1967-07-05

[Stage Direction]
First report of standing committee on external affairs-Mr. Dube.
[Note: Text of the foregoing report appears in today's Votes and Proceedings.3


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, in the closing days of last session the hon. member for Edmonton West and the hon. member for Perth asked that the regulations pertaining to deposit insurance be referred to the standing committee on finance, trade and economic affairs. I undertook to do so in this session. Therefore with the leave of the house I should like to table in English and in French copies of bylaw No. 1 of the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation, passed as order in council No. 1967-579 as amended by order in council 1967-1065.
By leave I should also like to move:
That bylaw No. 1 of the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation, passed as order in council 1967-579 as amended by order in council No. 19671065, be referred to the standing committee on finance, trade and economic affairs.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the minister leave to table the documents to which he has just referred?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: The house has heard the motion. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt it?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr.   Fernand-E. Leblanc@Laurier: for leave to introduce Bill No. C-145, entitled "An Act to amend the Criminal Code (Dissent of a Juror)".


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Mr. Leblanc (Laurier):: Mr. Speaker, this bill introduces a new concept with regard to the verdict of a jury.
With a view to avoiding new trials which often cause useless delays and expenses, I propose that the verdict of 11 jurors have the same effect as a unanimous verdict.
I trust this bill can improve the administration of justice and make it more expeditious and more efficient.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Peiers: 1.	Has the Minister of Labour at hand a report of the recent activities of the gentlemen appointed to the labour relations task force, particularly with a view as to whether present or recently completed tasks for other governments and private corporations and unions, such as the government of Manitoba, Domtar, and the S.I.U., may have committed them to positions regarding management's rights and the matter of labour management co-operation which would limit their usefulness and openness of mind in the work they are now doing?
2.	What is the record of such activities since 1963 for Dean Woods, Abbe Dion, John Crispo, and Dean Carrothers?


Mr. John R. Malheson (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to starred question No. 68 is as follows: 1. No reports have been received either from the task force on labour relations, or from other persons, relating to the appointment of the members of the task force. The members of the task force were selected because of their reputations and extensive experience in labour relations matters. They have not completed nor are they presently involved in tasks which would in any way limit their usefulness and openness of mind in relation to the work of the task force.
2.	Abbe Dion and John Crispo have served as chairmen of Domtar joint labour-management committees. Dean Woods has served as chairman of the province of Manitoba's joint labour-management review committee,

July 5. 1967
Questions
and Dean Carrothers was retained by the board of maritime trustees to advise the board on the preparation of a model constitution for the S.I.U.


POST-WAR EXECUTIONS OP GERMAN TROOPS
Mr. Peters: 1.	Before the Minister of National Defence made his statement in the house on December 21, 1966 (Hansard., pages 11445-6) regarding the post-war execution of German troops, was his attention drawn to a press report in the Times of London on May 18, 1945, relating to a series of executions other than those explained by the minister?
2.	If so, what was the nature of the advice the minister received regarding this report?
3.	If not, has the minister ensured that a thorough search through regimental and more senior formations' war diaries of the period has been made which would belie the Times report?


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):: The statement I made in the house on December 21, 1966 referred to the circumstances surrounding the trial and execution of two German sailors, Dorfer and Beck. I cannot recall just precisely when the Times report of 1945, datelined Utrecht, was brought to my attention but it is likely that I was aware of it prior to December 21, 1966.
The 1st Canadian Armoured Brigade was in the Utrecht area at that time and the war diaries for the complete month of May, 1945, of Canadian units, that is the headquarters 1st Canadian Armoured Brigade, 12th Armoured Regiment and 14th Armoured Regiment have been examined and no reference to the incident referred to in the Times report has been found. On May 17 the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division moved into the Utrecht area. The war diaries of the division and the three brigades, 7th, 8th and 9th and the regiments for the month of May have been examined. No reference to the incident was found. The war diary of the 3rd Canadian Anti-Tank Regiment, the only Canadian artillery unit in the area, also was examined without finding any reference to the incident. This examination of war diaries which is the only likely source of information on the subject has not disclosed any information relating to the incident referred to in the Times report.


ALTERATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS, CENTRAL EXPERIMENTAL FARM
Mr. Bell (Carlelon): 1.	Are alterations or improvements planned at the central experimental farm to (a) the greenhouses

(b) sanitary and storm sewers (c) the K. W. Neatby building (d) the William Saunders building?
2.	What is the nature and purpose of such alteration or improvement to each such building or service?
3.	Will any additional space or other facility be provided in any building and, if so, how many square feet or what facility will be provided?
4.	What is the estimated cost of each of such alterations or improvements?


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Agriculture):: 1.	(a) Yes, (b) yes, (c) yes, (d) yes.
2.	(a) Completion of alterations and improvements to provide for biological examination of imported plant material, a continuing renovation and improvement program of painting, recapping, renewal of heating and electrical systems, and general work area improvements. (b) Provision of new sanitary and storm sewers to service buildings south of the National Capital Commission driveway, permitting the abandonment of a septic tank system, (c) Replacement of existing transformers and improvements to power distribution system; improvements in air exchange system; relocation of partitions to permit accommodation changes, (d) Relocation of partitions and renovations to accommodate a plant taxonomy research centre.
3.	Yes, an office laboratory addition to the apiary building of 1,260 sq. ft. and interior improvements in other buildings.
4.	It is not customary to publish estimates of cost before tenders are called.


ROAD REVISIONS, CENTRAL EXPERIMENTAL FARM
Mr. Bell (Carlelon): 1.	What revisions to roads on the central experimental farm are planned?
2.	What is the purpose of such revisions?
3.	What is the total footage of such revisions?
4.	What is the estimated cost of such revisions?


John James Greene: 1.	It is proposed to widen the entrance to the farm near the K. W. Neatby building and to extend Driveway Avenue.
2.	To improve traffic flow.
3.	Entrance-4 lanes with median-552 feet; Driveway Avenue extension-2 lane carriageway-1400 feet.
4.	It is not customary to publish estimates of cost before tenders are called.
July 5. 1967


REMOVALS FROM INTERNATIONAL CONTROL COMMISSION FOR IMPROPRIETY
Mr. Diefenbaker: 1.	Have any Canadians connected directly or indirectly with the international control commission in Asia been removed from North Viet Nam for having been involved in alleged clandestine activities or for other improprieties?
2.	If so, what is the total number?


Mr. D. S. Macdonald (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first and second parts of this question is as follows.
No Canadians connected directly or indirectly with the international commissions for supervision and control in Indochina have been removed from North Viet Nam for having been involved in "alleged clandestine activities." With respect to "other improprieties", the term used in the question, the records of the Departments of External Affairs and National Defence indicate that during the 13 years of the commissions' existence 12 Canadians have been withdrawn from North Viet Nam by the Canadian authorities for disciplinary reasons. None of these cases had anything whatsoever to do with espionage or anything of that nature.


YELLOWKNIFE, N.W.T.,-ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY STUDY
Mr. Orange: 1.	Was there an engineering feasibility study carried out prior to the selection of Yellowknife as the capital of the Northwest Territories concerning the cost of providing government housing including extension of water and sewer services in that community?
2.	If so, when was this study conducted and by whom?
3.	Has this study been made public and, if not (a) is it the intention of the government to make such study public (b) when?


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: 1. Yes.
2.	This study was conducted by departmental engineers in the fall of 1966.
3.	No. Since this study consisted of a review of existing material commissioned by the town of Yellowknife, it will not be made public by the government.


ADULT EDUCATION PROGRAM, FILE HILLS RESERVE, SASK.
Mr. Douglas: 1.	When did the Indian affairs branch initiate an adult education program on the File Hills reserve, Fort Qu'Appelle, Saskatchewan?
Questions
2.	Is this program still in operation and, if not, when did it stop operation and for what reason?
3.	What is the name of the person who has been in charge of this program, and is he still in the employ of the Indian affairs branch and, if not, what was the reason for his leaving the Indian affairs branch?
4.	What are the names of all the instructors hired for the adult education program on the File Hills reserve?
5.	If any of them are no longer employed by the Indian affairs branch, what is the reason for their leaving the Indian affairs branch?


Arthur Laing: 1. A full
time adult educator was assigned to the File Hills-Qu'Appelle agency as of September 1, 1965.
2.	The position of adult educator will be abolished as of August 31, 1967. The program will be continued and expanded, utilizing services available through the university extension department and the department of manpower, supplemented as required by Indian affairs branch programs.
3.	Mr. J. V. Ferguson has been in charge of this program. Mr. Ferguson is still in the employ of Indian affairs branch.
4.	The following persons have been employed as short term instructors in the File Hills-Qu'Appelle agency:
Reserve
Mrs. Thelma Jones Mrs. Muriel Teece Mr. G. Carlson
Miss L. Goodwill Mrs. B. Eaton
Mr. A. Berner Mr. B. Edmonds Mrs. Sharon Pletz
Okanese
Okanese
Muscowpetung and Standing Buffalo Standing Buffalo Muscowpetung and Standing Buffalo Okanese
Carry the Kettle Carry the Kettle
5.	At present Mrs. Sharon Pletz is the only instructor on staff. The others have completed their short term contracts but will be re-employed if there is interest in further training and they are available.


SIOUX LOOKOUT, ONT.-EXPENDITURES ON INDIAN SCHOOL
Mr. Reid: 1.	How much money has the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development spent on the Pelican residential school near Sioux Lookout, Ontario, in each year, for the past ten years?
2.	What was the purpose of these repairs?
3.	How long does the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development estimate they will be utilizing these facilities and for what purposes will they be used?

July 5, 1967
Questions


Arthur Laing: Insofar as the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is concerned, the answer is as follows: 1. 1956-57, $8,185.13; 1957-58, $9,430.84; 1958-59, $12,868.30; 1959-60, $3,874.27; 1960-61, $7,997.10; 1961-62, $2,858.27; 1962-63, $19,893.57; 1963-64, $8,061.59; 1964-65, $15,378.17; 1965-66, $4,703.64; Total, $93,250.88. The final figure for the fiscal year 1966-67 is not yet available but it is estimated that this will be approximately $8,000.
2.	These were normal expenditures covering the maintenance of the buildings.
3.	It is not possible to predict, at this time, how long this school will be required. These facilities are now being utilized for the accommodation of Indian children who are orphans, or from broken homes, or from areas where day schools do not exist.


INDIAN AFFAIRS-ESKIMOS AND INDIANS EMPLOYED
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How many employees are there working for the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in isolated areas and, of these, how many are Eskimos?
2.	How many employees are there working for the Indian affairs branch as Indian agents, placement officers, research officers, etc., and, of these, how many are Indians?


