1966-06-15

COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
Mr. H. Pil Lessard for Mr. Macaluso presented the seventh report of the standing committee on transport and communications.

[Stage Direction]
Mr. Gerald Laniel (Beauharnois-Salaberry)
presented the fourth report, in English and in
French, of the standing committee on veterans affairs.
[JVote: Text of the foregoing reports appears in today's Votes and Proceedings.]
[English1

Mr. Waller F. Foy (Lamblon West) moved: that the third report of the standing committee on national defence, presented to the house on Thursday, June 9, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[DOT] (2:40 p.m.)

Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Finance) moved: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-200, to amend the Customs Tariff.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Laprise: 1.	Does the presence in this country of Ronald B. Ramsey represent a security risk for Canada?
2.	Has Ronald B. Ramsey made a request for asylum in Canada and, if so, will his request he granted?


Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: 1. The question is 23033-408J
hypothetical. Mr. Ramsey did not apply for landed immigrant status and I therefore was not called on to decide whether he was admissible as a landed immigrant under the Immigration Act.
2.	Mr. Ramsey left Canada after submitting a request for asylum, which was not granted.


C.B.C. COVERAGE OF VISIT OF POPE PAUL
Mr. Allard: 1.	How much did it cost the C.B.C. to produce a special program in the United Nations, during the visit of His Holiness Pope Paul VI in the fall of 1965?
2.	What was the amount of additional and special expenses, either as salary or travel allowance, that the C.B.C. was required to pay to its regular or special employees in order to produce such a program?
3.	Did the employees of the C.B.C. try to obtain an interview with His Holiness Pope Paul VI, which would be recorded on film?
4.	If so, did they meet with a refusal and for what reasons?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secretary of Slate):: I am informed by the C.B.C. as follows:
1.	Basic English radio and television coverage was available from the UN through U. S. networks at minimal cost. Special French radio and television network coverage cost approximately $56,000.
2.	Approximately $200.
3.	The English network public affairs department approached Vatican authorities with a view to obtaining a film interview with the Pope.
4.	The request for an interview was not granted. No reasons were given.
1English1


CENTENNIAL PROGRAM OF FOLK ARTS
Mr. Herridge: 1.	Will the Secretary of State and the centennial commission consider the plans and projects adopted by the National Conference of Ethnic Organizations and Community Folk Arts Councils, held in Ottawa on November 8 and 9, 1964, as an integral part of the centennial program for 1967?
2.	Was a feasibility study for a national conference and centennial folk arts program conducted in the early months of 1964 and, if so (a) what was the total cost (b) was a portion of these costs covered by moneys from the grant of funds by the centennial commission or any other government source and, if so, how much (c) were

June 15, 1966
Questions
the salaries of the conference organizer and of other staff members, during the period of the feasibility study, paid out of funds granted by the centennial commission or from private sources?
3.	Is the salary of the recently appointed executive director of the Canadian Folk Arts Council, and other staff members, paid out of revenues provided by government grant, or out of private sources of revenue?
4.	What were the total costs of the national conference on the folk arts, held in Ottawa in November, 1964, including payment for the transportation and accommodation of delegates?
5.	Was a portion of these costs covered by appropriations from the government grant and, if so, what portion?
6.	Is the Secretary of State planning to provide free headquarters accommodation to the Canadian Folk Arts Council in Ottawa, as indicated at the national conference in November, 1964 and, if so (a) to what extent-wholly or partially (b) will the headquarters staff be financed out of funds supplied by the centennial commission or any other government source?
7.	Were certain cultural groups in the ethnic communities excluded from participation in the national conference at Ottawa in November, 1964, and are any cultural groups of long standing barred from the national program of folk arts in the centennial celebrations?
8.	Does the government have plans regarding the participation of all Canadians in the official celebrations of Canada's 100th anniversary in 1967 and, if so, what are they?
9.	Have any groups of Canadians been excluded from participation in the centennial projects of the Canadian Folk Arts Council and, if so, will the government provide grants to these groups to assist in major cultural programs?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1.	Yes.
2.	Yes. (a) $7,002.35; (b) Yes. The sum of $3,114.35 was paid from a centennial commission grant; (c) Salaries of the conference organizer and his staff members were paid from other sources during the period of the feasibility study.
3.	The salary of the executive director of the Canadian folk arts council and the salaries of his staff members are paid out of revenue provided by a centennial commission grant.
4.	$8,115.66.
5.	Yes. $5,865.65 of a grant by the centennial commission was used.
6.	There are at present no plans for the Secretary of State to provide free headquarters and accommodation to the Canadian Folk Arts Council in Ottawa.
7.	The Canadian Folk Arts Council advises that no cultural groups were barred from the conference at Ottawa in November 1964, nor are any cultural groups of long standing
[Mr. Herridge.l
barred from the national program of folk arts in the centennial celebrations.
8.	By its varied program, which includes promotion in all media, the centennial commission seeks to bring about involvement and participation in centennial activities by as many people as possible throughout Canada.
9.	See answer to 7.


SALE OF C.N.R. PROPERTY, REGINA, SASK.
Mr. Douglas: 1.	Has the C.N.R. sold property formerly occupied by the C.N.R. freight sheds on the northwest corner of Dewdney and Albert in Regina, Saskatchewan?
2.	If tenders were called for the sale of the property (a) when and in what publications (b) who submitted bids (c) what was the amount of each bid (d) who purchased the property (e) what amount was paid for it (f) on what date was purchase made?
3.	If the property was not sold by tender (a) on what basis was the property sold (b) who submitted offers to purchase (c) what was the amount of each offer (d) who expressed an interest in purchasing the property?


Mr. J. A. Byrne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: The management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:-
1.	Yes.
2.	(a) (d) (f). During the months of October and November 1963, the property was advertised for redevelopment on a long term lease basis. Several replies were received; however, none considered acceptable. In June and July 1964, the property was again advertised on the basis of a long term lease or outright sale. One of the proposals submitted was considered acceptable to the railway but the tenderer later withdrew its offer.
Advertisements re this property appeared in the following publications: Winnipeg Tribune, Winnipeg Free Press, Saskatoon Star Phoenix, Regina Leader Post, Calgary Herald, Edmonton Journal, Vancouver Sun Province, Toronto Globe and Mail, Montreal Gazette, Montreal La Presse, Vancouver Journal of Commerce, Financial Post, Financial Times, Canadian Realtor, Montreal Le Devoir.
2.	(b) (c) (e). It is not the practice of the company to disclose the names of firms or persons submitting tenders nor to disclose information respecting proposals received.
3.	(a) Subsequent to the withdrawal of the tender referred to above, another party expressed interest in the property and following negotiations, a right of first refusal expiring May 15, 1965, was granted by the railway. On April 13, 1965, that firm advised the railway that it would not exercise its option
June 15. 1966

rights. On May 8, 1965, an offer was submitted by Mid-West Motors Limited and following consideration a sale was made to that firm at a price, which in the opinion of the railway officers concerned was in keeping with the market value of the property.
3.	(b) (c) (d). Information respecting the transfer of this property from the railway to Mid-West Motors Limited is available in the registrar of titles office, Regina, where the documents have been registered.


CANADIAN LOAN TO JAMAICA
Mr. Godin: 1.	Did the government of Canada borrow to grant its latest loan to Jamaica?
2.	If so (a) what is the interest rate on the amount borrowed by Canada (b) what is the interest rate on the amount lent by Canada (c) if there is a difference between the rates of these two transactions, (i) who covers the difference (ii) In what capacity?


Mitchell William Sharp: 1.	Two development loan agreements have been signed with Jamaica, one for $700,000 and the other for $925,000. Disbursements against the loans are made from the consolidated revenue fund under authority of Appropriation Act Number 10 of December 2 1964. If the receipts of the federal government from all sources are sufficient in any one year to finance total federal disbursements from the consolidated revenue fund, the government does not need to borrow funds for financing disbursements. To the extent that federal receipts are insufficient to meet total disbursements, the government must meet this excess cash requirements by borrowing in one form or another. In addition, borrowing may be necessary to repay debts or make loans.
The total borrowing requirement is attributable to total budgetary and non-budgetary disbursements and cannot be related to any one program approved by parliament such as development loans.
2.	Not applicable. See answer to 1, above.


NATIONAL CAPITAL CENTENNIAL PROJECTS
Mr. Isabelle: 1.	What are the names of the eight municipalities taking part in preparing the national capital centennial projects, as mentioned in the centennial commission's report dated February 1, 1966?
2.	What firm of consultants has been retained to conduct a feasibility study on the national capital program for 1967?
questions
3.	Who are the members of the centennial commission's advisory committee on events scheduled for the national capital area?
4.	What boundaries have been set to the area in which national capital events will take place?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: June 15, 1966
Questions
Executive Committee, Canadian Society of the Arts and Chairman, Sub-committee on the Performing and Visual Arts; The Chairman, Sub-committee on School Programs and *youth Groups'1'; Mrs. H. C. L. Ransom, Past Pres., Local Council of Women and Chairman, Sub-committee on Community Improvement and Beautification; Mr. J. A. Brockie, Province of Ontario; Mr. Simon-Pierre Rainville, Province of Quebec; His Worship Mayor Don Reid, City of Ottawa, His Worship Mayor Marcel D'Amour, City of Hull; Reeve Aubrey Moodie, Twsp. of Nepean; His Worship Mayor G. Grand-maitre, City of Eastview; Reeve Earl Armstrong, Twsp. of Gloucester; His Worship Mayor Jacques Poulin, Town of Gatineau; His Worship Mayor Daniel Lafortune, Town of Gatineau Pointe; His Worship Mayor Eric Acland, Town of Aylmer; Reeve Allan O. Gibbons, Village of Rockcliffe; His Worship Mayor Georges St. Jacques, Town of Hull East; His Worship Mayor Roger Traversy, Templeton; His Worship Mayor John Kearns, Templeton West; His Worship Mayor Jean-Paul Poirier, Municipality of Deschenes; His Worship Mayor Joseph O. Couture, Templeton East; His Worship Mayor Gilbert Nadeau, Municipality of Lucerne; Mr. D. C. Evans, Chief, Ceremonial Div., Centennial Commission; Mr. Arthur Mann, Proj. Off., National Capital Program, Centennial Commission.
a>
Not yet appointed.
[English!


NATIONAL GALLERY SALES OF REPRODUCTIONS
Mr. Stanbury: 1.	How many reproductions were sold by the National Gallery of Canada during each of its past five fiscal years?
2.	Are reproductions sold by the gallery priced to produce a profit, loss, or recovery of cost?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Reproductions of the National Gallery are sold through the Queen's Printer's sales facilities. There are no figures for the year 1961-62. Transfer to the Department of Public Printing and Stationery of the control and supervision of the distribution of National Gallery publications was made that year.
1.	No breakdown in numbers is available of the various items sold, which consist of small study reproductions, large color reproductions for framing, postcards, Christmas cards and catalogues. Inventories of National Gallery publications are under the jurisdiction
IMiss LaMarsh.]
of the Department of Defence Production. Figures for reproduction purchases are as follows for the past four years:
1961-62, No record; 1962-63, 1,738; 1963-64, 6,625; 1964-65, *13,660; 1965-66, 1,700.
* 10,000 of these were a low cost item sold as an advertising piece.
2. Selling price of reproductions is based on recovery of costs.


NEWFOUNDLAND FERRY &quot;JOHN GUY&quot;
Mr. Scoff (Danforth): 1.	When was the ferry that operates between Bell Island and Newfoundland, the John Guy, built?
2.	By what company was this ferry built?
3.	What was the proposed cost of construction and what was the amount of final cost of this ferry?
4.	What is the total amount to date spent on the ferry terminals for the John Guy since the takeover from the Newfoundland government?
5.	Has the federal government had any inspection of the books of the company operating the John Guy since 1960 and, if so, what amount of income or profit was made by the company?
6.	Was the John Guy ferry leased or chartered to any company, if so (a) to what company and what is the address of its head office (b) what were the terms of lease (c) what were the terms of payment?
7.	Is there any insurance on the John Guy and, if so, (a) what amount (b) what government or company holds the insurance policy (c) who paid the first premium and amount of same (d) are the insurance premiums paid up to date (e) what is the name of the agent of the company insuring the John Guy when new?
8.	Were federal government subsidies paid on the John Guy for the years 1960-61-62-63-64-65 and if so, what amounts?
9.	Was the federal government reimbursed each year from 1960 to 1965 on indebtedness and, if so, in what amounts?
10 What has been the income for ferry service of the John Guy for 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964 and 1965?
11.	What is the total amount of indebtedness to date to the federal government from the company operating the John Guy ferry service from Portugal Cove to Bell Island, Newfoundland?
12.	Has the government paid for repairs on the John Guy since she was built, and if so, what amount to date?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. 1960.
2.	Ferguson Industries Ltd., Pictou, N.S.
3.	(a) $1,200,000. (b) $1,171,580.
4.	$43,439 as at March 31, 1966.
5.	The company is required to furnish the Canadian Maritime Commission with a copy of the audited financial statement each year and these statements are reviewed by the
June 15, 1966

commission. The books are also inspected by officers of the commission when annual physical inspections are carried out. No profit is retained by the company; profit, if any, is recaptured by the government.
6.	Yes; (a) Newfoundland Transportation Coy., Ltd., P.O. Box 5626, St. John's, Nfld., (b) annually on a bare-boat basis, (c) charter hire is based on 4 per cent depreciation on actual cost of construction and interest at 51 per cent per annum on the unrecovered cost of construction.
7.	Yes; (a) Hull and machinery-$1,200,000, P. & I.-$1,000,000, (b) Hull and machinery- Marine Office of American Underwriters, P. & I-Lloyds Group, (c) Newfoundland Transportation Coy., Ltd., Hull and machinery-$13,980, P. & I.-$6,512, (d) Yes, (e) Fred W. Evans & Coy., Ltd., Montreal, Que.
8.	Yes. 1960-61, Nil; 1961-62, $274,385; 1962-63, $150,200; 1963-64, $223,285; 1964-65, $275,869; 1965-66, $273,307.
9.	The company has no indebtedness to the federal government.
10.	Nil. All profits have been refunded under the recapture clause in the contract.
11.	Nil.
12.	No.


COLLECTION OF WHARFAGE, BAIE COMEAU AND SEPT-ILES, QUE.
Mr. Blouin: Did the government of Canada collect money for wharfage in 1965 in the following seaports administered by the Department of Transport (a) Baie Comeau, Quebec (b) Sept-Iles, Quebec, and, if so, in each case how much?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Yes; wharfage collected for year ended March 31, 1965: (a) Baie Comeau, Quebec, $60,954; (b) Sept-!les, Quebec, $55,159.


