1966-04-06

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Hon. G. J. Mcllrailh (Minister of Public Works) moved:: That when this house adjourns on Wednesday, April 6, 1966, it shall stand adjourned until Tuesday, April 19, 1966, at 2.30 o'clock p.m., provided always that if it appears to the satisfaction of Mr. Speaker, after consultation with Her Majesty's government, that the public interest requires that the house shall meet at an earlier time during the adjournment, Mr. Speaker may give notice that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the house shall meet at the time stated in such notice, and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time, and
That in the event of Mr. Speaker being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to table a telegram dated February 22 from the premier of British Columbia to me and my reply dated April 5, concerning future shipbuilding subsidies for vessels built for provincial account, together with a letter dated March 25 from the five federal Liberal members from British Columbia and my reply to them of April 5, 1966.



PUBLIC SERVICE


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I should like also at this time to make a statement on the government's policy on bilingualism in the public service. I hope the house will agree that the importance of this subject justifies the fact that the statement is a little longer than would normally be acceptable.
It is the objective of the government to make the public service of maximum benefit to the people of Canada by attracting to it
the most competent and qualified Canadians available in all parts of Canada. To this end, and having regard to the character of our country, the government for several years has been taking practical steps to encourage bilingualism in the federal public service as part of its fundamental objective of promoting and strengthening national unity on the basis of the equality of rights and opportunities for both English speaking and French speaking Canadians.
In a diverse federal state such as Canada it is important that all citizens should have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in the national administration and to identify themselves with, and feel at home in, their own national capital. The government hopes and expects that, within a reasonable period of years, a state of affairs in the public service will be reached whereby
(a)	it will be normal practice for oral or written communications within the service to be made in either official language at the option of the person making them, in the knowledge that they will be understood by those directly concerned;
(b)	communications with the public will normally be in either official language having regard to the person being served;
(c)	the linguistic and cultural values of both English speaking and French speaking Canadians will be reflected through civil service recruitment and training; and
(d)	a climate will be created in which public servants from both language groups will work together toward common goals, using their own language and applying their respective cultural values, but each fully understanding and appreciating those of the other.
[DOT] (2:40 p.m.)
In developing measures to assist those now in the public service more effectively to achieve a reasonable proficiency in both official languages and to improve the recruitment of civil servants with this proficiency, the government has been guided by the following principles:
(a)	The achievement of bilingualism is in itself a desirable objective for any Canadian citizen. Where the need for bilingualism clearly exists in practice, above all in the
3916	COMMONS
Bilingualism in Public Service national capital, it should be recognized as an element of merit in selection for civil service positions.
(b)	In conformity with the merit system, which must remain unimpaired, the requirement for bilingualism should relate to positions, and not only to individuals.
(c)	Bilingualism must be introduced gradually over a period of years in a manner which will not lead to injustice or misunderstanding. The various measures should be integrated into a well defined, long term program.
(d)	It must therefore be a requirement of any program that, in areas where a need for bilingualism exists, civil servants and prospective recruits must be provided with adequate time and opportunity to adapt themselves to new conditions in the service in a way that will increase their own possibilities for a successful and satisfying career.
(e)	For similar reasons of equity, the careers of civil servants who are not bilingual and who have devoted many years of their lives to the service of their country must not be prejudiced in any way by measures to develop bilingualism.
(f)	The government will consult from time to time with civil service associations concerning its policy on bilingualism in order to obtain their point of view, and to provide them with all reasonable assurances and remove any possible misunderstandings in regard to measures being proposed.
On the basis of the above objectives of policy and principles of action the government has approved the following measures:
I. In respect of civil service positions
requiring prior university training
1. (a) Beginning in 1967, reasonable proficiency in the two official languages or willingness to acquire it within a prescribed period of time through appropriate training at public expense will be an element of merit in the selection of university graduates recruited for administrative trainee positions where the need for bilingualism exists, as is already being done in the case of candidates for foreign service positions.
(b) In those centres where a need exists for reasonable proficiency in both languages, procedures will progressively be established for the filling of executive and administrative positions, so that by about 1970 in the case of appointments from outside the service and by about 1975 in the case of promotions from within, bilingual proficiency or willingness to acquire it will normally be a requirement for

DEBATES	April 6, 1966
the positions in such centres; that is, where a need exists for reasonable proficiency in both languages.
(c) These procedures will not cover at this time the technical, professional and scientific positions in the civil service, the armed forces or federal crown agencies as these categories present special problems. The appropriate departmental and agency authorities are therefore being asked to submit a long term program of effective action in their respective areas of responsibility which takes these special problems and particular difficulties into account.
2. A special pool of positions will be established in the national capital to be used to facilitate the recruitment and to accelerate the development of candidates of high potential who are proficient in both languages.
II. In respect of senior executive officers
A special program for improving bilingualism among senior executive officers serving in the national capital will be undertaken. It is envisaged that each year some 20 English speaking civil servants from the most senior categories, plus their families, will spend a 12 month period in a mainly French speaking city, while some 10 French speaking civil servants and their families will spend a similar period in a mainly English speaking city, to study the other official language and gain an understanding of the cultural values of the group they are visiting.
In respect of bilingual clerical and secretarial positions, it has been agreed in principle that a higher rate of pay will be paid in future in respect of clerical and secretarial positions in which there is the requirement for a knowledge of both languages and where both are used in the performance of duties, providing the incumbents of such positions meet standards of competence established by the Civil Service Commission.
The present program of language training will be strengthened and expanded to make the most effective contribution to the development of proficiency in both languages in the public service in those centres where the need for such proficiency exists.
The federal government will undertake discussions with the Ontario and Quebec governments concerning the early establishment of a secondary school in the Ottawa area in which the language of instruction will be French, in order to meet the requirements of those who wish to provide their children with
April 6. 1966

secondary education in French, and concerning other joint measures that would directly or indirectly contribute to the improvement of the bicultural character of the civil service in the national capital.
A special secretariat on bilingualism is being established within the privy council office under my direction. Working in close consultation and co-operation with the Civil Service Commission, the Treasury Board and all deputy ministers and heads of agencies, it will be responsible for ensuring the coordinated and progressive implementation of the government's policy and program regarding bilingualism in the public service.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I should like to express the sincere hope that on the eve of our centennial, all Canadians will share my deep conviction that the policy and program of the government on bilingualism in the public service will be to make a very important, indeed an essential, contribution to the promotion of national unity and to a great and stronger Canada.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I say at once that any action to promote the objective set out in the concluding paragraph of the Prime Minister's speech will, I know, receive the fullest support from this group. Our record during the period we were in office was one of continuing steps forward toward the assurance of full partnership of those of English and French origin in building Canada, without in any way diminishing the rights of those millions from other racial origins.
During our period of office we, for the first time in Canada's history, made the House of Commons bilingual in fact. When I first entered the House of Commons anyone speaking in the French language received even less attention than those of us who spoke in English. Indeed, when a person spoke in the French language the house emptied because so many of the members were unable to follow what was being said. We brought in simultaneous interpretation.
[DOT] (2:50 p.m.)
During our period of office we brought about the opportunity for those of French language to have a larger share in high positions of government, something they had not had before. We made provision for the appointment of ambassadors of French language and French origin so that in all parts of the world the character of this country would be made clear.
Bilingualism in Public Service
I mention these things as evidence of our attitude. Indeed, it was under our administration that for the first time there was any recognition of French speaking countries in Africa for assistance from Canada, to the end that in a spirit of co-operation we would thereby epitomize something of the relationship which we have under our constitution. In addition, it was under our administration that Her Majesty's representative in Canada, the Governor General, for the first time since Vaudreuil became a Canadian of French origin. I mention these things merely for the purpose of assuring that the record is clear and not subject to the kind of misinterpretation which it sometimes suffers.
The constitutional rights provided for under the British North America Act, in the opinion of the Conservative party, are inviolable, and cannot be changed except by unanimity. We took the stand in 1946 when Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent was Prime Minister of Canada. When he as a constitutional lawyer expressed the view that the rights of language and education enshrined in sections 91 and 92 could be altered by a simple majority of parliament we said no, that could not be done.


Mr. Pickersgill:: He never said any such thing.


John George Diefenbaker: That was our stand. That was our attitude, and that attitude still prevails. Indeed, I can do no better than quote Sir John A. Macdonald when, within a year from his death, he expressed what has been the viewpoint of the Conservative party throughout the years. These were his words:
I have no accord with the desire expressed in some quarters that, by any mode whatever, there should be an attempt made to oppress the one language or to render it inferior to the other. I believe that would be impossible if it were tried, and it would be foolish and wicked if it were possible.
That, Mr. Speaker, has represented our view. Now, at a time when the report of the B and B commission, which has been spoken of in such fulsome terms by members of the government, has not yet been presented, we come to deal, not through parliament but through governmental action, with a major element in the whole field of bilingualism. Under section 133 of the British North America Act use of the English and French languages on an equal basis was recognized in parliament, in the Quebec legislature, in federal courts and in the courts of Quebec. There is also authorization for the publication of federal legislation and legislation in
April 6, 1966

Bilingualism in Public Service Quebec in both languages. These are sacred rights.
Sir, there are divisions within our country. There always have been. The Prime Minister hopes that on the eve of our hundredth year of confederation we shall be able to do something to solve those difficulties. We took the stand that in an equal partnership, constitutional rights should be maintained based on mutual respect and recognition. Speaking in February, 1963 on behalf of the government I used these words:
There have, however, arisen from time to time, questions as to whether Canada, as she approaches the first century of Confederation, has achieved the full measure of the vision of the Fathers of Confederation.
I suggested, with of course the unanimous support of the cabinet and our colleagues in the House of Commons, that there should be convened a national confederation conference, which would deal with certain matters, including those now being dealt with in this rather uncertain, vague and evasive manner. At that time I said:
The scope of the conference will he of the fullest breadth. It will be asked to study ways and means of repatriating the constitution; the problem of adequate representation in the public service, in crown corporations and other government agencies; the recommendations of the Therrien report-
Which, as Your Honour knows, was part of the report of the Glassco commission. Continuing, I said:
-the choice of a national flag, and other symbols of our national sovereignty. In brief, the conference will be asked to examine biculturalism and bilingualism in a comprehensive manner.
In the light of events of the last three years, the demand for what was then spoken of has intensified in the intervening years. Sir, tremendous problems are facing us. All kinds of doctrines have been advanced. There was the doctrine of the two nations that was basic to the government three years ago, until the hon. member for Mount Royal decided on a reinterpretation of that concept. There was the theory of opting out, leading to isolation of the province of Quebec. It has now to all intents and purposes gone up in the smoke of the Liberal council fire in Quebec last week.
Then there was the theory of associated states. That was the plaything of the President of the Privy Council for a while who, until the advent of the parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister, gave the lead to the acceptance of this doctrine.

We took our stand against these things. We were said to be anti-Quebec. The interesting part of it is this. When we stood in this House of Commons against the amending formula, when all the provinces but Quebec had approved of it, it was said by some that ours was an anti-Quebec attitude. Now the premier of Quebec and all his supporters stand where we stood, because we realized that that formula would simply mummify the constitution of Canada.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Page the hon. member for Kamloops (Mr. Fulton).


John George Diefenbaker: As far as the hon. member for Kamloops is concerned, he is consistent. By the time the President of the Privy Council had monkeyed with that formula, it was changed.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: In view of the interruptions, Mr. Speaker, may I say this-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It seems to me that we are now getting away from the statement made by the right hon. Prime Minister which, it appeared to me at least, dealt with bilingualism in the civil service. I suggest to the right hon. Leader of the Opposition that we go to that subject.
[DOT] (3:00 p.m.)


Mr. Starr:: I rise on a point of order. After all, when he made this announcement the Prime Minister ended with the contention that these measures would bring about unity. What the Leader of the Opposition is doing now is talking about unity.


John Whitney Pickersgill: On the point of order raised by the hon. member for Ontario, I suggest it would contribute to the unity of the country if the right hon. gentleman would not misrepresent a former prime minister of this country, who never at any time made the statement attributed to him about sections 91 and 92 of the B.N.A. Act.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Ricard:: Just read this.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. May we have order, please.


John George Diefenbaker: I did not make it clear, apparently, to Your Honour that what is being done today affects just one sector of the question of bilingualism and that the problem should be dealt with as a whole instead of by the adoption of a piecemeal system.
April 6. 1966

The Minister of Transport referred to a former prime minister. I would point out that his guardian angel, Right Hon. Mackenzie King, never engaged in this kind of thing in all the years when he was in a position to do so, and he had all the support of French Canada in doing nothing.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: But the last thing I want to do, Mr. Speaker, is to provoke controversy.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: I am trying to quieten it. There was a great blowing of trumpets as to what would be done in connection with the civil service. Throughout the election campaign we were told what was going to be done. There were promises as to what the government would do. Why did they not consult with the civil service organizations of Canada before proceeding along the line they have followed?


Mr. Sharp:: We did.


John George Diefenbaker: What is the reason? The statement made by the Prime Minister said:
The government will consult from time to time with civil service associations concerning its policy on bilingualism in order to obtain their point of view-
In other words, we are going to do the thing and then we are going to consult. That is not the attitude which will bring about unity within the nation.
I want to know this, and I think there is reason for my asking the question. What about the 10 per cent merit points which were spoken of so highly very recently and which were announced by the chairman of the Civil Service Commission of Canada? We see nothing about that in the statement. The chairman of the Civil Service Commission said he had a right to bring in these things. I say the Civil Service Act was never intended to be interpreted in this way, and if there are to be any changes in the Civil Service Act those changes should be made in this parliament, not under general sections taken advantage of by the chairman for the purpose.
I want to know whether this 10 per cent additional merit mark is in effect. If it is, I would point out that the civil service employees' organization of the province of Quebec has come out against it as being discrimination against those of French origin. Is this system in effect?

Bilingualism in Public Service
Now, what about some of the other changes? It is most desirable to bring together 20 English families in a French area and 10 French families in an English area, but that is just the icing on the program. It is a fine thing to have the necessary training facilities so that civil servants may become proficient in both languages. But these arrangements are mainly directed toward the future; 1970. After 1970 there will be no promotion unless a candidate is proficient in both languages or expresses a willingness to become so. Recruitment at university level after 1967 will require reasonable proficiency in the two official languages, or willingness to acquire it within a prescribed period of time.
Then the statement goes on to utter these pious words; that the merit system will be fully protected and there will be no prejudice to career civil servants. If the government carries this plan into effect, those words simply are not factually correct. There must be greater assurance that those who are today in the civil service will not, as a result of changes made after their entry into the civil service, be prejudiced in any way.
I shall not go into the other details. Believing as I do in the need of measures to encourage equal partnership-to do what we did, in large measure, to increase the fields of opportunity for those of the French language and race who previously were denied reasonable equality of opportunity-we think this whole matter should be referred to a committee of the House of Commons to secure the fullest possible information and the latest statistics thereon. And then the Civil Service Act should be rewritten by parliament, not by interpretation on the part of the chairman of the Civil Service Commission.
We believe that since this matter is a segment of the larger question of Canadian unity, action such as this should not be taken until the report of the B and B commission is available, and that in any event only such action should be taken as would bring about in this nation a new sense and recognition of the contribution of the two basic races, and of the other races. This was our plan in 1963, which was prevented from implementation only by our defeat at the polls. We had in mind the convening of a national conference on confederation whose purpose and aim would be a declaration of goals for the next 100 years. This provides the only way in which we as Canadians, can satisfactorily look forward to the second century.
April 6, 1966

Bilingualism in Public Service [Translation]


Mr. David Lewis (York South):: Mr. Speaker, we of the New Democratic party are glad to learn that the government has finally taken steps to establish bilingualism in the federal public service.
In my opinion, no one who fully understands the history of Canada can have any doubt that one of the deepest and most legitimate grievances suffered by French speaking Canadians is that they did not feel at home even in their own federal capital.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


David Lewis: I think it is to be deeply regretted also that we had to face a grave national crisis before we had the common sense and understanding to take the necessary action, which is probably essential to the future of our country.
I should like to underline the fact that the policy I just mentioned has always been advocated by the New Democratic party. As a matter of fact, the resolution on that subject passed by our party's national convention in 1963 read as follows:
In the federal public service, we should officially recognize the equality of both cultures and take accordingly the following steps:
(a)	After a reasonable period of transition, bilingualism should become a condition for admission or promotion in the federal public service.
(b)	A language school should be established for civil servants who wish to become bilingual. Courses at such a school should be given during working hours.
(c)	French and English should be recognized as working languages in the federal public service.
Mr. Speaker, I hope that today's statement of government policy is but the first step in a direction that will lead us toward a true and rewarding unity that will hold the brightest prospects for the future of our country.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
[DOT] (3:10 p.m.)
[English1


David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, I will not be much longer, because I do not think it would serve a useful purpose for the unity of our country to introduce recriminations and exchange mere needles when we are dealing with a subject which is of such fundamental importance to the future of Canada.
I say, Mr. Speaker, it is a commentary on our failure for decades that on April 6, 1966 the Prime Minister has to admit that it is not now the practice for oral or written communications within the service to be made in
[Mr. Diefenbaker.I
either official language; that by implication he has to admit that it is not now the practice that communications with the public being served are normally carried on in either official language, and that it is not now the practice for the linguistic and cultural values of both English and French speaking Canadians to be reflected throughout the civil service recruitment and training.
I feel it is a commentary on the failure of past governments of both the established parties that almost a century after the founding of our country, with both English and French established as official languages, the Prime Minister in a statement to parliament has to admit that, in fact, the civil service has not been bilingual, and that none of the elementary things that would be required have in fact been done.


An hon. Member:: What about Saskatchewan.
Another hon. Member: You are needling.


David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentlemen to my right and far right want to make reference to Saskatchewan or any other province, I will be delighted to debate it with them at the right time and in the right place. At the moment they might perhaps for a change leave aside their normal propensities and deal with the matter before the house.


Michael Starr: Why do you not deal with it.


David Lewis: In the Prime Minister's statement, Mr. Speaker, I noticed the suggestion that from now on he will consult from time to time with the civil service organizations in order to implement the policy he has outlined. One of the things we have regretted is that this was not done sufficiently before the policy was made and before the policy was stated. I hope the Prime Minister's statement will be carried out fully, and that the civil service staff organizations will be consulted at each step in respect of future implementation of the policy.
May I suggest finally that in order to get into the civil service, bilingual university graduates not only from the general arts courses but including also the technical, professional and similar graduates who are left out of the immediate plan, it will be necessary, in our submission, to start with the undergraduates in the universities and plan to open up for them opportunities for bilingual positions in the civil service so their undergraduate days will be given to training themselves precisely for such careers.
April 6. 1966	COMMONS
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the New Democratic party I welcome this statement of policy as a first step-and unfortunately it is only a first step, and we all are responsible for this situation-in the direction of a genuinely bilingual and bicultural Canada.


Mr. Real Caoueile (Villeneuve):: I wish to congratulate the hon. member for York South, Mr. Speaker, for the way he expressed himself in such fluent French. I thought the Leader of the Opposition and the Prime Minister would have done so also, but they did not. I hope they will become bilingual as soon as they can so that we will hear from them in French.

Mr. Speaker, I think the whole house is rejoicing at this statement of the Prime Minister on bilingualism in the Civil Service of Canada.
I take this opportunity not only to congratulate those civil servants who are currently taking language courses either in French or in English in order to master the two languages, but also to congratulate many federal members on all sides of the house who are at present taking language lessons to become fluent in one or the other official language of the country.
Mr. Speaker, I would now add that for four years the Ralliement Creditiste has exerted superhuman effort constantly to assert the existence of the French fact in Canada.
I maintain we have made a large contribution-and we are proud of it-to the decision the government has taken to do what is being done now.
The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Dief-enbaker) said a little earlier: We have had in the past Prime Ministers who did not pay any attention to the French fact, and in spite of that they received the full support of the French Canadian element or, in other words, the element of the province of Quebec. It is the case of the Mackenzie King government which lasted almost 30 years in Canada.
The English in the west are not to blame if we had sheep in Quebec, but we proved during those years that we had here sheep instead of people, capable of having the spirit and the letter of the constitution respected.
I think that we are now 50 years late. An old proverb says that it is never too late. Well, at the present time the attitude of the government is useful to the population as a whole. This does not mean that we will not
DEBATES	3921
Bilingualism in Public Service have or that we will not see again narrowminded elements or people in various regions of the country, including the province of Quebec. Those narrow-minded people are the ones who hindered Canadian unity in the past.
One of the objectives of that new policy is found in the statement made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson). I quote here paragraph (d) on page 2:
(d)	a climate will be created in which public servants from both language groups will work together toward common goals, using their own language and applying their respective cultural values, but each fully understanding and appreciating those of the other.
That is the attitude which the Ralliement Creditiste is advocating not only here in parliament but in the province of Quebec because we claim that it is not by practising discrimination against others that we will move upward, but it is by showing the greatest respect for others that we will gain the respect of our fellow-citizens. It is time that the position of the province of Quebec on that point should be known and even more so because all English speaking Canadians will be given the opportunity to learn French and all French speaking Canadians to learn English.
Mr. Speaker, along with those people, we will realize the benefits that this understanding will create and will bring about for the greater good of Canadian unity throughout the country.
Mr. Speaker, we heard a little earlier the Leader of the Opposition talk about the divisions which exist in the country. Those divisions are of long standing, they have been existing as long as Canada itself. We had people who pulled on one side for their benefit and others who tried to pull their way for the same reason. Those people did not meet. Communications at that time were very hard to establish, so that the lack of contacts, of meetings, prevented national unity from becoming a reality. We heard English people, Anglo-Saxon people, English speaking Canadians talk against the province of Quebec, against our language, our traditions, our religion, and we had at that same time people in our province who talked against the Anglo-Saxon or English speaking Canadians for the same reasons or practically the same.
This means that there were fanatics on both sides. The same is true today. There are fanatics even here in the federal parliament, people who cannot see further than the end of their noses and who, therefore, refuse to
3922	COMMONS
Bilingualism, in Public Service face the possibility of building a self-respecting Canada, a Canada composed of such elements as will enable it to develop and grow with honour and dignity.
Mr. Speaker, here is another point in the statement made by the right hon. Prime Minister:
It must therefore be a requirement of any program that, in areas where a need for bilingualism exists, civil servants and prospective recruits must be provided with adequate time and opportunity to adapt themselves to new conditions in the service in a way that will increase their own possibilities for a successful and satisfying career.
At this point, Mr. Speaker, I endorse exactly the statement of the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) that Quebeckers did not feel at home in Ottawa. There is some truth in that. People from the province of Quebec hardly felt at home in their own province, in many cases, for instance, as concerned the administration of the R.C.M.P., Air Canada or the C.N.R., it was required that reports from Chicoutimi or places where English is virtually unknown, be sent in English to the head offices of the various crown corporations.
Mr. Speaker, not a single other province in Canada would have tolerated what the province of Quebec has put up with since confederation. It is time for a change. It is time that the province of Quebec be respected and that it be treated as an equal as every one just said; then, we will be able to walk with our heads up, hand in hand, toward a united Canada which will develop allowing all its citizens to go forward respecting each other.
Mr. Speaker, the Ralliement Creditiste is very pleased with the decision of the government. We are going to watch what will be done tangibly, and what will be done on a practical basis following this new bilingualism or federal bilingualism policy.
Mr. Speaker, all members of my group are pleased with this initiative of the government and we urge it to hold out in all parts of the country, from coast to coast, so that all Canadians regard themselves as Canadians, not as opponents.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)
IEnglish1


