1966-11-18

Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. May I bring to the attention of the House of Commons the presence in the Speaker's gallery of a most distinguished visitor to Canada, His Excellency the President of Zambia, Dr. Kenneth Kaunda.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: His Excellency is accompanied by two of the senior members of his country's government, Mr. Wina, the Minister of Finance and Mr. Mudenda, the Minister of Agriculture as well as by Mr. Chona, the permanent secretary in the ministry of foreign affairs, On behalf of all members I wish them a pleasant and successful visit to Canada.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
[DOT] (11:10 a.m.)



TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the order: Government orders: November 8-Resuming the adjourned debate on the motion of Mr. Macaluso: That the twelfth report of the standing committee on transport and communications presented to the house on Thursday, November 3, 1966 be concurred in.
Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, this motion was adjourned the other day. I wonder whether it could be further adjourned, with unanimous consent?


Mr. Speaker:: I understand the minister refers to government order No. 108.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Yes, Mr. Speaker. It is a motion to reduce the quorum of the committee on transport and communications. I doubt that it is really necessary to pass it.


Mr. Knowles:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that this motion stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Motion stands.



CANADA CORPORATIONS ACT AMENDMENT


Hon. G. J. Mcllrailh (for the President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and Registrar General of Canada) moved: the first reading of Bill No. S-51, (from the Senate) to amend the Canada Corporations Act to facilitate the incorporation by letters patent of corporations without objects of pecuniary gain.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



OLD AGE SECURITY ACT AMENDMENT


George James McIlraith: that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following proposed resolution which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Old Age Security Act, effective with respect to months beginning with January, 1967 to provide for the payment out of the consolidated revenue fund and for the charging to the old age security fund under that act of a monthly amount, to be known as the guaranteed income supplement, to certain pensioners thereunder up to a maximum of 40 per cent of the amount of the pension payable under that act; to provide for the determination of the income of a pensioner for the purposes of such supplement and for appeals by pensioners against decisions or determinations made under that act; and to provide for other related and consequential matters.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Speaker:: The right hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker).


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate very much that indication of unification in the house.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.

November 18, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry


John George Diefenbaker: Although three or four hon. members on this side of the chamber adopted the attitude of sitting on their hands, I am sure that the general applause will strengthen for today the position of unification for the Minister of National Defence.
I would like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. For several weeks I have been trying to get information on the attitude by Canada with reference to the two-China proposition. Indeed I have placed before the house by questions what I have known only through the press, but as yet we have not been able to secure anything in the nature of information, though the press is full of it.
I ask the minister, now that the debate is under way or will be under way today in the United Nations, will he tell parliament what the Canadian government intends to do rather than have us wait until a statement is made in the United Nations?
Second, will he assure the Canadian people that whatever is done by the United Nations resolution, which apparently has been joined in by Italy, Chile and Canada, it will not in any way sacrifice the government of the Republic of China that has stood for freedom through dark years and, above all, that the people there will not be a sacrifice to the Red Guards who are running rampant today?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, in my absence the Prime Minister dealt with questions not unlike those which have just been put by the right hon. gentleman. As he said, the story in the press was speculative, and the story which I saw this morning is also speculative. We are, however, having consultations with a number of countries designed to see if we cannot provide a solution to a problem that has dogged the United Nations for some time.
These consultations are continuing. I had some myself in Rome on Monday. They are now continuing in New York. I will be going to the United Nations. I cannot of course indicate what will be the outcome of these consultations. I can say to the right hon. gentlemen that it is not the intention of the government of Canada in any way to encourage the expulsion from the United Nations of the government of Formosa. It is, however, our intention to do all we can to see that an effort is made to reach the principle of universality in the United Nations.
At any rate we have already declared our policy.


John George Diefenbaker: When?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: On September 27 I stated that the government would like to see the People's Republic of China take its place in the United Nations organization, but we would not agree to that happening at the expense of another government. That would be a denial of the principle of universality.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, that is a long way from an answer. Why should not this parliament know the kind of proposition that the minister and those associated with him are advancing in the United Nations? Why are we denied what the press in the United States and elsewhere throughout the world is able to secure? What is the nature of this plan that the minister has in mind? Why hide it from parliament and deny us the opportunity to discuss it before it is revealed officially, as it has already been revealed unofficially, to all the press that is represented in New York?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, I told my right hon. friend that the story was speculative. There has been no revelation to any news media whatever.
I do not want to enter into a controversy with my right hon. friend today on his return to the house, but he knows, as an experienced parliamentarian, that the conduct of the policy of the government in foreign affairs is a matter that the executive determines. Once a position has been taken, it is open to parliament to take issue with that policy. Foreign policy cannot be pursued in any other way. We are pursuing the same method which my right hon. friend, and all governments under our system, have pursued. We have stated the principles-


John George Diefenbaker: You do not have a bipartisan policy when you hide it from the house.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to be controversial with my right hon. friend on this very first day. I am trying to respect-


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: He never left the house.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: I am trying to respect my right hon. friend's return to the house, and I want him to know I have made-


Mr. Monleilh:: We know what you meant.
November 18, 1968


Paul Joseph James Martin: Well, I just want to say to the Prime Minister-to the right hon. gentleman-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I do not think, Mr. Speaker, that I should give that kind of comfort to my right hon. friend. What I was trying to say to him, as one who has been in politics and a member of this house for a long time, was that I, along with the Prime Minister and others, join in welcoming him back today. In the circumstances I would have hoped that he and those sitting behind him would have recognized the sporting quality of our joining in that welcome.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I always admire the sporting quality of the hon. gentleman, but what we are talking about today is not sport but the future of mankind. Why should not parliament know what this government has decided? Why should we wait until a speech is made in the United Nations before we can determine whether it is a proper one? As far as the executive having the responsibility for foreign affairs, is concerned, I thought our attitude in this country was that both major parties and the other parties should reasonably agree with our foreign policy, rather than its becoming the monopoly of the government.


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the Secretary of State for External Affairs tell the house whether, in the opinion of the government, a two-China policy holds out any hope whatever, when apparently it is rejected both by the People's Republic of China and the so-called nationalist government of China? Could he say whether or not as a result of the matters discussed in the talks he mentioned a proposal is being put forward that the People's Republic of China should be recognized and accepted within the United Nations as the representative of China, and that the other regime might be recognized and accepted as the government of Taiwan, where I understand it does in fact have control?


Mr.   Mariin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, that question is an argumentative one. We have, of course, stated our position, which is that while we believe that no sovereign body should be precluded from participating in the United Nations, we do not agree to take that position at the expense of another country that is entitled to membership in the organization.
Inquiries of the Ministry We are having consultations and we are discussing this matter with other countries. Until those consultations have been completed it is not possible for me to go any further.


Mr. David MacDonald (Prince):: A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the minister's remarks on the admission of the People's Republic of China to the United Nations, is the government now planning to give diplomatic recognition to the People's Republic of China in light of the fact that we have now initiated trading programs with China amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars?


Mr.   Mariin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, the question of the recognition of the regime diplomatically in one form or another or through some other process, is a matter which has not been involved in the questions which have been put this morning. This is a question that stands by itself, and the government's policy in this regard will be announced to the house in due course.



AIR CANADA


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquiilam):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the inconvenience to the travelling public caused by the Air Canada strike, and in view of the hardship which is being imposed upon hundreds of Air Canada personnel who are laid off as a result of the strike, does the Prime Minister not feel that the time has come for the government to intervene by appointing a mediator, in an attempt to bring both parties together so as to see whether there is some basis upon which a settlement can be reached as speedily as possible?


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend knows that there was an effort made by the two parties concerned to get together yesterday to discuss the matter and that the effort came to nothing, which shows the difficulty of mediation at this particular moment. Nevertheless, this matter of government intervention through a mediator is under active consideration.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Because the offer of Air Canada to negotiate was circumscribed by the company's saying it would not go beyond the figure
COMMONS DEBATES	November 18, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry suggested by the private mediator, does the government not think it would be proper for the Minister of Labour or the Prime Minister to call the two parties together, point out to them that the public interest is involved, and suggest that they meet with a government appointed mediator in an effort to reach settlement.


Lester Bowles Pearson: That matter, as I have said, is under active consideration.


Hon. Michael Siarr (Ontario):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the reports that all efforts to negotiate between the two parties have broken down, and that they are now estranged and not prepared to meet one another, does the Prime Minister not think that a mediator having government backing would bring the parties together to discuss their disagreements? So long as they are apart nothing will be done and the air line will remain on strike.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I quite agree that while the parties remain apart nothing can be done. I hope when they are brought together something will be done, and it is that matter we are considering.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):: A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Yesterday I asked whether information was available on the question of whether non scheduled carriers intending to service routes which Air Canada had served, but which it had been forced to discontinue serving, were being picketed by those involved in the Air Canada strike. The minister said he would take the question as notice. I wonder whether he, his parliamentary secretary or any other minister on behalf of the government can answer that question.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am afraid, sir, that I made no inquiries beyond the source available equally to the hon. gentleman, the newspapers. I have received no indications of picketing. The indications were that some flights have not taken place because there was fear that if they did take place the aircraft involved would not be serviced. But I have not heard of any picketing.


Edmund Davie Fulton: A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the hon. gentleman if he does not think this matter should be cleared up, even though the government is not intervening in negotiations. If non scheduled carriers are prepared to extend their services so as to prevent inconvenience to the public so far as possible, should the situation not be clarified so that they may know whether they will be able to extend that service?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I should be very happy to inquire of the Air Transport Board whether they have had any indications from any of the carriers that their operations would be interfered with. I do not think it would be proper for me as Minister of Transport to go beyond that.



GOLD MINING ASSISTANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Real Caouelte (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources concerning gold mining in northwestern Quebec.
Could the minister tell us whether he had further talks, further consultations, with the provincial authorities in this regard? Would he have anything new to tell the house in this connection?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: No, Mr. Speaker, I have already stated that the services of our department had been made available, if it could help solve a problem which we feel is essentially social. I have heard of no further important development since the hon. member last inquired about this.



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Howard Johnston (Okanagan-Revelsloke):: As the Minister of Labour is not here I direct my question to the minister replying for him, or to the Prime Minister. I should like to know what steps are being taken to end the strike, involving only 190 employees, that is currently tying up all Pacific coast shipping.
November 18, 1966



Righl Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Labour sent a telegram yesterday to the union leaders concerned. It was an appeal to end this wildcat strike.
A reply to that telegram was sent this morning and, as a result of that message I believe a meeting is taking place this afternoon.



FAILURE TO ANNOUNCE QUOTA FOR NO. 1 GRADE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce a question in connection with marketing of wheat on the prairies. I have received a number of representations to the effect that the two-bushel quota has not been announced in areas in which there is No. 1 wheat, and indeed No. 1 wheat does not seem to be demanded or required to any extent, by the wheat board.
What is the position? What hope is there for farmers in areas which grow No. 1 wheat, as large areas of western Canada do, and what is the possibility of an increase in these areas to meet a situation which is becoming increasingly serious? I realize the minister has not been in this job for long, but I am sure he will be able to answer my question.


Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: I am aware of the problem with respect to No. 1 wheat; the demand is not as strong as we would like to see it. However, I should like to be more precise in my answer, so I will take the question as notice and reply further to it later.



NATURAL GAS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: wish to direct a question to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources and ask him whether his attention has been drawn to a statement in this morning's press from Washington to the effect that Trans-Canada Pipe Lines has rejected a request by the United States Federal Power Commission that it provide further documents relating to the company's recent agreement with the Canadian government. This is in contradiction
Inquiries of the Ministry to what was said in the minister's statement yesterday to the effect that Trans-Canada Pipe Lines would make copies of this correspondence available to the Federal Power Commission. My question is: Are the documents in question the letters of September 15 and 19 which the minister said yesterday are to be tabled. Is it correct that Trans-Canada Pipe Lines has refused to make these documents available to the F.P.C. and, if so, why?


Jean-Luc Pepin: I can only say that the coming hours will show whether my information was better than the information given in the press on this matter


Mr. H. A. Olson (Medicine Hat):: Confirmation or otherwise of what the minister is saying will, as the hon. gentleman says, materialize in a few hours. Has the government refused consent to Trans-Canada's providing the additional documentation the Federal Power Commission had requested?


Jean-Luc Pepin: The situation is this: We have been asked by hon. members of this house to table the correspondence and we have promised to do so. As I said yesterday in the house, I was informed that the company would be willing to make this correspondence available to the Federal Power Commission. That is the situation as it now stands.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: There is no need for the minister to be mysterious. Is he saying he has information that these documents will be presented to the Federal Power Commission in Washington?


Jean-Luc Pepin: Exactly. I said they would be made available.



TRANSFER OF ENGLISH SPEAKING TELEPHONE OPERATORS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. A. Webb (Haslings-Fronlenac):: intended to address this question to the leader of the house but in his temporary absence perhaps I might address it to the acting house leader and ask whether it is true that all English speaking telephone operators in the government employ are being transferred to other positions?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I think I am the minister responsible for the government telephone services. I know of no such thing but, of course, I shall have to make inquiries. I do not keep track of the telephone operators at every hour of the day.
10048

November 18, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry [Translation]



FINANCE

[Stage Direction]
LOAN TO BOLIVIA On the orders of the day:
Mr. Henri Latulippe (Complon-Fronienac):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the hon. Minister of Finance and Receiver General, but in view of his absence I shall put it to the right hon. Prime Minister.
Can he tell us whether a loan to Bolivia has been under consideration? If so, will he tell us the amount, the rate of interest and the terms involved?


Mr. Speaker:: I would suggest to the hon. member that he should put his question on the order paper.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a question to the right hon. Prime Minister.
According to the news, Canada has just agreed to lend Bolivia $1,620,000 without interest. Can the Prime Minister tell us if that loan has been granted through the Bank of Canada?


Mr. Speaker:: I cannot see that the matter is urgent, as the member mentions a loan that has presumably been granted. The member wants details on the matter. I therefore suggest that he should put his question on the order paper.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I will look into it.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I am not asking for details but merely whether the government used the Bank of Canada to grant that loan.


Mr. Speaker:: I feel the hon. member can easily obtain that information by putting his question on the order paper.



CANADIAN CENTENNIAL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: have a question for the Secretary of State. Has the hon. lady received a representation from the Canadian Political Youth Council 
with respect to a proposed centennial youth parliament?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secretary of State):: I have received a document from the young people themselves and I have received information from the Centennial Commission to the effect that the commission is in favour of the principle but would like further time in which to study this proposal and make final recommendations to me.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: In view of the imminent approach of the centenary can the hon. lady use her good offices to have this matter expedited?



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: Yesterday the hon. member for Wellington South asked a question concerning recruitment of additional personnel for my department. I am sorry I misunderstood his question; I thought he was referring to the recruiting program outside of Canada. In answer to his question of yesterday I should like to say that the committee is in fact looking for manpower and has initiated a recruiting program aimed at obtaining the services of university graduates who are interested in serving the'r country as employment officers. There is an immediate target of 500 such employees for my department.


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: Is it a
fact that these prospective employees are being interviewed and hired by the Department of Manpower, and not through the usual channels by the Civil Service Commission?


Jean Marchand: I think they have to be hired through the Civil Service Comm;ssion, though they might be interviewed at the manpower centre. But of this I am not sure. I will check, and give the hon. member an answer later.


Alfred Dryden Hales: Would the minister also check whether the Civil Service Commission was asked to hire these people?



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs and ask him whether during
November 18, 1966



his visit to the Soviet union he discussed with officials there the prospects of the U.S.S.R. at least entering into talks about the entry of that nation into the North Pacific Fisheries Treaty pact?


Paul Joseph James Martin: No, Mr. Speaker.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: I do not know whether the Secretary of State for External Affairs has answered this question or not, but there are a large number of people in Canada whose relatives are behind the iron curtain. In many cases those relatives would like to emigrate to Canada, but up to the present this has been next to impossible. Was the minister able to bring about any kind of rapprochement with the Soviet union whereby these relatives might be permitted to come to this country?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The answer is, yes. If the right hon. gentleman would be good enough to read the statement I made yesterday, he will see that I dealt with this subject.


John George Diefenbaker: I could not quite follow that.


Michael Starr: The latest figures available on immigration show that the number of immigrants arriving here from iron curtain countries amounted to something like 151 in one year. Was any indication given that this figure might be substantially increased?


Paul Joseph James Martin: As hon. members may recall, about a year and a half ago the Prime Minister addressed a communication to Mr. Kosygin appealing on humanitarian grounds for improvement in the procedures for the reunification of families in Canada. As a result of that appeal, substantial additional numbers were able to come to Canada.


John George Diefenbaker: Seventy people.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: No, there were many more than 70. I was given an assurance by Mr. Kosygin that we might expect an acceleration in the numbers of people who will be allowed to come, pursuant to the appeal originally made by the Prime Minister
23033-636J
Inquiries of the Ministry and confirmed by me in the talks I had last Thursday.


Michael Starr: Seventy in 15 months is not many.



TELEVISION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert Simpson (Churchill):: I have a question for the Secretary of State. Earlier this week in relation to the C.B.C. television service the hon. lady made this statement:
This week I should have information before me which may form the basis for announcing a definite date for service in northern Manitoba.
May I now ask whether the hon. lady now has this information before her?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I do not normally tell hon. members about my dates, but I have one with the president of the C.B.C. in 17 minutes.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Transport. Some days ago I asked the minister when we might expect the Robinson report having to do with the salaries and pay for air traffic controller. At that time the minister said he would find out when we might have this report, because it was promised some time in September.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, obviously the hon. gentleman had a better source of information than I had, because at the time he asked the question he appeared to know that part of Judge Robinson's report was on its way to me, although nobody had told me this. Judge Robinson has chosen to make his report in two parts. The first part has been received and has been communicated to the heads of the civil service organizations concerned with the air traffic controllers. It has been indicated to them that it is the desire of the government that the whole matter be considered as one question and that we are hoping to receive the rest of the report as quickly as possible.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is it not true that the Professional Institute of the Public

November 18, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry Service of Canada informed the minister this week that they did not find his answer acceptable, and felt that it should be dealt with on the basis of the views placed before Judge Robinson?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. This question is argumentative.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Alfred Dryden Hales: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of National Revenue when he proposes to table the legal report he promised the house he would table concerning the Volkswagen-Studebaker transaction?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue and President of the Treasury Board):: Mr. Speaker, I do not recall making any such commitment to the house. What I have said is that officials of my department axe consulting with the Department of Justice concerning this matter.



FINANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Danforth (Kent (Ont.)):: Mr. Speaker, I had intended to direct this question to the Minister of Finance, but perhaps in his absence it will be entertained by the Minister of Trade and Commerce. As it is my understanding that we are fast approaching the termination date of the United States offer of a general tariff reduction at the negotiations in Geneva, can the minister indicate whether there is any progress toward a general agreement in this regard between the participating countries?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Speaker, good progress is being made. It remains to be seen whether the agreement envisaged by the late President Kennedy will be realized to the fullest extent. I am optimistic, however, that good progress will be made in reducing the barriers to world trade. I expect to be in Paris again next week, at which time I plan to have further discussions with our negotiating team from Geneva.



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. S. Barnett (Comox-Alberni):: Mr. Speaker, on October 27 when I addressed a question to the Minister of Transport concerning the problems the fishermen on the Pacific coast were having with what they considered to be the arbitrary and unjust government regulations, the minister replied that he did not think this was a question he could possibly answer on the orders of the day, but he said he would look into the matter. I should like to ask him whether he has looked into the matter and if so would he tell us what the result of his investigation has been.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I have looked into the matter. I am looking into the matter and I expect to continue looking into the matter for some time. It is a very tangled and difficult matter indeed. I should like to get it untangled, but I do not think it will be done this week.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Speaker, perhaps if the minister and I have a little discussion at ten o'clock this might help untangle the matter.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. D. Alkenbrack (Prince Edward-Lennox):: Mr. Speaker, will the new bonus to be paid bilingual civil servants also be paid to civil servants who are bilingual in any language combination other than English and French?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I think the regulations in that regard are quite clear. I believe the bilingual bonus applies only to those having knowledge of the two official languages of Canada. If my friend the Minister of National Revenue and President of the Treasury Board could add anything to that, perhaps he would do so now.
Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue and President of the Treasury Board: I will send the hon. member the regulation.
November 18, 1966	COMMONS DEBATES



FARM MACHINERY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Ed. Schreyer (Springfield):: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Minister of Agriculture. Several days ago the minister was asked whether he would be prepared to table the replies he received from the farm machinery companies, and at that time he said he would be pleased to consider that request. I should like to ask him now whether he is prepared to table the correspondence between himself and the farm machinery companies?


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Agriculture):: t am still considering it, Mr. Speaker.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Batten in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL-MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNCIL

The Chairman:: Estimates of the National Research Council, including the Medical Re-:earch Council, for the fiscal year ending (larch 31, 1967. When the committee rose yesterday vote No. 10 was being discussed.
The following items were agreed to:
10. Scholarships and grants in aid of research, ;41,000.000.
10a. Scholarships and grants in aid of research,
15.500.000.
15. Assistance towards research in industry under erms and conditions approved by the governor in louncii including authority, notwithstanding sec-ion 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to nake commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $6,000,000, $4,500,000.



INDUSTRY

[Stage Direction]
15c. To authorize, notwithstanding section 30 of he Financial Administration Act, an increase to
125.000.	000 in the total amount of commitments in he current and subsequent fiscal years for develop-nent grants under the Area Development Incentives let, $1.
L35a. To extend the purposes of Vote L35 of the lain Estimates for 1966-67 to provide for assistance o Canadian materials suppliers and tooling manu-acturers for the automotive industry by deeming uch suppliers and manufacturers to be manufac-urers of automotive products for the purpose of the lote and to increase to $40,000,000 the authority to nake commitments for the purposes of the Vote in he current and subsequent fiscal years; additional mount required, $6,400,000.
Herman Maxwell Batten: This completes the esti-nates of the Department of Industry.
Supply-Trade and Commerce
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE General administration-
1. Departmental administration including fees for membership in the international organizations listed in the details of the estimates, $6,664,500.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall vote No. 1 carry?


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the minister has anything further to say on this item?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, there are a few things I should like to say, if the committee feels like devoting the time to my remarks at this late stage of our consideration of estimates. In May when the officials of the department and I appeared before the committee on finance, trade and economic affairs, I reviewed the activities of the various branches of the Department of Trade and Commerce in some detail. We had good discussions centering around our export trade policies and promotion techniques, and we examined in considerable detail the program represented by the estimates now before the house.
[DOT] (11:50 a.m.)
I was gratified to note the committee's approval of a continuing high level of activity by Canada's trade commissioner service to stimulate external trade, and the recommendation to the branches of the department to continue an aggressive program of export promotion. One step to broaden the various aspects of our trade commissioner service is that we are now doing more to encourage young ladies to apply. I am hopeful that suitable qualified candidates will come forward for recruitment.
The importance of our export trade to the national economy is well recognized. Having in mind the total area of export trade promotion and policy development, it is a major concern of the department to deploy the staff and financial resources available to it in accordance with priorities which recognize the constantly shifting trade patterns and trading relationships, as well as varying supply and demand factors. It is our aim to neglect no part of our economy where we find capacity to export. We are, however, paying particular attention to foreign markets where the potential return is high. Our greatest effort is expended where we get best value in export terms for the expenditures incurred.
Exports to date in 1966 are up 20 per cent from the same period a year ago, to a new high in Canada's export performance. Merchandise exports for 1966 as a whole are likely to reach or even exceed the $10 billion
November 18, 1966

Supply-Trade and Commerce events of our centennial year, which I am convinced will be a great success.
Mr. Chairman, I want to refer to two other developments related to our commodities. As hon. members know, during the year we found it necessary to take control of copper in certain forms, and control re-exports of hides and skins. We did this in the latter case because the United States government took control of hides and skins but allowed them to come into Canada on the understanding that we in turn would prevent the re-export of hides and skins coming into Canada from the United States. The United States authorities have lifted their embargo on hides and skins, and accordingly we have done the same for re-export. They are now free for export. That action was taken by our government just a few days ago.
On the matter of copper ores and concentrates, we had to take a certain measure of control. This applied to scrap as well, except for those grades which were not satisfactory for use in Canada. The situation has eased somewhat. The Canadian demand and supply picture looks to be relatively more in balance. We are now permitting the export of copper scrap on a quota basis. We have not interfered at all with the export of copper concentrates from the west coast because there are no readily accessible smelters. In the east we have found it possible to allow certain mines to export their concentrates. We intend to review these permits as they come up for renewal from time to time; but we feel that more leniency in granting export permits on an annual basis, than is currently the case, vill become possible.


