1966-02-16

OBJECTIONS RESPECTING PROPOSED DISTRICTS IN NEW BRUNSWICK AND QUEBEC ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES READJUSTMENT ACT

Mr. Speaker:: It is my duty to inform the house that two objections, signed by the hon. member for Yictoria-Carleton (Mr. Flemming) and 11 other hon. members in one case, and the hon. member for Chapleau (Mr. Laprise) and nine other hon. members in the second case, have been filed with me pursuant to section 20 of the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act.
If the house will agree, I propose that the procedure followed on prior occasions in this session be again followed so that the text of these objections, together with the names of the members who signed in each case, will be printed as appendices to Votes and Proceedings for this day. Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



NATIONAL PARKS


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to table the exchange of correspondence between myself and the premier of Alberta on national parks policy, which was requested the other day.



BANKRUPTCY


Hon. Lucien Cardin (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker I should like to table correspondence between myself and members of the special committee who studied the Bankruptcy Act revision.



PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF NANCY GREENE, OUTSTANDING SKIER

Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, on motions I should like to have the indulgence of the house and draw to the attention of members of the house the presence in the Speaker's gallery of Miss Nancy Greene, a member of Canada's national ski team and an outstanding Canadian.


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Speaker, for the information of the house this young lady comes from Rossland which is in Kootenay West.


Mr. Groos:: That means from British Columbia also.
[Translation1



CRIMINAL CODE


Mr. Auguste Choquette (Lotbiniere) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-123, an Act to amend the Criminal Code (Corporal Punishment).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Auguste Choquette: Mr. Speaker, whereas preventive rather than punitive justice should be emphasized; whereas capital punishment remains the best deterrent to the increase in the number of murders in the present circumstances, punishment of criminals should nevertheless not be characterized by unpardonable barbarity.
The present bill proposes to eliminate the lash provided for in the Criminal Code.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



AMENDMENT RESPECTING ATTEMPTED SUICIDE BY MENTALLY ILL

Mr. Ian Watson (Chaieauguay-Huniingdon-Laprairie) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-124, to amend the Criminal Code (attempt to commit suicide).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Ian Watson: Mr. Speaker, I am introducing this bill because section 213 of the Criminal Code now reads that a person who is mentally ill or is undergoing psychiatric treatment who attempts to commit suicide is subject to a criminal accusation and possible conviction. In most cases of attempted suicide the authorities ignore section 213. Occasionally, however, as happened recently in my own riding, a crown prosecutor becomes overzealous and applies section 213.
The amendment as proposed would have, it is hoped, two effects. It would remove the stigma of a criminal conviction attached to the attempted suicide of a mentally ill person; it would protect the public, and would protect the person who attempted the suicide

February 16, 1966
Questions
from possible further suicide attempts by assuring that observation and treatment follow the attempt at suicide.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)

Mr. Coates: Has the federal government been in contact with the government of the province of Quebec regarding the elimination of the provincial sales tax on purchases made by patrons of Expo '67 and, if so, what has been the result?


Mr. Jean-Charles Cantin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Trade and Commerce):: The ministers of the federal government and the government of the province of Quebec responsible for their respective government's interest in Expo '67 have given consideration to the remission of certain taxes.
No arrangements have been made, and none are in process, for the exemption from provincial sales tax on purchases made by patrons.


PAROLE OFFICERS, JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How many parole officers are employed by the Department of Justice and what is their jurisdiction?
2.	How many of these are trained social workers?
3.	How many are university graduates in the social sciences?
4.	Does the department make provisions for bursaries for the training of more parole officers and, if so, how many bursaries and for how much?


Hon. L. T. Pennell (Solicitor General):: Forty five parole officers are employed by the Department of Solicitor General. The jurisdiction of those employed in the field offices is geographically limited to specified areas and the duties include the direct interview of applicants for parole; the direct or indirect supervision of persons on parole and the maintenance of liaison with crown authorities.
Generally speaking, the jurisdiction of parole officers employed at headquarters is geographically limited to a specified area and their duties include the assembly of data necessary to the study of parole cases; the preparation of summaries, based on the data assembled, for consideration by the National Parole Board and the performance of incidental duties.
2.	Eighteen.
3.	Fourteen.
4.	No.


TREATMENT OF NARCOTIC ADDICTS
Mr. Howard: 1.	Upon what basis are inmates selected for transfer to the Matsqui institution for narcotic addicts?
2.	Have any inmates serving a sentence of preventive detention been so selected and (a) if so, how many and what are their names (b) if not, what is the reason?


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1. Inmates selected for transfer to the Matsqui institution are addicted to narcotic drugs and may benefit from the treatment offered. Over aggressive and acutely disturbed individuals who are not suitable for a medium security institution and who may present a danger for security will not be transferred.
2.	Twenty inmates serving sentences of preventive detention have been selected for transfer up to date. It is not the practice to reveal the names of these inmates, so as to safeguard their identity and that of their families.


PRINTING BUREAU-STOLEN GOODS
Mr. Irvine: 1.	During the past five calendar or fiscal years, has there been any investigation by RCMP or other police into the receipt of stolen goods in the Ottawa-Hull area that extended to the Canadian Government Printing Bureau?
2.	If so, what were the circumstances?
3.	What was the value of any such stolen goods?
4.	Were any arrests made, and, if so, were any Printing Bureau employees questioned or arrested?
5.	Were any charges laid and, if so, what dispositions were made by the courts of such charges?


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1.	Yes.
2.	As a result of information received, investigations were conducted by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and no evidence was obtained disclosing the commission of any offence.
3.	Answered by No. 2.
4.	Answered by No. 2.
5.	Answered by No. 2.


NATIONAL INDIAN ADVISORY BOARD
Mr. Howard: 1.	What is the name and address of each member of the national Indian advisory board?
2.	Upon what date was each such member appointed or elected to the said board and what is his tenure of office?
3.	What method was used to determine the membership of the board and, if the method involved consultation, what is the name and address of each person, group or organization that was consulted?
February 16, 1966

Questions


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: 1 and 2.
Name and Address
Mr. Wallace Labillois,
R.R. No. 1, Box 10,
Dalhousie, New Brunswick.
Chief James Gaspe,
Oka Indian Reserve,
Oka, Quebec.
Mr. Aurelien Gill,
168 Aylmer Avenue,
Ottawa, Ontario.
Chief Omer Peters,


R.R. No. 3,
[Stage Direction]
Thamesville, Ontario.
Mr. Michael Bernard,
Golden Lake Band,
Golden Lake, Ontario.
Mr. Arthur Anderson, Jr.,

[Stage Direction]
Ohsweken, Ontario.
Mr. Lorenzo Big Canoe,
Georgina Island Post Office,
Ontario.
Chief Lionel Shannacappo,
Rolling River Indian Reserve,
Erickson, Manitoba.
Chief Cornelius Bignell,
Box 582,
The Pas, Manitoba.
Chief Wilfred Bellegarde,
P.O. Box 23,
Goodeve, Saskatchewan.
Chief Edward Laliberte,
P.O. Box 881,
Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan.
Chief Maurice McDougall,
Peigan Indian Agency,
Brocket, Alberta.
Mr. Mike Oka,
Blood Indian Agency,
Cardston, Alberta.
Mr. George Manuel,
P.O. Box 62,
Chase, British Columbia.
Mr. Phillip Paul,
South Saanich Indian Reserve, Brentwood Bay, B.C.
Mr. Kenneth Harris,
100 E. 8th Avenue,
Prince Rupert, B.C.
Mrs. Clara Tizya,
Whitehorse,
Yukon Territory.
Mrs. Agnes Casaway,
Rocher River,
Northwest Territories.
Date Elected June 9, 1965	Tenure of Office 3 years
June 8, 1965	3 years
June 8, 1965	3 years
June 2, 1965	3 years
June 2, 1965	3 years
June 2, 1965	3 years
June 2, 1965	3 years
September 17, 1965	3 years
September 17, 1965	3 years
May 19, 1965	3 years
May 19, 1965	3 years
May 20, 1965	3 years
October 4, 1965	3 years
June 4, 1965	3 years
June 4, 1965	3 years
June 4, 1965	3 years
June 4, 1965	3 years
December 3, 1965	3 years
[Stage Direction]
February 16, 1966
Questions
3.	The members of the national Indian advisory board are elected by the members of the eight regional Indian advisory councils and the name and address of each council chairman is listed below. The method followed by each of the councils in choosing members for the board is a matter for the individual councils to determine. The number of representatives from each region elected to the board is based on the Indian population of the region.
Maritime Indian Advisory Council-Mr. Wallace Labillois, R.R. 1, Box 10, Dalhousie, New Brunswick; Quebec Indian Advisory Council-Chief James Gaspe, Oka Indian Reserve, Oka, P.Q.; Ontario Indian Advisory Council-Chief Omer Peters, R.R. No. 3, Thamesville, Ontario; Manitoba Indian Advisory Council-Chief Cornelius Bignell, Box 582, The Pas, Manitoba; Saskatchewan Indian Advisory Council-Chief Wilfred Bellegarde, P.O. Box 23, Goodeve, Saskatchewan; Alberta Indian Advisory Council-Mr. Howard Beebe, c/o Blood Indian Agency, Cardston, Alberta; B.C. & Yukon Indian Advisory Council-Mr. George Manuel, P.O. Box 62, Chase, British Columbia; N.W.T. Indian Advisory Council- Mr. J. J. Pascal, No. 88 Arctic Red River Band, Aklavik, Northwest Territories.

Mr. Lambert: 1.	Did the government of Canada or anyone authorized on its behalf prior to October 31, 1965, approach any of the governments of the provinces with a view to entering any supplementary agreement under the Established Programs (Interim Arrangements) Act?
2.	If so, what was the nature of the reply from any such provincial government?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Finance):: 1.	Yes. On August 15, 1964, the Prime Minister wrote to the provincial prime ministers and premiers that it was the intention of the federal government to introduce legislation to implement the contracting-out arrangements outlined in the letter and asked those provinces, who might wish to conclude arrangements similar to those the federal government would be entering with Quebec, to inform him at their convenience.
On December 30, 1964, a copy of Bill C-142, entitled the "Established Programs (Interim Arrangements) Act" was forwarded to officials of each province and in May 1965, the act was discussed and the October 31, 1965, deadline for supplementary agreements under section 3 of the act was brought to their attention.
[Mr. Laing.l
2.	Five provinces, Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan, replied to the Prime Minister's letter. Nova Scotia, Ontario, and Manitoba acknowledged the Prime Minister's letter and reserved any comments to a future occasion. Quebec agreed to the proposals put forward by the federal government. Saskatchewan stated that that province would not contract out of the programs listed in part B of the Prime Minister's letter and sought some clarification on part C of the letter.


EXPENSE ALLOWANCES OF FORMER MINISTER
Mr. Ormiston: What was the total amount of all expense allowance funds drawn by the former minister without portfolio, the former member from Saint-Jean-Iberville-Napierville, from February 3,	1964 to
January 22, 1965?


Mitchell William Sharp: 


$13,375.37. ACQUISITIONS AND CONSOLIDATIONS OF COMPANIES
Mr. Mather: How many acquisitions and consolidations of companies capitalized at over $100,000 took place in Canada in 1963 and 1964?


Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: A statistical record of mergers is not maintained by the government of Canada at the present time.


TRANSFER OF POWERS FROM CIVIL SERVICE
Mr. Ormiston: Has there been any transfer of powers, duties, responsibilities and functions from the Civil Service Commission to Treasury Board since April 22, 1963, and, if so, what are they?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue):: 1. None of the powers, duties, responsibilities and functions of the Civil Service Commission have been transferred to Treasury Board since April 22, 1963.


FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION TO EXPO '67
Mr. Mather: What, in dollars, is the federal contribution to Expo '67?


Robert Henry Winters: The agreement entered into on January 18, 1963, by the government of Canada, the government of the province of Quebec and the city of Montreal stipulates that the government of Canada shall pay 50 per cent of the cost of the exhibition.
This percentage amounts to $30.8 million of the net cost of $61.6 million as approved
February 16, 1966

by order in council P.C. 1965-1494 dated August 13, 1965, in conformity with section 10 of the incorporating act. Under the master plan approved on the same date, the gross expenditure was estimated to be $250.7 million and the gross revenue $189.1 million.


CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS BY CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. Caouelie: Were any regulations made under section 83 of the Financial Administration Act with respect to the conditions upon which a corporation acting for the crown may undertake contractual obligations and. if so, what are they?


Edgar John Benson: 1. The government contracts regulations, P.C. 1964-1467, issued September 23, 1964 under the authority of sections 39 and 83 of the Financial Administration Act (R.S.C. 1952, c.116), declare in section 2(1) (d) (ii) that the regulations apply to the corporations named in schedule B to the Financial Administration Act and the National Capital Commission, National Battlefields Commission and the Northern Canada Power Commission.


AIR CANADA DC-9 SERVICE
Mr. Forreslall: 1.	What cities in Canada are to be included in the introduction of DC-9 aircraft to Air Canada domestic service routes?
2.	What dates are now anticipated for such introductions?
3.	What will be the frequency of such service between Halifax and Montreal?


Mr. J. A. Byrne (Parliameniary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: The management of Air Canada advises as follows:
1.	The following cities in Canada are included in Air Canada's plans for DC-9 aircraft operation in the first half of 1966: Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal. Other points of call are likely to be added in subsequent years as additional aircraft become available.
2.	Vancouver, Winnipeg, Montreal-April 24; Toronto-June 1; Edmonton, Calgary, Ottawa-July 1.
3.	There has been no decision yet as to flights to Halifax.


CANADIAN DELEGATES TO UN SESSION
Mr. McCleave: What were the names of the Canadian delegates and observers to the most recent session of the United Nations, and on what date was each appointed?


Hon. Paul Marlin (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: Canadian delegates to the
Questions
twentieth session of the general assembly of the United Nations (21 September-21 December 1965) were appointed by the government on August 25. Their names are the following: Hon. Paul Martin, Mr. Paul Tremblay, Dr. Stanley Haidasz, Mrs. Margaret Konantz, Professor R. St. John MacDonald, Lieut.-Gen.
E.	L. M. Burns, Mr. W. H. Wershof, Mr. Paul Beaulieu, Miss Margaret Meagher, Mr. Stuart Hemsley.
Following past practice, parliamentary observers were nominated by parliamentary party leaders. During the first half of June the Secretary of State for External Affairs asked the party leaders in the Senate and in the House to provide him with names of observers for the places allocated to each party. The names of observers were submitted by the party leaders during the summer and fall. Of those names submitted the following attended as observers during the session: Observers from the Senate: Hon. Rheal Belisle, Hon. J. J. Kinley, Hon. Hartland de M. Molson. Observers from the House of Commons: Hon. J. W. Monteith, Mr. Yves Forest, Mr. Walter F. Foy, Mr. Gilles Gre-goire, Mr. Raynald Guay, Mr. Milton L. Klein, Mr. Herman Laverdiere, Mr. Carl Legault, Mr. H. Pit Lessard, Mr. Marcel Lessard, Mr. Nicholas Mandziuk, Mr. Wallace B. Nesbitt, Mr. Gerald A. Regan, Mr. S. Perry Ryan, Mr. Max Saltsman, Mr. James R. Tucker, Mr. Ian Watson.
Mr. Willson Woodside, national director of the United Nations Association in Canada, was appointed by the government as nongovernmental observer on September 30.


INDIAN RESIDENTIAL SCHOOLS
Mr. Barneft: 1.	What, listed by name, location, denominational or other equivalent designation, are the Indian residential schools in each of the provinces and territories of Canada?
2.	Which of these schools are providing only residential services, and which are also providing classroom instruction?
3.	Is the Canada Labour (Standards) Code applicable to any or all of these schools and, if not to all, to which is it applicable?
4.	Are the salaries or wages currently being paid for any of the positions in any of these schools less than the equivalent of $1.25 per hour and, if so, what positions in which schools are paid at less than this rate, and in what amount per hour, day, week or month?


Arthur Laing: 1. See
following table.

February 16, 1966
Questions
2.	The schools listed on the attached table shown as "hostel" provide residential services only.
3.	The matter is being considered.
4.	Members of the staffs at the residential schools apart from teachers are employees of
the church denominations! Funds, however, have been provided by the federal government to pay a $1.25 minimum to each employee and the principals have been advised that this minimum must, without exception, be met.
	Federal Indian	Residential Schools
	Religious	
Name of School	Denomination	Address
	NOVA SCOTIA	
Shubenacadie	Roman Catholic	Shubenacadie, NS.
	QUEBEC	
Amos	Roman Catholic	St. Marc De Figuery, P.Q.Fort George	Anglican	Fort George, P.Q. (via Moosonee, Ont.)La Tuque	Anglican	P.O. Box 847, La Tuque, P.Q.Pointe Bleue	Roman Catholic	Pointe Bleue Co., Roberval, P.Q.Seven Islands	Roman Catholic	Seven Islands, P.Q.ONTARIO	Albany	Roman Catholic	Fort Albany (via Moosonee, Ont.)Cecilia Jeffrey Hostel	Presbyterian	Kenora, Ontario.Fort Frances	Roman Catholic	Fort Frances, Ontario.Horden Hall Hostel	Anglican	Moose Factory, Ontario.Kenora	Roman Catholic	Kenora, Ontario.McIntosh	Roman Catholic	McIntosh, Ontario.Mohawk	Anglican	Brantford, Ontario.Shingwauk Hostel	Anglican	Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario.Sioux Lookout	Anglican	Sioux Lookout, Ontario.MANITOBA	Assiniboia	Roman Catholic	621 Academy Road, Winnipeg 2, Manitoba.Birtle	Presbyterian	Birtle, Manitoba.Brandon	United Church	Brandon, Manitoba.Cross Lake	Roman Catholic	Cross Lake, Manitoba.Fort Alexander	Roman Catholic	Pine Falls, Manitoba.Guy	Roman Catholic	The Pas, Manitoba.MacKay	Anglican	Box 568, Dauphin, Manitoba.Norway House	United Church	Norway House, Manitoba.Pine Creek	Roman Catholic	Camperville, Manitoba.Portage la Prairie Hostel	United Church	Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.Sandy Bay	Roman Catholic	Marius, Manitoba.SASKATCHEWAN	Beauval	Roman Catholic	Beauval, Saskatchewan.Cowessess	Roman Catholic	Marieval (via Grayson, Saskatchewan).Duck Lake	Roman Catholic	Duck Lake, Saskatchewan.Gordon's	Anglican	Punnichy, Saskatchewan.Muscowequan	Roman Catholic	Lestock, Saskatchewan.Onion Lake	Roman Catholic	Lloydminster, Saskatchewan.Prince Albert	Anglican	Prince Albert, Saskatchewan.Qu'Appelle	Roman Catholic	Lebret, Saskatchewan.St. Philip's	Roman Catholic	Kamsack, Saskatchewan.ALBERTA	Assumption	Roman Catholic	Assumption, Alberta.Blood	Roman Catholic	Cardston, Alberta.Blue Quills	Roman Catholic	St. Paul, Alberta.

February 1G, 1966	COMMONS DEBATES	1305
Questions
Name of School	Religious Denomination	AddressCrowfoot	Roman Catholic	Cluny, Alberta.Desmarais Hostel	Roman Catholic	Desmarais, Alberta.Edmonton Hostel	United Church	Edmonton, Alberta.Ermineskin	Roman Catholic	Hobbema, Alberta.Fort Vermilion Hostel	Roman Catholic	Fort Vermilion, Alberta.Joussard	Roman Catholic	Joussard, Alberta.Morley (Hostel)	United Church	Morley, Alberta.Old Sun	Anglican	Gleichen, Alberta.St. Paul's Hostel	Anglican	Cardston, Alberta.Wabasca Hostel	Anglican	Wabasca, Alberta.BRITISH	COLUMBIAAlberni	United Church	Alberni, British Columbia.Alert Bay (Hostel)	Anglican	Alert Bay, British Columbia.Cariboo	Roman Catholic	150 Mile House, British Columbia.Kamloops	Roman Catholic	Kamloops, British Columbia.Kootenay Hostel	Roman Catholic	Cranbrook, British Columbia.Kuper Island	Roman Catholic	Box 510, Kuper Island (via Chemainus,Lejac	Roman Catholic	British Columbia). Lejac, British Columbia.Lower Post	Roman Catholic	Lower Post, British Columbia, (via WatsonMission	Roman Catholic	Lake, Y.T.). Mission City, British Columbia.Sechelt	Roman Catholic	Sechelt, British Columbia.St. George's	Anglican	Lytton, British Columbia.YUKON	Carcross	Anglican	Carcross, Y.T.Whitehorse Hostel	Roman Catholic	Box 2620, Whitehorse, Y.T.Yukon Hostel	Protestant	P.O. Box 389, Whitehorse, Y.T.


EMPLOYMENT OF INMATES OF INSTITUTIONS
Mr. Hopkins: 1.	On average, for how many hours per day are inmates productively employed at the following types of institutions (a) maximum security (b) medium security (c) minimum security (d) work camps?
2.	What remuneration is currently paid for such work?


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1.	On average, inmates are productively employed at the following types of institutions, for the number of hours per day indicated:
(a)	Maximum security	6.4	hours(b)	Medium security	7.1	hours(c)	Minimum security	7.5	hours(d)	Work camps	7.4	hours2.	The remuneration currently paid for .such work is:
Pay Grade Grade 1 Grade 2 Grade 3 Grade 4
Daily Pay 250 350 450 550


SPRINGHILL PENAL INSTITUTION PERSONNEL
Mr. Coates: What is the estimated number of individuals to be employed at the young offenders' penal institution in Springhill and what is the estimated annual payroll?