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure every one in this house shares the sincerity and concern of the Prime Minister as expressed in the last paragraph of

DEBATES	April 6, 1966
his presentation to the house, in which he said:
I...hope that on the eve of our centennial, all Canadians will share my deep conviction that the policy and program of the government on bilingualism in the public service will make a very important, indeed an essential, contribution to the promotion of national unity and to a greater and stronger Canada.
I believe the Prime Minister was sincere in making that statement, and that this is something to which all of us in this house can subscribe. It is my duty, I think, to say a few things in addition to what has already been said to re-emphasize the position of the Social Credit party and of myself, in our concern and conviction that Canada must achieve more unity than she has at the present time. We must go forward together to prove to the world that peoples of diverse backgrounds can live together in peace and harmony.
As a Canadian who is not a member of either of the founding races of this country I say that we have in our heritage not only an English and French speaking background but the backgrounds of those people who came from many parts of the world, with a combined force that can build unity and set an example to the world at a time when the world needs unity perhaps more than ever before.
I am concerned about several things, because I do not think the policy enunciated by the Prime Minister will achieve what he has expressed as being the goal of the government. A number of developments are taking place that I believe ought to be of concern to every one of us in Canada, even though we agree with the objective to which the Prime Minister referred.
Approximately two years ago the government established a royal commission on bilingualism and biculturalism. It was given the responsibility of reporting back to this house and to the people of Canada on the state of bilingulaism and biculturalism in this country. By the end of this year, as we learned the other day, this commission will have spent some $6 million, yet we still have not received a report and we do not know when one will be forthcoming.
If one looks at the press reports of today he will find that the B and B commission staff are fighting among themselves about the very things they are supposed to solve. One side calls the other immature spoiled brats, and they in turn refer to the other as a privileged class who will not consider the rights of everyone. When we see what is happening in
April 6, 1966

the B and B commission we realize that this approach is causing more disharmony in the nation than it is in providing solutions to the problems which it was established to consider. The thing that bothers me in this regard is that the government is moving ahead of this commission, which is spending millions of dollars to find an answer to the problem, and in doing so it is going on its own way.
Most of us in this house agree that in the past we have had one of the finest civil services of any nation in the world. The dedication of the type of people who are in our civil service is something we can be proud of. I suggest to the Prime Minister that at this time the morale of the civil service is in a shambles because on the one hand the reorganization of the government has not been clear and specific, while on the other, in relation to bonuses to be paid to persons who speak both languages, the government is moving ahead of the royal commission before considering the overall question or completing the necessary consultations.
I cannot understand why the Prime Minister and the government are moving ahead of the royal commission, and why they do not call for a report at this time. The members of the commission staff are not even able to get along or work together to find solutions to the problems, yet they are spending millions of dollars. One wonders how they can spend so much money, unless they are standing on the street corners throwing it away to the public.
[DOT] (3:30 p.m.)
It is about time this report was called for. After we have had a chance to study it I think the Prime Minister might be in order in making the same presentation as he made today. The Prime Minister has mentioned the fact that he is going to bring together the departments of education of Ontario and Quebec in order to talk about setting up a French language school in the capital city. I would remind him that there happens to be eight other provinces in this country apart from those two. For all these provinces and their people Ottawa is the capital of our nation too, so I consider that any program should be much broader than the one mentioned by the Prime Minister.
I would also remind the Prime Minister, as a point of interest, that last year the school board in this city attempted to set up a French secondary school. The school board gave its complete support to this proposal but only 140 people-this figure includes both

Statement on Wildlife Policy English and French speaking citizens-expressed any interest in the school, and only 43 of these people were within the boundaries of Ottawa.
It seems to me that the Prime Minister, in spite of his sincerity and desire in making 1967, our centennial year, a year of unity, is moving ahead of himself and in so doing is defeating the very objective which is his and to which I believe he is dedicated. I believe that the Prime Minister, in view of what he has said today, has an obligation to this house, to the country and to the government he leads to call for the report of the B and B commission immediately; because, if we are to proceed with the policy he outlined today, there is no justification for that commission continuing its work.
The objective of unity in this country is one that I share and believe in with all my heart, because if we in Canada cannot live together in unity and develop a cohesive nation, what hope is there for the rest of the world? We might look at two examples in this connection; one is Switzerland and the other Belgium. Switzerland is a trilingual country in which the people get along and work together in harmony, as we hope we can in Canada. On the other hand there is in Belgium a situation that is tending to disrupt that little country. I would hope that the policies to which the Prime Minister is dedicating himself will not make a Belgium out of Canada rather than achieving the real objective of unity that we need and which is demonstrated by Switzerland.


Mr. Speaker:: I take the liberty of drawing the attention of the hon. member for Sherbrooke, who apparently wishes to participate in the discussion, to the fact that the provisions of standing order 15, paragraph (2a), do not allow him to speak now.



NORTHERN AFFAIRS


Hon. Roger Teillei (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, who has had to leave, I seek the consent of the house to table a statement in English and in French on a national wildlife policy and program. Because of its length I shall not attempt to read the statement. Copies were distributed to the party leaders and later today will be in the hands of all members of the house.
April 6, 1966

Statement on Wildlife Policy
I do wish to say that this resource is of such great value that it has been the subject of extended discussion with and co-operation by all the provinces, and that we intend to discharge in full our responsibilities under the migratory birds treaty.
I shall say only that the government will build up its force of biologists and scientists and make their services available to the provinces. Because we recently announced a federal migratory bird licence, popularly known as a "duck stamp", I think it will be agreed that the policy and program I shall table today is of sufficient importance to be printed in Hansard of today, and if I have the permission of the house I would ask that it be printed as an appendix.


Mr. Speaker:: Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: For text of statement referred to above, see appendix.]


Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, the minister has been kind enough, as has been indicated, to provide copies of the comprehensive statement on wildlife policy. Having had an opportunity to peruse that presentation I should like to make one or two comments.
I noticed that the Minister of Veterans Affairs, in presenting the statement, referred to the ten provinces concerned. I have already been reminded by my worthy colleague the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) that there are two territories involved in this presentation. I can assure the hon. member for Yukon that the policy as outlined and as it will appear in Hansard covers the two territories as well.
The statement indicates that the government has been studying the reports that came out of the resources for tomorrow conference. It is unfortunate that we have not had a government statement on the matter before today because, as all hon. members are aware, that conference took place some five years ago in the city of Montreal. I think it is happy timing, now that this announcement has been made, that it comes on the eve of national wildlife week. It is of course well known that the celebration of this week commences April 10. It is an occasion that is dedicated to the memory of one who is known as the father of conservation, the late Jack Miner. I think it is also significant that it comes in the year in which we shall be

observing the fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the international migratory birds treaty.
I should like to have spoken at greater length on the matter, but I realize that a considerable amount of time has already been taken up in the course of this afternoon's sitting. I would emphasize once again that the time is long past due when we must come to grips with the problem of wise management, on the basis of the multiple use concept, of our renewable resources. This will require implementation of policies at all levels of government.
The statement as I read it is a rehash of many of the ideas, as I have already indicated, that came out of the resources for tomorrow conference. If we are to have government action on these matters the promise that was made almost a year ago to the resource ministers council, when the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources indicated that a wildlife act would be implemented, must be fulfilled at the earliest possible moment.
I think, too, that the problems of co-ordination, because of the jurisdictional difficulties in the management of our wildlife, must be submitted more frequently and with more vigour and enthusiasm to the resource ministers council and secretariat. I hope this organization will be revitalized and will do the job that was intended for it when it was set up some five years ago. This will require intergovernmental co-operation as well. I notice this matter is referred to in the statement.
Above all we must pay tribute to the excellent work that is being carried out by private groups in the resource field. I refer to the Canada Wildlife Federation, which was one of the direct results of the resources for tomorrow conference and is carrying on a major role in the public information sector of responsibility. The same applies to the Audubon Society, and sanctuaries such as the Jack Miner sanctuary and the Alberta game farm. The statement reaffirms principles that were laid down five years ago and is a major breakthrough in dealing with this long delayed problem. I hope that the statement will be followed by government action.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: First of all, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of our leader I want to thank the minister for his foresight in sending him a copy of his policy and
April 6, 1966

program statement. As one who has had a lifetime interest in wildlife, and as a member of a party whose policy has always been the maintenance of wildlife in Canada, I should like to congratulate the minister upon the announcement of a national wildlife policy and program for our country.
I presume this announcement is the end result of the resources for tomorrow conference that was called in Montreal, in 1961. I must emphasize the fact that this is the first detailed statement of policy in this respect we have had since the calling of that conference. I do not underestimate the work that was done either in calling the conference or at the conference itself. I am pleased the minister did provide for his full statement to be included as an appendix to Hansard today. This is very interesting to large numbers of organizations in this country that have worked for the conservation of wildlife and fish resources in Canada, as well as many other persons. I am sure that as a result of the previous announcement by the Prime Minister respecting the civil service, and this very important announcement, many thousands of copies of Hansard for this day will be ordered.
We are very pleased with the minister's announcement of a general wildlife policy which will provide for research into the relationship between wildlife and forests and their effect on wildlife populations. We are pleased that federal research services may be provided to the provinces on request, and that the federal government may support research and management related to wide ranging wildlife populations. Furthermore, we are glad to know that the federal government information program will be designed to serve the interests of all governments wherever situated in Canada.
The first requisite for research into this problem, Mr. Speaker, is a sufficient number of professionally trained staff to undertake research and to administer a policy program when it is implemented. We are very pleased to know that Canadians will have an opportunity to share in the use of our wildlife resources and in the cost of their maintenance. In that respect I have read the announcement carefully and I think it is a very imaginative suggestion on the part of the minister that we should be prepared to enjoy our wildlife and fish resources and to share in the cost of their maintenance and development.
Winter House Building Program.
This party is very pleased that the general policy will be applied to the Yukon and Northwest Territories. This party is pleased to note that opportunities will be sought to promote intergovernmental consultation, and that existing arrangements for consultation and co-ordination among various federal agencies will be reviewed with a view to improving the situation as it exists today. The control of the migratory bird harvests will require consultation and co-operation with the wildlife agencies of the United States.
I cannot resist mentioning at this time, Mr. Speaker, that I look forward to this co-operation on the part of the wildlife branch of the minister's department with similar agencies in the United States. We know already that the national wildlife agencies in the United States have expressed their opposition in the strongest terms possible to the proposal made by the North American Power Alliance for the development of our northern waters. I presume also that the proposed Canadian wildlife branch will offer its services to the government of British Columbia for research into the effect of the Columbia treaty projects and the Peace river power development on wildlife and fish in these vast areas to be flooded.
We hope, as a result, some sound solution will be found to the present problem. This program does offer an opportunity, in the opinion of this group, for the participation of organizations and persons that have been interested in this very important question. I am sure, as I said before, it will be welcomed by all those organizations; the wild life federations of Canada and British Columbia, rod and gun clubs and many other groups. We hope the minister will consider also along with this program, as has been mentioned before, the need for a Canadian conservation college to train young men to administer a program such as this. I also trust, Mr. Speaker, that this announcement is just a prelude to the announcement of a national water policy for Canada.



HOUSING


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minister of Labour):: On several occasions during the past few weeks, Mr. Speaker, members of this house including my colleague the Minister of Veterans Affairs and officials of Central Mortgage
April 6. 1966

Winter House Building Program and Housing and of the Department of Labour, have discussed with me the matter raised in the question asked yesterday by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, namely the effect of the flood conditions in Manitoba on the termination date of the winter house building incentive program.
I should like to say, first of all, that some general representations have been received from a few other areas to the effect that the time for completion of houses under the winter house incentive program be extended beyond April 15. These representations have been based on a variety of factors, including climatic conditions and shortages of labour and materials.
Hon. members will recall that during the previous two winters the termination date for construction under this winter house building program was originally set for March 31, but in each case was extended to mid-April. At the commencement of this winter's program the experience of the two previous years was assessed, and it was decided that the terminal date should be established as April 15. In view of this decision, and after reviewing the experience generally throughout Canada this winter, the government is not disposed to consider any further general extension of the period.
The situation in parts of Manitoba, however, is quite different. There is a possible disaster owing to the flood situation in the area between Emerson and Winnipeg. It is not practical, and in many cases not possible, to continue the construction of houses in flooded or potentially flooded areas. In fact I understand Emerson is being evacuated today.
Accordingly the government is giving the winter house building program in the potential disaster area careful study, and special provision will be made with reference to the completion of houses in all areas of Manitoba directly affected by the flood condition. The exact number of houses which may be affected by the flood conditions is not known, but officials of the Department of Labour and the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation have been requested to examine each case to determine to what extent a delay in construction has been caused by factors related to the current flood situation in Manitoba. Details as to the special action to be taken will be worked out as circumstances develop.


Mr. Sianley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, whether or not the decision of the government not to extend the


April 15 date generally is valid, I should like to express appreciation on behalf of the people of Manitoba for the latter part of the announcement the Minister of Labour has just made. The weather has not been particularly kind to us this winter in the Manitoba area. The result has been certain delays. As the minister pointed out, right now the situation is difficult. Work is actually proceeding on some houses that are behind the dikes, and an effort is being made to complete these by April 15 in order to get the $500 winter bonus. However, if the dikes fail these very houses could be flooded. It is that situation which many of us from Manitoba have directed to the minister's attention. That is the situation we have asked him to deal with.
The statement he has now made that consideration will be given to paying a bonus on houses flooded for work done after the flood waters have receded is a very sensible one. I am glad to know the officials are keeping close watch on the situation. On behalf of all of us from Manitoba I thank the minister for this statement.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)


Mr. A. B. Patterson (Fraser Valley):: adverse weather conditions, resulting in people being unable to meet the deadline.



LIBRARY OF PARLIAMENT


George James McIlraith: That the report of the joint committee of both houses on the library of parliament relating to salary revisions, reclassifications and upgrading of positions in the library of parliament, presented to the house on Thursday, March 24, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

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

Mr. Laprise: 1.	What is the basic pension rate granted to the pensioners of the Canadian National Railways?
2.	When was the rate of that pension last increased?
3.	Have there been requests for increasing this basic rate?
4.	Will the C.N.R. increase this pension soon?


Mr. J. A. Byrne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: The management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
1.	The basic pension under the C.N. 1935 plan is $25 a month. This is paid to all members of this plan who entered service prior to January 1935 and have at least 15 years of allowable service and to those who entered service subsequent to December 31, 1934 and have at least 20 years of allowable service. (Under the 1959 pension plan, there is no basic rate as pensions are based on allowable service and average earnings.)
2.	The basic pension has not been increased.
3.	Representations have been made from time to time to increase the basic pension.
4.	No.


PRINCE RUPERT, B.C.-HOUSING ACCOMMODATION FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
Mr. Howard: 1.	What type and size of houses are provided for government employees in the air services of the
Questions
Department of Transport in Prince Rupert, what rent is charged therefor, and/or are any housing allowances provided and, if so, what are the details thereof?
2.	What type and size of houses are provided for government employees in the marine services of the Department of Transport in Prince Rupert, what rent is charged therefor, and/or are any housing allowances provided and. if so, what are the details thereof?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. Seven duplexes and one single dwelling described as three bedroom basementless frame construction, having an area of approximately 944 sq. ft.
These houses are provided by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the department pays $135 per month for each unit to C.M.H.C.
Rental charges to employees vary between $77 and $80 per month and employees purchase their own electricity and heating fuel. These rental charges are based on the public service accommodation regulations.
2.	Two dwellings, one is a two storey, three bedrooms, basementless detached house, with carport, having an area of 576 sq. ft., and the other is described as one half of a semidetached building identical in size and description, except that no carport is provided.
The first dwelling is on permanent lease from Air Services and C.M.H.C. and the second one has been made available to marine services on a temporary agreement with air services until the fall of 1966. The rental charges are $80 per month for the detached house with carport and $75 per month for the one half semi-detached dwelling without carport. The employees pay for heat and electricity.


WORKING CONDITIONS, COAST GUARD VESSELS
Mr. Douglas: 1.	(a) How many days, on the average, do the masters and officers of the Canadian Coast Guard vessels Racer and Ready work each year (b) how does this differ from the average days worked by masters and officers on comparable commercial vessels using the same type of watch system?
2.	(a) How many hours per year does this average out to (b) how does this differ from the hours per year worked on comparable commercial vessels?
3.	(a) How many days off do the masters and officers receive in addition to annual leave and statutory holidays (b) how does this differ from the days off allowed on comparable commercial vessels?
4.	(a) What is the rate of pay for masters and officers on the Racer and Ready (b) what is the rate of pay for masters and officers on comparable commercial vessels?

April 6, 1966
Questions
5.	(a) When on leave, are masters and officers of the Racer and Ready required to be on a stand-by basis (b) how does this differ from the practice followed on comparable commercial
vessels?
6.	(a) Is compensatory leave granted to masters and officers of the Racer and Ready for Saturdays and Sundays worked (b) how does this differ from the practice followed on comparable commercial vessels?
7.	Are the masters and officers of the Racer and Ready covered by all provisions of the Canada Labour (Standards) Code?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. (a) The masters and officers of the Canadian Coast Guard vessels Racer and Ready work an average of 225 days each year, (b) The Canadian Coast Guard is a government service, performing specialized non-commercial functions with specialized vessels in fields in which there is no commercial counterpart.
2.	(a) These officers work an average of 2,700 hours per year, (b) See answer to part 1 (b).
3.	(a) These officers are off duty an average of 121 days per year, excluding 10 days' annual leave and 9 days' statutory holidays; after 15 years' service they have an additional five days' annual leave per annum, (b) See answer to part 1 (b).
4.	(a) The rates of pay are currently: masters $6,998; chief officer $6,228; second officer $5,148; chief engineer $6,716; second engineer $6,228; third engineer $5,148. The above rates are presently being re-examined, (b) See answer to part 1 (b).
5.	(a) When on leave masters and officers of the Racer and Ready are not required to be on stand-by duty, (b) See answer to part 1 (b).
6.	(a) Compensatory leave is granted to the masters and officers of these vessels for Saturdays and Sundays worked, and this leave is incorporated within the work cycle; these officers work an average of 56 hours per week, they serve on the vessel four weeks and are off duty two weeks, (b) See answer to part 1 (b).
Effective	Single	MarriedDate	Pensioner	Pensioner1 Oct 47	$228	$3001 Jan 52	372	5401 Jul 57	300	3601 Mar 61	360	4801 Sep 64	240	288

7.	The employees of the Canadian Coast Guard service are in the same position in this respect as other federal employees.


C.N.R. EMPLOYEES
Mr. Mather: 1.	What was the number of C.N.R. working personnel, including trainmen and shop staff members, in 1960, 1963 and 1965?
2.	What was the number of C.N.R. managerial level employees in the same years?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Canadian National Railways advise as follows:
The requested information which is published annually by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics in Part 6, "(Employment Statistics) of Railway Transport" is as follows. The figures for the year 1964 are shown as those for the year 1965 are not yet published.
Total Managerial Total Employees Supervisory (Canadian Lines) (Canadian Lines)
1960	96,227	6,5871963	85,591	7,7581964	86,341	7,771WAR VETERANS PENSIONS	
Question	No. 473-Mr. Laprise:	
1.	In 1920, what was the maximum pension a war veteran, either (a) married, or (b) single, could receive from the government?
2.	When was the annual rate of this pension increased and what was the amount of each increase?
3.	From 1920, what comparisons can be established between (a) the rise of the cost of living, and (b) the increase of that pension from year to year?


Roger-Joseph Teillet: 1. In 1920 the maximum pension received by (a) a married veteran was $1,200 per annum. Additional pension for one child was $180 per annum; two children $324 per annum; each subsequent child $120 per annum. (b) a single veteran was $900 per annum.
2.	Pensions were increased as follows:
Each
Subsequent
One Child Two Children Child (rates per annum)
$48	$84	$24
12	12 No change
No Change No change No change 84	144	4836	60	24
April 6, 1966

Questions
3.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS Veterans disability pension rates in current dollars and constant dollars, 1920-1965.
100 per cent pension rates1	100 per cent pension rates
in current dollars	in 1949 dollars
Married	Married	Consumer	Married	Marriedwith no	plus 2	price index	with no	plus 2Year	Single	children	children	(1949 = 100) Single	children	children$	$	$	$	$	$1920	900	1,200	1,524	93.6 962	1,282	1,6281921	900	1,200	1,524	82.4 1,092	1,456	1,8501922	900	1,200	1,524	75.4 1,194	1,592	2,0211923	900	1,200	1,524	75.6 1,191	1,587	2,0161924	900	1,200	1,524	74.3 1,211	1,615	2,0511925	900	1,200	1,524	75.0 1,200	1,600	2,0321926	900	1,200	1,524	75.8 1,187	1,583	2,0111927	900	1,200	1,524	74.5 1,208	1,611	2,0461928	900	1,200	1,524	74.8 1,203	1,604	2,0371929	900	1,200	1,524	75.7 1,189	1,585	2,0131930	900	1,200	1,524	75.2 1,197	1,596	2,0271931	900	1,200	1,524	67.8 1,327	1,770	2,2481932	900	1,200	1,524	61.6 1,461	1,948	2,4741933	900	1,200	1,524	58.7 1,533	2,044	2,5961934	900	1,200	1,524	59.5 1,513	2,017	2,5611935	900	1,200	1,524	59.9 1,503	2,003	2,5441936	900	1,200	1,524	61.1 1,473	1,964	2,4941937	900	1,200	1,524	63.0 1,429	1,905	2,4191938	900	1,200	1,524	63.7 1,413	1,884	2,3921939	900	1,200	1,524	63.2 1,424	1,899	2,4111940	900	1,200	1,524	65.7 1,370	1,826	2,3201941	900	1,200	1,524	69.6 1,293	1,725	2,1901942	900	1,200	1,524	72.9 1,235	1,646	2,0901943	900	1,200	1,524	74.2 1,213	1,617	2,0541944	900	1,200	1,524	74.6 1,206	1,609	2,0431945	900	1,200	1,524	75.0 1,200	1,600	2,0321946	900	1,200	1,524	77.5 1,161	1,548	1,9661947	1,128	1,500	1,908	84.8 1,330	1,769	2,2501948	1,128	1,500	1,908	97.0 1,163	1,546	1,9671949	1,128	1,500	1,908	100.0 1,128	1,500	1,9081950	1,128	1,500	1,908	102.9 1,096	1,458	1,8541951	1,128	1,500	1,908	113.7 992	1,319	1,6781952	1,500	2,040	2,460	116.5 1,288	1,751	2,1121953	1,500	2,040	2,460	115.5 1,299	1,766	2,1301954	1,500	2,040	2,460	116.2 1,291	1,756	2,1171955	1,500	2,040	2,460	116.4 1,289	1,753	2,1131956	1,500	2,040	2,460	118.1 1,270	1,727	2,0831957	1,800	2,400	2,820	121.9 1,477	1,969	2,3131958	1,800	2,400	2,820	125.1 1,439	1,918	2,2541959	1,800	2,400	2,820	126.5 1,423	1,897	2,2291960	1,800	2,400	2,820	128.0 1,406	1,875	2,2031961	2,160	2,880	3,444	129.2 1,672	2,229	2,6661962	2,160	2,880	3,444	130.7 1,653	2,204	2,6351963	2,160	2,880	3,444	133.0 1,624	2,165	2,5891964	2,400	3,168	3,792	135.4 1,773	2,340	2,8011965	2,400	3,168	3,792	138.7 1,730	2,284	2,734
1 Pension rates are shown for the year in which they became effective.