Mr. Lambert:: Mr. Chairman, as a member of the finance committee I simply want to say that we examined the estimates of this department in considerable detail and the committee made a report to which I would draw the attention of all hon. members. I should like to make one or two minor remarks in connection with this department.
First of all, with regard to the negotiations for the reduction of tariffs under what is familiarly known as the Kennedy round, although this matter does not come directly under the minister's jurisdiction I am sure he is involved in it. His colleague the Minister of Finance, through the tariff section, is more directly involved in this question. The chemical producers of Canada have put forward, in my view, a very strong and justifiable case that no unilateral decision should be taken by

the government to instruct Canada's negotiating team to arrive at certain levels of tariffs with regard to chemicals produced commercially in Canada, without direct consultation with the industry. This is vital to the Canadian industry.
I am sure that if the minister has seen the brief of the association or has talked to members of the association he will readily understand how the whole of the Canadian chemical industry could, frankly, be torpedoed by improper action on the part of our government; that is, if the government were instructing their negotiators to set certain levels at which they would be prepared to deal.
These are the only remarks I wish to make on this occasion, Mr. Chairman, because the committee has examined these estimates in detail. We will certainly be interested to see the progress that is made by Canada in reducing the extraordinarily large imbalance of trade with the United States on commodity account, and also the progress that is made in regard to our own deficit on commodity account.
[DOT] (12:10 p.m.)
Having said this, generally speaking I think we may let the estimates pass although I and my colleagues may have some questions to ask.


Herman Maxwell Batten: The hon. member for Vancouver East.


Mr. Winch:: Mr. Chairman, I am sorry for the delay in getting to my feet but unfortunately I am somewhat disabled physically. I am most anxious however to speak on certain matters which fall under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I noted that the minister said-and I quote him because I took his words down

that the value of export trade is nationally recognized. I agree with that; but export trade by Canada entails an understanding that if we want to expand it we must also give consideration to imports. If my understanding of economics is correct, and I believe it is, we have to recognize, with respect to trade deficiencies, that the more we bring together exports and imports the greater is our opportunity for exports.
My reason for participating in this debate under these difficult circumstances is to say regretfully that I have had to reach a conclusion that the Liberal government is so much interested in giving advantage to United States exports into Canada that it is betraying, and I repeat betraying, opportunities for
November 18, 1966

greater exports from the United Kingdom to Canada.
We have a deficiency situation as between Canada and the United States, with Canada being on the wrong side of the ledger. The United Kingdom, on the other hand, has a deficiency of payments problem with Canada, and it is my belief it should be government policy to reduce that deficiency in trade balance between the United Kingdom and Canada. The more we can import from the United Kingdom the greater will be our exports to the United Kingdom. Therefore I am most disturbed when I find the Canadian government policy giving advantage to the United States to export to Canada, and in some respects denying the right to the United Kingdom to export to Canada.
I had the opportunity and privilege of spending the first week of July last in Sheffield, England, and while there visited some of the local major steel industries. I met with members of parliament and councillors who have the same philosophical belief as myself, but I also met with some of the top industrial leaders. I was taken through two of the largest steel industries in Sheffield by a couple of those industrial leaders, one the president and the other the managing director. They told me they were most happy because just that day they had received a second large order from the United States automotive industry for automotive steel. Naturally I asked them, "What automotive steel do you send to Canada, because we have a large automotive industry"? Their answer was that none is sent here. I then asked, "Why do you not sell to Canada?" Their answer was "Because your government made an automotive agreement with the United States whereby we in the United Kingdom cannot sell automotive steel to Canada." I queried this and their answer was "We can and we will supply automotive steel to Canada at between 12 per cent and 15 per cent less than our selling price to the United States, less even than the price involved in the second big contract we have now got from the Ford Motor Company in the Unites States, but your Canadian government, by its automotive agreement, has made it impossible for us to sell anything to the automotive industry in Canada."
I see the Minister of Trade and Commerce shaking his head, but I tell him this information was given to me directly in Sheffield by men who certainly should know the situation. When the U.S.-Canada automobile agreement
Supply-Trade and Commerce came before this house I am sure not one of us realized that that was the situation-that the United Kingdom could not sell automotive steel to the industry in Canada.
Again I tell the minister, who knows parliament, who knows trade administration and, though he was not here for some time, was involved in finance and big industry, that this was the information given to me in Sheffield by two top men in the steel industry. I believe I have not only the right but the responsibility to ask the minister to give some explanation about this situation, and if the situation is as I have described it, then he should explain this betrayal of the United Kingdom in this matter.
There are other factors I wish to mention. Admittedly they come under revenue and customs, but the Minister of Trade and Commerce has a major interest in trade and if the steel industry in the United Kingdom cannot get anywhere with our revenue and customs restrictions, perhaps the minister could do something about the matter.
[DOT] (12:20 p.m.)
Let me refer again to the talks I had during my visit to Sheffield, the home of highly specialized steel interests. I spoke to the president-at his request because he was interested in Canadian trade-of a firm which is almost two centuries old. It specializes in the manufacture of agricultural machinery parts, files saws, scythes, etc. He does little business with Canada and I asked him why. He said: "Because your parliament and your government prefer to give the United States the right to export to Canada a privilege not extended to us from the United Kingdom". I asked him whether he would put this in writing and he did, and I have the correspondence before me lest I be challenged on it.
What is the situation, Mr. Chairman? As far as I know and as far as these people in the United Kingdom know there is only one company in Canada which manufactures high-class specialized steel for machinery parts, saws, scythes, etc., and they manufacture these parts for their own use. Other companies which require farm machinery and related parts import them from the United States.
They do this, Mr. Chairman, because of government regulation. Manufacturers in the United States are able to quote one price for the year. Their freight charges are such that they can quote a yearly price. Exports from the United Kingdom are shipped via the seaway while the seaway is open, but when it
10056	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce closes these goods have to be landed at Saint John and then go by rail. The companies in Canada who are prepared to buy this steel cutting equipment insist upon a price for the year because their business is operated on a computer basis. They require a guaranteed price for the year, and the United States can meet this requirement because freight charges there do not change during the year., The representatives of the two companies I spoke to in Sheffield say that they would be prepared to give a one year guaranteed price to meet Canadian requirements and would take a chance on whether the seaway would be open, carrying the loss incurred by landing at Saint John and then shipping by rail when the seaway is closed.
This is something, Mr. Chairman, which the government will not allow. The government insist on an f.o.b. price Manchester or Liverpool, plus freight charges at the time of shipment. Because of this regulation of the government, specialized steel products from the United Kingdom cannot be shipped on a one year guaranteed price basis, in order thereby to meet United States competition, that can offer this one year guaranteed price. To me it is an irresponsible and an unfair government regulation which would deny the United Kingdom the right to bid on a one year price basis.
As I say, Mr. Chairman, I have the correspondence from these industrialists in Sheffield before me, but I am not going to read it. However, I would say, Mr. Chairman, that I do not think it is understood by many backbenchers in this house that there is a government regulation which gives United States steel manufacturers top priority to sell their products to Canada while at the same time denying the United Kingdom, which has a big trade deficit with Canada, any opportunity of selling steel products to Canada.
I sincerely hope that the Minister of Trade and Commerce will take note of what I am saying, Mr. Chairman, and that he will have the decency and honesty to explain why automotive steel cannot be sold in Canada, despite the fact, as I was told by the president of this steel complex in the United Kingdom, that the price could be 12 to 15 per cent less than that of steel being sold to the Ford Motor Company of the United States. I should also like to know why, when only one company in Canada produces high grade agricultural machinery for its own use, government regulation is such that the United Kingdom is

DEBATES	November 18, 1966
unable to bid for what Canadian companies demand, namely a one year price, thereby handing on a silver platter to the United States this Canadian business.
I agree with what the minister said not too long ago about the value to Canada of exports. But Canadian exports could increase even faster if some consideration were to be given to the balance which exists between our imports and our exports. I, as one who thought he knew about government regulations, was amazed and disturbed at the information given me in Sheffield by those who should know, those who are employed in the industrial steel empire of the United Kingdom, information which indicates that there are government regulations which deny the United Kingdom the opportunity of exporting to its greatest Commonwealth colleague, the Dominion of Canada.
I sincerely hope that the minister will give me an explanation of this and that some study will be made of this most important matter. I certainly hope the minister will not try to give me any eyewash, or the brushoff, because what I have been telling him about during the past few minutes is based on information given me by industrial leaders in Sheffield, who I would think should know the regulations relating to export and import. I will look forward to hearing from the Minister of Trade and Commerce on what I consider to be two mighty important matters, about which I can assure him I did not know until they were drawn to my attention by the political and industrial leaders of the United Kingdom.


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I should just like to comment on the remarks made by the hon. member for Vancouver East, but before I do so I should like as a matter of record to reply to what the hon. member for Edmonton West had to say about consulting the chemical industry on any change in the tariff structure. I should like to inform the members of the committee that consultation is taking place in this regard. We have had very close consultation with many branches of industry in these tariff negotiations. The views of this industry have been received. They are being taken into account by the government in determining its position on the matter of chemicals raised by the hon. member for Edmonton West.
[DOT] (12:30 p.m.)
Referring to the remarks of the hon. member for Vancouver East, which are always made vigorously and dynamically, and which are well documented, I would say there is always room for both understanding and
November 18, 1966	COMMONS
misunderstanding. My interest in getting our trade into a better balance with the United Kingdom is as great as anybody's. Since I have had this portfolio, and before, steps have been taken to make it easier for United Kingdom exporters to trade in Canada. That those steps are effective is revealed by the figures. In September, 1966, Canadian exports to the United Kingdom dropped, whereas imports from the United Kingdom to Canada have gone up from $90.2 million to $95.6 million. United Kingdom exports to Canada increased by 13.1 per cent over September 1965. We have taken various steps to help them meet valuation difficulties which they feel have been plaguing them to a considerable extent.
Officials from the government have been in the Un ted Kingdom discussing these problems, a number of which have been isolated and solved to make it still easier for the United Kingdom to trade here.
To allow us to examine problems at first hand on a periodic basis, the United Kingdom government acted on the strength of a suggestion the government of Canada made to them at the time of the Trade Ministers Conference in the United Kingdom earlier this year. We suggested to them that they avail themselves of the same opportunities the United States now has through the medium of a joint ministerial committee. The United Kingdom accepted the suggestion. We are thus setting up a joint ministerial committee which undoubtedly will give its major emphasis to matters of trade. But it is open to them to bring up what they wish. The first meeting will be held shortly after the turn of the year.
I hope the achievements of that committee will be substantial and that it will eliminate a great deal of current misunderstanding.
In the specific field of specialty steels, the hon. member undoubtedly knows that in this country we produce excellent specialty steels at competitive prices. Now that the automobile agreement has come into effect we have access, if we can achieve it on the basis of price, quality, delivery and the other elements in trade, to the whole North American automotive market. Part of the problem involves the Canadian content of cars. The Canadian content provision was imposed by the government of Canada to ensure the maximum work effort and maximum value added to the Canadian cars. But there is no bar that [ know of to the importation into this country of United Kingdom stainless or specialty steels. To my knowledge British stainless
23033-637 J
Supply-Trade and Commerce steels are imported into Canada now and have use and application here. There is no special exclusion. If they can meet us on terms of price, delivery and all the other elements going into the trading pattern, the Canadian market is available to them, and in fact it is available to them now.
I wish to follow up the specific instances the hon. member brought to my attention. I should like our people to communicate directly, with the distinguished gentlemen concerned, to see if we cannot eliminate any misunderstanding, and to solve directly any d.fficulties which may arise. It is our aim to reduce barriers to trade on a multilateral basis, but if I may particularlize with one country specifically, we want to see a better trade balance between the United Kingdom and Canada.


Harold Edward Winch: The minister is evading the question I asked him. He referred to stainless steel, but at no time did I refer to stainless steel. I referred to cutting steel. My information is that Massey-Ferguson Industries Limited produce cutting steel only for themselves. I understand the United Kingdom must quote two prices, whereas the United States manufacturers quote only one. Does the minister not think that is damnably unfair to the cutting steel industry of the United Kingdom?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I referred to stainless steels and other specialty steels. My argument about stainless steels applies equally to specialty steels of all kinds. I wish to look at the particular instance the hon. member brought to my attention, because we might be helpful. I want to be as helpful as possible.


Harold Edward Winch: That is all that I am asking. I ask that you be helpful to the United Kingdom.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: I am not a member of the standing committee to which the estimates of this department were referred. I realize that these estimates have been considered in detail by that committee and returned to the house. I do not intend to take much time to discuss them because I wish to refer to only two matters at this time.
I do not know if I should congratulate the minister for being assigned the responsibility for the Canadian Wheat Board, but I do wish him well. Congratulations imply achievement. The wheat board may be a burden under the present circumstances.
November 18, 1986

Supply-Trade and Commerce
When the Minister of Finance was responsible for the wheat board there was discussion about the working out of a new quota system for the delivery of grain from the producers to the elevator companies in the areas serviced by the wheat board. The Minister of Finance never told the house the details of plans for setting up new quota systems for wheat deliveries. I realize that from time to time there have been difficulties in the system, and we want to know what the department or what the wheat board is doing to correct some of the inadequacies and weaknesses found in the present quota system. For example, we know there are wide discrepancies in quotas at various points. I do not know whether some points have no quotas, but some points a few days ago were not up to even a one bushel quota. I realize there are many shipping points in western Canada, but I also realize that some places have a quota of between five and six bushels per acre at the present time.
You can try to explain these discrepancies to the farmers by saying that it is necessary for the greatest amount of grain to get into export position by taking in the short hauls first before the St. Lawrence freezes, and so on. But no matter how you try to explain this, you still run into a situation such as I have in my constituency where, on a Canadian Pacific line running from Bassano to Empress, for example, almost all points are on a one or two bushel quota.
[DOT] (12:40 p.m.)
Only 50 or 60 miles north, where the C.N.R. runs through, most of these points are now on a quota of four or five bushels per acre. The difference in the quota along these two railway lines cannot be explained away; it does not accord with the explanation that the railways are required to move short haul grain to the lakehead before the lakes are closed. I hope some other arrangement can be worked out so that there may be more equal application of the quota system, including the dates when these quotas are open. There is no good and satisfactory reason for the present wide differences. I make a plea to the minister to do whatever he can in full co-operation with the wheat board, the railway companies and the elevator companies to make sure that this disparity in quotas is not repeated year after year.
This is not a new thing. It happened last year, and it happened the year before that. For farmers who are able to sell only one or

two bushels per acre by the end of the calendar year while others not far away are able to sell three or four times as much, the system is not satisfactory, and no satisfactory explanation can be given to them.
Discussions have been taking place, either in the minister's department or in the Department of Transport, about the possibility of providing new equipment for railways. I refer in particular to special equipment for the hauling of grain. It seems to me that general purpose box cars which need to be fitted with grain doors and papered up before they can be used for the transport of grain are not satisfactory, in the light of present conditions, and that other types of hopper cars could be designed to carry grain more efficiently. I am thinking of cars designed so as to minimize time spent loading and unloading; cars which would, in any case, be able to carry much larger quantities of grain.
It seems to me we should recognize that the potential production of wheat in western Canada has increased substantially in the last few years, not only because of the increase in the number of acres under cultivation but also because of new methods, fertilizers and so on. Along with this has come a reasonably assured increase in the prospects of the sale of our wheat on international markets.
We have been accustomed to export a volume of wheat in the neighbourhood of 400 million bushels annually. This figure is now increasing substantially and the narrowest bottleneck encountered at the moment is failure to move our grain fast enough by rail. There were suggestions that some of the trouble was at the terminal elevators, but what little investigation I have been able to do at various times indicates that the terminal elevators are not at the present time the major limiting factor. I believe it is the responsibility of the Minister of Trade and Commerce to do something about increasing terminal space and encouraging those concerned to improve the grain handling facilities at terminal points and other export points. As I said at the outset, I wish the minister well. I hope he realizes that our production potential and the marketability of our grain have increased substantially during the past four or five years, and that the need at the present time is to provide improved facilities so as to profit from our opportunities.
Another subject upon which I should like to talk briefly is the question of oil production and sales. A few years ago the federal government announced its intention to set up export
November 18, 1966	COMMONS
targets in keeping with the potential production of oil in Canada. Those targets have not been met. Yet the production of oil has increased in every single year since then-I am referring to 1959, or 1960. Oil production in Alberta today is far below the capacity of the wells to produce even within the limits of good conservation practices. Yet we are still importing oil and petroleum products. This is a paradox, particularly when one considers that the importation of petroleum and petroleum products into Canada is one of the heaviest factors contributing to our balance of payment problem. Yet we have the capacity to produce this oil at home.
I realize there are difficulties in working out agreements with other countries which are involved internationally. Nevertheless I suggest it would be good for this nation, good for the balance of payments condition and good for the maintenance of our international reserves, to make use of this "shut-in" oil producing capacity. I am not aware of any measure which has been taken by the government to correct the situation I have described.
I hope the minister will take a vigorous stand in favour of providing, either by import-export exchange agreements or by giving western oil companies access to oil markets farther east in Canada, some way of making use of this oil production potential which has already been developed in the west. These are two matters which are, I believe, of great concern to the part of Canada I represent. I believe they fall directly into the area for which the minister is responsible and I look forward to some announcement shortly that we are making progress in both these areas.


Mr. Regimbal:: Mr. Chairman, I do not propose to speak at any length. I would like to cover one point only, since I had the opportunity of dealing with it for a few minutes last night. The reason I am bringing up the matter again today is because, in my opinion, I did not even get anything like an answer yesterday.

I feel like a batter who goes up to bat with two strikes against him. I only hope I will have better fortune than our friend Casey. Ten days ago a question in reference to Expo '67 was asked by the hon. member for Cartier. He was suggesting rent controls because of the natural fear of skyrocketing prices during that year in the general area of Montreal. He
Supply-Trade and Commerce put the question quite bluntly and with all due and proper concern. The answer given to him as reported at page 9659 of Hansard was, in part, as follows:
The corporation has set up a reservations department called Logexpo which has already made
90.000	reservations covering some 370,000 hotel days or bed nights as the experts in Montreal call them.
[DOT] (12:50 p.m.)
Last night I brought up the particular subject of reservations. Strangely enough the answer which appears at page 10036 of Hansard is as follows:
The Expo corporation has set up a reservations department called Logexpo. It has already made
90.000	reservations covering some 370,000 hotel days.
This is word for word for the answer which was received by the hon. member for Cartier. It is a stock answer, and I do not believe it really answers the questions asked. The reason for my concern is not a negative one. I am convinced that the metropolitan area does have sufficient rooms available to accommodate the crowds which are expected, but I do not think this has been publicized widely enough. In the past month I have had occasion to be at various times in New York city, in Hamilton and in Vancouver. In New York city I believe everybody knows that Expo is to take place; this is a good thing. Publicity in that direction is paying dividends. However a taxi driver in New York, of all people-because these are the people who can spread the word around better than anybody else-as soon as I told him my home was close to Montreal immediately said, "Oh, yes, Expo. It should be a very, very good show, but I won't go close to the place, because you cannot get reservations". Imagine the impact of something like that getting around.
Two weeks later I was speaking to a businessman in Hamilton who immediately talked about Expo, and said, "From what we hear, you cannot get a reservation during the time Expo is on". One week later in Vancouver I spoke to a travelling agent, of all people, who came up with exactly the same answer-"People who were speaking to me last week have changed their minds because reservations apparently will not be available around Montreal". Here you have three totally different areas and they come up with exactly the same concern.
I mention this, because I do not believe it is true. But a voice in the wilderness has no authority. There are two special instruments at our disposal to get the point across. There
November 18, 1966

Supply-Trade and Commerce is Logexpo or the Expo public relations officers, and also the minister who has the responsibility for Expo in the house. I feel we have to do something definite to see that there is a clear and loud answer to this. If the rumors are true, then I believe everyone will agree something should be done about it. If the rumours are false, then we should say so and say so repeatedly, because when things like this start going around it takes months and months of repudiation to counteract them.
In some of the answers which have been given it has been indicated that accommodation is available in Montreal and around Montreal as far as St. Jovite, Ottawa, Trois Rivieres and I might add Lachute, St. Adolphe de Howard, St. Sauveur, and even Granby. This is all part of the picture and, if it is so, then let us say so and let us say so loud and clear so that we may dispel the doubts. I believe everyone in Canada has his heart set on making Expo a great success. I hope the minister will consider these very few remarks which I have made in the best possible spirit, and I hope that he will try to get something done about it.


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I should like to give an assurance in respect of the accommodation in Montreal and vicinity for Expo. 1 can give that assurance, and I hope that nobody will stay away from Expo because of a fear of not being able to obtain accommodation. Logexpo is doing a good job. They have been taking a good number of reservations. They tell me they are in a position to accommodate anyone who applies. I urge anyone who now is in any doubt about this to apply. We have been assured also that the roads which are under construction and which will lead to Expo from the communities in the vicinity including Granby and St. Hyacinthe will be completed.
Logexpo is at the present time conducting a survey of living accommodation in these neighbouring areas. So, I think I can unequivocally give the hon. member the assurance he is seeking. I have had discussions with him and I know this is a matter which has caused him concern. Expo is now undertaking a considerable program of advertising and public relations in the United States. It will try to bring interest to a peak at the right time so as to receive the maximum return. We will take this opportunity to assure the people in the United States that accommodation will be available for them at Expo.
I should like to address just a few words to what the hon. member for Medicine Hat said

and about his concern about wheat moving off the farms. Last Monday I spent the day in Winnipeg with the officials of the Canadian Wheat Board. I reviewed the figures and was assured by the Board that the movement is good this year.
I have one particular reference I should like to make about shipment to the west coast, where there always has been concern. The situation there has improved remarkably. Currently the railways are handling more than 500 box cars each day on the west coast.


Harold Edward Winch: Is it not correct that they require 1,200 to 1,400 box cars in order to use all the storage facilities and to take care of the ships which now are in harbour and waiting to be loaded?


Robert Henry Winters: Exports from the west coast are running at about eight million bushels ahead of last year's exports, and at November 4 there were only two vessels waiting to be loaded at Vancouver. As of today, I think there are about 15 because of the strike. The Canadian Wheat Board however advises that their stock position now is good, although there is a shortage in some grades. I should like to inform the hon. member that I would be more than pleased to keep in mind his representations. We have talked about this matter of quotas, and the Canadian Wheat Board certainly is making every effort to increase them just as fast as they can. We will see that this is continued.


Harold Edward Winch: In view of the representations made to the government by the Vancouver and British Columbia members, to the effect that one of the main problems is the availability of cars to supply the wheat that can be handled by the storage and loading fac lities, and the longshoremen available, may I ask the minister whether any endeavour has been made by himself and his department to reach agreement with the railways that they increase the number of cars available for the shipment of wheat across Canada either to Vancouver or anywhere else?


Robert Henry Winters: Th'S is a co-ordinated program on the part of all concerned. The Minister of Transport I believe answered that question the other day. Obviously we are looking into this. At the moment the movement is good. That is all I can say at this time. If as a result of the constant review which the matter is receiving it appears that extra facilities and extraordinary means are necessary, then we will do that too.
November 18, 1966


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question of the minister? Can the oil producers of Canada look forward to any increased availability of oil in the Canadian market either by import-export agreements or by direct delivery into major areas of the Canadian market?
[DOT] (1:00 p.m.)