Lawrence T. Pennell: The
estimated number of individuals to be employed at the young offenders' penal institution in Springhill is 241 and the estimated annual payroll is $1,160,000.


CONTINUATION OF PRESENT SPRINGHILL PENAL INSTITUTION
Mr. Coates: Will the minimum security penal institution located at Springhill, N.S., continue in operation upon the completion of the young offenders' institution at Springhill?


Lawrence T. Pennell: Yes, the present plan is that this institution will continue to operate.

February 16, 1966
Questions


C.B.C. FEMALE EMPLOYEES
Mr. Malher: 1.	How many C.B.C. employees are there?
2.	What percentage of these are women?
3.	What percentage of C.B.C. management-scale salary groups is composed of women?
4.	What percentage of C.B.C. senior management grades is composed of women?
5.	What is the highest level, in C.B.C. management, occupied by a woman?
6.	What percentage of the C.B.C. audience is composed of women?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secretary of State):: 1.	8,160.
2.	25 per cent.
3.	7.82 per cent.
4.	4.16 per cent.
5.	Second level below vice president.
6.	Audiences vary from program to program. However, in general, women tend to watch television more than men do, perhaps up to one hour more per day.


INVITATIONS TO DISPLAY AT EXPO '67
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	Have officials of Expo '67 extended invitations to international organizations such as the common market, NATO, etc., to have informational and educational displays at the world's fair to be held in Canada during our centennial year?
2.	If so, what groups have been invited?
3.	What groups have accepted the invitation?
4.	Which groups have declined the invitation?


Robert Henry Winters: 1. Invitations to participate in Expo '67 were extended in 1963 to the following international organizations: Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO); General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT); The European Communities; Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization (IMCO); International Atomic Energy Agency; International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD); International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO); International Development Association (IDA); International Finance Corporation (IFC); International Labour Organization (ILO); International Monetary Fund (IMF); International Red Cross; International Telecommunication Union (ITU); Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); Organization of American States (OAS); Pan American Institute of Geography and History; Postal Union of the Americas and Spain; United Nations; United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); Universal Postal Union (UPU); World Health Organization (WHO); World Meteorological Organization (WMO).

2.	Answered by 1 above.
3.	The European communities have accepted the invitation and have reserved a lot on the exhibition site, on which they are planning to build a pavilion.
4.	The United Nations have declined the invitation to participate. However, the United Nations Association in Canada, with the help of private sponsors, have reserved a lot on the exhibition grounds, on which they plan to build a pavilion. The planning of this pavilion for the United Nations is being done in consultation with the liaison officer designated by the UN secretariat and with a number of UN agencies.


ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON PENITENTIARY INDUSTRY
Mr. Brown: 1.	Who at present constitute the advisory committee on penitentiary industry?
2.	What institutions did they visit during 1965?


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1.
Officers of the penitentiary service have discussed penitentiary industry with representatives of management, labour and government agencies, but no advisory committee on penitentiary industry as such has been appointed to date.
2.	Not applicable.


PENITENTIARY STAFF COLLEGE TRAINING
Mr. Brown: In penitentiary staff colleges, in Quebec, Ontario and western Canada, what provisions are made for training non-professional staff in the causes and treatment of criminality?


Lawrence T. Pennell: non-professional staff members of the penitentiary service attend a regular training course or refresher courses at either of the three staff colleges operated by the service. These courses, varying in duration from two months to three months, offer basic training in the causes and treatment of criminality by the means of lectures by specialists, film presentations and discussion groups, supervised by qualified instructors.
The institutional in-service training program also provides for additional training in these subjects by specialist personnel, that is, psychologists and classification officers, through the medium of lectures and/or film discussions.
A training program, approved by the treasury board in April 1964, providing for the reimbursement of tuition fees paid by such members of the service who have
February 16, 1966

elected to undertake evening and/or correspondence courses from recognized educational agencies in the causes and treatment of criminality, has been implemented.


DORCHESTER PENITENTIARY-DANGER PAY FOR GUARDS
Mr. Coales: 1.	Did the government receive a request from the guards of the Dorchester penitentiary for danger pay of $1,000.00 annually?
2.	Why was this request made?
3.	What action is the government taking on this request?


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1.
Yes.
2.	This request was made following the commutation of a death sentence to life imprisonment in the case of a penitentiary inmate by the name of Reginald Colpitts.
3.	The government has at present under consideration a consultants report on the subject of penitentiary service pay classification.


GOVERNMENT ENCOURAGEMENT OF AMATEUR SPORTS
Mr. Caoueile: 1.	During 1965, in what ways did the government encourage amateur sports?
2.	What amounts were allocated to the various amateur sports teams during 1965?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1. During 1965 as provided for under the Fitness and Amateur Sport Act, the Federal Government continued to encourage the development and promotion of amateur sport by making grants to national sports governing bodies to assist Canadian participation at national championships, international meets or world championships; by giving technical and financial aid to training programs, and by assisting programs designed to promote the development of various amateur sports. Grants were also given to national sports governing bodies to assist in meeting the cost of administrative expense.
Additionally $1 million in federal aid is made available each year to the provinces on a 60% federal 40% provincial matching basis to assist provincial and community organizations in carrying on programs at the provincial and municipal levels (the Province of Quebec does not participate in this joint program).
Questions
Some $550,000 is also made available annually for Fitness Research conducted through Canadian Universities and for scholarships and fellowships to encourage postgraduate studies in physical education and recreation.
2. The attached table indicates the extent of Federal aid given to national sports governing bodies and agencies to assist programs carried out during the 1965 calendar year. The amounts indicated are in addition to financial assistance provided under the Federal-Provincial program.
Grants-in-Aid to Sports Governing Bodies and Recreational Associations for Events Held
in 1965
Association	Total

Amateur Athletic Union of Canada:
General	11,787
Boxing	5,381
Fencing	6,939
Gymnastics	8,604
Track and Field	27,924
Weightlifting	9,637
Wrestling	7,178
Handball	3,206
Association Canadienne des Centres
de Loisirs	31,900
18,000
Canadian Amateur Basketball
Association	37,574
Canadian Amateur Bobsleigh and Tobogganing Association	5,638
Canadian Amateur Hockey Association	88,870
Canadian Amateur Ski Association	24,844
Canadian Amateur Softball Association	6,000
Canadian Amateur Speed Skating Association	4,528
Canadian Amateur Sports Federation	4,000
Canadian Amateur Swimming Association
Swimming	40,383
Diving	4,922
Synchronized Swimming	8,952
Water Polo	6,495
Canadian Archery Association	8,085
Canadian Association of Amateur
Oarsmen	18,458
Canadian Association of Health,
Physical Education and Recreation	50,000
Canadian Badminton Association	11,434
Canadian Canoe Association	4,700

February 16, 1966
Questions
Association	Total

Canadian Cricket Association	4,265
Canadian Field Hockey Association	6,628
Canadian Figure Skating Association	31,947
Canadian Intercollegiate Athletic Union	17,010
Canadian Kodokan Black Belt Association	3,000
Canadian Lacrosse Association	8,460
Canadian Ladies Golf Union	3,510
Canadian Lawn Bowling Council	3,507
Canadian Lawn Tennis Association	27,715
Canadian Olympic Association	30,000
Canadian Rugby Union	2,000
Canadian Ski Patrol System	750
Canadian Snowshoer's Union	1,890
Canadian Soccer Football Association	17,646
Canadian Table Tennis Association	2,010
Canadian Union of Students	6,157
Canadian Volleyball Association	31,737
Canadian Water Ski Association	6,240
Canadian Wheelmen's Association	1,025
Canadian Women's Field Hockey Association	2,015
Canadian Yachting Association	25,848
Girl Guides of Canada	17,654
Guides Catholiques du Canada	13,250
National Council of Y.M.C.A.	22,500
National Federation of Amateur Baseball	25,469
Parks and Recreation Association
of Canada	2,200
Royal Canadian Golf Association	595
Royal Canadian Legion	62,717
Royal Life Saving Society Canada	9,910
Shooting Federation of Canada	4,834
University of Ottawa (Documentation Centre)	35,000
Young Men's Christian Association	6,260

Special Projects	$
British Empire Games	35,000
First Canadian Winter Games	347,500
Olympic 72	38,500
Pan American Games	220,000
Grand Total	$ 1,530,188
Association	Total


R.C.M.P. SALARIES AND PENSIONS
Mr. Douglas: 1.	(a) What was the salary of an R.C.M.P. Constable in 1943 (b) what is the salary of an R.C.M.P. Constable today?
2.	(a) What was the salary of an Assistant-Commissioner in the R.C.M.P. in 1943 (b) what is the salary of an Assistant-Commissioner in the R.C.M.P. today?
3.	(a) What was the pension of an R.C.M.P. Constable in 1943	(b) what is the pension of an
R.C.M.P. Constable today?
4.	(a) What was the pension of an Assistant-Commissioner in the R.C.M.P. in 1943 (b) what is the pension of an Assistant-Commissioner in the R.C.M.P. today?


Lawrence T. Pennell: (a)	maximum pay and allowances, $1,553.75 per annum; (b) maximum salary, $5,943 per annum.
2.	(a) maximum pay and allowances, $5,-
200.00	per annum; (b) $16,960 per annum.
3.	(a) $1,035.83 per annum; (b) $3,962.00 per annum.
4.	(a) $3,640.00 per annum; (b) $11,872.00 per annum.
Prior to December 1, 1950, the pension of a member of the force was based on his pay plus an allowance for pension purposes which was authorized by order in council. The "allowances" referred to in parts 1(a) and 2(a) above are those so authorized. From December 1, 1950, the pension of a member of the force has been based on his pay only.
The pension rates set forth in parts 3 and 4 are the maximum pensions authorized under the R.C.M. Police Pension Continuation Act. Pensions below the maximum vary with the length of service of the members concerned. Members engaged since March 1, 1949, are subject to the R.C.M. Police Superannuation Act and pensions under that act are based on the best six consecutive years' pay. The maximum pension payable to a constable who was subject to the R.C.M.P. Superannuation Act and who retired on January 27, 1966, would be $3,604.27 per annum based on maximum service of 35 years.


PRINTING BUREAU-STOLEN GOODS
Mr. Irvine: 1.	Since January 1, 1963, did the R.C.M.P. seize any goods in connection with any investigation of Canadian Government Printing Bureau employees in connection with alleged stolen goods?
2.	Did any such investigation disclose that stolen goods were delivered to Printing Bureau premises, or to the residence or business premises occupied by any employee of the Printing Bureau and, if so, what is the address of such promises and the name of the occupant or occupants?

February 16, 1966	COMMONS DEBATES	1309
Questions


Lawrence T. Pennell: 1.	2. Not applicable.
No.	3, Not applicable.
2. No.


FEDERAL CIVIL SERVANTS
Mr. Bell (Carleion): 1.	Since April 23, 1963, has the Department of Public Works conducted any discussions or negotiations with the government of Ontario or the government of Quebec with respect to the erection of a highway bridge over the Ottawa river between Quyon and Fitzroy Harbour?
2.	If so, what has been the nature of such discussions or negotiations, and what was the result thereof?
3.	What is the estimate of the total cost of the erection of such a bridge?


Hon. G. J. Mcllraiih (Minister of Public Works):: 1. No.


Mr. Hales: How many civil servants did the federal government departments, corporations and agencies have on the payroll and what were their total earnings on the following dates (a) end of April, 1961 (b) end of April, 1962 (c) end of April, 1963 (d) end of April, 1964 (e) end of April, 1965 (f) end of December, 1965?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The total number of federal public servants and their earnings as at April 30, for the years 1961 to 1965, and as at October 30, 1965 (the latest available) are shown in the following table.
Total number of federal public servants at April 30
Agency corporations	No.	9,611
$'000	3,799
Proprietary corporations	No.	122,093
$'000	45,923
Other agencies	No.	1,987
$'000	701
Departments	No.	185,665
$'000	63,582
Departmental corporations	No.	14,761
$'000	5,047
Total	No. 334,117
$'000	119,051
Oct. 30
1962	1963	1964	1965	19659,417 3,928	8,879 3,701	8,582 3,962	8,447 4,159	9,115 4,545121,710 49,235	120,087 50,930	121,471 53,077	122,802 57,195	126,808 60,5262,052 763	2,171 845	2,617 1,146	2,851 1,372	3,182 1,541188,732 66,309	185,774 68,256	187,990 73,622	192,845 78,677	198,495 82,94114,860 5,534	13,975 5,384	14,892 5,959	10,340 4,326	9,944 4,411336,771 125,768	330,886 129,115	335,552 137,767	337,285 145,729	347,544 153,965


ADDITION TO KEJIMKUJIK PARK
Mr. Crouse: 1.	Is the government planning to acquire part of the seaboard along the south shore of Nova Scotia and incorporate the same in the Kejimkujik national park?
2.	If so, how large is the area to be selected?
3.	In what county will the land be acquired?
4.	How much money will be appropriated for this purpose?


Arthur Laing: 1. In cooperation with the government of Nova Scotia the natural and historic resources branch of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources will be carrying out a
further analysis of shoreline in Nova Scotia to determine if a suitable area can be located for convenient operation in conjunction with Kejimkujik national park.
2 and 3. This information will become available only after the above mentioned study has been completed.
4.	Under existing practice no money would be appropriated for such acquisition.


ARDA PROJECTS, ARGENTEUIL-DEUX-MONTAGNES
Mr. Regimbal: Will the government submit the list of projects under ARDA which have been considered or are being considered for Argenteuil-Deux-Montagnes?

February 16, 1966
Questions


Hon. Maurice Sauve (Minister of Forestry):: Project number	Approved	Description	Category	General area of activity	Shareable cost	Federal contribution5004	March 1963	Improvement of the Lebeau-Lecompte waterway-16.5 miles reclaiming an area of 1,013 acres involving 80 farmers	sw	Terrebonne- Deux-Montagnes Counties	$ 54,911	27,4565010	March 1963	Improving the watercourse of Corbeil and tributaries; 3.7 miles, involving 24 farmers	sw	St. Augustin-Deux-Montagnes	25,290	12,6465023	March 1963	Improvement of Duquette water-course, 3.6 miles; 21 farmers	sw	St. Eustache & Deux-Montagnes Counties	23,610	11,8055113	March 1964	Deschambault watercourse improvement; reclaiming 338 acres over 4.6 miles; involving 30 farmers	sw	Deux-Montagnes County	38,678	19,3395114	March 1964	Meunier watercourse improvement over 3.9 miles to reclaim 735 acres; involving 24 farmers	sw	Deux-Montagnes County	20,621	10,3105115	March 1964	Nepveu watercourse improvement, over 4.1 miles, reclaim-	sw	Deux-Montagnes County	19,331	9,666
ing 161 acres, involving 27 farmers


MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT AS UN OBSERVERS
Mr. Code: 1.	Were any members of the House of Commons appointed and did they serve as observers at the most recent session of the United Nations, and, if so, how many?
2.	What were their names and the dates during which each of them served?


Paul Joseph James Martin: 1. Following past practice,
observers from the House of Commons were nominated by parliamentary party leaders. A total of 25 members of the house were nominated and 17 accepted to attend.
2. The period of appointment for observers during the twentieth session was two weeks although some did not stay for the full period. Following are the names of observers from the House of Commons who attended the session:
Name
Hon. J. W. Monteith Mr. Yves Forest Mr. Walter F. Foy Mr. Gilles Gregoire Mr. Raynald Guay Mr. Milton L. Klein Mr. Herman Laverdiere Mr. Carl Legault Mr. H. Pit Lessard Mr. Marcel Lessard Mr. Nicholas Mandziuk Mr. Wallace B. Nesbitt Mr. Gerald A. Regan Mr. S. Perry Ryan Mr. Max Saltsman Mr. James R. Tucker Mr. Ian Watson CMr. Regimbal.l
Period of Attendance in New York
6	- 12 December 17 - 22 October
21	September - 1 October 14 - 24 November
4	- 7 October 28 November - 5 December
22	- 28 September
28 November - 11 December 15-18, 21-26 November
4	- 7 October 21 - 25 November
27	November - 6 December 10 - 21 October
5	-	9 December
7	- 9 October
28 November - 11 December
29 November - 11 December
February 16, 1966	COMMONS


COTTAGE TYPE SCHOOL PROGRAM, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 367
Mr. Dinsdale:: 1.	Since the cottage type school program for children in isolated communities in the Northwest Territories was launched in 1961, how many of these schools have been established?
2.	Where are they located and what is the attendance at each school?


Arthur Laing: 1. The small pupil residences have been built to accommodate children of elementary school age who live beyond commuting distance to local schools. Twenty of these family type residences have been established in the Northwest Territories.
2. Community	School Enrolment
Baker Lake	109
Eskimo Point	90
Belcher Islands	20
'Igloolik	62
Broughton Island	51
Pangnirtung	84
Cape Dorset	91
Pond Inlet	60
Cambridge Bay	74


EMIGRATION OF DOCTORS TO CANADA
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	Have foreign officials of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration encouraged medical doctors from Europe, Asia and Africa, to come to Canada in the last five years?
2.	How many doctors have come to Canada in each of the past five years from Europe, Asia and Africa?
DEBATES	1311
Questions
3.	Is the Department of Citizenship and Immigration aware that many of these doctors have not been able to get permission to practise in parts of Canada?
4.	Does the Department of Citizenship and Immigration have information as to how many doctors from Europe, Asia and Africa have not been able to get permission to practise since coming to Canada?
5.	Has the Department of Citizenship and Immigration discussed the difficulties with the Canadian Medical Association or the appropriate provincial medical authorities?
6.	Is the Department of Citizenship and Immigration giving consideration to discontinuing the practice of encouraging doctors from Europe, Asia and Africa to come to Canada in the light of these difficulties?


Mr. J. C. Munro (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: 1.	Yes, provided the doctors have received some indication from a provincial medical licensing authority that they are likely to be able to qualify for practice in Canada. Before an application is approved for an immigrant to come to Canada as a medical doctor he is required to determine, through the licensing authority of the province in which he hopes to practice, whether or not he is likely to meet the requirements for the practice of medicine in that province. A person who receives a discouraging reply from the provincial authority is not admitted on the basis of his qualifications as a medical doctor. However, this in itself does not bar him from admission to Canada provided he understands that, if admitted, he must be prepared to accept employment outside of his chosen field. Such persons must now acknowledge in writing their understanding that they may never be able to practice medicine in Canada.
2.	IMMIGRATION OP PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS TO CANADA


FOR THE PERIOD 1961 TO 1965 INCL. FROM EUROPE, ASIA, AFRICA AND OTHERS YEAR
[Stage Direction]
Geographic Division	1961	1962	1963	1964	1965	TOTALEurope	
232	211	327	361	397	1,528Asia	.. . 80	154	140	149	240	763Africa	... 16	22	22	35	42	137Others	... 117	143	198	123	113	694TOTALS	... 445	530	687	668	792	3,1223.	The department is aware that some medical doctors from overseas have not been able to meet the requirements of some provincial medical licensing bodies.4.	No.5.	Yes.6.	The department will continue to encourage the admission of only those medical doctors who will likely be able to practice their profession in Canada.
February 16, 1966
Questions

Mr. Mather: 1.	Is the government aware of the report of the Federation of Ontario Naturalists that pesticide spraying has caused the deaths of so many eagles and falcons that these species will be extinct in Ontario within 10 years?
2.	Is the problem a federal or provincial responsibility?


Arthur Laing: 1. The government is aware of the situation in Ontario with regard to the decline of populations of eagles and falcons. Although it may not be correct to state that these species will be extinct in Ontario within ten years, such an event is possible. The situation is not unique to Ontario but is of international concern in that populations of eagles and falcons in eastern North America and most of Europe have been declining rapidly in the past decade. The basic cause of this decline is not apparently in an accelerated death rate of adults but in a failure of the birds to reproduce successfully. Most of the few eggs now laid are infertile and contain several chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticide residues.
An international conference on the decline of falcons was held at Madison, Wisconsin in late 1965 and two scientists of the Canadian wildlife service of our department attended that conference. The Canadian wildlife service of the Department of Northern Affaris and National Resources has initiated or is initiating the following studies directed at elucidating the situation with regard to Canada.
(a)	A survey of peregrine falcons and eagle nest sites is being conducted in eastern Canada to record nesting success; (b) An investigation of the reproductive success of falcons nesting in the Thelon game sanctuary is to be initiated in 1966; (c) A survey is proposed of falcon reproductive success in the Mackenzie river valley, also in 1966. Both studies will be supported by analysis of both falcons and their prey for pesticide residues; (d) In co-operation with the government of the United States, all eagles which are shot or found dead and which come into the possession of the Canadian wildlife service are shipped to testing facilities near Washington for analysis of pesticide residue content. That is done, not because facilities are not available in Canada, but because the American program has been going on for a number of years and it was deemed needless duplication for us to set up a parallel program.

2. Peregrine falcons and eagles are not protected under the terms of the migratory birds convention between Canada and the U.S.A. They are, therefore, a provincial responsibility except in the Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory. The Canadian wildlife service is investigating the situation regarding the populations of these species in Canada as being a matter of national and international interest. Expressions of support for that position have been offered by several provinces.


CLAIMS AGAINST POLAND FOR CONFISCATED PROPERTY
Mr. Ryan: How many Canadians have claims against Poland for property nationalized or confiscated without compensation by the Polish Government in the post-war period?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The Department of External Affairs has on record over 500 nationalization claims of Canadian citizens against Poland amounting to a total asserted value of over 32 million dollars. In addition, there are a number of Canadians with claims against Poland who have not yet notified the Canadian government of their claims.


PAYMENTS BY POLAND FOR CONFISCATED PROPERTY
Mr. Ryan: Has Poland paid compensation for any Canadian property it has nationalized or taken from citizens of this country and, if so, how does this compare with compensation paid to other countries?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No.