April 6. 1966
Questions


FLYING OF ROYAL UNION FLAG
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	In how many centres in Canada and abroad and over what buildings did the Royal Union flag (Union Jack) fly by direction of any department or official of the Dominion Government on May 24, 1965?
2.	On what occasion other than Victoria Day (May 24) would the Royal Union flag be appropriately flown on the courtesy flag staff on Parliament Hill?
3.	What commonwealth leaders on visits to Ottawa have been or would be appropriately honored by flying the Royal Union flag from the courtesy flag staff?
4.	What other flags are normally flown from this staff and on what dates or occasions?
5.	On what occasions are the UN flag and the NATO flag flown from this staff?
Kon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secretary of Slate):
I am informed by several departments as follows:
1.	The royal union flag and the national flag of Canada were flown on May 24, 1965 at federal locations in Canada where there was at least two flag poles. These were: Plea-santville, Nfld., main entrance to the complex; Halifax, N.S., Camp Hill hospital; Ottawa, Ont., Brooke Claxton building, Supreme Court building, Parliament Hill groundstaffs, National War Memorial; Val Caron, Ont., Federal building; Windsor, Ont., Federal building; Battleford, Sask., Fort Battleford national historic park; Edmonton, Alta., Tri Services recruiting centre; the Veterans' Home; Kamloops, B.C., Federal building; Vancouver, B.C., General post office; Shaughnessy hospital; Whitehorse, Y.T., Federal building; Forty nine Canadian Forces Headquarters buildings throughout Canada.
2.	The royal union flag is flown with the Canadian flag on the two ground staffs on Parliament Hill on the official celebration of the Queen's birthday (on or about May 24), and the anniversary of the Statute of Westminster (Dec. 11) and on the occasions of royal visits and certain commonwealth gatherings in Ottawa.
3.	The union jack has been and will continue to be flown on the courtesy staff on Parliament Hill when the Prime Minister of Britain or his representative pays an official visit to Ottawa.
4.	The UN flag and the NATO flag; the flags of other countries are also flown on that staff on special occasions such as state visits by the heads of those countries.

5.	The UN flag is flown on that staff on United Nations day, and the NATO flag on NATO day, while either flag may be flown by special arrangement on other occasions.


IMMIGRATION STATISTICS
Mr. Caoueffe: 1.	For each of the last five years (a) what was the percentage of French speaking Immigrants to Canada (b) what was the percentage of English speaking immigrants (c) what percentage did not speak either English or French?
2.	Of these immigrants, what percentage settled in Quebec, and (a) what percentage were French speaking people (b) what percentage were English speaking people (c) what percentage were neither English speaking nor French speaking people?
3.	Of these immigrants, what percentage settled in Ontario?
4.	Is the government intending to further immigration of French speaking people to Quebec?


Mr. John C. Munro (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):: A system of recording and compiling the language facility of immigrants to Canada was not introduced until 1962. For the years 1962 and 1963 the data compiled showed only whether the immigrant spoke one of Canada's two official languages fluently enough to integrate quickly in his occupation. The particular language spoken was not specified. However, more detailed information is available for 1964 and 1965.
1,	2 and 3. See following tables.
4. The government has intensified its efforts to increase the number of qualified immigrants coming to Canada from all countries, including French speaking countries. As far as France itself is concerned, two new immigration offices were opened during the fiscal year 1964-65 at Bordeaux and Marseilles and, to the extent possible under the regulations of the French Government, immigration promotional efforts have been stepped up. Regarding the settlement of immigrants in Quebec, the choice of destination is a matter to be decided upon by the immigrants themselves. However, immigrants are counselled overseas as to the areas of possible establishment best suited to their individual skills and personal
April 6. 1966
qualifications. For example, French speaking immigrants ordinarily are counselled that the best opportunities for successful and ready integration lie in those areas of Canada having a substantial French speaking population. As can be seen from the attached tables, most French speaking immigrants have migrated to Quebec and this trend is expected to continue.
Questions TABLE I Percentage of Immigrant Arrivals by Province of Destination for 1962 to 1965
Year	Quebec	Ontario	Other Provinces1962	25.65	49.88	24.471963	24.97	52.83	22.201964	23.06	54.58	22.361965	20.67	54.31	25.02


TABLE II
[Stage Direction]
Percentage of Immigrant Arrivals by Province of Destination and Language Spoken, 1962 and 1963
Language Spoken
French or English or Both
Neither French nor English
Canada	Quebec
Ontario
Other
Provinces
1962	1963	1962	1963	1962	1963	1962	196378.6	72.4	76.8	68.45	76.67	70.65	84.35	81.1321.4	27.6	23.2	31.55	23.33	29.35	15.65	18.87

[Stage Direction]
Percentage of Immigrant Arrivals by Province of Destination and Language Spoken, 1964 and 1965
Other
Language Spoken	Canada	Quebec	Ontario	Provinces	French but	1964	1965	1964	1965	1964	1965	1964	1965not English English but	5.83	5.20	19.89	19.15	1.79	1.69	1.17	1.31not French Both French and	44.46	50.58	24.51	29.62	47.16	50.86	58.46	67.26English Neither French nor	3.95	3.49	10.00	9.65	2.04	1.79	2.36	2.11English	45.76	40.73	45.60	41.58	49.01	45.66	38.01	29.32

Mr. Choqueiie: Have the Royal Canadian Mounted Police submitted a report giving information on the attempt made on the life of the present Leader of the Opposition when the rails were dynamited in Lemieux, Lotbiniere county, in 1963?


Hon. L. T. Pennell (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, the dynamiting of the rails at Lemieux, Quebec in 1963 was investigated by the Quebec provincial police and the Canadian National Railways police. Assistance was rendered by the R.C.M.P. and reports were submitted to R.C.M.P. headquarters, Ottawa, by the R.C.M.P. at Drummondville and Montreal.


FURS SOLD BY FISHERIES DEPARTMENT
Mr. Diefenbaker: 1.	What was the total value of furs owned in whole or in part by the Department of Fisheries as of the 24th day of January, 1966?
2.	What is the total amount of sales made since the said date?
3.	What company or companies were the sales agents?


Hon. H. J. Robichaud (Minister of Fisheries):: 1. Estimated market value as of said date-$2,700,000.
2.	$621,241.
3.	Hudson's Bay Company, fur sales department, Montreal.

April 6/ 1966
Questions


INTEGRATION OF SERVICES, NORTHWEST TERRITORIES
Mr. Orange: 1.	What plans are being made to integrate the staffs of the Indian affairs branch and the northern administration branch located in the Mackenzie district of the Northwest Territories, how soon will integration of staffs take effect and what timetable has been set out to integrate (a)welfare services (b) community development services (c) industrial development services (d) engineering services (e) financial services (f) purchasing and supply services (g) general administrative services?
2.	What will be the total reduction of positions following integration?
Numbers in classification and location of years shown
3.
Location and classification Fort Smith, N.W.T.
Indian Affairs Officer 7 Indian Affairs Officer 6 Indian Affairs Officer 4 Superintendent 2, Indian Agency Administrative Officer 4 Administrative Officer 3 Administrative Officer 1 (Seas.)
(unclassified)
Social Worker 5 Development Officer 4 Development Officer 3 Development Officer 1 (Seas.)
Principal Clerk Clerk 4 Clerk 3
Stenographer 3 Stenographer 2 Construction Supervisor 3 Assistant Technician 3 Maintenance Craftsman 4
Totals
Hay River, N.W.T.
Indian Affairs Officer 2 Assistant 3, Indian Agency Labourer
Totals
Fort Simpson, N.W.T.
Indian Affairs Officer 4 Indian Affairs Officer 1 Superintendent 2, Indian Agency Superintendent 1, Indian Agency Clerk 4
Stenographer 2 Labourer
Totals

3.	What were the numbers in classification and location of each position in the Mackenzie district of the Northwest Territories of the Indian affairs branch in 1962-63, in 1963-64, in 1964-65, in 1965-66, and in 1966-67 including those positions which have been proposed by the branch to Treasury Board and the Civil Service Commission


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources):: 1 and 2. This matter is now being studied by an interbranch committee, headed by the two assistant deputy ministers concerned. It is expected that this study will take several months.
3.	See the following list.
each position in Mackenzie District for fiscal
1962-63	1963-64	1964-65	1965-66	1966-671	1	2	2	2_	-	_	1	1-	-	1	1	11	1	-	-	i1	1	1	_	X6	6	6	-	-_	_	1	1	1_	-	-	1	1-	-	-	1	1-	-	-	6	61	1	1	1	11	1	1	1	11	1	1	1	1-	-	1	1	12	2	2	2	2-	-	-	1	1-	-	-	1	1 214	14	17	21	24-	-	1	1	11	1	-	-	--	-	-	1	11	1	1	2	2-	1	1	1 11 1	l 1	1	1	1-	-	1	1	11	1	1	1	13	3	4	4	5
April 6, 1966

Questions
Numbers in classification and location of	each position in Mackenzie District				for fiscal
years shown					
Location and classification	1962-63	1963-64	1964-65	1965-66	1966-67
Yellowknife, N.W.T.					
Indian Affairs Officer 4	-	-	1	1	1Indian Affairs Officer 2	-	-	1	1	1Indian Affairs Officer 1	-	-	-	1	1Superintendent 2, Indian Agency	1	1	-	-	Assistant 3, Indian Agency	1	1	-	"Clerk 4	1	1	1	1	1Clerk 3	-	-	-	-	1Stenographer 2	1	1	1	1	1-	-	-	-	-Totals	4	4	4	5	6Inuvik, N.W.T.	Indian Affairs Officer 5	-	-	1	1	1Superintendent 3, Indian Agency	-	1	-	-	Superintendent 1, Indian Agency	1	-	-	-	-Clerk 4	1	1	1	1	1Stenographer 2	1	1	1	1	1Supervising Clerk	-	-	-	-	1-	-	-	-	-Totals	3	3	3	3	4Fort MacPherson, N.W.T.	Indian Affairs Officer 2	-	-	1	1	IAssistant 3, Indian Agency	1	I	-	-	-Labourer	1	1	1	1	1-	-	-	-	-Totals	2	2	2	2	2Fort Norman, N.W.T.	Indian Affairs Officer 2	-	-	1	1	1Assistant 3, Indian Agency	1	1	-	-	-Labourer	1	1	1	1	1-	-	-	-	-Totals	2	2	2	2	2Fort Good Hope, N.W.T.	Indian Affairs Officer 1	.	-	-	1	1Labourer	-	-	-	1	1-	-	-	-	-Totals	-	"	2	2


C.B.C. PENSION PLAN
Mr. Gundlock: 1.	Do reports on a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation pension plan at March 31. 1964, indicate an actuarial deficiency in respect to future benefits payable of $6,682,000 or 6.7 per cent of the $100,000,000 actual value?
2.	Did the pension plan trustees recommend to the corporation that no action be taken until further analysis made in June 1965 was completed and the effect of integration with the Canada Pension Plan determined?
3.	How did this deficiency come about and what effect will it have on retirement benefits paid to the pension plan contribution?
4.	Has the further analysis of June been completed and, if so, what is the recommendation of the board as a result of the analysis?
5.	What has been the effect of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation Pension Plan as a result of the integration with the Canada Pension Plan?
6.	Have contributions to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation pension plan been allowed to determine collectively what changes were to be made to the plan and, if not, will they be allowed to in the future, and by what method?

April 6, 1966
Questions


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secretary of State):: 
C.N.R. SHIPMENT OF TRAILERS IN NEWFOUNDLAND
Mr. Scott (Danforth): 1.	How many trailers were shipped over the C.N.R. from St. John's, Newfoundland and Stephen-ville, Newfoundland, to Grand Falls and Bishop's Falls, Newfoundland, during the months of May, June and July, 1960?
2.	Who were the shippers for each shipment?
3.	Who was the consignee?
4.	What were the dates of the shipments?
5.	Was approved credit issued by the C.N.R. or requested from the C.N.R. in regard to the freight charges incurred and, if so (a) to whom was credit issued (b) what was the total amount of freight

charges on the shipments (c) were any collection statements sent to the shippers, and, if so, to whom (d) were any payments made on account and, if so, what were the dates of payments, by whom were the payments made, and what were the amounts of payments?
6.	Does the C.N.R. have "blocking charges" for shipments of this nature and, if so, what are the charges?
7.	Were blocking charges for shipment of the above trailers charged?
8.	Did C.N.R. employees in St. John's, Newfoundland, work overtime on week days or Sundays and were they paid overtime for shipment of the said trailers and, if so (a) how many men were working overtime (b) how many hours did they work (c) what was the total amount paid for the overtime (d) what steps have been taken to collect the account to date, and the date of these steps, if any?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Canadian National Railways advise that litigation is pending in the courts of Newfoundland and Quebec on certain aspects embraced by the questions and therefore answers to the questions could be construed as legal interrogatories or examination for discovery. In view of the subjudice nature of the matter it is not considered appropriate to provide information.


COMPETITION FOR FISHERIES WARDEN, PICTOU, N.S.
Mr. MacEwan: 1.	Who was the successful candidate in the recent civil service commission competition No. 66-H524, fisheries warden. Department of Fisheries, Pictou county, Nova Scotia?
2.	Has an eligible list been established as a result of this competition?
3.	What are the names and addresses of the applicants in this competition?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I have been given the following information by the civil service commission:
1.	Roderick MacLeod.
2.	Yes.
3.	Having regard for the right to privacy of candidates and the possibility that the release of information could prove not only embarrassing but prejudicial to them, the commission holds in confidence information concerning candidates whose names do not appear on the eligible list.
April 6. 1966


DISEASE IN CORN CROPS, SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO
Mr. Danforlh: 1.	Have any incidents of disease in the commercial and seed corn crops of southwestern Ontario, particularly in the counties of Essex and Kent, been identified as caused by virus infection?
2.	Have any outbreaks of disease in the commercial and seed corn crops been reported that have been suspected of being, or have been proven to be, caused by the maize dwarf mosaic or any other disease causing the stunting of corn?
3.	Has the government stationed in the immediate area sufficient agricultural technicians (a) to correctly identify any such virus infection (b) to determine whether such disease could be spread by insects and to identify such insects (c) to work out suitable control measures in either of the above instances?
4.	Are any technicians working on this problem directly and, if so, where are they located regarding laboratory facilities, etc.?


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Agriculture):: 1.	Yes. Only wheat streak mosaic virus, which causes mild mottle symptoms in corn, has been identified. Red kernel stripe of corn which was originally suspected of being caused by virus infection has not been confirmed and probably is not virus induced.
2.	No. Maize dwarf mosaic virus is known to occur in the corn areas of the United States but so far no suspected or proven cases have been found in Canada. It is known to be in the Ohio and Mississippi valleys and as far north as southern Ohio. Considerable research is in progress in the U.S.A.
3.	and 4. Adequate attention is given to plant disease problems in the region. One officer at Harrow now works on all corn diseases in southwestern Ontario. He refers any suspected virus diseases to the plant research institute, Ottawa, for expert identification and insect vector relationships. An additional specialist has been engaged, starting in June, to deal specifically with corn virus diseases and will be supported by local entomological staff on the mode of transmission.
Questions
In addition, the department has a highly qualified specialist at the plant research institute, Ottawa, on cereal and grass virus diseases, including corn. He is supported by two research officers on insect vector relations and isolation of viruses, respectively.


STATUES ON PARLIAMENT HILL
Mr. Enns: 1.	Under what appropriation were the various statues on Parliament Hill developed and which department is responsible for their maintenance?
2.	Has the government any plans to erect additional statues e.g., the Right Hon. Arthur Meighen. the Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King, the Right Hon. R. B. Bennett, the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent and subsequent prime ministers to commemorate the 14 prime ministers in our first hundred years of confederation?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the Department of Public Works and the Prime Minister's office as follows:
1.	Department of Public Works.
2.	Consideration is being given to the possibility of commemorating certain former prime ministers in the manner suggested.
ARDA PROJECTS, MANITOBA Question No. 967


Mr. Stefanson:: 1.	Since the signing of the second ARDA agreement with the province of Manitoba, how many projects have been approved and what is the estimated total cost of these?
2.	What are these projects, where are they located, when were they approved, what is the estimated cost of each and how is the cost shared?


Hon. Maurice Sauve (Minister of Forestry):: 1.	Fourteen projects have been approved and the estimated cost totals to $632,025.
2.	The following list indicates the description of each of these projects approved, where they are located, the date on which they were approved, the estimated cost and the federal contribution of each project.
{Mr. SauveJ


MANITOBA
[Stage Direction]
Projects Approved for the Province of Manitoba from April 1, 1965 under the new ARDA agreement
Project
Number	Approved	Description	General Area of Activity
26001	October 12, 1965	
26002	October 19, 1965	
26003	October 12, 1965	
26004	October 12, 1965	
26005	November 30, 1965	
26006	November 30, 1965	
26007	January 11, 1966	
26009	March 2, 1966	
36001	May 1965	
36002	May 1965	
36003	May 1965	
36004	July 1965	
36005	July 1965	
36006	March 1966	
Water Research Program	 Province-wide	
Land Utilization Research	 Province-wide	
Land Indexing of Productivity	 Province-wide	
Rural Development Program	 Interlake	
Rural Development Officer Services Training... Province-wide	
Fisher River-Feasibility Study	 Fisher River (Interlake)	
Blueberry Project	 Eastern Manitoba	
Fish Lake No. 2 Waterfowl Control Project	 Interlake	
Study Involving Rural Communities in Self-
Appraisal of Potentials	 Interlake	
Co-ordination for Rural Development Research.. Interlake	
Soil Survey in the Northern Part of the Interlake
Rural Development Area	 Interlake	
Land Capability Study, Including Preparation of Land Administration Map-Northern Interlake
Area	 Interlake	
Preparation of Long-term Recreational Development Master Plan for the Area Extending from
Netley Marsh to Hecla Island	 Southwestern Shore of Lake Winnipeg..
Pilot Group Action (Interlake)	 Interlake	
Federal
Contribution
Total
Cost
[Stage Direction]
56,900
50.000
25.000
98.500 12,925
50.000
25.000 25,200
45.500
12.000
50.000
136.000
25.000
20.000
[Stage Direction]
28,450
25.000
12.500 49,250
6,463
25.000
12.500 9,450
45.500
12.000
50.000
136.000
25.000
20.000
3936	COMMONS DEBATES	April 6, 1966
Questions
April 6. 1966
Mr. McLean (Charlotte): 1.	What was the total production of coal in Canada for each year from 1957 to 1965, inclusive?
2.	What was the total amount of subsidies or grants paid by the federal government to the coal industry for each year from 1957 to 1965, inclusive?
3.	What was the total tonnage and cost of Nova Scotia coal moved under subvention for each year from 1957 to 1965, inclusive?
Mr. Jack Davis (Parliamentary Secretary
to Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):
1.	By fiscal years, the total production of coal in Canada was as follows:
Year
1956-	57
1957-	58
1958-	59
1959-	60
1960-	61
1961-	62
1962-	63
1963-	64
1964-	65
2. By fiscal years,
Tons
14.287.000
12.814.000
11.182.000
10.936.000
10.484.000
10.772.000
10.310.000
10.617.000
11.739.000
amounts of subsidies
or grants paid by the federal government, directly or indirectly to the benefit of the coal industry, including amounts for which there was subsequent reimbursement, was as follows:
Cost to
Reimburse- Federal
Year	Payments	ments	Treasury1956-57	$ 9,454,640	$ 9,454,6401957-58	8,684,973	8,684,9731958-59	11,145,600	11,145,6001959-60	17,477,013	$393,124	17,083,8891960-61	19,203,823	706,876	18,496,9471961-62	19,786,089	500,000	19,286,0891962-63	20,334,402	296,468	20,037,9341963-64	20,457,238	20,457,2381964-65	23,062,762	23,062,762Note 1:	Under "Payments",	the above
includes: (a) the normal subvention assistance paid variously to transportation companies, coal mine operators, coal distributors or coal consumers in accordance with regulations under the subvention orders in council; (b)
Questions
tonnage payments on Nova Scotia coal not otherwise eligible for subvention, made in
1960-	61, 1961-62 and 1962-63, to delay the closing of certain Cape Breton mines; (c) payments of 30 cents per ton on Nova Scotia coal and 10 cents per ton on New Brunswick coal in 1962-63 and 1963-64, conditional on the use of such funds to improve the competitive positions of these coals in relation to imported residual fuel oils; (d) payments based on the consumption of coal in thermal electric power plants in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, made directly to the respective provincial power commissions, under the Atlantic Provinces Power Development Act, to enable them to reduce the cost of electric power to industrial consumers but indirectly encouraging the use of coal rather than other fuel; (e) payments made to sectors of the steel industry, under the Canadian Coal Equality Act, but having some indirect benefit to Nova Scotia, Alberta and British Columbia bituminous coals.
Not included in the above are contributions by the province of Nova Scotia to the 1960-61,
1961-	62 and 1962-63 programs of delaying the closing of certain mines until employment readjustments could be made. While making the federal payments as indicated by (b), the government of Canada acted merely as transmitting agency for these additional provincial payments.
Note 2: Under "Reimbursements" in the table above, the amounts shown were involved in an agreement of the province of Nova Scotia to pay part of the cost of increased subventions to enlarge the Ontario market for Nova Scotia coal and also a portion of the extra costs of stockpiling coal during a period of critical market constriction. In this case, the government of Canada paid the total cost of the increased subventions and the Government of Nova Scotia reimbursed the consolidated revenue fund for the provincial share.
3.	By fiscal years, the tonnage and cost of Nova Scotia coal moved under subvention were as follows:
3938	COMMONS DEBATES	April 6, 1966
Questions
Net Cost to Federal
Year	Tonnage	Cost	Reimbursements	Treasury1956-57	2,474,481	$ 7,043,378	$ 7,043,3781957-58	2,148,341	6,526,660	6,526,6601958-59	2,238,104	8,257,742	8,257,7421959-60	2,414,786	13,518,396	$393,124	13,125,2721960-61	1,872,913	11,864,874	706,876	11,157,9981961-62	2,311,503	13,266,996	500,000	12,766,9961962-63	2,275,920	14,069,383	296,468	13,772,9151963-64	2,560,633	14,588,150	14,588,1501964-65	3,171,288	16,971,607	16,971,607
Note 3: The reimbursements are the same as described in Note 2, above.
Note 4: Not included in the table immediately above are the payments of 30 cents per ton (note 1 (c)) for use in improving the position of Nova Scotia coal in relation to imported fuel oil, and included in the total payments tabulation in answer to part 2 of the question. On Nova Scotia coal, these amounted to $1,176,590 in 1962-63 and to $279,384 in 1963-64.