LOSS OF WORKMEN, DOCKYARD, HALIFAX
Mr. Forrestall: 1.	Have any skilled or semi-skilled tradesmen left the employ of the Department of National Defence at Dockyard, Halifax since January 1, 1966 and, if so, how many?
2.	Have any unskilled men left during this same period and, if so, how many?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associate Minister of National Defence):: 1. Yes. Twenty-five have left voluntarily. In addition there have been 76 separations due to retirements because of
Questions
age, completion of term of appointment, death, etc.
2.	Yes. Six have left voluntarily and 69 have separated for similar causes to those indicated in question 1.


* JOHN C. DOYLE-INCOME TAX ASSESSMENTS
Mr. Brand: 1.	What is the present position in the proceedings taken by the Department of National Revenue against John C. Doyle in respect to income tax assessments for the years 1950, 1953 and 1954?
2.	Under an Exchequer Court order in December 1965, were shares in Jubilee Iron Corporation seized on account of income tax indebtedness and, if so, how many shares, and what was the value at the time?
3.	Were any of the said shares sold after seizure, and (a) if so, when (b) if not, what is the market value of the said shares as of this date?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, the answer is as follows:
1.	The income tax assessments issued to John C. Doyle for the years 1950, 1953 and 1954 are presently under appeal to the tax appeal board and the amount of tax payable has not been finally determined. In order to secure payment of the ultimate tax liability, the Department of National Revenue filed a certificate of tax liability and took out a writ of extent in the Exchequer Court of Canada on July 8, 1963 for the income tax assessed for those years. Shares of Jubilee Iron and of other companies were seized under this writ.
2.	From the date of the writ of extent, 220,000 shares of Jubilee Iron were taken into the custody of the Exchequer Court. The Exchequer Court order of December, 1965, permitted Mr. Doyle to convert the shares into cash at not less than $3 per share, the proceeds to be retained in the custody of the court pending determination of the amount of the tax liability. The value of the shares at the date of the order was $3.30 per share.
3.	None of the seized shares of Jubilee Iron Corporation have been sold. Their present quoted market value is around $2 per share.


CANADIAN COMPANIES FILING RETURNS IN U.S.
Mr. Hamilion: Has the securities exchange commission of the United States provided the government of Canada with a list of companies that have voluntarily filed returns to Washington under the "American guide lines" and, if so, what is the list of companies?

June IS, 1966
Questions


Mitchell William Sharp: The securities and exchange commission on April 21, 1966 extended for one year the temporary exemption for foreign issuers from section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. During this period the S.E.C. has contacted those Canadian companies which it believes would qualify under section 12(g), inviting them to provide available information on a voluntary basis.
Although this request of the S.E.C. is being made with the government's knowledge we do not have a list of the Canadian companies who have voluntarily filed returns with the

The United States balance of payments guide lines do not request Canadian companies to provide information.


QUEEN'S PRINTER BOOK STORES
Mr. Allmand: 1.	How many government of Canada (Queen's Printer) book stores have been established in Canada?
2.	What are their locations?
3.	Are these stores used for the distribution of films produced by the National Film Board?
4.	Do these stores produce enough revenue to cover their costs?
5.	Is there any plan to increase the number of these stores?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1. Five.
2.	Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Winnipeg.
3.	No.
4.	Yes.
5.	Yes. Halifax book store planned to open in the fall of 1966.


C.B.C. TELEVISION STATION, SAINT JOHN, N.B.
Mr. Douglas: Has any decision been made as to when construction will begin on the proposed C.B.C. television station in the Saint John-Fredericton area of New Brunswick?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: No. Immediate plans are for construction in Fredericton of a building to house studios and offices for existing radio stations at Saint John and Fredericton.


JERICHO BEACH, B.C.-RECREATIONAL USE
Mrs. Maclnnis (Van-couver-Kingsway): 1.	Is it the intention of the government to open Jericho national defence lands in Vancouver for public recreation purposes?
2.	If so, when?
3.	Will the government consult the Vancouver park board regarding plans for developing Jericho Beach lands before any plans are made public?


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):: 1. A consultant has been engaged to provide a land use plan which might form the basis for future redevelopment. The plan envisages making some property along the ocean front available for public recreation purposes.
2.	No date has been set.
3.	Consultation will be conducted with the appropriate city officials.


POST OFFICE CONSTRUCTION, CAPE BRETON NORTH AND VICTORIA CONSTITUENCY
Mr. Muir (Capo Breton North and Victoria): Has the government any plans for the construction of any new post office buildings in the constituency of Cape Breton North and Victoria, Nova Scotia and, if so (a) what are they (b) in what areas will these buildings be constructed?


Hon. Jean-Pierre Cote (Postmaster General):: The Post Office Department has requested the Department of Public Works to erect a building at Ingonish, Nova Scotia during 1967-68. There are no other post office building projects in the constituency of Cape Breton North and Victoria.


CENTENNIAL, N.S.-RECOGNITION DURING CENTENNIAL YEAR
Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria): 1.	Does the government have any plans to give special recognition to Centennial post office, Inverness county. Nova Scotia, during the celebration of Canada's centennial year?
2.	Are there any other post offices in Canada by that same name and, if so, where are they located?


Joseph Julien Jean-Pierre Côté: 1. No.
2. No.


* CENTENNIAL YEAR PARKING, PARLIAMENT HILL
Mr. Irvine: Are any plans being made to provide sufficient parking facilities on or near Parliament Hill for the
June 15, 1966	COMMONS
great influx of visitors expected in Canada's centennial year and, if so, what are they?


Mr. J. B. Slewarl (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the question is yes, but the planning is not sufficiently advanced to permit an announcement at this time.


QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN
Mr. Caouette: What has been the nature of the loans or of the other debts incurred by foreign nations, individuals or foreign organizations with the government of Canada since 1960?
Return tabled.


MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. Albert Bechard (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, notice of motion for papers No. 143 is acceptable to the government.
Notice of motion for papers No. 140 is acceptable to the government, subject to the usual reservations concerning official documents and the authorization of the government of British Columbia.
Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining notices of motion be allowed to stand.
DEVELOPMENT OF GARIBALDI PARK, B.C. Motion No. 140-Mr. Davis:
That an humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all letters and documents since February 2, 1966, exchanged between the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources and ministers of the province of British Columbia in connection with federal participation in the development of Garibaldi park in British Columbia and all relevant official press statements of the federal government during this period.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
PILOTAGE SURCHARGES ON ST. LAWRENCE Motion No. 143-Mr. Bell (Saini John-Albert):
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all correspondence, papers, or any other documents concerning the negotiations since January, 1966, with respect to the surcharges affecting pilotage on the St. Lawrence waterway system that resulted in the passage of orders in council P.C. 1966-777, -778, and -779, and any others in the same context.
Motion agreed to.
DEBATES	6443
Inquiries of the Ministry EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of Ihe Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, asking him whether the presence of Mr. Chester Ronning in Hanoi means that there is hope of a return to the negotiation table, as between the Hanoi government and the United States, or a reconvening of the Geneva conference?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I would ask my right hon. friend to permit me to reply to his question in this way. It is correct that our former high commissioner to India, Mr. Chester Ronning, is visiting Hanoi at this time. His visit is taking place on the initiative of the Canadian government, and beyond that I am sure the right hon. gentleman would not want to press me at this time.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I do not wish to press for any unnecessary information, and in any event I would be unsuccessful in such an attempt, but I should like to ask the minister whether he can say that the presence in Hanoi of Mr. Ronning, a most esteemable and knowledgeable diplomat, has been approved of in any way through previous consultation with the United States.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, I have indicated the extent to which I wish to answer at this time.


LABOUR RELATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Labour to indicate what success he is having in seeking to avert the strike of Air Canada employees which is scheduled for tonight at midnight. Would he also indicate the extent to which mediation has been effective in order to prevent the strike of the St. Lawrence seaway employees which is scheduled for the day after tomorrow?


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, within the last half hour I have heard from the mediator in the Air Canada dispute, and have been informed that the parties were in close session, which in these

June 15, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry days seems to be the order of the day, until after two o'clock this morning. I understand that the individual parties met again this morning with the mediator and that negotiations are to be resumed this afternoon. It is no overstatement on my part when I say I am highly optimistic that a settlement will be reached before six o'clock today.
In regard to the second part of the question, I received an interim report early this morning from the mediator, Senator MacKenzie, informing me that progress is being made, that relations between the two parties are good and that negotiations are proceeding in a good spirit and in a relaxed atmosphere. He is hopeful that a settlement will be reached, and I expect a further report from him later this day.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the Minister of Labour whether there is any hope that he and the Minister of Transport will personally intervene if some solution is not found before midnight, in view of the fact that this dispute is between a crown corporation and its employees and the Minister of Transport, who is responsible for Air Canada, might be able, along with the Minister of Labour, to effect a settlement?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that the Minister of Transport is following the situation just as closely as I am, and we are both confident that it will not be necessary for either of us to intervene. I have nothing further to say at this time.


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether the Minister of Labour could give the house any assurance that if the air line strike is not settled satisfactorily tonight, the aircraft will continue to fly.


An hon. Member:: Safely.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: That is a hypothetical question, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Minister of Labour, in view of the growing need for experts in mediating labour disputes in which automation is a major cause of controversy, whether there is any plan under way in order to train and recruit people who would be able to provide such service.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman must have been listening to my broadcast last night. The government has been considering such a course for some little time.


Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon):: I should like to ask the Minister of Transport if he has received assurance from officials of T.C.A. that the pilots and other operating personnel will continue operating, notwithstanding any other labour situation.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: I have not put any hypothetical questions to Air Canada. I have been concerned about getting this strike averted.


Erik Nielsen: It is not a hypothetical question, may I submit. I am asking the minister whether he has received assurances from T.C.A. that operating personnel will continue to operate regardless of any other situation.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I submit to the hon. member that the point of order raised by the Minister of Transport was well taken. I recognize that the question is hypothetical.


Erik Nielsen: May I ask the minister if the statement made by the president of T.C.A. has been communicated to the minister, and if it is a fact?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have read the newspapers, just as the hon. gentleman has done. As for any communications, apart from things that are in the press, that may have passed between me and the president of Air Canada, I think in these circumstances the less said about them the better; because almost any statement that anyone could make is apt to affect the negotiations.


Mr. Heward Graffley (Brome-Missisquoi):: May I ask a supplementary question. Do you not think it would have been wise if the Minister of Labour had followed the same procedure during the recent strike that was just settled?


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


FISHERIES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Ron Basford (Vancouver-Burrard):: Mr. Speaker, I have an urgent question for the
June 15, 1966

Minister of Transport in his capacity as Acting Minister of Fisheries. My question arises from a report in this morning's newspaper that British Columbia is defying Ottawa by running logs down the Stellako river, thereby constituting a danger to the salmon spawning grounds in that area. Will the minister take all appropriate, immediate and urgent action to prevent this danger to our salmon resources?


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman was good enough to tell me he was going to ask this question. This morning I have been perhaps more closely engaged in my capacity as Minister of Transport than as Acting Minister of Fisheries. I have a brief, cursory report on this matter, but I think it would be wise for me, before attempting to give any answer, to make further inquiries, which I shall do at the earliest possible moment. Meanwhile I can assure the hon. member that the government will of course take appropriate action.


Stanley Ronald Basford: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the minister's difficulty, and would ask whether in dealing with this matter he would consider asking the province, nicely and politely-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: What an implication.


Stanley Ronald Basford: -to stop the running of logs at least until the situation can be clarified as to the legal jurisdiction and the possible damage to the salmon run.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Mr. Speaker, I have never made a request that was not polite.


SUGGESTED ESTABLISHMENT OF U.K.-CANADIAN PROMOTION GROUP
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George Hees (Northumberland):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Could the Prime Minister give the house some information about the British-Canadian trade promotion group which the Minister of Trade and Commerce spoke of establishing while in London yesterday?


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, this matter is being discussed in

Inquiries of the Ministry general terms in the ministerial committee that my hon. friend knows about. Perhaps when the Minister of Trade and Commerce returns he will be able to make a further report.


INQUIRY FOR RETURN
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. Russell MacEwan (Pictou):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a short question to the Minister of Transport in his capacity as Minister of Transport. I wonder whether the minister would check with his department regarding motion 115, which was passed by this house on April 6, in which I asked for papers, documents, and so on regarding television coverage from Halifax. I would ask that he exhibit the usual expedition to which he referred in the house yesterday.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would be glad to look into this matter, Mr. Speaker, and draw it to the
attention of my colleague the Secretary of State.
1Translation1


AIRPORTS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Martial Asselin (Charlevoix):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the
Minister of Transport.
Does the minister intend to comply with the urgent request made by the Quebecair company and take the necessary steps so that the work done by his department at the Wabush airport will be completed in such a way that Quebecair's flights will leave according to the schedule set up to serve 30 localities in northern Quebec and Labrador. I think that the minister has already received two telegrams from Quebecair which wants to find out his attitude on that matter.
[English!


John Whitney Pickersgill: I have received the message from Quebecair, but I have not received it with very much satisfaction. They knew perfectly well that we are trying to pave this airport to give better service to the community. They knew exactly what arrangements were being made, but they are trying to upset those
June 15. 1966

Inquiries of the Ministry arrangements and delay the work. I am happy to say that the other air line which is serving that community is a great deal more co-operative in the development ol the airport.
[Translation1


Martial Asselin: I wish to ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.
Does the minister know that the work now carried out at the Wabush airport is affecting approximately 80 flights daily as well as 500 passengers and 100 industries in that area? Therefore, could the minister remedy that situation and do something so that the work will be completed to allow-
1English1


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


LABOUR RELATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Michael Siarr (Onlario):: I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Can the minister tell us whether a meeting was held this morning between Mr. Jodoin and representatives of the Canadian Labour Congress and the cabinet committee on the question of nationally established bargaining units?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Not exactly, Mr. Speaker. A meeting was held with C.L.C. officers this morning. The hon. member for Ontario together with other members of the house no doubt will recall that several weeks ago I announced that representations were being made to an ad hoc committee of the cabinet regarding certain views that were put forward by the C.N.T.U. and their associated unions suggesting changes in the Canada Labour Relations Board. This morning the cabinet committee met with the president of the Canadian Labour Congress and several of its executive officers and with the heads of the railway unions to discuss that matter in line with the assurance given a month or so ago.


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question to ask. Was any decision reached at that meeting or was any promise given by the government of any action on this matter?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: No decision was reached. Actually further representations will be made by another group later this afternoon.