Arthur Laing: 1. Nineteen hundred and sixty-one employees of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development are working in isolated areas. One hundred and eighty seven of these are Eskimos.
2.	There are twenty eight hundred and thirty nine employees working for the Indian affairs branch as Indian agents, placement officers, research officers, etc.; the departmental records indicate that three hundred and forty three of these employees are Indians. Since information as to whether or not employees have Indian status is not available for every employee of the branch, it is quite possible that there are more employees of Indian status than shown in the foregoing figure.


C.B.C. BASEBALL TELECASTS
Mr. McCleave: 1.	How many National League and American League baseball games will be telecast on the (a) French (b) English networks of the C.B.C. in 1967 (exclusive of the all-star game and World Series) ?
(Mr. Reid.]
2.	Will the (a) all-star game (b) World Series, be carried on both networks?
3.	Is there a decision not to carry regular Saturday telecasts on the English network because of centennial sports events?
4.	If the answer to part 3 is yes, what centennial sports events have been telecast in that Saturday time period to the date of answer, and what events will be telecast during the remaining Saturday time periods until the end of September?
5.	How many letters requesting continuance of the baseball telecasts have been received by the C.B.C. at (a) Ottawa (b) its regional offices, by location, and number?
6.	By the same breakdown as in part 5, how many letters have been received approving the decision not to telecast baseball games on a regular basis?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secretary of State):: I am informed by the C.B.C. as follows:
1.	(a) 14. (b) 6.
2.	(a) English network only, (b) English and French networks.
3.	No single factor influenced the decision not to carry the baseball game of the week every Saturday. The flexibility required for centennial programming was one factor. Another was that in most parts of Canada, audience interest in T.V. coverage of baseball has waned.
4.	Coverage of a variety of sports events in Canada during 1967 has been scheduled in the Saturday sports magazine program "Ka-leidosport" including Canadian championship events in gymnastics, track and field, gliding and such events as the Pan-American games trials, championship soccer, boxing, racing, etc. Other events in the Saturday afternoon sports schedule from May to September include the Grand Prix, Kentucky Derby, FA Cup final and the Preakness in May; the Belmont Stakes and the Queen's Plate in June; the Canadian golf championship, baseball game of the week and Pan-American games in July; the Pan-American games, baseball game of the week and C.P.G.A. golf tournament in August; baseball game of the week and C.F.L. football in September. The World Series follows in October.
5.	Ottawa 15, Montreal 2, Toronto 121*, Halifax 4, Winnipeg 6, Edmonton 2, Vancouver 5.
*Most of the mail received at Toronto, including several organized petitions, came from viewers in the maritimes.
6.	Five letters received at Toronto.


PROPOSED TARIFF CHANGES RESPECTING CONTAINERBOARD
Mr. Orlikow: Is the government considering implementation of the recommendation in the report of the restrictive
July 5, 1967

Questions
trade practices commission on the acquisition of the common shares of Hendershot Paper Products Limited by Canadian International Paper Company to the effect that certain tariff changes should be made which it considered would protect the public from unnecessarily high prices of containerboard and shipping containers and would assist in removing the restrictive effects on the supply of containerboard which are inherent in the situation where a predominant part of the containerboard production in Canada is made by integrated companies and is used in their own converting operations?


Mitchell William Sharp: As a result of the Kennedy round of international trade negotiations the most favoured nation duty on containerboard and fibreboard shipping containers will be reduced from 20 per cent to 15 per cent.


QUALIFICATION AS ELECTORS BY OATH OR AFFIDAVIT
Mr. Stanbury: 1.	In each province, how many persons at the last general election either applied for and obtained registration as electors or took oaths or affidavits of qualification as electors?
2.	How many of such persons in each province were (a) Canadian citizens (b) not Canadian citizens?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the Chief Electoral Officer as follows: 1. The information is not available as a person who is a Canadian citizen or other British subject is not required, when being enumerated, to specify in which of these categories he falls. With regards to oaths and affidavits, the only oaths and affidavits that an elector can be called upon to subscribe to are those set out in schedule 1 to the Canada Elections Act. Amongst other requisites, such oaths or affidavits only require a person to swear to the fact that he is a Canadian citizen or other British subject and he is not required to swear in which of these categories he falls.
2.	(a) See 1 above, (b) See 1 above.


APPLICATIONS UNDER MANPOWER MOBILITY PROGRAM
Mr. Godin: Under the manpower mobility program (a) how many applications have been submitted to the Department of Manpower and Immigration since April 1, 1967 (b) how many have been accepted (c) what were the amounts granted (i) in each of the provinces (ii) in the constituency of Port-neuf?


Mr. J. C. Munro (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: From April 1, 1967 to May 31, 1967: (a) 3,942 applications for grants had been received at the Canada manpower centres of the Department of Manpower and Immigration, (b) 3,409 of the applications had been authorized, (c) (i) Newfoundland, $40,000; Prince Edward Island, $5,800; Nova Scotia, $53,000; New Brunswick, $5,500; Quebec, $192,642; Ontario, $257,566; Manitoba, $30,817; Saskatchewan, $21,691; Alberta, $39,527; British Columbia, $110,171. (ii) Constituency of Portneuf, $955.
N.B.: The dollar figures are the total amounts committed and paid in each province. The greater part of the amount committed in each province is for applications initiated in that province. However, when a worker moves from one province to another, payments may be made in the province from which he moves and also in the province to which he moves, particularly when a worker files an application after finding suitable employment.
[English1


COST OF HABITAT '67 AT EXPO
Mr. Coates: 1.	What was the final cost of construction Habitat '67 at Expo '67?
2.	Of the total cost of Habitat '67, how much will be born by the federal government and what portion, if any, will be the responsibility of the province of Quebec and the city of Montreal?
3.	How much has been received in rentals from Habitat '67 to date, and what is the estimate of rentals for the period of the world exhibition?
4.	What is the estimated salvage value of Habitat '67?


Mrs. Margaret Rideoul (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):: 1. The estimated total cost of constructing Habitat is $22,195,920 in accordance with the approved master plan cost estimates of the corporation.
2.	The total cost of Habitat '67 will be borne in accordance with the tripartite agreement among the three levels of government, i.e. 50 per cent federal, 37J per cent provincial and 12J per cent city of Montreal.
3.	The amount received in rentals from Habitat '67 up to and including June 30 is $92,370. The estimate of rentals for the period of the world exhibition is $281,000.
4.	The asset value of Habitat '67 is not yet finalized.

July 5, 1967
Questions


GROCERY STORE, LAC PHILIPPE, QUE.
Mr. Isabelle: 1.	Does the National Capital Commission intend to operate a grocery store on its property at Lao Philippe and, if so, how will the commission operate it or have it operated?
2.	Will the N.C.C. give it to a concessionaire and erect a building?
3.	Will the N.C.C. give the concession of the land to a concessionaire who will be required to erect a building on the land?
4.	What will be the rental rate (a) with building (b) without building?
5.	What is the name of the concessionaire for the Lac Philippe area?


Hon. G. J. Mcllraith (Minister of Public Works):: 1. The National Capital Commission already operates a grocery store as part of the food concession at Lac Philippe.
2. At the present time a small selection of basic supplies for campers are being sold by the present concessionaire from the pavilion at Parent Beach. This arrangement creates
additional traffic congestion in the vicinity of the pavilion and consequently it is planned that a small building be erected within the commission grounds from which to sell campers' supplies. Otherwise the concession remains unchanged.
3.	No. See answer to part 2 above.
4.	Not applicable.
5.	Mr. Jake Goneau.


DEFENCE PRODUCTION CONTRACTS IN WESTERN PROVINCES
Mr. Schreyer: Of the total expenditure by the Department of Defence Production in the last fiscal year, what proportion was paid out on prime contracts to contractors whose mailing address was in (a) Manitoba (b) Saskatchewan (c) Alberta (d) British Columbia?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minisier of Industry):: Insofar as the Department of Defence Production is concerned:
Head office
Regional offices
Combined totals
Percent	Percent	PercentDollar	of	Dollar	of	Dollar	ofvalue	total	value	total	value	totalManitoba	
16,445,000	2.12	8,043,000	9.46	24,488,000	2.8Saskatchewan	
738,000	.10	3,258,000	3.83	3,996,000	.5Alberta	
7,436,000	. 96	10,317,000	12.14	17,753,000	2.1British Columbia	
14,504,000	1.87	9,501,000	11.18	24,005,000	2.839,123,000	5.05	31,119,000	36.61	70,242,000	8.2
Note: The total value of contracts placed in Canada during the F/M 1966-67 for regional offices was $84M and the total amount for head office contracts was S775M making a combined total of $859M.


&quot;BIBLIOGRAPHY OF SEISMOLOGY&quot;
Mr. McCleave: 1.	Is the publication Bibliography of Seismology, items 18999-19426, September-December 1964 by F. E. Langill now permanently out of print?
2.	If so (a) why was the same listed in the daily
checklist of government publications on May 23, 1967	(b) when did the Department of Energy,
Mines and Resources and/or the Queen's Printer exhaust their supplies of this publication?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1. No. Copies are available from Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.
2. (a) Publication listed on daily check list of government publications because 200 copies had been supplied by the department concerned for that purpose, (b) See reply to (1)

above insofar as Department of Energy, Mines and Resources is concerned. Queen's Printer exhausted their supply within a few days from the issue of the daily check list.


AIR CANADA CONTRACTS WITH OTHER AIR CARRIERS
Mr. Thompson: 1.	What (a) foreign (b) Canadian air carriers are under contract to Air Canada for the conveyance of passengers and/or freight from Canadian airports to foreign destinations?
2.	What are the dates of commencement and termination of such contracts?
3.	What are the terms of contract, including financial arrangements, with these carriers?
4.	What are the frequencies and destinations of such carrier flights at the present time?
July 5. 1967

Questions


Mr. J. A. Byrne (Parliamentary Secretary to Overseas National Airways Inc. Jamaica, Minister of Transport):: The management of N.Y., U.S.A. Seaboard World Airlines Ino. Air Canada advises as follows: 1 (a) Standard Jamaica, N.Y., U.S.A. (b) None.
Airways Inc. Seattle, Washington, U.S.A.
2. Contract
Standard Airways Inc. Overseas National Airways Seaboard World Airlines
Commencement May 1, 1967 June 18, 1967 Apr. 10, 1967
3.	This is proprietary information which cannot be divulged.
4. Standard Airways Inc. Between Toronto and New York
Depart New York 0615 EDT*
1100 EDT 1600 EDT 2120 EDT**
Arrive Toronto 0735 EDT*
1220 EDT 1720 EDT 2240 EDT**
Depart Toronto 0830 EDT 1330 EDT 1850 EDT
Termination Sept. 29, 1967 Sept. 16, 1967 Sept. 10, 1967
Arrive New York 0945 EDT 1445 EDT 2005 EDT
Mondays only.
Mondays, Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays only.
Overseas National Airways Inc. Between Montreal and New York. June 18-Depart Montreal 2225 EDT-Arrive New York 2340 EDT.
June 19-August 31, 1967:
Depart New York 0745 EDT 1245 EDT 1945 EDT
Arrive Montreal 0900 EDT 1405 EDT 2105 EDT
September 1-September 16, 1967:
Depart New York 0705 EDT 1210 EDT 1735 EDT
Arrive Montreal 0820 EDT 1330 EDT 1855 EDT
Depart Montreal 1020 EDT 1710 EDT 2225 EDT
Depart Montreal 0940 EDT 1500 EDT 2350 EDT
Arrive New York 1135 EDT 1830 EDT 2340 EDT
Arrive New York 1055 EDT 1615 EDT 0105 EDT
Seaboard World Airlines Inc. (Freight only).
Four flight frequencies per week serving Frankfurt, Zurich, Paris, London, Prestwick, Montreal and Toronto.