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, the policy respecting oil is more appropriately a matter for the National Energy Board. When it comes to exports the Department of Trade and Commerce is involved and concerned. This was one of the major items in our discussion at the meetings of the joint ministerial committee of the United States and Canada in Washington earlier this year. At that time we made very strong representations to increase our penetration into the United States oil market. I know there are discussions going on currently between representatives of the National Energy Board and the appropriate officials in the United States. Without disclosing just what the status of those discussions is now, because I think that might be prejudical to the results, let me simply assure the hon. member that this is a matter of gravest importance to the Canadian government and we intend to pursue it vigorously.


Mr. Ricard:: Mr. Chairman, while we are on the estimates of his department, I should like to draw the attention of the minister on a few points. I am doing it at the request of manufacturers in my riding who have written to me. Here are some excerpts of their letter. The manager of J. A. M. Cote Limitee, the oldest shoe manufacture in Canada, has sent me a letter which contains this paragraph:
There are several shoe manufactures in the county of Saint-Hyacinthe employing hundreds of people and it would be in the interest of all concerned if the recommendations contained in the report were accepted.
The report referred to is the third brief which has been sent and, surely, submitted to the minister, concerning shoe imports in Canada.
The letter of the general manager of Chaussures Dufresne Ltee, of St. Pie, contains the following paragraph:
I am sure that you will fully support the recommendations contained in the brief and which are vital to the survival of an industry employing
25,000	people, 14,000 of them in the province of Quebec.
For some years now, Mr. Chairman, several small Canadian footwear manufactures have
Supply-Trade and Commerce been forced, because of foreign competition, to close down and cease production.
Cities are involved in this situation, and this creates many disadvantages for Canadian industry, and more particularly for local industry, and the fact that certain plants must close down results in loss of employment for those individuals who, until then, earned their living by working in these plants. This is also a source of loss for municipalities, which are deprived of the taxes paid by employees of these industries.
Very important information may be found in the third supplementary brief that I have here. For instance, we note that Canadian producers manufactured 48,756,870 pair of shoes in 1951, as compared to 65,772,898 in 1965. On the other hand, imports have risen from 2,623,000 pair in 1951, to 27,394,000 in 1965. We can see that foreign shoe imports have risen at a greater rate than Canadian production and, needless to say, such a state of affairs is detrimental to Canadian manufacturers.
Comparatively, our exports, which totalled 2,384,675 pair of shoes in 1962, fell to 1,749,461 in 1965.
Foreign shoe imports into this country are increasing very rapidly, whereas our exports of these products abroad are on the decrease.
Now, if we compare production to population, we also note an unfavourable lag. For instance, between 1951 and 1965, the Canadian population increased by 39 per cent, whereas Canadian shoe production showed a 35 per cent increase only, as compared to a 942 per cent increase in foreign shoe imports. The hon. minister will surely want to rectify this imbalance, so that our Canadian workers may not be penalized by importation of foreign products.
And, according to the brief, in spite of an increase in population of approximately one million people between 1962 and 1965, shoe production for the year 1965 was inferior to that of 1962 by 246,204 pair.
Between January and May, 1966, production was 2 per cent lower than that of the corresponding period in 1965; Canadian shoe manufacturers therefore conclude, and I quote from their brief:
Aware of the interchangeability of footwear because of its functional role and of the massive and rapid penetration of imported footwear on the Canadian market, we recommend that footwear be placed on the reserved list so that no tariff concessions be proposed with regard to footwear at the GATT negotiations on tariff and trade as provided for by the Kennedy round in Geneva, with a view
November 18, 1966

Supply-Trade and Commerce to protecting the Canadian footwear industry and its 25,000 employees,
Mr. Chairman, I understand that the minister must maintain a reasonable balance between our imports and our exports. I also know that the minister has the required knowledge and qualifications to deal expertly with the problem of imports and exports. I know also that it is a major problem which cannot be solved overnight.
But one must also remember, Mr. Chairman, that the minister and the government have an obligation toward the taxpayers, namely the workers of the footwear industry in this case. I am convinced that because I called that matter to his attention, the minister will look at it more closely than he has so far, and endeavour to find a fair solution for all the people and organizations concerned.
I would like to conclude my remarks by extending my best wishes for success to the minister in those tasks which are often very thankless but also very important as far as the citizens are concerned and I am confident that he will want to give all his undivided attention to the problems I have pointed out to him.
[DOT] (1:10 p.m.)


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, perhaps it would suffice to say at this time, in reply to the very constructive remarks of the hon. member, that the tariff in general on shoes coming into this country is 25 per cent. This is a pretty high barrier. The complaints of the industry, however, are being investigated. A questionnaire has been sent out to the companies concerned to find out just what they deem to be their problems. This matter is being followed up very closely. I thank the hon. member for raising this question.


Mr. Woolliams:: Mr. Chairman, I shall be brief in my remarks. I want to endorse-I sometimes think I am getting too mellow these days-the remarks of the hon. member for Medicine Hat with reference to agriculture and the petroleum industry. I want to add a few words to those of the hon. member in congratulating the minister upon getting the wheat board under the Department of Trade and Commerce. I have always been one of those who believed it should really be under the Department of Agriculture; but I do not think it really matters as long as you have a good man looking after it.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I have known the Minister of Trade and Commerce for some years. I have heard him speak to the chamber of commerce in Calgary. I say without any hesitation that he is quite a gracious gentleman; I know he has the know-how with regard to many things, and it will not take him long to grasp the problems I hope of the wheat board.
As I have said, the minister spoke to the chamber of commerce in the city of Calgary, and I hope that in the months ahead he will find time to speak to the U.F.O., the farm organizations of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. I also hope he will speak to the chambers of commerce in the smaller areas. I believe it is sometimes necessary for all of us in this house, particularly cabinet members, to get back to the real grass roots. It may be a good thing if the minister visited some of the small towns in Saskatchewan, Alberta and Manitoba, leaned against the wall of a country store or the post office and just talked to the farmers.
There has always been the fiction that the western farmer-I know the minister will not be guilty of believing this because he has knowledge of the whole of Canada,-is rolling in money, goes to Florida in the winter and drives a big car. This is complete fiction. There are a few farmers who do this, as there are a few people in any industry who do it; but it is the exception rather than the rule.
With regard to the wheat board, I hope the minister will obtain the co-operation of his cabinet colleagues to improve the movement of grain. I believe we all know that cabinet discussions are rather like those in the House of Commons, except that the press are not present, and you have to sell ideas to your colleagues. I hope that since the Liberal party is not represented in the west, and certainly it is not at the present time, the minister will put forward his arguments forcibly in cabinet on behalf of the western farmer.
Agriculture is not a small business today; it is not the small business in which our relatives engaged some years ago. It is big business now. In order to engage in wheat farming, it is necessary in the initial stages to have anywhere from $50,000 to $100,000 worth of machinery and land comparable in value to that amount of investment.
Over the past few years the costs of farming have been gradually increasing, as have the costs in every industry in the country. The big operators of today are still able to produce grain at a profit. But we must consider the middleman, because we do not want to
November 18. 1966	COMMONS
see the west owned by a few people. If this were to be the case, the west would become a series of great grain belts in the sense that just one or two operators would be in control and would own all the communities. We want to keep small communities and towns that are dependent upon this industry. We do not want to have a monopoly situation in this industry.
When we talk about the grain industry, we are talking of a $2 billion industry. The problem is that everybody in Canada who is not from the west thinks he understands the situation. A few years ago if the grain crop ran 50 bushels to the acre, or anywhere from 25 bushels to 50 bushels to the acre, it was a good crop and there was no problem. But the problem in the agricultural industry, as in the automobile industry, is that you have to sell the commodity you are producing.
It may be that on paper the grain is sold. The markets are there, if the grain can be moved off the farms to the ports of shipment. The cash advances program introduced in 1957 was badly needed at that time because in many cases the farmer found it difficult to obtain the cash needed to buy farm machinery and pay his expenses. The wheat quotas are still very low.
A great deal of mail arrives over my desk from my constituents. The amount of mail I receive is typical of that received by western members, except that half of my constituency is city and half is rural, so that there is a division between urban and rural problems. Most of the mail I receive comes from country elevator agents and farmers who point out that they can get the grain to the elevators but the difficulty is in moving it out of the elevators to the terminals and ports from which it will be shipped to the countries which have purchased it.
Some people think I have been too critical of the C.P.R. I have said over and over again in this chamber that I believe in free enterprise, and I think the C.P.R. has been a great company. But somehow, whether it has been the fault of governments or the company, the C.P.R. is years behind in respect of the movement of grain. As the hon. member for Medicine Hat pointed out, the company is years behind in automating its equipment. It is not easy to do this, and it is a very expensive matter. When the C.P.R. changed from steam to diesel locomotives, the cost ran into millions of dollars. No doubt it will cost millions of dollars for them to automate the facilities at the terminals. However, Mr. Chairman, I still believe that one of the big
Supply-Trade and Commerce problems in this area, as the hon. member for Medicine Hat mentioned, is the inability to obtain sufficient cars to move the grain. The big problem today seems to be in the hold-up of cars.
I am told over and over again that 10, 15 or 20 cars will back into a siding but nothing happens. Therefore, I hope the Minister of Trade and Commerce, with the co-operation of the Minister of Transport, will consult the officials of the railway and get these box cars moving to the port of shipment, whether it be Vancouver, Port Arthur or Fort William. At these ports there is a hold-up of box car movements because the railways are not automated.
If any industry in Canada as big as the grain industry were completely under free enterprise, these problems would not arise. The movement of grain is under the control of the wheat board, an agency of the government. I am confident that any other industry of this size would be fully automated in a very short time in order to compete. These problems arise because of government control and regulation. I support the wheat board because it organizes the seller as well as the purchaser of wheat, so that we have over the years obtained a fair return for our grain.
After the minister has obtained the facts at the grass roots, I ask him to talk to the railroad people, as well as others concerned, and convince them that something must be done to improve this situation. It must be done immediately. If the railroads keep the equipment they have, then something must be done to move the grain as quickly as possible so that the grain Canada has sold can be delivered.
I suppose that every government likes to hide a few facts. I am sure we did it when our party formed the government, and I am sure the Liberals do it now they are the government. However, Mr. Chairman, we want to get down to brass tacks. On several occasions, I have pressed the Minister of Finance to answer questions I have put to him as to whether we lost grain sales last year because of delays in delivery caused by railway strikes, longshoremen's strikes and other problems. Mr. McNamara, head of the wheat board, said that irreparable damage had been done to our grain markets. I know that in cabinet discussions the minister can raise these matters with his colleagues; but at other times one has to be careful about the words one uses. I do not care whether you are Liberal, Conservative,
November 18. 1966

Supply-Trade and Commerce Social Credit or N.D.P., when you are speaking before the public about any matter you must be a little careful about the words used.
[DOT] (1:20 p.m.)
This is a serious economic problem and I tell the Minister of Trade and Commerce that he could build a great image for himself in western Canada if he really did something about it. Over the years that I have been in this chamber I have heard successive ministers say they were going to give it serious consideration, but that means nothing. The consideration which the average man thinks about as worthwhile results in something really happening.
We have lost some of our markets because of the delay. When you have a two bushel or a three bushel quota, and you have to build bins to store the grain which you cannot sell, this *creates difficulty. I do not say the difficulty is rampant. I do not want to exaggerate, but there were cases where trucks were being repossessed during a time of prosperity simply because the farmers could not make delivery of their grain. In most cases the people involved were those who recently got into the industry and did not have that backlog of capital built up over the years as did those whose pioneering fathers settled on the farms.
When I was a boy on a wheat farm, before I left home and became a lawyer, I remember the complaint heard at breakfast, dinner and supper, was that we could not sell the wheat. Drought has never hurt Saskatchewan as much or as badly as low prices. I remember when wheat was 23 cents a bushel. I remember in one instance in 1930 1,000 pounds of beef were shipped from Rosetown to Winnipeg, and after the freight costs were deducted my father got only 16 cents for the whole 1,000 lb. beast.
The situation now is that we have a market but we cannot make deliveries. I say, let us get the product moving. I am not particularly criticising the Minister of Trade and Commerce because he has just taken over responsibility for the wheat board, but I say to him that he can build an image for himself in western Canada if he tackles this problem .and provides the solution. I beg him to do that. I ask the minister to go out and do what I suggest.
I know the minister wants to help because I heard him speak to the Chamber of Commerce in Calgary, and I thought he had a great appreciation not only of the grain trade but of the petroleum industry. I say to him, go and talk to these people. Give them some confidence, and after that do a job for them.

I made what I felt was a major address during the interim supply debate on the petroleum industry and the Trans-Canada pipe lines project. I am not going to reopen that argument now, because if too much is said it will harm the company's application before the Federal Power Commission in the United States. At present powerful lobbies are working in the United States to keep Canadian products out of the United States market. But that is normal. I am not opposed to the Americans doing this. As a Canadian I can appreciate their lobbying against our products, but I do not fear lobbies. Today they are a part of influence in the business world and the political world. I do not blame anybody for trying to use this issue to win a few electoral seats in a certain area of the country, but I think we should consider the Canadian interests as a whole.
The National Energy Board is chaired by an Albertan, a man who has spent practically his whole fife in the petroleum industry, and who has served on the conservation board. He is working with his experts and has the advantage of the rules of law laid down in the National Energy Board Act. He is doing a good job in taking care of Canada's interests. Trans-Canda's second application was approved by that board, and by the government. I believe they were absolutely right to do so, and time will prove them to have been right. But, as I say, the problem is that every time one makes a comment on this matter-and I may be guilty of this too-it does irreparable harm to the company in the hearings being held by the federal commission in the United States.
The hon. member for Medicine Hat quite properly said that our petroleum exports to the United States are on a quote basis. When we got into difficulty after the Suez crisis was over, our domestic and export markets decreased by 200,000 to 300,000 barrels of crude oil per day. But a former minister of trade and commerce, the hon. member from Winnipeg South Centre, and the hon. member for Northumberland made a deal with the United States which permitted us entry into the western United States market. In return we permitted them to have the eastern Canadian market. This was a mutually beneficial agreement because it is cheaper to ship our petroleum into the western States than to bring it to eastern Canada. It is likewise cheaper for the United States to ship petroleum to eastern Canada.
November 18, 1968

We cannot isolate ourselves in present day economics. People who call themselves nationalists and who say Canada first, who say we must keep everything within our borders, are preaching an outdated philosophy. We are becoming highly industrialized. We have got energy that we can afford to export because it is in surplus quantity, but we must make certain that its cost is kept in balance with United States costs so that we may benefit Canada's interests.
When we attack this program, particularly in view of the sensitivity of that industry, we are attacking ourselves. If the petroleum and grain industries of western Canada fail, their failure will affect our whole economy. They are our greatest aids in balancing our trade with the United States, and surely everyone should appreciate this. In that regard, I endorse the government's stand 100 per cent, but again I urge the minister to go to Calgary and speak with representatives of the petroleum industry. He should learn their problems, learn about the grass roots of the industry, and then devote his energies to making certain that our export targets climb year by year.
When a drilling rig is idle in Alberta or Saskatchewan, who suffers? It is not only management but labour, and everyone all down the line. I say to my good friends in the N.D.P. who represent labour interests-and of course labour interests must have a voice- they must realize that if they kill this industry they kill thousands of jobs in Canada. There has to be a balance.
I could cite as an example the coal industry in western Canada. We used to see six or seven mines operating in the Drumheller valley, but now there is only one still struggling to keep open. Men are living in poverty in this country of ours which is experiencing prosperity. Only when capital and management are flourishing can labour earn a decent living.
I have talked longer than I intended to, Mr. Chairman, but I hope the minister will take some of the things I have said to heart. He can build a great image and a great future not only for himself but for Canada if he does what I suggest.


Harold Edward Winch: If Canada develops, as undoubtedly it will, there is no question but that the ports on the eastern coast will advance also in volume of exports and imports handled. But having said that, Mr. Chairman, I wish to state that it cannot be challenged that in the years ahead the major advance in Canada's
Supply-Trade and Commerce trade is going to be over the Pacific. The U.S.S.R. will be importing more than wheat from us, and the route will be over the Pacific because on the Atlantic coast the U.S.S.R. has only one port, a small one, that is open for 12 months a year. Opposite the Pacific coast we have China, Japan and Australasia, and there will be major advances in trade over the Pacific. No doubt the Minister of Trade and Commerce is already working on that.
[DOT] (1:30 p.m.)
In working to advance our export and import trade, we also require the necessary facilities. In this connection, I am not just referring to wheat or grain; I am referring to facilities to handle bulk commodity shipments, especially on the Pacific side where we now have ships with a capacity of 175,000 tons calling at ports. In fact, I read only last week of two contracts let for the construction of ships of 225,000 tons capacity.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, when we think of trade we must think not only of the goals that the Minister of Trade and Commerce may have in mind, but also of the facilities required to handle an increasing volume of imports and exports.
Along with this we must also consider competition. Here, I refer to the position on the Pacific coast. Vancouver and New Westminster in particular are very close to the ports of Portland, Seattle and San Francisco. In 1924 the government of the day built the Ballan-tyne pier. In fact, I worked on that pier as an apprentice electrician. The government at that time imposed a charge of three cents per ton for the use of the port facilities in order to pay for the Ballantyne pier. The pier has been paid off mere than once already, this three cents per ton is still being imposed.
The Pacific ports of Vancouver, New Westminster, Victoria and Prince Rupert should be able to look forward to an unchallenged future, but because it takes three, four or five years to build port facilities, and because of this extra charge in the port of Vancouver, the Minister of Trade and Commerce, who I know is sincere in his position, must realize that selling goods is not enough. We must have the required facilities on the Pacific coast. Vancouver and British Columbia have had promises galore from both Liberal and Conservative governments in the past, but unfortunately in the main all they have had has been promises. If they were not given promises, they were told the matter was under consideration.
November 18, 1966

Supply-Trade and Commerce
Only recently in Vancouver, the Minister of Transport had a great deal to say about the future, but he said nothing specific. I should like to ask the Minister of Trade and Commerce this question: I presume he must be in contact with the departments of revenue and transport, and must be familiar with harbour charges and customs. He must communicate with the departments of transport and public works about construction matters. He must also be in touch, not only with government but private enterprise, now that the C.P.R. owns part of the Vancouver waterfront. I ask the minister, what is going to be done not only to improve our grain storage and handling facilities, but particularly, in view of our developing trade with Japan in bulk commodities, to erect the new type of harbour and wharfage facilities required.
In doing his selling job the minister has been in touch with private enterprise, with the C.P.R. in Vancouver and is, of course, in touch with his colleagues in the government. Therefore, I ask him to stand up now and give to British Columbia and Vancouver not promises, not the statement that the matter is under consideration, but a definite indication of what he has in mind for the future for the porst of British Columbia in general and Vancouver in particular.


Mr. Forresiall:: Mr. Chairman, I have one brief question for the minister, of which I have given him somewhat brief advance notice. Before I put the question, may I compliment the last speaker on having declared his party's position most clearly with regard to the people in the maritimes. The port of Halifax has never been a small, or in his words a little, port. It did more to build this country than most ports in Canada, and made a greater contribution. In any event, we now know where the New Democratic Party members stand on that issue.
My question to the minister is this. Could he shed some light on the volume of Russian flour shipments during the past eight to 10 months? What might we look forward to in the nature of renewed orders for the coming year, particularly during the summer shipping months? And generally, could the minister review for us the general grain picture as it affects Halifax?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, in reply to the hon. member for Vancouver East I think I should say that the questions he posed fall within the jurisdiction of a number of my colleagues, who perhaps would prefer to answer for themselves. However, we are well
fMr. Winch.]
aware of the requirements for keeping pace with shipping developments. I myself have been following with interest the development of enormous freighters of over 200,000 tons, which itself is a great feat. I know they have been used in the iron ore industry and elsewhere to great advantage, and the facilities at our shipping terminals must also develop in commensurate manner.
To that end, the hon. member may recall that last week the Minister of Transport announced an extension of the boundaries of Vancouver harbour to include Sturgeon Bank, Roverts Bank and Boundary Bay, which are all outside Vancouver harbour. At the time he stated the national harbours board will accept responsibility for facilities demanded in the future by ships of deeper draught in order that the new commodities may be moved.
At the same time, I should remind the hon. member that there is more than one ice-free port on the Atlantic coast, as the hon. members for Halifax will be so ready to inform him. There is also Saint John-


Harold Edward Winch: I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, but what I said was ice-free port in the U.S.S.R. on the Atlantic side. There is only one, the others are on the Pacific coast.


Robert Henry Winters: I do not think the hon. member will mind me reminding him that there are good ice-free ports on the Atlantic coast of Canada, too.


J. Michael Forrestall: They are not little ones, either.


Robert Henry Winters: Yes, other than little ones.
With regard to the Russian contract, as the hon. member is probably aware, the port of shipment is a matter for negotiation between the Russian buyers and the milling companies in the case of flour. The government is not directly involved and cannot interfere with the terms of contract. New tenders are being called shortly for flour and it remains to be seen where the point of shipment will be. But I would imagine that each port, particularly Halifax and Saint John, would be competing for this business. Nearly all the traffic to the Caribbean area goes from the port of Halifax, as the hon. member knows; but shipments to the U.S.S.R. and the United Kingdom have been largely made from the port of Saint John, New Brunswick.
[DOT] (1:40 p.m.)
Speaking of wheat, we anticipate that during the winter months Halifax will have a good shipping season. On the strength of the
November 18, 1966

question asked today, and other observations made, we will look into the situation in the port of Halifax as it affects future shipments.


Mr. Aiken:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to raise another subject. This has been raised in committee. I noted that in his opening remarks, the minister mentioned the travel bureau and the tourist industry. It is not necessary to remind the minister and the committee that the tourist industry is one of our largest businesses bringing in foreign currency. Speaking of one particular problem-my remarks may overlap another branch of government-I wish to refer to the Industrial Development Bank, and I hope the minister brings what I say to the attention of the Minister of Finance. When Expo is over we shall still have to rely on a large body of tourist businesses across Canada to maintain our national tourist income. The industry faces money problems. In normal times there is difficulty raising money, because the tourist industry is not classified as highly secure, being in many cases seasonal. The industry has difficulty in raising funds from the private sector and is placing more and more reliance on the government.
When I was first elected to this house in 1957, the tourist industry had nowhere to go for funds. The private sector refused to lend them money, and government agencies also were not lending. In the meantime, there has been progress because the tourist industry is included in the Small Businesses Loans Act. But these loans are only for improvements and are not for refinancing, nor for partial improvements and partial refinancing. The act has helped but it is not exactly what is now needed.
The other source of funds is the Industrial Development Bank. In 1957 the Industrial Development Bank did not consider the tourist business an industry and made no attempt to give it loans. Subsequently, around 1961 the bank revised its policies and now the tourist industry is included in industries receiving loans. The Industrial Development Bank, being a branch of the Bank of Canada, treats itself as a bank. It approaches loans to tourist businesses and to other industries as bankers would in making investments, rather than as a government agency promoting development. This I think is the wrong approach.
From time to time I have heard of many businesses-mostly tourist businesses-which have been restricted so much in the loans they might receive by collateral, security, and hings like that, that they do not get what
Supply-Trade and Commerce they need. In the end, they are worse off than if they had not bothered borrowing money. The complaint I have about the Industrial Development Bank, affects the tourist industry, and I should like the minister responsible for the travel bureau to look into this. I notice that a former minister of northern affairs is present who was responsible for this department at one time.
I hope that the Minister of Finance or some minister responsible will give a policy direction to the Industrial Development Bank to approach loans to tourist businesses in a freer manner, to approach these loans as a government agency promoting industry rather than as a government agency lending money.
Let me show the ridiculous way in which the bank now works. Some businesses, when they want to repay money borrowed in advance of the due date, have to pay a 5 per cent or 6 per cent premium on the money being repaid. In other words, when they want to prepay part of the loan in a good year, they have to pay a 5 per cent premium for the privilege of paying off the money. Then, if they have a bad year, they are in trouble if they cannot meet payments. That is not satisfactory. I hope that the minister considers the interests of the tourist industry, and I think we should do more for that industry now than we have at any time past.
I know of many businesses in my area which are discontinuing this year through lack of funds. I was told of eight or 10 fairly substantial businesses which will not operate next year because they are short of money and cannot refinance. There is nowhere for them to turn. In the private sector, the tourist industry is the last in line. As money becomes tighter, the industry finds money more difficult to obtain.
What holds true for the private sector is true for the Industrial Development Bank which considers its first duty to industry, other than the tourist industry. If we are to have a satisfactory tourist industry, the Industrial Development Bank must approach its task with a more liberal attitude. The bank must develop the idea that it is there to keep the tourist industry going, rather than to get money back when it is due.