John George Diefenbaker: Will the minister say whether the views he expressed yesterday in this regard still stand; that no change in policy is contemplated at this time, in other words, that no consideration will be given to having the Canada Labour Relations Board directed to alter its policy and recognize regional bargaining in industries under federal jurisdiction?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I will be glad to repeat what I have said previously. The matter has been put before the minister but it has never come before the government for action or decision.


Michael Starr: I want to direct a question to the Minister of Labour.
In view of his answer, in which he stated that at this meeting this morning there was a decision reached-does the minister want to correct that statement?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I may be overly tired, because I am sure that I said no decision had been reached. We are to hear a further delegation this afternoon.


John George Diefenbaker: Will the minister say what that further delegation is?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: The teamsters council.


WATER RESOURCES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kooienay West):: wish to address a question to the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys. Will the minister inform the house if Mr. Stewart Udall, secretary of the interior of the United States of America, intends to visit Ottawa on June 23 to have an Arnold Heeney type of discussion with the minister with respect to Canada's national water policy?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: I can confirm the fact that Mr. Udall is coming on June 23 and that the discussion will be a polite and fruitful one, and also say that our discussions will not deal with Canada's water policy but only with the pollution of the waters of the great lakes.
June 15, 1966


Mr, Ron Basford (Vancouver-Burrard):: wish to put a supplementary question to the minister. If the discussion should get round to the subject of water, will the minister assure us that Canadian water is not for sale?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The question is hypothetical.


UNITED NATIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
William Heward Grafftey: The question I wish to address to the Secretary of State for External Affairs is based on some recent reports that have reached me. Is it now the view of the government that a satisfactory procedure can be arranged whereby mainland China will be permitted to attend the next session of the United Nations general assembly?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I consider the question to be of a very general nature involving matters of policy and therefore it cannot be asked at this time.
1Translation1


Martial Asselin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Prime Minister has even helped the Secretary of State for External Affairs to answer. Would the minister now be ready to answer the question?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. He did not help him quick enough.
[English1


HEALTH AND WELFARE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. E. D. Fulion (Kamloops):: In the absence of the Minister of National Health and Welfare may I direct this question to the Prime Minister. Is it the intention of the government to pay to the provinces which decline to accept the federal medicare plan the fiscal equivalent of the payments out of the federal treasury, on the same basis as the arrangement generally known as opting out approved with the province of Quebec in recent years?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Again I would not think this is the type of question that can be asked at the present time. It is a matter of
Inquiries of the Ministry general policy, and I do not think the question can be posed now.


SHIPPING
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport and ask him whether any thought is being given to advancing the opening date for shipments out of Churchill so the backlog of wheat which has resulted from the strike may be moved to importing countries.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would be glad to look into that possibility and any other possibility for advancing the shipments of wheat.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Barry Mather (New Westminster):: should like to ask the Minister of Justice if he is aware of the action taken yesterday by the Canadian Medical Association in calling for compulsory breathalizer tests for im-paried drivers in view of the urgent national problem involved in the slaughter on Canadian highways?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The question as asked cannot be accepted now.


Barry Mather: Ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker.



COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. David MacDonald (Prince):: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. I wonder if the minister can tell the house whether he has given some assurance recently to the heads of government of some of the British West Indian islands that shortly there may be a customs and monetary union between those islands and Canada?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The question should be placed on the order paper.
6448	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry LABOUR CONDITIONS



ST. CATHARINES-REPORTED LAY-OFF AT

[Stage Direction]
mckinnon industries
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: have a question for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the urgency of which arises from the fact that, as he knows, there are some 400 jobs in jeopardy at McKinnon Industries Limited in St. Catharines as a result of the discontinuation of certain production lines. I want to ask the minister whether his department has been asked to make a complete investigation of the situation, and when such an investigation will begin.


Jean Marchand: I received a report on this situation this morning, and we will do all we can for these people who are going to be laid off at the end of June, if my recollection is correct. 1 know that some of the men who are going to be laid off will be rehired at the beginning of September. Perhaps tomorrow I will be in a position to make a more complete report on this situation.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Will the minister be able to tell us today or tomorrow, when he reports, whether those who are displaced for the summer months will be eligible for TAB payments?


Jean Marchand: I believe the employees have to apply for this type of benefit, and I am not aware that they have done so as yet.


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: May I
ask a supplementary question. Will the minister say whether this lay-off results from the Canada-U.S. car treaty?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. This question is argumentative and cannot be accepted.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: On Friday, June 10, in the absence of the Minister of Forestry the Prime Minister took as notice a question that was posed by the hon. member for Portneuf. In my capacity as Acting Minister of Forestry I should like to reply to that question, which dealt with a supplementary subsidy to Quebec farmers for feed grains. On June 7 the

DEBATES	June 15, 1966
Minister of Agriculture announced that the federal government would subsidize the transportation of feed grains from ports in Ontario, that is Prescott, Georgian Bay and Fort William, to Quebec farmers.
I am happy to say that the subsidy can be discontinued. The strike votes which were taken today have resulted in unanimous agreement on a settlement, and at the ports of Montreal and Quebec, the longshoremen will resume work tomorrow morning, and possibly work will be resumed this afternoon at Trois-Rivieres.



PRESS GALLERY MEMBERS ATTENDING NATO COUNCIL MEETING

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: apologize for interrupting again, but this is more or less my welcome home question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. It arises from a certain sensitivity on the part of older members of the press gallery. Will the minister inform the house whether, on his recent trip to the NATO council meeting in Belgium, he invited particular members of the Canadian press corps to attend, and were these press men provided transportation at public expense?


Mr. Speaker:: This question should be put on the order paper.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes.
[DOT] (3:10 p.m.)

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



DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $6,732,100.
Mr. Teillel:: Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention to make a statement this afternoon, because I did make one earlier before the standing committee. However, I thought I should say that the estimates of this department have been given a thorough examination by that standing committee. The committee spent several days on that task, and therefore it is not necessary for me to make any remarks.
I should like to express my admiration and commendation for the manner in which the members of that committee from all parties
June 15, 1966	COMMONS
conducted their work. I want to express, on behalf of the staff of the department, their thanks for the words of commendation and for the co-operation they received from the members of the committee.
I also want to assure the committee that all of the recommendations and suggestions which have been made not only by veterans organizations but, perhaps more particularly, by members of the House of Commons will certainly be given serious consideration. I include in this of course the repeated recommendation of the hon. member for Swift Current-Maple Creek, who has requested that the 365-day overseas limitation for war veterans allowance be removed. I want to assure the committee that if there is any further information which it might be possible for me to provide I will be glad to do so.


Mr. Fane:: Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to note that the estimates for the Department of Veterans Affairs have now come up for consideration in the committee. As a member of the standing committee on veterans affairs I want to express to the minister the pleasure of the committee in having had him present at some of its meetings, and for making the extensive statement he did make. I also wish to tell the minister how unhappy was the committee that he was not able to attend more of its meetings. However, the committee was pleased to note the attendance of representatives of the Department of Veterans Affairs, who were available to answer questions. I refer to such officials as the deputy minister, the assistant deputy minister and the various heads of departments. These officials were available at all times and they conducted themselves in a very fine manner, answering all our questions and assisting us in every way.
Representations were made to us by the Hong Kong veterans and the Royal Canadian Legion. We also discussed the report of Dr. Richardson of the Department of Veterans Affairs on the situation of the Hong Kong veterans.
It is very gratifying to note that statements have been made by the minister and by members of his department to the effect that at last the Hong Kong veterans are about to receive certain considerations for which they have been asking ever since they were discharged from the services.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to
interrupt the hon. gentleman but I think for the sake of clarity, when we speak of the
DEBATES	6449
Supply-Veterans Affairs officials of the department, perhaps in that context the hon. member means the officials of the Canadian Pension Commission. There is a distinction.


Frank John William Fane: Yes, Mr. Chairman, that is very true. I qualified what I said by saying "certain considerations". I did not say that they were getting all they asked for.
While I am speaking about the committee, Mr. Chairman, I should have said that I should like to commend the co-operation of all members of the committee as well as the chairman of the committee for controlling its meetings in the proper manner.
The Royal Canadian Legion did not make any representations to us this time, other than to back up the claims of the Hong Kong veterans, to which consideration was given. It did not want to submit a larger brief covering more subjects until the report of Mr. Justice Mervyn Wood, who is carrying out an investigation into pensions at this time, is submitted. When his report is received the committee hopes that it will be referred to the committee for discussion.
I think, Mr. Chairman, there is very little more that has to be said about the Department of Veterans Affairs estimates, because this is one department that really is not very provocative. There is great unanimity of interest among our veteran members of all parties, and we feel that these estimates should be accepted with very little discussion. Therefore, I should like to bring my remarks to a close in the hope that these estimates will be approved very shortly.


Mr. Ormiston:: Mr. Chairman, I have no wish to hold up the estimates of the minister's department. With the personal reassurance of the minister that all aspects of the problems which have been discussed will be thoroughly examined, I wish only to remind him that when the previous estimates of his department went through earlier this year we made representations regarding the Pension Act, bringing to his attention some of the sections that we would like to see reviewed. Up until this time the minister has given us no assurance that this review has taken place. However, knowing his interest in, and the notice which was taken of, the sections in question I hope that at some time in the near future the minister will give us some idea of what attitude he is taking in connection with this matter.
Another matter is this. I understand that some reorganization of the veterans welfare
June 15, 1966

Supply-Veterans Affairs services branch is taking place, and I think it would be appreciated by members on this side of the house if the minister gave us some idea of what exactly is taking place. I know that Mr. Woods, the superintendent of veterans welfare services in Regina, is in Ottawa doing some preliminary work, but I think we should like to know exactly what is taking place. Are the facilities going to be improved, and what extension of services is anticipated?
I should also like to remind the minister that we understand that some consideration will be given to examining the War Veterans Allowance Act, as he mentioned previously. It is expected and anticipated by veterans on this side that a review of the act will take place at an early date. Other than that, Mr. Chairman, I can only say that we appreciate the efforts the minister has made in the past; and we hope he will give our recommendations active consideration and prepare some statement in relation thereto at an early date in the future.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I have a certain amount of pleasure rising to say a few words on these estimates. It is nearly 21 years since I was first appointed a member of the committee on veterans affairs, which is now known as the standing committee on veterans affairs.
I wholeheartedly support the remarks of the hon. member for Vegreville, who said that our committee carries on its work in a distinctly non-partisan spirit. The hon. member for Vegreville and the hon. member for Kootenay West are miles apart in philosophy and seldom agree on other questions; but we do manage to submerge our differences during the two hours or so that we are at the meetings of this committee. I think it is based on a common war experience which superimposes itself on our otherwise crabby natures.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)
I wish to say to the minister that I appreciate the courtesy with which he has dealt with the questions I have brought to his attention, and his willingness to try to do what he could for certain veterans in my constituency who have faced particular problems arising from a certain development which is taking place in that area, and about which I shall say nothing further. All members of the committee gave the chairman credit for his excellent work.
I wish, also, to pay tribute to the senior officials of the department in Ottawa who appeared before the committee. As usual they
[Mr. Ormiston.l
were extremely willing to explain aspects of the work of their branches of the department, aspects of legislation, and so on. We appreciate the work they are doing in Ottawa. I am sure too that all members of the committee appreciate the work of the officials in the field, wherever they may be located. I may say that in all my experience of the Department of Veterans Affairs I have only had one occasion on which to make any criticism of an official of the department.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: That proves they are human.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Yes. The minister says it only proves they are human. Well, that applies even to the hon. member for Kootenay West. A lot of people think he is a saint, but he is not really.
It has come to be recognized that the Department of Veterans Affairs has pioneered several fields in the administration of pensions and social legislation. A great deal of the work which has been done by the Canadian Pension Commission over the years has been studies by workmen's compensation boards across the country, and in some cases their methods have been patterned on the experience and practices of the commission. I think it is right to give credit where it is due, though on some occasions of course we differ from the views of the commission.
The Veterans Land Act was a pioneer measure in the field of supervised credit. For a number of years this work was undertaken by the department, and the results were watched. It is because of the experience of the administration of the Veterans Land Act with respect to the supervision of farm credit that the Farm Credit Act was brought into being.
The department has also pioneered research into the development of artificial limbs, not only to the advantage of veterans but now, because of recent arrangements, to the advantage of all Canadians who require this service.
The standing committee on veterans affairs has some things to its credit. There is no question about this-it has the best attendance record of any committee of the House of Commons. I am sure every hon. member who is present will support me in that assertion. We do not have to wait for half an hour for a quorum to turn up. I believe this is a tribute to the members of the committee and it indicates their interest in the subject with which they are associated.
June 15. 1966

I wish to make a few comments on the committee's report. I am dealing now with the third report of the standing committee on veterans affairs and I wish to refer to three paragraphs.
Pursuant to its order of reference from the house dated May 3, 1966, your committee has made a thorough examination of the main estimates (196667) of the Department of Veterans Affairs and has agreed to recommend same to house for adoption.
I wish to emphasize in this connection that it was indeed a thorough examination. All the officials from the department answered the questions put to them to the satisfaction of the members of the committee.
Your committee was most pleased with the high degree of efficiency and understanding which mark the administration of all branches of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The committee commends the minister, the deputy minister and the officials of the department for their co-operation and assistance and for the manner in which they supplied detailed answers to questions posed by members of the committee.
Finally, I would like to read the following paragraph:
Your committee would greatly appreciate having the opportunity of examining the Woods report on the work and organization of the Canadian Pension Commission after the said report has been tabled in the house, as well as being granted the authority to study the general problem of pension rates.
That was a recommendation to the house. I want to say the committee was very pleased, as I believe most members of this house were, when the Prime Minister authorized a study to be made of the organization of the Canadian Pension Commission to be conducted under the chairmanship of Mr. Justice Wood. I know that a number of members of this house went down to give the benefit of their views and experience before that body with respect to amendments which might improve administration.
Then we heard from the Hong Kong Veterans Association, and from representatives of the Royal Canadian Legion. We also heard from Dr. Richardson, one of the medical officers to the Canadian Pension Commission, and studied his report. All members of the committee were very pleased at the detailed study which he had given to this question of the Hong Kong veterans, and with his answers to the many questions which were raised. The committee spent a considerable time in preparing a report to the House of Commons based on the representations made on behalf of the Hong Kong veterans.
I think we were very fair and acted with responsibility. I believe our report contains
Supply-Veterans Affairs recommendations which should be readily acceptable to all members of the house. It takes all aspects of the question into consideration, so that we may be fair to the Hong Kong veterans themselves without falling into the trap of creating precedents or administrative difficulties for the Canadian Pension Commission in other directions.
From April 17 to April 22, the 21st convention of the Royal Canadian Legion was held in Montreal. I, together with some other members of the committee, attended as members of the standing committee on veterans affairs. We were very interested in the organization of this convention and in its conduct. Let me say without any hesitation that it was a demonstration of democracy in action. There was no question, there, of delegates lining up at microphones and being cut off without having an opportunity to speak. I heard of another convention where delegates lined up at three different microphones, but they were cut off and the question decided by a show of hands without all the delegates wishing to speak being heard.
At this convention, any delegate coming from any part of Canada, whether five miles from Montreal or 3,000 miles away, was given an opportunity to present his views on any resolution which came before the assembly. This is what was done, and I think it was a demonstration of the functioning of democracy which might well be copied by some other organizations in Canada.