BILINGUALISM IN BUREAU OF STATISTICS
Mr. Caouette: 1.	What is the total number of civil servants In the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, and (a) how many speak English only (b) how many speak French only (c) how many are bilingual?
2.	During the last three years, what was the yearly total number of publications issued by D.B.S., and (a) how many of these publications are in English only (b) how many in French only <c) how many are bilingual?
3.	How many times has a reply been given by D.B.S. that a publication was published in (a) French only (b) English only?
4.	During the last three years, what steps were taken by D.B.S. in order to ensure that French and English are on the same basis?
5.	Does the government intend to appoint a full time adviser on bilingualism to D.B.S.?
[Translationi


Mr. Jean-Charles Caniin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Trade and Commerce):: 1. The number of civil servants in the Dominion Bureau of Statistics is as follows: (a) who speak English only, 1,765; (b) who speak French only, 25; (c) who are bilingual, 906.

July 5, 1967
Questions
2. The number of publications issued by DBS during the last three years is as follows:
1965	1966	1967(a) English	615	607	634(b) French (1)	54	54	56(c) Bilingual	350	397	456
(1) Counterpart of each title included in the numbers shown opposite English.
3.	Information is not available.
4.	The Dominion Bureau of Statistics has been increasing the number of publications available in both French and English to the full extent of the translation resources which could be made available for this purpose.
5.	Yes.


LOANS UNDER FISHERIES IMPROVEMENT ACT
Mr. Siefanson: How many loans were made to fishermen during the past five years under the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act, giving the number of loans and the total amount of loans by provinces for each year?


Mitchell William Sharp: A total of 1,273 loans amounting to $3,621,194 have been made to fishermen under this act in the last five years. The breakdown of these figures by province and by year is shown on the attached table.

THE FISHERIES IMPROVEMENT LOANS ACT Fiscal Yeah Ending
Province	March 31, 1963	March 31, 1964	March 31, 1965	March 31, 1966	March 31, 1967	Total last five years	No.	Amount	No.	Amount	No.	Amount	No.	Amount	No.	Amount	No.	AmountBritish Columbia	.. 35	S 96,762	39	$119,258	48	$149,930	113	$ 653,029	173	$1,045,975	408	$2,064,954Alberta	.. -	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-Saskatchewan	.. -	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-Manitoba	.. -	-	-	-	2	7,500	2	4,000	1	8,400	5	19,900Ontario	5	13,165	6	8,268	5	2,960	5	16,805	13	17,600	34	58,798Quebec	.. 19	11,324	12	9,630	11	9,660	8	8,800	8	8,198	58	47,612New Brunswick	1	965	3	4,020	3	7,500	4	9,824	1	1,200	12	23,509Nova Scotia	.. 39	42,348	78	146,572	84	173,225	95	233,725	69	214,060	365	809,930Prince Edward Island...	.. 43	48,617	63	79,641	84	106,598	112	170,054	83	185,106	385	590,016Newfoundland	2	1,635	1	840	1	2,275	2	1,725	-	-	6	6,475Total	.. 144	$214,816	202	$368,229	238	$459,648	341	$1,097,962	348	$1,480,539	1,273	$3,621,194July 5, 1967	COMMONS DEBATES	2267
Questions

July 5, 1967
Questions


FHE-400 HYDROFOIL
Mr. Ormiston: 1.	What has been the cost of developing the FHE-400 hydrofoil to date?
2.	What is the further anticipated expenditure before this craft is operational?
3.	What is the anticipated operational date for this craft?
4.	What is the propulsion system used in this craft?
5.	Have any breakdowns occurred in this craft during proficiency trials and, if so (a) how many (b) of what type?
6.	Have the jet propulsion and electric type systems been considered for use in the FHE-400 hydrofoil?
7.	What was the extent of damage incurred by the recent fire in the FHE-400 hydrofoil?
8.	To what sections of the hydrofoil was this confined?
9.	Has the damage been repaired and, if so, at what cost?
10.	What was the solution used in the hydraulic system of the FHE-400 hydrofoil?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Insofar as the Department of Defence Production is concerned:
1.	The total cost to date (31 May 1967) of the FHE 400 Hydrofoil project is $37,088 million, i.e., $29.940M for the ship and $7.148M for the weapons system.
2.	The further anticipated expenditure before this craft is fully operational is estimated at $12,918 million, i.e., $9.934M for the ship and $2.984M for the weapons system.
3.	The ship will be fully operational upon completion of the weapons system installation scheduled for November 1969. Acceptance trials for the ship without its weapons system are expected to complete by September 1968.
4.	Two separate propulsion systems are to be installed, namely foilborne and hullborne. Both systems are of the conventional mechanical type. The foilborne system is driven by a Pratt and Whitney FT4 A-2 gas turbine engine. The hullborne system is driven by a Paxman 16YJCM diesel engine.
5.	All mechanical equipment received to date has been bench operated and tested at the makers' plants. There have been three significant breakdowns to date and these have been in components being specially developed for FHE 400. These are:- (a) Bevel
Designated Area
Brandon Canada manpower centre area and adjacent designated census divisions Dauphin CMC area and adjacent designated census divisions The Pas CMC area

gear failure in the foilborne transmission bevel gearbox due to a fabrication problem which has since been corrected, (b) Failure in the 2nd reduction epicyclic gearbox of the foilborne transmission. This occurred on June 7, 1967, and is presently under investigation. (c) Failure of an amplifier unit of the type used in the anhedral tip and steering actuator. A modified unit is now being manufactured.
6.	Both jet propulsion and electric type systems were considered for use in FHE 400 and were rejected for reasons of weight, size, or inefficiency at hydrofoil speed ranges.
7.	Damage was sustained to ship's side plating, structural framework; deck plating, auxiliary equipment, electrical wiring, ventilation ducting and systems piping.
8.	The above damage was confined, except for superficial heat and smoke damage, to the general area of the engine room.
9.	Repairs to the ship and weapons systems necessitated by the fire are now in work and are expected to be completed by September 1967. The estimated cost of these repairs amounts to $3.158M.
10.	The fluid used in the hydraulic system of FHE 400 was and still is hydraulic fluid to specification MIL-H-5606, a military approved hydraulic fluid which is in general use throughout the armed forces.


AREA DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS IN MANITOBA
Mr. Siefanson: 1.	How many projects have been approved in the province of Manitoba under the area development incentive program, giving designated area, capital investment and type of industry?
2.	How many of these industries are already in operation or production and how many jobs have been created?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: 1. 18 projects in the province of Manitoba have been approved under the area development program subject to compliance by the applicants with section 71A of the Income Tax Act or the Area Development Incentives Act and the relevant regulations, as follows:
Approved Projects Capital Investment
11	$31,487,000.
6	$15,626,000.
1	$ 86,000.
18	$47,199,000.
July 5. 1967

Various types of manufacturing industries are involved in these projects: food and beverages, printing and publishing, chemicals, textiles, pharmaceuticals, machinery, plastics, optics and feed mills.
2. 13 of the approved projects are in commercial production involving 315 direct labour jobs.


DONATIONS OF STRUCTURES AT EXPO
Mr. MacDonald (Prince): 1.	What nations or participants have donated as a permanent gilt their structures or equipment to Expo?
2.	Will other participants be encouraged to take similar action?
3.	Who will be responsible for determining the eventual use of these donations?
4.	What suggestions have already been made as to future uses following Expo of structures, equipment and the Expo site?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. Several nations have indicated a desire to leave their pavilions in Canada but no nation or participant has donated its structures or equipment to the Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.
4.	Numerous suggestions have been made as to the future use of the site. All such suggestions are being considered by the committee, which has been established by the sponsoring governments, to study the question of disposal of assets and to make recommendations to the governments.


EXPO ATTENDANCE AND REVENUE
Mr. Isabelle: 1.	Is the actual attendance at Expo '67 to date in excess of estimated attendance and, if so, by what percentage?
2.	What is the total revenue realized by Expo '67 to date: is it in excess of estimated revenues and, if so, by what amount?


Jean-Charles Cantin: 1. Actual attendance to July 3rd was 17,666,434 (up by approximately 40%). Forecast attendance to that date was 12,618,210.
2.	As of June 26th, the total revenue realized was $58,539,912 against a budgeted revenue of $63,737,206.
Questions


PROLONGATION OF EXPO '67
Mr. Lessard: Has the Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition been authorized by the Council of the International Exhibitions Bureau to prolong Expo '67?


Jean-Charles Cantin: Yes, authorization has been given to prolong the 1967 World Exhibition for two days until October 29.


PUBLIC SERVICE PERSONNEL
Mr. Horner (Acadia): How many civil servants were and are now employed by the federal government for the years 1960 to 1967 inclusive?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The number of civil servants employed by the federal government under the Civil Service Act, as at September 30, 1960 to 1966 is as follows:
Year	Number
1960	131,953
1961	137,327
1962	138,867
1963	137,818
1964	138,666
1965	140,206
1966	145,783
1967	not available


ABOLITION OF DRUG PATENTS
Mr. Orlikow: Has the government reached any decision as to the desirability of implementing the recommendation of the report of 1963 of the restrictive trade practices commission on the manufacture, distribution and sale of drugs that "patents with respect to drugs be abolished" since "in the opinion of the commission this is the only effective remedy to reduce the price of drugs in Canada"?


Hon. John N. Turner (Registrar General):: In response to a similar question (unrevised Hansard, May 4, 1966, page 4688) the then President of the Privy Council stated that while careful consideration was being given to the recommendations contained in the report, it was not expected that a decision would be made until after the report of the special committee on drug costs and prices had been received. Upon receipt of the final report of the committee on April 3, 1967, it was referred immediately to departmental

July 5, 1967
Orders for Returns
officials. The recommendations contained in the committee's report will be considered on an urgent basis over the summer months in conjunction with the recommendations contained in the reports of the restrictive trade practices commission and the royal commission on health services. It is intended that any announcement about legislation in connection with the various recommendations will be made to parliament in the autumn.