POST OFFICE, NOTHE DAME DE LA GUADELOUPE, QUE.
Mr. Langlois (Meganiic): 1.	How much did the construction of the post office at Notre Dame de la Guadeloupe, Frontenac county, cost?
2.	What was the cost of the land?
3.	What was the cost of the building?
4.	From whom was the land purchased?
5.	Who supplied the building materials for this building?
6.	What quantity of lumber was used in this building?
7.	Was this lumber stamped or approved?
8.	How much did this lumber cost?
9.	What various sizes of lumber were required for this building and what quantity of each size was bought?
10.	Who was or who were the regular inspectors who supervised this work (a) local inspectors (b) federal inspectors?
11.	Were there any surplus building materials, and, if so, what was their nature and their value?
12.	Was a part of the construction cost of this building borne by winter works programs and, if so (a) what was the amount of those grants (b) how many persons benefited from them (c) what are their names (d) how much did each one receive?
13.	Who was the contractor for this building?
14.	How many tenders were sent relative to this building and received by the government, and (a) what are the names of the people involved (b) what was the amount of each of these tenders?


George James McIlraith: 1. $34,282.81 including Post Office equipment, legal fees, survey, etc.
2.	$4,500.
3.	$25,265.10 (contract, extras and credits).
4.	The Municipality of the Village of La Guadeloupe, Que.
5.	La Guadeloupe Construction Enrg. General Contractor.
6.	All lumber was furnished by the general contractor. The estimated quantity is approximately 14,300 bd. ft. of lumber and 3,660 sq. ft. of plywood (windows, doors and wood trim not included).
7.	Lumber for floor and ceiling beams and joists was stamped. Lumber for perimeter walls and partitions was not stamped but was approved.
8.	Unknown. (This is the responsibility of the general contractor.)
9.	Approximate quantity as described in
item 6 provides for the following sizes: (1" x	2")	(1"	x	3")	(2" x 2")	(1" x	6")(2" x	3")	(2"	x	4")	(2" x 6")	(2" x	8")(2" x	10")	(2"	x	12")	or approximately	997pieces	12 ft. long or 11,800 bd. ft. Woodsheathing, approximately 2,500 sq. ft; Plywood, approximately 3,660 sq. ft.10.	(a) Mr. J. Lapierre, Clerk of Works, (b) Messrs. J. M. Chaloux, Architect, District Office; R. Godin, Mechanical Engineer, District Office. R. Imbeau, Technical Officer, District Office. A. Trudel, Technical Officer, District Office.11.	Not known.12.	No. (a) Nil. (b) None, (c) See (a) and (b). (d) See (a) and (b).13.	La Guadeloupe Construction Enrg., La Guadeloupe, Que.
April 6, 1966

Questions
14.	Five (a) La Guadeloupe Construction Enrg. (La Guadeloupe) $24,477.00; H. Lessard & S. Labreque (East Broughton $24,659.00; Claude Bourassa (Victoriaville) $24,833.50; Marquis & Freres Limitee (Sherbrooke) $24,991.00; Girard & Frere Enrg. (Chicoutimi) $29,600.00. (b) See above.
tEnglish]


TELEVISION TOWER, ELDEE, ONT.
Mr. Lefebvre: 1.	What was the total cost of the land purchased for the erection of a television tower at Eldee, Ontario, in the Nipissing district?
2.	When was the tower erected?
3.	Who was the contractor?
4.	How many tenders were received and from whom and what were their respective amounts?
5.	Does this tower receive its signal from the relay station of Sturgeon Falls, Ontario, and, if so, where does the signal of Sturgeon Falls come from?
6.	Does the tower of Eldee serve also the French speaking population of Mattawa, Ontario, and the residents of the town of Temiscamingue and its district as well?
7.	What is the total estimate of the size of the French speaking population served by this tower of Eldee?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1.	$100.00.
2.	Tower erection was started on January 27, 1963 and the station came into operation on March 15, 1963.
3.	Canadian General Electric Company Limited.
4.	Tenders were received from Canadian General Electric Company Limited and RCA Victor Company Limited in the amounts of $151,291.30 and $154,517.10 respectively. In addition, Canadian Marconi Company Limited and Northern Electric Company Limited were invited to tender but declined to bid. These tenders were for the supply, installation and testing of a complete television rebroadcasting station and associated equipment including the tower.
5.	This television rebroadcasting station receives its signal from the Sturgeon Falls station by means of off-air reception. The Sturgeon Falls station receives its signal by means of a direct connection to the C.B.C. French television network.
6.	Yes.
7.	A population of 18,900 based on the June 1, census.


STUDY OF MOUNT LOGAN SKI PROJECT
Mr. Keays: 1.	Has an amount of $48,000 been paid in full to the Dyname Corporation for the study of the Mount Logan winter skiing project and. if so, was the amount paid in one instalment?
2.	If the amount was not paid in one instalment (a) in how many instalments (b) on what dates (c) how much was paid each time?


Maurice Sauvé: 1.	The answer to the first part of the question is yes, and to the second part is no.
2.	(a) Seven (b) and (c) October 2, 1964, $7,000; October 5, 1964, $14,000; October 7, 1964, $7,000; November 6, 1964, $7,000; January 8, 1965, $7,000; January 20, 1965, $3,000; January 21, 1965, $3,000.


USE OF TOWER, MOUNT RYAN, QUE.
Mr. Isabelle: 1.	Does the government own a tower situated on Mount Ryan, in Lac Sainte-Marie, Gatineau county?
2.	Did this tower once serve as a radar substation?
3.	How much did it cost and when was it built?
4.	Could it be used as a relay tower for television?
5.	What is the average cost of a television relay tower with ordinary equipment?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the departments of National Defence and Transport as follows:
1.	No. The installation was disposed of through Crown Assets Disposal Corporation in September 1964.
2.	The radar station was never operated.
3.	The cost of the tower is not known because it was financed by the U.S.A.F. It was built in 1962.
4.	For relay purposes depending on what stations are to be received, the distances involved, and the areas to which these signals are to be relayed.
5.	Depending on type, from $20,000 up.


SASKATCHEWAN REQUEST FOR TABLING OF PENSION PLAN CORRESPONDENCE
Mr. Douglas: 1.	Has the government of Saskatchewan asked permission from the government of Canada to table in the Saskatchewan legislature all correspondence between the government of Saskatchewan and the government of Canada regarding the Canada Pension Plan, since May 22, 1964?
2.	If so, on what date was the request made?

April 6, 1966
Questions
3.	Has approval for the tabling of this correspondence been granted by the federal government?
4.	If so, on what date was approval granted?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: 1. The Department of National Health and Welfare has not received a request from the government of Saskatchewan for permission to table correspondence dealing with the Canada pension plan in the Saskatchewan legislature.
2,	3, and 4. See answer 1. above.


ACCESS ROADS, CHAPLEAU COUNTY, QUE.
Mr. Laprise: 1.	Since the implementation of the joint construction program for access roads to forests, what projects have been completed in Chapleau county?
2.	What projects are still not completed, and when are they to be completed?
3.	What projects are under study at the present time?


Maurice Sauvé: 1.	The following access projects have been completed in the electoral district of Chapleau: (1) Forsyth-Maricourt Lake access road. (2) Paradis

Ducharme Lake access road.
2.	Projects not completed include: (1) Vil-lebois Township access road; (2) Bourque Township access road; (3) Mazarin Township access road; (4) Megiscane River access road; (5) Varsal Township access road; (6) Chibou-gamau to Matagami access road; (7) Mata-gami to James Bay access road; (8) Faillon Lake access road.
Completion dates not available as this information is not required for forest access projects submitted by the province for federal government contributions.
3.	Final details of the province's 1966 program have not been supplied. Preliminary information indicates continued construction of most of the projects listed in 2 above.


GOVERNMENT ANNUITY SALES
Mr. McCutcheon: 1.	Has there been a decrease in the number of government annuities sold since 1960 and, if so, for what reason?
2.	Has the government any plan to increase its sales of these annuities?


Mr. B. S. Mackasey (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Labour):: 1. Yes. There was a decrease of about 25 per cent in the number of deferred annuities sold between 1960 and 1966. The number of immediate annuities

sold also decreased from 1961 to 1964, but has increased sharply during 1965 and 1966 following the adoption of a new interest rate.
There are several reasons for the decrease in the number of deferred annuities, among these being higher interest rates in other forms of investments, a buoyant stock market and a tendency on the part of potential purchasers to postpone decisions until they knew more about the Canada Pension Plan.
2. No, but it is expected that there will be some increase in the sale of annuities now that the Canada Pension Plan is in effect.


PURCHASE OF MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, SAINT JOHN, N.B.
Mr. Douglas: 1.	Is the Department of Transport giving consideration to the purchase of the municipal airport at Saint John, New Brunswick?
2.	When such takeovers occur, is it the policy of the Department of Transport to absorb present employees and give full protection to the seniority, pension and other rights and privileges enjoyed by the present employees?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. At the request of the municipalities concerned, the Department of Transport has agreed to look into this possibility.
2. Subject to satisfactory agreement with the municipality, it is the policy of the department to endeavour to continue employee benefits wherever possible within governing federal legislation and regulations.


PURCHASE OF BATTERIES, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT
Mr. Crouse: 1.	Did the Department of Transport purchase batteries from a company named Cipel and LeCar-bone Ltd. during the month of February, 1966?
2.	If so, in what part of Canada is this company licensed to carry on business?
3.	What are the names of its president and directors?
4.	What is the brand name of their batteries?
5.	How many companies in Canada bid on the purchase of these batteries, and (a) what are their names (b) what were the amounts of their bids?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the Department of Transport and my department as follows: 1. Yes.
2. This company was incorporated on May 18, 1954 and according to the terms of its letters patent it may carry on its operations throughout Canada.
April 6, 1966

3.	According to the annual summary as at March 31, 1965, the directors of the company are: A. David Cavaz, 45, rue des Acacias. Paris 17, France; Willy Gast, 34 A Oster-mundigenstrasse, Berne, Suisse; Thomas Joseph Palmer, P.O. Box 250 Valleyfield, Que; Louis Jalabert, S.F.C.I. 500 St. James Street West, Montreal, Que; Bertram R. Bad-more, 12 Treascobeas Rd, Falmouth, England; Jean Louis Rambach, 98 Ter Blvd. Heloise. Argenteuil, France; P. Demoreuille, The Carbone Corporation, 10 Bowers Road, Caldwell, N.J., U.S.A.
4.	"Cipel".
5.	Two (a) Cipel & LeCarbone Limited, Union Carbide Canada Limited, (b) Cipel.
Type: AD608Z, $94,789.80 (low bid); AD513. $96,847.24; AD215P, $21,361.40 (low bid).
Union Carbide: Type GG124, $116,325.80; T1600, $62,039.52 (did not meet D.O.T. specification); AC1000, $26,647.40.


LICENCES FOR B.C. POWER DAMS
Mr. Herridge: 1.	On what date was a license issued or were licenses issued to the B.C. Power and Hydro Authority for the building of the High Arrow, Mica Creek, and Duncan dams?
2.	What are the terms of the license or licenses for the building of these dams?
3.	Who is responsible for the safety or design of these structures?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys):: 1. Licences were issued for the Arrow Lakes, Mica and Duncan Lake projects under the International River Improvements Act on August 1, 1965.
2. The terms and conditions of the licences read as follows:
"1. The improvement shall be constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with, and the licences shall comply with the requirements of, the treaty between Canada and the United States of America relating to co-operative development of the water resources of the Columbia River basin signed at Washington on January 17, 1961, together with Annexes A and B thereto; the Protocol to the said Treaty, being an annex to the exchange of notes dated January 22, 1964, between the governments of Canada and the United States of America regarding the Columbia River treaty; the exchange of notes between the governments of Canada and the United States of America dated September 16, 1964, relating to the disposition in the United States of Canada's entitlement to
Questions
certain benefits arising under the said treaty together with the Canadian Entitlement Purchase Agreement entered into between the Licensee and the Columbia Storage Power Exchange signed August 13, 1964; and any exchange of notes between the governments of Canada and the United States of America or any other inter-governmental agreement exchanged or entered into hereafter pursuant to, and for the purpose of, the said treaty.
2.	The improvement shall be constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with, and the licences shall comply with, any orders, directions and judgments of the Permanent Engineering Board established by Article XV of the said treaty and any tribunal or authority mentioned in Article XVI of the said treaty or constituted by the governments of Canada and the United States of America pursuant to the said Article XVI."
3.	Section 3(a) of the Canada-British Columbia agreement dated July 8, 1963 stated that "British Columbia shall at its own expense construct or arrange for the construction of all the dams and operate or arrange for the operation of all the storages as required by Articles II and IV of the Columbia River treaty dated January 17, 1961."


NORTHERN ONTARIO WATER RESOURCES STUDY
Mr. Fulton: 1.	Is the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, on behalf of the government of Canada, participating with the government of the province of Ontario in a northern Ontario water resources study?
2.	If so, what is the extent of the federal government participation, and what is the nature and scope of the primary interest of the federal government in such studies?
3.	What is the estimate of the duration of such study?
4.	How many federal government personnel will be involved in such studies in the fiscal year 196667 and what is the estimate of cost to the federal government during that fiscal year?
5.	With the exception of the Nelson river, are there any arrangements for similar co-operative water resources studies in other provinces in existence or in contemplation?


Jean-Luc Pepin: 1. No. The Department of Mines and Technical Surveys is conducting an engineering appraisal of northern Ontario water resources; while the government of Ontario is conducting economic

April 6, 1966
Questions
and other studies of the water resources of the same region. Both study programs are being co-ordinated by a federal-Ontario committee.
2.	Not applicable. See answer to (1) above.
3.	The federal study will require at least three years.
4.	Full time services of six classified employees and part time services of an additional ten classified employees, plus casual assistance on field surveys. The sum of $500,000 has been provided in the fiscal year of 1966-67 estimates specifically for this assignment.
5.	As stated in (1) above the government of Canada and of Ontario have undertaken separate studies of the water resources of northern Ontario with co-ordination of these separate studies by a federal-Ontario committee. The Nelson river power investigation was a single study program undertaken jointly by Canada and Manitoba. The planned water use study of the entire Nelson-Saskatchewan basin will be on a basis similar to the Nelson river power investigation, except that this will be a study program undertaken jointly by Canada, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The proposed study of tidal power possibilities in the Bay of Fundy will be undertaken jointly by Canada, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.


IMPORTS OF PORK PRODUCTS
Mr. Winkler: 1.	What amounts of pork carcasses or pork products were imported into Canada from March 1 to March 18, 1966, inclusive, from countries other than the United States?
2.	From what countries did such imports originate?
3.	What are the names of the companies that imported this product?


John James Greene: 1. The amounts of pork carcasses or pork products imported into Canada from March 1 to March 18, 1966, inclusive, from countries other than the United States, according to Department of Agriculture records, were:
From Ireland
Fresh and Frozen	Pounds
Hams	562,180
Backs, Loins, etc.	345,476
Bellies	445,974
Butts and Picnics Miscellaneous Boneless Pork, Blade Meat, Cheek and Head Meat,	543,140
Jowls, Trimmings, etc. 	120,944
Miscellaneous Bone-in Pork, Hocks,
etc.	29,567
Ribs,	back	and	loin ribs	13,031Ribs,	side	and	regular spare ribs	36,409Ribs,	shoulder	and riblets	12,011
2,108,732
Cured, Smoked and Cooked-
Bellies, Side Bacon, Bacon squares,
Dried Pork Bellies, etc.	5,235
Miscellaneous Bone-in
Hocks, Knuckles, etc. (smoked)	279
5,514
Pork Casings	24
From Denmark
Canned Pork	9,031
Canned Hams	39,600
48,631
From The Netherlands Pork Casings	33
From Poland
Canned Pork	7,200
2.	These imports originated from Ireland, Denmark, The Netherlands and Poland.
3.	The names of the importers are known to the department through its inspection of imported product. This information is regarded as confidential.


DEVELOPMENT BOARD GRANTS, STELLARTON, N.S.
Mr. Carter: 1.	Was an Atlantic Development Board grant In the amount of $400,000 authorized for a general purpose building at Stellarton, N.S. and, if so (a) what company will occupy it (b) who are the directors of this company?
2.	Was an Atlantic Development Board grant in the amount of $200,000 authorized for an industrial park at Stellarton, N.S. and, if so, will the said company occupy part of it?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I am informed by the Atlantic Development Board as follows:
1. Yes. (a) Temporarily occupied by Clair-tone Sound Corporation Ltd. (b) We are advised that the directors are: Peter Munk, President Executive; David Harrison Gilmour, Vice President and Treasurer; Zigmund A. Hahn, Sr., Vice President and Secretary; Michael A. Chojnacki, Vice President, Manufacturing; G. Malcolm Hogarth, Director; Clifford V. Brokaw, III, Director; James M. Hutton, Jr., Director; Wallace Robert Johnston,
April 6. 1966

Director; J. Maitland Macintosh, Director; J. C. MacKeen, Director; D. W. Samuel, Director; Robert M. Southerland, Director; A. Mark Vansittart, Director.
2. Yes. The company will occupy part of the park.


WHARF AND BREAKWATER REPAIRS, PORT GREVILLE, N.S.
Mr. Coates: 1.	Is it the intention of the Department of Public Works to carry out any repairs to the wharf at Port Greville, N.S., or to carry out any dredging in the harbour in close proximity to the existing wharf?
2.	Is it the intention of the department to carry out any repairs to the breakwater at Port Greville, N.S.?


George James McIlraith: 1. No.
2. No.


WHARF REPAIRS, PORT PHILLIP. N.S.
Mr. Coates: Is it the intention of the Department of Public Works to carry out any further repairs or improvements to the wharf at Port Phillip, N.S., or Port Howe as it is more normally called, and what is the extent of the repairs or improvements planned?


George James McIlraith: No.


LOBSTER TRAP AND LICENCE QUOTAS
Mr. Coates: 1.	Is it the intention of the Department of Fisheries to place quotas on the number of traps that can be used by a lobster fisherman and, if so. when can a decision be expected in this matter?
2.	Is it the intention of the Department of Fisheries to limit the number of licences issued for lobster fishing?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: 1. Controlled lobster trap limitation is to be introduced this season, as an experiment, in lobster fishing area 8 in Northumberland strait.
2. No.


OTTAWA PERSONNEL, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
Mr. Lind: 1.	What are the names of the individuals who occupy the following positions in the Department 23033-2501
Questions
of Public Works, Ottawa branch (a) chief of accommodation (b) director of property and building management (c) assistant director of property and building management (d) assistant superintendent of government buildings (e) chief of operations (f) superintendent of government buildings?
2.	How long has each been employed by the department?
3.	What special qualifications does each have for these positions?
4.	Has the Department of Public Works received inquiries from the Ottawa Real Estate Board, individual property owners, and contractors relating to these positions?


George James McIlraith: 
LIMITATIONS ON CIVIL SERVICE COMPETITIONS
Mr. Reid: 1.	Are some civil service competitions limited to certain geographic areas?
2.	If so, what are the criteria for determining the geographic area?
3.	Is this practice common in civil service competitions, and (a) if so, for what reasons (b) if not, for what reasons?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1. Yes.
2.	(a) The nature of the duties to be performed (b) The area served by the office (c) The availability of qualified candidates.
3.	Yes. See answer 2 above. In addition, it is in accordance with the provisions of sections 33, 34(b) and 35 of the Civil Service Act.


LANDING STRIP, REINDEER LAKE, SASK.
Mr. Watson (Assiniboia): 1.	Who owns the landing strip at Reindeer Lake in northern Saskatchewan?

April 6, 1966
Questions
2.	Did the Department of Transport assist financially in its construction and, if so, to what extent?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. While Department of Transport records do not indicate the ownership of this aerodrome, they do show that it is operated by Arctic Lodges Ltd.
2. No.


C.N.R. CONTRACT WITH TRANSOL, INC.
Mr. Ricard: 1.	Did Canadian National Railways sign a transportation contract on October 9, 1963, with Transol Inc., a company which was incorporated on June 13, 1963, and, if so, up to what date was this contract in force?
2.	Has Canadian National Railways become the owner of Transol Inc., and (a) if so (i) what were the purchase terms (ii) what amounts have been paid to the said company (iii) what were the assets of Transol Inc. at the time of purchase (b) if not, what is the present relationship between Canadian National Railways and Transol Inc.?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. Yes, and it is
still in effect.
2. (a) No. (b) A contractual arrangement whereby Transol Inc. under a Quebec Transportation Board permit performs for the railway an over the highway cartage service between Quebec and Riviere du Loup serving intermediate points en route.


AIR CANADA EXCURSION RATE TO EUROPE
Mr. Martin (Timmins): 1.	Does Air Canada's 21-day excursion rate to Europe apply between June 9 and July 11, and between August 4 and August 29, 1966, and, if not, for what reason?
2.	If the 21-day excursion rate does not apply in these periods, is this made clear in Air Canada's advertising and, if not, for what reason?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Air Canada advise as follows:
1.	Twenty one day excursion rate does not apply eastbound to Europe between June 13 and July 7, and between August 8 and August 25. As an incentive to travel in off-peak times, by industry agreement excursion fares may not be offered by any airline between the dates quoted.
2.	Airline advertisements do not give details of all terms and conditions, or periods of validity of fare levels but refer to-"See your travel agent or district Air Canada office."


FEDERAL GRANT TO LUCKNOW, ONT.
Mr. Loney: What amount of grant in lieu of taxes on federal property was paid to the municipality of Lucknow, Ontario, for the year 1965?


Mitchell William Sharp: 1965 grant, $529.


AIR CANADA FLIGHTS TO MARITIMES
Mr. Bell (Saint John-: Alberi):
1.	Has Air Canada recently advertised flights to the Atlantic provinces from Montreal entitled "going to the maritimes"?
2.	Were Moncton, Halifax and Sydney mentioned and, if so, why was Saint John not listed?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Air Canada advise as follows:
1.	Yes.
2.	Yes; Saint John was not listed. Destinations mentioned in individual advertisements vary according to current and forecast loads. The volume of traffic moving to Saint John was at a level which was considered to be satisfactory by comparison.