An hon. Member:: No guillotine there.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: No guillotine whatever. And, on occasions, when you get some of these older veterans before a microphone they take a little time to express their views. They can be a little trying on occasions. I am sure I am trying to some of my colleagues on occasion.


Mr. Churchill:: Oh, frequently.


Herbert Wilfred Herridge: I am glad to know it. It shows I am effective.
But these men were listened to-sometimes apparently, with little sympathy from the delegates around them. But the chairman said: Everybody is going to be heard. And apparently everybody was heard, before the question was put on any resolution.
[DOT] (3:30 p.m.)
Now, Mr. Chairman, resolutions arising from that convention will in due course be presented by the Royal Canadian Legion to the standing committee on veterans affairs.
June 15, 1966

Supply-Veterans Affairs There were resolutions with respect to amendments to the Pension Act, the Veterans Land Act, the education assistance act, the administration of D.V.A. hospitals, the armed forces and civil defence, the latter being a very constructive one, and also proposals with respect to a history of Canada for our centennial year. All members of the committee present at the convention were impressed by the serious approach taken to these matters by the representatives of veterans and their dependants, who total approximately 4 million people.
With those few remarks I shall conclude, and trust that later on this year we will have an opportunity to hear representations from the organizations I have mentioned, and others, so that we will be able to make a report to the house that the government will feel inclined to accept.


Mr. Patterson:: Mr. Chairman, the Social Credit party was not able to have a member on the veterans affairs committee this session. Therefore I wish to make a few remarks on this occasion and indicate our support for some of the statements made this afternoon, and to present several proposals that we feel should be emphasized.
I want to join with those who have expressed confidence in the Minister of Veterans Affairs and his officials, and in their sincere efforts to eliminate some of the inequities that still remain in veterans legislation. I have heard many veterans say that this Canadian legislation is among the best in the world. They appreciate that fact; yet there are several problems that still need to be resolved. This is not in any way to question the sincerity of the minister or his officials, or of those who served in like capacities in days gone by. It is just a recognition of the fact that problems arise and that new information comes to hand which points out the need for additional remedial action.
I first wish to mention the question of disability pensions. There has been considerable discussion in the house on this problem. It was raided on many occasions in past years when 1 had the opportunity to serve on the veterans affairs committee, but to date the government has not been able to come up with a satisfactory solution. I appreciate the reference that has been made to the commission that is presently studying this matter, and I hope in the near future action will be taken on it.
[Mr. Herridge.i
Due to the increased cost of living and other factors which enter into the matter, all hon. members are aware of the need to pay constant attention to the requirements of pensioners in all categories. I would draw attention to a resolution on this subject which appears at page 24 of the June edition of The Legionary, and which reads as follows:
Therefore be it resolved that the Royal Canadian Legion renew its request for an immediate increase in the basic rate of disability pension to bring this in line with the salaries of civil servants, which can only be done by increasing the basic rate without further delay to $3,880 per annum.
We in this group heartily support that resolution and ask that attention be given toward providing an immediate increase in the disability pension. Just yesterday I received a letter from a veteran in my own constituency calling this problem to my attention once again.
Another matter which has been brought to my attention by veterans and their organizations in my area has to do with war veterans allowance recipients and their eligibility for old age security benefits. At page 26 of the same issue of The Legionary there appears this resolution:
Therefore be it resolved that old age security be considered as exempt income under the War Veterans Allowance Act.
There is a lengthy preamble to the resolution, setting out the basic reasons why the Legion feels justified in making this request. Once again we in this party give it our support and ask that it be given favourable consideration.
Another matter which I have mentioned in this house from time to time is the application of the benefit of doubt clause. The feeling exists in the minds of many veterans that this clause actually works in reverse, and instead of the commission placing the interests of a veteran first and foremost, many people feel the clause is being used to try to get out of meeting the needs of various veterans. I trust this will be taken into consideration by the department.
I am glad to note the special attention that has been given to the Hong Kong veterans during the course of the veterans affairs committee proceedings. These are in a class by themselves, with particular needs and particular problems, having suffered conditions that were worse than those which many other veterans were called upon to endure.
June 15, 1966	COMMONS
I know the committee has recommended the adoption of the report and passage of the estimates. We agree with this procedure, but we are glad to have this opportunity to bring these matters to the attention of the minister at this time.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I wish to join in general with the observations that have already been made, which in every way have been characterized by that freedom from political considerations that has always been a rule in the house when dealing with veterans affairs.
When the hon. member for Kootenay West made reference to the convention of the Royal Canadian Legion it came to my mind that it was during the lifetime of the administration of which I had the honour to be the head that I was able to recommend to Her Majesty the addition of "Royal" to the name of the Canadian Legion. That was accepted by Her Majesty, and this was the first time among the Legion organizations that this high and honourable designation had been permitted and allowed.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
When I look back over the years, from time to time I am reminded that it was 50 years ago that I had the honour of joining His Majesty's forces. Throughout the period, since the time of the foundation of the Canadian Legion, I have been an active member, until, as is the case with all who have been prime minister of this country, that great body of Canadians conferred upon me the honour of a life membership.
Today, instead of dealing in general with many of the matters which have been considered so thoughtfully by the committee, I am going to restrict myself to just one thing. It is of course known that my views do not coincide with those of others in this house who have an inexorable urge to bring about the committees system. Throughout my period of office, and also while in opposition, my experience has been that the committees system does not operate effectively under parliamentary government. There are exceptions. Those exceptions have to do with matters which are not of a partisan nature and which therefore command the general support of members of the committee. There were those with stars in their eyes in this parliament, as in previous parliaments, who have strongly advocated the committees system.
DEBATES	6453
Supply-Veterans Affairs 1 am one of those who do not accept the committees system as being effective under parliamentary government. I think the experience of the last few months at least might be cited, for, on several occasions, committees have found it necessary to apply to the house for a reduction in their quorum, those reductions being of such a nature as to reduce the committees to virtual inoperation. According to reports, committee after committee has had to adjourn because of lack of a quorum. I should like to point out again that one major exception is the veterans affairs committee, which brings together the members of this house in that fraternity of comradeship which gives them a desire to contribute their best each year during the meetings of this committee.
During the days of the last war those who were ex-service men and ex-service women used to meet together from time to time at dinners and other social functions. I can tell you that those functions were clear evidence that members of this house, however divergent their opinions may be politically, lose all sense of condemnation of one another because of the fact that they have been partners in the service of their country.
The particular item to which I wish to refer has to do with the injustice, as I see it, that is suffered by the veterans who receive the war veterans allowance, better known as the "burnt out" pension. Those who served in the first world war, with the exception of members like the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre who served at the front line in both world wars and who seem to have found the elixir of everlasting youth, are showing their age. Today only a few are under 70 years of age, the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre being one of the exceptions. Many of these veterans are in financial difficulties and straitened circumstances. It is only because they are in financial difficulties in so far as their income is concerned that they receive the war veterans allowance.
I believe Canadians as a whole would support action to remove what many of them believe to be an injustice, namely that, when they become entitled to the old age pension, their war veterans allowance is reduced, the pension being considered as income. Therefore they are denied full privileges in respect of payment under the War Veterans Allowance Act. These men feel a sense of deep injustice. If they had not served, they would receive the old age pension, old age security, or whatever you may designate it. It is theirs

June 15, 1966
Supply-Veterans Affairs by right; every person whatever his or her financial position is entitled to the payment oi the old age pension. They have a very logical argument. Why should they as men and women who served, and whose income otherwise is below the level for entitlement to the war veterans allowance, be discriminated against in the manner in which they now are?
The hon. member for Vegreville, as well as hon. members in all parts of the house, has mentioned this on more than one occasion. Surely this is one change which we could make. The argument is that if we do so, some time long in the future, when young men like the Minister of Veterans Affairs, who served with distinction in the second world war, will have attained the age of qualification for the old age pension, the charge against the public treasury will be a very considerable sum. When we were in office we were faced with this. When parliament passed the last increase in the old age pension, the $10 increase, we specifically provided that the amount of that increase should not be taken into consideration as income which would result in a reduction of the war veterans allowance.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)
It has been said that it will cost the country something to take this stand and make it of general application, but let us not forget to count the cost to those who served and are entitled to war veterans allowances. This cost is something that still causes irritation and annoyance, and sometimes the expression of words that are not completely parliamentary.
The minister in his position, like his predecessors, has administered the department in a way that assures a high degree of responsibility and justice to those who served. While I do not often inject myself into these debates on estimates I am making an appeal to the minister to do something effective in this regard. Dr. Richardson went fully into the contemplated action that is to be taken with regard to Hong Kong veterans. There is no limit, as I see it, to the favourable reaction that would come from those old soldiers who, today, cast their longer shadows toward the east, and it would be a wonderful thing in our centennial year of confederation for Canadians as a whole to express their thoughts of appreciation to those who served by removing from them what they feel so often is an injustice and unfairness.

It is in that spirit that I give the strongest possible support to action being taken. These people are nearing the end of their road and they have given everything. We spend tens of millions of dollars on other things, yet those things would never have been in existence but for the services of those men and women who served. I know that the minister, all who have served, and, indeed all Canadians, would look with favour on action in this regard.


Mr. Carfer:: Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to make any extended remarks at this time because, as other speakers have pointed out, these estimates have been examined very thoroughly by the standing committee, which was unanimous in recommending that they be given speedy approval by this house.
I should, however, like to associate myself with the compliments that have been paid to the chairman of the committee on veterans affairs by those who have preceded me, for the manner in which he carried out his duties and for the fair and impartial way in which he presided over its deliberations. I have been a member of that committee now for 17 years and I do not think I have ever attended any meetings of a former committee at which the zeal of members to safeguard the welfare of veterans and give sympathetic consideration to their problems surpassed that of the members of the committee which has just rendered its report.
I want to express my appreciation also to the minister, the officials of his department, the heads of the agencies of that department including the Canadian Pension Commission, the war veterans allowance board, the Veterans Land Act Administration, the veterans bureau, and the chairman, vice chairman and directors of those agencies for the warm and sympathetic consideration they have always given to the problems of veterans. These people are uniquely fitted to deal with human problems and they are the members of at least one department to which people are more important than material things.
It is evident from representations made by various veterans organizations, members of the standing committee and members of this house that the present basis upon which veterans pensions are determined is no longer adequate, but still a modification of the original basis which was related to salaries or wages paid to unskilled labour. The spirit in which the veterans charter was presented to and passed in this house many years ago was
June 15. 1966

that the veteran was entitled to special treatment over and above the average citizen because of his service to this country, his willingness to serve and risk everything so that the rest of us might be free. That spirit has pervaded our approach to veterans legislation, and nowhere has this been more evident than at the meetings of the present parliamentary committee on veterans affairs.
The time has arrived when we must seek a new basis on which to calculate veterans pensions. I have given some thought to this matter and I should like to put forth the suggestion that we explore the possibility of using the median of civil service salaries as the basis. I have not had time to find out how that median of the last three or four years would compare with the present scale of pensions, but at least it would be a constant basis to be used year after year and would tie up with the cost of living increment calculated over several years.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
Let me point out to the house that I am referring to the median and not the average civil service salary. The median salary is the salary where the number of salaries below is equal to the number of salaries above it. That is the possible basis upon which I suggest veterans pensions might be calculated.
Many other things could be discussed in relation to the Pension Act and the operation of the Pension Commission, but since there is a committee under Mr. Justice Wood examining these matters I think it would be wise to defer any further comment in this regard until he has presented his report.
There are several other matters which I should like once again to bring to the attention of the minister. When I was sitting on the other side of the house I advocated certain things, and I want to go on record now as being still as strongly in favour of them as I ever was in the past. The first of these matters is perhaps a local affair because it has to do with the Newfoundland foresters who served overseas in world war II. We have been advocating for many years that the foresters and seamen be brought under the veterans charter. I do not think this would cost very much in terms of dollars, because they would not receive very much monetary benefit beyond what they are now receiving under the Civilian War Pensions and Allowances Act, but I think it would be a recognition of their service which they have been
Supply-Veterans Affairs seeking so long to attain. While I am talking about the Civilian War Pensions and Allowances Act I should like to bring to the minister's attention the fact that there is a clause in it which discriminates between merchant seamen and foresters. A merchant seaman can qualify for a civilian war allowance provided he served for a period of six months and during that time made at least one trip in dangerous waters.
There are many foresters of world war II who served overseas for six months but are debarred from receiving the civilian war allowance because the act contains a clause which requires them to have signed on for the duration. The first contingent of foresters recruited in Newfoundland was signed up under a contract for six months. They had no option to sign any other contract at that time and no option afterwards, except to renew their contract for a further period. It thus happens that many who served overseas for four years are still debarred from receiving the allowance just because of the technicality that they did not sign up for the duration. When they see a merchant seaman living next door in their own village who served six months and qualified for this allowance they feel, and I think justly so, that they have been discriminated against. I would ask the minister to look into this matter and try to find some way of eliminating this "duration" clause from the legislation.
I should like also to support the representations made by my hon. friend from Vegreville on behalf of the removal of the 3 65-day clause in the War Veterans Allowance Act with respect to veterans of world war I. There are not very many veterans of world war I left. We learned in committee that their average age now is 72. I have been informed by the chairman of the War Veterans Allowance Board that if this clause was eliminated and every veteran who might possibly qualify automatically became eligible, the total cost would be somewhere around $7 million. Of this figure $4 million would be for the increase in allowance and the other $3 million would be for the cost of treatment services, because a recipient of war veterans allowance is automatically entitled to free treatment.
I should like to point out to the minister and the committee that this figure of $7 million is based on the assumption that every single veteran left would qualify. We know this would not be so because the War Veterans Allowance Act has a means test and I
June 15. 1966

Supply-Veterans Affairs doubt very much whether half of these people would qualify; I think half are well enough off that their financial circumstances would not permit them to qualify under the act in any case. This means that the total cost in one year would be somewhere around $3 million, perhaps $3J million, of which $2 million would be for the payment of the allowance and the other $1J million would be for treatment. Since they are 72 I think we can safely say that in 10 years time, by the time they reach the age of 82, the amount expended on these veterans would be negligible.
This means that the average total cost over 10 years would be only around $2 million a year. Time is running out for these old veterans, and in view of the rising cost of living many of them now need additional help. In view of the desire of the people of Canada to give the veteran a little special treatment above that afforded the ordinary citizen, to keep him from going on public relief, I think this 365-day requirement could very well be eliminated from the legislation. The cost to the treasury, when compared with our huge budgets covering expenditures of $7 billion, would be practically negligible.
The only other point I wish to bring to the attention of the minister and the committee also has to do with the War Veterans Allowance Act. This matter concerns the clause which requires a veteran under 60 to be totally and permanently unemployable before he can qualify for war veterans allowance. I think when the War Veterans Allowance Act was introduced we had in mind the old veterans of world war I. We have not paid much attention to the fact that there are now many veterans of world war II who are under 60 and because of their physical condition are no longer able to work. These veterans and their families are suffering real hardship and there is no way in which they can obtain relief because there is in the act this clause requiring that they be totally and permanently unemployable and incapable of maintaining themselves. With the advances that have been made by medical science in recent years it is almost impossible for anyone to be classified as totally and permanently unemployable. If a veteran is unable to work for a period of six months or a year this causes very real hardship and distress to himself and his family, and I believe he is entitled to expect some relief under the veterans charter.


Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I would ask two things: First, that we modify this requirement of being totally and permanently unemployable and, second, that some other means be provided in the War Veterans Allowance Act to supplement the war veterans allowance. The old war veterans who qualify can have extra income up to $220 a month. In addition they can go out and earn $900 a year in casual work. But the young veteran, the veteran of world war II who is unemployable, who is practically an invalid, cannot do this. He cannot work; he cannot supplement his allowance by casual earnings-and very often he has more obligations than those of the world war I veteran because he probably still has children attending school.
He can get only the maximum allowance, which is $161 a month. I believe some method should be devised of supplementing the maximum allowance for the veterans of world war II. I would be very grateful if the minister could give favourable consideration to that request, e (4:10 p.m.)
I have taken more time than I intended, but I feel very strongly about these three items and I could not afford to miss the opportunity of placing them before the house and the minister for consideration.


Mr. Winkler:: I only wish to take a few moments to raise a couple of points. Although I have been a member of the veterans committee, I have not been able to participate in their meetings in the last few months. Nevertheless I would like to place these suggestions before the committee of the whole. First of all, I wish to speak on veterans allowances. It might be that my contribution will prove to be somewhat irrelevant, except for the fact that it concerns veterans and the allowances to which they are entitled.
Before I begin, may I extend my sincere appreciation of the services rendered by the departmental authorities present with us this afternoon. This matter which we are considering is usually beyond the area of those things which we as politicians consider to be important, but I believe that these officials are doing a good job in the area of the policy before them.
I will not speak in particular about the veterans who are eligible for a larger veterans allowance but I wish to speak of veterans who are in receipt of a small service pension and are unable to earn a livelihood, but cannot obtain other assistance because of the
June 15, 1966

veterans allowance they are receiving. I feel the minister should use his good offices to influence the government to ensure that such a pension income will not prevent war veterans from receiving additional benefits under the War Veterans Allowance Act. I know of several cases in the province of Ontario where welfare payments are made according to the elegibility clauses currently effective in the provincial welfare plan. As I said, this may not be immediately relevant to the war veterans allowances, but it is relevant in regard to veterans who find themselves in the position I have described.
My next comment, Mr. Chairman, regards the matter of the Hong Kong veterans. I fully agree with the policy which has been adopted in this regard, that is that such benefits would be extended to all ex-prisoners of war.
I may point out that both the minister and I have knowledge of this matter because we both found ourselves in exactly similar circumstances. I do not wish for one moment to detract from the need of the Hong Kong veterans; nevertheless I wish to point out that I have information on cases that are equally important and demand equal consideration to that which was given the Hong Kong group. Only last Saturday I received a telegram from the wife of a front gunner with whom I had the privilege of serving, and who died of arteriosclerosis very quickly and unexpectedly.
A series of such occurrences has taken place in the last ten years. I also know of another case of a very close friend of mine from Port Credit who has suffered from the illness, and I could name some other cases in the minister's province of which he knows. I should like to point out that one does not usually find such an advanced stage of arteriosclerosis in people of this age, so these are unusual cases. I therefore wish to ask the minister to give every consideration to this group as well, as I am sure he will.


Mr. Cowan:: I was also a member of the veterans committee which has approved these estimates in principle and in detail. As a member of that committee I wish to join the previous speakers in extending thanks for the industry and fairness of our committee chairman, the hon. member for Beauharnois-Salaberry.
However, I rise today with the express purpose of paying tribute to the Minister of Veterans Affairs and also to comment on a situation which was uncovered during our
Supply-Veterans Affairs investigation of the operations of his department. Some time ago I personally congratulated the Minister of Veterans Affairs, Hon. Roger Teillet, because about two years ago hospitals within the purview of the Department of Veterans Affairs introduced a shift differential rate of pay in their operation procedure. This advanced method of treating employees was one that could have been a mountain peak in labour negotiations, conciliation and arbitration for the dominion. However, in our examination of the operations of the medical services of the department an amazing situation disclosing interference by the Civil Service Commission was uncovered, and I wish to draw it to the attention of the house.
Although we are now considering item 1 in the estimates I wish to refer to an item under vote 30 which deals with overtime for the fiscal year 1966-67 which is estimated at $800,000 while in the year 1965-66 it amounted to $630,000. The sum of $800,000 to the uninitiated seems to be a tremendous amount of money to be paying for overtime, but I am advised that it also covers shift differentials. However, it seems to me that the situation which was uncovered in our investigation of the various details of the operation of this department is amazing, and I would go so far as to say it is alarming.
The department is paying a shift differential to the nurses working in the evening and night shifts. We were told that the evening shift starts at 4 p.m. and runs until midnight, while the night shift starts at midnight and runs until 8 a.m., and that the shift differential amounts to 8 cents an hour on the evening shift and 12 cents an hour on the night shift. But what really shocked us was to be told that the Canadian government only pays these nurses a shift differential of 8 cents an hour on the evening shift between 6 p.m. and midnight and 12 cents an hour on the night shift between midnight and 6 a.m. This means that we do not pay these nurses a shift differential from 4 to 6 p.m. nor do we pay them a shift differential from 6 to 8 a.m.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
If I may be allowed to refer to another department of government when we are discussing the estimates on the Department of Veterans Affairs, I should like to point out that I am also a member of the committee on health and welfare. Under that department we find a number of hospitals for Indians and
June 15, 1966

Supply-Veterans Affairs Eskimos. When I made inquiries as to whether or not shift differentials were being paid in the hospitals falling under the Department of National Health and Welfare, I was surprised to find that some of the highly placed officers of the department were not too certain whether shift differentials were being paid. We reminded them of the shift differentials that were being paid by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and they advised they would make a report the following day.
It was only yesterday that we received a typewritten report from the Department of National Health and Welfare with regard to shift differentials in these hospitals. I must read part of it to you because it also covers shift differentials in the Department of Veterans Affairs. This statement is entitled, "Clarification of procedures relating to the payment of overtime and shift differentials in the Department of National Health and Welfare". I quote:
During the committee's review of vote 20, questions were raised concerning the payment of overtime and shift differentials to employees in medical services. These procedures are governed by the civil service regulations-
We are told, however, that in the matter of overtime, operating classes under exempt staff regulations may be granted leave or compensated in cash at the rate of time and one half. In so far as shift differentials are concerned the report states:
A shift differential is paid to employees who work regular shifts between the hours of 6 p.m. and 6 a.m. The shift differential for the evening shift, i.e., between 6 p.m. and midnight is 8 cents per hour and between the hours of midnight and 6 a.m. is 12 cents per hour.
Now, I asked the highly placed authority in the Department of National Health and Welfare if he knew of another employer anywhere in Canada who did not pay the full shift differential for each hour in the shift, that is the evening shift or the night shift. The gentleman, and the several assistants he had with him, nodded their heads in great surprise and said no, they did not know of a single other employer who refused to pay the shift differential for each hour of the shift, as was being done by the government of Canada. When I asked them only yesterday who would be responsible for such a ridiculous situation as a shift differential being paid only for certain hours of a shift, I was told that this aspect would come under the Treasury Board, by authority of the Financial Administration Act.

I intend to follow the matter further because I think it is ridiculous for the government of Canada to be paying these wages under a shift differential heading, when people expect the government to be a model employer and to treat the employees in the civil service with decency, and with regard for the prevailing wage practices throughout the nation as a whole.
When I congratulated the Minister of Veterans Affairs two years ago-and I congratulated him with a sincere and full heart-for having established shift differentials in the payment of nurses in the 11 hospitals, I felt confident that the establishment of shift differentials for nurses in these 11 hospitals right across the Dominion of Canada would serve as a model to other active treatment and chronic hospitals. I felt it might even serve as a spur to other hospitals to establish shift differentials for their employees. I have been rather distressed by the lack of response on the part of other hospitals to shift differentials. I trust that when the minister is summing up matters just before we pass these estimates, and I sincerely hope they will be passed this afternoon, he will make some comment with regard to Sunnybrook Hospital in Toronto.
Sunnybrook Hospital in Toronto is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Veterans Affairs. We understand that if final arrangements are completed it will be turned over to the University of Toronto as a teaching hospital on July 1. The minister has been kind enough to make a statement to me just now, and he says it will not be July 1. I draw to the attention of the minister, for whom I have the highest regard, that there are reports circulating in Toronto and central Ontario to the effect that one of the stumbling blocks to the transfer of Sunnybrook Hospital to the University of Toronto as a teaching hospital is the opposition in the province of Ontario to shift differentials which prevail in Sunnybrook Hospital at the moment. This hospital of course will immediately come under the wing of the Ontario Hospital Services Commission. It certainly begins to look as if there is active opposition in Ontario at the provincial level toward shift differentials in hospitals. It is felt that if Sunnybrook Hospital is transferred, with the ridiculous shift differentials that are now being paid, it might serve as a precedent to establish shift differentials elsewhere throughout Ontario in active treatment hospitals.
June 15, 1966	COMMONS
I have referred to this situation because in Toronto we have Riverdale Chronic Hospital in the riding of Broadview, the employees of which were governed by a municipal employees contract. Employment conditions at Riverdale Hospital were certainly much better than in any other hospital in the Toronto area. In fact, at Riverdale Hospital, when the last collective agreement was signed in June, 1964, the starting rate for registered nurses in other hospitals in Toronto was $335 per month and the starting rate at Riverdale was also $335. This increased to $355 after three months of service. In addition to this $20 per month differential there were other certain conditions which were not available in other hospitals such as shift premiums, premium pay for holidays worked, uniform allowance, time and a half for overtime, etc. These conditions made Riverdale sufficiently attractive that it had a full complement of staff for the equipment available in the hospital at that time.
What has happened is that the municipal government in Toronto has now detached Riverdale Hospital from the municipal services and it has been established under an independent board of trustees or governors. It has been placed indirectly under the Ontario Hospital Services Commission, and every step is being taken to eliminate these fringe benefits which the Riverdale Hospital nurses enjoyed, as well as the hospital staff, while they were members of the municipal union. It looks to me as though there is a concerted effort afoot in the province of Ontario to knock hospital wages down to the lowest level from the Ottawa River to Kenora.
Now, in this connection I sincerely hope that the Sunnybrook Hospital, when turned over to the University of Toronto, will continue to pay a shift differential, ridiculously low as it is. I hope the minister will ask assurance it will be maintained as a beacon light in this regard. In January of this year a decision of an arbitration board adjudicating on a dispute between Welland County General Hospital and its service employees was handed down. The mmebers of this arbitration board were Professor H. W. Arthurs, J. David Cromarty and Drummond Wren. In the course of their decision, these gentlemen had some comments that are interesting. They pointed out that in Ontario the employees of hospitals cannot strike, but have to submit to 23033-409
DEBATES	6459
Supply-Veterans Affairs arbitration. Professor Arthurs writes, as recorded on page 6 of the report:
But arbitration is made to substitute for the srtike and should therefore likewise be considered an exercise in discovering labour market realities. This being so, it is to relevant wage comparisons that we must look...
We would also consider the following factors to be relevant:
1. Difficulties encountered by the hospital in recruiting and holding staff (some evidence of the hospital's failure to pay a level of wages high enough to attract workers on the local labour market.)
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)
Further on page 10 Professor Arthurs writes:
This adjustment is important in our calculations because the general labour market obviously affects hospital wages by drawing away hospital workers if substantial disparities in pay levels develop.
There is no question that the wages paid in other industries are affecting the employment of the staffs of hospitals, and these wages should be on a parity. One of the great benefits in the labour market of unionized contracts is shift differentials.
I should like to refer to the question of premium pay for holidays. Why should nurses who are employed in war veterans hospitals be expected to work on Christmas day, Good Friday, civic holidays, Labour day, Victoria day, Canada day and the other national holidays for the same wages as they would receive on an ordinary Monday or Friday in a regular work week? I suggest to the Minister of Veterans Affairs that he should authorize premium pay for the statutory holidays which have been enumerated by this parliament.
I would draw his attention to the fact that in 1964, in manufacturing as a whole, almost three quarters of a million workers, representing 82 per cent of the total, received premium pay for holidays. The source of this information is the Department of Labour's booklet "Working Conditions in Canadian Industry". The proportion has no doubt risen in the two year period since this survey was made, which covers establishments with 15 or more employees.
I should like to give the committee, Mr. Chairman, a breakdown for a few individual industries where over 90 per cent of the non-office employees receive premium pay. In the paper products industry, 67,000 employees receive premium pay. In the pulp and paper industry, 51,000; in the iron and steel products industry, 126,000; in primary iron and

June 15. 1966
Supply-Veterans Affairs steel industry, 33,000 or 100 per cent of the employees; in the transportation equipment industry, 88,000; motor vehicles, parts and accessories, 52,000; and electrical apparatus and supplies, 49,000.
Here are some additional examples in non-manufacturing industries, local governments, etc. In the metal mining industry, 46,000; railways, non-operating, 72,000; urban and suburban transportation, 15,000; telephones, 32,000; public utilities, 30,000; and municipal public works, 32,000. However, Mr. Chairman, when it comes to the working conditions for hospital employees the story is entirely different.
I should like to speak further on this matter but I am anxious to see these estimates passed today. Therefore I would urge the Minister of Veterans Affairs to institute a system of premium rates of pay for holidays for staffs of war veterans hospitals throughout the dominion. I would ask him to see that shift differentials are paid, and that a decent figure is arrived at instead of the 8 cents per hour for six hours out of eight on the evening shift and 12 cents an hour for six hours out of eight on the night shift. Again my congratulations and thanks to the Minister of Veterans Affairs for a job which is being well done.