ENTRY TO CANADA OF KO CHUCK-HUNG
Mr. Hamilton: Has Mr. Ko Chuck-Hung of Hong Kong entered Canada since June 11, 1967?


John Carr Munro: The answer to the question is as follows: The Department of Manpower and Immigration has no record of Mr. Ko Chuck-Hung having entered Canada since June 11, 1967.


AGRICULTURE TASK FORCE
Mr. Godin: 1.	Has the task force begun its investigation of agricultural problems?
2.	If so, what are the names and addresses of its members?


John James Greene: 1. No.
2. Not applicable.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Allard: 1.	With regard to advertising in connection with the centennial celebrations, what amount has been spent so far by the federal government or its agencies and by the centennial commission, both in Canada and abroad, and in each province?
2.	With regard to the details in part 1, what are the estimates for this advertising?
3.	What proportion has been spent on French language advertising in the following media: television, radio, newspapers, periodicals, booklets, pamphlets, biHboards, circulars or other written or similar advertising material, flags, medallions or other advertising articles, indicating for each category the total amount spent on French language advertising?
4.	With regard to the categories in part 3, what proportion has been spent on bilingual advertising for the same advertising media, the same printed matter, or the same items?
[Mr. Turner.)
5.	With regard to the categories in part 3, what proportion has been spent on advertising in languages other than French or English, both in Canada and abroad, and in each province?
Return tabled.


PROVISION FOR PAYMENT OF RESEARCH STAFF
Mr. Orlikow: What amount of money was placed in the estimates in the last three years for research programs by the National Research Council and the Defence Research Board for the payment of staff for the research programs and, of this amount, how much was actually spent?
Return tabled.


CANADA PENSION PLAN
Mr. Horner (Acadia): 1.	How much money has been accumulated in the Canada Pension Plan fund since its inception?
2.	How much money from the Canada Pension Plan has been loaned back to the provinces?
3.	What are the different amounts of money loaned back to each province?
4.	How much money has been paid out of the Canada Pension Plan to date for pensions?
5.	What has been the total administration cost to date of the Canada Pension Plan?
Return tabled.


C.B.C. TELECAST OF UN PROCEEDINGS
Mr. McCleave: 1.	Did the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation broadcast live the proceedings from the United Nations security council on June 10, 1967, over Port Arthur station CKPR-TV and, if not, for what reason?
2.	Which (a) CBC-TV stations (b) affiliates, carried the said program and which, if any, did not?
Return tabled.


OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION, VALUE AND DISTRIBUTION
Mr. Souiham: 1.	What was the total production of crude oil and natural gas in Canada during the years 1964, 1965 and 1966 in barrels, and cubic feet, respectively?
2.	What was the production for each province, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories in each case in the years 1964, 1965 and 1966?
3.	What was the dollar value for each of the years referred to for both crude oil and natural gas for Canada and each province, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories?
July 5. 1967

4.	In what markets were these products disposed of in each year, and in what value, giving quantity and dollar value in the case of each province, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories?
Return tabled.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order in connection with starred question No. 330. This portion of the session will come to an end on Friday and the information I seek is readily available. It has to do with the licence or certificate granted to the Bank of Western Canada and certain other matters ancillary thereto. I am asking that this question be answered before we adjourn on Friday. There have been too many shenanigans in connection with the Bank of Western Canada, and we want this information.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, may I say to the right hon. gentleman that the reply was on my desk this morning, and I will give it before the house adjourns.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, the right hon. Leader of the Opposition asked if we could give today the answer to starred question No. 330. If I have unanimous leave, may we revert to questions so I may answer it?


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that we revert to questions for the purpose of considering this one answer?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


BANK OF WESTERN CANADA
Mr. Diefenbaker: 1.	On what date was a license or certificate to begin operations issued to the Bank of Western Canada?
2.	To whom was the license issued?
3.	Who were the major shareholders of the Bank of Western Canada at the time of the issuing of the license to operate?
4.	What is the date when British International Finance was exempted from the limitation to 10 per cent of the stocks which any one shareholder could hold in said bank?
5.	Why was such exemption granted?
6.	According to the latest reports to the government, have (a) British International Finance, and/or (b) Sinclair Stevens any shares in the said bank?


Mitchell William Sharp: The answer to question No. 1 is December 8, 1966.
The answer to question No. 2 is Bank of
Western Canada.
Motion for Papers
The answer to question No. 3 is Wellington Financial Corporation Limited, name later changed to York Lambton Corporation, Canadian Finance and Investments Limited and York Trust and Savings Corporation.
The answer to question No. 4 is Treasury Board order No. 658534 issued on August 3, 1966, pursuant to section 9 of an act to incorporate Bank of Western Canada, exempted the three corporations named under (3) above and any other corporations and individuals associated with them from the 10 per cent limitation, up to a maximum of 471,500 shares out of the original issue of 865,000 shares.
The answer to question No. 5 is the provisions of section 9 of the act to incorporate Bank of Western Canada are similar to those of section 57 in the Bank Act. They are intended to facilitate the establishment of new banks in Canada by making it possible for government to approve a group of resident shareholders holding more than 10 per cent of a new bank's shares during the first years of its operations and before the bank had established an earnings record which would increase the marketability of its shares to the general public. In the case of the Treasury Board order affecting Bank of Western Canada, the exemption is for a period of ten years.
The answer to question 6(a) and (b) is, the latest report to the government on individual shareholdings in Bank of Western Canada lists the holdings in excess of 500 shares. Neither British International Finance nor Sinclair Stevens is included in this list.



MOTION FOR PAPERS

Mr. Albert Bechard (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, notice of motion No. 16 is acceptable to the government subject to the usual reservations as to privileged papers and the consent of government authorities concerned.
I ask, sir, that the remaining notices of motions be allowed to stand.

MINIMUM SECURITY INSTITUTION, P.E.I. Motion No. 16-Mr. McQuaid:
That a humble address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this house a copy of all documents and correspondence between the federal government or any of its departments or agencies and the
2272	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry government of Prince Edward Island and any of its departments or agencies relative to the establishment of a minimum security institution in Prince Edward Island.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs whether he will table the various resolutions that were put before the United Nations general assembly yesterday. Indeed, I might go further and suggest, if the house would agree and the minister were favourable, that they be printed as an appendix to Votes and Proceedings, because they are of great importance.
With regard to the Pakistani resolution which Canada voted in favour of, I would ask the minister what the government has in mind regarding the city of Jerusalem, in view of the fact that the resolution sponsored by Pakistan states that the measures taken by Israel to change the status of Jerusalem are invalid, calls upon Israel to rescind all measures already taken and to desist forthwith from taking any action which would alter the status of Jerusalem, and requests the Secretary General to report to the United Nations general assembly and to the security council on the situation.
In view of Canada's vote in favour of this resolution and against the action taken by Israel in Jerusalem, what is the stand of Canada regarding the city of Jerusalem as a whole?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secretary of Stale for External Affairs: Mr. Speaker, I hope I may be allowed to deal with the subject in a more extended way than is normally done under orders of the day because of the importance of the question.
In the statement I made before the general assembly I said that Canada felt there should be no precipitous action taken with regard to the matter of Jerusalem by any party concerned. I also stated that our primary concern was for the right of access to the holy places by the three main religious communities, namely the Christians, the Moslems and the Jews.
[Mr. McQuaid.l
DEBATES	July 5, 1967
Yesterday my hon. friend asked me what we were going to do about the Pakistani resolution, and I told him I was not in a position to give him an answer because consultations were taking place then with regard to the wording of the resolution. The changes being considered were not, however, accepted.
Along with 98 other members of the United Nations we supported the Pakistan resolution because we felt that to do otherwise might render more difficult the task of establishing practical arrangements in respect of Jerusalem and the holy places. All along our policy has been to promote, through all available means, a fair and balanced settlement which may endure in the Middle East. It was for this reason we supported the Latin American resolution. We also opposed any demand for a withdrawal of Israeli forces which was not related to legitimate Israeli claims and rights, and which did not deal with the state of belligerency exercised by certain countries against Israel.
Over the years we have discouraged unilateral action with respect to the city of Jerusalem and the status of the holy places, as well as other sensitive issues in the Middle East. We have urged the acceptance of a United Nations role to safeguard the holy places and to facilitate international agreement on the other outstanding issues. We have felt that there should be further United Nations consideration of the question of Jerusalem, and we have endorsed suggestions that the general assembly should discuss this problem during its next regular session, following the report which will be made by the secretary general. We believe that the pause thus provided would give all concerned an opportunity for careful and mature consideration of this very vital matter. This position does not in any way prejudge our views on the ultimate terms of a settlement for Jerusalem.


John George Diefenbaker: I ask the minister, Mr. Speaker, when he says the matter is going to be left in abeyance for consideration at the next regular session, whether this portion of the Pakistan resolution is not most condemnatory of Israel, in that it calls upon Israel to rescind all measures already taken and to desist forthwith from any action which would alter the state of Jerusalem. Does this not mean that Canada believes what has been done is illegal, and says to Israel "This must end now"? Is this not what the section means?
July 5, 1967	COMMONS


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: The Canadian government refused to join in another resolution that called for condemnation of Israel. The Pakistan resolution simply directs the attention of Israel to the opinion of 99 members of the United Nations who feel that there should be no final unilateral action taken now with regard to the disposition of Jerusalem. In response, the government of Israel say that what they have done has been to provide for common administrative services for the two sections of the city. I hope that between now and the time the next general assembly meets to consider this matter, as well as other matters that must be the subject of negotiation, Canada and other countries will be able to encourage an arrangement that will lead to a durable peace in the area.
I do not believe the resolution is open to the interpretation my right hon. friend places upon it. If it were really open to that interpretation, it would not have been possible for Canada to take the position she felt, in all responsibility, she must take yesterday. We have insisted that these problems in the Middle East can only be settled by recognizing the statehood of Israel, the right of free navigation, the right of territorial integrity, the solution of the refugee problem, and as well, of course, guaranteed access to the holy places. What the final position will be in September will depend upon the nature of the negotiations which we hope it will be possible to encourage as a result of the appointment of someone to represent the Secretary General and the United Nations.


John George Diefenbaker: A further supplementary question in connection with this matter, Mr. Speaker. In view of the statement by the minister, how does he explain the words in the resolution by which Canada declares that these measures just taken by Israel are invalid and calls upon Israel to rescind all measures already taken? This is not a decision to wait until fall or the next meeting, but is to be dealt with now.
Second, as the minister mentioned the refugee problem, has Canada made any offer to absorb any definite number of refugees?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Before going to the right hon. gentleman's third supplementary question, I have allowed the first part of the supplementary to which the minister might want to reply, but there are other members who want to ask supplementaries in
DEBATES	2273
Inquiries of the Ministry connection with the first problem raised by the Leader of the Opposition.