Mr. Harkness:: I wish to make a few comments and to ask a few questions about the travel bureau. I have always taken an interest in this bureau, but particularly since nine years ago I had some responsibility for it.
I note that the travel branch shows a considerable increase in personnel. I wonder
November 18. 1966

Supply-Trade and Commerce whether this is a temporary increase because of the people who will be needed for the centennial celebrations, Expo and so on, or whether this is a permanent increase. I should like to know where the increased numbers of officers are to be used.
We realize that the great bulk of travellers and visitors to this country come and will continue to come from the United States. As a result of being in many countries in Europe this past summer, it struck me that the Canadian government, through the travel bureau, should be doing more to attract travellers to Canada from that area. Because of increasing affluence and increasing travel going on in Europe at the present time, I think a large market is developing there. We have done a little, but not nearly what we ought to have done to attract travellers. I did not see a single poster in railway stations, airports or in any of the places where you would expect to find them inviting people to Canada. It may be that there are posters in places I did not visit, but I did not see any. I should like to know whether the minister is contemplating an effort to attract European travellers to this country. I understand that recently a promotion office has been opened in Mexico. That is all to the good. Possibly there are other areas in central or South America which might be receptive to a program aimed at increasing the number of visitors to this country.
[DOT] (1:50 p.m.)


Robert Henry Winters: We seem to be getting into a discussion of particular matters. Could I ask whether the committee wishes to pass item 1, and then go on to deal with other subjects under specific votes?


Mr. Southam:: I have a few remarks to make on item 1. I welcome this opportunity to make these observations in connection with the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce. I should like to associate myself with a number of my hon. friends who have congratulated the minister on assuming his new responsibility to report to the House of Commons for the Canadian wheat board. I must say that I am still in favour of placing this important board under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture. However, it may well be that the minister, with his experience as a businessman, will be able to give the wheat board the kind of direction and assistance it needs.
I would be interested to know whether the minister, in his recent discussions with wheat

board officials in Winnipeg, gave any consideration to complaints about extending the crop year to August 20.
I have heard a number of complaints from my riding about actions taken by the wheat board in this respect. I realize the board is endeavouring to move as much grain as possible into marketing position early in the season. At the same time this imposes hardship on farmers in a number of areas. The end of July, the end of the crop year, is about the time farmers are anticipating what the next year's grain production might be. They make a reasonably good effort to get the grain off the farms and into the elevators. But in some areas, particularly in southeast Saskatchewan, prematurely warm weather this year hastened the maturing of the grain and as a result farmers not only got their grain into deliverable positions but began to harvest the 1966 crop; they marketed this year's crop under the old quota.
In this connection, I should point out that the farmer who farms extensively using modern equipment had a great advantage over other farmers and got his crop in first. In consequence, when the latter were ready to market their crops they found the elevators full. They had to sit back and wait.
There is another problem involved here. Over the years the elevator agents who handle the bulk of this grain, have been accustomed to take their holidays for two weeks in August beginning on July 31. They have done so because normally, these two weeks are the slack season. This year, hundreds of these agents were denied the opportunity of taking a holiday. They manned their elevators until August 20, when they found that this year's crop was being delivered, and as a result they did not get away from the elevators at all.
I received a number of complaints about this, and I am wondering whether the situation was discussed in the course of the minister's recent meetings with the wheat board. Perhaps the minister would give us the bene^ fit of his views. It was the first experience of this kind which many of us have had. I was not able to explain the circumstances to the wheat farmers of my area, and I know that other western members were faced with the same difficulty.
I should like to say something, now, regarding the world wheat agreement. I know the agreement has been extended for one year, until 1967. A few minutes ago my hon. friend from Bow River placed some pertinent facts
November 18. 1966	COMMONS DEBATES	10069
on the record concerning the economic situation of western farmers, the vast majority of whom need to market their grain within a reasonable time and at a reasonable price. We remember what happened in 1965 when the then Minister of Trade and Commerce, who at that time had responsibility for the wheat board, allowed the board to get into a price war with our friends south of the border, the result being a fall of between 14 and 18 cents, in the price per bushel. This was translated into a total loss of some $75 million to the pockets of western Canadian farmers, which bears out the statement I made a few minutes ago when I expressed the hope that the minister would take responsibility for assisting the wheat board in resisting the pressures which are placed upon it at the present time in connection with the continuation of the world wheat agreement.
As far as western farmers are concerned, this is one of the most basic and most important commodity agreements in existence. I realize, in considering this subject, the influence of the policies being followed across the line. Under the policy followed by Mr. Dean Rusk, a great deal is being done to preserve United States leadership in the fight against communism by exporting wheat surpluses on a non-commercial or cut price basis to developing countries, as a humanitarian and political measure. I cannot disagree with this policy. But as a result, there has been a tendency for wheat to sell at prices lower than those which the world wheat agreement would wish to recognize, with consequent pressure on the wheat board. I believe the minister could go to the assistance of the wheat board in a situation such as this. We, as Canadians, cannot afford to have these pressures brought to bear on the grain markets of the world. It should be borne in mind that the United States consumes approximately 85 per cent of its total grain production domestically and need to export only about 15 per cent. In Canada, the opposite is true. We consume only about 15 per cent of our total production and depend on an export market to the extent of 85 per cent.
Obviously, wheat sales and wheat prices are matters of great consequence to western agriculture, and I suggest to the minister that when negotiations for a new world wheat agreement take place he should give every support to the officials of the wheat board and others who will be carrying on the discussions. He should approach these matters on
Supply-Trade and Commerce the basis that a healthy increase in price is desirable.
[DOT] (2:00 p.m.)
He should keep in mind the fact that there should be an increase in the price of wheat. This is the chief saleable commodity, along with livestock, that the western farmer has. There is an ever increasing cost in the goods and services which he requires. It is known that he has to pay anywhere from $8,000 to $12,000, or even a greater price, for a combine or tractor, as compared with half that amount,
10	or 15 years ago. He must not only increase his production, and use all the technical know-how he can obtain, but he must also have better prices for the goods and services he provides. Otherwise, he will have to get out of the agricultural industry due to the cost price squeeze. As I have said the minister has a very important role to play as the minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board.
The hon. member for Bow River referred to the oil industry. I come from one of the particularly fortunate areas of Canada which has a large oil development. We have over 6,000 producing wells in the province and about 5,000 of them are in the riding of Moose Mountain. The people engaged in that industry, naturally are very interested in the policy of the present government in respect of the export of oil and oil quotas. Along with many others, I feel that we have a disgracefully low quota at the present time for export of oil from Canada. If the minister has time, I should like to invite him to come to that part of Saskatchewan, particularly the Estevan area, where a great number of the
011	companies in Saskatchewan have their head offices. He could discuss this matter with them and obtain advice. I am sure he would be welcomed by these people and would acquire at first hand information concerning some of the problems in the oil industry and the policies in respect of marketing oil.
I could speak at great length concerning these matters, but I believe my colleague the hon. member for Bow River expressed the position very clearly. I should like in the main, to go along with the suggestions he made concerning the oil industry.


Mr. McCleave:: Mr. Chairman, my remarks will be brief. You or anybody else will be entitled to ring the gong if I go beyond two minutes. First, I should like to thank the minister very warmly for his kind remarks about the excellent port facilities in Halifax. I agree that once a contract is signed it would
November 18. 1966

Supply-Trade and Commerce not be easy for the government to step in and suggest the use of particular facilities in Canada for handling the flour shipments. I think, however, that in the future the minister or his department might point out to prospective purchasers that the government would like to see the wealth shared between the two ports.
In backing the request of the international longshoremen, my final point is to ask the minister whether he and his department would do everything possible to help promote trade through the Atlantic ports. I think there is some uncertainty in the shipping field at the present time. Perhaps this results from the fact we have not passed the railway legislation. I realize that this is more the responsibility of the Minister of Transport, but perhaps the Minister of Trade and Commerce could urge him to take away any of the uncertainties which exist in the local harbours in the area I represent.


Edward Richard Schreyer: Mr. Chairman, I have only two comments to make with regard to the estimates of this department. Both relate to the Canadian Wheat Board. No doubt the minister is aware that at the present time, under the regulations of the Canadian Wheat Board, permit book holders are required to deliver at a specific shipping point. Several years ago I believe the practice was to give the permit book holder a choice between several delivery points. Certainly, there was more than one point at which he could deliver. Whatever the rationale was for making this change, the persistent feeling now-and I think it is an increasing one-is that the regulation is too restrictive.
At some shipping points, of course, there are a number of elevator companies operating, so the problem is not too great. Other shipping points in the prairies, and certainly in the area which I represent, are located in small towns or villages where there may be only one elevator company operating. In that case the deliverer is, in a sense, captive. Of course he is protected by certain regulations administered by the Board of Grain Commissioners and by the Canadian Wheat Board, but nevertheless it seems to me it is not an unreasonable request that the regulations of the Canadian Wheat Board in this regard be looked at closely with a view to going back to the practice which obtained only a few years ago. If this were done, I think it would meet with the approval of a good number of western grain producers.
The second point I have in mind has to do with the issuance of the initial payment to
{Mr. McCleave.l
grain producers. Of course, this matter has been before the house for some time. Questions have repeatedly been put to the appropriate minister by several members on this side of the house. So far, however, we have received only evasive answers to the effect that the matter is under consideration. Repeatedly, the request has been for an increase in the initial payment. I do not think this is an unreasonable request. At the present time the level stands at $1.50. If it were increased 16 cents or 17 cents per bushel, basis No. 1 at the lakehead, then this still would not put it beyond the floor price of the International Wheat agreement. Therefore it would not be imprudent on the part of the Canadian Wheat Board to accede to this kind of request. If an initial payment increase of 16 to 25 cents does not put the price much beyond the floor prices of the International Wheat agreement, then it cannot be a dangerous thing to do. No one could fault the Canadian Wheat Board if they acceded to this request; it would not be an imprudent policy on their part, I suggest. If the minister has the information readily at hand, I should like to know why there has been this persistent procrastination in respect of finalizing this particular issue.
[DOT] (2:10 p.m.)
The fact is that during the course of the past several months the cost of production to the farmer has surged upward aggravating the situation which has existed for many years, namely, the cost price squeeze. Surely, one of the things that the government and the board can do immediately is the adoption of the request to increase initital payments by between 16 and 25 cents a bushel. In this way, farmers would receive an initial payment at least equal to the floor price of the international wheat agreement.


Mr. Pascoe:: I have very few remarks to make, Mr. Chairman, but I think I should make them during our consideration of item 1, as a follow-up to the remarks of the hon. member for Moose Mountain regarding wheat deliveries and quotas.
I should like to refer particularly to the interior storage elevator at Moose Jaw. This is a government owned elevator and has a capacity of 5J million bushels. It has not been used to any great extent for the last couple of years. This is a very good elevator situated on the main line of the C.P.R. Some greater use could be made of it in the marketing and handling of grain by the Canadian wheat board. I know this elevator has been equipped
November 18, 1966

for grain deliveries in boxcars. Having made some inquiries I know this elevator could be altered at a cost of a few hundred dollars so grain could be delivered directly by truck. This situation has been brought to the attention of the wheat board, but I hope the minister will look into this matter so this elevator can be used to handle grain delivered by truck, either from farmers under their own wheat delivery permit books or by large trucking companies from country elevators. Then, there would be more room in the country elevators, permitting farmers larger delivery quotas immediately following harvesting operations, and they would not have to store so much grain during the winter or in the following year.
I am sure the minister has received reports about tough and damp wheat. Let me draw to his attention the fact that the Moose Jaw elevator has very modern grain drying facilities. It has a large capacity and could be utilized to put this grain into good condition.
The right hon. Leader of the Opposition referred to the high proportion of high quality wheat grown this year. I understand that the latest contracts with Russia and China are for four and five grade wheat although, as the minister has said, there is a loophole in this regard. I trust that if four and five grade is not available the minister will use every means at his disposal to market this high quality grain at the higher price, so there will be a greater return to the farmer.
The hon. member for Halifax asked questions about flour export. The latest statistical review by the D.B.S. indicates that the export of flour is down. Not only is the export of flour down, but the manufacture of flour for the home market is down.
The minister announced today that he was going to make a greater drive in respect of exports. I hope he will impress upon the newly developing countries the health value of the consumption of bread made from wheat flour. I have on several occasions strenuously objected to diets, and diet fads which do not include bread. I know the minister's department is not concerned with this, but I hope he will assist the flour manufacturing industry by convincing the department responsible for health diet charts that it should emphasize each individual should eat at least three slices of wheat flour bread per day in the interests of health.
I know the minister has been sitting here through the lunch hour. It is to be hoped that
Supply-Trade and Commerce he can get away soon for a lunch which will include some bread.


Mr.   Walson@Assiniboia: Mr. Chairman, I should like to use a few moments of the committee's time to bring out one or two points. Let me congratulate the minister on his new position in relation to the Canadian wheat board. I am sure he will do everything within his power to assist the sale of our wheat, and to discover some way of modernizing our transportation system for the movement of grain. He surely must realize we are using the same boxcars to move grain that we used 40 or 50 years ago.
Under item 1, I wish to refer to the price received by farmers for grain. While I know new negotiations are to be undertaken in connection with the international wheat agreement, it seems that the greatest problem facing farmers in western Canada relates to both the initial price of grain and the over-all price received, that is the initial price plus the wheat board payment.
Farmers today are faced with a very difficult cost-price squeeze. The cost of machinery has progressively increased. Today, I believe the index in respect of farm machinery has risen to 180 as compared with 100 in 1949. The price of grain has not risen to the same extent and farmers are in a worse position today than they have been for 20 years because there is no control over the price of machinery. I do not know how this situation can be controlled without getting into labour and union problems.
[DOT] (2:20 p.m.)
As I see it, Mr. Chairman, Canada should strive for a higher price under the international wheat agreement. I know that a great many people today think that the farmer needs a higher initial payment. I would welcome a higher initial payment, but I th'nk this is secondary to the over-all price that we receive for our grain. I am sure that most farmers welcome a cheque from the wheat board in the spring. I point out that this is our own money, but is paid on a deferred basis. One of the best things that can happen to the farming industry is for the farmer to receive a large cheque in the spring.
I suggest that to keep up with the trend of prices at the present time we must strive for an increase of 50 cents a bushel. I do not think this figure is unrealistic, because of the conditions that exist at the present time. I am a farmer who is very much involved in buying equipment and I know that one of the major problems facing the farmer today is trying to
10072	COMMONS DEBATES	November 18, 1966
Supply-Trade and Commerce find the money to pay for the combines and tractors. These are the biggest and most expensive items that he has to purchase. Four or five years ago, the farmer could buy a tractor for $6,000 or $7,000 to do the work that was necessary. The tractor required to do this work today, when the farmer is trying to farm economically, costs anywhere from $10,000 to $12,000. A combine that in 1962 cost $11,000 is selling today for over $15,000. We all realize that in this period of time the price of grain has not changed. As a farmer, and on behalf of farmers, I suggest that this is one of our major problems. Therefore, I emphasize that we should strive for a higher price under the international wheat agreement.
The hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre mentioned the elevator in the city of Moose Jaw. It has been one of my pet beliefs that we have not been making enough use of our internal terminal elevators. The facilities are there to be used. I bel eve two years ago approximately 238,000 bushels were put into that elevator. Last year, I believe approximately 600,000 bushels of No. 6 grain, were put in. But immediately after the end of the crop year they were taken out. I maintain, and I agree with the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre in this respect, that far more use could be made of our elevators.
I believe that in this day and age we should modernize the equipment used for handling grain. Th s principle has been proved in respect of the automobile industry. The railways were trying to haul automobiles across Canada with old fashioned facil ties, and the trucks took away this business completely. We must modernize our equipment. We must obtain modern cars that can haul three or four times the amount of grain that is hauled at the present time. I realize that this matter falls within the jurisdiction of the Min'ster of Transport, but I am dealing with the movement of grain and to that extent it is a responsibility of the Minister of Trade and Commerce.
I believe we should have box cars that hold 4,000 or 5,000 busheld of grain. We should have trains that are completely grain-carrying, so that they can haul grain to the terminal and immediately come back pick up another load. Then, the terminal elevators would be used more effectively. The argument will probably be put forward that it would cost a great deal of money to instal this equipment to handle the grain, clean it and get it into position.
We are in the age of automation, and I believe that the cost involved in automating

these facilities would be less than those incurred under the present set-up. I shall not take up any more time of the committee, but would emphasize, Mr. Minister, that we must strive for these things in the very near future, namely, the modernization of our grain handling facilities and a higher price under the international wheat agreement.
The only alternative is to impose price control upon the machinery companies. I realize that if such controls were imposed the effect would be felt all the way down the line. We must take a tougher line with the machinery companies, and I realize that when we do this we get into the problem of labour relations and unions.
I believe these problems must be faced and under the conditions that exists today the farmers must obtain a better price for their grain, on one hand, or we must impose strict controls on the price of machinery on the other. If we do not do these things, we will be put out of the grain business completely.


Mr. McLelland:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to say just a few words on this subject. In rising at this time I would first of all, wish the minister well with his added responsibilities for the Canadian Wheat Board. I hope he will become increasingly interested in this area of his responsibilities and while in Paris next week will try to think about the problems of the western wheat farmer. I suggest that if the minister thinks he needs an adviser from this side of the house to accompany him to Paris, I could perhaps make myself available. Then I could probably bring him up to date on those things in which the western wheat producer is interested, and we could probably come to some agreement on them.
The Minister of Finance, when speaking in Regina to the Saskatchewan wheat pool delegates, suggested that wheat sales to the European market seemed to be under a cloud. I wondered when I read that statement what the minister meant. Perhaps he would clarify this situation by issuing a statement as soon as he has a clear indication of what the problems may be. I hope the minister is not suggesting that we might be priced out of the European wheat market. But whatever the situation is, I wish the minister would look into it and issue a statement as to what the problems may be.
I also hope that the minister will have salesmen in every part of the world trying to obtain new contracts and increase our sales of wheat, because with the new techniques being
November 18, 1966	COMMONS
used to increase the production of wheat we must increase our sales. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I hope the minister will seriously consider putting salesmen in every part of the world so that new contracts can be obtained.
I am also interested in the activities and promotion of Expo '67, increased exports of potash, and so on. However, all these things have been mentioned by previous speakers, and I do not wish to take up any more of the minister's time. I know he has not yet had lunch. I do hope the minister will look into the possibility of increasing wheat sales, and having salesmen situated throughout the world to increase wheat exports in the years ahead.


The Deputy Chairman:: Shall vote 1 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE General Administrationla. Departmental administration, $107,500.
lc. Departmental Administration-To extend the purposes of Trade and Commerce Vote 1 of the Main Estimates for 1966-67 to include the grants detailed in these estimates, $75,000.
Trade Commissioner Service-
5. Administration, operation and maintenance, $8,179,000.
5a. Administration, operation and maintenance, $156,000.
10. Exhibitions branch, $3,932,200.
10c. Canadian Government Exhibition Commission, $159,500.
15. Canadian Government Travel Bureau-To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada including a grant of $55,000 to the Canadian Tourist Association, $9,825,000.
Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to prevent the conclusion of my own estimates but I think I should answer the question raised by the hon. member for Calgary North in respect of the increase in the staff of the travel bureau, and what we are doing to encourage more people to come to Canada as tourists from Europe. The staff to handle the increased growth and responsibilities taken on by the travel bureau is largely permanent.
[DOT] (2:30 p.m.)
Some of them are casual type labour which will be employed to deal with peak situations, but generally it is a matter of overall growth in the operations of the travel bureau. We will
Supply-Trade and Commerce be bringing in $1 billion worth of travel next year.
I think our effort in Europe is rather substantial. We opened an office in Paris just a few weeks ago and the opening, in my opinion, was quite an outstanding success. I happened to be there for the occasion. Among other things we had several members of the mounted police directing traffic in front of the opera house in Paris. They made quite a hit and received a lot of attention.
Other offices which are operating in Europe are in London, Frankfurt, and Amsterdam. We are planning offices in Copenhagen and Rome. The hon. member referred to the office which was established recently in Mexico, and another one has been opened in Japan. The bureau is striving to get a return on these investments. We like to regard them as investments.
At present our account on tourism is not as healthy as we would like to see it. We would like to have more on the revenue side in relation to the amount that Canadians, who are big spenders in this field of travel, spend on their trips abroad.
In the centennial program, and particularly Expo, we hope to have one of our greatest tourist attractions. We want our facilities in shape to encourage the largest possible flow of tourists to Canada next year, and go on from there to increase the flow in succeeding years


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to)'
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE Standards branch-
20. Administration and operation, $3,922,500.
1967 World Exhibition-
29. Canadian government participation in the 1967 World Exhibition, Montreal, $8,672,000.
Special-
32c. Grant to the Pacific National Exhibition, Vancouver toward the cost of constructing a trade fair and sports building at Exhibition Park, Vancouver, the government of Canada's share not to exceed $2,000,000; amount required for 1966-67, $1,200,000.
Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, could we deal with the Dominion Bureau of Statistics vote now?


Maurice Rinfret: The committee will now take up consideration of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics estimates which are to be found on page 90 of the blue book.



DOMINION BUREAU OF STATISTICS

[Stage Direction]
1. Administration and operation including the fee for membership in the Inter-American Statistical
10074	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce
Institute and a contribution of $500 to the International Statistical Institute, $16,904,500.
Mr. Muir (Lisgar):: How does the D.B.S. gather information in regard to crop figures for western Canada? The reason I ask is that its forecast is usually very optimistic but when the figures are revised there is usually quite a drop from the actual production. This does not help the grain trade of western Canada to the extent that the bureau should be helping it.
I know it is only an estimate, but I hope in future the bureau could be more careful. Its forecast should not be too much out of line with actual production, because if it is this tends to be reflected in the price received. As a colleague of mine said a little while ago, we in western Canada feel that the price of grain, particularly considering the wage increases granted within the past few months, is way out of line. The figure he mentioned of 50 cent a bushel for wheat, or at least $2 on the farm, would not be unrealistic.
These optimistic forecasts tend to knock the price down, and the people with whom we negotiate the international wheat agreement get the idea that Canada's granaries are always bulging with surplus grain. The day is coming when this no longer will be true.


Robert Henry Winters: Would the hon. member mind if I get that information and provide it for him more specifically than I can at this moment?


George Robson Muir: I would be very happy with that.