Mr. MacRae:: Mr. Chairman, I am in the very fortunate position at this point in the consideration of the estimates of having had nearly everything said already for me. However, there are one or two points I should like briefly to cover.
As we know, the estimates have been discussed in the committee on veterans affairs. They have been as thoroughly discussed this year as they were in past years. I should like to add my words of commendation along with those of other hon. members to the chairman of the committee, the hon. member for Beauharnois-Salaberry, and also to the vice chairman of the committee. These two gentlemen were a pleasure to work with, and I am sure that I am echoing the sentiments of other members of the committee when I say that.
The standing committee on veterans affairs is a non-partisan committee, which is the way it should be. There was no partisanship in wartime in this respect. Veterans legislation has been based, and for the most part amended over the years, on non-partisan principles, and it is only right that in the committee there should also be this spirit of non-partisanship.

The right hon. gentleman who is my leader mentioned a few moments ago the number of committees of the House of Commons and the difficulty of getting quorums for them. The hon. member for Kootenay West very rightly said that in this committee there is an especially high record of attendance, and this is all to the good.
I think that one of the faults of our committee system in this house is the fact that we bunch all our committee work into the latter stages of the session. Members who are perhaps deeply interested in four or five subjects find that the whip is after them, trying to get them to attend two or three committees at once which, of course, is just impossible.
I think experience has taught us that it is
much wiser for members to serve on only two, or perhaps three, committees at the most, in which event they can attend the committees. Many of those who serve on the veterans affairs committee devote the major part of their attention to it and perhaps one other committee. That is the case as far as I am concerned. Therefore I would suggest to the government at this time that if the work of these committees could start a little earlier in the session, we could devote more time to committees. It did not take the veterans affairs committee very long, once the committee started to consider the estimates, to clear them up.
Another matter which has been touched on is the report on the Hong Kong veterans. I have read many reports made by commissioners and others, but I do not think I have ever seen or read a finer report than that which has been prepared by Dr. Richardson. This gentleman brought sympathy and understanding, and of course all of his medical and administrative knowledge, to bear on this particular subject, and he has presented an exceptionally fine report.
Many members have been deeply interested in this particular problem of the Hong Kong veterans over the years. My colleague from Athabasca has been pressing this matter for many years, as have many others. I have been interested in the subject for a very special reason. The Royal Rifles of Canada, one of the two battalions which served in Hong Kong, were recruited almost exclusively from the eastern townships, the Gaspe area and Restigouche county in northern New Brunswick. This is my part of Canada, Mr. Chairman, and so many of my friends were
June 15. 1366

in Hong Kong. I saw them before they went there, and I had the opportunity to see them as soon as they arrived home; and there is no question about the maltreatment which these men received while in Hong Kong.
As I said, Dr. Richardson undertook this particular task, to which sympathetic consideration was given by the committee, and he has written a very fine report. Here again I must commend my friend, the chairman of the committee, for the very fine job he did in this regard. I know how hard he has worked; and he has another month's hard work ahead of him before the middle of July.
I omitted at the beginning of my remarks to commend the members of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the chairman of the Pension Commission, the chairman of the War Veterans Allowance Board and all the other officials for the exceptionally fine work they have done. The Department of Veterans Affairs is very fortunate in the calibre of men and women who have served it over the years.
In my own case, my relationship has been an especially happy one. This does not mean of course that all of the cases which I have taken to the Pension Commission, for example, or to the War Veterans Allowance Board, under Colonel Cromb, have been adjudicated upon in the way 1 had hoped; but I do know that they have given careful and thorough consideration to these cases, and if they could not be ruled upon as I had hoped, then it was not their fault. They must follow the regulations and the act, of course.
Very brief mention, Mr. Chairman, has been made of the commission headed by Mr. Justice Mervyn Wood, who is looking into the organization of the Pension Commission. Again we have here an excellent man. I have known Mr. Justice Wood for many years. We served together on the dominion command of the Canadian Legion many years ago, and I look forward to his report. If I am not mistaken, I understand that this report will also be referred to the standing committee for study, which I gather is a not too common a procedure. Nevertheless if this be the case the report will receive careful consideration.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)
When my leader was speaking a few moments ago he raised the question of veterans pensions. I believe something must now be done to increase the pensions paid to veterans. What veterans are paid may seem a

Supply-Veterans Affairs considerable sum to certain people; but everything is relative. If in the 'thirties they had been getting what a veteran is receiving now, they would have been able to live, if not like millionaires, then almost like them. But we are living in a different age and today we are facing the tremendous problems caused by inflation.
Too many of us in government and elsewhere, are prone to hide our heads in the sand rather than admit the tremendous increase which has taken place in the cost of living. In the United States and in this country I believe we are now on the verge of runaway inflation. The people upon whom the burden falls most heavily are the recipients of war veterans allowances, those receiving pensions under the Pension Act, civil service superannuates, and others on fixed incomes which they can do nothing to increase.
All of us know what organized labour can do; we have had an example of that in the last few days. They can strike, and in many cases they can get substantial increases. Pensioners and those on war veterans allowances have nobody to speak for them but ourselves. We must speak for them, and I urge the minister to consider this question very deeply, now, and to recommend a substantial increase. I realize he will have to face Treasury Board, but I ask him to bring his full talents and energy to this particular matter.
The hon. member for Kootenay West mentioned the Legion convention. This convention was held, as we know, in Montreal in May and some of us had the opportunity of attending. The Legion has had excellent leadership over the years. It is a fine organization dedicated to the welfare of all veterans. In the man who was elected this year to head the legion for the next two years, Mr. Ronald MacBeath, of Moncton, the Legion will have an exceptional leader. Mr. MacBeath has been a personal friend of mine for a long time. I know of his many fine qualities and I think the government as well as the Legion will benefit from his wise counsel.
I will not spend any further time discussing the estimates themselves. They have been examined very carefully by a good committee. I simply commend them to hon. members of this house so that they may now be passed.


Mr. Allard:: Supply-Veterans Affairs on the estimates to the Department of Veterans Affairs to point out to the minister the discrimination which still prevails against French Canadians in his department and the agencies which come under his jurisdiction.
I understand that the minister is not entirely responsible for such a situation, because he inherited it from his predecessors and the previous governments. But since we will be commemorating the centennial next year, an occasion when life in Canada must be celebrated throughout the country, I think it would be appropriate to remedy as many cases of injustice as possible. To that effect, I ask the minister to make an unofficial inquiry within his department and its various agencies; he will easily find out, if he does not know it already after the numerous complaints made, that French Canadians in his department and other agencies under his jurisdiction, as well as the French Canadians who deal with his department's agencies, do not get justice and are not treated as they should be in this country.
For instance, Mr. Chairman, I refer the minister to page 17 of a booklet entitled; "The last chance" which I wrote in 1963. He can get a copy of it right here in the library. He will find on page 17 that, among the civil servants getting an annual salary of $5,000 or over, there are only 10 per cent of French Canadians. It is the general average in all departments.
If you study the various departments one by one, you will find that the ratio in the Department of Veterans Affairs is lower than that average, that is 9.1 per cent.
Some might bring up the argument, which is sometimes heard, that there are not enough French Canadians in some regions of the country, that the standards of competence are to blame, etc. We are used to such arguments. But I want to point out to the minister a very obvious example which I take in the province of Quebec, more precisely from the Queen Mary hospital in Montreal which comes under his department.
That hospital is located in the province of Quebec, whose population is made up of over 80 per cent of French Canadians. Well, I say that there again we are not getting our fair share and that the minister would be well advised, in the interest of peaceful relations throughout this country and give the necessary directives to the officials of the Queen Mary hospital in Montreal.

He can refer to the answer given by his officials and himself to question No. 1,260 I had put on the order paper a few weeks ago.
I asked a first question. It was after many complaints made to me by constituents in Sherbrooke and the province of Quebec to the effect that when French Canadian veterans went to Montreal to be treated, they could not speak in their own language with the physicians there. They wanted to speak, to explain their symptoms to physicians speaking their language, but they could not, and that in the province of Quebec, stronghold of the French Canadian nation. Well, this is not admissible in 1966.
Mr. Chairman, the first part of my question read as follows:
How many French speaking physicians are there at the Queen Mary hospital in Montreal to admit and examine French speaking veterans.
The answer given me was as follows;
Patients at Queen Mary veterans' hospital are examined and admitted from the out patient clinic. This is staffed by 10 part-time general practitioners. Three of these are French speaking.
Well, Mr. Chairman, in the province of Quebec where the great majority of the people are French Canadians, out of these ten physicians, only three are French Canadians. I surely do not want to be told that with all the excellence of its medical body and its physicians, the province of Quebec does not have enough qualified physicians to be able to treat our veterans at the Queen Mary hospital. We should have a majority of French speaking physicians in that hospital coming under the jurisdiction of the department.
Another part of the question was as follows:
What Is the total number of medical practitioners or specialists at this hospital, and of this number, how many are French speaking?
The answer was:
There are a total of 148 part-time medical practitioners and specialists at the hospital. Of these, 40 are French.
There again, Mr. Chairman, less than a third. Well, this is unfair, the complaints are well-founded, and supported by official statistics given to us here in the house. We do not complain on a sentimental basis; we complain on matter of representation which should be given to us.
As far as the other parts of the question are concerned, the minister could find answers showing this adverse and discriminatory situation.
June 15. 1966

In part 5 of my question, for instance, I asked:
What Is the total number of... and other staff employed at this hospital, and of this number, how many are French speaking?
Again, the situation is disastrous. In the case of nurses, for instance, out of a total of 179 only 83 are French speaking, that is less than half.
Mr. Chairman, I do not want to dwell on the matter any longer, but I feel that it is my duty to remind the hon. minister of the situation. I know the minister is favourably disposed, that he endeavours to do a good job, but we would appreciate it greatly if he immediately made an informal investigation, in his department and its agencies, and more particularly at the Queen Mary hospital. Even if, as we are told, there are three doctors out of ten, or 40 doctors out of 148, most of the French Canadian veterans from Sherbrooke and the area come back with grievances, and complain that when they go to Queen Mary hospital they cannot converse in French.
They always have to deal with an English speaking doctor, one who does not understand French. Quite frequently, the veteran comes back-and this affects his health-and his allowance is revised, or decreased or refused precisely because he was unable to speak freely and frankly with a doctor speaking his own tongue, in the province of Quebec.
So these are real grievances. Questions arise in one's mind when discussing the first report of the Laurendeau-Dunton Commission, which report establishes that there is a serious crisis in Canada, a crisis which has its root in Quebec, in spite of what newspapers say in different provinces. Attempts have been made to hush the problem, but it exists, Mr. Chairman. The crisis is serious, but it is not insoluble. That is why French Canadians, in 1966, are asking for a solution from the ministers, from the government, who, in certain spheres, have indicated favourable dispositions, especially the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) through his new policy on bilingualism. Even if it does not extend very far, steps are being taken in the right direction. If we want to solve those problems, French Canadians must at long last be treated as they deserve, so that the centennial to be celebrated next year might truly be of special significance to them.
Supply-Veterans Affairs
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
[English1


Mr. Chatterion:: Mr. Chairman, I hope to take not more than about two minutes. I want to bring to the attention of the minister, if he has not realized it by now, that the veterans organizations have not had a chance to appear before the standing committee on veterans affairs on the legislation the government has introduced. On September 29, 1964, the minister promised that certain legislation would be brought in, and we certainly understood that this would include amendments to the Pension Act. Possibly through a misunderstanding, the veterans organizations did not appear before the standing committee this year on the Pension Act, or to discuss the rates in any event, except in so far as Hong Kong veterans are concerned.
I urge the minister to try to have the proposed legislation with reference to the Pension Act ready shortly after the summer recess, in order that the veterans organizations may speak on it before the standing committee, because there is great dissatisfaction about the pension rates.
It will be recalled that the minister introduced legislation just three days before the recess last year and there was no chance to submit it to the standing committee on veterans affairs. He should try to have his proposed legislation with reference to the Pension Act, and possibly the War Veterans Allowance Act, ready shortly after the summer recess so that veterans organizations may appear before the committee and have their opinions heard by the committee.
[Translation1


Mr. Latulippe:: Mr. Chairman, I am glad to take part in this debate. I join all those who agree to the veterans' requests. They ask for many things, but it really comes down to very little. They ask for a better treatment and for a higher pension so as to be able to live decently. They ask that their pension be raised in accordance with the present cost of living.
Mr. Chairman, I should like to tell the minister that I am full of admiration for his good work, his spirit of self-denial and for everything he does for the veterans. The minister is a worthy man. I saw him at work in many places and, in my opinion, he does honour to Canadians and to the department for which he is responsible.
Now, I agree with the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Allard), who spoke a while

June 15, 1966
Supply-Veterans Affairs ago, when he says that French Canadians are not sufficiently represented in the hospitals in key positions. I agree with him in that respect. I know that the minister, a man of good will, is going to do something in this regard.
Now, I will come to the veterans. I am from the county of Compton and I was told that Compton contributed more Canadians who took part in the Japanese war than any other riding. It is an honour for me to represent this constituency and I want to honour them. Now, my fellow-citizens have been ill-treated, as we say; they were submitted to an awful treatment. Because of the atrocities they suffered they are entitled to our admiration, our consideration, our spirit of co-operation and fairness. I think they were the victims of injustice in some cases. Indeed, these veterans were not treated with all the dignity and justice they were entitled to. Consequently, I would be remiss in not defending them in that respect.
Mr. Chairman, we were able during these awful wars to provide them with everything they needed. We have provided them with means of transport and with a pension for themselves and for their family; we have treated them very well during the war. We have even promised them that the old days were over in Canada, the dark days, the days of hardship. We have asked them to fight for civilization, for our basic freedoms, for religion, for security, for what is dearest to our hearts. They have agreed to defend all these things. For us Canadians, for the protection of our laws and freedoms, those people did all we had asked them to do.
Mr. Chairman, since we have provided them with all those things during the war, since we have promised them a lot, I believe that now that the war is over we should find it easy to keep our promises.
During the war, Mr. Chairman, men were not working, they were destroying. Many soldiers were busy destroying. They were neither producers nor builders.
They were not engaged in production but in destruction. Canadians who then remained in Canada contributed to this huge destruction.
Now the war is over. The men have returned home and many of them contribute to Canadian production, thus increasing the volume of our products, and are they to believe that there is a shortage of goods in Canada, that Canada cannot afford to provide for their welfare needs?