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):: have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. 1 should like to ask the minister whether it is anticipated that the security council will take any action on this resolution during the period before the assembly meets again. May I also ask whether it is anticipated that the security council will be taking action on the other matters in dispute between Israel and the Arab countries.


Mr. Martin (Essex East):: Mr. Speaker, as my hon. friend knows the government's view was that the matter should have been left with the security council. We were not anxious for the calling of a general assembly, but when 62 member states indicated that they wanted one to be convoked, we did not register any objection. I would hope that in the interest of a settlement the matter might return to the security council as quickly as possible.
Whether the security council will act under article 7 is a matter to be determined by that body. I think that the vote taken yesterday will indicate the very deep understanding which many countries have of the problems of Israel. I am sure Israel will read the results of these votes in the light of the position that countries like Britain, Canada and New Zealand took with regard to the Yugoslav resolution, which sought to ask for a withdrawal of Israeli forces without doing anything about recognizing the legitimate claims of Israel.


Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: Mr. Speaker, my question is supplementary to the original question asked by the Leader of the Opposition and is directed, of course, to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is Canada planning to take any steps to bring before the security council the reported pouring of arms into Egypt by the Soviet union, which is just tantamount to pouring gasoline on a fire? In view of the fact that the minister said in an answer to questions this morning that he was hoping to negotiate a final settlement of the matter, is Canada planning to take any steps in this regard?


Mr. Martin (Essex Easl):: Mr. Speaker, I should not say that Canada is planning to take steps; Canada has already taken the necessary steps. In the statement I made in the general assembly I pointed out that Canada was not selling any arms to any
July 5. 1967

Inquiries of the Ministry country in the Middle East, and I went on to urge that all countries that have been selling arms to the various sides desist, so we might find a means of bringing about stability and peace in the area. When the security council meets and this question is again submitted, this will be the position of our ambassador in the security council.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: A further supplementary
question. In view of the fact that arms, particularly aircraft, are flowing into Egypt at an enormous rate, does the minister not think it might be a good idea to have the matter brought before the security council now before it is too late?


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, I can assure my hon. friend that the government has expressed its strong views on this matter. It has been engaged in consultations on controlling the flow of arms to the Middle East which we believe are more likely to bring about the result that my hon. friend urges on us. Certainly I agree fully with him that if we are going to resolve this problem, those countries which have been supplying arms to the various parties ought to recognize that the time has come when this should stop.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, earlier 1 asked the minister whether he would give consideration to tabling the four resolutions that are before the United Nations assembly. I suggest that they be attached as an appendix to Votes and Proceedings.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker; I forgot to do that, but I will.


Mr. Speaker:: Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of the fact that the official news agency of the Russian government has indicated in a public statement that a coup is about to take place in Cyprus, that the statement accuses NATO forces of exploiting the Greek situation, and having in mind what happened in a similar vein before the Middle East crisis developed, has the minister any word for us about this
IMr. Martin (Essex East).]
situation, particularly as it might relate to our own peace keeping forces in Cyprus?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secretary of Stale for External Affairs: I have not, Mr. Speaker.


MR. LEO LANDREVILLE INQUIRY AS TO RECEIPT OF PENSION UNDER JUDGES ACT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. Is it now the government's position that it will not award a judge's pension to Mr. Leo Landreville without first bringing the matter before parliament?


Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Minister of Justice: Mr. Speaker, I think I can answer yes to that question.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I hope that with the same facility the minister will be able to answer no to the question whether Landreville is going to get a pension through the action of the cabinet. Would the minister reply to that?


Mr. Trudeau:: I will be able to answer no to that question, Mr. Speaker, when the Leader of the Opposition can state as a matter of general principle that no man who has been retired from the civil service or any other form of employment deserves a pension for any consideration.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, that is a half-dressed answer and is not in keeping with the House of Commons. I ask the minister this. K Landreville going to receive a pension or retirement allowance of $18,266, or any lesser sum, per annum? Don't give me those kind of answers.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I have told the house I have not yet made up my mind on this point. I explained the matter quite fully the other day in the standing committee on justice and legal affairs. I added, as I have said just now to the Leader of the Opposition, that I had not made up my mind whether the punishment which has been meted out to this man for something which was not done in the discharge of his duties should extend indefinitely.
July 5, 1967


John George Diefenbaker: That is a half-dressed answer not in keeping with the practice in this house.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Get to your feet.


John George Diefenbaker: The minister tells me to rise. I say to him that that answer is not-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


John George Diefenbaker: -in keeping with parliament and-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I believe the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has a supplementary question.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to be howled down in that fashion. The hon. gentleman should be more considerate of the house, dressed most improperly as he is.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex East: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to prolong this argument. I should like to divert it, but I am sure you will agree with me that it is not within the rules of the house for one member to comment on the dress of another member.


Mr. Maclnnis (Cape Breton Souih):: Which rules are you talking about?


John George Diefenbaker: The proprieties of parliament are to be upheld even by the Minister of Justice.


Mr. Speaker:: May we please have order and return to the question originally reused. I will allow the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre to ask a supplementary question.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question to the Minister of Justice is based on his reply to my first question. In view of his statement that the government will not act on this matter without bringing it before parliament, can we therefore be assured that there will be no executive action on this question while parliament is in recess?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member really is asking for an interpretation of law. The Judges Act makes it pretty difficult for the executive to act without going before the house either for an amendment to the Judges Act or with an item in the estimates. I said it is pretty difficult, though I am not convinced as a point of law that it is completely impossible.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Stanley Howard Knowles: A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does the answer which the minister just now gave qualify his first answer on this question?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. That supplementary question is not acceptable.


Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The Minister of Justice has indicated that he has not made up his mind on the one matter. Has the Minister of Manpower and Immigration in the meantime made up his mind about what is to be done with respect to Judge Meunier's pension? That judge was under sentence to serve a prison term.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


TRANSPORT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. R. Southam (Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Its urgency is based on the widespread interest of the people in western Canada in the applications now pending with respect to rail fine abandonment, the master agency plan and other pertinent matters. Can the minister say when the new transport commission will be fully constituted and operational?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: I think, sir, the experience of anyone who has ever served in the government is that to make predictions about something that will happen in future is a very unwise and imprudent occupation. Having said that, I hope it will not be very long.


AIR TRANSPORT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: May I ask a question about a related subject, Mr. Speaker. Can the minister inform the house when the hearing with respect to the TransAir prairie service will be held? That is a matter of great and urgent importance.


John Whitney Pickersgill: I understand that the only delay is occasioned by certain respondents who under the law have the right to present written
July 5, 1967

Inquiries of the Ministry submissions before the hearings can be held. The necessary delays have not yet expired. If it should prove that my recollections are incorrect I shall correct them tomorrow.


LABOUR CONDITIONS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. members for Kenora-Rainy River and Winnipeg North Centre asked a question about the situation prevailing in Keewatin, Ontario, because of the flour mill which had been destroyed by fire. I am informed that yesterday the executives of this company flew from Montreal to Keewatin to take a decision about the future of the mill. In the meantime the Canada manpower centre from Keewatin went to the site of the mill and interviewed all the staff involved, approximately 100 people. These workers are presently receiving vacation pay for two weeks.
The whole range of our services will, of course, be made available, if the need arises. I also understand there is a possibility of alternative employment for the workers in the mining industry of that area. Laid off workers, should that be needed, will be considered for training courses in mining occupations.




[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is it a fact that troops this morning invaded that part of the Congo that is usually known as Congo Leopoldville and seized the former city of Stanleyville? If so, from what country did these troops come?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I shall take that question as notice. I have not the full information about this, and I should like to know more.


PRESENCE IN GALLERY OF CHIEF JUSTICE OF AUSTRALIA
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Paul Joseph James Martin: While I am on my feet, Mr. Speaker, may I call your attention to the presence in the gallery of the chief justice of the Supreme Court of Australia, Sir Garfield Barwick, a former and distinguished member of the government of Australia.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


INDUSTRY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. Nasserden (Rosthern):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice and for the Registrar General. In view of recent and apparently unwarranted price increases for films and flash bulbs, would the ministers have officials of their departments investigate the high prices of films, flash bulbs and other photographic equipment and supplies at the wholesale and retail levels?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. As we shall adjourn in a few days I hesitate to suggest that this question be placed on the order paper. However, the hon. member is making a representation, and I assume that it has been noted by someone on the government side.


Edward Nasserden: Surely, Mr. Speaker, the ministers can say whether these investigations are to be started. I think this is an urgent matter, particularly when one considers the amount of film that is being used this year.


INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. N. Ormision (Melville):: Mr. Speaker, I had a question for the right hon. Prime Minister. In his absence may I direct it to his esteemed parliamentary secretary, the hon. member for Leeds. Has the Prime Minister received a request from the premier of Saskatchewan to name the reservoir formed by the Gardiner dam "Lake Diefenbaker"? If so, what action has been taken.


John Ross Matheson: May I take this question as notice, Mr. Speaker.
July S, 19S7	COMMONS


AGRICULTURE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe East):: I wished to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture but in his absence I shall direct it to the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development. In view of the severe flooding and resultant damage to crops in central Ontario has the minister received communications, either from the province of Ontario or from any other government level, regarding assistance to this area?


Hon. Maurice Sauve (Minister of Forestry and Rural Development):: I shall pass on this question to the Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Eric A. Winkler (Grey-Bruce):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question I would put to the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of Agriculture in consideration of the reply given by the minister of forestry to the hon. member for Simcoe East. A similar question was asked on June 29. Can the parliamentary secretary advise the house whether any action or leadership is contemplated in regard to crop damage, particularly in the lower lying lands in the province of Ontario?


Mr. Bruce S. Beer (Parliameniary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, the government of course is concerned with the disaster, particularly in the Holland marsh area. The answer to the question is that no request for assistance has been made up to this time. I am of the opinion that if a request were made it would be made to the provincial government first and then come to the federal government.


Eric Alfred Winkler: This may be the case, but I wonder if the parliamentary secretary would consider my representations on behalf of these people as an official request.


CANADIAN CENTENNIAL
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Roland Godin (Porfneuf):: I am happy to speak on behalf of the people in my region who came to parliament hill during the week-end. The festivities were magnificent, and I join my colleagues in congratulating
DEBATES	2277
Supply-Health and Welfare those who organized them. I would ask the hon. Solicitor General to add his name to the list of those who have done such an excellent job in choosing among the 849 bilingual R.C.M.P. officers those appointed to direct traffic on the hill.
[DOT] (11:50 a.m.)



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


The Chairman:: Order. House again in committee of supply, estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1968, Vote No. 1. Vote No. 1 will be found on page 338 of the blue book and the details on page 341.


DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration including recoverable expenditures on behalf of the Canada Pension Plan and $500,000 for health grants and welfare grants, under terms and conditions approved by the Treasury Board, for research and demonstration activities in the field of mental retardation, $4,127,000.
Mrs. Maclnnis (Vancouver-Kingsway):: Mr. Chairman, when the minister's estimates were being considered last week we heard a great deal about special needs and special groups of people. Much was said about the needs of people receiving old age security pension, about the way this pension impinged on veterans allowances, about the needs of blind people, and about the problem of retired civil servants. In addition we had discussion of medicare, involving the needs of the sick, the handicapped, the mentally ill and other groups of people.
In every case we found that although the legislation was intended to cover averages of people there were loopholes and cases where great numbers of people were either overlooked or their needs not adequately met by the legislation. In other words we have discovered that what covers the average in the way of legislative provisions in many cases fails to cover the needs of the individual.
All of this points to the necessity to take the next step in social security legislation. I believe that next step is the establishment of a guaranteed minimum annual income plan. In other words the time has come to change the old patchwork quilt for a modern electric blanket. The old quilt has stretched. Patches have been put on patches, until it has become over worn. In spite of the good solid
2278	COMMONS
Supply-Health and Welfare work being done to keep it in good shape, the old quilt is no longer adequate for present day needs, and I believe it is time we gave thought to getting a modern electric blanket in the form of a guaranteed annual income for every Canadian and every Canadian family.
A guaranteed annual income is something which has been under discussion for a number of years, and the notion has become widespread. I believe it was the great French author Victor Hugo who said there is nothing as powerful as an idea whose time has arrived. I believe the time for implementing the idea of a guaranteed annual income plan is close to arrival. Basically this idea has grown quickly.
Back in February 1966 we read in the newspapers that a 14 member commission on technology, automation and economic progress had reported in the United States. The commission had been created by congress, and its members were appointed by President Lyndon Johnson to study technological unemployment and related problems. On February 3, 1966, the commission reported to President Johnson and to congress, and recommended that every United States family be guaranteed a minimum annual income, stating that the annual cost of such a plan would range from $2 billion to $20 billion, depending on its scope. As many as 30 million Americans could be affected if the minimum income level were fixed at $3,000 a year.
I mention this to show that the idea has been seriously considered in the United States, where the figures involved both in money and people are of course much greater than they would be in Canada, but where conditions are not so much different from what they are in Canada, and where their commission considered $3,000 a year as being a suitable level for guaranteeing income. This figure has also been mentioned in Canada.
Under the United States plan the federal government would make up the difference between a family's actual income and a fixed income minimum standard. The commission reported at a time before the cost of the Viet Nam war had almost wiped out the war on poverty in the United States. Its recommendations were seriously considered at that time, and no doubt will be given further consideration before too long.
A few days after the United States commission reported, the assistant deputy minister of welfare in the province of Nova Scotia advocated a similar plan. In this connection I
[Mrs. Maclnnis (Vancouver-Kingsway) .1
DEBATES	July 5, 1987
quote from an editorial in the Globe and Mail of May 13, 1966, as follows:
The other day, Mr. E. R. MacKinnon, Nova Scotia's deputy minister of public welfare, proposed a similar approach to welfare cases. He believed it would remove one of the greatest causes of poverty and would encourage a man to help himself because he would be sure of a foundation on which he could build for the future.
The editorial commented:
A guaranteed minimum income is a logical step in the progress of social security measures. There is obvious merit to it, in that every Canadian would be sure of a living. Unemployment insurance and old age pensions cannot always offer a similar assurance, and a guaranteed income would cover all sections of society, regardless of age or opportunity. It would be a major step, and those concerned should begin to examine its possibilities.
[DOT] (12 noon)
Also in this connection I would like to quote from the Vancouver Sun of January 24, 1967. This is a syndicated article by Joseph Kraft from Washington in which he concludes with this line of thinking:
With this change-
That is, to the guaranteed income.
-there would disappear many of the invidious distinctions which now set the social security system apart from public assistance to the needy. Both the retirees and the welfare cases would, as the saying goes, be feeding from the public trough.
The line between welfare handouts and earned social security income would be blurred. So would the line between lower-class assistance, or welfare, and aid to people comfortably off, as is the case with many of the people on social security.
With these moralisms stripped away, there emerges a single problem-the problem of income maintenance for people who do not have the ability to earn enough through their own efforts. And once that problem is sharply defined, then there emerges with great force the simple logic of meeting it by a guaranteed annual income.
I should like to refer here, in speaking of welfare cases, to this reference to feeding from the public trough. I wish to suggest that, after all, the idea that those who are on welfare are the only ones who feed from the public trough is surely a little bit of an understatement. If I had to think of others who are feeding from the public trough these would include senators, members of parliament, civil servants, servants of crown corporations and all those who receive in any way, shape or form public funds for the performance of their duties or for their living. In my view it is perfectly ridiculous when talking about the public trough to refer only to the welfare cases. The only problem is that people like ourselves and other public servants are so close to the trough, in the front
July 5. 1967

Supply-Health and Welfare for the organization of our economy. Today guaranteed annual income is the fact that if we do not know how to plan production and we are going to build quality into our distribution in order to provide everyone Canadian society we can no longer afford to with an adequate standard of living. When have people living far below a modern stand-we think of this age of computers and cyber- ard of living, particularly now when we are netics-	entering our second century.


The Assistant Deputy Chairman:: Order, please. I regret to interrupt the hon. lady but her allotted time has expired.


Donald MacInnis: Could I have just a few more minutes?


Maurice Rinfret: Does the committee give its unanimous consent in this regard?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Winona Grace MacInnis: I will not be long, Mr. Chairman.
In this age of automation with all our techniques, computers and so on, we find it exceedingly difficult not only for the administrators of these different welfare schemes, but for those who must plan our economy, to develop good plans. If we had a set income floor we would know exactly what should be produced for food, housing, education, recreation and the other things essential to our modern form of living.
As I said not long ago in this house, when it comes to ironing out the booms and depressions, the inflationary periods and the reverse, a guaranteed annual income plan would indeed be a great stabilizer. We should be thinking in terms of our economy so that we do not move from crisis to crisis, from boom to bust, and then from boom to bust again. We must have something that is far more stable. In this regard I believe a guaranteed annual income would be a great stabilizer.
Fifth, we need a guaranteed annual income for economy in the true sense of the word. If we carry on with this patchwork system of social welfare and social security we will continue to find it is an uneconomical and wasteful way of doing things today. The cost for administration is wasteful and unsatisfactory. I can never get over the wastefulness of using social workers to delve into the details of means and needs tests. I know that you yourself, Mr. Chairman, through your earlier work as a social servant here in the city, have a great deal of knowledge of how necessary it is to use social workers for purposes other than inquiring into the tiny details of peoples' incomes.
The sixth and last reason I should like to advance in support of the establishment of a
[DOT] (12:20 p.ra.)
If we want people in this country, to become interested in education and culture and things having to do with the spirit, we must see that they have enough money with which to care for the body in the first instance, so they will not have to spend their whole lives scratching as a great many people have to do just to get bread and butter and a roof over their heads. This has been the pattern for far too many people in this country. I urge the minister that together with the other programs which have been under way in this country, he pioneer the establishment of a guaranteed annual income, not just in name but in reality, based on a standard of living which will be recognizably modern and will cut out the wastefulness and patchwork nature of our old-fashioned social security schemes.


Mr. Brand:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make just a few comments on the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare. First of all may I take this opportunity to comment on the speech made recently on June 12, by the Minister of National Health and Welfare to the Canadian Medical Association. It refers, of course, to the beginning on July 1, 1968, of the national medicare scheme. I think this was an incredible speech. After reading it I wondered whether the minister had read it himself before delivering it at that meeting.
On page three of the speech as delivered to us by the minister's office the minister is very careful to point out that the federal medical care legislation does not presage or pave the way for state medicine or state health services; it means a program of state insured medicine, which is quite a different matter. I made this point when we were discussing this legislation earlier. I said that the government bill which is presumably coming into effect next year will not insure the people against the costs of medical care, but will insure the services of a doctor. This is something which has not as yet got through the minister's head. In other words, the doctor is unable, no matter what he does, to practise outside the scheme of medicare, as proposed by the minister, because his services are insured.
2282	COMMONS
Supply-Health and Welfare
No matter what the minister may have said to the Canadian Medical Association, that it is the people who are insured, this is not the case; it is the doctors' services that are insured. I agree with some of the statements made by the minister. We hope the people will be free to choose their doctors and the doctors free to choose their patients. This will probably be the case. However, I should like the minister to understand the difference between insuring people against the costs of the services, and insuring the services of a particular person such as a physician or surgeon.
The minister comments, and quite properly I am sure, as follows:
Some Cassandras and Jeremiahs have been predicting that the introduction of a universal program of prepaid medical care will erode the quality of patient care, that doctors' offices will be awash with waves of patients clamouring for unnecessary attention and that the valued doctor-patient relationship will somehow be immediately put assunder.
Those are tremendous words.


Mr. MacEachen:: They are good, eh?