OUTSTANDING CLAIMS AGAINST POLAND FOR CONFISCATED PROPERTY
Mr. Ryan: Are steps being taken by the Canadian government to seek settlement of outstanding claims for compensation for Canadian property which the Polish government has confiscated or nationalized and. if so, what are such steps?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Repeated efforts have been made in the past by the Canadian government through diplomatic channels to achieve some progress toward a just settlement of these claims. Further discussions took place in 1965 in Warsaw between Canadian officials and the Polish authorities with a view to reaching a preliminary agreement on a satisfactory basis for claims negotiations. As a result, an understanding was reached whereby the Polish government agreed to
February 16, 1966

enter into negotiations toward a lump sum settlement of Canadian claims on the basis of principles similar to those applied in settlements Poland has concluded with other countries. The Department of External Affairs issued a public announcement on September 1, 1965, inviting Canadians to submit the details of their claims against Poland to this department preparatory to negotiations. The original deadline of January 1, 1966 which was set for the submission of claims to the department was recently extended to May 1, 1966, in response to numerous requests from interested persons. Statements of claim should be prepared in accordance with instructions and questionnaires which may be obtained on request from the claims section of the Department of External Affairs.


POLISH ASSETS IN CANADA
Mr. Ryan: Does the Canadian government hold Polish property or assets in Canada, and, if so, what disposition is being made of such Polish assets?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes. Property in Canada belonging to Polish citizens vested in the Canadian custodian of enemy property during world war II. Subsequently partial releases of these assets were made to certain Polish owners in hardship cases. The government has indicated to the Polish authorities that the question of any further release of these assets, which are valued at approximately $200,000, should be reserved for discussion in the course of the proposed negotiations toward a settlement of Canadian claims.


PROPERTY CLAIMS AGAINST EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
Mr. Ryan: What action is the government taking to assist Canadians who have property claims outstanding against eastern European countries other than Poland?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Canadians obtained compensation for property claims against Yugoslavia under an agreement of December 23, 1948 signed by the British and Yugoslav governments.
A preliminary agreement was signed by Canada and Hungary on June 11, 1964 to negotiate a lump sum settlement of claims of Canadian citizens against Hungary. Subsequently public announcements were made
Questions
inviting Canadians who have claims against Hungary to submit the details to the Department of External Affairs preparatory to negotiations. Canadian negotiators returned last week from a round of discussions with the Hungarian authorities in Budapest, and further discussions are expected to take place at an early date.
Similarly the government announced on December 1, 1964 that claims of Canadians against Bulgaria should be submitted preparatory to negotiations with that country. Negotiations between Canada and Bulgaria were commenced in Sofia in April 1965 and are expected to be resumed in the near future.
It is hoped that similar progress with respect to Canadian claims outstanding against Czechoslovakia and Roumania can be made in the near future. In all cases the Canadian government is actively pressing for early settlements of these long outstanding claims.


CHAMPLAIN WATERWAY
Mr. Laniel: 1.	Have the Canadian and American governments received the report of the study requested from the International Joint Commission concerning the Champlain navigable waterway?
2.	If not, has the international study bureau on the Champlain navigable waterway submitted its report and recommendations to the International Joint Commission?
3.	When is it expected that these documents may be made public?
4.	Will new public hearings be organized by the International Joint Commission in order to allow all interested parties to make representations concerning the report and the suggestions?


Paul Joseph James Martin: 1. No.
2.	I am informed by the International Joint Commission that the international Champlain waterway board submitted its Champlain waterway facility report in three volumes to the commission on September 16, 1965. After receiving the report the commission requested the board to provide certain additional information. This is contained in a supplementary report which the commission received from the board on January 7, 1966.
3.	I am informed that the I.J.C. expects to make both reports public in the near future.
4.	I am informed by the I.J.C. that public hearings will be held in both countries for this purpose on May next.

February 16/ 1966
Questions


ASSISTANCE TO FISHERMEN, P.E.I.
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	What measures of assistance are being provided for lobster fishermen of District Number Eight?
2.	How many applications have been received from fishermen from Prince Edward Island?
3.	What is the total amount available to qualified applicants from Prince Edward Island?
4.	What organizations from Prince Edward Island have made representations to the Minister of Fisheries for additional assistance to lobster fish-erment in District Number Eight?
5.	What was the response of these representations?


Hon. H. J. Robichaud (Minister of Fisheries):: 1. The special assistance made available by the Department of Fisheries to fishermen during January, February, and March 1966, where fishermen suffered a loss of income last season as a result of catch failure applies.
2.	141 to February 4, 1966.
3.	$36,650 to February 4, 1966.
4.	Acadian Fishermen's Co-Operative Association, Abrams Village; Prince Edward Island Fisheries Federation, Charlottetown; East Prince Fishermen's Association, Cape Egmont.
5.	The measures taken are nation-wide, and it is not the intention to develop methods of assistance that would apply to individual groups of fishermen.


DISTRIBUTION OF &quot;HANSARD&quot;
Mr. Caouette: How many people receive Hansard, by province (a) in English (b) in French?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Figures up to February 3, 1966.
Province	English	FrenchOntario	4,099	339Quebec	623	1,335New Brunswick	211	31Nova Scotia	322	2Prince Edward Island	92	-Newfoundland	78	-Manitoba	453	7Saskatchewan	397	-Alberta	425	5British Columbia	668	1Northwest Territories	11	-Yukon	11	-


MANUFACTURED GOODS PURCHASED
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 412-Mr. Laprise:		ABROAD
1. During the years 1960,	1961, 1962,	1963, 1964
and 1965, what is the amount of manufactured goods		
from abroad that were bought by (a) Canada, and (b) Quebec?		
2. For each of these years,	what is the	per capita
breakdown for (a) Canada, and (b) Quebec?
[Translation1
Robert Henry Winters: 1 and 2. Imports of
fabricated materials and end products into Canada during the years 1960-1964 and January-August 1965 (latest data available) are shown in Table 1 attached. This is the closest available equivalent to a total for "manufactured goods" (including manufactured foodstuffs) . There are no statistics to indicate the amount of these imports bought by Quebec.


TABLE 1.
[Stage Direction]
Imports of fabricated materials and end products into Canada, during the years 1960-1964, and January-August, 1965 (latest figures available.)
Imports
Total	"Manufactured
Fabricated	End	"Manufactured Population Goods" PerYear	Materials Products	Goods"	of Canada	Capita$'000	$'000	$'000	'000	S1960	
1,494,577	2,926,726	4,421,303	17,870	2471961	
1,556,742	3,102,577	4,659,319	18,238	2551962	
1,661,758	3,390,896	5,052,654	18,570	2721963	
1,820,083	3,436,265	5,256,348	18,896	2781964	
2,051,120	4,036,084	6,087,204	19,235	316Jan.-Aug. 1965	
1,474,796	3,074,261	4,549,057	19,571	232

Mr. Flemming: What was for the last fiscal year the (a) dollar value of exports to the United Kingdom (b) dollar value of imports from the United Kingdom?


Robert Henry Winters: (a) The dollar value of exports 
to the United Kingdom for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1965 was:
Domestic exports .... $1,197,900,000
Re-exports	 7,374,000
Total	 $1,205,274,000
(b)	The dollar value of imports from the United Kingdom for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1965 was $581,897,000.
February 16, 1966


FOREST PRODUCTS EXPORTS
Mr. Flemming: What was the value of exports of all forest products, including paper and paper products, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1965?


Robert Henry Winters: There are at present no statistics of Canadian exports by industrial origin, and a complete total of exports of forest products is therefore not available. Domestic exports of the principal forest products for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1965 were as follows: Crude wood materials $ 54,593,000 Wood fabricated materials 593,753,000 Wood pulp	472,050,000
Paper and paperboard	909,672,000
Total	$2,030,068,000


WAR ON SMOKING
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	Which minister of the crown is now in charge of the "war on smoking" launched by the former Minister of National Health and Welfare, Hon. Judy LaMarsh?
2.	What further action is planned in this welfare?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1. Hon. Allan J. MacEachen, Minister of National Health and Welfare.
2. The five year smoking and health program inaugurated in 1963-64 will continue to inform the public about the risks to health connected with cigarette smoking; encourage smokers to discontinue the habit; dissuade non-smokers from acquiring the habit; and promote research.


HARBOUR IMPROVEMENTS, ARNES, MAN.
Mr. Stefanson: Has the government any plans for improving harbour facilities at Arnes, Manitoba, and when will these plans be carried out?


George James McIlraith: No.


'SINKING OF &quot;SUZANNE&quot; ON LAKE WINNIPEG
Mr. Stefanson: Did the boat Suzanne sink on Lake Winnipeg, Manitoba, in September, 1965, when nine lives were lost and, if so (a) has the government ordered an inquiry into the sinking, and (b) what form will the inquiry take and when and where will hearings be held?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The motor vessel Suzanne E. sank during a storm on lake Winnipeg on 24 September 1965, with the loss of nine lives; and (a) the casualty was
Questions
investigated by the Department of Transport under the provisions of the Canada Shipping Act; and the deaths were also the subject of a coroner's inquest at which the investigating officer of the Department of Transport was called as a witness. It does not appear that any additional information would be forthcoming if a further public inquiry were held and, accordingly, none is intended; but a report of the findings of the departmental investigator is being prepared and will be made public, (b) Not applicable.


TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION, CHARLOTTETOWN, P.E.I.
Mr. MacLean (Queens): With regard to the construction of Department of Transport agency facilities at Charlottetown (a) what was the estimated date of completion of each prime contract and when were these contracts, in fact, completed, and what was the total cost of each (b) what contracts have been let and are yet to be completed and what are the estimated dates of completion and what is the cost of each (c) are any contracts to complete this program yet to be let and, if so, what is the estimated cost of same?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: (a) Contracts completed: Marine wharf, estimated date of completion, April 2, 1963. Actual completion, July 9, 1964. Delay due to change by Department of Public Works in foundation design after contract awarded. Soil conditions were worse than borings indicated. Total cost, estimated to date-$1,681,983 but final costs not yet adjusted.
(b)	Contracts let and incomplete: Marine stores and offices, estimated date of completion, September 30, 1966. Cost $643,964.
(c)	Contracts to be let: (i) Marine shops, estimated cost $350,000.; (ii) Buoy shed, estimated cost $30,000.


PURCHASES OF JAPANESE PLYWOOD
Mr. Laprise: 1.	What was the dollar value of plywood bought by Canada from Japan In 1963, 1964 and 1965?
2.	Has the elimination of restrictions imposed upon Japanese plywood influenced the volume of imports of that product since the end of 1964?
3.	Have any complaints been received from competing Canadian industries and, if so, what does the government intend to do in this respect?
4.	In order of importance, what are the types of Japanese plywood that are the most popular in Canada?


Mitchell William Sharp: 1. According to the data published by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, the dollar

February 16, 1966
Questions
value of Canadian plywood imports from Japan is as follows:

1962	5,516
1963	3,626
1964	6,043 First 10 months
1964	4,258
1965	4,167
Source: D.B.S. Trade of Canada, Imports by Commodities.
2.	The restraint applied by the government of Japan on exports of plywood to Canada was lifted at the beginning of 1964; during 1964, the volume of Canada's imports of plywood from Japan were substantially higher than in 1963. Imports in the first ten months of 1965 were slightly greater than during the same period in 1964.
It is not possible to single out any one reason for the increase in plywood imports from Japan, although the lifting of the restraint no doubt had some bearing on the increase in imports.
3.	Last year the government received representations from the Canadian Hardwood Plywood Association requesting various measures of support because of increased import competition. Following a meeting between officials of several government departments and representatives of the association, a questionnaire was prepared in co-operation with the executive of the association, and directed to all known Canadian hardwood plywood producers. The purpose of the questionnaire was to provide up to date information on all factors contributing to the present situation of the industry. The questionnaire was sent out in October and a follow-up letter was mailed to each of the manufacturers early in January. At present, out of a total of twenty-four companies that are members of the association, completed replies have been received from five firms; there has been correspondence with a number of others, and their final replies are awaited. Replies have also been received from a number of hardwood plywood producers who are not members of the Canadian Hardwood Plywood Association, as well as several letters from firms that produce hardwood veneer only.
The increase in the volume of imports and the representations received from the industry have been drawn to the attention of the Japanese government; it is hoped, with the co-operation of the industry, that the survey
TMr. Sharp.]
of the effect of imports on the Canadian market and on Canadian firms will be completed in the near future.
4.	According to the Japanese Ministry of Finance export statistics for 1964, the types of plywood exported to Canada according to the volume are: Luaun plywood, not less than 3.2 mm; Luaun plywood, not less than 4 mm; but less than 6.4 mm; further finished plywood.


CONTRIBUTION TO UN TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FUND
Mr. Laprise: How much has the government contributed annually to the special technical assistance fund of the United Nations since the inception of the fund?
[Translation1


Paul Joseph James Martin: 1. Since the inception of the United Nations Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance Canada has made annual contributions to the program as follows: 1950-51, $850,000; 1952-53, $750,000; 1953-54, $800,000; 1954-55, $1,470,000; 195556, $1,480,000; 1956-57, $1,770,000; 1957-58, $1,930,000; 1958-59, $1,950,000; 1959-60, $1,920,000; 1960-61, $1,940,000; 1961-62, $2,220,000; 1962-63, $2,340,000; 1963-64, $2,320,000; 1964-65, $2,330,000; 1965-66, $2,330,000.


SALARIES AND WAGES, TRADE AND COMMERCE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Godin: What amounts were spent by the Department of Trade and Commerce, during the years 1960 and 1965, for the payment of (a) salaries and wages (b) professional and special services?


Robert Henry Winters: 1960: (a) Salaries and Wages, $14,199,787; (b) Professional and Special Services, $647,282.
1965: (a) Salaries and Wages, $22,540,565; (b) Professional and Special Services, $1,135,135.
Note: The above figures include Dominion Bureau of Statistics.


SUGAR BEET PULP MARKETING
Mr. Fairwealher: What percentage of the 1965 sugar beet pulp crop was marketed in (a) Canada (b) the United States (c) other countries?


Robert Henry Winters: Information on the 1965 production of sugar beet pulp is not available. In
February 16, 1966

1964 shipments of dried sugar beet pulp and sugar beet pulp with molasses added amounted to 74,800 tons. How much of the 1964 production was consumed in Canada or exported is not known.


SUBSIDY PAYMENTS ON CREAM
Mr. Rynard: 1.	What is the differential in subsidy paid for sweet cream, grade one cream, and grade two cream?
2.	On what basis are they classified?


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Agriculture):: 1. The Agricultural Stabilization Board pays producers a subsidy of 10.9 cents per pound butterfat regardless of quality when the cream is manufactured into creamery butter. Price differentials between special, first and second grade are under provincial jurisdiction. These differentials vary from province to province.
2. The grades of cream used for the manufacture of butter are based primarily on flavour and acidity.


USE OF FIREFIGHTING EQUIPMENT, FORT CHIMO
Mr. McCleave: 1.	What firefighting equipment is used by the Department of Transport at Fort Chimo?
2.	Was the use of any of such equipment requested but refused In the case of a fire which gutted the home of an Eskimo, named Jacob Gordon and, if so, on what grounds?
3.	Is there now a policy by which federal firefighting equipment may be used outside federal properties in the North?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. The department maintains one 1950 Willys Jeep at Fort Chimo airport. The extinguishant medium of this vehicle consists of 300 lbs. of dry chemical powder for extinguishing flammable liquid fires.
2.	A request was received from the Department of Northern Affairs for the use of a fire truck. When informed by the airport manager that the DOT vehicle was not a fire truck in the normal sense and that the DNA water truck was more suitable for the purpose it was decided to use the water truck.
3.	The use of departmental vehicles for fighting fires on other than federal properties is at the discretion of the airport manager.


INVITATIONS TO EXPO '67
Mr. Allard: With regard to persons of distinction whom the government intends to invite to Expo '67 during the centennial celebrations (a) will invitations be
Questions
sent to heads of state and, if so, to whom among them (b) when will the said invitations be sent and will they all be sent at the same time (c) will an invitation be sent soon to His Holiness, Pope Paul VI, head of the Vatican state?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The question of invitations to persons of distinction of other states to visit Canada in 1967 is at present under active consideration.


WAGES OF MOTOR TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES, HALIFAX
Mr. Douglas: 1.	Why are the rates of pay for motor transport employees at HMC Dockyard, Halifax, N.S., determined by reference to the rates paid by seven shipyards in the maritimes and St. Lawrence areas, whereas the rates for the motor transport at HMCS Shearwater are determined by reference to prevailing rates in the transport industry?
2.	What is the shift differential paid to workers employed in the motor transport section at HMC Dockyard, Halifax?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associate Minister of National Defence):: 1. All rates of pay in HMC Dockyard, Halifax, are based now upon one comparison thereby eliminating industrial disputes previously caused when more than one area of comparison was used in determining rates at the Dockyard. In so far as HMCS Shearwater is concerned, the motor transport rates are established, like all other trades at the air station, against rates prevailing in the Halifax area. The Halifax area is one of the many geographical areas selected by the Department of Labour to collect wage rate data from outside employers. Such data is used as a basis for a recommendation to Treasury Board to establish rates of pay for prevailing rate employees in the area.
2. Time and one eighth for work on a night shift has been approved.


CHIBOUGAMAU, QUE., RESOLUTION ON FAMILY ALLOWANCES
Mr. Laprise: 1.	Did the government receive a resolution from the city of Chibougamau, asking that family allowances be increased to $25 monthly for each child?
2.	Does the government intend to grant this request?
[Translation1


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1. Yes.
2. As this is a matter of government policy, any announcement will be made by the government at the appropriate time.
Questions

February 16, 1966


SOUTH SASKATCHEWAN RIVER DAM
Mr. Lind: In respect of the Saskatchewan dam (a) what has been the federal financial contribution to date (b) what has been the provincial financial contribution to date (c) what is the cost of power installation by Saskatchewan Hydro (1) what amount on site power will be installed (ii) what is the estimated cost per kilowatt (d) was there an undertaking by the province to service an area of land for irrigation and, if so, how many acres (e) how many acres of land for irrigation have been made available (f) what is now the total final cost of the project (g) has the water of this lake become alkaline?


John James Greene: 1. (a) Canada's contribution to capital works to December 31, 1965, taking into account the sharing of costs as provided under the agreement, is $76,878,636.
(b)	The province of Saskatchewan reports its contribution to capital works to December 31, 1965, taking into account the sharing of costs as provided under the agreement, is $22,159,836.
(c)	* The cost of power installation in the initial stage is estimated at $23,000,000. (i) Initially 252,000 horsepower of a potential
400.000	horsepower at full development, (ii) The estimated cost of the power facilities is $123 per kilowatt in the initial installation.
(d)	Yes, 50,000 acres within one year of the reservoir being raised to minimum irrigation level and to develop the entire irrigation system as rapidly as practicable.
(e)	* The province of Saskatchewan is presently planning and constructing works for
40.000	acres.
(f)	* The cost of the project, including ultimate power and irrigation development, is estimated to be $209,000,000.
(g)	The lake created by the dam is only partially filled as construction is not completed. There have been no indication that this lake is, or will become alkaline.
*Part of the information given in these answers has been assembled from data published by agencies of the province of Saskatchewan.


APPLICATION OF PENSION PLAN, ATOMIC ENERGY LTD.
Mr. Hopkins: Is the government considering laying down a definite ruling on the stacking or integration of the Canada Pension Plan in so far as the employees of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, at Chalk River, are concerned, or are the employees going to be given a choice?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: 1. All Atomic Energy of Canada Limited salaried employees engaged on a continuing basis-whether or not they are included in a bargaining unit-come under the Public Service Superannuation Act. For them, the Canada Pension Plan will be integrated with public service superannuation in the same way as for federal civil servants.
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited employees paid on the basis of hourly rates do not come under the Public Service Superannuation Act. At Chalk River nuclear laboratories, except for guards, all these employees are included in bargaining units, and collective agreements between Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and the unions concerned have recently been signed. In these agreements, a partial integration and a partial stacking of Canada Pension Plan and the pension plan previously in effect have been agreed upon. This same arrangement has been put into effect for the guards.


MILITARY HOSPITAL, CAMP PETAWAWA
Mr. Hopkins: In view of the urgent need for hospital facilities, has the government considered the construction of a new hospital for military personnel in Camp Petawawa and, if so, at what stage are any plans in this regard?


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: The question is under consideration. Planning is at the preliminary stage.


COMMEMORATIVE STAMP, MIGRATORY BIRD TREATY
Mr. MacLean (Queens): Is it the intention of the Post Office Department as the United States post office is doing to issue in March of this year a special stamp to commemorate the fiftieth anniversary of the migratory bird treaty between Canada and the United States?


Hon. Jean-Pierre Cole (Posimasfer General):: No. As a result of the contribution the Post Office is making in commemorating the centennial of confederation, the philatelic program for 1966-67 is one of the heaviest in Canada's history. Numerous outstanding subjects have been suggested for portrayal on postage stamps, therefore, it is necessary to defer many worthy suggestions with national and international connotations.
February 16. 1966

1966 SEAL HUNT, GULF OF ST. LAWRENCE


Mr. MacLean (Queens): 1.	Will any foreign countries be allowed to hunt seals in the gulf of St. Lawrence during 1966?
2.	Will there be a quota on the total number of seals which may be killed in the gulf of St. Lawrence in 1966?
3.	What conservation measures, if any, will be in force with regard to the killing of hair seals on the high seas in the North Atlantic in 1966?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: 1. Norway, the only country other than Canada that has hunted seals in the gulf of St. Lawrence in modern times, consented to refrain from sealing in 1965 and has renewed this consent in 1966.
2.	The quota is the same as last year; namely, 50,000 young seals.
3.	Prohibition to kill harp and hood seals from May 1st to the 11th of March next following, both days inclusive, and to kill harp seals in breeding patches.