Well, Mr. Chairman, it does not make sense. Canada has everything to feed and clothe those people adequately. It did it in wartime and it can do it in peacetime.
A large number of people need security, need us, need justice in this country. Some are sick, though this is denied in certain quarters.


The Deputy Chairman:: Order.

Order. In order that the house may proceed to consideration of private members business it is my duty to rise, report progress and request leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house.
Progress reported.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: When shall the committee have leave to sit again; at the next sitting of the house?


John B. Stewart: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order; I should like to suggest that we dispense with the private members hour this afternoon. The committee has been making progress such as would lead us to believe we might conclude the estimates of this department prior to six o'clock. I believe that would be desirable. Therefore I should like to suggest to the house, through you sir, that the committee now resume its discussion of the estimates of the Department of Veterans Affairs.


Mr. Knowles:: We agree, Mr. Speaker, but we would ask that the word be "postpone"
rather than "dispense".


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Does the house agree
that we defer the private members hour?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Batten in the chair.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 1. Departmental Administration, $6,732,100.


Maurice Rinfret: The hon. member
for Compton-Frontenac.
[Translation1


Henry P. Latulippe: Mr. Chairman, as I was saying, some veterans are sick and need care, others are not sick but doctors claim they have no right to a pension because they are not sufficiently sick.
June 15, 1966

I think some people, because of the hardships they have endured, are morally sick. Many people would need a pension because they are morally sick.
I would like to convince the minister that many of them are really sick from a moral point of view. But a medical check-up does not show anything physically wrong with them, so they have no right to a pension.
I would say there are a large number who are morally sick and I believe that they should be entitled to the same service as others. I would ask the minister to consider these cases so that justice be done to many of these citizens, as they have been so ill-treated by the Japanese during the war.
Now, Mr. Chairman, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker) mentioned those who were getting the old age pension and the veterans who could not obtain the full pension to which they should be entitled. The Leader of the Opposition said that all citizens of Canada were entitled the old age pension. Well with the Leader of the Opposition I say that all these veterans, even though they may be getting another pension, should be receiving the old age pension because, once again, if production is being considered, we know that production is not lacking in Canada.
We know that the only thing we need in Canada is consumers. Well, if more purchasing power is distributed to various citizens, they will consume more, which will help the industry and give work to many citizens. This involves consumers, whether they are veterans or not. Veterans are specially in need of such benefits. So, I am in agreement with the Leader of the Opposition and with the members of all parties in this house who are siding with the veterans.
Well, these veterans must be treated as full-time citizens; we must provide them with reasonable livelihood; we must enable their families to develop, too, in every way, morally and culturally. We must see to it that they are well off.
To conclude, I congratulate the chairman of the committee on veterans affairs for his wonderful work. He has worked hard, he is well informed on the question since he is a veteran and I wish to express my sincere admiration.


Mr. Barnett:: Mr. Chairman, I have read with interest the report which the standing committee on veterans affairs has sent back to the committee of supply. Also I have been
Supply-Veterans Affairs interested in the comments which have been made today by some of the members who served on that committee. I feel sure that the members of the present committee, both from what they have said and from what 1 have read in the report, have devoted themselves to the consideration of matters affecting the welfare of veterans in the dedicated and non-partisan way which has characterized the standing committee on veterans affairs throughout the years.
I should like to make just a few comments in respect of one or two matters which I feel should be touched upon in the light of the committee's report and in the light of possible developments in the field of veterans legislation. As a member of this house, on a good many occasions I have heard it stated that Canada's veterans legislation, as embodied in the so-called veterans charter, is among the best in the world. I know that many committees and indeed many ministers-and I am including in that category the present minister-over the years have laboured to improve the provisions for the administration of veterans affairs and the legislation which affects them particularly.
However, Mr. Chairman, I am sure that even the minister would not quarrel with me too much if I were to say that, despite all these efforts by ministers and committees over the years, I am not alone among the members of the house in finding that I encounter, among the veterans of Canada, some of the most distressing and disturbing situations which exist in respect of individual citizens of this country. This would suggest to me that we still have not found any perfect answer so far as our veterans legislation is concerned. I understand it is likely that it will not be until some time considerably later in the year that the house or the veterans affairs committee-as is suggested in the report of that committee-will have an opportunity to examine the Wood report on the work and organization of the Canadian Pension Commission.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
In the meantime, as far as I am concerned,
I am sure some of these distressing circumstances will continue to exist. It is impossible to forecast at this stage just what changes in Canadian pension legislation may flow from the report, but I join with other members who have expressed hope that legislation will follow clarifying and improving the so-called benefit of doubt provision. That provision in
June 15. 1966


Mr. McCleave:: Mr. Chairman, I rise simply to endorse a suggestion made to the committee earlier this afternoon by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo, namely that the minister, his department and the government consider the extension of war veterans' allowance benefits to those under the age of 60.1 have in mind several cases from my own riding, one of which I shall relate and which I think backs up the contention of the hon. member.
This case concerns a younger man who served in world war II after entering the army in excellent physical condition, but emerged in a poor physical category. For one reason or another he was not given the benefit of a pension. His condition was an ulcerous one, obviously a nervous condition, and since he applied himself fully to his military duties it is difficult to see how this condition could have arisen from any cause other than military service. But the fact is that he was not given the benefit of a pension and therefore finds himself, after good war service, in the position where he is not able to work at a level he probably would have attained had he not undertaken to serve his country. In short, Mr. Chairman, the income of this man is of a low level, and he has serious responsibilities.
There are other cases like this in my riding but I shall not deal with them in detail. I mention this one as a specific instance and I heartily endorse the suggestion of the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo. I realize that there are difficulties in the way of bringing in a formula which would work. There would be people who would try to take advantage of such a formula. But the fact is that our veterans legislation is supposed to err, if it errs at all, on the side of generosity and giving all doubt to the veteran. This reinforces me in my suggestion that the request of the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo be given great consideration by the department and I ask the minister to do this.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall vote No. 1 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Herman Maxwell Batten: This completes the main estimates of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The committee will now proceed to the further consideration of the estimates of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.
DEBATES	6467
Supply-Citizenship and Immigration DEPARTMENT OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
General administration-
5. Payments to carry out the purposes of the Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act and agreements made thereunder, including undischarged commitments under previous agreements: payments to provinces under agreements entered into with the provinces by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration wth the approval of the Governor in Council for the organization and use of workers for farming and related industries, including undischarged commitments under previous agreements; and to authorize payments in accordance with agreements entered into with the approval of the Governor in Council by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with provinces, employers and workers in respect of labour mobility and assessment incentives, $1,625,000.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Shall vote No. 5 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Citizenship-
35. Administration, operation and maintenance including grants and contributions for language instruction and citizenship promotion, and grants to organizations as detailed in the estimates, $2,332,400.
Thomas Miller Bell: Mr. Chairman, before item 35 carries I wonder whether the minister would give us any indication as to when he will bring forward the long expected amendments to the Citizenship Act. They have been promised in four Speeches from the Throne. Surely if they were ready as long ago as May of 1963 the minister could put the bill on the order paper tonight. I want to say to him that if he does this, we will pass the bill next week. We are anxious to do this. We are just as anxious as was the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate, when he sat over here, to pass a bill of this sort. I really do suggest to the minister-and I know he has the bill ready-that he could put it on the order paper before six o'clock tonight. If he does, we will be glad to pass it as one of the prime legislative items next week. Will the minister give us some indication of his plans?


Mr, Marchand:: Unfortunately, Mr. Chairman, I do not know what has been going on in the house for the past 10 years. I do not think there have been many delays since I have been here. I still believe that in a very short time I will be in a position to tell the house what kind of amendments we want to make to the law and the regulations. The hon. member believes that I can do it tonight, but unfortunately I cannot.


Thomas Miller Bell: What bothers me, Mr. Chairman, is that the minister will probably
June 15, 1966

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration cease within a matter of days to have responsibility for citizenship. Then this question will be passed over to a new minister who will be able to plead to the house that she is green in the task, just as the minister has now asserted. Now that the minister has had six months of experience, I think he could bring this bill forward before he passes responsibility for citizenship over to the hon. member for Niagara Falls. That is why I am now pleading with him especially to bring the bill forward as one of the last acts in his responsibility for citizenship.


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, everything will be very well prepared before this responsibility is transferred to the Department of the Secretary of State.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Mr. Chairman, I think probably the hon. member for Carleton may have-I noticed this from a twinkle in his eye-a certain amount of sympathy with the position of the minister. However, I should like to join the hon. member for Carleton, and without any lack of feeling for the minister's predicament suggest to you, Mr. Chairman, that he happens to be the minister who is before us on this item. Even though he has not been a member of the house for the last 10 years, or even since the present administration took office, neither he nor the government of which he is a member can escape the responsibility for the matter of amendments to the Citizenship Act to which the hon. member for Carleton has referred.
Also, as the hon. member for Carleton has quite rightly pointed out, during the various changes in ministerial responsibility in this particular area we have had some pretty specific assurances on this point by the minister's predecessors. I think the hon. member for Carleton is certainly within his right to raise this question and point out to the minister that the government as a whole has promised such action. Even though the minister may not have held this office for a great length of time and may shortly be relinquishing this particular responsibility, he should be in a position to state to us, while we have this item before us, something pretty clear as to the intentions of the government.
It is a responsibility which he may wear with a little discomfort at the moment, but nevertheless I feel that this situation is not good enough. This kind of thing has happened not only in this instance but in a number of other instances, where because of the switching of portfolios we have in effect had to take this kind of answer in respect of amendments to the Citizenship Act, in respect

of amendments to the Immigration Act and on some pressing matters with regard to which we have had quite definitive statements from time to time from the government that such and such a line of action was agreed to in principle and we could expect specific proposals to be placed before the house at an early date.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
I feel, Mr. Chairman, it was quite proper for the member for Carleton to raise this point but I had hoped that we could have received a more definite answer from the minister than the one he has just given to the house.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Herman Maxwell Batten: The Legislation estimates having been passed, we will now proceed to the consideration of the estimates of the Department of Labour. I understand that in accordance with an agreement reached on May 27, Item 1 will be called and allowed to stand and we will then proceed to the estimates of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, I know that the Minister of Labour is very busy at the moment so I wonder whether we could not go on to the consideration of the estimates of the Privy Council.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: May I raise a point of order? As you will recall, Mr. Chairman, it was unanimously agreed earlier this afternoon that we would suspend consideration of private members business. It was also my understanding that we would not be dealing with the estimates of the Department of Labour this afternoon. I realize that the estimates of another department have been passed more expeditiously than was anticipated, but in view of the understanding which we had previously and in view of the fact that other considerations are involved in regard to the first item in the estimates of the Department of Labour, I wonder if we could not agree to let Item 1 of the estimates of that department stand.


John B. Stewart: May I speak on that point, Mr. Chairman? What the hon. member said is quite correct and in any case the Minister of Labour is very urgently involved in a meeting on public business. I will therefore ask that the estimates of the Department of Finance be now called.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, may I remind you of my suggestion to call at present the estimates of the Privy Council? I would
June 15. 1966

suggest that after consideration of these estimates we could go on to the Department of Finance.


John B. Stewart: In view of the fact that the Minister of Finance is here and ready to proceed, I think it would be more expedient to proceed along the lines I suggested initially-


Herman Maxwell Batten: Is it agreed that the estimates of the Department of Labour shall stand and that the committee will proceed with consideration of the estimates of the Department of Finance?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Herman Maxwell Batten: We will now proceed to the consideration of the estimates of the Department of Finance, Vote No. 1.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE Administration-
1. Departmental administration including administration of the Guaranteed Loans Acts and the Inspector General of Banks' Office, and payments to provinces and grants as detailed in the estimates, $4,332,900.


Michael Starr: I wonder whether the Minister of Finance is prepared to make some remarks on his stewardship of the department and on whether he has had any difficulties with former members of the cabinet?


Mitchell William Sharp: In response to the invitation from the hon. member for Ontario I want to say that the Minister of Finance is having a hard time, which is usual for all ministers of finance, although I do not think his difficulties are any greater than those of his predecessors.
We are at a time, in our nation's history in which there are financial problems, but I am very glad to say that they are associated with great prosperity. I think we all like to live at a time when the demand for goods and for the services of our working people is not deficient. But if we want to ensure that our prosperity will continue for a good time into the future, policies of restraint are necessary, restraint which applies-as I said in speaking on the Bank of Canada Act the other day-in the field of monetary policy as well as in other fields.
I am therefore very happy to present my estimates for the consideration of the house, and I wait with bated breath for the comments from the opposition.