Lewis Mackenzie Brand: Yes; I think the speech is well written. At least the minister is not mixing his metaphors, as he does on the first page. He goes on to say:
I am not aware of any studies which suggest that the introduction of a universal, personal health care program in any country has led to a deterioration in the quality of care given by the medical profession to its patients.
Surely after the many speeches which have been made in this house and across the country, the minister should be aware of the great shortage of doctors in Canada as compared with other countries. Despite the brave words of the minister, the situation in this respect does not seem to be improving at all; in fact it is getting worse. The minister goes on to point out that more patients will be seeking medical care because a great many people are not receiving it now. The minister makes that statement and I will read it to him if he likes. If more people will be seeking medical care and the shortage of doctors is serious and acute now, what will the situation be if more patients require care? Surely if you add two and two together you come up with the same answer no matter how you look at it.
Our biggest problem in Canada at the moment is that we do not have enough doctors and other medical personnel to look after the health needs of the people. It is said that this situation will improve because we are going to take doctors from other countries, under 
DEBATES	July 5, 1967
the policy of the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. It is said that we will bring into this country as many doctors as possible. We will forget about the morality of taking doctors away from countries which do not have enough at the moment. We should be training more doctors in Canada.
Unless we take steps to train enough doctors to handle the services that will be required we will be in a very serious situation indeed. This is the crux of the problem that faces Canada right now. My home province of Saskatchewan, which has had a comprehensive scheme of medical care since 1962, is finding it increasingly difficult to retain doctors. Patients are finding it increasingly difficult to obtain appointments with doctors because there are not enough doctors in the province to handle the demands of sick people. The problem is that there are not enough doctors.
Unless we do something now to keep Canadian graduates in this country, and try to graduate more doctors, it seems to me we are making a very serious mistake indeed. It is all very well, as the minister said in his speech, to say that perhaps we should look at other methods of treating patients. Is the minister suggesting using nursing assistants to do some of the work normally carried out by nurses? Is the suggestion perhaps that we should have physicians' assistants, persons who will carry out a great deal of the work now carried out by the physicians, perhaps doing simple things such as the examination of a person or the diagnosis of a disease? Perhaps this could be done by a partly trained assistant. Is this the minister's suggestion? He certainly makes it in his speech.
I wonder what the minister would do if he became ill and could see either a doctor or a partly trained assistant. Perhaps he would be in the same position as the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam when visiting Britain a few years ago. At that time the hon. member was premier of the province of Saskatchewan. He suffered a slight disability during that visit, and rather than attend one of the clinics provided under the national health service he saw a specialist on Harley street. The visit to this specialist cost the hon. member 20 guineas, or some figure like that. Perhaps the minister would do the same thing. I do not agree with the suggestion that we should in effect lower the standard of doctors or those who are looking after people, in order to meet the demand. I believe this is nonsense and I am surprised that such a
July 5. 1967	COMMONS
suggestion should have been made to the centennial meeting of the Canadian Medical Association. It is incredible that the Minister of National Health and Welfare could have made such a statement.
[DOT] (12:30 p.m.)
As if this was not bad enough, he said the following as reported at page 5 of his speech:
In some areas, doctors may well have to budget their time to ensure that the persons who need the care are the ones who receive it and those who can wait are the ones who do wait.
In other words if you go in to see a doctor, obviously it will be the patient who will do the diagnosing in the future because the doctor would not have the time to examine him. If you were to say to the doctor "I am having a heart attack", the doctor would give you a certain priority and assign you to a certain place, but then if the next patient were to come and say to him "I have an appendix attack" the doctor might tell him to wait. How else would priorities be given? "It is a matter of judgment and priorities." Surely it must be obvious to the minister that the doctor must look at the patient to decide what is the matter with him.
Perhaps the minister wants to adopt once again military medicine, or triage. Perhaps he would wish to set up government clinics using the triage method whereby the doctor would say: "This patient will go to resuscitation, the other one to the morgue and the third one straight to the operating room." Is this what the minister wants? Perhaps we should take over the east block and use it as a government clinic. In this way it might be put to better use than it has up till now.
This sort of nonsensical statement is typical of the type of thinking we seem to be running into in this day and age. It is the unrealistic thinking of a government that does not seem to realize that the health care of the people comes first and that the requirements of those who are ill come first. I cannot see myself receiving a phone call at four o'clock in the morning from a patient asking me to come to him because he is ill, and saying to him "I am sorry, but I am budgeting my time and this is my time for sleep". Perhaps to carry it to more ridiculous lengths I may suggest that if we budgeted our time properly we could see to it that we are in the operating room from 8 a.m. to 12 noon only, and when the peace tower chimes the noon hour we would lay down the scalpel and say "We have to go now to our office to see the acutely ill patients". The fact that the
DEBATES	2283
Supply-Health and. Welfare patient is still on the operating table with his belly opened up, and not sewn together, would not deter us from leaving him there to be looked after perhaps by one of the untrained or partially trained assistants whom the minister proposes.
I should now like to refer to an answer given by the Prime Minister on June 19, at page 1654 of Hansard, when the hon. member for Simcoe East asked him whether the Minister of National Health and Welfare stated at a C.M.A. meeting in Quebec that it may be necessary, when medicare comes into effect, for doctors to see their patients on a basis of priority of illness, and asked whether this represented government policy. The Prime Minister then said:
Mr. Speaker, if that statement is alleged to have been made by the Minister of National Health and Welfare, he has told me that he did not make it.
I can well understand why he would say that. I myself would like to dissociate myself, as I understand the Prime Minister did, from any such ridiculous statement as is reported in the speech sent to me from the minister's office. I did not write it.
The minister went on to mention the fact that a nearly universal program can be expected to bring a rise in doctors' incomes in general. I will not argue the statement. If he referred to gross incomes, then what he said is probably true so far as the general practitioner is concerned. However, I would point out to the minister that although doctors' incomes may rise with an increasing number of patients, and I can give him specific examples in numbers and figures, the costs associated with the practice rise at a much higher rate than the rate of income and will produce a situation where the general practitioner with a busy practice will have to work almost continuously from 8 in the morning untill 11 at night, and very often all night, in order to provide the type of care that is necessary. I know that this is being done because I have done it myself. I am not complaining because this is the profession I chose, and I am sure it is true of most of my fellow practitioners. However, I do think it should be understood by the minister that it is not as simple as all that, namely that if a doctor will have a few more patients he will make a lot more money. A doctor does not get up at 4.30 in the morning when someone calls him on the telephone because he will make $7.35, as they do in Saskatchewan. Let the minister try and get a plumber for $20 at that hour in the morning and see if he can
July 5. 1967

Supply-Health and Welfare get him. That is not the reason for which physicians get out of bed at that time.
I recall that in 1960, 1961 and 1962 it was being said in Saskatchewan that the doctors were opposed to medicare because under that program they were not going to make as much money. That is not true. The doctors said they would make more money, just as the minister has said. That was not the point and it still is not the point. It is not the doctors' income that is in question here but the manner in which doctors like to practise their profession, so that they can give what they feel within their professional competence is good medical care for the patients that come to see them. The patients do not come to see their doctors because the bills will be paid by the government but because they have confidence in what the doctors can do for them, and that is what is known as the doctor-patient relationship. It has nothing whatsoever to do with fees. In this I accept what the minister has said, with one proviso, that a situation similar to the one in Saskatchewan may arise, when a patient was saying: "Since the government is paying my bills I will go to three or four doctors to compare their opinions". This is what breaks down the confidence between the doctor and the patient, and unfortunately it is happening in the country today.
I will refer once again to part of the speech which appears at page 8 and which reads as follows:
It is becoming increasingly apparent that if the public's need for the more prosaic, but still basic, medical care is to be met, it will be necessary for physicians to delegate or divest themselves of certain procedures which less highly-trained people can provide so that they can concentrate on those vital services which only a physician can supply.
I wonder what procedures the minister is referring to. The service provided by the St. John Ambulance is excellent. It is quite true that if someone has a torn radial artery and is bleeding to death, anyone who can apply direct pressure to the wound can stop the bleeding. However, instead of having the wound sewn and the artery saved, as it is possible to do these days, it will be sufficient merely to put on pressure and a pad and thus stop the bleeding and let the wound heal by itself. This is one way to do it.
[DOT] (12:40 p.m.)
I am not sure what these vital services are which only a physician can supply. I suppose taking out someone's appendix would be one. However, we have all heard the stories of the

sick bay attendant in the navy who, during the last war, removed an appendix by using a penknife. Really, the minister's speech makes one wonder who wrote it. The more I read the speech the more upset I get, so perhaps I had better put it away. It should be kept in the archives and resurrected later.
During the few minutes I have left, Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few comments on the food and drug services. In so doing, I do not wish to tread on anyone's toes except those of the government. Mention has been made already in the house of the report of the committee on drug costs and prices. Mention has been made too of the question of drug safety, and the work that the food and drug directorate perform. It is to this aspect of the matter I should like to direct a few comments.
I do not believe there is any argument about the fact that the food and drug directorate deserve a great deal of credit for the work they are doing as they attempt to insure that all the drugs taken by Canadians are as safe as modern science can make them. During our committee meetings, it became obvious that not only was the food and drug directorate understaffed, but it lacked sufficient funds and space to carry on the type of supervision that should be conducted over the drugs on the Canadian market. It is amazing to me that those who work in this department have been able to do as well as they have up until now. When I heard the government intended to provide more money for the food and drug directorate, I thought this was fine. Then I heard they were spreading this money over the next 12 or 15 years.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Where did that information come from?


Lewis Mackenzie Brand: I think the minister is asking a question. I am sorry I do not have the committee evidence with me, but I believe that information was given to the committee.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Twelve or 15 years, the government?


Lewis Mackenzie Brand: Certainly; the money does not come from any other place, unless we consider the people, and that is something the government does not usually do. Yes, this government: It is a matter of priority. I may be wrong, and perhaps it is seven years or 10 years. But this is not the point; the point is that in the last 10 years there have been more advances, more new drugs brought on to the market in this country than in the
July 5. 1967

previous 1,000 years. What is it going to be like in the next few years?
The minister has questioned the suggestion that the government is thinking of spreading the money over several years, and I am glad to hear him question it. Perhaps, although I do not see it anywhere in the estimates, he is thinking of providing additional money now to make sure that the drugs on the Canadian market are safe for each and every Canadian who uses them. I believe it is essential, with the rapidly changing pharmaceutical technology, that sufficient funds and personnel be provided the food and drug directorate to enable them to carry out many of the recommendations of the committee on drug costs and prices. Unless this action is taken, there is no question but that the food and drug directorate is going to be in serious difficulty if they have to implement fully some of the recommendations of the Hilliard committee, the Boyd committee or the parliamentary committee.
I feel it is essential that the minister look into this matter as soon as possible to ascertain if perhaps some money can be made available to this very valuable watchdog of our Canadian health, the food and drug directorate. They are essential to the drug industry of our country, and they deserve the fullest support of the government of Canada.
There are many other matters that one could mention, Mr. Chairman. There is the matter of the Canada Assistance Plan, which is not working. There is the matter of the guaranteed income supplement and the difficulties people are meeting in that connection. I was reading some of the material put out by the minister's office. He sends out a lot of stuff and I read a lot of it, too. Mention was made of the fact the average amount being paid under the guaranteed income supplement was something like $17 or $19. We are paying $17 or $19 at a time when the cost of living in this country is the highest it has ever been. What has happened to this $19? Well, some rents have been increased so that they approximately equal this amount. This is what has happened.
I believe it is shameful that many of our pioneers in this country do not have sufficient food because of a lack of funds. They do not have any money to provide any of the other amenities which are necessary for every person. Yet this government is proud that we provide $17 or $19 on an average. Some people get only $5, you know, while others get $30.
Supply-Health and Welfare
I do not believe I need to go into what has happened to the war veterans allowance. I believe this subject was well covered by the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway. It seems to me that the act is being used unfairly to penalize the veterans; I do not think there is any question about that. I am sure all of us, even the minister, have received many letters on this subject. I am sorry indeed to find that the act is being used in this way against those who helped defend the freedom of our country.
There are many other problems but I will not take up the time of the committee to go into them, except to ask the minister once again to look very carefully at the food and drug directorate and the amount of money allocated to them. He should listen to the requests made. If he asks the members of that branch, he will find out what they need, and he should give them the support they need. I should like to pay tribute to the staff of the Department of National Health and Welfare. I feel they deserve extra credit for being able to do such an excellent job for the people of Canada, despite speeches such as the one the minister made to the Canadian Medical Association. I am sure it is a very trying thing for those people to have to put up with this. Nevertheless I congratulate them on their diligence, and I recommend that the minister listen more carefully to some of the suggestions they make from time to time.
[DOT] (12:50 p.m.)