EMPLOYEES COVERED BY LABOUR CODE DEFERMENT APPLICATIONS
Mr. Orlikow: How many employees are covered by submissions for deferment under sections 51 and 52 of the Canada Labour (Standards) Code that were pending on July 1, 1965, and are, therefore, not covered by the provisions of the Canada Labour (Standards) Code, even though they come under the jurisdiction of the federal government?


Mr. B. S. Mackasey (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Labour):: This information is not available. Most of the employers making submissions for deferment did not supply information as to the number of employees affected.


RABIES PROBLEM, ONTARIO AND QUEBEC
Mr. Rynard: 1.	Is there an unsatisfactory chronic residue of rabies remaining in Canada, particularly in Ontario and Quebec?
2.	Will the government advise what research is now being done and what additional steps will now be taken to deal with this problem?


John James Greene: 1. A reservoir of infection persists, in various wildlife species in Ontario and Quebec.
2. Research by the Department of Agriculture, Animal Diseases Research Institute, has been in the field of developing more rapid tests for the diagnosis of rabies in animals, as well as on studies of the various vaccines available for the immunization of dogs and other animals against rabies.
Orders for Returns
Rabies in animals is a reportable disease under the animal contagious diseases regulations and the department's control program embodies investigation of reported cases, diagnosis, referral of human exposures to medical authorities, quarantines, and free dog vaccination clinics in the infected areas. In addition, a rabies indemnity program provides assistance to owners where domestic livestock have died as a result of rabies.


GRAIN STORAGE, CHURCHILL
Mr. Korchinski: How much grain has been in storage at Churchill for each month since the closing of shipping from that port in 1965?


John James Greene: The same quantity of grain has been in store each month at Churchill since the close of the 1965 shipping season, viz: 824,115 bushels wheat; 5,526 bushels mixed feed oats; 491 tons sample grain; 1,417 tons screenings.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Tucker: What was the total production of all minerals, in tons and dollar value, in each province of Canada from (a) January 1 to December 31, 1964, and (b) January 1 to December 31, 1965, inclusive?
Return tabled.


PROVINCIAL ARDA PROGRAMS
Mr. Allard: 1.	Which provinces have included Indian lands and Indians in the ARDA program?
2.	What is the nature and location of each ARDA project in Quebec whether accepted or under consideration?
3.	In what provinces are there joint advisory committees to advise the province and the federal government on ARDA projects?
4.	How much was spent in each province, under the ARDA program prior to December 31, 1965?
Return tabled.


PRESERVATION OF INDIAN SHRINE, SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. Brand: 1.	Has any consideration been given to extending aid to the Cree Indians of Elbow, Saskatchewan, in their anxiety to have the 400-ton Plains Cree shrine (Mistaseni) moved to safe ground before its possible flooding by the waters of the South Saskatchewan dam reservoir?
2.	Will consideration be given to the formation of a special parliamentary committee to inquire into the need for a national antiquities act that would protect Indian historic objects and monuments such as the Plains Cree shrine (Mistaseni) from the reservoir of the South Saskatchewan dam?
Return tabled.

February 16. 1966
Motions for Papers MOTIONS FOR PAPERS


Mr. Albert Bechard (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, notice of motion No. 88 is acceptable to the government, subject to the usual reservations regarding classified documents and subject to the approval of the provincial and municipal authorities, if necessary, and to the Indian organization concerned.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations and conditions expressed by the parliamentary secretary is it the pleasure of the house that notice of motion No. 88 be adopted?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Translation1


Albert Béchard: Would Your Honour call notices of motions No. 10, 83, 86 and 90? I would ask that the remaining notices of motions stand.



IDENTICAL BIDS FOR ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 10-Mr. Orlikow:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence between municipalities, provincial governments, hydro-electric systems, etc., and the Department of Justice, combines division, in the past three years regarding the submission of these agencies of identical tenders when bids for equipment or supplies have been called for.
Hon. Guy Favreau (President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, I have had occasion to discuss the terms of this motion with the hon. member for Winnipeg North, and it would seem appropriate to include papers relating to a period beginning January 18, 1963 and continuing to date, and to include also within the scope of the motion such municipal agencies as school boards, public utilities and hospitals. There will, of course, have to be the usual reservations with respect to obtaining the permission of the governments concerned. Hon. members are also aware of the long standing policy respecting the principle of privacy inherent in the act not to make public, before a report has been published, any facts about an inquiry currently in progress or which may give rise to an inquiry. Subject to these reservations I will endeavour to locate and table the papers in question.


Mr. Orlikow:: This is agreeable to me, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations expressed by the minister, shall this motion carry?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 83-Mr. Knowles:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all the copies of documents Sled by Canadian PaciSc Investments Limited with the United States securities and exchange commission in Washing^ ton in the possession of the Privy Council office and the Department of Finance as noted in the reply to question No. 52 as reported on page 573 of Hansard for February 2, 1966.
Guy Favreau: Mr. Speaker, I understand from a discussion I have had with the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre that if the government voluntarily tables the documents referred to in the motion, he has no objection to withdrawing his motion.


Mr. Knowles:: That is correct, Mr. Speaker. So long as the documents are tabled I have no objection to withdrawing the formal motion.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the motion dropped?
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.
CONSOLIDATION OF SCHOOLS, LIBAU, MAN. Motion No. 86-Mr. Schreyer:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all correspondence exchanged between the Indian affairs branch of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration and the (a) department of education of Manitoba (b) chief and council of the Brokenhead Indian reserve, and (c) Libau School District, regarding consolidation of schools in the area of Libau, Manitoba, and the Brokenhead Indian reserve.


Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, this is entirely agreeable, subject to the usual reservations with respect to documents which are private, and subject to the approval of the government of the province of Manitoba.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations and conditions expressed by the minister, shall the motion carry?


Some hon. Members:: Carried.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 88-Mr. Schreyer:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence with the Indian affairs branch and/or the Department of Northern Affairs and
February 16, 1966
[Stage Direction]
National Resources, relative to the problem of water pollution in the Winnipeg river as it affects the town of Pine Falls and the Fort Alexander Indian reserve.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 90-Mr. Coales:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of the "Preview Commentary" heard on the C.B.C. the morning of February 11, 1966.
Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Speaker, as the matter referred to in the motion is not a document within the custody and control of the government, I understand from discussions which have been held with my hon. friend that he agrees to withdraw the formal motion. On that condition I am prepared to table a copy of the document in question on a voluntary basis.


Mr. Coates:: I am in agreement, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that the motion be withdrawn and the document tabled at this time?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.


Mr. Speaker:: Shall the remaining motions stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Prime Minister whether his attention has been directed to remarks of the Liberal leader in Ontario who, in dramatic fashion, set forth the detrimental effects of the United States economic guide lines; and in particular whether the government has looked into the question raised by him to the effect that these guide lines restrict the amount of capital available in Canada, that U.S. corporations are draining money from Canada for investment in foreign countries, and that:
Total borrowings for the past five months come to at least $300 million in U.S. funds, much of it raised in Ontario.
Does the Prime Minister agree with Mr. Thompson's contention that this borrowing is raising interest rates in Canada and taking dollars out of this country at a time when 23033-841
Inquiries of the Ministry Canada desperately needs them for its own development?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I have missed the report to which my right hon. friend has referred, but I shall be glad to have a look at it.


John George Diefenbaker: Will the Prime Minister say whether there is any justification in the point of view expressed that Canada is a kind of economic beagle in the way it is being treated?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It seems to me that the right hon. Leader of the Opposition is asking the right hon. Prime Minister to express an opinion about the justification for an article which appeared in a newspaper. I suggest that question is not in order.


Hon. J. W. Monteilh (Perth):: I should like to ask the Prime Minister a supplementary question. Will he also determine whether certain companies such as General Electric, B. F. Goodrich and General Foods, among others, have transferred funds to the United States from Canadian subsidiaries?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest that question is also out of order.


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance.
Does the minister intend to institute a new procedure which would force Canadian companies, subsidiaries of American companies, to reveal to the Department of Finance their movements of capital to foreign countries?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, we do know a good deal about this situation, and perhaps it would be of interest to the house if I stated some of the facts concerning the transfer of funds to the United States. Canadians have for many years-


Mr. Nielsen:: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point
of order. This is the shortest day in the week as far as our sitting hours are concerned, and we only have half an hour for oral questions. I am sure the minister and the house will agree to revert to motions so the minister can make a statement to which we will have the opportunity of replying. I am sure everyone will agree to a request to revert to motions for that purpose.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
February 16, 1966

Inquiries of the Ministry


George James McIlraith: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I should like to say that if a question is proper, then it is proper for the minister to answer it. If on the other hand, as the hon. member suggests, we should revert to motions, the question would have been ruled out of order.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I recognize the question as being of a general nature, and that perhaps it should not have been allowed. However, it has been allowed, and I suggest that the minister should be allowed to reply if he so wishes at this time. His reply should be brief, of course, as that is one of the requirements in respect of questions and answers at this time.


Mitchell William Sharp: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. During the first nine months of 1965, the last period for which statistics are available, the net purchases by Canadians of foreign securities amounted to approximately $62 million. Preliminary indications are that during the last quarter of 1965 net purchases by Canadians of foreign securities, including those that were described by the leader of the Liberal party in Ontario, were only about $10 million.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. You ruled my question out of order and said it was improper. Now the minister is trying to surreptitiously make this statement.


An hon. Member:: He is trying to smuggle it in.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Perhaps the explanation given by the minister so far is sufficient to answer the question and we should proceed to another question.
(Translation]


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance because he did not reply to my previous one.
Does the minister intend to institute a new procedure which would force Canadian companies, subsidiaries of American companies, to reveal their transfer of capital, something which is not being done at the present time?


Mr. Speaker:: My view at this time is that this question is of a very general nature and might be placed on the order paper.



BROADCASTING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquiilam):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State regarding a B B.G. regulation which forbids political broadcasts for 48 hours prior to an election or by-election. There is a by-election today in the province of Saskatchewan and "The Nation's Business" program at six o'clock tonight has been cancelled. I want to ask the minister why the C.T.V. program on Monday evening featuring the Prime Minister being interviewed by Pierre Burton was not also cancelled. Will the Secretary of State indicate whether the regulation in question applies only to the C.B.C. and not to private stations?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest that is not a proper question. The hon. member is referring to something that has already happened. Perhaps he will put the question on the order paper.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please I feel that the question directed to the Secretary of State is not a proper question. Certainly it is irregular.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The program to which I referred is to be broadcast tonight at six o'clock and, unless some action is taken, that program will be cancelled. I am raising a question as to whether the regulation of the B.B.G. applies only to the C.B.C., or whether it should be applied fairly across the board. Since the C.T.V. did not observe this particular rule, I am wondering whether the minister will allow this program to proceed at six o'clock tonight.


John George Diefenbaker: Surely that is a proper question.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps I did not understand the question correctly in the first instance. I thought the hon. member indicated that the program at six o'clock tonight had been cancelled. I apologize if I did not understand him correctly. Perhaps the minister would like to reply to the question.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry I did not know of this situation. It seems to me that this regulation should apply to both private and public broadcasting stations. I assure the hon. gentleman that I will look into the situation well
February 16, 1966

prior to six o'clock and, although I will not have an opportunity to inform the house about it, I will pass on the information to the hon. gentleman.



HEALTH AND WELFARE

[Stage Direction]
MEDICARE-IS FEDERAL PLAN TO BE COMPULSORY?
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George Hees (Northumberland):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the latest Gallup poll shows that a clear majority of Canadians prefer a medicare plan on a voluntary basis, does the government intend to proceed with its plans to introduce a plan on a compulsory basis?


Mr. Starr:: They don't believe in Gallup polls any more since the last election.


Mr. Speaker:: This also is a question of a general nature. It is sometimes difficult for the Chair to determine whether this type of question should be asked, but I would be inclined to rule this one out of order.



THE MINISTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the right hon. Prime Minister and has to do with the efficiency and effectiveness both of the parliamentary process and governmental departments. In view of the fact that on Monday night the Prime Minister stated there was not time to think, there was not time to make decisions, there was not time to get parliamentary action on important matters, is the Prime Minister considering giving the parliamentary secretaries some greater degree of authority and responsibility?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. This is not a question that can be asked at this time; it is of a general nature.



OLD AGE SECURITY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Erik Nielsen: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister and ask if he is in a position to say whether he is now considering the increase
Inquiries of the Ministry requested in old age pensions, and whether he is asking the provinces to undertake any share in any such increase?


Lester Bowles Pearson: This is a matter of very important government policy, Mr. Speaker, and my hon. friend knows of course that it would not be proper to answer it on the orders of the day.



HARBOURS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, because of its importance I desire to direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister, although I realize it may have to be answered by the Minister of Transport.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Harold Edward Winch: I have been advised by telephone this afternoon from Vancouver that it is thought a settlement has been reached relative to the ownership of harbour properties in the port of Vancouver. It is thought that a decision has been reached in this regard. I should like to ask this question. If this is correct, will the report be tabled in the house and a statement made; and if it is not correct, can we anticipate that the report of the commission appointed to arbitrate this matter between the harbour commission and the C.P.R. will be tabled as soon as possible?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport will be able to give a brief answer to this question.


An hon. Member:: Make it brief.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: The briefest answer I can give is, I don't know.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Whitney Pickersgill: But I do know that
negotiations are going on, and the last report I had was that they looked as though they were very close to conclusion. I will look into the matter just as soon as I can and reply further.


Harold Edward Winch: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. My information from Vancouver today is that a decision has been arrived at and there is agreement on this matter.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.
February 16, 1966

Inquiries o} the Ministry HIGHWAY SAFETY



REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSINGS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. V. Noble (Grey North):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct this question to the Minister of Transport. Would the minister make a contribution toward highway safety by way of the removal of railway level crossings? Second, where this is not practicable, would he instal signal protection devices; and third, would he consider making this a centennial project?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. These are very important and interesting questions which might be placed on the order paper.



SUGGESTED RECALL OF TRADE COMMISSIONERS FOR CONSULTATIONS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Now that he has returned from his visit to Paris where he met with his trade commissioners in Europe, has he been able to make a decision to have all his trade commissioners from all over the world confer with the businessmen of Canada in order to better acquaint them with trade opportunities throughout the world?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Speaker, I had a very productive and very interesting meeting with 29 trade commissioners from 25 countries. We discussed at considerable length the opportunities for further trade by Canadian business in those countries. We concluded that there are opportunities if businessmen can take advantage of them on the basis of price, quantity and good service, which I am sure they can. We discussed the best means of their taking advantage of the Canadian trade commissioner service. All these matters are under consideration and you may be sure, Mr. Speaker, that we shall use them to the best advantage of the Canadian business community.


George Harris Hees: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister, after his preliminary reply, now just answer my question yes or no?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.
[Mr. Speaker.)


Hon. E. D. Fulion (Kamloops):: I have a question for the minister, Mr. Speaker. Did the minister have an equally productive meeting with the directors of Brinco at lunch today; and if so, can he report to us the decision arrived at there?
[Translation1


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I hope that he enjoyed his stay in France and that he appreciated the beauties of the French language.
Could he tell the house whether the proposed uranium transaction between Canada and France was discussed during his trip and whether he has anything to announce in that regard?


Robert Henry Winters: I did enjoy the beauties of the French language; I even tried a bit of it myself. As regards our discussion on uranium, I did indeed have very interesting discussions with the minister responsible, Mr. Peyrefitte. We exchanged views on the position of each other's government. He is a new minister in his present portfolio, as am I, and we regarded this as an opportunity to get to know each other. While I cannot inform the house of any substantial news, we did agree that it would be in our mutual interest to meet from time to time.



WATER RESOURCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Have any discussions yet been initiated with the government of the United States to commence joint action on the elimination of pollution of lakes Erie and Ontario, in accordance with the recommendations of the International Joint Commission?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, as my hon. friend is perhaps aware, the International Joint Commission which is representative of both countries and is an agency established by both governments has made an interim report on actions that might be taken with regard to pollution in the Great Lakes. I believe that my colleague the minister of energy and resources will have something to
February 16, 1966

say on this subject in so far as action contemplated by the federal government is concerned.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the minister is going to answer my question, because I would be glad to hear the answer. I am interested in knowing whether as a result of this report discussions have been commenced.
1Translation1


Jean-Luc Pepin: Mr. Speaker, I was somewhat reluctant to answer that question, because it may take quite a bit of time.
The first recommendation of the international joint commission asks for the support of public powers. In this regard, I believe the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Martin) said, when his estimates were up for consideration, that the federal government would keep subsidizing that survey. There are also four departments of the federal government which are now contributing to the research work of the commission. Such work will be continued at a cost of several million dollars. In that way, I feel the first recommendation is implemented. The second recommendation, however, is much broader. It suggests:
That all industrial, urban and residual waters be adequately treated and that no combined sanitary and storm sewers be allowed, etc.
The implementation of those recommendations depends mainly, on the municipalities and the provinces, I think. However, it has become obvious that in the field of pollution someone must look after the common interests and assume the responsibility for coordinating the action of the various levels of government-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: All I asked was a simple question. Have discussions been entered into with the United States government with a view to carrying out, along with the province of Ontario these recommendations? I know there are a lot of problems, but we have to make a beginning. Have the discussions started?


Paul Joseph James Martin: As I have indicated, in so far as action by the two governments is concerned, they have joined together in a request resulting in the interim study which has set forth certain recommendations. Now each government will consider those recommendations. The federal government's
Inquiries of the Ministry position has been stated by my colleague. The position of the United States government will be taken by it, as will the position of the province of Ontario, the municipalities in that province and the municipalities in the state of Michigan.


Erik Nielsen: Have they started discussions?



ONTARIO-ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR CONSERVATION PROJECTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and this is further to my question of several weeks ago and the minister's affirmative reply. Has the minister or any member of his department as yet opened discussions with the Ontario Minister of Resources or any member of his department concerning the payment by the federal government of its share, namely, 37.5 per cent of the cost of land for conservation projects in the province of Ontario? I ask this question because several large conservation projects in Ontario are being held up because the present government is apparently reneging on its agreed payment for its share of these costs.


Mr. Speaker:: The question is not submitted in the proper way, and I suggest for this reason it is out of order.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Will the Prime Minister say, in view of the statement made yesterday in Toronto by General Maxwell Taylor, special aide to the President in connection with matters such as Viet Nam, whether the United States has expressed a desire for, and I quote, "very tangible aid" from Canada so far as Viet Nam is concerned? Has there been any such request, and what kind of aid has been asked for by the United States?


Lester Bowles Pearson: We have had no request from the United States government asking, to use my right hon. friend's words, "more tangible aid". We have had discussions with the United States regarding the increase in our economic assistance in Viet Nam.
February 16, 1966

Inquiries of the Ministry


John George Diefenbaker: Will the Prime Minister say what would be the nature of the additional economic assistance that is being requested?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The Prime Minister suggests that I might reply to this part of the question. The total available aid to Viet Nam under our external aid appropriations in 1965-66 is about a million and a half dollars. This represents an increase of half a million over the situation a year ago. We have been endeavouring to give further medical assistance. We have a plan already prepared with the assistance of Dr. Gingras of the Rehabilitation Institute in Montreal-he was in the city yesterday on his return from Saigon-and we are prepared to send a medical team just as soon as the facilities we have requested can be put at our disposal by the government of South Viet Nam.


John George Diefenbaker: What size of team?


Paul Joseph James Martin: It could be a team of three doctors and some 15 other personnel. This is a project which all the parties concerned, having discussed this matter, agreed would be a desirable Canadian contribution. In addition, there is the offer of the Canadian government, made by the Prime Minister, to assist further on the Mekong river project and the general scheme of social reconstruction and rehabilitation mentioned by the President of the United States a few months ago.


Mr. J. A. Mongrain (Trois-Rivieres):: In view of the fact that we may find ourselves more deeply involved in Viet Nam, will the Prime Minister consider the possibility of sending a delegation from this house to study the situation thoroughly on the spot and then report to the house?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. This is a very interesting suggestion and perhaps the Prime Minister will take it into consideration. The hon. member should place the question on the order paper.


HEALTH AND WELFARE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. William Dean Howe (Hamilton South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare in respect of a statement in

today's Globe and Mail attributed to an official of his department. In view of the increasingly obvious dangers to humans and livestock from the use of pesticides and herbicides, is the minister considering immediate action to restrict the use of these chemicals?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: As I pointed out in a reply to an earlier question, the research is continuing with regard to this problem. The department is taking the usual action in controlling the residue that may be found in food and other materials for human consumption. This work of the department is going along in the normal, effective way.


William Dean Howe: May I ask a supplementary question. Is there any thought of abandoning the use of these obviously dangerous chemicals until such time as it can be determined what degree of danger they represent?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: To my knowledge, there is no food on the market in which there is a dangerous level of any such chemical.


BANKRUPTCY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Raymond Langlois (Meganlic):: I should like to ask the Minister of Labour if he has received any specific recommendations from labour leaders in the C.L.C. or the C.N.T.U. regarding labour's position in relation to the bankruptcy problem? If so, does the minister intend to report to the house on those recommendations?


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minisler of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and other members of the government did receive a memorandum containing a great many suggestions and representations yesterday from the Canadian Labour Congress, all of which will be carefully considered. I can also inform the hon. member that the government will meet with leaders and members of the C.N.T.U. delegation later this afternoon.