Harold Warren Danforth: I would like to bring one point to the minister's attention. Is he directly aware of the tremendous responsibility and the cost that is forced on various establishments and companies in trying to provide the information that is constantly sought by various departments? I know the bureau requires essential information, and that this information is of the utmost benefit to many departments of government. But of late representations which I have been receiving on this matter have been increasing in number. They are coming to me from various firms which feel that in some instances the pursuit of this knowledge is taken beyond the bounds of what might be considered reasonable.
A constant barrage of questionnaires is being sent to companies, and the questions on them are very precise and detailed. They require careful analysis of the entire business procedures of a company, and the information cannot be obtained without direct cost to a company.
[The Deputy Chairman.]
DEBATES	November 18, 1966
The complaints that I have received are not directed at the particular cost but at the impression there is a great deal of confusion down here in Ottawa as to the the type of information that is required. In addition there is tremendous duplication by departments which often request the same information.
I am wondering if any attempt has been made to see if all the questions that are sent to companies are necessary, to see if there is a great degree of overlapping in the information that is sought, to see if the information that is from time to time requested is not already available in a department, and to see if something could be done to simplify the whole process. Otherwise, the government should contribute directly to the costs involved in procuring the information.
This is becoming quite a serious matter, especially for smaller industries whose bookkeeping systems and business methods were not set up to make the gathering of such information an easy job. I would like the minister to give consideration to this matter and see if something can be done to alleviate what is actually a hardship on many companies when they are asked to prepare information for the government. The people involved are sincere in their efforts to answer the questions in detail, but they find the burden has increased to such an extent that they believe something must be done about it.


Robert Henry Winters: I shall be very glad to look into that, Mr. Chairman. I know from first hand experience how onerous these returns can become, particularly if one does not regard them as necessary, or feels one is contributing information which is not properly the kind of information the government should have. I would ask the hon. member to be good enough to let me know of any instances where duplication of information is requested by various departments, and then I will be very happy to look into them.


Harold Warren Danforth: I will do that, Mr. Chairman.


Mr. Enns:: I would like to support the statements made by the hon. member for Kent (Ont.), because I would not like the minister to think that is only, an isolated instance. These complaints are coming in to several members. It is certainly true of secondary industries, where the staff to maintain records at the various offices involved are hard pressed to find the time.
[DOT] (2:40 p.m.)
As the hon. member for Kent (Ont.), said, some way should be found either of reducing
November 18, 1966	COMMONS
the amount of information requested or of reimbursing the firms for the time spent in collecting information. I am not sure that that is necessarily a practical suggestion, but it has been made to me and I pass it along. In some instances firms indicate that they spend two and a half to three days a month collecting information for the government, and it is an entirely profitless operation for them. So, I indicate to the minister that this is a problem that exists across the country, and I lend support to the statement made earlier.


Mr. Scolt (Danforlh):: Mr. Chairman, 1 want to ask the minister whether the Dominion Bureau of Statistics will become the statistical gathering agency for the Department of Manpower in acquiring information on which to base its manpower policies, or are they going to set up a duplicate system?


Robert Henry Winters: I hope it will not be a duplicate system, Mr. Chairman. The Dominion Bureau of Statistics is the instrument of the government for collecting and analysing statistics, but I should like to be more precise in my reply to the hon. member. If he does not mind, I will send him a note or speak to him and provide him with more precise information.


Reid Scott: If I may follow that up, I want to urge on the minister the fact that there will be strong support, at least from this section of the house, for the government to extend the scope and personnel of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. We have received complaints that there is inadequate staff and they are unable to do as good a job as they might otherwise be able to accomplish.
Recently, the director of the Swedish ec-nomic commission appeared before the prices committee, and explained that one of the reasons for their great success in drafting both manpower policies and economic forecasting formulae was the fact that they required from business and industry generally even more information than the industries divulged to their shareholders. However, this information was kept highly confidential, and contrary to their expectation there was no real objection to this because industry found that with sounder forecasting they themselves derived greater benefit.
Notwithstanding what the two previous speakers said-and they may have legitimate points-I hope that the minister will seek to expand considerably both the personnel and the areas in which statistics are gathered. Manpower policies are very important and
Supply-Trade and Commerce will be badly incapacitated if information is not gathered which heretofore has been ignored.


Roderick Arthur Ennis Webb: Mr. Chairman, I should like to support what was said by the hon. member for Kent (Ont.). Many small businesses, service stations and grocery stores are finding it most difficult to fill in the forms which are sent to them. Many of these small businesses have only three or four employees, some of whom have no bookkeeping experience. Many of the forms sent out are complicated, and these people cannot afford to keep up with bookeeping methods. They, therefore, spend a considerable amount of money in completing these forms. I am wondering whether the minister or the department would simplify the forms and assist these people in this way.


Mr. McIntosh:: Mr. Chairman, I also wish to support the suggestion made by the hon. member for Kent (Ont.). I represent small business, and I know the nuisance these reports are to people who are engaged in small business. I should like to suggest to the minister that if his department could in some way simplify these forms, as the last speaker suggested, and also consolidate the forms, and send them out at the end of the fiscal year when the information is readily available to these small business people, it would be of considerable assistance. If they are not themselves competent in bookkeeping, they employ an auditor at the end of the year to prepare their books, and all the information is then available.
Although the department may not realize it, their request is causing much extra work to those in small business. With the other provincial reports business has to prepare these days, you almost have to employ someone to make sure you do not get fined for failing to submit these reports. I think this is unfair. Therefore, the suggestion of simplification and consolidation I think is a good one. If the minister would look into it, this would be appreciated by the small businessmen.


Robert Henry Winters: I would be glad to do that. The Dominion Bureau of Statistics is well aware of the onerous burden of reporting. We are not alone in this field; provincial governments and others require information, too. Recently, Treasury Board issued the directive that all returns being sought by the federal government must be reported to D.B.S. so that they can determine to what extent there is duplication. We will endeavour to move as far as we can toward simplification as well.

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Item 5:

[Stage Direction]
5. 1961 Decennial Census ol Canada, $221,700.
Item agreed to.
Item 10:
10. 1966 Quinquennial Census of Canada. $9,000,000.
Item agreed to.
Maurice Rinfret: This concludes
study of the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce and the Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT (formerly Northern Affairs and National Resources) Administration-
1. Departmental administration, including grants as detailed in the estimates. $2,196,100.


Maurice Rinfret: The committee will now consider the estimates of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to ask the minister if he will make the usual statement?


Mr. Laing:: Mr. Chairman, my estimates were entered previously, at which time I made a statement. I think the hon. member for Brandon-Souris adjourned the debate.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I can confirm what the minister has stated, Mr. Chairman. Although I did not conclude my reply, as far as I am concerned I am ready to discuss the various items, but I understand that there are one or two others who would like to make a statement on the first item.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: May I just apologize to the minister, Mr. Chairman. His estimates were probably begun when I was absent from the chamber, so I apologize to him.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Chairman, I will be brief because many of the things I have said about parks I have said a number of times during discussion of the estimates. May I say at the outset that I am very happy the committee on northern affairs and national resources will be visiting the parks and that hearings will be held in Jasper and Banff commencing the week of November 30. I trust the minister will have time to join with these members of parliament, so that not only the members of the committee but the minister himself will be able to hear the grievances
[Mr. Winters.!
which will be presented by the citizens of those areas. They have formed themselves into a committee during the last two years which now comprises more than 500 people.
One particular area of complaint with regard to the parks today is that of security of tenure of land. Although I do not intend to spend much time on this, I hope the minister has read a very able brief prepared by Mr. G. H. Steer, Q.C., of Edmonton. He will be one of the witnesses and will present this brief to the committee. I do not intend to say anything about the brief now, because he will be presenting the facts to the committee.
[DOT] (2:50 p.m.)
I think some of the misunderstanding which has occurred about the security of land tenure has resulted from the fact people have confused the objectives written into the act with the idea that the parks today have grown into centres which large numbers of tourists come to visit. The three statements about the objectives and purposes of the parks are set out in three statutes which I will quote. They are brief.
In the original act of 1887 it was set out that the parks are for the benefit, advantage and enjoyment of the people of Canada. No person, no matter what side of the fence he is on, will argue with those objectives.
In 1911, the act was changed. The change was with respect to public parks, and as public parks and pleasure grounds, they were to be for the benefit, advantage and enjoyment of the people of Canada. There is not much difference in this act. In 1930, at a time when the resources of western Canada were handed back to the prairie provinces, Saskatchewan and Alberta particularly-it is in this way that those provinces obtained their resources of petroleum and natural gas -parks were formed in areas where they could be preserved in their natural state for the advantage and enjoyment of the people of Canada.
In order that these parks may be enjoyed, certain recreational facilities must be built in accordance with the regulations. Nobody finds fault with that. The act, I submit, has had a very narrow interpretation. After all, members of parliament know that though parliament passes statutes, the words of the statutes are subject to interpretation. A legal officer in some department may say that the words mean one thing, but if the words have not been subjected to the judicial test, that does not mean the interpretation is correct. In
November 18, 1966

other words, the interpretation ought to be a judicial interpretation.
Sometimes we have men of vision and imagination who give words a wider meaning than other people lacking that imagination. Perhaps people of narrow imagination interpreted the law as it applies to the parks, and because of that we are having problems.
The 1930 act said that the parks are hereby dedicated to the people of Canada for their benefit, education and enjoyment, subject to the provisions of this act and regulations, and that such parks will be made use of so as to leave them unimpaired for the use of future generations.
People say that Banff is a small park, but in area it is as large as Prince Edward Island. In fact, if you put all the western parks into one area you would find they were as big as the maritime provinces. Since the formation of the parks in 1930, great changes have taken place. Members on both sides of house discussing the trade and commerce estimates talked of one of our great industries, the tourist industry. The tourist industry fits into the objectives of the parks, because the parks are dedicated to the people of Canada, for their benefit. The people of Canada from all parts of the country visit Banff, to see and enjoy the wilderness. Let us get down to brass tacks, they go there to enjoy the animals, the bears, the antelope and deer. If they want to see those animals they must have a place to stay.


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: A hotel.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: You have to have a place-I beg your pardon. I always enjoy the lady minister because she comes to hear me speak, and I know her interest in this subject. She is so interested that she may even take the place of the present minister; that is no disrespect to him. He may move to a more senior portfolio to accommodate the lady minister. I always enjoy her being here, because she always knows when I am to speak about parks, and because her presence gives the necessary touch to anything I might say.


Mr. Nielsen:: Senator LaMarsh.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Of course, no one knows what the future holds.
Coming back to the parks, the 1930 act said that they are hereby dedicated to the people of Canada for their benefit, education and enjoyment. Since 1930, and I will not clutter up the record with statistics I previously quoted, the tourist industry in the parks has
Supply-Indian Affairs grown until now almost 2 million people a year from Europe, the United States and Canada, visit Banff National Park. They come to enjoy the wilderness, and above all to enjoy a game of golf on the Canadian Pacific golf course. Incidentally, that course now charges so much that few people can afford to play on it.
The point is that in order to make certain the parks are preserved for the orginal objectives of the act, they must be zoned. There ought to be provision for a visitors' centre. The idea was suggested by this side of the house and carried into effect by the other side. In other words, there ought to be provision for hotels, motels, restaurants and things like that, so that when the people come to the parks on a holiday away from the asphalt jungles in which they live year round they can enjoy the wilderness while staying at a comfortable place. Unfortunately, there has been a divergence of opinion about this matter.
Some people have the idea that if you make staying at the park as difficult as possible, if you have few recreational facilities, you will discourage people coming to the park and the wilderness will not be destroyed. Well, Mr. Chairman, the parks were set up for the benefit and advantage of the people, and if you do away with the facilities I have mentioned nobody would be able to get into the parks. As it is there are great areas of parkland in which no man has yet set foot, and which probably will be unexplored for the next 50 years.
Security of tenure of land is extremely important for the man in the tourist business, who is building facilities. To get the capital to build motels, restaurants and a golf course, so that the average man can play golf and not have to pay $10 when he plays alone, $20 when he takes his wife, and $30 if he takes his son, security of tenure is essential. For businessmen to put up hotels where people will not have to pay $30 per night, and top prices for everything else, that security is essential.
The minister may say we have camping grounds. I took photographs of those grounds last year: they are good grounds, but when you have half p mile of cars lining up waiting to get in-


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: I agree. I have seen that.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: The hon. member agrees with that. When you have that situation, it is not good enough. We have had enough propo-ganda from the minister who has called the

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs Globe and Mail and other newspapers to say everything is fine.


Arthur Laing: May I ask a question.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: No. Let me finish because I will outline the facts in a few moments.


Arthur Laing: Do not quote $10 golf rates, because there are none.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: All right. What is the golf rate in Banff, right now?


Arthur Laing: I am not talking about Banff.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Then what are you talking about?


Arthur Laing: The hon. member was talking about the Banff golf course-


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I was talking of the
Canadian Pacific course. If there is another golf course in Banff I want to hear about it. When the hon. member for Qu'Appel le was the minister he suggested that we should have an ordinary golf course established by the department, so that the average man visiting the park could have recreation. I ask the minister this: is it alright for the rich people to play golf, but not the others? Is that the policy?
Let me get back to the point I was making before the minister tried to get me off the rails. I was talking about security of tenure of land.


Arthur Laing: The hon. member was right off the rails.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: To build the facilities I mentioned, you must have capital. If you have capital, credit, know-how and management you can make a success of your business. But will any mortgage company, insurance company, or even the Industrial Development Bank set up by the government of Canada lend money to those who want to build motels and hotels in Banff, when it is known that there is no security of tenure to land? The answer is no.
What is the consequence of this? My question implies no criticism of Canada Power or the Canadian Pacific. The average man, I am not talking about the big corporation, cannot get capital, because there is no security of tenure in land to build recreational facilities. So, what happens?
[DOT] (3:00 p.m.)
Canada Power is allowed to go in and build Sunshine. It is a wonderful venture. But if it
is right for Canada Power, and if it is right for the Canadian Pacific Railway, then surely it is right for the average man who has served the tourist trade for 20 or 30 years in the Banff national park to do the same thing?
These things cannot be accomplished, because the people I am speaking of cannot get capital. Nobody will lend them money because there is no security of tenure in the land they hold. Calgary has grown from a city of 70,000 to a city of more than 300,000 because people are willing to lend other people money for development. I am not suggesting the city should develop the park. I am suggesting that the park should be zoned to make it possible for business to serve the tourists who are coming to Banff. The fact that people must line up for half a mile for toilet facilities is a disgrace. They come with camping equipment and find there is no place for them to hook up to sewer and water services. They have had to move camp very often to prevent the camp sites becoming unsanitary places.
What is the reaction of people from the United States, people from the maritime provinces who come to see the beautiful parks in this area? It is not good. I have raised this question before. I know the minister is able to show us a lot of letters praising the parks and the department. Certainly, a lot of people will write good things about Banff National Park and Lake Louise, because we are talking about the most beautiful area in the whole world. People who stay in the Banff hotel or in the Chateau Lake Louise, and who can afford to pay the prices there, naturally write the minister wonderful letters. But I should like to read the letters, if they are still in existence, from people who have found themselves obliged to line up for hours and hours for the simplest services while the government has been content to turn the parks into a playground for the rich, despite the solemn pledge that the parks were to be devoted to the people of Canada for their benefit and education. This is not the definition which hon. gentlemen opposite are following. In far too many cases people who do not possess a big bank roll cannot spend two or three weeks in these parks.
When the parks were set up, there was some land held in fee simple, as the minister knows. All the land owned by the C P.R. is owned in fee simple, with few exceptions. There were other leases of 99 years, there were leases in perpetuity, and there were 42-year leases with 21 year renewal dates. Any of these leases granted by the crown and still in existence are good leases. If the people

November 18, 1966

who have the need for capital and the people who are prepared to advance the capital were prepared to believe that the Queen would keep her word, as expressed through the government of Canada, there would be no difficulty about obtaining money for development. But what happens? Mr. A owns a motel. He has worked for 25 years and he wishes to retire. He decides to sell. He gets a buyer who arranges the financing. The lease goes into the department. He has to wait six months for a reply, and the department finally tells him, "We consent to the lease being transferred but the terms and conditions of the lease will be changed."
Surely, if this country, in the name of the Queen, signs a contract, then that contract should be of such a nature as to warrant belief in it by the individuals concerned? What happens in such a case as I have described? The sale does not go through.
I know of a small operation in respect of which a transfer could not be secured. What happened? They kept the old name. The new man went in to run it and both took part in management on a share basis. It was claimed the property was to be torn down to provide parking facilities. But that was three years ago and I will wager that it will still be there 15 years from now. What is happening is this: the department refuses to measure up to its legal obligation to approve the assignment of these leases.
The minister talks about compensation. Officials in his department say: we will take over your property but compensation will be paid. We all know that today the expropriation laws both in the provinces and under the federal government are a disgrace. When it comes to expropriation, there are no civil rights left.
How does expropriation take place in connection with land held in fee simple in the parks? The authorities file an order in council with the land council office without notice to the owner. He has lost his property. Should he happen to make a search of title, he will find it is no longer his. That is the situation. They believe they can cancel leases by a mere say-so without any due process of law. That is why those three meetings were held last spring and this summer. These meetings were not arranged on any political basis. The people in these parks in Alberta got so desperate that they sought for and obtained a decent and reasonable hearing from the premier of Alberta; it was because they could not get their grievances across to the minister and to his department.
Supply-Indian Affairs
We know how the committee system works in this house-


Arthur Laing: Tell me, later, when there will be an opportunity for me to ask a question.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I am sure there will be an opportunity. I know the minister has always taken a keen interest in this subject. One of the great drawbacks of the committee system in the House of Commons is that the government itself controls the committees through its own members. This has always been the case. A minister wishes to get his ideas across, so he finds government members who will agree with the position he takes. Then, before the report of the committee is made public, it is shaped according to the government's wishes. This is not something which happens only under the Liberal government; it happened when the Conservatives were in power. That is why we hear the whips of the parties stand up and say: Mr. A will cease to serve on a particular committee and Mr. B will serve in his place. They want to make sure that the minister will get his views across in committee.
I must congratulate the present minister, who I see is smiling in his place. When I hit him intellectually, he always enjoys it.


An hon. Member:: Impossible.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I would not say that. I have not seen any changes in the committee on northern affairs and national resources, and I hope when that committee goes out west it will do so with an open mind and listen to a man like Mr. George Steer, Q.C. So that there may not be any misunderstanding, let .me say that Mr. Steer is one of our leading counsel and that he has been before the judicial committee of the privy council as many times as most lawyers have appeared in their trial courts.
[DOT] (3:10 p.m.)
Intellectually he is an honest man and, I understand, he is a Liberal by politics. So, I am quite sure when he presents his point of view it will be presented on a factual and legal basis. There will be no prejudice. The minister will not be able to say that the man is prejudiced, because even in his political philosophy he is on the same side of the fence as the minister. Five hundred people were at this meeting at Banff and Jasper. There were 500 of them, and the minister would not attend that meeting. He refused to go to the meeting.


Arthur Laing: No, no.

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: That is what it says in the letter. If it is wrong, I will take the minister's word. He was not there. He should have been there. Senator Cameron said that he should have been there. I say he should have been there. The chairman of the Banff council said he should have been there, and he was not there. I say this nicely, but I think the reason you were not there was that you were afraid to be there because the grievances were so great and you were so wrong. You could not stand up before such a group.
I hope that this committee will go out there and that the members of the committee will have open minds. I hope that the report which will be written will rise above politics so that these people who are serving the tourist trade will get a fair shake. I believe in the objectives concerning the national parks. Rezone the national parks for recreational centres. The zones can be small in size; they can be in areas other than Banff and Lake Louise. However, let us have the facilities which are required by the people who are serving the tourists. Let them have security of tenure of land so that they can obtain the kind of capital which is necessary to build the required enterprises which should be built at Banff.
We have had some tremendous people in this department. It have not always agreed with Mr. Coleman, but I will say that he is a dedicated civil servant. He has done a tremendous job in the parks. I would be the first to make that statement. But, when we come to this kind of policy within the department I cannot agree with it. I am not attacking you, sir, personally, but I am attacking something which has been gross in the sense that nothing has been done about it. Immediately, the minister will get up and say that the Conservative government passed a certain order in council in 1958 which started this trend.
I was not the minister at that time, but I can tell you that these problems existed then and I was fighting them as strongly as I am now. I see the former minister in the house. When I went to him, he and his executive officials sat down with me and ironed out the problems.


Arthur Laing: Is that so?


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: It is so, and it was not that order in council of 1958 which started this trend. Even if it did, let us take your side of the argument. If it was wrong in 1958, let us not perpetuate it in 1966. What kind of political nonsense is it to say, "Sure, the problem is terrible, but you Tories started it". I am not

admitting we did start it. Often a minister becomes a prisoner in his own department. I do not think our minister ever was, but I am afraid that this is what happened to you. I do see some tremendous changes, however, and I hope you will go out with the committee to Banff. We know that it is not an easy task to administer the parks. We know that some people like to have monopolies. It may be that in these cases the minister has a very difficult problem. It is very difficult because there always are political overtones when one is dealing with the people who are in the parks. It may be easier for a member in the opposition to represent the parks than it is for a member on the government side. Perhaps that is a truism.
Let us not have the kind of nonsense where say, "Because you started something therefore I am going ahead with it". Let us take a realistic approach. These people have been denied their just rights. I am not suggesting I believe that people in Calgary or some place else should be allowed to build houses in the parks. But I do say that these people should be allowed to build adequately in order to serve the tourist industry, which is the second industry of Canada. The Premier of Alberta backs this stand. The minister of economics in Alberta backs this stand, and I back it. I think that anyone who has done any research in this regard cannot help but come to the same conclusion. Surely, this committee will take a real look at it. I will do my part. I will try to remain as polite as possible, and say I hope you will give those witnesses a real hearing and come to a proper judgment on the evidence rather than on some pre-conceived idea that you are going to do something whether they like it or not. I do not say the minister is taking that attitude, but that attitude has been indicated to certain people.
If you are short of staff in the department, for goodness sake at least get some people to answer the mail. Wherever I have gone in Jasper, the grievance has been that no replies were received.


Arthur Laing: That is not correct.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: That is correct. I can read from the report of the committee. Your deputy minister said that he would look into it. I have a letter of apology. Do not shake your head; that does not make something right that is wrong.


Arthur Laing: You are making a generalization out of a single case. You should not do that.
November 18, 1966


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: At that meeting which you would not attend, numbers of people got up complaining they did not get answers to their letters. Senator Cameron will back me up on this. He, himself, could not get answers to his letters.


Arthur Laing: He got some answers that he did not want.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: He also got some answers that he did like, because he still fought for the people of Banff. Surely, this is an important grievance which the minister should not take as just another political knock. I hope that I will receive support from some other Alberta members. I see that the hon. member for Medicine Hat, who usually is in his seat, has just gone out.


Arthur Laing: He could not stand you.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: That is not kind; it is not nice.


Maurice Rinfret: Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. member, but the time allotted his speech has expired.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I just wish to say one thing to the minister. He does not believe that.


Arthur Laing: Will you answer a question?


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Certainly.


Arthur Laing: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member has made a great to-do over the sanctity of contracts for all time. I should like to ask him whether he will tell me, now that he would insist upon a contract for eternity, why a lessee is paying the government of Canada $7 per year, receiving all the services for that $7 a year, and building thereon a $60,000 summer home for him and his family when the government which he supported in 1958 decided that it simply was not possible to extend that sort of a privilege to people in Canada?