MEDICATION MK665
Mr. Harley: Is the medication MK665 (Merck Sharp and Dohme) under study in Canada at either the preclinical level or clinical testing level?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The medication MK665 (Merck Sharp and Dohme) has never been under study in Canada at either the preclinical or clinical testing level.


ACTION ON RECOMMENDATION RESPECTING PESTICIDES AND INSECTICIDES
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 1,184
Mr. Harley:: What action to date has the government taken on the recommendations of the special committee on food and drugs concerning pesticides and insecticides?


John James Greene: On July 9, 1964, the formation of the federal interdepartmental committee on pesticides was approved and it was charged with looking into all the recommendations of the special committee on food and drugs as these pertain to responsibilities of federal government. The federal interdepartmental committee has held 13 meetings. It has formed
April 6. 1966

working parties on legislation, research and development, and transport of dangerous materials. The legislative working party has reported to the committee and recommendations concerning legislative changes are being prepared. A survey of pesticide research in Canada has been conducted and a report is in preparation. The federal interdepartmental committee on pesticides has encouraged the formation of provincial interdepartmental committees on pesticides. Such committees are now operating in eight provinces. The federal committee has reviewed all current operational pesticide programs conducted by the federal government.


MILK SUBSIDIES
Mr. Godin: 1.	What was the cost of 100 lbs., of milk in 1950, 1955, 1960, and 1965?
2.	During these years, has the government granted subsidies to farmers with respect to milk production?
3.	If so, what was the amount granted per 100 pounds of milk?


John James Greene: 1. There are no published figures on the actual cost of producing 100 pounds of milk in the years indicated.
The average cost of milk to plants for all purposes (fluid and manufacturing), based on dominion bureau of statistics average value of milk sold f.o.b. the farm gate, for the years specified was:
1950	1955	1960	1965$2.63	$2.88	$3.16	$3.68
2 and 3. The government has assisted manufacturing milk and cream producers in various ways over the years. Support has been given by purchases of product, quality premiums, export assistance, butterfat subsidies, and milk subsidies. Some provincial governments have set minimum prices.
Because of the variable methods of support which differed in individual years, direct comparisons are not possible but herewith are given Federal expenditures in those fiscal years, and manufacturing milk and cream deliveries in those calendar years.
Expenditures
1950	1955	1960	1965*($ millions) 2.4 Milk equivalent of manufacturing milk and cream deliveries	5.3	14.2	54.4(cwt. millions) 84.4 * Estimated	98.9	107.3	113.4
Questions


MILK PRODUCTION COST
Mr. Godin: During the years 1940, 1950, and 1960, what was the production cost of 100 lbs. of milk in the federal experimental farms (a) throughout Canada (b) throughout the province of Quebec?


John James Greene: The dairy cattle research program on the experimental farms is in the fields of nutrition, breeding, and management. It is not conducted specifically for the purpose of determining costs of milk production. Accordingly, the information requested on production costs of milk on experimental farms across Canada is not available.


FLASHING LIGHT, HALIFAX AIRPORT
Mr. Forrestall: Has the government given consideration to the installation of a flashing light at the entrance to the Halifax international airport, and (a) if so, what decision was reached (b) if not, would the government now do so?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The provincial department of highways has agreed to instal a flashing amber light at this intersection.


NUMBER OF UNEMPLOYED
Mr. Crossman: What was the total number of unemployed persons as reported by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics for the month of February for each year since 1957?


Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Estimated number of unemployed persons, 14 years of age and over, Canada, February 1957 to 1966, inclusive. February 1957, 352,000; February 1958, 600,000; February 1959, 570,000; February 1960, 597,000; February 1961, 716,000; February 1962, 582,000; February 1963, 546,000; February 1964, 467,000; February 1965, 397,000; February 1966, 356,000.
Source: Dominion Bureau of Statistics Canadian labour force survey.
tTranslation]


Mr. Albert Bechard (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, allow me at this stage to point out that, out of a total of 1,261 questions put on the order paper since the beginning of this season, the government has answered 1,027 questions, which, I believe, is an all-time record.
Orders for Returns

April 6, 1966
[English1


Mr. Speaker:: I am pleased that that statement was not made on motions.


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker, in commenting on what has just been said by the parliamentary secretary, I must say that irrespective of what he has said all he has to do is to look at the written questions on the order paper. He will find that many of them have been there since January 18, and they are the ones about which we are worrying.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Ormislon: 1.	What has been the total cost of all foreign patents purchased since 1945 by (a) the federal government (b) other Canadian institutions including corporations and companies operating in Canada?
2.	What has been the total cost in fees paid by (a) the federal government (b) other Canadian institutions including corporations and companies operating in Canada for the use or license of foreign patents since 1945?
3.	What has been the estimated total value of all Canadian patents sold and licensed to foreign countries, foreign nationals, foreign institutions, foreign corporations and foreign companies since 1945?
Return tabled.


DEFICITS AND PROFITS OF CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. Caouette: 1.	What are the annual deficits or profits of the following crown corporations since their inception (a) Canadian National Railways (b) Air Canada (c) C.B.C. (d) Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation (e) Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (f) Polymer Corporation Limited (g) Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited (h) Northern Canada Power Commission (i) Defence Construction Limited (j) Canadian Arsenals Limited (k) Atomic Energy of Canada Limited?
2.	What commercial profits has the government of Canada earned through its industrial or commercial enterprises?
3.	How are the amounts accruing from the profits of the crown corporations generally divided?
4.	What are the regulations governing the reserve funds and the investments of the crown corporations.
Return tabled.
[Mr. Bechard.l


ST. MARY INDIAN RESERVE, B.C.-AIRSTRIP
Mr. Howard: 1.	Does the government have any plans or does it know of any plans to establish an airport or airstrip on the St. Mary Indian reserve in B.C. and, if so (a) what acreage will be used (b) what compensation will be paid, and (c) how will the compensation be distributed?
2.	Upon what dates was this matter discussed with the Indian people concerned and what are the names and positions held by each person who participated in each such discussion?
3.	Was any objection to the proposal raised by any of the Indian people and, if so, what was the nature of those objections and what action was taken with respect thereto?
4.	What is the current status of the plans?
Return tabled.


PURCHASING POLICY OF CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. Caouette: 1.	Do Canadian National Railways, Air Canada, C.B.C., Polymer Corporation Limited, Eldorado Mining and Refining Limited, Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation have a purchasing policy which favours Canadian enterprises?
2.	If they have such a policy of what does it consist?
3.	If they do not have such a policy, does the government intend to issue directives, so that state owned enterprises give preference to Canadian enterprises?
Return tabled.


FEDERAL FERRY OPERATIONS, ATLANTIC COAST
Mr. Barnett: 1.	Does the federal government operate, either directly or indirectly through any of its agencies, ferries or other types of vessels on the Atlantic coasts of Canada for the public carriage of passengers, freight and motor vehicles?
2.	If so, what vessels between what ports carry motor vehicles on a "roll on, roll off" arrangement?
3.	If operating agencies of the federal government are involved in any of the above specified services, what are they and what runs do they operate?
4.	Is any operating deficit incurred in the operation of any such vessels or runs?
5.	If so, through what channel is any such operating deficit met and what amounts, by way of subsidy or otherwise, have been paid for each vessel or service involved during each of the last five fiscal years (including an estimate for the current fiscal year)?
April 6, 1966


C.N.R. WATER TRANSPORT SERVICES, ATLANTIC COAST
Mr. Barnett: 1.	Does Canadian National Railways operate water transportation services in the coastal trade on the Atlantic coast of Canada, either directly or through subsidiary companies?
2.	If so, between what ports and on what runs, listed by its various schedules, does the C.N.R., or each and all of its subsidiaries operate such services?
3.	Which, if any, of such services carry (a) passengers (b) general cargo (c) motor vehicles?
4.	Do any of the vessels engaged in any such services carry motor vehicles on a "roll-on, rolloff" basis and, if so, between what ports?
5.	Do any of the vessels engaged in such services receive a federal operating subsidy either directly or indirectly?
6.	If so, through what agency is such subsidy paid for each vessel or service involved?
7.	For each of the last five fiscal years (including an estimate for the current fiscal year) what was the total amount of the operating subsidy paid for each vessel or service involved?


GOVERNMENT FERRY SUBSIDIES
Mr. Nowlan: 1.	What ferries or other types of vessels listed by name does the federal government either directly or indirectly pay subsidies to or operate?
2.	Where do such ferries or other types of vessels operate?
3.	Is any deficit incurred in the operation of such ferries or vessels and, if so (a) what has been the amount of the deficit for each ferry or vessel during each of the last five fiscal years, and (b) what formula has been used for payment?
4.	What amounts, by way of subsidy, deficit, or otherwise, have been paid in the operation of each such ferry or vessel during each of the last five fiscal years (including an estimate for the current fiscal year?)
5.	What amounts were paid by the federal government either directly or indirectly in the construction or purchase of each such ferry or vessel?


REPORT ON MEDICAL RESEARCH
Mr. Bell (Carleton): 1.	Was a report on medical research in Canada presented to the Prime Minister and/or the government by Mr. Charles L. Gundy and, if so, when?
2.	What consideration has been given to this report?
3.	By what persons was the report endorsed?
4.	When may a decision of the government in respect of the recommendations in the report be expected?
Return tabled.
Motions for Papers


DEATH BENEFIT ACCOUNTS
Mr. Howe (Hamilton: South):
1.	As of March 1, 1966, what was the balance in the (a) public service death benefit account, and (b) the regular forces death benefit account?
2.	What amount has been contributed to each account in each of the past 12 months?
3.	What amount was disbursed in benefits from each account in each of the past 12 months?
4.	Has there been any change in premiums payable under the supplementary death benefit plan (Public Service Superannuation Act) since October, 1964?
Return tabled.


CANADA-WEST INDIES EXPORTS AND IMPORTS
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	What is the dollar value of Canadian exports to each country of the West Indies each year since 1960?
2.	What is the dollar value of imports to Canada from each country of the West Indies each year since 1960?
Return tabled.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS

Albert Béchard: Mr. Speaker, notices of motions for the production of papers Nos. 114 and 115 are acceptable to the government.
I ask that the other notices of motions be allowed to stand.



FORMS COMPLETED BY GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 114-Mr. Douglas:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy (a) fingerprint form CSC 283-20M-1-57-1027, and (b) "personal history form" which the Civil Service Commission asks certain government employees to complete.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 115-Mr. MacEwan:
That an order of the house do issue for a copy of all telegrams, letters and correspondence between any unions, organizations and persons in the county of Pictou, province of Nova Scotia, and the Minister of Transport for February 1, 1966, to March 31, 1966, with respect to the removal of the freeze on television applications and coverage by satellite from the CTV network, station CJCH, Halifax, Nova Scotia.
Motion agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
April 6, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry PUBLIC SERVICE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of clarification may I ask the Prime Minister this question. He covered the general field of bilingualism and the measures to be taken in the Civil Service. Is it to be understood that no longer in effect is the decision that was announced by the chairman of the Civil Service Commission on February 1, that proficiency in the two official languages is to be considered as an additional asset, and will count as an aggregate 10 per cent of the total selection-rating score? Is that still in effect or has it been abrogated by the announcement of the Prime Minister?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, in my statement I said that proficiency in both languages would be considered as an element of merit in respect of those positions where a knowledge of both languages is required. The application of that, Mr. Speaker, will of course be the responsibility of the Civil Service Commission. There is on the order paper question No. 944 dealing with this matter, the answer to which will probably go into very considerable detail.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the right hon. Prime Minister.
Will consideration be given to bilingualism when candidates applying for a position take examinations?
Will the merit factor respect, within limits, bilingualism? Will it be worth anything?


Lester Bowles Pearson: It will be one of the elements of merit, Mr. Speaker, in respect of those positions where a reasonable proficiency in both languages is required.


Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon):: As a supplementary question, may I ask the Prime Minister whether this policy applies to the armed forces?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, if my hon. friend would read the statement he will find that special reference is made to the armed forces. It does not apply to them. A special

report is being made regarding the situation in the armed forces, and discussions are going on.


Erik Nielsen: May I ask a further supplementary question of the Associate Minister of National Defence. The minister will recall the policy changes implemented with respect to staff officers in the army some two years ago, with respect to bilingualism and promotion on the basis of capability. Has that policy been extended to the other two armed forces?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associate Minister of National Defence):: There was no change in the policy adopted two years ago. This, as the Prime Minister has just mentioned, is the subject of an inquiry just now. However, no concrete recommendations have been made so far.


Hon. R. A. Bell (Carleton):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the Prime Minister if he and his colleagues would consider referring the policy statement which he made this afternoon on bilingualism in the public service to a standing or special committee of the house where evidence might be heard and where the staff associations and other interested parties might be given the opportunity publicly to present views and opinions. Also may I ask, Mr. Speaker, since the Prime Minister mentioned 
question No. 944-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Richard Albert Bell: -since that question has been on the order paper for some 33 days, may I ask when it will be answered.


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Civil Service Commission is an independent body.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I will consider the matter referred to by my hon. friend in the first part of the question. I would point out to him that the staff associations of the Civil Service have already been consulted in respect of the statement I made today.
Concerning the latter part of the question, a detailed answer is being prepared by the Civil Service Commission. I will try to hurry them up.


Mr.   J.-A. Mongrain@Trois-Rivieres: Mr. Speaker, my question is really supple-
April 6, 1966	COMMONS
mentary to the first one put a few moments ago by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition to the right hon. Prime Minister about bilingualism. 1 understand that you did not hear it because the voice of independents is so weak that I am under the impression we will need a megaphone to be heard by you, at the other end of the house.
My question is the following: can the right hon. Prime Minister tell us whether the measures announced at the beginning of the sitting this afternoon concerning bilingualism in the public service, will be incorporated into the Civil Service Act, particularly section 47?


Lester Bowles Pearson: All the regulations issued by the Civil Service Commission require to be within the legislation as it now stands.



ATTENDANCE AT MEETING OF POSTAL EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATIVES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Could he tell the house whether executive members of the Canadian Postal Employee's Union attended the meeting held in his office today?
[English1


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker, the postal unions were not at this meeting. It was a meeting of national service-wide organizations of the Civil Service. This very important union is a particular occupational union inside the Civil Service in which there are, I believe, 20 to 25 other such unions. Attending the meeting were only national service-wide organizations.



UNIDENTIFIED FLYING OBJECTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of widespread concern over press reports regarding unidentified flying objects, and in order that these reports may not lead to unfounded speculation, I want to ask the Prime Minister if this matter is being investigated by any department of his government. If so, may I ask what department has been assigned this responsibility.
DEBATES	3949
Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I am aware of these reports. Indeed, I had a telegram a few hours ago concerning another report from western Canada. These matters are being investigated by the Department of National Defence.


Erik Nielsen: It is the soaring cost of living.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the Prime Minister if the Department of National Defence proposes to make any public statement following the investigation?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I would hope so. When the investigation is completed, I hope the statement will be a reassuring one.


Mr. William Dean Howe (Hamilton South):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the Prime Minister, in the absence of the Minister of National Defence, whether in investigating these possible unidentified flying objects the protection of Canadians could not be taken into consideration, to protect them from possible radiation burns such as are apparently suffered by a boy in my riding?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I am sure all aspects of the problem will be investigated. My hon. friend may recall, in respect of rumours and stories that unidentified heavenly objects had been sighted over Michigan a week or so ago, that the reports showed that these stories were greatly exaggerated.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a question to the hon. Secretary of State for External Affairs with regard to France's decision to withdraw from NATO.
In view of France's request that foreign troops be withdrawn from French territory, is the department still consulting with the French authorities with a view to establishing the advisability of keeping Canadian troops over there? Should Canadians troops remain in France, will the French government have any control over their operations?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the government of France does not intend to leave NATO.
April 6, 1966

Inquiries of the Ministry
President de Gaulle's government is not in favour of NATO's integrated military operation system. There will soon be bilateral negotiations with France on the matter of the two Canadian bases, but these have not yet started.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
Did the French government inform Canada that it would have to withdraw its troops from France?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


David Réal Caouette: Before when?


Paul Joseph James Martin: We have until April 1, 1967, to do it, Mr. Speaker.


RHODESIA-IMPLEMENTATION OF SANCTIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Norman Thompson: My question is directed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has Canada been informed that the Commonwealth committee in London, of which our High Commissioner is chairman, intends to ask the United Nations to authorize use of force to implement compulsory sanctions against the government of Ian Smith in Rhodesia?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, there was a meeting this morning of the sanctions committee which, as my hon. friend says, was chaired by the Canadian High Commissioner. The meeting has not come to any conclusions, and it has adjourned for an indefinite period.


Robert Norman Thompson: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister tell us whether the two ships in a harbour in Mozambique have cargoes which are for Rhodesia, as the reports indicate?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: The ship that has gone to Beira, in Portuguese territory in Mozambique, has not docked. The best information available is that it does not propose to discharge its cargo. It would seem that the ship's captain is under orders of the government of Greece which has prescribed that no ship of Greek registry shall carry oil to Rhodesia.


NATIONAL SECURITY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Prime Minister. Has he any information as to when the royal commission, I believe the Cardin commission, will be convened? Is he aware of the fact that the cleaning firms which clean the Centennial Towers building has been advised that it must have its personnel fingerprinted and checked for security, because the royal commission on security will be occupying offices in the building, beginning next week?


Mitchell William Sharp: Perhaps I might answer the first part of the question about the Carter Royal Commission. In my budget address I said the report would be down in a matter of two months.


John George Diefenbaker: No, the Cardin commission before Mr. Justice Spence.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I do not know of any commission known as the Cardin commission.


John George Diefenbaker: May I ask whether I can identify it so that the Prime Minister may understand what I am dealing with? I am referring to the royal commission to be presided over by a judge of the Supreme Court of Canada. Is the Prime Minister aware of the date on which this commission will convene? Is he aware of the circumstances I have mentioned, namely that the staff of a certain cleaning organization working in that building are to be fingerprinted? I hope, now, the identification is such that the right hon. gentleman will understand.


Lester Bowles Pearson: If the right hon. gentleman is referring to the commission presided over by Mr. Justice Spence, I know nothing about the latter part of the question he asked. I will be, glad to look into it.




[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
David Lewis: I wish to address to the Secretary of State for External Affairs a question of which he was given notice by my hon. friend from Greenwood. Is it correct as reported from New York that
April 6, 1966

official Polish sources at United Nations have stated that Poland, as one of the members of the international control commission, does not envisage any role for the commission in bringing about a cease-fire or negotiations for ending the war in Viet Nam? If this is correct, is there any possibility for the remaining two powers on the commission to do anything without the concurrence of Poland?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I saw this report which appeared in the Montreal Star last night. In reply, I would say that, as I informed the external affairs committee on Monday, both the Polish and the Indian governments in their initial reaction to the Canadian suggestion about a possible future role for the commission raised a number of considerations which they thought would have to be taken into account if such a proposal were to stand any chance of gaining acceptance by the parties on the ground.
Careful study is being given to these considerations. I have no reason to believe that either government would regard our exchanges on this matter as closed. As is well known, Canada has been having exchanges of its own in Hanoi, Saigon and other capitals as well as at the United Nations, not wholly unrelated to what the commission might be able to do to bring about negotiations in Viet Nam at the opportune time.


David Lewis: Are talks with the Polish government or its representatives still being carried on by any Canadian representatives?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


VIET NAM-REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF CANADIAN POLICY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. R. Schreyer (Springfield):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. I should like to ask the minister whether the welling up of domestic discontent in South Viet Nam in recent days has caused him to review and make a re-analysis of our policy relative to hostilities in that country?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I cannot say anymore than I did the other day in the House of Commons.
Inquiries of the Ministry FISHERIES


SCALLOPS-INQUIRY CONCERNING PRICES AND INSPECTION PROCEDURES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg):: should like to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries. Is the minister aware of the concern felt by the scallop fishermen on the east coast of Canada over the low price recently paid to the fishermen for their catches and also of their concern about recent inspection practices which resulted in large quantities of scallops being withheld from the market? Would the minister advise the house of any action proposed by his department to help the scallop fishermen out of some of their present difficulties?


Hédard-J. Robichaud: The hon. member, who has had many years of experience in keeping fish fresh at sea, knows that the department has a responsibility to develop clearly defined quality criteria and to differentiate between fit and unfit fish. He will agree with me that it is the responsibility of the buyers and of the fishermen to co-operate with departmental inspectors to assist them in implementing the fish inspection regulations.
I want to make it clear that departmental standards have not changed since last year. There has been no change, contrary to a report on Monday in one of the Halifax newspapers. Buyers and fishermen must recognize that scallops caught by Nova Scotia fishermen in waters off the Carolina coast require more and better attention than those originating from the nearer Georges bank. I would urge the close co-operation of all fishermen, as well as buyers, in assuring the consumer of a high quality product resulting in a better price to the fishermen.
I also want the hon. member to know that a specially equipped experimental fisheries vessel with a departmental officer aboard left yesterday for the Carolina ground to test the effectiveness of refrigerated sea water as a chilling medium for storing scallops at sea.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: I wish to thank the minister for his thorough reply. In addition to the measures he has already taken, has he suggested to his fisheries staff that they spend more time with the scallop fishermen, informing them of better practices in icing their catches which would eliminate the possibility of further fish being withheld from the market?

April 6. 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry


Hédard-J. Robichaud: This is being done. In fact officers from outside regions have been into this area to assist the fishermen in the proper handling of scallops.


NATIONAL DEFENCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: I would direct my question to the Associate Minister of National Defence and ask him whether he is now in a position to report on the investigations into complaints with respect to the Shannon area to be expropriated in order to add to the space available at Valcartier Camp.


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: We have made a complete review of this project and we are now considering what the possible alternatives to Shannon might be. We intend to go on the ground as soon as the snow has gone. We shall then see the people concerned and get their views, which will be taken into consideration before a final decision is reached on the subject. This should be later this month-I think in the last week of April.


HOUSING
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Carr Munro: I wish to address a question to the Minister of Labour in his capacity as minister responsible for Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Has the minister been contacted by the Hamilton Board of Control with reference to its desire for assistance in the construction of a $6 million trunk sewer designed to open up 900 acres of C.M.H.C. land for home construction?


Some hon. Members:: Order, paper.


Mr. Speaker:: This is a question for the order paper.


BRIDGES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Clement Vincent (Nicolei-Yamaska):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Transport.

In view of the statement made a little earlier by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State, could the minister consider the possibility of tabling the documents asked for by the notice of motion for production of papers of the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres which was passed last February 2, and which we are still waiting for.
tEnglish]


John Whitney Pickersgill: I would have to look into that, sir.


MARZINE-USE BY AIR LINES AS SICKNESS REMEDY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe East):: I have a question to address to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In his absence I would address it to his parliamentary secretary. I may say I had given the minister notice. My question concerns the use of a drug called marzine which is now issued only on doctors' prescription. Is this drug being dispensed on Canadian air lines as an air sickness remedy?