Raymond Langlois: May I ask a supplementary question?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. We have only a short time, and I suggest we should allow other members an opportunity to ask a question.
[Laterl [Translation1


Raymond Langlois: Mr. Speaker, may I direct to the Minister of Justice a question
February 16, 1966

supplementary to the one I asked the Minister of Labour a little earlier?
Will the terms of reference of the committee on the Bankruptcy Act allow labour unions to express their views in the same manner as businessmen?


Louis-Joseph-Lucien Cardin: Mr. Speaker, I am of the opinion that there will not be any discrimination between labour unions and industries about representations that can be made later to the committee.


MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT LOANS ACT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. Russell MacEwan (Pictou):: I have a short question for the Minister of Finance. In view of the minister's meeting with provincial ministers yesterday, and in view of the importance of this subject to many municipalities in the Atlantic area as well as other parts of the country, will the minister please advise the house whether he has now made a decision to extend the terms of the Municipal Development Loans Act beyond March 31?


Mitchell William Sharp: May I point out to the hon. member that that date was fixed by parliament, not by the government, and it would require an amendment to the legislation. After receiving representations from the provincial ministers yesterday, I am discussing this matter with my colleagues as to whether we should recommend such an amendment.


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Alberl):: Will the minister keep in mind the promise he made to introduce this legislation early?


REQUEST FOR REPORT ON TARIFF NEGOTIATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce who on St. Valentine's Day, I understand, met with the Canadian delegation to the so-called Kennedy round of tariff negotiations. 1 wonder whether the minister could give any indication to the house of the expectations that might arise from those discussions?
Inquiries of the Ministry Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade
and Commerce): I would be glad to do so, Mr. Speaker, but not in a word. As time is short I suggest that perhaps we can leave this until my estimates are before the house for consideration.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
[Stage Direction]
INQUIRY AS TO EXTENSION TO FARM LABOUR On the orders of the day:
Hon. Hugh John Flemming (Victoria-Carleton):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister able to inform the house whether the government is considering action by which farm labour will be able to qualify for unemployment insurance benefits in the near future?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, that is something we hope to do during this session. When we will get to it I do not quite know.
1 Translation]


HOUSING
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Henri Latulippe (Compton-Frontenac):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Labour? I gave him notice of my question.
Could the minister tell the house if the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation has any intention of making up deficits incurred by other housing organizations, as it is doing already for the city of Montreal with regard to the Habitations Jeanne-Mance?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, the National Housing Act authorizes Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to join with provinces and municipalities in the development of housing projects and to pay deficits or losses in connection with the operation of such projects. If the housing corporations referred to by my hon. friend in his question are agencies of the province or of the municipality, then they probably would qualify for assistance; otherwise not. However, I must say that each project must be considered in the light of the circumstances of the project itself, since circumstances so frequently differ. I could not answer a general question of this kind without particulars.

February 16/ 1366
Supply-Transport POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


STEPS TO OVERCOME LOSS ON SECOND CLASS MAIL
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Max Saltsman (Waterloo South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address my question to the Postmaster General. In view of the Auditor General's request that parliament should give early consideration to ways and means of covering the loss sustained by the Post Office Department in the handling of second class mail, will the Postmaster General indicate what steps he has taken to bring this recommendation before parliament?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. This also is a question which is of a general nature and should be placed on the order paper.


Max Saltsman: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, this question has been hanging fire since 1963 and the Post Office Department has lost about $35 million as a result.


Mr. Speaker:: I realize it is important but the hon. member knows that if he thinks it is that urgent he can always discuss it on the adjournment debate.


Erik Nielsen: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Perhaps the question could be asked tomorrow by the hon. member for Yukon. The time allowed for questions this day has now expired.

House in committee of supply, Mr. Rinfret in the chair.


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT
[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $4,862,900.
The Deputy Chairman:: Shall vote No. 1 carry?


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, in the discussions which have taken place on the first item of the estimates of the Department of Transport many members who represent western ridings have put before the minister what I think are very legitimate complaints in connection with the shortage of box cars at various points throughout the western provinces. So far no satisfaction has been given these members. No assurance has been given to alleviate the anxiety in the minds of the farmers who have not had the same opportunity to ship their grain as others owing to the lack of box cars at certain points.

I think that before we proceed to pass the first item it would be advisable if the minister would now give the committee a clear and concise statement as to what he intends to do to alleviate the situation, not in the future but immediately.


Maurice Rinfret: Order. I am having a little difficulty in hearing the hon. member. Would hon. members please refrain from holding conversations which are too loud so that we can listen to the hon. member for Ontario. Conversations carried on in an undertone will be permitted.


Michael Starr: I ask that something be done not in the future but immediately so that the fears in the minds of hon. members as well as those they represent may be allayed. I invite the minister now to give a firm commitment that he will take some action with regard to this serious situation which will be satisfactory.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I am sure the hon. member will not object if I draw attention to the fact that he has asked me to speak on this occasion.


Mr. Crouse:: Briefly.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, on a point of order, maybe I went too far. If that is the conclusion which he drew from my remarks, may I say it was not intended that the minister should now make his 38th speech. What we want is a clearcut and concise statement.


John Whitney Pickersgill: 
Maurice Rinfret: Do the members of the committee consent to this document being, tabled by the hon. minister and being printed as part of his speech in Hansard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: The table referred to above-is as follows:]
Summary of Box Car Location*
Canadian Box Cars American Box Cars:
Date	on American Lines	on Canadian Lines,Jan.	1, '66	18,666	7069Dec.	1, '65	21,031	7591Nov.	1, '65	20,548	7537Oct.	1, '65	17,351	6281Sept.	1, '65	18,828	5658July	1, '65	16,701	5468Apr.	1, '65	19,729	6552Jan.	1, '65	16,861	7316Oct.	1, '64	17,375	5686July,	1, '64	15,540	6030Apr.	1, '64	15,999	6684Jan.	1, '64	16,157	5808Oct.	1, '63	16,652	5130July	1, '63	17,486	4857Apr.	1, '63	19,289	4851Jan.	1, '63	15,702	4579Oct.	1, '62	18,614	5010July	1, '62	14,861	8611Apr.	1, '62	16,438	5720Jan.	1, '62	16,091	5226Data refers	to reports from	eight major Canadian	railways.	Source: The Railway Association of	
Canada.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Chairman, the minister has told us that the government is doing its best to equalize the quotas and get the wheat moved to the terminals. The minister has not referred to the appalling shortage of box cars during the past four or five months when they were so badly needed. The question 1 asked the other day, which was answered in the house on February 2, gives information as to the targets set by the Wheat Board and the box cars that were available in the period from August 1 to January 20.
We find that the Canadian Wheat Board target during that period for the Canadian Pacific was 33,706 box cars. The number loaded was only 25,218. That represents a shortage of 8,488 in the period from August 1 to January 20.
For Canadian National Railways the target set by the Wheat Board was 28,987 box cars and the number of cars loaded in this period was only 22,284, which means that Canadian National Railways were short by 6,703 box cars. This makes a total target of 62,693 box cars of which only 47,502 were loaded. This

February 16, 1966
Supply-Transport
means that the spread between the targets set by the Wheat Board and the number of box cars loaded was 15,191 or a very substantial gap of 30 per cent. Mr. Chairman, that is a very serious gap indeed. I think that the Minister of Transport has some responsibility to tell the members of the committee and particularly to tell the farmers of the prairie provinces why there was this most appalling shortage. The Wheat Board either set a target which was unrealistic when they set a target of 62,693 box cars or the railways were negligent and derelict in the discharge of their duties when they were able to load only 47,502 cars out of the 62,693 target that had been set by the Wheat Board. Certainly something is wrong. I could give the minister more information if he wants it as to the volume of wheat loaded, the volume of wheat shipped and the amount of wheat in transit. It all shows that we are far behind the targets which have been set.
I hope that the minister can give some explanation to the committee. It is not good enough to tell members of the committee now that the government is going to do its best and that the railways are doing everything they can do to cope with the situation. The bald fact is that the number of box cars loaded was about 30 per cent short of the target set. I think some explanation is due to the committee why there was this serious discrepancy.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, perhaps the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam would allow the Minister of Finance to speak about this matter since the arrangements were made by the Wheat Board with him in his former ministerial capacity. Perhaps my hon. friend would let the Minister of Finance deal with the question rather than my doing so. I am sure that the Minister of Finance is much better informed than I am on this matter.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I should be very happy if the Minister of Finance would reply.


Mr. Olson:: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Minister of Finance to tell the members of this committee what is being done by the government to urge the Canadian Pacific to equalize these quotas? We accept the position which was taken by the Wheat Board and by the government that the railways should move as much grain as possible into an export position before the navigation season closed on the Great Lakes. The Minister of Finance well knows that the Canadian Wheat

Board does not have any authority under Canadian law to direct the railways to place cars at any particular shipping point. The Wheat Board has some authority respecting the distribution of cars to the various elevators at a shipping point but it does not have any authority to direct the railways to place X number of cars at this or that point or for that matter at any shipping point. Some areas, particularly in southern Alberta, have the lowest quotas of any part of Canada. Yet southern Alberta must be one of the closest areas to Vancouver and therefore the movement should have increased more rapidly than in any other part of Canada since navigation closed on the Great Lakes. However, we find that most of the very low delivery quotas at shipping points are still in southern Alberta.
I should like to ask the Minister of Finance if any action is being taken by the government directly through his office or through the office of the Minister of Transport or through the Board of Transport Commissioners, who have some authority in this respect, to equalize the quotas. I realize that now there is no real urgency for getting more grain into lakehead position.


Mr. Horner (Acadia):: Mr. Chairman, before the minister replies to the questions asked of him may I say a word about what has been raised. We are anxious about the box car question. I accept the statement of the Minister of Transport with regard to the Wheat Board and I am sure that most farmers accept it too. The farmers well know and understand the Wheat Board's difficulties in trying to meet shipping orders last fall. However, during December, 1965, and January, 1966, we have seen a continuous deterioration of shipments at prairie points.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
It is all very well to say that the Wheat Board is trying to equalize quotas now and is doing everything it can. We want to know what the government is doing to urge and encourage the C.P.R. to meet its commitments to the people. As the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam has pointed out, the railroads are far behind in the job and grain movement generally has been slow. The Minister of Finance said the other day that grain has not been moving slowly in western Canada. This is not a fact. It has been moving very slowly, particularly from C.P.R. points. The Wheat Board cannot equalize quotas today without the full co-operation of the C.P.R. I ask the
February 16, 1966

minister whether the government has obtained a commitment from the C.P.R. that it will make every effort from now on to help the Wheat Board to equalize these quotas and move grain more rapidly.


Mr. Watson (Assiniboia):: There is one point which I should like the minister to clarify. He mentioned there were 1,600 box cars in the United States in 1962.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Sixteen thousand.


Lawrence E. Watson: Pardon me, sixteen thousand. He also said there were 18,000 in 1966.


John Whitney Pickersgill: It was 18,600, I think.


Lawrence E. Watson: Then the hon. gentleman said this increase was in about the same proportion as the increase in our exports to the United States. Can the minister tell us whether the railway companies have increased their rolling stock in Canada in the same proportion in the last four years?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I doubt it. I think that is one of the difficulties. I think they should have been increasing their rolling stock more rapidly.


Mitchell William Sharp: I listened very carefully to my colleague, the Minister of Transport, explaining the situation with respect to the movement of grain in western Canada and I have no suggestions to make to him. I agree entirely with what he said. I should, however, like to supplement his observations by answering some of the specific questions which were put to me and to my colleague about the current movement of grain and its relation to the targets to which the hon. member for Bur-naby-Coquitlam referred, targets which had been mentioned by either the Minister of Transport or myself in a reply to a written question. These targets were fixed by the Wheat Board, not in agreement with the railways-


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: In consultation with them?


Mitchell William Sharp: No. The railways were aware of them but they did not agree to them. The commitment which the railways made was a general commitment made at the time the government and the Wheat Board were negotiating with the Soviet Union for the very large contract entered into last fall. At that time we had to estimate how much grain we could undertake to deliver to the Soviet Union within this crop year. Needless to say, the main factor involved apart from the size
Supply-Transport
of the crop was the transport facilities available. So we called Canadian National Railways and the Canadian Pacific Railway into consultation-


John George Diefenbaker: On what date was that?


Mitchell William Sharp: It was given in the house some time ago. It was in September of 1965. No, I am sorry, it was in August, 1965. We said to the railway companies: The Soviet Union would like to enter into a contract for the delivery of five million tons of wheat and wheat flour during this crop year. Do you think we would be safe in accepting a contract of this magnitude? Do we have the transportation facilities available?
It will be recalled that in the crop year 1963-64 the railways had moved a total quantity of 595 million bushels of wheat and wheat flour. We had concluded that if we were to fulfil the contract which the Russians were offering to enter into with us and fulfil the other contracts we had on the books or those which were in contemplation from our regular customers, we should need to move some 600 million bushels, approximately the same amount as in 1963-64. The railways replied that they thought they could move this quantity of grain provided there was a good break in the weather and that there was a rapid unloading of cars so that they could be used for further movement. The railways also pointed out to us that the problem this year would be much more difficult than it had been in the crop year 1963-64 because in 1963, when we entered into the first big contract with Russia, Canada was not as prosperous as it was in the fall of 1965. They said they had an arithmetical measurement of the change which had taken place during the interval and that loadings of commodities other than wheat had increased by ten per cent.
In the light of all these factors the railways said: We are prepared to accept this undertaking to move our respective shares of this 600 million bushel quantity. But make no mistake about it, this will be an extremely difficult job. It will mean we shall have to move grain from the prairies from the closest points grain which is ready for shipment and for which there is an immediate market. We cannot be held down by a requirement to equalize quotas throughout the area. This will be a monumental task; we advise you to accept the contract. We will do our part.
That is the extent of the undertaking given by the railway companies. I think it is fair to

February 16, 1966
Supply-Transport
say, and the Minister of Transport agrees, that the railways still believe they will be able to fulfil their undertaking. Indeed, I was gratified to note that by February 2 exports of wheat alone had amounted to 302 million bushels. There may have been one occasion in 1963-64 when we exported as much wheat in a comparable period but the figure I have given can only have been exceeded once. So as far as exports are concerned, a tremendous effort has been made. Extremely large quantities of wheat have been moved out of Canada to fulfil the contracts into which we have entered.
On the prairies there has been great inequality of quotas. I warned the house that this would be the case. The Wheat Board warned the farmers that this would be so. Had it not been for this great inequality of quotas we would not be as far ahead as we are today in the movement of grain. It would have been impossible to have done as much as has been done had there been the customary adherence to equalization.


Mr. McIntosh:: Explain.


Mitchell William Sharp: I say this particularly to the hon. member for Medicine Hat. I do not need to urge or advise the Wheat Board to try to equalize quotas before the end of the year. The board considers this as part of its general mandate. It is very much in the board's own interest that there should be as great an equality as possible. After all, the board markets wheat on behalf of the farmers. This is its sole responsibility.
[DOT] (3:50 pm.)
The hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek accused me the other day of having directed the Wheat Board to fix the quotas to the advantage of a prospective member of the house who did not win a seat. I denied this and I deny it now. Never at any time did I ever direct the Wheat Board as to the level of quotas at any point and I never intend to. I hope the hon. gentleman will apologize for attacking the Wheat Board and casting a reflection on their integrity.


John (Jack) McIntosh: First of all, Mr. Chairman, I am not apologizing either to the Wheat Board or to the minister for sticking up for the farmers I represent. The minister said a few moments ago that he did not direct the Wheat Board in regard to where these quotas should be open. May I tell him that I happen to know that at one point in the constituency of Assiniboia prior to the election of November 8-he can check this instance but it is

generally true all over the constituency-one elevator shipped 104 cars to June 23, 1964, and 103 cars in the new crop year up to December 18, 1965, which was only one car less in the first five months of the new crop year than in all of the previous year.
Also, from September 8, the date of the writ, to November 8 the farmers in that constituency were given an extra three bushels on their quotas, which brought them up to 4 or 5 bushels, while farmers in the rest of the province of Saskatchewan had only 1 or 2 bushel quotas. Can the minister explain that?


Mitchell William Sharp: I certainly cannot explain it because this is the first time I have heard these facts.


John (Jack) McIntosh: But you are the minister. You know them now.


Mitchell William Sharp: The best evidence I can provide the committee is that I did not know this was the situation. The hon. gentleman seems to know far more about it than I do, but I deny that at any time I ever directed the Wheat Board as to what the level of quotas should be at any point. Furthermore, I do not know why the hon. member does not accept the denial of the Chairman of the Wheat Board who said he has never accepted such advice from me or any of my predecessors, including the minister of agriculture in the government which the hon. member supported.


John (Jack) McIntosh: I will accept the minister's denial but it is very coincidental. All we want is an explanation.


John George Diefenbaker: Is that where Argue
lives?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Chairman, I can ask the Wheat Board why they fixed these quotas but it had nothing to do with the election that took place on November 8. I can assure the hon. member of that. May I conclude these remarks? I am sorry I strayed into the territory of the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Would the minister permit another question? In the light of this agreement and in the light of the difficulty last fall in grain movement generally, after the 1964-65 wheat pool is closed will the minister see to it that the annual report of the Wheat Board is submitted to the agricultural committee, as it used to be in the past?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, I will be very happy to see that the report is preferred to the agricultural committee. I know that when the chairman of
February 16, 1966

the board comes here he will deny the allegation of the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek.


John (Jack) McIntosh: He can deny it but I want an explanation.


Mitchell William Sharp: He will deny it. He has publicly denied it, and if he did not deny it I would demand that he would deny it-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mitchell William Sharp: -because I have never at any time given any-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: What the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek wants is an explanation. This is all he said. If the Wheat Board officials appear before the agricultural committee that explanation can be given. This is all we are seeking.


Mitchell William Sharp: This is not what the hon. gentleman said. He accused me of having directed the Wheat Board to increase the quotas in Assiniboia to help Mr. Argue win the election. I deny that and so does the chairman of the Wheat Board.


John (Jack) McIntosh: I said it appeared to me. I did not accuse you. You are the one accusing yourself. You said you would demand that the Wheat Board deny this. You are going to make one demand. Surely you can make two.


Mitchell William Sharp: The only demand I will make on the Wheat Board is the one that parliament has laid upon them, to handle Canadian grain in the best interests of the western farmers and of farmers in all parts of this country. That is the responsibility that parliament has laid upon them, not I. I have no authority to direct them to do anything else. May I just conclude these remarks-


Maurice Rinfret: The hon. member for Rosthern wishes to ask a question.


Mitchell William Sharp: I would like to finish my comments and then I would be very happy to answer any further questions.
As to the future and whether these quotas can be equalized I want to be perfectly frank and forthright with the committee. If in the judgment of the Wheat Board itself it is necessary that there should be some disparity in the level of quotas by the end of this year in order to move to market the maximum quantities of grain that can be moved, I hope that all hon. members will support the Wheat Board in their endeavours to sell as much Canadian grain as possible. I hope they will never be criticized for their endeavours to
Supply-Transport
find markets for our grain. The Wheat Board must be given some opportunity to exercise their judgment in these matters and I hope their efforts will be supported by all parties.


Mr. Nasserden:: The question I should like to ask the minister is, why did the government and he as the minister in charge of the Canadian Wheat Board delay meeting the railways from August 13 until September 25 in regard to this important matter? The Canadian Wheat Board met the railways on August 13, I believe, and it was 42, 43 or 45 days later that the minister and the Minister of Transport met the railways in Winnipeg as a follow-up to that.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Chairman, we met with the railway companies before we signed the contract with the Russians, at which time the railways undertook to move the quantities of grain we felt were necessary to fulfil the contract. The Minister of Transport and I met the railway companies in Winnipeg on September 25 and as a result of that meeting I think there was a considerable improvement in the movement of grain to Fort William.


Maurice Rinfret: Does the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam want to ask a question?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I do not want to ask a question. I want to make some comments.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I believe the Minister of Finance has to go somewhere else, so if there was anyone who wanted to direct a specific question to him that I might not be able to answer perhaps there could be agreement to do that.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I have a specific question.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The remarks I wish to make I want to direct to the Minister of Finance and if he has to leave I should like to do so at this time. I should like to deal with two matters briefly.


Maurice Rinfret: Order, please. We are at a period when questions are being asked of the Minister of Finance. The hon. member for Acadia wishes to ask a question and I would recognize him now.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It will just take a minute.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I want to ask the minister a question. I should like-


Maurice Rinfret: Order. I recognize the hon. member for Acadia before the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam.

February 16, 1966
Supply-Transport


John (Jack) Henry Horner: My question, Mr. Chairman, is with regard to the statement originally made by the Minister of Transport and enlarged on by the Minister of Finance with respect to the equalizing of quotas. Has the government now got a commitment from the C.P.R. that every effort will be made by it to catch up with the C.N.R. with regard to the delivery points that are on C.P.R. lines? In other words, have they now reached an understanding with the C.P.R. and is the railway prepared to work for the general good of Canada and western Canada particularly?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Chairman, from the outset the C.N.R. and the C.P.R. gave the same undertaking to move the quantities of grain we had undertaken to deliver to our foreign customers. That was the nature of their undertaking and in pursuance of that undertaking the C.P.R. has responsibility mainly at points on their lines. On several occasions we have drawn to their attention not only that it has a responsibility to keep pace with the movement of grain from C.N.R. points but that in fact, and this is an important point, a higher proportion of the remaining deliverable grain is on C.P.R. lines rather than on C.N.R. lines. I can assure the hon. member we have made these representations very strongly to the C.P.R. and we are hopeful-


John (Jack) Henry Horner: What has been their reply?