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I should like to answer this fully and honestly. You have taken the example of a home. In this argument I pointed out that I did not go along with the idea of people having summer homes. I know that Mayor MacKay, one of the biggest Liberals, built a summer home. I could name other persons who did this through monopolies. There may be some on this side of the house who have built homes, but they are wrong. I do not wish to mention the names of any motels, but people have begged for the opportunity to extend their enterprises. They are good operators. The minister knows who I mean. Some
Supply-Indian Affairs of them are around Lake Louise and Banff. They have been told they cannot extend their enterprises unless they accept a new term. If the rent is $7 a year or $7 a month, then tax them in accordance with their capital return and you will not hear a squeal.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)
The way it is they do not have the security of tenure of land. In the cities, where we operate on titles, if the taxes are not high enough the authorities do not take over the whole house, they just increase the rate of tax.
Let us not be nonsensical and refer to one individual who had a summer home. I hope the minister does not make the same mistake made by Maclean's when it took a picture of a run-down restaurant outside the park at Canmore and played it up as though it was part of the park. That is the same error you are falling into now. This picture was of a terribly rundown place and the suggestion was that this was in Banff national park. Everybody in Ontario who read that article believed that was the situation, but it was completely misleading.
The question put to me by the minister I am sure will mislead the press in whom I have a great deal of confidence. The minister should not mislead them in this regard. The minister knows that these leases are being affected. I refer specifically to leases on motels, hotels and restaurants which are serving the tourist trade. I know of individuals living in summer homes who received some grants as the result of political influence. I know one or two of them such as Don MacKay, the former Liberal candidate for Calgary North. He made a fortune in this regard. I know of another fellow who is now on the bench, but I do not want to name him. The government gave him a piece of property and appointed him to the bench as well. I am not talking about those people, I am talking about people like the Brewsters and the Gammons and other people who have served the parks with dignity and dedication.
Those are the kind of people who have come to me. Even Mr. Brewster has made a complaint, and he is a great supporter of your party. I mentioned two individuals who represent both sides of this philosophy. Let us forget about politics and get down to brass tacks.


Arthur Laing: Will you answer another question?


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Certainly.

November 18, 196S
Supply-Indian Affairs


Arthur Laing: You indicated that we should look after this situation by increasing the taxes. Is the hon. member not aware that my predecessor in 1962 wrote to all the tenants in the parks guaranteeing them there would be no increase in their taxes until 1970?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, my name is
continually being dragged into this debate. I do not intend to participate, but the minister knows why that stand was taken. He knows there is a reassessment going on.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: That is the answer, and the minister knew that answer.


Arthur Laing: That happened just before an election.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: The minister says it took place just before an election.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Chairman, reassessments take place before elections as well as after them. That has nothing to do with the situation.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Let me answer this question. I am 100 per cent in agreement with the minister, but even if that is true, is the answer the cancellation of these leases and titles? Because some other minister said he would not increase taxes, should the government cancel these leases? What kind of nonsense is that? Is that the kind of rule of law you believe in, as a Liberal minister of this great government? Good gracious, if that is what you do believe I hope the Prime Minister calls you into his office tomorrow and has a serious talk with you, or appoints you to the Senate.


Mr. Roxburgh:: Mr. Chairman, I listened with interest to the hon. member for Bow River. I have no intention of taking exception to what he said, except to say this. He did say that government members on a committee were brought in under certain circumstances. As far as the northern affairs committee is concerned, the hon. member's name was on the list of its members at one time and then it was taken off. The hon. member for Yukon was placed on the committee, then he was taken off and replaced by somebody else. This situation is the same in respect of members on all sides of this house.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I have admitted that.


John Maxwell Roxburgh: While I am on this subject, let me say that I believe the hon. member for Bow River, as other hon. members who served on that committee, feels deeply that the committee was just and fair. I am personally

looking forward to hearing all sides of this story.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I rise on a question of privilege. At no time did I cast any reflection on the committee on northern affairs. I merely said that all committees of the house are controlled by government members. I said that this was true when this party was in government. I was most fair in that regard. I said that I hope and pray this committee will rise above any political influence. I hope the hon. member who now has the floor has received that message.


John Maxwell Roxburgh: We will leave the situation at that for the present.
I rise at this time to say a few words about the wildlife program of the department of national resources which, since I have been in this House of Commons, has received very little publicity or backing. At this time in all fairness, and I think even the opposition members will agree with me, I congratulate the minister and his department for their forward-looking park policy. The policy followed by the administrators of our national parks has a great deal to do with the preservation of our wildlife, and it is essential that a strict protective policy be adhered to.
I agree with the hon. member for Bow River who said practically the same thing I now intend to say. Any park policy has to be a policy for the people. Space for family camping, tourism and recreation have to be given utmost consideration by our park administrators. I am sure we all agree with the minister and his department that consideration for the wildlife angle, with its cultural, scientific, educational and inspirational aspects, must be given.
Today, with more spare time on people's hands and with more money in their pockets, we are faced with an ever increasing demand for outdoor recreation. That is true in spite of the claims of the wheat growers across this country that they are facing the worst time in history. I should like to know how so many of them are able to go south this year in their Cadillacs.
It is heartening to note that the department is already doing something about this situation through park zoning. I understand the department has a park zoning program under consideration and has taken steps for the establishment of an appropriate review authority to inquire into outdoor recreation requirements not only for our immediate requirements, but for those over the next 30 or 40 years.
November 18, 1966

In today's atmosphere of big business, outer space, and so on, I wonder whether we as Canadians are really aware of the treasure that is our wildlife heritage? This is a heritage that goes back to the first explorers, trappers, fur traders and homesteaders when wildlife often meant the difference between survival and starvation.
With the advancement of civilization, we have drained the wetlands, burned the vegetation, taken off the top soil, cut the timber and we have strewn chemical poisons by planes and thus dumped them into our rivers and lakes. Do not tell me there has not been a change in our wildlife habitat. There is no doubt about that and, therefore, it is a good thing that provincial and federal governments have finally recruited highly trained scientists to probe to the fullest the effects these changes have had, and to devise methods of managing wildlife in an effort to offset these changes. These people are moving forward.
[DOT] (3:30 p.m.)
I would like to point out at this time that Canada is very, and I emphasize "very", short of trained scientists to carry on this work. I feel that a special effort to remedy this situation should be made by government and, yes, also by industry which has become wealthy by acquiring and harvesting these natural resources. I am referring to the lumbering industry, the pulp and paper industry and the mining industry. I understand that some money, though not a very great amount, has been allotted by the government and a few companies for wildlife scholarships. However, more has to be done in this respect. This is one practical way, I think hon. members will agree, to interest our young students to expend their efforts in this field.
I wonder whether hon. members realize that it has been estimated that during the next ten years 160 professionals and 545 technicians will be required in the park management field just to fill the vacancies that will exist without allowing for any expansion. Therefore I do feel most sincerely that more consideration has to be given by the government to increasing these scholarships. Private enterprise, those industries that I mentioned, should be approached, and if necessary pressure should be put on them to contribute to these scholarships.
The trouble is that when a great many people think of wildlife-this applies especially to sportsmen-they naturally think of hunting and fishing. And what experience can be greater if these activities are carried on on the proper scale? However, as I have already
Supply-Indian Affairs mentioned, the economics of hunting have changed greatly along with the environment that I mentioned previously.
The January 15,	1966, edition, of the
Financial Post ran a full page story on hunting and what it means in dollars and cents. I have often wondered whether we think of what hunting means to this country in dollars and cents. I am not always interested in what these things mean in dollars and cents, but I should like the committee to know that some 790,000 hunters spent $88 million on their sport in 1961. They travelled 245 million miles by car, 4 million miles by privately owned boats, and over 16 million miles by train, aircraft and other means of transportation. The Financial Post estimated that a conservative total of the amount spent in 1964 on hunting was $118 million, and this figure is rising steadily. Probably this year it is up to $130 million.
Let us not forget that these figures refer to pleasure hunting only, not hunting for food. We often say that people hunt for food, but in the great majority of cases this is not so. But let us as Canadians not forget that there are many people in Canada who rely directly on game for their livelihood and even for their very existence. Fur trapping is still an important occupation in Canada. In 1962-63 the sale of Canadian wildlife furs totalled more than $12.1 million. Many of our Eskimos and Indians earn their livelihood from fur trapping and they need wildlife for food and clothing. One could say a great deal on that subject alone.
Of course, wild animals also help to control insects, birds and small mammals which damage crops; in other words, the control exercised by wildlife helps to keep these things in balance. However, the main objective of Canadians concerned with the future of wildlife is that it should be managed properly as a renewable natural resource of great value. Yes, above all else, Mr. Chairman, wildlife management in Canada must place stress on the preservation of the natural habitat as much as on the preservation of the birds, mammals and fish which live therein. A wild bird or animal and its surroundings cannot be separated. We all know it is true that one cannot be preserved without preserving the other.
It is therefore most reassuring to the Canadian public, and wildlife enthusiasts in particular, to learn of the new federal migratory bird program whereby it is proposed -listen to this; this is what the department of northern affairs is doing and it is

November 18, 1986
Supply-Indian Affairs a forward step that has never been taken by this department in any other government-to lease some five million small potholes on the prairies. Why is this being done? It is to prevent their destruction by draining or filling. Pilot projects have been carried on for three years in order to work out administrative and legal techniques. This is to be a ten-year program starting in 1967, and under the program $5 million will be spent annually. In other words, in the next ten years the department of northern affairs will spend some $50 million to prevent the destruction of wildlife breeding grounds.
I have been talking only about potholes on the prairies, but additional expenditures on behalf of migratory birds will be necessary for the preservation, by purchase or long-term lease, of large marshes not only on the prairies but elsewhere in Canada. The marshes that are going to be leased or bought are important as breeding, resting and over-wintering areas. I believe this is one of the most important projects that any government has taken in sustaining and protecting wildlife.
Apart from this program-and many opposition members know this is true-because of the unending perseverance of the minister of northern development, and I know the perseverance he has shown, the new Canadian migratory game bird permit came into being by government order in council. I know how hard the minister worked privately to bring this into being. It was not an easy thing, let me tell hon. members.
To sportsmen this permit is known as the duck stamp, and it will pay a very important role in estimates of kill by species and location. This is a big step forward, because without these estimates it would be a little 1 ke management endeavouring to operate a business whose volume and distribution of sales were unknown. In other words, the department is taking a very forward-looking step in respect of wildlife management. I personally would like to congratulate the minister and his department for taking this step, and I know I speak on behalf of every member of this house and the sportsmen of Canada.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
I shall not take much more time of the committee but, Mr. Chairman, I would like you to bear with me for a few minutes while I speak about a matter in my own riding that is very dear to my heart. It concerns the local duck hunting in Long Point Bay, one of the finest duck areas in Canada. Part of this large
(Mr. Roxburgh.]
hunting area is under provincial jurisdiction and is open for hunting to any person who pays a small fee. Most of the remaining area is either owned by clubs or by private persons, hunters being allowed to come in and shoot on a daily or yearly fee basis, or whatever the term may be. Certain sections of these marshes are baited, and it is felt by the owners of the marshes that shooting should be permitted within 200 yards of the baited areas rather than 500 yards, which is the law at present. Marsh owners and hunters strongly believe that this law is most unjust, especially for the large population living in southwestern Ontario where about two-thirds of the people of the province reside.
Do you realize, Mr. Chairman, that shooting over baited areas is carried on legally right across Canada, by shooting over corn and grain fields, over some fields specially planted for the purpose, with grain put out in the fields, thus making it impossible for conservation officers to prove anything? This in effect is shooting directly over baited areas, and not from 200 yards away as is suggested by Long Point Bay sportsmen and marsh owners.
Long Point Bay people believe, and I feel rightly so, that a strict bag control would be far more practical and in this area more easily controlled. There is little doubt that the law would receive full support from the marsh owners who would be willing to apply the law to the fullest to hunters on their property. In such a case not only would the provincial and federal governments not have two or three officers running around to see if they could find a grain of wheat that has been lying in the bottom of one of these pools for dear knows how long, but in addition the local marsh owners would be helping to apply the law. This is something worth considering.
I know the people there. They have commercial marshes for shooting but they are farming their marshes and they do not want them mined. They are practical conversationists at heart, and the government would do well to learn from their experience.
Although migratory bird control is a federal responsibility, it can only be put into effect properly by working with the provinces, which is more or less what is happening now. However, if both federal and provincial wildlife conservation departments were sincerely interested in applying the law as it should be applied, it could be done much more easily and at very little extra cost.
Conservation officers should be moved around from area to area two weeks or so
November 18, 1966

before the local hunting season opens so that a new face would appear in each territory. Hon. members may know what the effect of that would be. At present officers seem to concentrate on the ordinary farm boy who has a little .22 and is using it out of season, and on the professional poacher. But more important in this connection is the local businessman, the respected businessman, the retired businessman.
Hon. members know that what I say is true, that it is more likely the retired businessman who is the worst breaker of the game laws in the Dominion of Canada, and it is only natural that the local game warden, who has known him for years, will walk up and say, "Well, Jack, you are out of line here but please don't do it again." If conservation officers were moved around from territory to territory, the new officer in any given district could not care less whether the hunter he stops is a bank manager or a member of parliament, or who the heck he is, and this would soon cut down greatly on poaching and over-bag limits.
Today's sportsman is becoming more and more conservation-minded, and there is little doubt in my mind that if the right approach is taken toward the application of our game laws by both federal and provincial governments, a better understanding and co-operation by the hunters themselves will automatically follow. I certainly am going to do my best to work along those lines.


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Chairman, I have a few remarks to direct to the minister of northern affairs and to the committee in connection with the administration of his department as it applies particularly to the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. But before doing that may I say I am glad to see that the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources is in his seat because this concerns him as well.
I want to to ask the minister of northern affairs to give us an assurance that the same policy is not being followed in his department as appears to exist in the Department of Energy, Mines and ressources with respect to the requirement of the completion by all employees in the water resources branch of that department of a form which calls for the most intimate and, in my view, uncalled for information. I refer to a form which has been circulated in the Department of Energy,
Supply-Indian Affairs Mines and Resources called a "personal history form". This is the kind of question that appears on that form:
16. Give dates and countries visited and purpose of travels made to any communist-dominated areas since July 1st, 1945...
15. Have you ever been convicted of an offence?


Arthur Laing: Mr. Chairman, may I ask you to rule whether or not this is the proper time to bring up this matter? The hon. member commenced by asking me for an assurance that what was going on in another department is not going on in mine and then proceeded to read into the record something that allegedly is going on in that other department. At this stage we are discussing my estimates and I think it highly improper that this kind of attack be made on me, or even on the other department, at this time.


Erik Nielsen: On the point of order raised by the minister, I wish to point out that he is responsible to report to this committee on the policies which exist in his department. I am asking him whether this kind of policy, and this kind of requirement exist in his department. He can finish the matter immediately by saying no, but I do not think he can do that. This form required from all personnel information of the most intimate character, and I suggest it offends and unduly intrudes upon the freedom of individuals whether they be in the Civil Service of Canada or not.
Surely, Mr. Chairman, the administration of the minister's department and of other departments of the government can be carried on without the requirement for employees to divulge this kind of information and to be told, by the heading on the form, that unless they give accurate and true statements and unless they disclose all the information sought they will be liable to prosecution under Section 5 of the Official Secrets Act. I hope the minister can give the committee the assurance that he is not imposing such a requirement on his employees. I am glad to see the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources in his seat because the disclosure that this form is in circulation and in use might cause him to reconsider its use by his department. Security investigations, yes, but security investigations to the depth to which this form goes are completely unwarranted and in fact are undue intrusions upon the freedom of the employees of the government of Canada. I raise the matter now, Mr. Chairman, because I have received complaints from public servants, not

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs only from employees who work in the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources but from those in other departments as well.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)
I would also tax the minister with his refusal to grant the most reasonable request of the members of the Yukon council to place before him and the committee, this fair committee on northern affairs-


John Maxwell Roxburgh: Does the hon. member believe it is a fair committee? May I ask him whether he thinks it is fair or unfair?


Erik Nielsen: With respect to the decision that has been made concerning the request of the members of the Yukon council, who were elected by the people there, to appear before that committee and give their views on governmental reform, it has been a most unfair committee. It has been most unfair because of the government majority on the committee which voted against that request. What kind of democracy is this? We have the elected representatives of a duly constituted body making a request to the committee and an appeal to the minister-


Arthur Laing: They did not complain to me.


Erik Nielsen: They did complain to the minister, and the members of the council will confirm that.


Arthur Laing: You wrote the stuff for them yourself.


Erik Nielsen: The allegation of the minister, Mr. Chairman, that I wrote the stuff for them myself is absolutely false. It is untrue and the minister knows it.


Arthur Laing: You have said that before on another matter too.


Erik Nielsen: The minister, when he raised in the house, the particular matter to which he has reference, knew that there was a good answer as well. He failed to mention that in the proceedings before the council full explanation had been given to the members there with respect to the authorship of that particular section of the document to which he refers. The minister did not mention that to the council. He wanted to be fair. Fair, my foot!


Arthur Laing: You have denied it categorically.


Erik Nielsen: I did not deny it categorically. The minister knows that and the record of the committee proceedings will bear it out. So let

the minister stop misleading the committee now.


Arthur Laing: It does show it.


Erik Nielsen: The minister is wrong and his statement is untrue. None the less the fact remains that the appeal to the minister by the members of the council fell on deaf ears. The appeal of the elected representatives of the Yukon to the committee fell on deaf ears. Why, Mr. Chairman? Perhaps it was because I was a thorn in the side of the committee. Perhaps I was saying something they did not like or agree with, or perhaps they thought I was going to become political.
The members elected by the citizens of the Yukon wanted to be heard but they were denied that right. I might add that some of my friends in the corner in the Creditiste party joined with the Liberal majority on the committee in denying them that right, as well as members of the other smaller parties in the house.
They again repeat that request, Mr. Chairman. They make that request through me and appeal to the minister and to the committee to be heard on these matters when the committee sits again. They feel the time has long gone when there must be an increasing degree of executive responsibility passed to the people of the Yukon. They feel the time has long gone when the bureaucratic control now exercised must cease. If we adopt the recommendations made by the Carrothers commission, this is what is going to happen in the Northwest Territories as well. They want to see more responsibility on the ground.
The minister has the views which I have placed on record in this committee and in the standing committee in connection with the reforms which we feel should be brought about. I urge him not to set up any studies or commissions and not, by subterfuge, to continue any longer the existence of this tightly-gripped bureaucratic control of the government. I urge him now to consider enlightened reform, to make the council mean something, to give to that council the responsibility of spending the money that they derive from imposing taxes upon themselves.
I have said before that the conditions that exist in the Yukon are colonialistic. Whether such a word exists in the dictionary or not, the minister knows what I mean. I have compared the conditions that exist with those which gave rise to the Boston tea party. Here
November 18, 1986

you have citizens imposing taxes upon themselves but being denied by bureaucracy the right to spend those moneys.
I know that the reply is going to be that the council has to pass the spending estimates, but the minister knows as well as I do that no statement of this nature will override the fact that they cannot design and introduce fiscal policy, and there is the rub. This is what has to be cured. It was a tremendously backward step when the Northwest Territories Act was amended to take away that specific right which the people on the Northwest Territories had prior to the amendment, but this has been done.
As to the Carrothers report, Mr. Chairman, I find little argument with the mechanical recommendations. With those concerned with decentralization of governmental procedures and administration, moving them form a location in Ottawa to an on-site location in the Northwest Territories, there can be little quarrel. But where I do find myself differing from the recommendations of the Carrothers commission is with the so-called governmental reform of the executive. The recommendations in this regard do nothing more than perpetuate control in the hands of precisely those officials in whose hands it now resides. All the recommendations accomplish is a reshuffling. If the recommendations are adopted they give the commissioner, who is the minister's appointee by government order in council, the power to appoint the executive instead . of its members being elected in accordance with the spirit of a truly democratic process.
I also ask the minister to turn from that subject to the question of what his plans are for the revision of the Yukon Quartz Mining Act. At a time when we are in the midst of an influx of investment capital which indicates a very promising return we are hampered by an antiquated quartz mining act which as been in the process of amendment now interdepartmentally for the last three years. The amendments which were proposed where refined almost three years ago but nothing has been done. The minister has received recently a request from the Yukon chamber of mines to effect an amendment to section 12 of that act. I should like his observations as to when we may expect the request of the Yukon chamber of mines to be acceded to.
I should also like to raise at this time when dealing with these estimates the question of the Alaska highway and the myriad reports which have been prepared, with yet another at hand.
Supply-Indian Affairs [DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
The report of the Sandford Research Institute gives the most pessimistic conclusions which are completely unjustified because they are based on inaccurate and for the most part untrue suppositions. In the Yukon we suspect that the only purpose of the Sandford report was to justify a further delay in the government coming to some kind of decision with respect to the paving of the highway. An engineering report was prepared by a department of the federal government and this report, excellently done, suggests five different alternatives with respect to highway improvement. What is the government's intention with respect to an improvement program? When do they intend to sit down with the various jurisdictions involved to arrive at some scheme for highway improvement?
What does the minister intend or what does the government of Canada intend to do with respect to the recent announcement by United Keno Hill Mines, an old mining company in the Yukon, that they will curtail production by June of next year? When the minister replied to a question of mine on the matter a few weeks ago he said he was optimistic that the pessimistic part of the announcement would not be justified. The fact remains that the announcement stands, and my information from mine officials is that only a caretaker will be on the spot in June next year.
I hope that the government, and particularly the minister, are taking interest in what is happening there. Four communities are directly involved and the total population affected is some 2,000 people. I have tried to come up with some kind of suggestion about this matter. Perhaps this whole question could be considered by the minister.
In most fields of skilled trade in Canada there are ample vocational training facilities. There are schools turning out welders, carpenters, plumbers, electricians and, indeed, almost the whole spectrum of skilled trades. Yet there is an absence in Canada of an institution to train practical miners. This is one of the factors causing the difficulties of the mine I have mentioned which has a requirement of between 400 and 500 miners but can obtain only 50 to 70. When International Nickel at Thompson, Manitoba, has to advertise in Whitehorse newspapers for miners, a serious problem with respect to the shortage of skilled miners confronts Canada. I suggest to the minister that he might consider the possibility of establishing a school for miners at United Keno which was and presently is

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs the richest silver producer on this continent. The mine is large and the company is engaged in varying operations. Co-operation between the company and the government might establish a school to turn out skilled miners and skilled diamond drillers to alleviate the shortage in this area of the Canadian labour scene.
I also want to ask the minister what he intends to do about the repeated complaints by people in the Yukon concerning the justification of the use by Edmonton of the Klondike trade mark. I am glad the minister accepts the suggestion which I placed through one of his officials that the Klondike theme be the trade mark of the people of the Yukon and be kept intact for the commissioner and the people of the region. Now that the minister has a legal direction in that behalf, what does he intend to do with it? Is it his intention to commence legal prosecutions for infringements of the rights we have obtained due to the instructions which he issued to the then administrator in the Yukon, Mr. Frank Fing-land?
I should like to hear something of the minister's plans for roads and power. I should like to hear an explanation from the minister of why he allowed the Northern Power Commission-I know he does not sit on the board but he has a good deal to say about the functioning of that crown corporation-to compete directly with private enterprise in Dawson City when he had before him a proposal from a private concern which would have supplied cheaper power to the residents of that community.
What are his plans with respect to the intervention of the government or government crown corporations in connection with the potential of future power development in the Pelly River area where mining operations are being conducted? These and other important questions must be answered by the minister, though we should like to be able to answer them ourselves. But since all the strings are held here, 4,000 miles away, and since all the direction comes from the minister on the recommendation of his officials to the commissioner, we cannot get the answers until we check with Ottawa. We want to have those answers instead of being delayed and sloughed off. This is what usually happens to questions which council members ask. Those questions are delayed and sloughed off by the administration.
Perhaps the minister will be interested to know that we have an elected body in the Yukon which asks in written or verbal form
questions of the administration headed by the minister's appointee, the commissioner. Though the answers are available, the commissioner, the department head, or whoever it might be, says to the elected members of the council seeking information, "We will check with Ottawa first to see whether it is government policy to release this information." So the chain reaction starts, the instruction is requested and given, and many months later the answers come forth.


Arthur Laing: What information is the hon. member talking about?