Mrs. Margaret Rideout (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):: This matter is now under investigation.


NATIONAL DEFENCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. Does he intend to take any action to prevent the resignation of R.C.A.F. navigators and other aircrew, because of the discrimination they feel is being practised by reason of the recent pay increases for R.C.A.F. pilots.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I think this matter was dealt with very fully by the minister yesterday.


James Ernest Pascoe: The question, Mr. Speaker, is prompted by a telegram I received from an R.C.A.F. navigator stating that he had resigned because of the pay policy announced by the Minister of National Defence.
April 6, 1966	COMMONS


WINTER WORKS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. K. H. More (Regina City):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Labour. Does the minister not think that construction today which fails to meet deadlines because of six weeks or more of extremely cold and stormy weather should receive equal consideration to that received by those affected because of flooding.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member's question is not acceptable.


HIDES AND SKINS-REQUEST FOR QUOTA CONTROLS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack A. Irvine (London):: Mr. Speaker,
I have a question I wish to direct to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, and it is prompted by representations which have been made to me by London manufacturers. Is it the intention of the minister to establish quota controls on the export of Canadian cattle hides and calf and kip skins to protect our export markets and to prevent inflation of shoe prices in Canada.


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


TRANSPORT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. David MacDonald (Prince):: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Prime Minister. I wonder whether the Prime Minister would inform the house whether or not he received a telegram today from the Premier of Prince Edward Island announcing that at yesterday afternoon's sitting of the legislature in Prince Edward Island a unanimous resolution was passed protesting the announced increase of fares to be charged on the car ferries, and if so, may I ask what action is being taken in this regard.


Lester Bowles Pearson: The answer to the first part of the question is yes, and the answer to the second part will be given by the Minister of Transport.
DEBATES	3953
Inquiries of the Ministry


John Whitney Pickersgill: The Canadian National Railways did announce that they did not intend to continue to sell return tickets. This is the only increase in a great many years, and it is a very small increase indeed.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Would the Minister of Transport tell us exactly what percentage of increase this would mean.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.
The hon. member for Bruce.


AGRICULTURE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John Loney (Bruce):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Agriculture. Would the minister inform the house whether final stabilization payments to dairy producers have been completed for the last dairy year.


John James Greene: Mr. Speaker, there have been 135,000 cheques processed, and farmers of Canada have received a total of $18,750,000 to date, the highest payments in history. Claims are still coming in at the rate of about 750 per week.


QUEBEC-REQUESTED COMPENSATION FOR CROP FAILURES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. In case of poor crops and agricultural disasters in the province of Quebec, to what extent does the federal government help the farmers in Quebec at this time?


Mr. Speaker:: That question seems of a very general nature and I wish to point out to the hon. member that it cannot be asked at this time.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, does the federal government help the Quebec farmers when there is a disaster?


Mr. Speaker:: There again, it seems to me that the hon. member is asking a question of a very general nature and I do not think that it is in order.

April 6, 1966
Inquiries of the Ministry


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture.
Did the government of the province of Quebec request assistance for farmers who experienced crop failure?


John James Greene: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


J.-H.-Théogène Ricard: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Did the federal Department of Agriculture comply with such request?


John James Greene: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. J. A. MacLean (Queens):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Has the minister received a resolution unanimously passed by the legislature of Prince Edward Island urging the federal government to introduce amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act which would allow farm workers to be covered by unemployment insurance? Also in this connection, I should like to ask whether their hopes are expected to be met by the legislation forecast in the Speech from the Throne?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I thank the hon. member, Mr. Speaker, for having given me notice of his question. I have made inquiries. As yet I have not learned of any resolution such as that to which the hon. member has referred; but in the course of inquiries I learned-and I think the house will be interested in this information-that an interdepartmental committee has been looking into proposed amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act and regulations. The work of this interdepartmental committee is well advanced. I have been promised their report within a matter of the next two or three weeks. When that report has come to hand and been considered by me it will be submitted to the government. I also wish to re-affirm the assurance that was given by the Prime Minister some months ago to the effect that, in due course there will be a revision of the regulations and the Unemployment Insurance Act, and that unemployment insurance will be extended to employees on farms in Canada at that time. I hope these changes will be possible before the conclusion of this session.
[Mr. Speaker.!


INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr.  T. S. Barnell@Comox-Alberni: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he would accept my thanks for his tabling today of some correspondence which I asked for on March 1, together with the very interesting additions thereto. I should also like to ask him, in connection with the inclusion of British Columbia, which is within the ambit of the subsidy program, whether he would convey to the Minister of Transport my compliments on the improved functioning of that portion of his anatomy which lies above the neck.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Ville-neuve.


EDUCATION
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Robert Stanbury (York-Scarborough):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether yesterday he received representatives of the Canadian Association for Adult Education who presented a white paper on the education of adults in Canada; also I should like to ask him whether the government will give urgent consideration to the white paper's important recommendations, including the recommendation in respect of a federal office of education.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I received a delegation from this important association yesterday morning and they presented to me a white paper. I have read it; it is a very interesting and important document and we will be giving consideration to it.


HEALTH AND WELFARE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Now that the Prime Minister has kept his promise to get the Canada Assistance Plan and collective bargaining in the civil service on the order paper, what about medicare? Will it be on the order paper when we come back after Easter.


Lester Bowles Pearson: I hope so, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I regret to advise hon. members that the question period has expired.
April 6, 1966


AGRICULTURAL REHABILITATION AND DEVELOPMENT ACT
John James Greene: the third reading of Bill No. C-152, to amend the Agricultural and Rehabilitation Development Act.


Clément Vincent: Wait a minute.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)


AERONAUTICS ACT
George James McIlraith: the third reading of Bill No. C-153, to amend the Aeronautics Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.


BILLS OF EXCHANGE ACT
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee on Bill S-14, to amend the Bills of Exchange Act-Mr. Sharp-Mr. Batten in the chair.
On clause 1-Cheques.
Mr. Lambert:: Mr. Chairman, this bill has been considered in committee and there was an amendment which received the approval of the members of the committee. On behalf of the opposition I would ask for quick passage to assist the banks so they may remain open on Easter Monday.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clause 2 agreed to.
Bill reported and read the third time and passed.

Hon. John N. Turner (for the Minister of Transport) moved: that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution:
That it is expedient to introduce a measure to authorize and to provide for the construction of a line of railway in the province of Ontario by Canadian National Railway Company from the vicinity of Amesdale on the Redditt sub-division of the Canadian National Railway in a north northwesterly direction for a distance of approximately

Canadian National Railways 68 miles to a point in the vicinity of Bruce Lake, in the district of Kenora, at a total estimated expenditure of $11,100,000, not to be exceeded by more than 15 per cent.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Batten in the chair.


Michael Starr: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the minister acting on behalf of the Minister of Transport can give us some detail as to the necessity for the construction of this line.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Chairman, this resolution is in the standard form. It simply authorizes the railway to expend the necessary amount of money. There is no expenditure from the Consolidated Revenue Fund involved. The company has written the minister of the department and assured him that there is a guaranteed income in terms of total tonnage and that everything in the standard form has been satisfied. This proposition is deemed by the company to be a worth-while enterprise, and the company seeks the authority of this house to commence construction.


Mr. Bell (Saint John-Albert):: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask whether it is not usual to send this type of resolution to a standing committee of the house.


John Napier Turner: The house has the option to either deal with this resolution in the committee of the whole or send it to a standing committee.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: That can be done only after second reading.


John Napier Turner: That is correct. We are now at the resolution stage.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: This resolution calls for authorization for an expenditure of $11 million. Of course that money is recoverable, but the construction of this line involves capital construction grants for which this house has some responsibility. I think it is incumbent upon the government to inform the house why this line is necessary. We are all interested in development, but we do not want to authorize a development over muskeg or through mosquito ponds. Obviously there is a good reason for the construction of this line, but I think the minister should give the committee all the information he has in order to clarify the situation.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Chairman, perhaps I could undertake that, after the bill is introduced and given second reading, it will be sent to a
3956	COMMONS
Canadian National Railways standing committee, if that is the desire of the house, in order to save some time at this stage.


Thomas Miller Bell: Mr. Chairman, if we have the assurance that the proposed bill will be referred to a standing committee perhaps we can defer any statements until that time.


John Napier Turner: I will give that assurance, Mr. Chairman. I think this would save the time of the committee.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Turner thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-165, respecting the construction of a line of railway in the Province of Ontario by Canadian National Railway Company from the vicinity of Amesdale on the Redditt sub-division of the Canadian National Railway in a north northwesterly direction for a distance of approximately 68 miles to a point in the vicinity of Bruce Lake, in the district of Kenora.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)


Clément Vincent: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, a few minutes ago we passed Bill No. C-152 and I want to know whether this bill was passed as amended.


George James McIlraith: Yes, it was.


Clément Vincent: I was waiting for a copy of the bill and before I received a copy the bill was given third reading and passed.


George James McIlraith: It was passed as amended. Unfortunately some copies of the bill as printed on first reading were distributed to hon. members. I checked on this point, and the amendment was concurred in at the committee stage. The bill given third reading is the bill as amended.


John Angus MacLean: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could ask the house leader whether the bill as amended was reprinted and is available. I am not making a point of this, but I should like to know whether it is available.


George James McIlraith: I believe there were no reprints of the bill. At least, if there were they were not available at the table.


Clément Vincent: On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker, may we know exactly what the amendment was?

DEBATES	April 6, 1966


George James McIlraith: I did not refer to Votes and Proceedings but I checked with the appropriate authorities to make sure of the position, because an hon. member had privately raised the very point now being discussed. I went to the Clerk to check the record, and the bill as amended was passed.


Michael Starr: Further on the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I think the record should be clear so that all members of this house are satisfied that the amendment referred to a moment ago was concerned with the change of name of the act.


George James McIlraith: Yes, it was concerned with the change of name.


Michael Starr: So the act will still be called ARDA?


George James McIlraith: That is right. The amendment was to the clause dealing with the change of name.


FAIR WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOUR ACT
John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: the second reading of Bill No. C-2, to amend the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?


David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, may I ask whether the Minister of Labour (Mr. Nicholson) would be good enough to explain the bill and any representations that have been made to him with respect to its contents.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to amend the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act. This act was passed originally in 1935, being chapter 39 of the statutes of that year. The purpose of the present bill is to bring the wages and hours standards in this act into conformity with the standards of the Canada Labour (Standards) Code enacted by parliament last year.
It has been the policy of the federal government for many years to establish wages and hours conditions for work on government construction contracts. This act relates to government construction contracts only. The wages required to be paid are the rates found to be prevailing in the district in which the work is to be performed for each class of
April 6, 1966	COMMONS
work. The hours standard, however, was specifically set down on a national rather than a local basis. In the act as it now stands these hours are established at eight hours a day, and 44 hours a week, unless longer hours are authorized in special circumstances.
In accordance with the principles which parliament approved last year in the Canada Labour (Standards) Code, the proposed amendment will make it a condition of a federal government construction contract that $1.25 an hour will be the minimum rate to be paid for work on all such contracts if the prevailing standard for any class of work in any area should be less than $1.25. If it is more, the hourly rate is not changed; we want to be sure that it will be brought up to the minimum rate fixed in the Labour Standards Act. If the bill becomes law the standard work week on federal government construction contracts will be 40 hours rather than the present 44, and an overtime rate of time and one half will be required after 40 hours in a week.
Also in line with the hours of work provisions of the Code, contractors will be permitted to work longer hours than under the existing legislation without the necessity of obtaining a permit. At present a permit is required, if it is found necessary to work more than 44 hours in a week. I might say that a substantial number of permits have been issued when work has had to be completed in a short season or in circumstances where completion of a contract was urgent. It is therefore proposed that the act be amended, in accordance with the bill now before the house, to permit the contractor to work up to 48 hours a week without a permit, so long as the overtime rate is paid after 40 hours.
At the present time a contractor is not penalized in any way if he is found to have failed to carry out the wages and hours conditions of his contract. The government considers that contractors who violate the labour conditions of their contracts should be subject to penalties. Having practised law for many years, it is my opinion that it is absurd to have a situation in which no penalties are provided. Accordingly an amendment is being introduced in the bill which will require that a construction contract shall contain a provision establishing liquidated damages in case of default in carrying out the wages and hours conditions.
In answering the second question asked by the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) I would say that over the past year my
DEBATES	3957
Fair Wages and Labour Act predecessor and I, as well as senior officials of my department, have discussed the changes required in the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act with both employer and union representatives of the construction industry. In fact, I had consultation with one of the leaders in the construction industry today. I advised him that following the announcement of government business last night, this bill would be considered in the house today. A number of helpful suggestions were made during the discussions to which I have referred. We have incorporated some of the suggestions in the bill and we shall be discussing others later with industry when the regulations under the act are being revised.


Mr. R. E. McKinley (Huron):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to begin my remarks in connection with this bill with some general observations regarding government legislation on hours of work and pay per hours of work. In recent years such legislation has become more prevalent in our society. I expect this is because of pressure of certain groups upon the government. We appreciate that legislation in this connection has traditionally served a two fold purpose, namely that of protecting workers against exploitation and contractors against unfair competition. It is very difficult to set a standard of wages and hours of work that would apply equally to all Canadians, because of the different circumstances in rates of pay and relationships between employers and employees in various parts of the country.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
It seems very apparent a serious mistake is being made in this Bill No. C-2, which endeavours to regulate the hours of work performed under government contracts. At times when the work may be taking place many miles from the employee's home, the employee would appreciate the opportunity of spending more time on the job in order to increase his weekly pay. Many of these working conditions can be, and are being, agreed upon between contractors and their employees at the present time. It is my submission that once a contract has been let at a certain figure, the government should no longer dictate to the contractor or his employees. Many construction firms and labour organizations feel very strongly along these lines.
Labour has fought for many years for the right of free negotiation with contractors, and labour representatives do not appreciate undue interference with their negotiations. I
April 6, 1968

Fair Wages and Labour Act could say many things about management and labour relations in other industries and government legislation governing labour. However, since this bill is directed strictly at government contracts, I will confine my remarks to that subject.
I should like to mention further that the kitchen attendants and waiters at two air force bases in my riding received pay increases. However, at the same time their hours of work were reduced to 40 hours a week, so the end result was no increase in take-home pay. This was not what the working people of Canada want in the way of government legislation, and this is especially true at a time when there is a shortage of workers.
There are some changes I should like to see in the bill. The first would be no restriction on the hours of work: all negotiated paid employee contributions should be incorporated into the fair wage, wherever they exist. As we know, there is often a difference in this respect between companies and contractors. Possibly a recognition of the different types of construction work throughout the country is necessary. This suggestion is based on a desire to eliminate difficult and disruptive influences in the industry. I would propose that all conflicts over freely negotiated hours of work should be avoided in all types of construction work in a given labour market.
Then, too, a 30 day limit should be imposed on the registration of any violation of the labour code. If this were done a worker could not come back after one or two years and cause a contractor a great deal of difficulty in attempting to prove there had not been a violation of the labour code. The overtime permit procedure should be limited. I understand that this is being looked after. It has been a nuisance to many contractors when they have been required to get a permit for overtime work, especially on those jobs where the workers desired to work overtime. I would be interested in hearing the minister clarify some of these points.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, it seems utterly ridiculous to me to introduce this bill to amend the fair wages and hours of labour act because, for instance, the minimum wage is set at $1.25 an hour. Here is what paragraph 1 says:
(a) "fair wages" means such wages as are generally accepted as current for competent workmen in the district in which the work is being performed for the character or class of work in which such

workmen are respectively engaged; but shall in all cases be such wages as are fair and reasonable-
And the minimum wage is set at $1.25 an hour for competent workmen.
I understand that the minister will be able to claim that nobody prevents a contractor from paying his employees $1.50 or $2.00 an hour. However, one thing remains; the minimum wage, in view of the cost of living at this time, is clearly insufficient.
Moreover, in the explanatory notes of Bill C-2, one reads:
The main purpose of this bill is to amend the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Act to change the general standard of hours of work on federal government contracts from 44 hours in a week to 40 hours-
Let us take the case of a worker who now earns $1.25 an hour. If he works 44 hours a week, his salary is $55 a week. With the new legislation, if his salary remained the same, he would get only $50 a week, that is $5 less than previously.
I do not see in this bill any provision which would guarantee to the worker the same weekly salary, that is the same salary for 40 hours of work that he is now getting for 44 hours of work.
If another worker earns $2 an hour, and works 44 hours a week, he gets $88. If he works only 40 hours a week, he will get only $80, that is a decrease of $8 in his weekly income.
In my opinion, that bill should include some provisions to guarantee that the worker's salary will remain the same for fewer hours of work.
If he only works 40 hours a week, under the new provisions of the act, then his salary should be adjusted accordingly and he should be assured that his take-home pay will not be reduced.
In view of the present economic situation, I think such measures are essential at this time and that the Minister of Labour (Mr. Nicholson) should state that all workers carrying out federal contracts will actually get the same salary, in spite of shorter working hours, they are now being paid under a 44 hour week.
Mr. Speaker, may I point out it is five o'clock?
1English]


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It being five o'clock, the house will now proceed to a consideration
April 6, 1966

of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely, notices of motion and public bills.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: In view of the fact this bill has been on the order paper for some time and that some members of the house have expressed a desire to get the legislation through as soon as possible, I wonder if there is any possibility of proceeding with it? It is an anomoly that when parliament by an overwhelming vote has stated there should be a minimum wage, and a maximum 40 hour week without overtime for such industries as come within federal jurisdiction, yet we are not in a position to impose these restrictions when we let federal contracts. I am hopeful that hon. members might not see the clock for a few minutes until we get this legislation through.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)


Michael Starr: I appreciate the desire of the Minister of Labour to get this legislation through, and we share that desire. However, a great deal of time was taken up by statements on motions by ministers and replies by hon. members, and this is a short day. There was a great deal of time taken up by written and oral questions. However, in the last 20 minutes we have passed four pieces of legislation. I am sure the minister does not want to cram this through at this late hour. In any event, the government house leader and I agreed earlier today that we would proceed, in view of what has been done, with the private members' hour.


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: I am in the hands of the house, Mr. Speaker.


OLD AGE SECURITY ACT
Mr. Eric A. Winkler (Grey-Bruce) moved:: That, in the opinion ol this house, the government should give immediate consideration to the advisability of introducing a measure to increase the amount of pension provided under the Old Age Security Act to $100 a month and lowering the age of eligibility of applicants to 65 years.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Carried.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Mr. Speaker, I would welcome a decision of the house in regard to the resolution standing in my name; and I appreciate the comment which came from my left. If it was any indication to me that this would be the result, then because, in the first
Old Age Security Act instance, this is merely a resolution, and second, because it is for the guidance of the government, I would very gladly resume my seat and allow hon. members to indicate their opinions on the question.
Since approval of a motion does not normally occur in private members' hour, and since I have rarely had the opportunity to discuss any business during the course of this hour, I should like to say just a few words in order to allow members of the house to give the government the benefit of their decisions with regard to this matter.
I am very pleased, as are other hon. members of the house, to see a government resolution in the name of the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. MacEachen) on the order paper dealing with this question, and other plans in social justice. The house of course, knows the many times I have brought this matter to the attention of the government, both through the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) and the Minister of National Health and Welfare and, I must admit, also through my colleague from Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles). We are not too far apart in our views in this regard.
Very few of the members in the house today would deny that repeatedly during the course of the last election campaign this subject was made a very great issue. I would put before the house and the country today the thoughts I had on this question, as well as what I thought was necessary for people who must exist on the old age security pension and also on old age assistance.
One way or the other these questions are included in the resolution of the minister. A wealth of research information has been placed before us following upon the hearings before the committee of the other place, and I think that this fact has expedited the appearance of the resolution now standing in the name of the Minister of National Health and Welfare. I am well aware that a vast number of members and supporters of the government know the feelings of the people in their constituencies who are concerned over this very important matter.
I do not think I need refer to the tremendous increase in the cost of living which has taken place since this government took office. Neither do I think I have to make reference to the status of people who are subjected to living on this income-and I say that with all

April 6. 1966
Old Age Security Act justification. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, whether or not this resolution is accepted holus-bolus, I believe the government should increase old age assistance, and the old age security pension to $100 a month forthwith.
I have also taken note of the many other areas of social justice referred to in the government resolution, and in this regard another matter I should like to put before the house this afternoon is this. I think it is high time that some definition of the word "disability" were given, as it relates to the awarding of disability pensions. For too long now we have been at the mercy of people who make arbitrary decisions in this regard. I am sure that every hon. member is besieged from time to time by people who can no longer earn their own livelihood because of the fact that someone in authority has stated that they are not permanently disabled, when in fact they could not earn five cents an hour even if hired on a production line.
This is a regrettable state of affairs. The government must accept the responsibility now of clarifying this provision under the Disabled Persons Act. In this enlightened age of affluence which we are enjoying it should not be difficult or beyond the bounds of reason for the government to make this matter clear.
As I said initially, Mr. Speaker, this was a course which I followed during the last election campaign. I am not going to boast about the results I had in the campaign; they are open to scrutiny by anybody. But I do recall that a cabinet minister in the last Liberal government stated that the main reason he was defeated in the last election was because of the Conservative platform of $100 a month for our old age pensioners.
The situation today is such that I know that if given the opportunity, the vast majority of the members of the house would stand up and support the terms of this resolution. I know that all my hon. friends to my left would. As a matter of fact, if the members to my far left had acted in accordance with their consciences, I know that the government would have been defeated in one of the earlier confidence motions during this session. I believe it is as a result of the careful consideration which has been given to suggestions made by the opposition members that the government is finally going to take action on behalf of the people who come within this great area of need.
I now wish, Mr. Speaker, to resume my seat, having taken very few minutes of the

time of this house. I think you, Mr. Speaker, perhaps more than some of the other members of the house, know the degree of fairness I like to show when I deal, not only with the government but with all members of the house. The only favour I am going to ask of this government in this parliament is that they allow us to voice our opinions by way of a vote on this resolution, with the stipulation that it is intended for the guidance of the government.


Mitchell William Sharp: May I ask the hon. gentleman a
question?


Eric Alfred Winkler: Surely.


Mitchell William Sharp: I should like to see whether I understand the position on the resolution. Is the hon. gentleman also including in this the consideration that the cost involved should be met out of the Canada Pension Plan, as he and his party advocated during the last election?


Eric Alfred Winkler: Mr. Speaker, the minister belongs to a government which does not have much regard for the way it spends money. He can find the money from wherever he wants; it will not matter to me, as long as he increases this very necessary payment to people who are in receipt of the old age security pension and old age assistance.