Mitchell William Sharp: They have said they understand the situation and will do their utmost to meet their commitments.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: There are two points about which I want to ask the minister. The first has to do with his statement that the targets which were set by the Canadian Wheat Board were not set in consultation with the railways and that the railways did not agree to them. It seems to me a most alarming statement to come from the minister that the two ministers concerned, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Transport, who knew that a very large volume of wheat had to be moved, would have consultations with the railroads and the Wheat Board, which knew how the wheat could best be moved, and would set a target to which apparently the railroads did not accede. I should like to ask the minister whether any steps were taken to persuade the railways that the movement of this wheat was of vital importance to the Canadian economy or whether the railways were apparently allowed to do whatever they chose in
tThe Deputy Chairman.]
meeting only 75 per cent of the target. That is all they met between August 1 and January 20. Of 62,000 cars they loaded 47,000 cars. That is only 75 per cent of the target, which is not very good. I am surprised that this matter should have been handled in such a lackadaisical manner. I would have thought that if the Wheat Board had set targets which it considered to be realistic and obtainable, it would have been the responsibility of the government to see that the railroads came reasonably close to those targets.
I want to point out that the effect of this on Saskatchewan loadings, irrespective of what the Wheat Board and the minister say will be moved, is that in the crop year 1963-64 from August 1 to January 26, 176 million bushels were sold at the elevator and for the present crop year from August 1 to January 26 only 153 million bushels have been sold. Comparing that with the crop year of two years ago, elevator loadings are down 23 million bushels. We are not doing as well as we did two years ago. It seems to me that there has been a complete breakdown in communications at some point and that the government has not been able to get the railways seized of the necessity of meeting the targets set by the Wheat Board. Assuming that the targets set by the Wheat Board were realistic and reasonable, and I think they were, I am at a loss to understand why the government should have been so willy-nilly in allowing the railroads to fall 15,000 box cars short of the objective.
I notice that in Saskatchewan on January 29, 1964 there were 21 million bushels of wheat in transit whereas on January 26, 1966 there were only 9 million bushels. That represents a very serious difference.
The other matter I wish to refer to is the inequity of quotas. Saskatchewan has been particularly hard hit by this inequity.


Mr. Gundlock:: Alberta has been hard hit as well.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Alberta has also been hard hit but in Saskatchewan there are 257 points which have only a one, two or three bushel quota. There are 240 more points which have a one, two or three bushel quota than last year. There are more delivery points this year with a four bushel quota but there are 100 fewer with a five bushel quota. There are 350 fewer points with a six bushel quota.
I am disturbed by the statement just made by the minister to the effect that this inequity may continue throughout the crop year. I
February 16, 1966	COMMONS
wrote down what the minister said and it was to the effect that if necessary there may have to be some areas of disparity in respect of quotas if we are to move the maximum amount of wheat to market.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: He has just left the door open in case of mistakes.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The minister hopes the house and the farmers will support the Wheat Board in using every possible method to get the wheat to market. I understand that both the minister and the Wheat Board desire to get the wheat to market. That is certainly necessary. But I want to ask the minister this question. If at the end of the crop year there is a great disparity between some shipping points and others, because of the Wheat Board's desire to get wheat shipped, do the Wheat Board and the minister propose to do something for the farmers at points where the quotas are low?
It will not be of much consolation to the farmers with low quotas to know that we have shipped 600 million bushels and it will not be of much consolation to them to know that their neighbours 50 miles away have shipped on an eight bushel quota when they are still on a three or four bushel quota. Is there going to be some carryover or some equalization? What does the Wheat Board propose to do if at the end of the crop year this disparity between different shipping points reaches the point where some farmers are going to suffer hardship in order that other farmers can sell a larger amount of grain? The whole principle of the Wheat Board has been equalization. Is there going to be any type of equalization in the matter of shipment? I am sure the minister readily appreciates the fact that if the quotas at the end of the crop year at some points on the prairies are extremely low the farmers there will feel aggrieved. No matter how often the Wheat Board argues that it was necessary to favour some districts over others in order to ship wheat, this is not going to put money in the pockets of the farmers who have not been able to deliver their wheat and will not be able to deliver it after the crop year closes.
In view of the minister's statement today I am afraid there will be some alarm in western Canada. I hope the minister will give some assurance to this committee that he and the Wheat Board will apply themselves to this problem in an effort to work out some method of compensating farmers who are in areas where the quota is low at the end of the crop year.
DEBATES	1335
Supply-Transport


Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, a few moments ago the minister said that following the meeting in Winnipeg on September 25 everything improved. Did I understand him correctly in that regard?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, after the meeting, the situation improved at Fort William.


Edward Nasserden: Why then did the Wheat Board find it necessary on November 10 to complain about deliveries from C.P.R. points?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Mr. Chairman, before the minister replies I should like to ask another question for clarification. I think he misunderstood what I asked him a few moments ago. I certainly do not wish the minister to exercise any undue influence on the operations of the Canadian Wheat Board involving the equalization of quotas. I agree completely that the Wheat Board is anxious, as it has shown in the past, to equalize the quotas in so far as that is possible, taking into account the kind of grain that is available and the immediate market for that grain. However, I should like the minister to take into consideration the fact that there have been shipping orders placed by the Canadian Wheat Board at a number of shipping points at which there are low quotas but the railways, particularly the C.P.R., have not provided box cars for 60 to 90 days. It is my information that while the Canadian Wheat Board can place shipping orders it has no authority whatever to require the C.P.R. or any other railway to place box cars at those shipping points.
I am sure that the wishes and efforts of the Canadian Wheat Board to do something about equalization have been genuine and sincere but it has not had the kind of co-operation it needs from the railroads in order to achieve this. It seems to me that if the C.P.R. is going to continue week after week and month after month leaving certain shipping points far below others in respect of box car supply when there is no apparent reason why it should, then no matter how sincere the intent and desire of the Canadian Wheat Board are to equalize these quotas it is going to be completely frustrated by the activities of the railway companies.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
I should like to ask the minister this question again and I hope he completely understands its intent. Is there something that the government can do either in consultation with the C.P.R. or in some other way to encourage them and demand, if that is possible, that the railways do in fact set off cars at

February 16, 1966
Supp ly-Transport
the shipping points where the Canadian Wheat Board has placed shipping orders? I know that several point in southern Alberta have had shipping orders from the Canadian Wheat Board for more than two months and have not been able to get the C.P.R. dispatchers or whoever directs them to place cars there so they may comply with what appears to be the desire of the Wheat Board to ship grain from these points.
The minister knows very well that the Wheat Board raises the quota in direct relation to the space that is available at any shipping point. As a matter of fact, they wait until there is space. But the only way you get space is if you have cars to move the grain and make space available. Therefore I do not think the failure in attempting to equalize these quotas rests either on the minister or the Canadian Wheat Board. I think it lies with Canadian Pacific Railway in the area I am talking about. I wonder whether the minister could give us some indication that the government is going to take an active interest in seeing that these very low shipping points will receive additional consideration from the C.P.R. and will receive it soon.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, there is just one matter I should like to bring before the committee. It is generally agreed there is a flagrant disregard of the rights of producers in being denied the opportunity to sell and market their wheat. This delay continued for several months. Apparently the situation is improving and it has improved following the widespread criticism advanced by members in this house who from personal experience are acquainted with and know exactly what has taken place in western Canada. If this debate has done nothing else, it has enabled the people of western Canada and Canadians as a whole to know something of this problem and of the injustice that has been done.
I do not often speak of my own area but the quotas there were very low, almost infinitesimal, until quite recently. In that part of Saskatchewan we are close to the Hudson Bay route which has not been used as it should have been. It should have been used to a far greater extent. That fact has been argued over and over again by various members, including particularly the hon. member for Churchill.
All of us want to see action. When the Minister of Agriculture went west he went, he saw and he returned and condemned the failure of one or the other railway company because of inaction, because of their failure

to act reasonably and responsibly. I endeavoured to make a suggestion in September or early October, I think it was. It was one that I felt was constructive and will have to be followed sooner or later by this government.
The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam has placed the distressing news before this committee that, bad as things have been, the expectation for the future does not hold out very sanguine hopes for those who have wheat to market. Indeed, there has been no suggestion that when the new crop year comes along farmers who have suffered by having low quotas are going to be preferred and will receive an increase in quotas. Apparently they are just going to be left out.
I asked the question and I am repeating it now: What are the reasons for not appointing a traffic controller?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I can answer that question.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, if the minister would just-


John Whitney Pickersgill: The right hon. gentleman asked a question and I want to answer it.


John George Diefenbaker: A moment ago I thought the minister did not possess the ability to answer but on this subject he is just like a jack-in-a-box. I ask a question and up he jumps with the answer.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Well, he is back in the box.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: I had not thought of the appropriate box, Mr. Chairman, but the minister has actually applied to himself something that I did not have in mind at all. He just bounced up. The appointment of a traffic controller was something we did during our period in office and it got results.


Mitchell William Sharp: You never did.


John George Diefenbaker: Now we have agreement between at least two ministers. The Minister of Finance has said it did not get results. Well, the western farmers said it did; that is all I have to say.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mitchell William Sharp: You had no authority.


John George Diefenbaker: I beg your pardon?


Mitchell William Sharp: You had no authority.


John George Diefenbaker: It is a very strange thing, Mr. Chairman, that this suggestion should receive such an instantaneous reaction from
February 16, 1966

Supply-Transport
both ministers. It must be that they have in their hearts the thought that if they had done so things would have been better, but the fact that the suggestion came from someone in the opposition may have led them to believe that its acceptance would not have been politically appropriate. I should like to hear the answer to my question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should like to give it to you.


John George Diefenbaker: I shall wait with expectation, Mr. Chairman, and I am glad that on this subject we are going to receive a clear and definite answer. My question is: Why was the appointment not made? Why even at this stage has action not been taken? Certainly there is no liaison in this respect. Forty five days elapsed between the time the Russian contract was under way and a meeting of ministers took place. What were they doing during that time? Certainly the former minister of trade and commerce was making forays into the west. They were not too successful, as it turned out, but he made forays out there. The farmers were led to believe that all was going to be well. Over and over again in the months of September and October the answer was, "Things are going to be well". They did not. The Minister of Agriculture went out west and he had eyes that saw what his fellow ministers could not see.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: And what the Minister of Finance will never see.


John George Diefenbaker: His criticism exactly duplicated what we had said over and over again. I must say that the next time he comes out there he will be welcomed. I think a trip out there at this time would be beneficial, the minister could once more apply something of his new, fresh attitude to meeting this problem so that our farmers in so many areas will not find themselves discriminated against whether intentionally or not.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I should like to reply to the one specific point raised by the right hon. gentleman. Whether it would be wise to appoint a controller is a separate question. However, the government of the right hon. gentleman allowed the legislation to expire which authorizes the government to appoint such a controller and the government therefore had no power under the laws of Canada to make such an appointment. That is why the matter could not be considered unless the law was changed.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)


John George Diefenbaker: Isn't that interesting? They rushed into an election when they should have been bringing legislation before the house to meet this problem. Here we were in the month of July or August when it first became known that there was not available the necessary motive power and instead of calling parliament to meet this serious situation they rushed into an election in order to get a majority. I thank my hon. friend.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The right hon. gentleman certainly shifted gears fast.


John George Diefenbaker: I thank my hon. friend for again rising to the bait.


Frank Howard: I do not want to interrupt the discussion of this vitally important matter. I wanted to get the floor on another matter entirely but I will gladly desist if there are others who want to discuss the question of box cars and grain shipment.


The Chairman:: Is the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek rising to discuss the same topic?


John (Jack) McIntosh: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I think that as a result of the discussion this afternoon a lot of confusion has been created with regard to the responsibility of the Wheat Board and its relationship to the producers. I suggest that the minister's remarks have added to the confusion. He said he gave no orders to the Wheat Board and a few minutes later he said he would demand that the chairman of the Wheat Board do such and such. I then stated that if he could demand once he could demand a second time. I want to make sure that is on the record because it indicates to me and the people I represent how some things have happened.
I should like to say also that the dispute arose between the minister and me because of a statement I made. I said that the reason the Wheat Board is now in the hands of the Minister of Finance is political expediency by the Liberal Party. I have information to back that up and I cited some of it a few minutes ago. I referred to what happened in the constituency of Assiniboia which is adjacent to mine, I could not answer the questions of my farmers until I found out what had happened in Assiniboia.
It is clear to me what happened. Somebody gave somebody orders because the Liberals wanted to win this one constituency on the prairies. This constituency was given special consideration. I ask the minister to explain to

February 1G, 196$
Supply-Transport
the house why responsibility for the Wheat Board has not been left with the department which is supposed to have it?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Now, Mr. Chairman-


John (Jack) McIntosh: Just a minute-


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am rising on a point of order. I have no objection to a discussion which will throw any light on the grave problem of getting the wheat moved by the railways. I thought the Minister of Finance was able to answer some of these questions better than I was so I was happy to have him do it. I think we are going beyond that situation when the hon. member talks about which minister should be responsible for the Wheat Board. This is not a matter that can be settled by me. It is not a matter that can be settled by my hon. friend, the Minister of Finance. This is a matter for the Prime Minister. If the hon. gentleman would wait until the Prime Minister's estimates are before us and put the question to the person who can answer it in the house, I think that would be the time to do it.


John (Jack) McIntosh: I suggest that is not a point of order at all. The point I am trying to raise is the basis of the whole argument. We have a Minister of Agriculture who has not said a word on this issue. We should have the Minister of Trade and Commerce here but he is not here. We have the Minister of Finance who is supposed to be speaking in this house for the Wheat Board. We have the Minister of Transport who gets up and says that he has nothing to do with it. The whole question of moving our grain certainly must be a problem that concerns the minister's department. If the question our leader asked a few minutes ago were answered, I think that would help solve the problem.
I said there was confusion so far as the producers were concerned. There is certainly more confusion in the house now because of the way the government has handled this question. We do not even know which minister is to answer these questions. If one minister gets stuck the other minister gets up to answer. No one can be pinned down. If we cannot pin down anyone we cannot solve the problem. I should like the Minister of Finance to get up and say why the Wheat Board should be under his department.


Mitchell William Sharp: I have no intention of explaining this situation because I think the question is quite irrelevant. May I, as the minister responsible for the Wheat Board, deal with some of the points that were raised and

particularly those raised by the Leader of the Opposition.
In the remarks I make in my previous intervention I said that a tremendous task lay ahead for the Wheat Board, the railway companies and all our handling facilities to-move the largest quantity of wheat ever moved in Canadian history. I suggest to my right hon. friend that he never faced a situation like that. By comparison the achievements of his administration were miniscule.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mitchell William Sharp: I think of the problem with which my right hon. friend was faced in moving grain. He was so pleased when he got exports up to 358 million bushels. In 1963-64 the Canadian Wheat Board and the Canadian railways moved into export position 595 million bushels. This year our target is 600 million bushels. If my right hon. friend thinks it is not difficult to move 595 million bushels or 600 million bushels, then I feel he does not understand the situation that faces this country in connection with the movement of grain He is thinking back to those years when he was handling such a small volume. He was so proud of handling 358 million bushels. This was the amount moved by my right hon. friend's administration, and that is all. He never faced a problem like this. He was never able to put the Wheat Board or the railway companies of this country to the test.
Moreover, one of the reasons we are faced with this problem today is that we have been remarkably successful in increasing the prosperity of this country. When I think of the situation that we met when we took office in 1963, when I think of the extent of unemployment, when I think of the low level of business, I am reminded that it was comparatively easy in that first year. In 1963-64, when we entered into these great contracts, we set our target for wheat exports at 550 million bushels, that was our first target. The railways had no difficulty in moving it because we had just come from a period of recession. This was the reason the government of my right hon. friend was thrown out of office, because of their failure to deal with the domestic problems of this country. This was the situation we faced.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Oh, come off it.


Mitchell William Sharp: When we took office we did not find it so difficult. We started with a target of 550 million bushels and we actually sold 595 million bushels. My hon. friend forgets about
February 16, 1966

these things. He has a very convenient memory.
May I say he has also, as is usual on these occasions, distorted the issues in order to serve his own purposes. I have seen him do it *on so many occasions. However, I thought this was a real example of the great skill of the right hon. gentleman. He stood up here and said I had suggested certain things. I can see him trying to make the headlines in western Canada by trying to create a misleading impression, with that skill which he exhibits to such an extraordinary degree in this house. He took my very simple statement, which I repeat, that if the Wheat Board in its desire to move maximum quantities of Canadian wheat into export finds at the end of the year there is still some disparity in quotas I hope it will have the understanding of the whole house. I repeat that statement.
Then, the right hon. gentleman distorts my statement and says that I predicted the situation would be worse than it is today. If that is not the greatest distortion of the very simple, and I hope sensible, statement that I made, I should like to hear a better one.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Stick around.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, I expect I will hear it from the hon. member for Acadia. We face a tremendous task, Mr. Chairman, and I only wish that I could impress upon the members of the opposition what a tremendous task it is. In the last three years Canadian farmers have grown three of the greatest crops on record. There has never been anything like this. It is a great tribute to the people of western Canada. The Wheat Board has had the task of marketing that grain and never before have they done the job as well as they have done it in these past three years.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: You are thankful they did not follow your advice at that time.


Mitchell William Sharp: I only wish that I had heard more words of credit from those members who sit on the other side of the house and who represent these constituencies in western Canada. They criticize the board but they never say anything about the tremendous job that has been done by the Wheat Board on behalf of western farmers. I think the Wheat Board has been doing a magnificent job this year.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Hear, hear. We agree.
Supply-Transport


Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, I should like to rise on a question of privilege, if the other hon. gentleman will take his seat. My question of privilege is that the distinguished minister has just stated that we have continually attacked the Canadian Wheat Board. I have never heard any attack against the Canadian Wheat Board from this side of the house.


Mitchell William Sharp: The hon. member heard one from the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek this afternoon.


Edward Nasserden: What the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek was doing today was attacking the minister who has abused the power given him by the parliament of this nation.


Mitchell William Sharp: Well, Mr. Chairman, this is a side issue. I hope that my hon. friend from Swift Current-Maple Creek will have the decency to apologize to the chairman of the Wheat Board for suggesting that he would accept any advice from me on the question.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. I think it might be as well if the committee would listen to the minister so that we could get along with vote No. 1.


John (Jack) McIntosh: Mr. Chairman, since the minister has brought my name into the debate perhaps I might say that I said nothing against the Wheat Board.


Mitchell William Sharp: Well-


John (Jack) McIntosh: Just a moment. I objected to the minister's interfering with the Wheat Board, which I think is what has happened. Will the minister answer my question and explain why he is handling the responsibility for the Wheat Board for the government rather than the Minister of Trade and Commerce or the Minister of Agriculture? Perhaps some of this confusion will then be cleared up.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Chairman, there is a very simple answer to that question and it is this. I was asked by the Prime Minister to continue my responsibility for the Canadian Wheat Board. It may be that some other minister would handle it better but that is not for me to judge.
May I now refer to a question which was asked by the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam. I do not think it is possible to answer a hypothetical question of this kind. I can assure the hon. gentleman that the Wheat

February 16, 1966
Supply-Transport
Board will do everything they can to equalize quotas by the end of this crop season. Whether they will succeed only time will tell. Certainly this will be their endeavour. I would point out to him that even in the best of circumstances, even when demand for grain was as low as it was when my right hon. friend was in office, quotas are sometimes not equalized by the end of the year. You cannot get perfect equalization of quotas. I do not think it will be possible at this time to deal with a hypothetical question as to what would hap.pen if there were serious disparities. I hope there will not be.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I see that the Minister of Finance is smiling following his remarks. I am going to review those remarks. He spoke of distortions. No one ever spoke with the same authority as he in that regard. Let me point out that before we came into office and while the hon. gentleman had been deputy minister of trade and commerce wheat had piled up unsold. The attitude of the government was: If the people of the world want to buy Canadian wheat, let them come and get it. That was their philosophy.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Nine hundred million bushels were piled up.


John George Diefenbaker: That is the first thing. He was then deputy minister of trade and commerce and was no doubt carrying out the policy of the government of that day which was that wheat would find its own market. That is what happened. The minister went on to talk about the amount of sales during the period when I was prime minister. We brought about a sale with Communist China.


Mr. Pascoe:: They called it treason.


John George Diefenbaker: What did the Liberal party do at that time? They ridiculed and condemned it. The present Prime Minister said it was ridiculous. Future Senator Argue said, speaking from this side of the house-


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, the right hon. gentleman is about to say what Mr. Argue said. My recollection is that at that time Mr. Argue was leading another party. I should like the right hon. gentleman to show me where the Prime Minister said that this was ridiculous. The Liberal party supported that transaction.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I would repeat what I said. So far as Mr. Argue is concerned, he went through a period of conversion. He has now entered the promised land and hopes shortly to go to that place from whose bourn none returneth.
[Mr. Sharp.)
I know it is distressing to go back over these things but I have been asked to give some information. When we made this sale the Liberal party ridiculed it. They went across the country saying it was a one-shot sale. They criticized it, as did the administration of the United States. They said it was wrong. If it had not been for the initiative of the government of the day, and in particular that of the present hon. member for Qu'Appelle, I do not know where the Canadian farmer would have ended up as the producer of wheat in this nation.
The minister spoke today as though he had authority. It was as though he was something set apart, an oracle of Delphi. He said "I am giving you the facts". But what did he tell the western farmer a year ago last fall and in the spring? He said "Don't sow any additional wheat".


Mitchell William Sharp: I did not. I deny that.


John George Diefenbaker: That is what he told them.


Mitchell William Sharp: I never said any such thing. I deny it.