Erik Nielsen: Information with respect to questions asked by elected members of council when they are sitting. I have heard complaints from members of the council, which the minister knows is sitting now, that they have asked questions at one session which have not been answered until the next, months and months later. We wonder why that is.
Why is there this reluctance to give information to the representatives of the people of the Yukon? Why is there this tremendous loathing on the part of officialdom to release some of its powers? I appeal to the minister to give force to what he has been saying. He pays lip service to us each time he speaks in the Yukon about any governmental report, but nothing is done. He pays lip service to the democratic institutions which he would like to see established in the Yukon. Yet nothing is done. He says he wishes to move as rapidly as possible toward the day when we in the Yukon can assume control of our own destiny. Noble-sounding words and phrases. Yet nothing is done. Why? I suspect it is because on the advice of his officials he does not wish to see these developments come about. I regret very much that the sentiments expressed by the previous deputy minister, now secretary to the privy council, have been lost sight of. I speak of Mr. Robertson who said:
The Department of Northern Affairs only exists to administer itself out of existence.
That is the view which the minister and his officials should be taking with respect to the Yukon. Because of differences in history, institutions and progress, the Northwest Territories will take a bit longer to reach this point. But we in the Yukon are ready.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
The minister himself went on site and spoke to a number of prominent people and others in the Yukon. He asked them whether they
[Mr. Nielsen.)
November 18, 1966

would run for council if its size were increased and if greater responsibility by way of executive power were granted. I am sure he expected a negative answer. But he got a positive answer because there are people there ready to step forward if the minister vould take the initiative and bring in the necessary amendments to the Yukon Act to allow for increased executive responsibility. There is no earthly reason why there should be such tremendous reluctance to give up the power, if that indeed be what would be given up. The mechanical departmental structure is set up and is operating smoothly as it has been for years. It will continue to operate smoothly when executive control is gradually transferred. There is no reason to expect that all the administrative skill which exists in the official structure in the Yukon will disappear if the minister decides to adopt an enlightened approach.
The same applies to the Northwest Territories. Instead of taking steps forward in the direction of reform the department is slipping backward; it is taking retrograde steps. I do not speak of mechanical improvements. I speak of reform in the democratic processes themselves.
The minister has appointed a new commissioner. I was happy to see this appointment made. It is one with which I have no quarrel at the moment, though I may have in the future. The man appointed was a Conservative, and the minister knew it. He is a man a good deal more likely to be loyal to the minister than some I have seen in the past few days, and there will be no departure from that loyalty with respect to this appointment. He will take his instructions and he will follow them through, and if he has any deep differences with the minister he will tell him and step down. The minister will find that his instructions will be carried out, and therein lies the quarrel I have with the whole system.
The minister, on the advice of his officials, pulls the strings and all the council does in Whitehorse is to sit as a rubber stamp agreeing with legislation prepared and drawn up in Ottawa, passed through the channels and laid on the council's table. No ideas are allowed; unless they are approved and ratified by Ottawa they will not see the light of day.
The whole system is completely repugnant to our way of life in this country. I hear members in this house from the province of Quebec talking about being somehow left out of things Canadian. We feel the same isolation. It is enhanced by the utter futility of having 23033-639J
Supply-Indian Affairs our every move overseen by big brother here in Ottawa. All we have is the insipid machinery of passing motions in our council regretting something or other and suggesting that this or that should be done. But it never is done.
Now we are saddled with another white elephant. I am glad the minister has spoken up about this. I refer to the correction institution which is to be built in Whitehorse and will be the finest building in the Yukon Territory. I am not decrying the need for reform in the area of our penal institutions. God knows this is needed in the northern territories. But before we consider building the type of institution which will encourage people to go and live there, we must pause. The headline in the Whitehorse newspaper which reproduced the architect's drawing of this minimum security institution was: "Reserve Two With A View." The next time the minister is in Whitehorse I urge him to look at what is happening.


Arthur Laing: I am afraid.


Erik Nielsen: I do not blame the minister for being afraid. I do not know what is being built in the Northwest Territories-


Mr. Orange:: The same thing.


Erik Nielsen: If it is anything like this one I am sure the whole population will be applying to get into one of the finest residences in the region. My point is that had there been more power to decide these things on the spot, had there been more power locally and more executive control, things like this would not have happened.


The Acting Chairman (Mr. Richard):: Order. The time allotted to the hon. member has expired.


Mr. Herridge:: Mr. Chairman I shall not take the time of the committee for long but I cannot allow these interesting estimates to go through without making a few observations, asking the minister a few questions and putting forward a few suggestions.
First, I should like to congratulate the minister on his vigorous administration of this department with the support of his very competent and active officials. The hon. gentleman was born two generations after the member for Kootenay West but he has learned a lot from our generation in British Columbia. I know he comes from a pioneer family and that he understands many of the situations which arise in the department he

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs now administers. I wish him well in all he undertakes in this department.
Before going further I should like to quote briefly from a speech made by Dr. O. M. Solandt before a convention considering the subject, "Man and his Environment." This is to strengthen the hands of those who support the minister in his efforts to maintain our national parks in a wilderness state as far as possible. This is what Dr. Solandt had to say:
Experience has shown that it is extremely difficult to recreate wilderness once it has been lost, so we must preserve it while it still exists.
I am even one of the enthusiasts who believe that there should be inner areas in our wilderness preserves that are only accessible on foot, on horseback, or by canoe and where all mechanical aids such as outboard motors and aircraft are banned.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
I agree absolutely with Dr. Solandt's contention in this respect. I suggest to the minister that in dealing with parks he not follow the practice being followed in some parts of the United States where they actually are constructing asphalt paths to the tops of mountains. These asphalt paths are two or three feet wide so that people can climb the mountains and go through the parks. I cannot agree with that sort of thing. I think that when you go into the wilderness you want to enjoy the beauty there and live under natural conditions. He goes on to say:
For those unable or unwilling to travel with mechanical assistance, there will always be ample territory available. Roads do not make wilderness accessible-they destroy it. Similarly, aircraft and outboard motors can make wilderness accessible to the very few, but as soon as they appear in substantial numbers, the wilderness again ceases to exist.
I do not have the genius to describe adequately the importance of wilderness to modern man. My mother, who was an inveterate camper, used to say that she had to get out into the bush periodically because, as she put it. "It takes the wrinkles out of my soul". I hope that even the most dedicated developers of Canada's natural resources will recognize that wilderness is a priceless resource and will give it an adequate priority in their plans for the future.
I have quoted that because I was very impressed by Dr. Solandt's remarks in that connection. So far as this house is concerned I think it would do some members a lot of good if they went out in the wilderness and recovered their sense of balance and fair play.


Mr. Baldwin:: The government never has been out of it.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am not making any comment on that. I wish to congratulate the minister on the introduction of a national

policy this year. I should like to ask him to tell the committee, when he has an opportunity to reply, what has been done with regard to the various proposals he put forward in the first national wildlife policy ever announced by the federal government in Canada. We do not expect things to be done overnight, but we should like to hear a brief report of what has been attempted under the various headings in connection with this policy.
Another matter I wish to bring to the minister's attention is the plan for the development of the Duck Lake wildlife management project. Dr. J. A. Munro did a very interesting study of this area. He made a report which I have on my desk and have read with great interest. Many of the rod and gun clubs in the constituency I represent, and in other places, are interested in the development of this area as a wildlife management project. On June 23 I asked a question of the Prime Minister in this regard. He replied as follows:
On June 23 you asked in the house if the federal government was prepared to co-operate with the government of British Columbia in the development of Duck Lake for wildlife conservation, and if the federal government would contribute financially to that end. X said at the time that we were anxious to co-operate with the government of British Columbia, but that before replying further I would have to discuss the details with the minister concerned.
My colleague. Honourable Mr. Laing. has told me that he considers Duck Lake and adjacent areas to be of great importance to the ducks and geese that pass through southeastern British Columbia and that, the preservation and improvement of those areas for waterfowl is a matter of national significance.
I was very glad to know that the minister considers it a matter of national significance, because large numbers of ducks and geese go into that area. The reply continued:
Officers of the Canadian wildlife service have studied the area and the birds that inhabit it on a number of occasions during the past 20 years.
The government of British Columbia, which holds title to most of the lands concerned, formally reserved them for wildlife a year or so ago. Shortly after that, Honourable Kenneth Kiernan, Minister of Recreation and Conservation for British Columbia, requested the assistance of the federal government in developing a management plan for the area. We were happy to comply. The requested assistance was provided by the Canadian wildlife service during the summer of 1965.
Because of the federal responsibility for migratory birds, outlined in a statement of the national wildliie policy tabled in the house on April 6 last, it would be quite proper for the federal government to participate in implementation of a management plan that would meet the requirements of both governments.
November 18, 1966



The organizations in the interior of British Columbia were very interested to read this. I sent them copies of this letter. I should like the minister to comment later on what is being done in this regard. Then the reply concluded:
The responsible ministers of the two governments have exchanged letters to explore the possibilities of close co-operation in the future development and management of the area. The process of exploration has been useful and I am hopeful that it will soon lead to an agreement for co-ordinated and cooperative activities for the benefit of wildlife and the people who live in and visit the area.
This is of great interest to the persons in the southeastern portion of British Columbia particularly who are interested in wildlife, and we shall be glad to know what developments there have been to date. In this connection I should also like to bring to the attention of the minister-I do not know whether this is because of the developments on the Columbia River or whether it is caused by something else-that there are other flyways developing now. For instance, there are ducks and geese coming into the area near Beaton on the north arm of the Arrow Lakes. There are large numbers coming into a place called Shore-holme on the upper Arrow Lakes. We never saw these before. This is an interesting change. There are also others coming into the flatlands just south of Burton on the Columbia River. There seems to have been a change from the flyways which the ducks used previously. I thought that the minister and his officials would be interested to know this.
When the minister replies I should also like him to tell us what is happening with regard to the consultations between the wildlife service and the appropriate officials in the government of British Columbia having to do with the numerous problems concerning wildlife and fish. These are problems which have been created by the development of the Columbia Treaty projects and concern redfish and other species of fish, as well as the necessity for a trout hatchery. I might say that at one time we had a federal government hatchery near Gerrard which produced large numbers of fish for release into the various lakes. This operated very successfully and many sportsmen and other people in southeastern British Columbia were very sorry to see the federal government pull out of that project some years ago. I think it was quite a few years ago. The hatchery performed a very useful service at that time.
I have one or two suggestions to make. I suggest to the minister that it would be a good idea for him and his officials to consider the
Supply-Indian Affairs need for a national code of ethics as between farmers and hunters across Canada. There is a different law in nearly every province in respect of trespassing and things of that sort. Generally speaking every farmer is quite willing to co-operate with hunters if his rights are respected, but he is not prepared to do so if his gates are left open and his cattle get out on the road. I know of one case where hunters came in and shot the tails off cattle on the ranges and another case where they brought in beer, broke the bottles, left the pieces of glass on the side of a creek and the cattle cut their feet. Years ago it was very easy to get an agreement with property owners and farmers to allow the residents of the area to hunt and fish, but with the increase in the number of roads, undesirable people get into areas. They are not necessarily hunting in the true sense but rather shooting everything that is alive including squirrels, birds and other things of that nature.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)
I suggest it would be a good idea for the wildlife services in co-operation with the wildlife organizations to consider the possibility of bringing this question before one of the dominion-provincial conferences. In co-operation with the ministers of agriculture of the various provinces and the federal Minister of Agriculture it might be possible to draft a national code which would be agreeable to the farmers' organizations and wildlife organizations. The provincial governments might then agree to adopt this code as provincial legislation. There would then be an opportunity for people to fish, hunt and enjoy the wilderness while at the same time the rights of the property owners and farmers would be protected. I think something could be done in this regard and I should like to see this matter taken up by the appropriate department when a dominion-provincial conference is being held. Perhaps it could be initiated by the present minister in co-operation with the Minister of Agriculture. This is something we should work toward.
In conclusion I have one other suggestion to make which I have made before on two other occasions. It is my firm belief that there is a need in this country for a college of conservation which would teach the principles of conservation of our natural resources including fish and wildlife. There are a lot of good, young boys in this country who are not inclined to go to universities and not very interested in higher academic education but they could make a contribution in this field as

November 18. 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs a result of taking a one or two-year course in the principles of conservation. They would then be in a position to work as conservation officers in the federal or provincial departments or in related services. I am not suggesting something that would cost a lot of money, but I am suggesting that a suitable site should be found surrounded by timber and wildlife. Possibly the buildings could be made of logs and the college could accommodate roughly 50 students. This would only require a small supervisory staff of three or four with visiting lecturers from other universities.
I am so interested in this subject, Mr. Chairman, that I have talked it up and down the country in which I live. I would be willing to offer the federal department a very nice site adjacent to one of the most beautiful lakes in British Columbia. I refer to Beaver Lake in the little Slocan valley. With those few words I will take my seat. I look forward to the minister's reply to the various suggestions I have made.


Robert John (Bud) Orange: 

I ask the minister to take particular cognizance of another recommendations of the Carrothers commission, namely that with respect to the status and salary of the new commissioner. The Carrothers commission recommended that the commissioner hold the rank of a full deputy minister and that he be responsible directly to the minister of northern affairs. It as with a little concern that I learned that the newly appointed Commissioner for the Yukon is receiving a salary which, while adequate, places him much below the level of deputy minister in the hierarchy of the civil service. I think all of us recognize that salary is an important item not only in terms of money but status. If the commissioner for the Northwest Territories is to have status in the eyes of his colleagues, I suggest that the minister appoint him with the rank of deputy minister and at that salary level.
The Carrothers commission report has been received in some parts of the north with a certain amount of disappointment. I think this is particularly so in the case of Fort Smith because that community hoped and anticipated for many years that they could and would be the capital of the territories. The Carrothers commission recommendation is that the capital be Yellowknife. I suggest that in the main the northern people are excited by the report, but they are also anxious that some of the recommendations be implemented as soon as possible and that there be a development of the process of self-government for the Northwest Territories.
I has in the territories in the last two or three weeks and was fortunate enough to attend the opening of the Norhwest Territories Council session at Resolute Bay, approximately 2,300 miles north of Ottawa, located on Corwallis Island. It was the first session of the territorial council where elected representatives from all parts of the territories were in attendance. I can assure hon. members that a great tribute was paid to the House of Commons by the newly elected members as well as those who had been elected for some time. The members of the council expressed their appreciation of the amendments to the Northwest Territories Act which extended the franchise throughout the Northwest Territories on a territorial basis.
However, the council members almost unanimously expressed concern with regard to the implementation of those features of the
Supply-Indian Affairs Carrothers commission report which the government of Canada and themselves are prepared to accept. They are concerned that it will take an undue length of time to bring into effect those recommendations which are meaningful. The expression has been used that Carrothers, referring to the commission, is in danger of being buried. This is the feeling not only of the council but of many people in all parts of the territories.
I should like to make a suggestion to the minister which I think would help speed up the implementation of the recommendations of the Carrothers commission report. Part of the problem is that in April, 1967, the life of the present council will expire and there will be an election throughout the territories. The council's life is normally three years. I suggest to the minister that the life of the present council be extended one year, thereby permitting his department and officers to study the recommendations of the Carrothers commission, together with the recommendations of the territorial council and the departmental officers. These recommendations could then be brought together so that we in this house could enact the enabling legislation some time within the next year.
I think all of us recognize that because of the mechanics involved it would be virtually impossible to bring forward by next spring sweeping changes suitable to the people in the north, the council, the minister, his department and this house. The task is too great. By extending the life of the council one year, these recommendations could be tidied up and brought before the House of Commons, thereby permitting the new council with its increased responsibilities and functions to come into existence in April, 1968. Otherwise I cannot see that the council will have a new face and a new meaning until 1970. I hope the minister understands that those of us who live in the north cannot wait that long.
I recognize that to effect the suggestion I have made would involve a minor amendment to the Northwest Territories Act. I feel confident that hon. members who sit on the opposite side of the house, particularly those who are members of the northern affairs committee and have spent some time in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon, would be prepared to have this amendment brought forward and dealt with as quickly as possible.
I should like to impress upon the minister the recommendations of the Carrothers commission with regard to the executive council. I have some sympathy with what has already

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs been said by the hon. member tor Yukon in this respect. Under the proposals of the Car-rothers commission the executive council could consist of persons who are not members of the legislative body, namely, the territorial council. As it now stands there are problems in this respect, and I hope that the minister in his reply will give us an indication of his thinking in reference to this question.
One of the exciting recommendations of the Carrothers commission is that with regard to the setting up of an economic development board and an economic development fund for northern Canada. The report recommends that approximately $10 million be set aside for the fund. If we want to see the private sector of northern Canada develop, become meaningful and contribute in its own way to the growth of the north, we require an imaginative and exciting scheme which will in effect complement what those in the south know as the Industrial Development Bank. The economic development fund, or whatever name is given to it, could accomplish this particular purpose with respect not only to large industry but also the small man, the one who is trying to make his stake in the north on his own.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
At one stage I read in The Northerner, one of our northern newspapers, published in Fort Smith, a report of a suggestion made by the hon. member for New Westminster that the Carrothers commission report, having now been received by the government, should be referred back to northerners for their comments, in other words, re-Carrothers Carrothers. This is not what we want in the north. We want action based on the report, based on the territorial council's recommendations, and based on the minister's own views.
I would now like to speak of the officers of the department, who are serving in the eastern Arctic. I refer to the field officers, men and women, social workers, teachers, administrators, engineers and technical officers who serve the department and thereby serve Canada, particularly the people of northern Canada. I would like to comment on the great feeling of humanity and understanding that most of these officers bring to their responsibilities in the north.
It is not an easy thing for a person who is a social worker, a teacher or an engineer to change the pattern of his life, to leave the urban setting of southern Canada with its television, roads and all the other amenities
IMr. Orange.]
and go into a small northern community where mail is received once a month, where he will not see fresh food for months at a time, where his water supply in the winter will be ice blocks, and in the summer will be brought in from a lake miles away and have to be chlorinated by his wife. But these people attempt to adjust and do adjust to their responsibilities and roles as representatives of the government of Canada.
They wish to bring to the less fortunate people in the north some of the features of southern civilization and at the same time help them retain the basic elements of their own culture. They want to bring the northerners into the mainstream of Canadian life, but this task has been complicated by the problems of recruiting. I am convinced that there are Canadians in all walks of life who are prepared to go to the north, but I am sorry to say that the present system of recruitment is designed to thwart and keep people out of the north. Recently I placed a question on the order paper asking how many field positions there were in the Northwest Territories under the Department of Northern Affairs and inquiring about how many of them were vacant as of October 1.
The answer was that there are approximately 1,380 positions in the northern administration branch in northern Canada. This includes all the prevailing rate positions and teaching positions. But taking into account the fact that the majority of prevailing rate positions are filled by local help and that the vast majority of teaching positions are filled without any problem, it is remarkable that approximately 15 per cent to 20 per cent of the other positions in the field are unfilled. I am talking about social workers, development officers, administrators, and administrative support services. This is making the role of the department most difficult. For example, I know that in Keewatin in the central Arctic major departmental programs for the arts and crafts are being seriously affected by lack of staff, and I have always placed the blame on the inadequate facilities of the Civil Service Commission.
I do not believe it would be possible, but personally I would like to see the responsibility for recruiting people for the north taken out of the hands of the Civil Service Commission, or Public Service Commission as it is to be known shortly, and given to the minister and his department, allowing him to do as he now is able to do when recruiting teachers. At present experts from his department travel all
November 18, 1966

through Canada during springtime visiting schools, and when they find a suitably qualified person who wishes to move to a particular part of the north the minister's staff are able to say, "Come with us. You are hired as of September 1." It is impossible to do this when recruiting social workers under the rules of the Civil Service Commission. They may be interviewed at work but then the matter comes back to Ottawa and letters are sent to them from Ottawa. This may take up two months. Then the commission must examine their qualifications. A lot of time is wasted.
I ask the minister to look into the possibility of working out an arrangement with the Civil Service Commission whereby all northern affairs personnel for field positions could be removed from the provisions of the Civil Service Act and hired in the same manner as northern teaching staff are hired. Mr. Chairman, may I call it five o'clock.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.


Mr. Depuiy 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, public bills and private bills.


Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, at this point I would like to advise you that I understand there have been discussions between the government house leader and members of other parties and it might be the sentiment of the house that we forgo private members' hour at this time because there may be some advantage in completing the estimates of the department under review and, speaking personally, especially in the light of the fact that they are my estimates.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)


Stanley Howard Knowles: I think that is a correct statement of the position, Mr. Speaker. There have been discussions and there was this kind of agreement.


Mr. Rapp:: Mr. Speaker, I understand that this was the agreement reached between the house leaders.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Does the house give unanimous consent to suspend private members' hour?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Supply-Indian Affairs SUPPLY
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Richard in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT

[Stage Direction]
Administration-
1. Departmental administration, including grants as detailed in the estimates, $2,196,100.
Robert John (Bud) Orange: Mr. Chairman, I realize the urgency of approving the minister's estimates.
I am sure that he appreciates, as I do, the agreement of members of all parties to proceed with the estimates. Consequently I will try to be as brief as possible in my remaining remarks.
The great concern of many northern people is with the growth and development of the educational system in the territories. I think it would be only fair to say that the function of education is to equip the individual to exist in his environment. It has been stated that the educational system in the north at the present time is not designed to enable the average student to live in the present northern environment; it is designed to equip an individual to exist in an individual society.
In effect, Mr. Chairman, what we are suggesting here is that the educational system, which is based on southern curricula and standards in many respects, is not meeting the total requirements of the many and varied people who live in the north. We recognize that there is a great difference between the urban centres, metropolises such as Yellowknife, and the small Arctic settlements such as Arctic Bay and Pond Inlet. This is the dilemma in which the educational authorities now find themselves. This is the dilemma that the people of the north are concerned about.
I can think of no better way to make a positive suggestion than to refer the minister to an editorial in The Drum, one of our six northern weekly newspapers, in which it is suggested that following the report of the Carrothers commission and two other boards of inquiry into particular aspects of northern life possibly a board of inquiry on education in the Northwest Territories might now be established to examine the needs and the perspective of territorial educational programs and requirements. This board of inquiry would start its investigating, as suggested by the editor of The Drum, at the nursery school age and go on all the way through to university level. Perhaps the minister would like to take this matter under consideration. I

November 18. 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs doubt very much that he will have the opportunity to express any views on it at this stage, but I should like him to consider it for the future.
During the course of our discussion of his estimates I hope we will hear from the minister with regard to adult education. I say this because I am afraid that the older generation of northern peoples will be lost in the face of the technological changes which are coming to them inevitably and over which they have no control but with which they must live. We cannot forget about our older people. I now that in terms of our Eskimo housing program adult education plays a great and significant role. I would ask the minister to do what he can to strengthen adult education, in my opinion probably the most important aspect of the total educational system.
I hope that the minister will also be able to give us some idea about school construction, particularly in the major centres such as Cambridge Bay, Coppermine, Aklavik and Frobisher Bay. I hope the minister will be able to provide us with some explanation of the problems of northern construction, not the quality of it but the timing. I was in Providence, a delightful little community on the Mackenzie River, toward the end of August where plans have been in the mill for the last two years to build a two-classroom school. Tenders were called early in the year but for some reason or other the contractor could not get around to building the school in time for opening on September 1. Had he met his commitments in accordance with the tender called the school would have been ready. It was a small construction job which he could have completed in a very short time.
As I mentioned earlier, Mr. Chairman, the roads program is an exciting one as far as northerners are concerned. This year we saw completion of the highway to Fort Smith. This particular section of the road is one for which the people of Fort Smith are very grateful to this government. It was cancelled in 1962 but action wras commenced in 1964 to complete the road and the department was able to find sufficient funds to complete the program one year ahead of time. However, I should like to hear from the minister about programs for the coming years. I should also like to suggest to him that in the development of a roads program for the future consultation be had not only with the government agencies concerned but with the private sectors of the community, particularly the mining industry. It seems to me that this is one area in which the private 
sector must be consulted; otherwise the ideas and views in connection therewith are those of the civil service alone.
There are many other items I should mention. For example, with regard to housing Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is now moving into the north and for this we express our appreciation. We think it is about time it did so. I have seen many squalid communities in the north. One serious problem with regard to Indian housing is-


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. I must advise the hon. member that the time allotted to him has expired.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, could we not agree to allow the hon. member to finish his remarks?