Thomas Miller Bell: I think the minister has made a most inadequate statement in commencing these estimates. He has dealt almost not at all with the important issues 23033-4101
Supply-Finance
which face the economy of this country. I confess I am somewhat surprised that in view of the controversy that has existed between the minister and the hon. member for Davenport he has not sought to bring before the house his own point of view and to express clearly what the policy of the government may be, as opposed to the policy of the grey eminence of the Liberal party.
The fact that the minister has refrained from making any major statement is, I think, an indication that he is permitting the policies of the Department of Finance to drift. Apparently what he has established as the basic economic and fiscal policy of the government is one of drifting. We saw this in the budget which was a stand pat budget. The fact is that since that time there has been nothing at all to indicate that the hon. gentleman has any imagination or any vivid approach to the serious problems that confront the country today.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)
Now, sir, I had not expected the estimates of the Department of Finance would be called this afternoon. I had intended to make a rather extensive presentation on one particular subject. Twice before at this session of parliament I have mentioned in some detail the question of increases in pensions for retired civil servants. I think the proper time to deal with this subject, and to have it out with the Minister of Finance, is now on item 1. The minister and the Prime Minister, in their negotiations and discussions with various civil service organizations, have been adamant. I say to the minister today that it is not good enough for him or the Prime Minister to take the attitude which they have taken.
There has been only one occasion when there has been any increase in the pensions of retired civil servants, and that was in the year 1958. Initially, it was an estimate and was crystallized in legislation in the pension adjustment act of 1959. I say to the minister that there are many retired civil servants across this country who are suffering grave hardship by reason of his adamant refusal to make the increases which I believe are entirely justified. This is not an area in which policy has not been established already by this parliament. Parliament has set its seal of approval on the policy of increases when they are needed to meet the cost of living. It did so in 1958 and 1959.
It is not as if we alone had done this. This procedure has been adopted, as the minister

June 15, 1966
Supply-Finance
well knows, in the United States and the United Kingdom. I think it was on Monday last that I read into the record some of the statements which have been made in the United Kingdom as contained in that Hansard for November, 1965. There were at least six pension adjustment increases for retired civil servants in that country. I then put on the record as well what the position is in the United States. These two countries have set a model and an example with regard to pension adjustments, just as this country set a model and an example in the enactment of the pension adjustment act.
I suggest that this is the example the minister ought to follow, and he ought to follow it at this session of parliament. If the minister had received all the representations which I have received from time to time from retired civil servants across this country, he would know the genuine hardships and injustices that there are by reason of the decline in the value of the dollar. Some of these persons have been retired for many years, and when they made their contributions they were in dollars of an entirely different value than the dollars they are taking out of the fund today. In some cases these dollars have a value as low as 50 per cent of the value of the dollars they put into the superannuation account. I do not believe that this country should treat its retired public servants in such a shoddy, shabby way as the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance have insisted upon doing. I believe if he tested the will of the members of this house he would find they were all in favour of increases, and of an updating of the pension adjustment act to bring genuine justice to these retired civil servants.
I know there is a disposition to get ahead with these estimates. I want to say to the minister, however, that I should like a full answer in respect of this matter. I want the minister to try to vindicate in some way the adamant stand that has been taken. I cannot understand how there could he any vindication of it. However, I hope he will at least try to rationalize the point of view he has taken. I do appeal to him, if he will, to listen to reason, to listen to what I believe is a popular demand to introduce legislation in this respect at this session of parliament.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I was rising only part way in the hope that the Minister of Finance was going to get up and give the answer that ought to be given to the plea that has just

been made once again by the hon. member for Carleton. I agree with the hon. member that at some point we have got to have this matter out. I think it is disgraceful, the way in which these people have been pushed around, encouraged and then discouraged, put off and told to wait for this piece of legislation or that; and finally we seem to have reached a point where we cannot get anywhere at all.
I had hoped that with the amount of attention being paid in this session to civil service matters and civil service pensions, particularly in relation to Bill No. C-193, we would get action. However, the Minister of National Revenue, who is piloting that bill through the house on behalf of the Minister of Finance, has taken the very adamant position that that bill deals only with people now in the civil service, and not with retired persons. We seem therefore to be thrown back upon the tender mercies of the Minister of Finance.


An hon. Member:: Tender?


Stanley Howard Knowles: I hope that question is on the record because it will indicate that I am not the only one who wonders just how tender those mercies are. Our purpose in this debate is to try to find out. Frankly, I hope the minister will try to give us his reasoning with respect to this matter. I do not see how the government can stand against this principle. The hon. member for Carleton has referred to the action taken by the Diefenbaker government when it brought in the Public Service Pension Adjustment Act. I suggest that act did establish as a principle the willingness of parliament to deal with this matter. If the present government is sensitive about having Conservative practice thrown at it from time to time, I remind this government that it is the one that accepted the principle of escalation in pensions. This has been done in respect of two pieces of legislation. There is, both in the Canada Pension Plan and in the Old Age Security Act, a provision for escalating pensions. In one case, the escalation can take place both prior to the time one receives a pension and afterwards. In the other case, it applies only after the pensions have been paid.
I believe this was a very good move that the government made in allowing the principle of escalation in at least two of our pension acts. I am sure the reason the government did that, the reason the government
June 15, 1966

was prepared to ask parliament to do it, was that it had come to the realization that after people retire they still have certain rights as members of the community. Those rights include the right to be able to live on the pensions that are awarded to them on the basis of their service. The right to live in the years after one retires, Mr. Chairman, includes the right to be able to keep up with the cost of living, and also the right to be able to keep up with the rising standard of living. I know that most people who write letters to us appealing for pension increases base their arguments on the increased cost of living, and that is a sufficient argument to make it necessary that something be done.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
I think an equally valid argument is the rising standard of living. When conditions of life improve all round, those improved conditions exert pressures on people which are just as real as pressures which arise from an increased cost of living. Because a person retired before there was television, there is no reason that that person should not enjoy television in his retirement. Because a person retired before certain other improvements took place in our standard of living, that is no reason that he should not enjoy these other improvements. We would not say that some members of a family shall enjoy such affluence as the family has, but that other members shall not.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, because of these two reasons-the rising cost of living and the rising standard of living-I believe that parliament has gladly accepted the principle contained in the amendments to the Old Age Security Act and in the Canada Pension Plan, that there shall be escalation of pensions, yes even after they have been put in pay. If the government has been prepared to do this in general legislation, I submit that the government should do it for its own retired employees.
I insist there is no ground at all, in principle, for opposing that for which we are asking on behalf of our retired civil servants. The argument is sometimes made that they were employed on a contractual basis, and that these people have to accept the terms of that contract. But every year or so we amend the terms of the contract in our various pension acts. We are doing it this session in Bill No. C-193. We are not only doing the job of integration and all the rest of it, but we are taking care of the various anomalies. Every time we do this we admit that as the
Supply-Finance
statute stood before it was not perfect. Why should these people who are retired be forced to be the victims of the imperfections of the legislation, or the formula, or the contract made in years gone by?
The hon, member for Carleton referred to the fact that action in this area has been taken in the United States and in the United Kingdom. It has also been taken in a number of the provinces in this country. I have not the list in front of me, but a number of them have done so. In the province of Ontario I know that arrangements have been made to improve the pensions of teachers after they have retired. In my own city of Winnipeg the municipal administration has provided that pensions of retired civic employees can be increased and that provision is there for those who may retire in the future.
The idea that we have this responsibility to our retired workers when they leave our employ is so widely accepted that I cannot understand why this realization has not impressed itself on the hearts and the mercies of those who sit on the treasury benches. One of the matters which is terribly disheartening to these people has been the way in which their hopes have been buoyed up, only to be put down again.
Even after this government came into power there were times when this matter was being considered. The former minister of finance, the hon. member for Davenport, assured us on a number of occasions that this question would be considered. Representatives of these people came to Ottawa and had interviews with cabinet ministers, I believe an interview even with the Prime Minister, and they were led to believe at one time that when the Canada Pension Plan was passed their problem would be dealt with. They were also led to believe that when the subject of old age pensions was dealt with their problem would be considered. But the recent letters they have received, mainly from the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, have given them the impression that this government has closed the door. I do not think that the government is reflecting either the will of parliament or the will of the people of the country in the position it is taking.
As the hon. member for Carleton says, it is apparently this minister with whom we must have it out. I almost said that it is this minister whom we must "have it out with", but I thought I had better be precise in dealing with the Minister of Finance. The

June 15, 1966
Supply-Finance
Prime Minister passes the problem to him. The Minister of National Revenue says that it does not come under his legislation. If it is a financial question, then it is this minister who must make the decision, and I think we should hear from him. I hope that what he has to say will be satisfactory; if not we will have to keep at him.


Mr. Richard:: Mr. Chairman, ever since I have been the member for Ottawa East I have never let the opportunity pass to make this plea to the Minister of Finance. Almost yearly for the past 20 years I have asked him to do something to escalate the pensions of retired civil servants. Those of us who live in Ottawa know the need for this escalation. When our civil servants contributed to the superannuation fund they expected they would be able to retire with sufficient to afford them a certain standard of living. Instead of that, Mr. Chairman, during the past 10 to 15 years many of them have been living like people who, certainly, one would think from their present standard of living had been engaged in some other kind of occupation.
I would urge on the Minister of Finance at this time, when we come to consider amendments to the superannuation acts, when the Canada Assistance Plan is introduced, and when we discuss legislation for the benefit of those who are in similar situations, to see to it that we look after our own employees even in a better way than those of private industry, other governments, provincial or municipal, or governments of other countries. I hope that the day will soon come when this parliament will be proud to say that our retired civil servants now have the treatment to which they are entitled.


Maurice Rinfret: Shall item 1 carry?


Michael Starr: Six o'clock.


Mr. Scott (Danforth):: May I call it six o'clock, Mr. Chairman?


Maurice Rinfret: Order. It being six o'clock, shall I rise, report certain resolutions and request leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house?


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



COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE


Mr.   J.-T. Richard@Ottawa East: Mr. Speaker, by leave, may I revert to routine proceedings under presenting reports by standing and special committees?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Rinfrel):: Order. Is
there unanimous consent to enable the hon. member to revert to routine proceedings?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Mr. Richard presented the first and second reports of the special joint committee on the public service, and moved that the reports be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)

John B. Stewart: I ask leave to make a motion in regard to the subject matter of private members Bill No. C-105, to Amend the Criminal Code (Insanity), which stands in the name of the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin). The purpose of the motion would be to refer the subject matter to the standing committee on justice and legal affairs.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


John B. Stewart: I move:
That the subject matter of Bill C-105 be referred to the standing committee on justice and legal affairs.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. Jim McNulty (Lincoln):: Mr. Speaker, I move:
That private members notices of motions Nos. 21, 25, 64, 73, 74 and 76 be referred to the standing committee on privileges and elections.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. Mcllraith:: The business for tomorrow
will be as indicated by me last night and as recorded in Hansard for last night. We expect on Friday to consider estimates again for the
June 15, 1966

day, depending on what estimates are reported back from the standing committees which are studying them now.


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

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $6,732,100.
Welfare services, allowances and other benefits-
5. Administration, including the expenses of the war veterans allowances board, and grants as detailed in the estimates, $4,270,500.
10. War veterans allowances, civilian war allowances and assistance in accordance with the provisions of the assistance fund regulations, $105,475,000.
15. Other benefits including treatment and related allowances, burials and memorials, the training of certain pensioners under regulations approved by the Governor in Council and repayments under subsection (3) of section 12 of the Veterans' Rehabilitation Act in such amounts as the Minister of Veterans Affairs determines, not exceeding the whole of amounts equivalent to the compensating adjustments or payments made under that act, where the persons who made the compensating adjustments or payments received no benefits under the Veterans' Land Act, or where, having had financial assistance under the Veterans' Land Act, are deemed by the minister on termination of their Veterans' Land Act contracts or agreements to have derived thereunder either no benefits or benefits that are less than the amounts of the compensating adjustments or payments, $5,563,900
Pensions-
20. Administration, $2,787,300.
25. Pensions for disability and death, including pensions granted under the authority of the civilian government employees (War) Compensation Order, P C. 45/8848 of November 22, 1944, which shall be subject to the Pension Act; Newfoundland Special Awards, and gallantry awards (World War II and special force), $182,403,000.
Treatment services-
30. Operation and maintenance including authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year for hospital and related services, $48,874,000.
35. Hospital construction, improvements, equipment and acquisition of land including a contribution to the province of Alberta toward the cost of [DOT]constructing and equipping a nursing home in accordance with the terms of an agreement between -the province and the federal government, $5,058,000.
Soldier Settlement and Veterans' Land Act-
40. Administration of Veterans' Land Act; Soldier settlement and British family settlement; upkeep of *property, Veterans' Land Act, including engineering and other investigational planning expenses that do not add tangible value to real property, taxes, insurance and maintenance of public utilities; and ito authorize, subject to the approval of the Governor
Supply Items Passed
in Council, necessary remedial work on properties constructed under individual firm price contracts and sold under the Veterans' Land Act and to correct defects for which neither the veterans nor the contractor can be held financially responsible, and for such other work on other properties as may be required to protect the interest of the director therein, $4,320,900.
45. Grants to veterans settled on provincial lands in accordance with agreements with provincial governments under section 38 of the Veterans' Land Act, grants to veterans settled on dominion lands in accordance with an agreement with the minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources under section 38 of the Veterans' Land Act and grants to Indian veterans settled on Indian reserve lands under section 39 of the Veterans' Land Act, $145,000.

[Stage Direction]
General Administration-
5. Payments to carry out the purposes of the vocational rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act and agreements made thereunder, including undischarged commitments under previous agreements; payments to provinces under agreements entered into with the provinces by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with the approval of the Governor in Council for the organization and use of workers for farming and related industries, including undischarged commitments under previous agreements; and to authorize payments in accordance with agreements entered into with the approval of the Governor in Council by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration with provinces, employers and workers in respect of labour mobility and assessment incentive, $1,625,000.
Technical and vocational training assistance-
10. Administration, $1,118,200.
15. Payments to the provinces to carry out the purposes of the Technical and Vocational Training Assistance Act and agreements made thereunder and payments under agreements providing for the sharing of expenditures for research projects to provide information relating to vocational training and manpower requirements, $186,585,000.
National employment service-
20. Administration of the National Employment Service, $28,340,100.
25. Manpower mobility program-grants, in accordance with regulations approved by the Governor in Council, to or in respect of persons who are moved from one place in Canada to another place in Canada in connection with the manpower mobility program, $3,500,000.
Immigration-
30. Administration, operation and maintenance including trans-oceanic and inland transportation and other assistance for immigrants and settlers subject to the approval of treasury board, including care en route and while awaiting employment; and payments to the provinces, pursuant to agreements entered into, with the approval of the Governor in Council, in respect of expenses incurred by the provinces for indigent immigrants and $20,000 for grants to immigrant welfare organizations, $18,233,800.
[Stage Direction]
June 15, 1966
Supply Items Passed
Citizenship-
35. Administration, operation and maintenance, including grants and contributions for language instruction and citizenship promotion, and grants to organizations as detailed in the estimates, $2,332,400.

[Stage Direction]
The senate-
Members of the Senate-
1. Allowance in lieu of residence to the Speaker of the Senate, $3,000.
5. General administration, $1,179,700.
House of commons-
Members of the House of Commons-
10. Allowances in lieu of residence to the Speaker of the House of Commons, and in lieu of apartments to the Deputy Speaker of the House of
Commons: allowance to the Deputy Chairman of committees, $8,500.
15. Expenses of the Canada-United States interparliamentary group, of delegates attending other interparliamentary conferences, expenses connected with visits of delegates to and from other legislatures, including the expenses of the commonwealth parliamentary conference to be held in Ottawa in 1966, Canada's share of the expenses of the commonwealth parliamentary association including the assessment for membership in the association, and grants as detailed in the estimates, $458,725.
20. General administration, $5,758,900.
Library of Parliament-
25. General administration, $543,300.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, June 16, 1966