John George Diefenbaker: Oh, yes. No amount of distortion on the part of the hon. gentleman can possibly remove that blot from his record.


Mitchell William Sharp: I denied that statement publicly-


John George Diefenbaker: The minister can deny it
but he said it over and over again. He said to the western farmer "Don't seed anything extra; I don't know what is going to happen". On the other side of the equation was the hon. member for Qu'Appelle. He said "Sow it and we will sell it".


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Deny that.


John George Diefenbaker: Then in June, 1965, after all the seeding was done-


Mitchell William Sharp: I never said that. I never made any such statement.


John George Diefenbaker: -this minister spoke with the authority and knowledge of the major financial streets of our nation. He advised the farmers then that they should sow additional wheat. That was in June of 1965-


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order or on a question of privilege. When I say that I deny such a statement, is it not incumbent on the Leader of the Opposition to accept my statement?
February 16, 1966

[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I heard him say it. Let that be clear. The minister advised the western farmers not to sow too much because they would not be able to sell it. He said there was a danger that markets would not be available. In the month of June, 1965, after it was too late to seed along came the advice that the farmers should seed as much as possible.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Chairman, I did not make that statement and I think the right hon. gentleman should accept my word. I thought that that was one of the rules of this house.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, there is no rule that one must accept a statement which one knows to be untrue when it is made. The minister cannot deny the record.


Mitchell William Sharp: Where is it on the record? Show us the record. Produce the record.


John George Diefenbaker: I will be very glad to produce that advice. There will be every opportunity to produce the advice given to western farmers. That is why the election results turned out as they did in western Canada, because of the advice given out there by the then minister of trade and commerce. The farmers saw how ridiculous was the minister's advice when first of all he said that they ought not to seed and later advised them to seed although it was too late. The advice given to them was of such a nature that they could not possibly place any reliance on the views of the minister.
Instead of trying to answer the questions raised he simply endeavours now to obscure the issue. He talks about the tremendous prosperity of Canada. What about the prosperity of the United States? Was it the government of Canada that made possible the great expansion in the United States in the last two years? When we were in office the United States was in a position identical to our own.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: Following that time any changes that took place were not changes brought about by the government of Canada. Surely this government is not saying that it was responsible for the improvement in the economy of the United States.
Things have changed since then. Would the minister stress the fact that in Canada there are 359,000 unemployed? I understand that is the latest figure. I had to mention that because I want the minister, who has had
Supply-Transport
something to do with statistics, to get the actual facts. He certainly would get the facts if he went out and tried to tell western farmers what they ought to do.
I think the minister should know that in the west he is regarded as a man of great energy. The people there also regard him as a man whose predictions they must ignore if they are to maintain themselves in productive agriculture. Let us go on with the rest of the argument. The minister says today that a tremendous amount of wheat is being sold. That is absolutely correct. What was condemned when we did it, namely selling to communist nations, is today accepted by the party which condemned it. All over the world there is a demand for wheat. The Minister of Finance and the Minister of Transport, who spent so much time condemning us for selling to communist nations, should realize that now they are actually making sales which otherwise they would not have made were it not for the previous Conservative government.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Can I ask the right hon. gentleman a question?


John George Diefenbaker: Certainly.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Would the right hon.
gentleman please inform the committee which government it was that made the first sales of wheat to a communist country? Was it not the St. Laurent government?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, all I say is
that that question does not divert me in any way from the fact that when we entered into the agreement to sell wheat to communist China it was ridiculed by the Liberal Party.


An hon. Member:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: It was condemned. We were described as selling for cash to our friends and for credit to our enemies. That is one of the reasons that the political crop so far as the Liberal Party is concerned has turned out not as favourably as was expected or as it appeared it might in the months of June, July and August when they felt that they would be able to garner a lot of votes in western Canada. I know the farmers' hopes with respect to their crops. I have seen western farmers in the month of July look at beautiful upstanding crops which when they were threshed had nothing in the head. That is what the Liberal Party found in the field of political agriculture in westen Canada just recently.


Mitchell William Sharp: Also as the right hon. gentleman found in Toronto.

February 16, 1966
Supply-Transport


John George Diefenbaker: It just shows that the western farmers could see through the transparent attitude of the Liberal party.
We are back to the subject we spoke of earlier. I am sorry I was dragged into this digression because I do not like to be brought into fields such as this. I do suggest in view of the minister's attitude that a controller should be appointed. May I ask him now, in view of the fact that it is admitted that a controller would have done some good-otherwise the government would not have given consideration to it-will he not bring in legislation to that effect? The minister said that the government could not take such action because the legislation had been allowed to lapse. Will the government now, in order to guard against the possibility of those future events to which the minister alluded when answering, the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam, bring in legislation for the appointment of a controller to the end that there will be the liaison and authority necessary to meet a difficult problem? That it is a difficult problem no one will argue against.
In order to get the most effective action I ask the government to bring in legislation to assure that there will be that authority, that liaison, that communication which will place both railway companies in a position where any laggard conduct on their part will be met in a manner in keeping with the situation. That was my purpose originally in rising. I aroused the minister and I hope he is over it now. I should not have brought these things out had I not been pressed to do so. My purpose in rising was to say that the problem is great. It has been great. I admit that there has been improvement in the last few weeks and I express my appreciation for the voyage of the Minister of Agriculture through western Canada. I know he suggested that nothing would be more beneficial in giving a new impetus to the good husbandmen in western Canada and in other parts of Canada than if the government were to bring in that legislation I have referred to immediately. That it can be done immediately I am sure. I am sure also that legislation to provide for the appointment of a controller would be passed almost immediately without debate.
The Minister of Transport seems to indicate by his reaction to what I say that it might not be passed without debate. May I ask him as a passing observation not to participate 38 times in a debate because he is developing a capacity for actually talking out

the passing of his own estimates, unintentionally I am sure. However, that has been the result of his intervention.
My purpose in rising is to say: Will you do what I suggest? I think that this would bring all of us together. We would have a worthwhile debate because the fact that an appointment was considered by the minister indicates how effective a controller would have been had one been in office. Let us have a controller so that we will not in the future have the fears, exemplified today by the minister, translated into events.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I think I should say right away that when I am advised by a former prime minister that a certain course of action ought to be considered it would be disrespectful if I did not say at once that I will bring this suggestion to the attention of my colleagues. The former prime minister knows that one minister alone cannot commit the government without consultation. I will bring the matter to the attention of my colleagues, and we will consider all the implications of the right hon. gentleman's suggestion.


John (Jack) McIntosh: May I say to the minister in respect of what he has said that if he follows that suggestion I think he will find that not all the fault is with the railway companies. I am quite sure that some of the blame falls on the elevator companies. That is particularly so in regard to non-competitive points, which seem to be on very low quotas. Adjacent points that are competitive have had higher quotas. If the minister were to follow the suggestion of the Leader of the Opposition it would eliminate some of the criticism which has been directed at him.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I do not wish to delay the passing of these estimates and I will make my comments very brief. I hope that when the Minister of Finance is considering the appointment of a traffic controller he will also give thought to making a statement in clarification of the comment he made today concerning what might happen in the course of the delivery of the present wheat crop. I am a little afraid his comment may cause some dismay across western Canada and I do not think this is his intention.
The minister said he could not answer my question because he could not deal with a hypothetical situation. But I would point out that the minister's own statement will lead a great many people to believe that the wide
February 16, 1966

disparity which now exists will carry through to the end of the crop year. I will not go over the figures which have been mentioned earlier, but the disparity is very wide and if there is any feeling that it is likely to continue to the end of the year perhaps he should make a further statement.


Mitchell William Sharp: Let me say at once in reply to the hon. member that this disparity will not continue to the end of the crop year. It will grow less and less and I hope it will disappear. But it might not quite do so.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: If the minister is saying that seriously, I am satisfied, but that is not the statement he made earlier today.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, it is.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The minister said earlier today that in order to get rid of this crop it would be necessary to ship the grain from where the maximum amount can be moved and that this may cause serious disparities.


Mitchell William Sharp: It might cause disparities.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: If these discrepancies are serious and extended, I hope the minister will consider making some statement before long that there will be an equalization formula applied so that farmers whose quotas are below a certain level will be allowed to carry part of their quota through to the next crop year. I suggest that the minister consider making such a statement before June 1. Otherwise there is likely to be a good deal of public agitation in areas where quotas continue to be low.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: In addition to examining the possibility of appointing a traffic control officer would the minister examine the legislation which parliament has already passed to see whether something could not be done along the lines of a directive to the railway companies? I am convinced that the Wheat Board is attempting to equalize the quotas because they have sent hundreds of shipping orders to points where the quotas are low. But their efforts are frustrated unless the C.P.R. does in fact place cars there. I suggest the minister use the authority he already has in order to persuade the railways to co-operate in equalizing these quotas.


Mitchell William Sharp: We shall examine carefully the suggestions made by the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam and by the hon. member for Medicine Hat and to the extent that it is necessary we shall take action.
Supply-Transport


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Minister of Finance
has been too modest to say this but on at least four or five occasions starting last September he in my presence-I do not know how many other times he may have done this-has conveyed to the railways, particularly to the Canadian Pacific Railway, in the most urgent possible tones, in the most urgent possible language, the importance of getting the wheat moved, fulfilling the contract and as far as possible moving the wheat as equitably as possible from western Canada. The minister did not tell us he had done this. But I heard him say these things to the presidents of both the railway companies on more than one occasion and to the C.P.R. more frequently than to the C.N.R.


John George Diefenbaker: I rise because the minister claimed he did not make certain statements. I cannot go into this matter in any detail now in the time at my disposal, but on June 11, 1965 there was a Canadian Press report from Regina in the following terms:
Trade Minister Mitchell Sharp yesterday called on Canada's wheat farmers to produce another record crop.
In Edmonton, provincial agriculture statistician, R. E. English, said farmers will not be able to do anything about Mr. Sharp's call because the wheat crop already is in the ground.
Then on September 24, 1963, as reported by Mr. Bob Hull, the minister said in a speech delivered at Moose Jaw to the Saskatchewan Farmer's Union.
It will be in the interests of western producers to devote less of their land to wheat than they have in the recent past.
And on July 30 there was a report in the Globe and Mail from Edmonton under the heading "Sharp Urges Less Wheat, More Feeds". It reads in part as follows:
Future demand for Canadian wheat can probably be supplied from a smaller acreage than the record 27,000,000 acres growing this year. Trade Minister Mitchell Sharp forecast last night.
Mr. Sharp's remarks constituted a clear go-slow sign to prairie wheat growers, taking into account dwindling export opportunities and other factors including the decision of U.S. farmers to reject more acreage controls on wheat production.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mitchell William Sharp: I only denied the statement of June, 1965. I fully accept responsibility for what the right hon. gentleman has read from my earlier speech in September, 1963. I changed my mind about that. But I did not make that statement in June, 1965. I denied it publicly. I am sorry the right hon. gentleman

February 16, 1966
Supply-Transport
does not have the denial with him. That was an inaccurate report of the statement I made. I did not make any statement like that in 1965. After all, like him I am a prairie boy.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mitchell William Sharp: I know that by June the crop is planted. I have Spent the whole of my life connected with the grain trade and if I did not know in June, 1965, that the crop had been planted I did not deserve to have been born in Winnipeg so many years ago. I think the right hon. gentleman should have given me the benefit of the doubt and realized I would never have said such a foolish thing in June, 1965.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
John Whitney Pickersgill: I wonder whether the committee would be disposed not to see the clock for a while? Perhaps I could give some of the answers to questions raised by hon. members and we could carry a few more items.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Frank Howard: Did we carry item one?


Herman Maxwell Batten: I understood that vote one was carried.


Raymond Langlois: I had some remarks to make on item one but I was under the impression that the hon. member for Skeena was about to speak on this item. That is why I did not rise.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am sure the hon. member would have the indulgence of the committee to the extent that he would be able to make his observations on some other item.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)


Raymond Langlois: Provided I get that assurance from the minister.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall item 5 carry?


Frank Howard: This is a matter of great concern to myself and other hon. members. In spite of the minister's suggestion I do not think we could pass the rest of the items in the time remaining so I suggest we call it five o'clock.
Progress reported.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely, notices of motions, public bills.


EDUCATION
Mr. Richard Cashin (SI. John's Wesl) moved:: That, in the opinion of this house, the Government of Canada should consult with the provinces with a view to calling a federal-provincial conference for the purpose of devising an acceptable formula for federal aid to elementary and secondary education.
He said: Mr. Speaker, we are all well aware of the fact that under our constitution education is wholly within the jurisdiction of the provinces. Indeed, there is no other area of provincial jurisdiction that is so jealously guarded as education. It is my hope that no one in this house or outside it for that matter will interpret this resolution which I am pleased to introduce as in any way affecting that jurisdiction. I trust that hon. members on all sides will agree with me that while education is within the jurisdiction of the provinces it is nevertheless a matter of national concern.
The people of Canada as a whole are or ought to be concerned about the quality of education in Canada. The Canadian people are concerned er ought to be concerned about the disparity between opportunities for education that exist in the various regions of this country. Indeed, disparity exists between individuals within the same region.
It is an undeniable fact that while education is a provincial responsibility great differences exist between the ability of each province to provide educational opportunities for their people. The Canadian Teachers' Federation has long been concerned about the severe imbalance in educational opportunities in Canada. A little over two years ago they presented a brief to the government of Canada on this matter entitled "Educational Inequalities." The problem as outlined in that brief is basically that the quality of education available to Canadians depends on where they live. With the indulgence of the house I will quote from the brief:
The two main factors which determine the level of opportunity are not the ability and willingness of students to work diligently, but rather the general wealth of the province and the relative importance placed on education by the people in that province.
The second factor, the value placed on education by the province, the federal government cannot rightfully affect. The first, provincial wealth, is appropriate to bring to your attention since it affects the ability of a province to provide funds to discharge its constitutional responsibilities towards education, since it affects the economic well-being of a nation as a whole, and since it has roots outside the field of education.
February 16, 1966

This brief discusses the indicators of equality, the most notable of which is the per pupil expenditure on public, elementary and secondary education by provinces. In 1961 the difference was between $378 in the province of Alberta and $141 in the province of Newfoundland. The Canadian average was $286 and six provinces spent sums of money below that figure.
The effects of this inequality are widespread. One particular effect drawn attention to by the Canadian Teachers' Federation was the estimated retention rates at the junior matriculation level by provinces, that is to say, a statistic which shows the number of drop-outs. Again we find a relationship here between the amount of money spent in a province on education and the number of students in that province who did not complete secondary education. The province with the highest per capita expenditure on education is the province that looks best in this statistic.
There are many other effects of inequality in education which I hope are obvious to all members of the house. If anyone has any doubt about the relation between education and economic development, then I can only suggest that they have been unaware of the refinement in Canadian thinking that has been going on among educationalists and economists in Canada. There is, indeed, a direct relationship between standards of education, the availability of qualified people, and the economic growth in a particular area. Thus, there are large areas in Canada which will continue to be slow growth areas unless greater effort is made to increase standards of education and the opportunities for education in these areas.
As the matter now stands, funds for educating the children of a province must be derived largely from the wealth of that province. The average personal income of all Canadians in 1963 was $1,532. One province had less than half the per capita income of the two or three highest income provinces and equally had proportionately less than half the money to spend on education that the top provinces had. It is the provinces with the lowest personal incomes which spend the least on public, elementary and secondary education. These are also the provinces which have the lowest student retention rates and the lowest proportion of teachers. Therefore the conclusion of the Canadian Teachers' Federation was that those provinces which spend little on education do so
Proposed Education Conference mainly because they have relatively little to spend
One other matter raised in the brief to which I would like to make reference is that a province's effort is not necessarily related to its wealth. They include a table in their brief which is entitled, "The Total School Board Expenditures for Education as a Percentage of Personal Income by Province in 1961," and the five highest provinces were Saskatchewan, Alberta, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and British Columbia. Of those five highest spending provinces on a percentage of personal income basis, two were provinces which have the least personal income per capita in Canada.
Another study was made by an Eric J. Hanson for the Canadian Tax Foundation, which devised statistical information respecting the percentage of personal income needed to provide an average Canadian standard in education, that is, if educational standards were in complete uniformity and equal in all provinces. If that were done it would mean that the province of Newfoundland, which has the lowest per capita income, would have an expenditure of 9 per cent on education as opposed to 3.3 per cent in British Columbia and Ontario. So even if this province out of its own resources were to provide the standards of education that are enjoyed in Ontario and B.C. it would be spending twice to three times the proportion of its provincial expenditures on education.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
In the foregoing remarks, I have made some references to the areas touched upon by the Canadian Teachers Federation. There are many other areas of statistical information available from this body which illustrate the main point of the federation's brief, namely, that the quality of education available to Canadians depends largely on where they live. The main significance of the brief, therefore, which seems to be an indisputable fact, is that the inequalities that exist are due primarily to a variation in the degree to which the provinces are financially capable of discharging their constitutional responsibilities. The main problem has its real roots in the unequal distribution of economic resources among the provinces, a field which is properly the concern of the federal government.
Perhaps since the time of the Rowell-Sirois report we have been cognizant of this great disparity in provincial resources. In the quarter of a century or so that has elapsed since
February 16, 1966

Proposed Education Conference that significant document, which perhaps has not been given the attention it deserves, various governments have attempted to cope with this problem. The present administration, through such devices as the Atlantic Development Board, the designated areas program and equalization payments, has perhaps recognized the dilemma more than any other administration.
We are all aware too that education has a profound effect on economic growth. I think it is safe to say that our awareness of this is of recent vintage. The Economic Council of Canada devoted a full chapter of its second annual review to education and economic growth. The report suggests that a very considerable scope would appear to exist in Canada to promote the growth of per capita personal income by improving the educational standards of the labour force. There is ample evidence that there is a direct relationship between education and personal income.
As I have said, the provinces that spend the least on education are the ones with the highest percentage of low income people and the lowest levels of education. If these provinces are to have the same opportunity for economic growth as the rest of Canada they must spend more on education. The problem of economic development, therefore, cannot be divorced from education, and since these provinces obviously do not have the required wealth themselves they must turn to the federal government.
Any meaningful program of regional economic development must face up to this dilemma. The related problems of educational opportunity and economic development are as important to the Atlantic provinces as the matter of biculturalism and all its related factors is to the province of Quebec. All of these matters are, one way or the other, bound together with the inequalities of opportunity existing among Canadians.
This then is the greatest challenge to Canadians, to remove these inequalities and to assure that all Canadians have equal opportunities to live in dignity.
In a very real sense the problems of the French Canadian, the Atlantic provinces, the new Canadians and other groups are not so different as they would appear. The causes and solutions may vary but the real problem is to make Canada the kind of country in which all of these people can feel equally at home, equally assured of their participation in the growth of their nation and equally fulfilled in the advantages of being Canadian.
[Mr. Cashin.l
How then do we approach this challenge^ Mr. Speaker? I think the first and important thing to do is to have more discussion of the-problem of educational opportunity and economic growth in our war on poverty. I do not. mind saying that I was considerably annoyed by the attitude of some hon. members of the-house who suggested that this is an improper thing to do.
I know there are legalistic and constitutional purists who worry about the impact of discussion and talk on one jurisdiction or another but this does not worry me. One of the reasons it does not worry me is that worrying about it is not going to obtain for the people of my province a better living. On the other hand, the worrying done by these purists may obtain for the people they represent a better living. What we are all interested in is really the same thing. If we are asked by some groups in this country to have more understanding of their problems, then I say there are these low income groups across this country with problems relating to education and economic development that should become the focus of national attention. Certainly it is impossible for provinces such as the Atlantic provinces, which have the highest proportion of such people, to fulfil their constitutional responsibilities within their present means. This dilemma has to be resolved and any program of economic development that does not recognize education as an integral part of the problem is doomed to failure. What are the things that the federal government can do about this? I suppose we could adopt the old procrustean bed theory in our shared cost programs. I am sure hon. members are familiar with the bed of Procrustes. It was of a determined length and one had to sleep on it fitting it properly. If your legs were too long they were cut off and1 if they were too short they were stretched. That is the effect of shared cost programs. They do not do very much to remove the inequalities between provinces. I do not think that shared cost programs are the answer to the lack of education. Again, this may be too-blatant for those who are legalistic or constitutional purists on this point. Perhaps we-should take a page from the book of the United States in its war on poverty. They have recognized the importance of education and improving educational opportunities in their battle against poverty.
At the federal level we do have agencies concerned in this regard such as the Atlantic Development Board. Perhaps this is a way to
February 16, 1966

accomplish the required end. I would suggest that the most meaningful way to do this is really to discuss the problem and obtain a national consensus to the effect that it is a real challenge to eradicate the inequalities of groups in Canada and give all regions the .same opportunity as the most prosperous regions. That is the basic philosophy I support, and I am concerned that we are not talking enough about this problem across Canada. Politicians of all political parties may pay lip service to the problem but I do not think we have really been seized with it.
I think that in years to come we will be in greater difficulty if we do not take hold of this problem.
This is something that could excite Canada. [DOT]Canadians are always wondering what our national identity is. This has never bothered me or those of us who know what our identity is. It seems to me that if we put something meaningful into being Canadian, and undoubtedly this involves being bicultur-.al, we will help to solve the identity problem as well as the problem of inequality of opportunity between provinces. I cannot help but think that the bicultural problem is similar to the one about which I am talking. I would .suggest that perhaps a change in our equalization formula would help so that the provinces with the lowest per capita incomes would then have the financial resources available in one way or another to give their people the same opportunity to live in dignity.
I have become very concerned about this situation from time to time because it seems fo me that a gap exists between our efforts in this regard and our requirements. My province has made considerable improvement over the past number of years and is one of the Atlantic provinces which has enjoyed a relative increase in per capita income, but we are not narrowing the existing gap. If this relative position continues for those of us who live on the outer fringe of Canada, *confederation will have failed. We are just as interested in confederation as are the rest of *Canadians, but what is perhaps needed to a greater extent is a better kind of assistance.
I realize that there are people in all ten provinces of Canada who share this basic problem which is so important to Newfoundland and the other Atlantic provinces, but I would urge that the federal government talk about it and that the provinces talk about it. If there are some provincial premiers or federal politicians who do not like this