Herman Maxwell Batten: Is it agreed that the committee will allow the hon. member to continue his remarks?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Robert John (Bud) Orange: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the members of the committee. I visited communities such as Providence during the summer months and in the months of September, October and early November of last year and I found the housing conditions of the people living in these communities pretty deplorable. They were squalid. We appreciate that the new Indian housing program will improve these conditions, but in the meantime what is to happen to the people living in these substandard houses?
I inquired into this matter, Mr. Chairman, and this is what I was told. Because of the changes announced earlier, Indian affairs in the Northwest Territories are now the responsibility of what we commonly refer to as northern affairs, and I was told that as a result money for the repair and maintenance of Indian housing was not available. The minister knows my views on this subject and I say to him, for heaven's sake to do something for these people, so that those who do not move into new houses will at least live in warm and dry quarters and can keep their children warm and dry. This is an investment in humanity and in the Canadian people.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
I became concerned about the development of electrical power supply in the north. Again speaking of Indian housing, in the community of Fort Rae 25 homes were built this year. In
November 18. 1966



addition, the department added two temporary classrooms and four sets of new living quarters. I understand that the power supply was inadequate for the new construction and somehow or other there was no co-ordination to provide a hook-up between the government-owned buildings and the Indian housing.
I hope that by the time Christmas rolls round the Indian houses and the new classrooms as well as other new homes will have electrical services.
I should like to talk about economic development. The minister has talked about resource development, and we have heard him make many speeches about this with which I agree. The future of Canada and of the north rests in the resources to be found in the north. We believe they are there. We see on North Baffin Island the Mary River project which is an attempt to exploit hundreds of millions of tons of high grade iron ore. There are difficulties in mining the ore and bringing it to market, but we see the example set by the members of the community at Pine Point.
We know there is the possibility that oil exists. Finds such as the Rainbow field may extend throughout the Northwest Territories. We know of major mineral deposits. There is a development fund which is intended to encourage resource development, possibly on a smaller scale, in the territories. We must not forget, nevertheless, that people are still living in the north who will not participate in this resource development. I am referring to the development of other economic ventures and specifically to arts and crafts.
We have communities engaged in arts and crafts at Baker Lake and Rankin Inlet. Regrettably, difficulties have arisen. It is almost impossible to find people to go into the arts and crafts business which has been developed at Baker Lake. This program received tremendous press coverage outside the territories but because no one was able to carry on the project it failed, the result being that the drop-off affected the economy of the area. At Rankin Inlet, because of disagreement between two or three people involved in the promotion of a certain type of handicraft, the articles made could not be brought to market. There is a ceramics project at Rankin. One year ago it appeared that the industry would do excellently by selling in southern Canada, but nothing has happened so far.
I wish to draw attention also to the development of service industries in northern communities. Those of us who were on the northern affairs committee met some of the people
Supply-Indian Affairs involved in the delivery of water and the provision of sewer services under private contract at Frobisher Bay. We also met the members of Inook Limited, an Eskimo company at Frobisher Bay engaged in janitorial services in the community. While on the subject we must not forget the programs having to do with fishing and the development of like resources at Hay River and Fort Resolution. The problems existing have to do with the fish packing plants and conditions in those plants. Another thing to be looked at is the co-operative development by those fishermen who are fishing in Great Slave lake. We must see to it that they receive an adequate return for their work.
I want to refer to the welfare services throughout the Northwest Territories. Welfare is primarily a territorial responsibility. Because of the peculiar nature of the divided responsibility in the territories, Indians and Eskimos are the responsibility of the federal government at this time. There have been suggestions that as many functions as possible of the federal government which are territorial in nature be taken over by the territorial government. Welfare services in the past have suffered because of there being three or four programs, one for Indians, another for Eskimos, another for territorial residents and another still for residents of certain municipalities.
There is co-ordination now between the various services but I believe there is a lack of trained local people participating in welfare services. Let me tell the minister a little story about a small community called Igloolik situated in the Foxe basin about 75 miles north of a main D.E.W. line site. The only way to get there in the summer is by boat, and if you hit it at this time of the year it gets a little cold. The Eskimo council spoke to me this year and they said that they want to see the administration of welfare become the responsibility of the people themselves, and that they would form a committee to decide which persons would be eligible in their opinion for welfare assistance. I draw this to the attention of the minister, despite the fact that I know that professional social workers may think what is happening there is heresy. Perhaps times are changing.
I ask the minister, in spite of his many problems concerning parks, conservation, wildlife and Indian affairs, to come to the north. We want to see more of him. Let him take a trip by himself or with a few other

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs people and visit some of our small communities during the winter months when the days are short and the weather cold. I hope he may have the opportunity to sit down and talk with the people I have referred to, the social workers and administrators and members of community councils, so that he may see another aspect of northern Canada. I am not critical, but I do not think the minister has had the opportunity to do this. If he wants an itinerary I should be delighted to make one up for him.
May I quote a few words from the maiden speech of Professor Robert Williamson delivered at the territorial council meeting at Keewatin in the Northwest Territories. He was referring to the development of the northern peoples and their country and he said:
Depend on it, then, that elsewhere in the world we are being watched. In this context, certainly our responsibilities here are great, but because of our present stage of constitutional development this situation also points the finger of decision directly at the federal minister. With the support of his cabinet and parliamentary colleagues, he has it within his reach to go down in history as the man who made possible the proud standing-forth of the northern people and the sound completion of our confederation.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)
In this he can be sure of the thoughtful and vigorous support of the north. Against this background, then, we might well say "The world is watching you, Arthur Laing".


Mr. Laprise:: Mr. Chairman, we heard this afternoon many things about the Northwest Territories and, in my opinion, among all the fine speeches delivered on the matter, those of the main representatives of the north, the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) and the hon. member for the Northwest Territories (Mr. Orange) have retained our attention the most.
The representative for Yukon has the habit of interesting us by what he says, no matter how, and I was greatly surprised by his remarks. Frankly, Mr. Chairman, it would be really interesting to see him-if that ever happens-at the head of a province called the Yukon.
But I would like here to make a suggestion to him which might settle many problems or bring a solution to several problems, which arise now concerning the Yukon. It would be to join this territory to the province located to the south, British Columbia. With a creditist administration, a modern administration, the member for Yukon could obtain many solutions to all the problems which arise.

I was also much interested in the proposals and suggestions made by the hon. member for the Northwest Territories, and I had the opportunity last summer to visit the territories with the committee; that trip was really an eye-opener.
One is sometimes disappointed at first when visiting that vast area of our country, but after analysing it and talking with local people one sees things in a new light and soon becomes aware of all the future prospects in the Northwest Territories.
I am sure that the suggestions of the member for that large riding will be fully looked into and will not be ignored.
We also realize the importance of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, when we think that this year the minister is asking us to vote some estimates amounting to $177,957,600, that is an increase of $26 million over last year. We thus realize the importance of the Northwest Territories and the Yukon, and the citizens of the southern part of the country can increasingly look towards the north where can be noted various developments which are beginning to enhance the beauty and advantages of the Northwest Territories.
During the trip which I had the privilege to make during the summer, I was in a position to find out that there is a lack of communication between the officials, namely the white men, and the natives, namely the Indians and Eskimos.
In some of the localities we visited, there was a closer approach which seemed beneficial; on the other hand, in some others, we noticed that the Indians and Eskimos seemed quite remote from the administration. What struck me the most, was that the communities farther north seemed to be the ones where the Eskimos were participating to a greater extent in the administration of their council and their area. As we were getting to the communities further south of the territories, we noticed that it was just the opposite.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the minister will admit that in appointing or inviting officials to go and work in those territories or communities, we should give a very special attention to their selection, so as to encourage the Eskimos and Indians to provide for their own needs, to administer their own affairs and to participate to a greater extent in the administration of their community or territory.
I have come to the conclusion that Eskimos and Indians of the Northwest Territories have a greater need for missionaries who adapt
November 18, 1966

themselves to serve them than public servants who adjust them to satisfy their own purposes. I think that when public servants are selected-and I will frankly admit that there are not too many people who offer to go to the Territories-an effort should be made to find, even among laymen, people who have the call of the missionary and want to serve.
I was also able to see that, in some places anyway, our faults, our vices, were accepted more easily than our qualities. I therefore feel that, in that respect, we can improve the services we extend to the Northwest Territories, and particularly to the Yukon.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
Mention was made this afternoon of the Carrothers report on the administration or evolution of government in the Northwest Territories. I fully agree with the recommendations of the commission to the effect that granting a provincial charter to the Northwest Territories is not so pressing, so urgent, that it cannot be put off for a few years. I also welcomed the suggestion on the choice of a centre to become the capital when the province is founded.
In fact, Yellowknife is the administrative centre, or the bureaucratic centre, if you wish, but it is also that of private industry which is developing the natural resources. In my opinion, all that constitutes a solid basis for a provincial capital. The recommendation that the commissioner be a resident of the locality of Yellowknife is excellent and cannot but bring favourable results in the development of those territories.
Now, Mr. Chairman, something in particular has caught my attention since I have been a member of the committee on northern affairs and natural resources and I have been able to see it for myself this summer. I mean the great wealth in minerals, gas and oil which is found in those territories, not to mention other resources, and the proposed developments are fantastic. And the committee on northern affairs and natural resources was not the only one to visit the territories during the summer. There was another delegation made up of business men and high officials who visited the north at the request of the minister himself. It has also reported on the wealth which now lies in the soil or subsoil in that area.
And in a news report from Mary River, Northwest Territories, published in L'Action on October 19, 1966, which is not so long ago, we are told:
A mountain of iron ore of such high quality that it could be sent directly towards the blast-furnaces
Supply-Indian Affairs
is waiting to be extracted by a powerful international consortium. Its development could have a considerable impact throughout the eastern Arctic.
And it adds:
The Minister of Northern Affairs, Mr. Arthur Laing, who headed an economic mission of 40 members on a trip to the north, gave his personal approval to a project in Mary River, which is located 130 miles south of Lancaster Sound and at the northern tip of Baffin Island.
Approval is subject however to the endorsement of a group of technicians who will study the project in detail during the next few months, after which a report will be made to the federal cabinet.
It is obvious, Mr. Chairman, that in the Northwest Territories, not only on Baffin Island or at the western extremity of the Territories, there are many deposits of iron, copper, zinc, lead, in short all kinds of minerals. However, I wonder if it is so urgent to develop those resources, since in the Southern areas of our country, there are also many undeveloped ore deposits of all kinds. I want to tell the minister that there are in my riding of Chapleau and in the neighbouring riding of Villeneuve, iron ore deposits of a rather high grade which could be developed economically and with advantage; these deposits are located in the area of Val d'Or, namely in Louvicourt. There are others in an area a little more to the north, near lake Waswanipi, which are close to the highways, the railroads and where there is manpower which would be employed for the development and extraction of the ore existing there.
We find the same situation concerning other kinds of ore. I wonder then if it is really advantageous to invest great amounts of money to build the railroads needed to fetch these minerals and take the necessary people there, who will have to be given accommodation at high prices, to develop these fields, while we have within our reach all the iron ore and all the minerals to meet the present demand.
Mind you, Mr. Chairman-and I want the minister to note this-I am not against expansion and all the developments proposed, but I must add that we should look to easier access at the present time; afterwards, as time goes by, it will be possible, perhaps by more modern, newer methods, to develop more easily the resources of our subsoil.
The article published in L'Action, which I quoted a moment ago, mentions that the companies concerned in the Mary River project now hold mining interests in some fields. The name of Baffinland Iron Mines Ltd. is mentioned as holding interests in the Mary River

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs concession, purchased from British Ungava Exploration Limited; it is also said that Baffinland belongs to a consortium composed of Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Co. Ltd., Consolidated Mining and Smelting of Canada Ltd., Madsen Red Lake Gold Mines Ltd., Falconbridge Nickel Mines, Asbestos Corporation Ltd. and many others.
Mr. Chairman, I suppose that all these mining companies are interested in these developments, all the more so since it is said that the ore is of such a high grade that it would not be necessary to refine it and that it couid be sent directly to the blast furnaces, to be converted into high grade steel. But I am sure that if those mining companies were encouraged to take an interest in the deposits located farther to the south, they would surely be interested in their development and the country's economy would benefit thereby.
I do not intend, Mr. Chairman, to continue my remarks at this time. This afternoon, other topics dealing more particularly with the national parks division have been discussed.
Another member, my hon. friend for Norfolk (Mr. Roxburgh) very ably covered the problem concerning Canadian wildlife and migratory birds; I think nothing can be added to his remarks, and I hope the minister will heed the recommendations made by the hon. member for Norfolk and by the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Herridge) who spoke along the same lines at one stage. I fully endorse what they have said and I am sure the minister will give their remarks special consideration.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman, my remarks will be brief, not only because I wish them to be brief but also because I see the clock is against me and I, for one, recognize that in any case of conflict between myself and time, time must always prevail. First let me make one comment. I wish to pay tribute to the services which were rendered in the Northwest Territories by the retired Mr. Justice Sissons. Mr. Justice Sissons was a colleague of mine in the Peace River bar. I practised before him while he was sitting as a judge. I have known him very well for a great many years. Mr. Justice Sissons has made a remarkable contribution in bringing to the native people of the Northwest Territories in particular our system of justice. He has made many journeys, and I believe the judgments he has made will always remain in our law books as precedents to guide those who come after him. By themselves they pay tribute to

the great perseverance, courage and knowledge of Mr. Justice Sissons. I would be derelict in my duty if I did not make reference to him, particularly in view of the fact that at one time he was a distinguished member of this house. I wish well also to the gentleman who is taking his place.
I heard with interest the remarks of the hon. member for the Northwest Territories. I always listen to him with interest. I particularly enjoyed his peroration to the minister. I suggest that the minister should have three copies made of it, one for his desk in the House of Commons, one to frame and hang on his wall and one to carry with him, because in the days of darkness ahead when the minister has an inclination to worry and run away he will be able to bring out those glorious words spoken by the hon. member for the Northwest Territories and inwardly renew himself, refresh himself, and go forward with the courage which I am sure he is going to need. I say that quite honestly, because the minister has a tremendous responsibility.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)
He is the man charged with the necessity of ushering into this century, particularly the vastly changing and complex part of it in which we now live, the development of that great, starkly beautiful and lonely area, the Northwest Territories, which has been so badly neglected in the past. He has coupled with that the twin responsibility of bringing forward and making adjustments to the association of the Indian and native people of Canada with the rest of the population. These people have also been shamefully neglected in the past.
I wish the minister well in his work and, although I will from time to time have to clobber him about these problems, I hope he will understand that I do so in a spirit of sadness at having to reprove him but also in a spirit of necessity. I am sure he will appreciate my view. His task is a tremendous one and in a job of this kind it is best for all of us to lose sight of partisanship. Partisanship is very essential in this house. We could not get along without it, but there are matters in respect of which partisanship must yield to our duty as Canadians. I hold this view deeply and I respect others who hold the same view. One can only make one decision when there is a conflict between our responsibility as members and our duty as Canadians.
In view of the time I will be able to deal only briefly with some of the subject matters I wish to touch upon. Let me refer to the
November 18, 1966

Alaska highway which was adverted to by the hon. member for Yukon. There must perforce always be land communication between Alaska and the centre of this continent. If that is the case, 40 years from now land communication will still be required. In the name of all that is sensible and reasonable, surely we should give consideration to the fact that the cost of maintaining a gravel highway for a period of 40 years, contrasted with the cost of constructing a paved highway with the suggested improvements referred to by the Sandford research commission, is virtually the same. That report and the report prepared by the Department of Public Works would indicate that there would be virtually no difference in the cost at the expiration of 40 years.
If we maintain the gravel road, at the end of 40 years we will still have a dusty highway which will repel rather than attract people. Yet the cost of maintaining that highway and improving it will be very nearly the same as the cost of paving the highway and maintaining the gravel road during the time the paving is being done. I do not suggest to the minister that the government declare now that it is going to start this improvement right away, but I suggest that the government take that vitally fundamental fact into account, realize that is the sensible course to follow and declare that it intends to follow that course. There is no question whether this is essential; the only question is when it should begin. We must pursue this matter more indefatigably in our discussions with the governments of the United States and British Columbia. I ask the minister to give careful consideration to this suggestion. I have had some discussions with members of the United States government who are concerned about this road and I know of their views. If a categorical statement could be made as to the government's intention, without regard to the timing, it would be very useful.
The same applies to the roads to resources program generally, which the Conservative government so usefully started, and the Mackenzie highway, that great artery into the Northwest Territories. The time has come when we should consider what is happening in the Rainbow Lake area and throughout the north generally. There is an awakening in this great land which I think will provide a stimulant to the federal government to enter into arrangements with the government of Alberta for the joint sharing of the cost of maintaining that part of the highway lying immediately to the south of the Northwest Territories border.
Supply-Indian Affairs I understand that the government of the province of Alberta has indicated its firm intention to launch a yearly program to lay paving toward the north. I think this is an essential policy.
The northern part of Canada lying north of the 55th parallel is like the upper part of a great bowl. Everything flows down into the centre. Our fiscal laws, our economic policies and our monetary measures are all designed to militate against the growth of these areas. If this country is ever going to amount to anything, surely now is the time for us to concentrate and turn our attention to the development of that part of the country which has been neglected. There are grave problems involved, problems in persuading people to live there and in persuading them of the great economic possibilities which exist.
I left a statement for the minister when he was in Peace River recently. It contained a distillation of the views I have held for many years. These are not only my views but views that have been impressed upon me by other people living in the north, and they represent points of view that the government should consider.
I should now like to deal with national parks. Let me direct the minister's attention, as I am sure he knew I would, to Wood Buffalo park. It is the largest national park in the country, and no one could sensibly suggest at this time that there is any likelihood of tourist development there such as the hon. member for Bow River referred to so eloquently and so forcefully a short time ago. It may well be that in the course of the development of our wildlife policy, and I believe this to be the case, a great area of that park will have to be retained in its natural pristine state. The park includes such areas as that which lies along the Peace River where there are great gypsum deposits. Timber areas in the park have been logged for many years under an agreement made pursuant to the National Parks Act. There is even a farming area in the park. The minister should turn his attention immediately to the suggestion that we should carve out of that park area the land lying along the Peace River where these resources are located. I cannot see how there could be any objection to this by those people who are honestly and anxiously concerned about wildlife and natural development within the country.
Having regard to the rest of the park, I suggest that the minister might well enter into an arrangement with the province of Alberta

November 18, 1966
Supply-Indian Affairs for the appointment of a commission composed of an economist, an expert on wildlife and conservation and a geologist to make a detailed and careful investigation and report about the future of this park. I think the situation could be handled in this way rather than by making it a political issue. I believe that if this were done in collaboration with both governments it would be to the benefit of all concerned.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
Finally, I want to deal very briefly in the time left to me with the Indian problem. This is a sad and tragic story. The minister has inherited the problem, as other ministers inherited it before him. Our record in this regard is one of which we cannot be proud. We now begin to see some light ahead. Just recently some Indian people came to this city to see the minister. I understand from a press statement issued today that the minister was not able to see them because they were accompanied by others. I ask the minister to reconsider this decision, if it is not too late.
I do not know who all the other men were, but I know one of those who came. He is a young man from my constituency who is an Indian under the Indian Act. This young man has done a considerable amount of work for his people in the Driftpile Indian reserve and acts in Ottawa and elsewhere as a spokesman for the Indian peoples in Canada. I understand that two men who came here were not members of the Fox Lake band. The people in that band would probably find it difficult to come down here and lay their case intelligently and adequately before the minister: therefore they sent representatives. I would urge the minister to give the most serious consideration to this matter, even though I can well understand the reasons behind his rejection. Nevertheless, it is for each and every one of us to be prepared to stretch a point and make concessions in this regard. This is one concession the minister could make.


Arthur Laing: Mr. Chairman, if at this juncture I could explain the matter, it might satisfy the hon. member. I did see Mr. Daniels and Mr. Samson in the company of a member of the House of Commons from the New Democratic Party and an hon. gentleman from the other place.


Gerald William Baldwin: I thank the minister for that explanation and am very happy that he did see these people. I have known of this situation for some time. I have not raised it in the

house at any time because of what I have said before, namely, that matters of this kind should not be the subject of partisan consideration. I am most thankful that the minister saw these people and hope that something will develop therefrom. I know this area; I have been out there. There is a problem in the area similar to that which exists in many other parts of northern Alberta.
When the Indian affairs department decided to embark on the program of building day schools, these schools were built but from time to time with an inadequate knowledge of the conditions which prevail. Fox Lake is a typical example. In this area there are absolutely no economic opportunities or possibilities. A day school was built. The Indian people, who have a great attachment to and love for their children, moved out, built small houses somewhere around the day school and usually subsisted on nothing but the help they received in the way of welfare payments.
It is absolutely essential that the most careful and anxious consideration be given by the government and the officials of the department to establishing the areas in which day schools are to be built. A great deal of attention must be paid to the wishes of the Indians. It may well be that their wishes do not make sense in the light of the knowledge of the officials of the department. But where there is a conflict, I submit with great deference that the most careful consideration must be given to the wishes of the Indian people. If that had been done in this case, and as it should have been done in the neighbouring reserve of Habay, these problems would not have arisen.
I am happy that the Indian affairs department has resolved itself into subcommittees. I hope these subcommittees will honestly, intelligently and realistically take the opportunity of bringing their views to the Indians and, what is more important, will hear the views of the Indians. I have spoken with the member for Northwest Territories. It is our hope that the trips to our areas will be made in the middle of the winter when conditions are the most difficult, when all the problems of poverty, lack of education and lack of housing accommodation can be seen at their worst. I hope this will be done all over Canada. In that way, while we may not solve the problem, at least fair and reasonable attempts will be made to obtain the views of the people most concerned. In this way we can make a most serious attempt at least to resolve some of the problems.
November 18. 1966


Mr. LeBlanc (Rimouski):: Mr. Chairman, I am very happy today to have the opportunity to express my opinion concerning past accomplishments and to penetrate into this vast area known as the Northwest Territories and the Yukon.
First, I would like to pay tribute to the Canadian government and particularly to the hon. Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (Mr. Laing) for his accomplishments and for the plan they are elaborating to develop this vast area for the benefit of the people living there and also, which is even more important, for the benefit of the Canadian people as a whole.
I had the opportunity last summer, as member of the committee on northern affairs and national resources to visit this immense northern country with a group of members from both sides of the house.
It is my opinion that, in general, people in Canada have an unfavourable impression or rather are ignorant of the nature of this country, what is going on there and the immense wealth to be found in those parts.
I realized that the north country, particularly in summer, is much more interesting, much more attractive than we would be inclined to think. There exists a variety of landscapes and wealth. The beauties of the Arctic can be admired, the tundra, the limited arborescent vegetation, the mountains, particularly in the Yukon and southwestern Northwest Territories. Obviously, the winters are long and severe, but during the summer the long days compensate for the rigors of the winter. Above all else we realized, and it is important that the Canadian people realize it too, that those vast territories are blessed with natural resources which I would qualify as limitless, especially with regard to iron,
Business of the House
copper, oil, gas, fishing and tourism. The territory is naturally not very densely populated.


An hon. Member:: Six o'clock.


Louis Guy LeBlanc: Mr. Chairman, a colleague sitting opposite points out that it is six o'clock. If the house allows me, perhaps I can resume my remarks at the next sitting.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. Is it agreed that the committee call it six o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Jay Waldo Monteith: Could some minister tell us the business for Monday, Mr. Speaker?


Arthur Laing: Mr. Speaker, on Monday the government will be proposing a motion that you do leave the chair for the house to go into committee of supply. I think that debate could take us until Wednesday.


[Stage Direction]
At 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]
10, 10a, 15.

[Stage Direction]
15c, L35a.

[Stage Direction]
1,	la, lc, 5, 5a, 10, 10c, 15, 20, 29, 32c.

[Stage Direction]
1,	5, 10.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, November 21, 1966