Mr. Richard Cashin (St. John's West):: Mr. Speaker, I welcome an opportunity to participate in the discussion this afternoon, and I congratulate the hon. member for bringing this matter once more to the attention of the house. As all hon. members realize, it is indeed a vital question.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
I might say that this is the third consecutive April that I have had the opportunity in this house to speak on matters pertaining to social security, and I should like to reiterate something I said on two previous occasions in the general area of social security. Over the past 30 years, in our approach to this subject, we have allowed a great many anomalies to creep into the law. In many areas this has been ignored. In my view one of the prime reasons for this is the fact that politicians, being what they are-and this is true at least in part of all parties in this house-have talked from time to time about these measures of social security as a result of pressure being brought to bear on them by various groups in the country. It may well be that the course of action advocated is justified. Of
April 6, 1966

course it may be that the justification has been helped greatly by the pressures placed on various politicians to do these things.
In common with other hon. members, I feel that in many instances, and perhaps in the vast majority of cases, $75 a month is not at all sufficient for the old people of this country.
Reference was made, Mr. Speaker, by the hon. member who preceded me in this debate, to the way he conducted his campaign. Judging by the results and by the many elections he has fought, he undoubtedly conducted himself very well because he is now a most successful member of this house. I congratulate him for that. He made reference to the question of this $100 a month. I, too, would like to make reference to the type of campaign conducted in St. John's West, Newfoundland, and to that conducted by my colleague from St. John's East (Mr. O'Keefe). Both of us conducted our campaign in a manner consistent with what we both have said in this house. Really, all that we have done in social security is to approach it from a broad and comprehensive approach. Many areas of need exist.
I know if the hon. gentleman who spoke were to refer to his mail from his constituents, he would find what I have found. I realize from the many letters I have received, that many people who are not old age pensioners, are looking for assistance. As a result of this, over the past few years I have had an opportunity of making a relatively complete study of the type of assistance that is available to various groups, including old age pensioners, in this country. I refer to those groups who are very much in need of assistance.
Anyone who looks at the facts will find out that while $75 a month may never be adequate, there are many other groups of people in this country who have to survive on much less. I refer particularly to widows with young families. There are many other people falling into this class. I know of many persons in my constituency belonging to that group who might be termed the forgotten people of Canada.
Therefore, any government which is to deal with the problem of social security, if it is really to hold true to the principles of social justice must look at the whole area of need to determine what can be done on the basis of the resources available to the country.
When one makes a statement like that I suppose it is like Abraham Lincoln's definition of the responsibilities of government.
Old Age Security Act Anybody can agree with it. A person of a conservative viewpoint can say, "That is very practical" and a person with a radical viewpoint may say the same thing. What really determines the difference is the way we apply this principle of social justice, personally.
Over the years we may have had periods in our history when we have not paid enough attention to social security. However, in the last few years perhaps we have been paying more attention to social security than we had before that time. The result is that today there is a greater awareness than ever before. There is a greater awareness now than there was even a couple of years ago on the part of members of the House of Commons and on the part of the public generally about social security. Not only old age pensioners but a great many other groups of people need to be attended to by the federal government. Many areas of social security are within the jurisdiction of the provinces. We find that one of the difficulties is in the field of the financial abilities of various provinces to cope with this situation.
Therefore, in answer to the hon. member's speech, I hope that when the resolution on the order paper to which he made reference comes before this house for debate he will give it his full support. I say that, because I think that this Canada Assistance Plan is an enlightened and certainly a much needed approach to social security. It will cover for the first time not only old age pensioners, who are very much the concern of this resolution, but other groups as well.
There are various ways in which the $100 a month can be financed. I think it is to these that the most practical considerations of any government must go. For instance, if we were to grant across the board $100 a month to old age pensioners, we know that it would cost in the vicinity of $800 million. Were the government to incur that kind of expenditure, what would happen to other programs for other people in need?
Many other social demands besides the one raised in the resolution are placed on the government. Those demands include such fields as education, retraining of the unemployed and other very necessary social programs which could have an impact on the economy of our country. When we talk about $100 a month, we must determine what it is that we are really trying to do. We must relate this to the cost, and we must try to come up with the best way of doing it.

April 6, 1966
Old Age Security Act
In the light of the present circumstances I know that it is much easier for any politician to go out on the hustings and say to the constituents, "Well, we are going to give $100 straight across the board" because that covers those who need the money very much; it covers those who have less need for the money, and it covers those who perhaps do not have a need for it. The point is that it will cost the treasury a considerable amount of money.
It may be that any government happening to be in office, be it Liberal, Conservative, or otherwise, were it to raise the old age pension would tend to think it had done something wonderful in social security, and therefore would continue to neglect some other areas of need.
May I say that I think there are other ways at this time by which we can accomplish the purposes implicit in the resolution now before the house. That is to say, we may be able to provide additional assistance to old age pensioners through the Canada Assistance Plan which will be coming before the house at an early date. I am afraid I cannot comment on it. However, I am sure that it will meet with the approval of members of the house. In saying that I know that there will be hon. members who will feel that they would rather see an increase to a straight $100, because they will be afraid that under the Canada Assistance Plan there may be certain areas of need, as in the case of old age pensioners, which will not be met because ten provinces of Canada will be doing the administering, and perhaps for other reasons. I feel that by the provisions of the Canada Assistance Plan the government is, in part, meeting the problem implicit in the resolution before the house today.
There may be other ways to approach this matter. Many hon. members in the house were particularly attracted to the Senate report, commonly referred to as the Croll report. It appeals to me, because in the administrative sense it seems in terms of social justice to guarantee practically a minimum income to our older Canadians.
I think that is the direction in which this country ought to be heading. In matters of social security in the past, that has been our approach. It has been the peculiar position of the federal government as related to other fields of need, which has caused it to branch into those other areas of social need. Therefore I say again that while our approach to the problem of old age pensions may not be

all that perhaps it ought to be, it is more comprehensive than is the approach to almost any other area of social security.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)
So, if we move in the direction of providing a minimum income for older people I think we shall be accepting this principle of guaranteed minimum incomes and that we would go on from there at some later date in our development to making guaranteed minimum incomes available to other categories of people. This is, if you will, the cleanest way, the most honest way and the fairest way in which to meet this pressing social problem.
In the 30 years or more which have passed in this country since we began dealing with social security in a serious way we have built up a program based on a philosophy which is today, in my view, outdated. It has been based on the philosophy of the hand-out. I think this kind of approach is being taken far less frequently by members of all parties in this house, although I am dismayed from time to time when I attend meetings of boards of trade and similar bodies and find people there, no doubt with good intentions, still behaving as if welfare represented a kind of drain from the people who have to the people who have not, whereas what we are trying to do in reality is to give various classes of people better opportunities to fulfil themselves as Canadians.
We should remember that there are many groups of people, scattered and hidden throughout this country, who do not now receive even the level of assistance which is available to our old age pensioners. Many of them are not yet 50. They include widows with families, young people who have dropped out of school and who cannot find suitable jobs, people who have to draw social assistance-all of them people whose dignity is being severely damaged. I recognize the honest differences we may have on this subject, but the fact that so much was said during the past election campaign about this $100, important as it may be, could lead to our forgetting some of these other claims. When we talk about old age pensioners and their pressing needs we should remember there are many other groups in this country for whom little has been done up to now, either by Liberal or by Conservative governments to bring them into line with the benefits now available to our senior citizens.
This is, in part, a constitutional problem-at least, a constitutional problem presents itself in one piece of legislation to which
April 6, 1966



the hon. member for Grey-Bruce (Mr. Winkler) had made reference. I hope that when these matters are discussed further during the course of the next few months we shall all examine them in an effort to find the best and most acceptable way, both in terms of economics and of social justice, of providing pensioners with the assistance they need, and in this way help to establish a more comprehensive approach toward social security in this country than in the past.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Would the hon. member permit a question? Does he really think that the resolution before us raises a constitutional question?


Richard Joseph Cashin: No. I think-


Eric Alfred Winkler: Thank you. That is all I wanted to know.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Like the hon. member for Grey-Bruce (Mr. Winkler) I shall keep my remarks very brief because I should like to see this motion voted on by the house. I congratulate the hon. member for Grey-Bruce not only on presenting this motion but on the luck of the draw which enabled his motion to be discussed before some others. There are three or four motions on the order paper under the heading of private members' business including one in my name, all of which seek the same end, namely an increase in the old age pension to $100 a month and the lowering of the age of eligibility to 65 years right away.
I support this proposition. I have supported it for so long that I hardly need say so. I also wish to make the point that if we are to reform parliament and get some business done here it might be a good thing once in a while to let a private member's motion such as this come to a vote. All the motion says is that in the opinion of the house the government should consider providing $100 a month at age 65.
When this question was before us in two amendments during the debate on the address there were procedural arguments and it was suggested that the passing of either of those amendments would cause the defeat of the government. The passing of this motion would not cause the defeat of the government. It would simply express an opinion of the house, and I believe if the house were free to express its opinion on this issue, as it has been on other issues, it would be categorically in favour of the motion before us.
Old Age Security Act
I listened with interest to the hon. member for St. John's West (Mr. Cashin). He took 15 minutes to tell us what he wanted to say. But what did he say? Really, all he said was that there are other areas where something needs to be done just as urgently as something needs to be done for the old age pensioners. But he did not say when or where we should move. As a matter of fact I believe his speech added up to the using of these other areas as an excuse for doing nothing to raise the old age pension, and I suggest that is not good enough.


Richard Joseph Cashin: Would the hon. member permit a question? Does he not recall that I made reference in my speech to the Canada Assistance Plan which I thought would in a large measure cope with this problem?


Stanley Howard Knowles: Yes, I know the hon. member referred to the Canada Assistance Plan. We have been trying to get the government to proceed with that for a full year. But again he is using that plan, as well as other things undefined, as an excuse for opposing the motion put down by the hon. member for Grey-Bruce.
I do not take second place to the hon. member for St. John's West in my belief that the Canada Pension Plan is good legislation. Indeed, I believe we have got many pieces of worthwhile social legislation on the statute books of this country, put there by the governments which have held office over the years, even if under pressure from some of us. But I think our package of social legislation will not be good enough for Canada in the sixties as long as we leave the old age pension at its present figure of $75. Even though people will begin getting the benefit of the Canada Pension Plan in some future year, I believe, as one who has studied this matter carefully, that at the present moment the level of our old age pension should be brought up to $100 a month.
I am asking the house today to let us have a vote on this issue to see whether this is not the opinion of the members of the House of Commons. The government can then decide whether it wishes to pay some attention to that opinion. Surely we have the right once in a while in private members' hour to express our opinion by a vote. The hon. member for St. John's West made a remark about the mail we get from our constituents. This is something which, I think, impresses all of us. Anyone who has been around here as long as I have gets a great deal of mail, and during

April 6, 1966
Old Age Security Act the present session there have been many subjects on which people have been writing us. But in my experience it is still the hundreds of letters from older people telling me of their plight, of their difficulty in trying to get along on $75 a month, which outdistance all the mail I get on all the other subjects. If this is my experience I suggest it is probably the experience of a good many other members of this house.
It is also a fact that all the responsible social agencies in the country have established that an older person simply cannot get along on less than $110, $115 or $130 a month-different organizations have arrived at different figures.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
I submit that with these facts staring us in the face, as presented to us by social work organizations, concerning the conditions which our older people face, and as presented to us in the letters our pensioners write to us, that we in this House of Commons ought to have the heart, the decency and the responsibility to act on this motion.
I would like to speak on it at length, Mr. Speaker, but I am pleading for a vote, and therefore I conclude these remarks at this point and urge the house to support this motion for raising old age security to $100 a month right away.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, my first words will be to congratulate the hon. member for Grey-Bruce (Mr. Winkler) for having introduced this resolution, and having put it on the order paper, to ask that the old age pension be raised to $100 a month and the age of eligibility of applicants be set at 65 years instead of 70 years as it is today.
While the mover was explaining why his motion should be adopted, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Sharp) intervened to ask if he thought we should raise taxes or include such an increase in the Canada pension plan. The Minister of Finance seemed to wonder where he could find the money to pay $100 to persons of 65 and over. I think that we are taking this matter a little too lightly in this house.
We do think of our old people, but not seriously enough. Like any other member of the cabinet, the Minister of Finance knows very well that a pension of $75 is inadequate at the present time and, during the last

election campaign, the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson), the head of government, promised up to $125 a month to those of our senior citizens who were in need.
But now, four and a half months after the election, the Minister of Finance is worrying about where to find the money to raise old age pensions.


Mitchell William Sharp: May I say to the hon. member, Mr. Speaker, that I did not ask that question. I asked the hon. member who was speaking at the time whether he intended to finance this out of the Canada Pension Plan, as had been advocated by his party. It is quite obvious where the money would come from: It would come from the taxpayers.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister of Finance for making known his stand, but I do not agree with him in that the money required to increase old age pensions would have to be taken out of the pockets of Canadian taxpayers. We now have several plans in Canada: the Canada pension plan, old age security, unemployment insurance, unemployment assistance, the Blind Persons Act, the Disabled Act, and coming medicare, all kinds of plans, the cost of which will be met through taxes.
Now, there is another way of financing an increase in old age pension, of financing social security in Canada. And that method, the Minister of Finance knows what it is. It is the full use of the Bank of Canada in making financially possible what is physically achievable. Instead of calling it a plan, a "master plan", let us call it a national dividend from the new credits of the Bank of Canada.
It is strange, but when war comes, the Minister of Finance does not wonder where the money will come from. The minister knows that in 1939, when war broke out, the government of the day did not go to the taxpayers for money, because they had not had a cent for some ten years, since the beginning of the depression. We went to the Bank of Canada. The Minister of Finance at that time, Mr. Ilsley, managed to use the Bank of Canada credits, to summon forth, right across the country, such war industries as no country in the world has ever known.
It was possible then to find the money and to set up a tremendous war machine in Canada. When it comes to social security, the Minister of Finance will ask us: where will the money be found, where will it come
April 6, 1966

from? From the pockets of Canadian taxpayers? Let us be logical, and let us face the facts.
The Minister of Finance is aware that the Canadian people are making superhuman efforts and are ready to keep on contributing to the economic development of our country, to the establishment of new industries and to the increase of Canadian productivity. The Minister of Finance is aware of this. But in his budget, he checks the economic development of the country and he will create more unemployment and slow down the progress of the Canadian economy.
The increase in old age pensions must not result in a decrease of the purchasing power of other elements or social classes of our society. Is Canada able to produce enough goods to guarantee to all those who are 65 or over an income of $100 a month? Is Canada capable of producing enough clothing, food, housing, for all our elderly people to live decently in our country? Has Canada the physical possibilities to make life happier for our old people? The Minister of Finance does not ask himself those questions because he knows that Canada can do it, that the production is there, that our stores, our industries are full of all kinds of goods. We are not lacking in clothing, wood, manpower, goodwill, to develop the country.
And the main question which keeps coming up in the house as well as outside is the financial question: Where will the money come from? The taxpayers will pay, the Canadian taxpayers will be taxed more.
Mr. Speaker, when we tax the worker and the farmer, when the government taxes the people, we diminish the purchasing power of that class by that much.
Why not resort to the redistribution of wealth in Canada? If some requisites are taken away from someone earning $5,000 a year to be given to one who earns nothing, the over-all purchasing power of the Canadian people is not increased in any way.
We, in the Ralliement Creditiste, suggest the implementation of the social credit principle to pay a national dividend, not out of thin air but based on what the Canadian people create through productivity.
This year, in 1966-1967, we are advised by the government-and the Minister of Finance said so in his Budget speech-that Canada will produce approximately $54 to $55 billion worth of consumer goods or services. Faced with this huge production, the 23033-251
Old Age Security Act Canadian people as a whole, and not only in part, will have a total national income of about $40 to $42 billion. There will be a difference of $12 to $13 billion because the government does not try to balance production and the purchasing power or the taxpayers' income.
Mr. Speaker, the Social credit doctrine has been expounded in this house by members from Alberta for nearly 25 or 30 years. Since 1935, members outlined here the Creditists' theory or the Social credit doctrine, but the government has always turned a deaf ear. Instead of gearing the financial system to the production system, the government tries to adjust the production system to the financial system.
Instead of making financially possible what is physically possible, the government tries to make physically possible what is financially possible. Production is adjusted to finance, instead of finance being adjusted to production. That is the weakness of the present system.
Does the minister want to put a question?
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. gentleman a question about something that has always puzzled me regarding his views and the views of those who adhere to Social Credit doctrines? The hon. member has said, and now repeated it, that what is physically possible should be financially possible. I wonder whether the converse is true, that what is financially possible is also physically possible. That has been a problem that has always puzzled me about his financial views.


David Réal Caouette: That is exactly what I just said.

Instead of fitting finance to material possibilities, efforts are made to adjust material possibilities to financial possibilities.
I would now ask the Minister of Finance whether, in wartime, this one question was asked: Is there any credit available to make guns and shells or to build war plants?
As the need for war plants, guns, clothing and feeding soldiers arose, the government found the necessary credits. The minister knows that. But with peace, and for the preservation of peace, the minister can no longer find the money to guarantee economic security and personal liberty to each and every Canadian citizen.

April 6, 1966
Old Age Security Act
In wartime, there were jobs for all Canadian young men and women and there were no unemployed in Canada. But, the minister says it is financially impossible to do it in time of peace. We will not accept this constant tight credit policy, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member for Villeneuve and I appreciate the fact that he can be carried away when talking about financial theories, but I wish to remind him that a specific matter is before the house: the advisability of increasing old age pensions to $100.
Therefore, I ask the hon. member for Villeneuve to confine his remarks to the subject matter of the motion now before the house.


David Réal Caouette: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I shall comply with your request.
However, I wanted to insist that funds must be found to increase old age pensions to $100 per month.
Now, the present government does not have the means to finance these pension increases. All the government does, is to make promises at election time and to forget those same promises the day after the election. That is all it does.
I suggested the Bank of Canada to the government as a means to finance old age pension increase.
We have been demanding $100 per month for our senior citizens in Canada for the last ten years; with the rise in the cost of living, we will some day ask for $125 per month at age 60, because people 60 years of age can no longer find employment to make a living; even at 40, they are considered too old.
Mr. Speaker, these are considerations that we must eventually face. I do not want to prevent the vote from being taken on this resolution, but I want to give the Liberals an opportunity to prove they are sincere. If they are so desirous of helping the elderly in Canada, they will let the vote be taken on the motion this afternoon.
If they are not sincere toward our senior citizens, all they have to do is to stand up and talk the resolution out in order to prevent it from coming to a vote.
The Ralliement creditiste will vote in favour of an increase of the old age pension to $100 at 65 years of age-


Mr. Habel:: How many are you?


David Réal Caouette: My friend, the hon. member for Cochrane, asked me how many members we are. Proportionately, we are more numerous than the members of his own party. In closing, I shall say that we strongly advocate a pension of $100 a month at 65 and that we wish this same pension be paid to needy people of 60.
I shall not talk the resolution out as the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) did earlier, and as the mover of the resolution requested, I ask that the vote be taken in favour of our senior citizens, and not in favour of any political party.


Alexander Bell Patterson: Mr. Speaker, on an occasion such as this I think the sincerity of one's support for a motion of this kind is indicated more clearly by allowing it to come to a vote than by indulging in a multitude of words. However, I do want to state categorically that we in the Social Credit party are in full support of the resolution now before us, and we intend to give it our support if the government will allow it to come to a vote before six o'clock.
I do not think there is any question in anyone's mind regarding the necessity for an increase in old age security to $100 per month. On a number of occasions we have received communications from individuals who are endeavouring to get by on the present pension of $75 per month. They have provided us with lists of groceries, and their other costs, to show the increase in the cost of living that has taken place over a short period of time.
Here in this house it has been brought to our attention that there has been a constant increase in the cost of living, and we have been warned that this increase will continue throughout this year. For that reason I do not think anyone can argue that an increase in old age pensions is out of line. We hope therefore, that other members will have an opportunity this afternoon to support this resolution and vote on it.
A short time ago we in this party had the opportunity of presenting a compromise formula to the government for its consideration. We did so because the government had indicated quite clearly that it was not prepared to grant $100 per month old age pension at age 65. We regret there has not been any response whatsoever to this compromise proposal, and we must come to the conclusion that the government has not been sincere in its quest for a formula whereby old age
April 6, 1966

pensions could be increased to bring some relief, especially to those who are in dire need.
The hon. member for St. John's West (Mr. Cashin) referred to the fact that our proposal would cost in the neighbourhood of $800 million. We do not accept that suggestion because old age pensions are universal and there would be a return in the form of income taxes. Of course other types of assistance would be eliminated, and this would drastically reduce the cost from $800 million.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
Therefore we believe the government should move in line with the recommendations of this motion. We also call the attention of the government to the fact that veterans, superannuated civil servants and other categories of senior citizens are still awaiting some definite consideration. Many of these people are living in conditions almost of destitution. I have received from a number of old age pensioners organizations the request that we have a free vote on this particular measure. We were allowed a free vote on the matter that was decided yesterday. I realize there is of course a difference in the issue that was before us then and that which is before us now, but it is very difficult for senior citizens to understand why a free vote can be allowed on one issue but not on another that so vitally affects their interests. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, the suggestion is made that this matter should come to a vote today as an indication of the feeling of the house for the guidance and direction of the government in its consideration of this issue.
I would suggest that a vote be taken this evening in order to obtain the decision of the house. I would further suggest that the government should take the result of the vote into very serious consideration. In the debate that was concluded last evening-I shall not refer to it in detail-it was said that treatment of the misfits in our society is a measure of the stature of our nation. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, may I suggest that the treatment of our senior citizens is a measure of the stature of our nation.


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Mr.   J.-A. Mongrain@Trois-Rivieres: Mr. Speaker, it amused me somewhat to hear several members clamour for the vote, and then, all of them took the time to speak just the same. One spoke for 29 minutes, another for 14 minutes, and so on. This
Old Age Security Act being so, Mr. Speaker, everybody here would claim his right to speak in this house. I know members on both sides who would like to speak about old age security.
Everybody agrees, I think, that the situation of our old people should be improved. It is a matter of considering the best procedure to be followed for that purpose.
In my opinion, it is not realistic to give $100 to persons of 65, because some of them really need $150 at that age, while others would still not be getting enough, and for others still, $150 would be luxury.
Therefore, I feel that the whole social security program should be reviewed.
A member of the Ralliement Creditiste mentioned an aspect that should be taken into consideration. As things are, obtaining a pension at 65 leads some people to think they are getting old in our society, whereas between 60 and 65, jobs are getting scarce. This is not realistic.
I believe the whole social assistance system should at all costs be revised and reviewed, in a practical way, according to the needs of 1966. Consideration should therefore be given to the manpower program, for instance, as well as to the retraining of the unskilled worker, in short, jobs should be found for those between 55 and 60 years when they are no longer able to work.
The needs of old people should also be taken into consideration, because, as I said earlier, for a few of them, $150 a month would not be enough.
Even if partisanship is forbidden, even if it is said that no political capital should be made out of this question, I believe that efforts are being made to embarrass the government and I shall believe it until I am shown it is not so.
It was stated a while ago, across the floor, that the government did not seem sincere. It nevertheless remains that a bill on social security was announced and it seems to be rather comprehensive. It has not been submitted to us, but if it contains provisions to ensure a guaranteed income to our old people, according to their needs, and if it provides for additional benefits, for instance, when their health makes it impossible for them to survive with the present allowance, in short, if special allowances are paid without too many restrictions and red tape, I think their needs will be more adequately met than if we were to grant them a $100 pension at age 65. It was the leader of the

April 6, 1966
Old Age Security Act Ralliement creditiste (Mr. Caouette) who suggested at one time that the pension be set according to the cost of living. That would be more realistic, for it is possible that a $100 pension at age 65 may not be realistic at some future time.
I think a vote at this time would settle nothing. First, the house is now in a minority. It would only embarrass those people who are unanimous in wishing the old people well.
In these circumstances, I think all opposition parties are helping the government by leaving it no peace, by reminding it of its responsibility to do something to meet the needs, not only the old people aged 65, 66 or 70 but of all those in our midst who need to live properly according to 1966 standards. The unemployed, for instance, those who, because of social conditions, cannot find employment, must also be our concern as much as the old people.
Consequently, I suggest to the opposition to keep on harassing the government for a comprehensive social legislation to solve the whole problem, covering all those in need, in a society as affluent as ours where it is inconceivable, even today, to find poverty when so many things go to waste.
I am not concerned about the financial aspect of the matter, for I know that when a practical plan to meet such needs is found, what is materially necessary will be made financially possible.