Proposed Education Conference idea, then the answer is to have the public of Canada become so concerned about it that those politicians who continually watch the political barometer will be forced to talk about it. I hope before too long educational and economic opportunities will be recognized as related factors so that Canada can begin to do something meaningful about this problem.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)


Mr. R. W. Pritlie (Burnaby-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I should first like to congratulate the hon. member for St. John's West (Mr. Cashin) for a very able presentation on the problem of education. I have presented a resolution along the same lines which I think will be discussed next week. I hope this is an example of great minds thinking alike and not the other side of that old adage.
However, as I listened to the hon. member it seemed to me that the problem he enunciated was not quite the one stated in his resolution. The resolution seems to refer to all provinces and the hon. member in his speech made particular reference to the Atlantic provinces. The idea that the federal government should be involved in assisting the financing of elementary and secondary education is not abhorrent to me. I am not against the principle but I think there are very important practical difficulties and I should like to elaborate this point at the moment.
In my view it would be better for the federal government to confine its assistance to and involvement in education to the field of higher education or, if you like, postsecondary education. This is the field in which the federal government is already engaged to a certain extent. We all know that in the immediate years ahead there will have to be a very dramatic increase in the financial involvement of the federal government in financing post-secondary education in Canada, that, is colleges, universities, technical schools and so on.
There are some people in this country who say that we cannot afford to give this aid to higher education. It is a very great amount of aid, as we know from the report of the Bladen Commission. These people say we cannot afford to do this and have medicare, increased pensions and so on. I am convinced that the country can afford this assistance if the economy of Canada continues to grow at the rate recommended by the Economic Council of Canada. I suggest that if the
February 16, 1966

Proposed Education Conference federal government meets the bill for education at the post-secondary level recommended by the Bladen Commission and goes beyond what the Bladen Commission recommended to the goal of tuition free education for students, it will have its hands full in the field of education because this will involve very great amounts of money.
There is one important aspect of the question of financing education that we must keep in mind. It seems to me it is a principle of government in this country that when you finance something there should be some financial accountability to the legislature or parliament providing the funds. I think we sometimes forget that. If this is the case, the federal government will have to require an accounting from the institutions of learning which are receiving its funds, namely, the institutions of higher learning in Canada.
This means some sort of federal control. It may only mean the control of veto, but it means some sort of control over spending because if we do not do this we will hear about it from the Auditor General. This can be very important. For example, the universities will have in the next few years very great capital expenditures. These will have to be watched to a certain extent.
Universities become ambitious and want to add colleges and faculties of various types. I should like to give some illustrations, Mr. Speaker. At the present time I think there are in Canada four faculties of forestry, one at the University of British Columbia, one at the University of New Brunswick, one in Toronto and I believe one at Laval. These may be enough to supply the forestry engineers that we need in this country. I do not know. This is a matter that can be determined. But suppose ten other universities suddenly decide that they should have faculties of forestry. We would have to determine whether those were required and we might have to say no.
We have a limited number of dental colleges in this country. Again, I do not know how many we need. We have in western Canada one school of veterinary medicine under construction, I believe, at the present time. This may be all we need. We have a number of medical schools in the country and more are under construction. If more universities decided that they wanted medical schools and improved research facilities, and we did not need that many, there would have to be some sort of control applied. I raise this

point because control goes with spending and if the federal government has to spend a great deal of money in the field of higher education, as I think it will, it will have to exercise some sort of control along with the spending it will be doing.
If I am not mistaken, the involvement of the federal government in higher education is not a problem in nine of the ten provinces. Apparently it is in the province of Quebec. The opposition in that province have said even more forcefully than the government that they want to deal with their universities directly. At the present time there is a controversy, it seems to me, between Premier Lesage and the federal government whether they must account for the funds they receive from Ottawa. I do not think this problem occurs in the other provinces. I can see the day in the future when the federal government will be putting up the greater part on the money required for financing colleges, technical schools and universities in Canada.
When that time comes, Mr. Speaker, I suggest it will be all the federal government can do to meet that responsibility. This does offer some hope for the provinces. If they can be relieved of their heavy costs of higher education they can then apply these funds to the improvement and expansion of elementary and secondary education.
It seems to me that if you accept my argument about financing and control as logical it follows that if the federal government were providing funds for elementary and secondary education some sort of control would have to be used. I suggest that provinces other than the province of Quebec might object. For example, I do not think Ontario wants this government to have very much say in the operation of its public school system. It may not object so much in the field of universities but it would certainly object as regards the lower levels of education. Again, Mr. Speaker, if the federal government takes up the costs of higher education it will release funds in the provinces which can be spent on elementary and secondary education.
The hon. member for St. John's West has raised a very important point, namely, the relationship of the amount which can be spent in a province on education to the per capita income of the residents of that province. I would suggest to him that this is a problem more confined to the Atlantic provinces than the other provinces. I think my
February 16, 1966	COMMONS
own province and the province of Ontario can well afford to finance the elementary and secondary schools and they could certainly do this if they were relieved of other educational costs.
I agree that the hon. member has made a good case for the Atlantic provinces and I should like to see some method worked out whereby through the Atlantic Regional Economic Council, I believe it is called, or the Atlantic Development Board some plan could be devised which would give them extra aid for their particular problems. But I doubt that the idea of the federal government financing and being involved in elementary and secondary education would be well received in the other provinces generally. Let us do a good job in the field of higher education, because a tremendous job faces us in the years ahead in this field alone.


Mr. Howard Johnston (Okanagan-Revel-stoke):: Mr. Speaker, I admired the forcefulness of the original presentation with regard to the bill and I have always had a great deal of sympathy for the educational difficulties in the province of Newfoundland. At one time I was almost sufficiently moved to apply for a teaching position in that province, as some British Columbian teachers have been at various times, but I did not take that step. On the other hand, I do not quite see the bill presented here as being the solution to the problem, particularly not in the terms expressed by the hon. member for St. John's West (Mr. Cashin).
The hon. member stressed that education was a provincial responsibility as defined in the British North America Act, and I think one of the things we have to do is face up to this problem with regard to our constitution. It is not a case of being a legalist or a constitutional purist; it is a case of facing a fact.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
We have developed an educational system in this country as if we were ten independent countries. This makes Canada a rather unique country in today's world. If you study comparative education, you will find that probably in no other country do the individual parts of the country have the independence in the field of education that the provinces of Canada have. This independence is jealously and fiercely guarded, fiercely guarded not just by the province of Quebec but by many of the provinces in this country.
DEBATES	1349
Proposed Education Conference
We have allowed the federal government to intervene at the university level. I think one of the reasons this intervention has been accepted has been that traditionally the university has been a sort of autonomous organization itself. There is a freedom and lack of direct government control at the university level that simply does not pertain to the rest of the educational system. Certainly in the elementary and secondary educational systems provincial control is very complete, at least it is in my province of British Columbia, and I think you will find this pattern pretty well across the country.
Whereas we do break up the national system into ten parts, once we have made that initial division we have a centralization of educational control within the provinces. This is so to a very great extent, and the province has been supreme. The individual school has not had the authority it would have in some of the other nations of the world. The problem of injecting financing from the federal level, therefore, becomes more acute.
I think we should realize that this has been partially bridged by the supplementing of vocational educational facilities through federal assistance. I think we should perhaps be ready to admit that this does involve a certain bias or pressure in regard to the educational systems of the provinces that are accepting it. On the other hand, I doubt very much that the provinces are willing to allow federal intervention in other areas.
I think the basic problem in the argument presented by the hon. member for St. John's West is that it would not result in the solution he desires. I feel we should clearly understand that throughout all the years of our development there has grown up an intense rivalry between provinces with regard to their educational facilities. Some provinces pride themselves on being first and the amounts that are paid per capita are watched very keenly across the entire country. The levels of salaries that are paid teachers are also watched very keenly across the entire country. I can assure the hon. member that unless his formula amounted to an absolute strait-jacket that would forbid provinces going above it we would still have inequalities because there are some provinces that have prided themselves for many years on being ahead in the Canadian educational picture. I do not know how you would eliminate that unless your formula became much more than a formula and became a restriction
February 16, 1966

Proposed Education Conference or a brake on the provinces that were determined to go ahead and stay ahead in the educational game.
It seems to me some methods could perhaps be introduced within the provinces themselves to meet the situation. Again, it seems to me that the provinces that are ahead were the first to move into the areas of consolidation and have developed ideas of consolidation to the furthest extent. This has been a factor in their being ahead. There have been devised such schemes as home owners' grants, for example, that have been very effective in persuading the local populace it can afford a higher standard of education than it previously thought it could. If you were to look at the last issue of the British Columbia teachers' magazine, you would see an article entitled, "Home Owners' Grants A Good Idea". There may be some need to examine the tax system to ensure that it is not at present discouraging the local populace from advocating advances and reforms in the educational field.
The other problem that arises is that there is no equality of educational opportunity even within one province at the present time. In the province of British Columbia, for example it is extremely difficult for some areas to attain anything close to the same level of educational opportunity afforded to others. I think that there are other anomalies and that this would be true of some of the other provinces. One of the things that might overcome some of these problems would be forming something like the Company of Young Canadians. Amongst teachers, perhaps you could get people who would devote part of their life to service in some part of the country where teachers are almost impossible to obtain. I have in mind the peace corps suggestion of the Canadian Teachers Federation. We would be doing something that would be tangible and would help overcome the problem of educational inequality. It is not just a question of how much money you can offer persons to go to these undesirable areas but whether you can find anyone at all who will go to such an area in order to teach. I am not condemning any particular province here. I am saying that all provinces will have this problem of inequality of educational opportunity within their boundaries.
There is another area that might be considered which would involve a program in the field of pre-school training, particulary for

some of the groups in this country. I mentioned this earlier in the house as the sort of aid that should be given to Indian students on reservations in developing a program that would prepare them to fit into our society. It would be extremely difficult to work out an acceptable formula because it is one of my theories on education that the place where the money needs to go most desperately-I am speaking of provincial money here-is always at the grade one level. However, I doubt very much that the setting up of a grants structure through the federal government would influence that level of education particularly because there are so many other levels that are more dramatic. This is the area, however, where you can make the greatest possible improvement in an educational system with, I believe, the least expenditure of money. I think anyone concerned with education should constantly keep that in mind.
I think perhaps it would be advisable to call not for the setting up of a formula here but for the setting up of a ministry of federal-provincial affairs together with a ministry or educational bureau. At the moment I wonder just who would attend a federal-provincial conference as proposed in the bill which we are discussing sponsored by the hon. member for St. John's West.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)
There are areas of co-ordination which could be established between provinces in order to solve some of the problems arising in education, particularly when students transfer to one province from another. Again, it would be impossible to get a standard curriculum across the country. People often demand one but I usually tell them that they just have to face up to the constitutional fact that we do act like separate countries. I do not think that within the foreseeable future we could have one curriculum across the country. In fact, our schools tend to be moving away from this idea; they seem to be moving toward more authority to establish their own curricula. So that problem would remain.
I think that rather than rushing into a federal-provincial conference at this moment, which as I see it would have no possibility of success, we should examine the possibility of setting up a ministry of federal-provincial affairs, giving it an educational responsibility and possibly working through it toward a solution of some of the problems facing Canada in our development of education.
February 16, 1966

[Translation1


Mr. Georges Valade (Sainie-Marie):: Mr. Speaker, I should not like to miss this opportunity to express an opinion, not only on behalf of my colleagues of the province of Quebec who are members of the Conservative party but also on behalf of all the members for the province of Quebec, regardless of their party affiliations.
I believe the motion made by the member for St. John's West (Mr. Cashin) should not be considered by the house. I base my claim on the B.N.A. Act which is very specific with regard to education.
I wonder if my hon. friend belongs to the legal profession. If so, I should not like to be one of his clients nor have to be judged by my peers or by a court and, even less, a constitutional court.
Before introducing his resolution, my hon. friend should perhaps have looked up the Canadian constitution, that is the British North America Act and more particularly sections 91-


Richard Joseph Cashin: What about health?


Georges-J. Valade: -92 and 93 of the British North America Act.
With the indulgence of the house, I will quote a few references to enlighten my young friend. I appreciate the fact that his intentions are quite commendable and that he would like to win over the sympathy of the younger generation of his province. Unfortunately, his province is ill-administered by a government which has neglected its responsibilities in the field of education and has to resort to unconstitutional publicity means in this regard.
If my hon. friend will bear with me, I would like to quote some of the sections of the British North America Act, of which, unfortunately, I have only the English version here. I hope you will excuse me if I quote these sections in English.

Section 91 of the British North America Act, Mr. Speaker, states:
It shall be lawful for the Queen, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate and House of Commons, to make Laws for the Peace, Order, and good Government of Canada, in relation to all Matters not coming-
I emphasize these words.
-within the Classes of Subjects by this Act assigned exclusively to the Legislatures of the Provinces-
1351
Proposed Education Conference


Richard Joseph Cashin: You can get around that. We have done it before.


Georges-J. Valade: I think that is quite clear to my hon. friend.


Mr. Vincent:: They want to opt out once more.


Georges-J. Valade: Section 92 lists the matters coming within the exclusive jurisdiction of provincial legislatures and the second paragraph states:
Direct Taxation within the Province in order to the Raising of a Revenue for Provincial Purposes.
If that is not clear to my hon. friend on the other side of the house, may I throw some more light on his junior mind by referring to section 93, which reposes these privileges exclusively under provincial responsibility. Section 93 reads as follows:
In and for each Province the Legislature may exclusively make Laws In relation to Education, subject and according to the following provisions-


Richard Joseph Cashin: I do not disagree with you.


Georges-J. Valade: My hon. friend says he does not disagree with me. If he does not disagree with me, then I understand he is inviting this house to contravene the spirit and the letter of the law which has founded this country-


Richard Joseph Cashin: That is not so.


Georges-J. Valade: -with respect to the rights of the provinces which have participated in the elaboration of the Constitutional Act of Canada.


Richard Joseph Cashin: You know we can get around
that.


Georges-J. Valade: We are talking today about writing a new constitution. This one has not yet been revised and already our friends across the way want to change not only the three sections of the constitution to which I have referred but they also want to eliminate the most important and exclusive rights falling under provincial responsibility.


Richard Joseph Cashin: That is not true.


Georges-J. Valade: My friend is a lawyer and he says that is not true. In that case I do not know how he came to draft a motion in which he asks the provinces to ask for federal aid for education. I do not know how many definitions my friend has of education but to me education is education.


Richard Joseph Cashin: There is federal aid now.
February 16, 1966

Proposed Education Conference


Georges-J. Valade: I do not know why my hon. friend finds it necessary to differ in his motion from the B.N.A. Act. Perhaps this is part of co-operative federalism. But I do want to make it clear to my hon. friend-this is why I am speaking in English; I have referred to some sections of the B.N.A. Act and I want to make this clear because the translation might not reach my hon. friend in time-that education has been exclusively preserved as the right of the provinces.
If my hon. friend wants to show that he is speaking for his party, then I hope he will get up and make the statement that he is now expressing the views of his entire party. If he is not expressing the views of his party but is talking for himself, then I hope that my hon. friends from Quebec, who should be around him tonight, will invite him to repeat-


Richard Joseph Cashin: Are you speaking for your party?


Georges-J. Valade: At the next election we in Quebec will invite him-


Richard Joseph Cashin: Are you speaking for your party?


Georges-J. Valade: -to make the statement he has just now made in the House of Commons so that the people of Canada and the people of Quebec will know that they are facing a Liberal party in Quebec which is two-faced, one policy for the rest of the country and another for Quebec when this is necessary.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
ITranslationi
Mr. Speaker, we, in the Conservative party, succeeded several years ago in reaching an agreement with the government of the province of Quebec, not at the elementary or secondary levels of education, but rather on an adequate formula for aid to education at the university level and to research. There was perfect and cordial agreement between the former Conservative government and the then premier of the province of Quebec, Mr. Paul Sauve.
The formula was acceptable and I would be pleased if my hon. friend, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, and member for Mount Royal (Mr. Trudeau) would let it be known that he is present in this house. I am told that he is a great constitutional lawyer, but unfortunately we have yet to see the flashes of intelligence he made a show of during the last election campaign. I should like him to tell us whether he shares the

views of his colleague. Let him tell us, as an expert on constitutional law, whether he agrees with his colleague. If not, I hope he will have the courage to rise and to-


Mr. Trudeau:: Do you want me to tell you right away?
Mr Valade: You may speak later.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I cannot have the courage after six o'clock.


Georges-J. Valade: After sitting in the house for three weeks, he has not yet spoken a word. I hope he will have the courage to rise-


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I shall not have time later, but now I could do it.


Georges-J. Valade: I shall give you two minutes so that you may tell us whether or not you endorse your colleague's motions.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: My answer is no.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Mount Royal tells me he is not in agreement with his colleague. I am very happy about it because it proves that the motion before us tonight is contrary to what the Canadian people expect of our legislation.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Why did you do it in the case of universities?


Georges-J. Valade: I think the motion suggested to us is bad, because it will be like pouring oil on a fire that has been smouldering now for many years. In fact, it touches upon a sore point in the province of Quebec, the separatist idea. Why? Because there have been centralizing infringements of the confederation pact. This is why we of the province of Quebec, had demanded respect for the spirit rather than the letter thereof.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Why do you say that it is good at the university level?


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I hope that the hon. member for Mount Royal who likes to interrupt and who said, before being appointed to the post he now holds, that he preferred not to be made a minister, because he wanted to remain independent in order to express himself freely in the house-


An hon. Member:: And he was not made a minister.


Georges-J. Valade: But in view of the fact that he was appointed Parliamentary Secretary-
February 16, 1966	COMMONS


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.
[Translation1


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to say that I am against the resolution introduced by the hon. member for St. John West, and I wish to put my opposition on record.
Unfortunately, time does not allow me to say more. I see how impatiently the hon. member for Mount Royal awaits his turn to take the floor and I would like him to tell us if he is for or against the resolution introduced by his colleague.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I think the remarks which the hon. gentleman is making are not relevant to the resolution before the house.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I thank you for calling me to order. I know that Your Honour should have heard the member for Mount Royal but he provoked me to reply and I did reply to him.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I was asked to state an opinion. I asked the hon. member for Sainte-Marie to grant me the floor and he would not. I cannot state my opinion if he will not grant me any time.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. May I remind the hon. gentleman that the remarks he is directing toward another hon. member of the house are not relevant to the resolution before the house.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I was replying to a question asked by the member for Mount Royal.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I must remind the hon. gentleman again that he is not directing his remarks to the resolution before the house.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, because I want to give other members of the house an opportunity to express their points of view, may I express once more my disappointment at the motion which was introduced in this house today. I hope, sir, that other members on the other side of the house will take this opportunity to express themselves against the motion. We all know that this motion is in direct contradiction of the spirit and the letter of the constitution of Canada. I hope, sir, that motions of this kind will not see the light of day in this house in 23033-861
DEBATES	1353
Proposed Education Conference the future. I now yield my place to the hon. Member for Mount Royal.


Mr. Keith Hymmen (Waterloo North):: Mr. Speaker, in speaking to the motion introduced by my colleague, the hon. member for St. John's West (Mr. Cashin), I would say at the outset that it is phrased in very diplomatic terms as it should be. It is not my intention to enter into a discourse on the constitution at this time because we all know that that fabled piece of legislation, oft-quoted in this house, which 98 years ago formed the dominion of Canada, places the responsibility for and the jurisdiction with respect to education strictly in the laps of the provincial governments. No one, however, prior to 1867 had any idea of the ramifications and the extent of the financial costs of education. The motion, Mr. Speaker, does not suggest that a federal-provincial conference on education be called but because of the serious criticism that we have had in the house this afternoon with regard to this matter I suggest that with the approval of the house the government consult with the provinces with a view to ascertaining their wishes with regard to having such a conference for the purpose of investigating the possibility of federal aid which to the best of my knowledge has never had this important consideration.


An hon. Member:: Are you in favour?


Kieth Reinhardt Hymmen: I have mentioned the criticism of federal-provincial conferences. Some of the severest critics would appear to be those who have had the least experience with this vehicle and what can be accomplished by it. No less a person than the provincial treasurer of Ontario in his budget address mentioned the many conferences at all levels that had been held and what had been accomplished. This is one example of co-operative federalism with which the Liberal government has been closely identified and which we hope can be continued effectively.
The provinces appreciate the assistance which has been given at the university level. This is evidenced by the recent exchange of correspondence between the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) and the premiers of all ten provinces. This had to be done and must be continued and increased with the growing interest in the significance of higher education, having regard to our emergence into the technological and atomic age, the population explosion and the establishment of new universities.
February 16. 1966

Proposed Education Conference
The provinces were not prepared to assume by themselves the financial burdens of higher education.


An hon. Member:: Six o'clock.


Kieth Reinhardt Hymmen: If I have appeared to deviate somewhat from the subject matter I will return to it immediately.


An hon. Member:: Six o'clock.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I wish to advise the house that the hour for the consideration of private members' business has expired.


[Stage Direction]
It being three minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply this day:]

[Stage Direction]
A-Department
1. Departmental Administration, $4,862,900 A-Department
lb. Departmental Administration, $118,000
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, February 17, 1966