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Margaret Isabel Rideout: Mr. Speaker, some hon. members are calling for the question to be put. I should like to draw to their attention the importance of the matter under discussion. I was prepared to put forward quite legitimate arguments giving the government's viewpoints with regard to increasing the old age pension to $100 a month. Many members on this side of the house, and I am sure on the other side, would have welcomed the opportunity to speak in this debate today. However, many of them have left for the Easter recess, under the impression that we would continue with government business a procedure which was denied by hon. members opposite. Therefore with all due respect, Mr. Speaker, I should like to call it six o'clock.


Eric Alfred Winkler: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Did the hon. lady say "denied"?


Stanley Howard Knowles: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, in view of the desire of the hon. member for Westmorland (Mrs. Rideout) to make her speech, and our desire to hear it, I wonder whether we could have unanimous consent to sit for another hour, perhaps hear her speech and a few others, and then reach a decision?


An hon. Member:: No.


Eric Alfred Winkler: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I would once more ask the hon. lady whether she used the word "denied" in regard to our dealing with government business?


Margaret Isabel Rideout: I said that the minister this afternoon asked for permission to continue with government business.


Eric Alfred Winkler: And he was denied consent?


Margaret Isabel Rideout: Yes.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. The hour appointed for the consideration of private members' business has not expired.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Let us go on.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, is the house leader going to indicate what the business will be for the week in which we come back?


George James McIlraith: Yes. We expect to proceed with the budget debate and continue with it through that week. I hope there will be no need to change those plans. I do not foresee any at the moment, and I hope there will not be any need arise in the intervening time.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)
May I express the hope that all hon. members will have a much needed recess between now and Tuesday, April 19. I hope they will have an opportunity to visit the people in their constituencies as well as an opportunity to visit with their families, so that they will return refreshed and invigorated for the tremendous program of work we have ahead.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.

April 6, 1966


[Stage Direction]
Introduction, 3969
General Wildlife, 3970
Migratory Birds
General policy, 3970 Maintenance and management of habitat, 3971
Control of harvest, 3972 Research, 3972
National Parks Wildlife General policy, 3973 Research, 3973
Territorial Wildlife General policy, 3974 Research, 3974
Co-ordination, 3975

[Stage Direction]
Introduction
Wildlife, a renewable resource, is one of Canada's great heritages. Yet not enough is being done to ensure its future usefulness to Canadians. As the economy expands, as Canadians find more leisure time at their disposal, as urban development impinges on wildlife habitat, and as farmers and foresters adopt new techniques to protect and improve their crops, the pressures on wildlife steadily mount.
Wildlife contributes to the national economy and provides millions of man-hours of priceless outdoor recreation. There are over 1,000,000 hunters in Canada. In recent years they have spent about $100 million annually in pursuing their sport.
A great number of Canadians and foreign visitors use the resource in other ways: they look at wildlife, travelling many miles to do so, and study and photograph wildlife. Wildlife is a major attraction for visitors to both National and Provincial parks. There were over nine million visitors to our National Parks in 1965.
The demand for wildlife for both hunting and non-consumptive uses seems to increase with population growth and the rising standard of living. Evidence from the United States and Great Britain indicates that the increase in demand continues as the human population grows. So the need to preserve wildlife will become even more urgent.
The supply of wildlife has generally grown smaller as the number of Canadians and visitors to Canada has grown larger. Drainage of wetlands, destruction of natural cover for the building of cities, the improvement and extension of farms, the growing of trees, and the flooding of lands behind large dams have all reduced the area of habitat for many species. Wildlife numbers depend upon the extent and quality of available habitat, just as the numbers of livestock depend upon the quality and quantity of range.
Jurisdiction over wildlife is divided between Canada and the provinces. Canada has a responsibility for migratory birds, for wildlife in the National Parks, and for those species in the Northwest Territories declared by the Governor in Council to be in danger of extinction. The provinces and the Territories have full responsibility for all other wildlife, but the benefits of wildlife can accrue to all Canadians and some national perspective toward the resource is long overdue.
Means by which national concern about wildlife can best be translated into effective action have been discussed by representatives of Canada and the provinces at meetings of the Canadian Council of Resource Ministers, the Federal-Provincial Wildlife Conference, and the Prime Minister's and Premiers' Conference in July 1965. It has been agreed that the Federal Government should take positive action for the conservation of migratory birds and their habitat, and that federal assistance should be made available in respect of wildlife coming under provincial jurisdiction.
The policy and program outlined herein have been developed to meet the needs expressed by conservationists and wildlife officials throughout Canada by means in accordance with principles generally endorsed by responsible Ministers.
In brief, the program to be developed under our general wildlife policy includes supporting and undertaking fundamental research in support of wildlife management throughout Canada, provision of information about wildlife, and co-operation with the provinces, on request and by agreement, in attaining the goals of wildlife management. The program also includes an increase in activities related to the federal responsibilities for migratory birds, wildlife in National
[Stage Direction]
April 6. 1966
Parks, and wildlife in the Northwest Territories.
General Wildlife Policy
1.	The Federal Government will undertake research on the relationship between wildlife and forests. This program will be integrated with basic studies of forest ecology and productivity being carried on by the Department of Forestry. Objectives will be to determine factors affecting wildlife populations supported by various types of forests, the effects of varying populations of wildlife on the forests, and the effects of forestry practices on wildlife populations.
2.	The Federal Government will undertake research on factors affecting the health of wildlife populations. Diseases, parasitic infections, pesticides and other environmental pollutants have important effects on wildlife populations in all parts of Canada. Studies of those factors are specialized occupations calling for a high degree of training and adequate laboratory support and it is unlikely that those requirements will be met in all provinces. The Federal Government must develop facilities for such studies to meet its own responsibilities. Pesticides and many diseases affect more than one member of an animal community, so the information obtained will be useful to all governments.
The following programs are planned:
(a)	Systematic assessment of the occurrence and significance of diseases and parasites affecting Canadian wildlife populations (some of which indirectly affect humans as well).
(b)	Determination of the effects of pesticide-use programs on wildlife populations.
(c)	Maintenance of a central registry of information on pesticide characteristics, pesticide residues in wildlife, and diseases and parasites if they relate to wildlife. Information will be provided to other governments on request.
(d)	Development and maintenance of a national reference collection of wildlife parasites and disease organisms.
3.	Wildlife research services may be provided to provinces on request and by agreement if it is apparent that the Federal Government is best equipped to deal with the problems concerned.
4.	The Federal Government may support research and management related to wide-ranging wildlife populations. Some wildlife
populations, for example, barren-ground caribou, move across provincial boundaries and thus come under the jurisdiction of more than one government. Co-ordinated or cooperative research and management are usually necessary if such populations are to thrive. Agreements may be concluded with provinces desiring to participate in co-operative research or management of populations that are not confined to one province.
5.	The Federal Government's information program will be designed to serve the interests of all governments wherever possible. The dissemination of information about wildlife by all media is a powerful means of improving the quality of wildlife management and securing public acceptance of management measures. The principles of wildlife management are the same whatever species or groups of species may be involved, although the details of application may vary. Bulletins, brochures, and films prepared primarily to convey information about wildlife subject to federal responsibility may thus usefully and easily be modified to serve a broader purpose.
6.	The Federal Government will act to improve the supply of professionally trained wildlife biologists. Prospective entrants to the field should be encouraged, and research carried on in the universities as an aspect of their graduate training program should be supported.
Two activities are under way and will be expanded:
(a)	Needed researches in the wildlife field that can be effectively undertaken by university staff members and graduate students are being supported by contracts.
(b)	Scholarships are being offered to graduate students in wildlife and allied fields.
Migratory Birds
General Policy
1.	Every effort will be made to prevent the extinction of any species. Special protection of the birds and their habitat, and artificial propagation may be employed.
2.	Bird populations should be managed so that they are maintained at levels as nearly as possible in harmony with man's various interests. Such a concept of optimum population size is useful, even though optima cannot yet be defined for more than a few species. Limitations of habitat and conflict between birds and man's other interests set the upper
April 6. 1966
[Stage Direction]
limit of optimum populations. Human demand and the danger of extirpation set the lower limit. Populations of most ducks should be maintained as nearly as possible within the high and low levels that existed during the period 1950-56. Such populations will ensure survival of all species, provide some opportunity for hunting and other recreational pursuits in Canada and the United States for the foreseeable future, yet not give rise to insoluble problems of crop damage. Populations of most geese could usefully be maintained at somewhat higher levels than have existed in recent years. As opportunity permits, or circumstances require, studies should be directed toward defining optimum populations of other migratory birds. If actual populations are not in line with defined optima, means should be devised to bring them to the desired level.
3.	All Canadians should have an opportunity to share in the use of the resource, and those who use it should contribute by user fee to the costs of management.
4.	Because migratory birds move back and forth across the continent, intergovernmental and international consultation, co-ordination, and co-operation in research and management will be continued and expanded.
Maintenance and Management of Migratory Bird Habitat
1.	Survival of migratory birds is dependant upon maintenance of habitat. Suitable wetland habitat in amounts sufficient to support desired populations of ducks and geese will be preserved by acquisition, lease, or other form of agreement.
2.	Agreements may be concluded with provinces desiring to participate in acquisition or management of habitat, the terms of agreement to be compatible with the national objective of maintaining desired populations and distribution of migratory birds and to provide security for the federal investment.
3.	Some of the areas acquired in fee simple or to which agreements pertain may require no management other than that required to maintain them in their natural state. For many others, the pressure for an increased supply of birds and the need to get the highest return for the public investment will call for development and improvement. Thus, when it is economically feasible, habitat will be improved so as to increase its carrying capacity for and productivity of birds. This may be done by controlling water levels, altering natural plant cover, and creating
nesting and resting sites. It is desirable that this be done so far as possible without adversely affecting the aesthetic quality of the landscape.
4.	Habitat may be managed so as to influence the local distribution of birds and thus reduce the possibility and extent of damage to agricultural crops and other interests. Management plans for all areas where significant damage by birds occurs or may occur will include features designed to eliminate or minimize damage. Provision of food to attract birds away from commercial crops is the principal technique presently employed.
5.	Land managed for migratory birds should be available for public use so far as possible. In most cases, the public should have access to habitat under public control in order to watch, study, or photograph the birds. In many cases, such lands may support concentrations of birds of sufficient size that hunting is desirable. In any case, management will involve controlling public activity so that it does not damage the habitat or undesirably disturb the birds. Public use may be subject to a user fee. Arrangements in this regard may be a part of agreements with provinces.
6.	Land secured primarily for preservation of migratory bird habitat may be used for other productive purposes, if they are not incompatible. Where such is the case, and there is local need and economic justification for it, such uses may be permitted by agreement with provinces, other government agencies, corporations, or individuals.
7.	Two programs to acquire adequate control of wetland habitat are planned:
(a)	Conclusion of agreements with landowners whereby they agree not to drain or fill the wetlands which they own, or burn the vegetation around them, in return for a payment based on the value of the surrounding land discounted at five per cent for a 20-year period. Using this procedure to maintain about two-thirds of the more than six million small potholes in the vitally important prairie breeding grounds should provide habitat for populations within the 1950-56 levels.
(b)	Purchase or long term lease of large marshes which require management for great productivity and public use. Large marshes are important not only as breeding areas but also as areas where the birds may winter or rest during migration. They are also the areas where much of the hunting takes place. Some
[Stage Direction]
April 6. 1966
of the marshes that are important to waterfowl and are likely to be drained or otherwise adversely affected are well known. The magnitude of a program to preserve all such areas, and the priorities for acquisition, cannot be finally determined until the ARDA-sponsored Land Capability Inventory, now under way, is completed and studied.
Control of Migratory Bird Harvest
1.	A sustained yield of migratory game birds should be secured at as high a level as availability of habitat and risk of damage to other interests will permit. Within the limits imposed by the natural distribution of populations, all Canadians should have equal opportunity for a fair share of the harvest.
2.	Given adequate habitat, regulation of the harvest is the principal means of population control. Regulation of the opening dates, season lengths, bag limits, and zones governing hunting will have the primary objective of maintaining overwintering populations at a level in harmony with the ability of the habitat to support them. Risk of unforeseen natural hazards, the existence of a presently unknown margin of error in population data, and the unpredictability of weather conditions that affect hunting seasons demand a conservative approach to the establishment of regulations.
3.	Other objectives of regulations will be to reduce the waste of birds by crippling, to reduce the risk of accidents, and, so far as possible, to provide equivalent hunting opportunity to all Canadians. In addition, regulations will be drafted with a view to the practicality of their enforcement.
4.	Equitable opportunity to harvest depends upon observance of the regulations governing hunting. Illegal over-harvest is equivalent to the theft of public property. Enforcement and information programs designed to secure conformity of hunting practices with regulations will be expanded and improved.
5.	Special temporary provision will be made for privileged use of migratory birds by persons who, because of their place or mode of living, require the resource for subsistence. The legal basis for such provisions, which are especially necessary to some Eskimos and Indians, is not clear, nor will their administration be easy. Solution of both the legal and administrative problems will be given high priority.
Migratory Bird Research
The primary objective of research is to secure information that will enable effective management. In the process the sum of human knowledge of our natural environment is increased.
Research Related to Habitat
1.	Since migratory bird management involves management of habitat as well, some research must be directed toward obtaining information on habitat characteristics and the complex interrelationships among living things that share the same space.
2.	A major objective of migratory bird habitat research is to develop better methods of evaluating the habitat required for all stages in the life cycles of the various species. Contributing to this end are studies of rates of occurrence of birds in different areas and comparisons of growth, survival, behaviour, and use made of food and cover plants in each type of area. Data obtained will be basic to an improved classification of migratory bird habitat, as well as a more effective method of evaluation.
3.	Research is required to provide the information necessary to develop methods of improving the usefulness of habitat at lowest cost. Studies of the characteristics and usefulness of natural habitat are basic, and yield the information to plan experimental modification of water levels, plant cover, etc.
4.	Development of effective and economic methods of alleviating damage by birds to other interests requires investigation of the characteristics, extent, and severity of damage.
5.	If land is to be used for more than one purpose, the requirements of the several purposes must be clearly understood. Thus, to develop plans for multiple use of wildlife habitat, the results of wildlife research must be considered in conjunction with information obtained during studies of other land uses, such as grazing, forestry, etc.
Research Related to Populations
1.	Research on migratory birds themselves has the objective of maintaining current, accurate information on their population levels and distribution, and developing an understanding of the operation of factors affecting the numbers and distribution of the birds.
2.	The demand-supply squeeze on ducks and geese necessitates development and perfection
April 6. 1966
[Stage Direction]
of systems for accurate and continuing measurements of their populations. Present systems include aerial and ground censuses of populations on the breeding grounds in spring, midsummer surveys to provide data for an estimate of productivity, and posthunting season surveys on the wintering grounds. Most of the relevant work in Canada is carried on by the United States. Canadian participation will be extended with the eventual objective of assuming major responsibility within Canada.
3.	The use of waterfowl by hunters should be measured so that there can be an annual balancing of population gains and losses. This can be done most effectively by a National Kill Survey that will be carried out by mail questionnaires directed to a sample of persons hunting waterfowl. The statistical universe from which the sample will be selected will be provided by a list of the names and addresses of hunters purchasing the Canada Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit. All hunters of migratory birds will be required to hold a Canada Migratory Game Bird Hunting Permit, although it will be issued free of charge to Indians and Eskimos. This survey and associated enquiries will also yield information on the species of birds hunted, as well as when and where they are hunted. That sort of information will permit an evaluation of the effects of changes in regulation that has not previously been possible.
4.	Factors other than hunting affect migratory bird populations and, if changes in population levels are to be understood and at least partially controlled, research on those other factors is required. Studies based on recoveries of banded birds yield information on survival rates, distribution, and movements. Field studies of breeding success and other phases of life history contribute to understanding of factors affecting populations. Effects of diseases, parasitic infections, and the use of pesticides can be significant and require continued study.
National Parks Wildlife General Policy
1.	Wildlife in National Parks is an important part of the national heritage and should be preserved unimpaired for the benefit, education, and enjoyment of future generations. It is, therefore, part of the national park purpose to maintain healthy populations of native animals, including predators, in balance with their environment.
2.	Wildlife is an element of the natural ecological communities in National Parks. Such communities, including the wildlife components, may require management to maintain healthy forest and other vegetative cover, to control erosion, and to preserve recreational and aesthetic values. Management should be kept to a minimum in order to maintain aesthetic values of, at least, a quasi-natural environment.
3.	National Park planning should give full consideration to character, size, shape, and location of park areas in order to provide for the year-round ecological requirements of the indigenous animal species, especially those with migratory habits.
4.	Conflicts between wildlife and other park interests including human safety should be resolved if possible without destruction of wildlife. When removal or destruction of animals is decided upon on the basis of research findings, it should be done by Departmental employees and as promptly and unobtrusively as possible.
5.	Adequate stocks of fish should be provided and maintained through modern methods of management where they can be applied without detriment to the aesthetic values of the areas concerned.
Parks Wildlife Research
1.	Wildlife research is an integral part of National Park purposes where data are required to establish appropriate public activities and sound management of the natural features. Wildlife research for other than park purposes may be carried on in parks, if such study is otherwise in harmony with parks policy and if no areas suitable for its conduct can be found elsewhere.
2.	Wildlife research in parks will be oriented toward studies of animals in their total environment, since the objective is to maintain environments that reflect a minimum human impact. Studies of range and habitat conditions and of the factors affecting population levels are basic. Priority will be given to studies helpful in devising means of maintaining habitat capable of supporting desired populations.
3.	Studies of health and condition factors are of particular importance in parks, where populations are often limited by the extent of available habitat.
4.	Studies basic to the develpment of suitable methods of controlling size and distribution of animals to maintain them in balance
[Stage Direction]
April 6, 1966
with their environment and to prevent conflict with other interests are of particular importance in parks.
5.	Research oriented toward the maintenance of adequate stocks of fish is essential. Subjects of research should include productivity of park waters, the biology of fish and associated fauna, and other related limnological matters.
6.	Public appreciation of natural history values must be developed through provision of nature trails, nature museums, nature guides, leaflets, lectures, and other interpretative activities. Data essential to such interpretative programs should be developed by well-planned research.
7.	The National Parks Service is responsible for management of wildlife in parks and interpretation to the public of the natural features (including wildlife) within parks. The Canadian Wildlife Service is responsible for research aimed at obtaining information needed for the management of wildlife in parks.
Territorial Wildlife General Policy
1.	The federal responsibility for Territorial wildlife is to provide research support for management and such management services as may be agreed upon between the Federal and Territorial governments, except that there is complete federal responsibility for migratory birds. There is also a residual authority that may be exercised to safeguard species in danger of extinction.
2.	Wildlife management in the Territories should be developed to and maintained at a level commensurate with the importance of the resource. Wildlife is one of the most important resources of the Territories, many of the inhabitants still depending in large measure upon wildlife for food and clothing. As the economy of the North develops, the importance of wildlife will change, but it will not diminish. The North will remain one of the few regions in the world where use of the land by wildlife will not be in serious competition with other uses. A continuing development of recreational use of wildlife is foreseen.
3.	A primary objective of wildlife management in the Territories is to prevent the population of any species from declining to a level from which it might not recover.
4.	Wildlife in the Territories should be managed so as to provide a sustained yield of those species that contribute to the subsistence of native populations. So long as native populations subsist in whole or in part on wildlife populations, this objective is secondary only to that of preventing the extinction of species.
5.	Wildlife may also provide a basis for recreation, and, consequently, contribute to the economy of Territorial residents. Management for recreational use may be harmonized with subsistence needs under certain circumstances.
Territorial Wildlife Research
1.	In line with the objectives of management, wildlife research in the Territories is aimed at determining the status of wildlife populations on a continuing basis, finding out what factors cause changes in the size and distribution of populations, and devising methods for maintaining desired populations.
2.	The status of populations will be determined by inventories and periodic censuses of acceptable design. Studies of reproductive success and the effective rate of recruitment to wildlife populations as indicated by observations of sex and age classes within populations also contribute to that end and may, in some instances, provide a more economic means of obtaining the necessary information. Studies of physiological condition can provide indicators of trends in wildlife populations.
3.	Management requires an understanding of the factors affecting changes in status and distribution of populations, as well as an awareness of such changes. Studies of condition and extent of range or habitat are important, particularly in areas where habitat conditions are amenable to modification, by control of forest fires, for example. Studies of mortality factors are also of high priority. These include hunting, the incidence and pathological effects of diseases and parasites, predation, and unusual weather conditions.
4.	Research provides the means for assessment of the effects of management as well as the information required to devise the methods of management. Studies must be directed toward determining the effects on wildlife and the users of wildlife of changes in regulations governing the harvest.
5.	Practical methods of disease prevention and control require continuing research and development.
April 6, 1966	COMMONS DEBATES	3975
Co-ordination
1.	Opportunities will be sought to promote inter-governmental consultation on the effects on wildlife of programs and projects that substantially alter the natural environment.
2.	Existing arrangements for consultation and co-ordination among agencies of the Federal Government will be reviewed and improved as necessary.
Consultation between governments and among government agencies is of particular importance in regard to wildlife. There are two reasons for this. For one thing, many
forms of wildlife are mobile and regularly cross boundaries between jurisdictions. Therefore, what is done in one area may affect wildlife in another area as well. The second point is that wildlife exists on lands used for a variety of purposes and controlled or influenced to some degree by a multitude of government agencies at both provincial and federal levels, and any major change in land use has some effect on the numbers and distribution of wildlife. Good wildlife management will not be achieved unless there is consultation and agreement during the planning phases of projects affecting land use and programs of broad biological impact.
23033-252 J
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday. April 19, 1966