Mr. Mackasey:: Mr. Chairman, I could not
help but wonder as I listened to the hon. member for Saskatoon praising, on the one hand, the department of health and welfare and its staff under the minister, how on the other hand, he could criticize the speech made by the minister, which I am sure one of his staff prepared. I think it is normal and natural for speeches of ministers to be prepared by people within their department.


Lewis Mackenzie Brand: I did not think he was with them any longer after that speech.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: I have taken advantage of the opportunity afforded by these estimates, Mr. Chairman, to comment briefly on the food and drugs committee that has just brought in its report, already known as the Harley report. But as is often the case, unfortunately, I was diverted from my main theme by some remarks that I was happy to listen to while awaiting my opportunity to participate.
July 5, 1967

Supply-Health and Welfare
I was particularly intrigued by the very excellent speech of the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway, who in the short time she has been in the house I have come to recognize as one who works particularly hard in the house for her constituency. I suspect that she puts a lot of time and effort into her speeches. I was very gratified, in view of the turmoil going on in that party at the present moment, where they are endorsing special status for provinces before getting around to defining it and now find themselves unable to define what that special status is, to see that the hon. lady has made a complete turnabout from the stand she took last year when the minister was bringing in the first step in his guaranteed annual income policy for specific groups of Canadians.
I remember that debate very well, Mr. Chairman, because in the heat of the debate the hon. lady referred to the Canada Assistance Plan as nothing more than a handout. What struck me at that time as unbelievable was that a party dedicated to the cause of socialism, a party that prides itself on its alleged-I use that word now, though I did not dare use it before-role in this House of Commons as being the voice of the little people of Canada, opposed guaranteed minimum income legislation.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What are you so worried about?


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Chairman, it is unusual that anyone can rouse the veteran from Winnipeg North Centre to holler from his seat, and thus breach the rules that he holds so dear. Frankly, this intrigues and pleases me. I am not worried about the New Democratic party because the New Democratic party are well on the way to destroying themselves. Anyone who reads reports of the convention that is now taking place in Toronto knows that this party is on the path to self-destruction. The leader of the party makes one statement, the deputy leader then contradicts him, and half an hour later a third prominent member says that neither of these two gentlemen knows what he is talking about. So I suggest we do not have to be preoccupied with the New Democratic party. They are so confused and bent on destroying themselves, now that they have endorsed the cause of separatism by preaching a particular status concept for the province of Quebec, that no deep thinking Quebecker would pay any particular attention to them.
I do not think its members need to be singled out, but I think the people of Canada

are entitled to know when one of the more distinguished members of the house shows signs of leaving the socialist party, as the hon. lady for Vancouver-Kingsway is obviously about to do, and join the more logical, moderate and temperate Liberal party. In her wonderful half hour tribute to the concept of guaranteed minimum income she was, without actually saying so, paying tribute to this party, which originated the idea under Senator Croll, and the very energetic minister of health and welfare, who had the courage to bring it in.
Had the minister been more interested in his public image and in playing politics, he could quite easily have brought in a $30 increase across the board. Rather he took the concept of a minimum income seriously and decided that we should implement it in the area it was most needed, namely the group of people who were eligible for old age pension but who, for one reason or another, had little or no other sources of income. I could say a lot about that but I am not going to.


Mr. Churchill:: Go on. Tell us about Walter
Gordon.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: The anvil chorus is as usual saying "go ahead, go ahead". I want to speak about the drug industry, not the new party of separatists in the House of Commons. That subject I will leave for another day, when I can document all of the contradictions that are emanating from their convention, particularly this status for Quebec which they have not got around to defining. The deputy leader tried to define it the other day when he said that this revolutionary new concept of theirs is precisely the concept that the Liberal party was practising under co-operative federalism up to a year ago, but that since the bogeyman, Mr. Trudeau, had joined the Liberals, the N.D.P. were going to adopt this philosophy.
It is nice at times to see the socialists saying that the Liberals were right up until a year ago, and that they are going to carry on because we deviated a little. Looking at these fine representatives of the socialist party, and realizing that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has been here throughout the last few days, and to the best of my knowledge has missed the whole convention, I just hope that his sort of advanced thinking has not been forgotten at the convention, and that before the convention ends the hon. member will have the opportunity to go there and put his party back on its socialistic rails.
July 5, 1967	COMMONS
Right now, Mr. Chairman, that party is tumbling and is badly in need of the experience of the hon. member, who has a great reputation as a parliamentarian, in helping them get back to the Regina manifesto, which certain members of the party wanted to put before the public but were refused.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Would the hon. gentleman permit a question. Assuming that all of this is in order on the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare, does not the hon. member realize that if one does have some advanced ideas they are far more needed here in this parliament than at our convention in Toronto?


Maurice Rinfret: Order. I think both members are out of order. I was trying to listen to what the hon. member was saying about an unhealthy condition, but I do not think it has anything to do with the estimates we are now studying.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Chairman, this condition referred directly to the socialist party-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. It is improper for a member of this house to suggest to the chairman that he is alleging an unhealthy condition in any party.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to get into a debate between your honour and the acknowledged self-appointed custodian of the rules of parliament and parliamentary procedure.


Stanley Howard Knowles: What drugs have you been taking?


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: I will pause for a moment to give those two members a chance to get together and to decide what their next intervention or interruption is going to be. I agree that I am out of order, Mr. Chairman, and that the question of a special status for Quebec can be the subject of debate at some other time. Many of us have strong ideas on that subject, and while I do not want to disagree with your suggestion that I am out of order, my observations do tie in with the very excellent speech of the newly converted member for Vancouver-Kingsway. After all, there is an old saying that you cannot have your cake and eat it too.
[DOT] (1:00 p.m.)
Under the concept of a special status for Quebec, plans such as have been suggested could not be fulfilled. Such actions could only
DEBATES	2287
Supply-Health and Welfare be taken under a strong central government.
I do not suppose at the present moment that anybody in the New Democratic party is really sure of what special status for Quebec is all about. When the hon. member for Greenwood, in a speech of two weeks ago, tried to define that special status, he defined a strong central government with further restrictions on the rights of provinces in the field of education.
Were we to adopt the suggestion of the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway, in her desire to see that every citizen has a guaranteed minimum income of $3,000, without taking into account regional differences in the economy of various parts of the country and without taking into account that the old age pensioner, say, in Newfoundland does not need the same amount of money to meet his overhead as does the old age pensioner in Vancouver, it could mean that we would be faced with a 30 to 35 per cent increase in taxation. Of course the leader of the N.D.P. has a pat answer to this: We shall increase productivity. That is the new phrase we are hearing now. Instead of "planning" we now hear about "increased productivity".
Having been diverted by interruptions from the opposition side, may I now return to the subject of the drug industry. The Harley committee was in existence for the better part of three years. In common with others who participated in its debates, I wish to congratulate not only Dr. Harley for the wonderful way he conducted this marathon committee, but also Miss Savard, the clerk of the committee, who stayed with it for the whole of its duration throughout two sessions of the House of Commons.
One cannot, as one would wish, discuss in depth the drug industry, on the estimates of one department. I have concluded that the drug industry is of prime importance to at least four departments of the government-the Department of National Health and Welfare, the Department of Finance, the Department of Industry, and now, the Department of the Registrar General. To discuss at length on the estimates of this department the recommendations of the Harley committee, that were designed to reduce the costs of drugs, would be unfair to the minister and to his department.
Nor do I intend to enter any controversy that might exist between members of the house and representatives of the P.M.A.C. with respect to the brand names of drugs, or their generic equivalents. Unfortunately we cannot divorce entirely questions of drug
July 5. 1967


Philip Bernard Rynard: Hear, hear.
[DOT] (1:10 p.m.)


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: One of the committee
recommendations, and I use it only as one example because there are many of them, which will affect the food and drug directorate, extending out of the Harley committee, is that if drugs are to be imported from countries beyond the seas, once a compulsory licence has been obtained, inspections must be made of the premises and sources of origin in those countries. This is a difficult problem even at the present moment when relatively few of our drugs are being imported-and I say relatively few, meaning in comparison to what is anticipated when these recommendations are adopted as legislation.
But presuming, Mr. Chairman, that this problem is solved, that is, that through some way the source of supply can be checked out
July 5. 19G7

in the various countries around the world- and these sources of supply range anywhere from England to Italy, Denmark, Hong Kong, Poland and other countries behind the Iron Curtain, and some other countries where, up to the present moment, there has been some reluctance to have our inspectors visit their up to date plants-even if this problem is circumvented and these inexpensive, and I presume safe drugs, appear on the market, the main problem will once again be to find ways and means of convincing the doctors to prescribe those inexpensive drugs.
I know there are many wonderful recommendations that we re-educate the doctors and put more stress on generic names. In this connection I was struck by the experience of one of the so-called generic firms. I would describe it as a vigorous, up coming firm in the Toronto area, which is well organized and which sells an increasing volume every year to government sources. The president of the company, who is a very distinguished scientist, once said to me, "You know, we have in Canada the least expensive drugs in the world". I chatted with the gentleman for about half an hour to find out precisely what he meant. Perhaps he was generalizing and, if so, unfairly; but he did point out that because of our unique escape clause under the Patent Act there is provision for the availability of less expensive substitutes to a brand name drug where, in the opinion of the courts, the holder of a patent is gouging the public and overcharging for his product. This provision has not been used to the fullest possible extent, but I suspect it will be used much more in the future. The note of desperation in this gentleman's voice came from his disenchantment and frustration with his inability to convince the retail druggists to stock his products, rather than the so-called brand name products.
The reason I said earlier that I deplore the tendency to concentrate on brand versus generic, rather than on safe versus dangerous, is because in refuting or rebutting many of the arguments of the P.M.A.C. there has been a tendency to oversimplify and play down the fact, or rather create the impression, that for every brand name product there is a generic substitute equal in potency, equal in effect, and equal in the safety factor. This is not true. In fact it is not even certain from our investigations that one can reproduce someone else's product identically.

Supply-Health and Welfare
This of course is the basis of the Hilliard report and of the Boyd report. A very interesting article in this connection appears in this week's Time magazine dealing with investigations taking place at the present moment in the United States. For the sake of the record I may say this article appears on page 60 of the magazine. It deals with a very simple, and at times a very dangerous drug, the common aspirin. The substance of the article is that one patricular firm, I think it is Bayer, refuses to limit its quality to the minimum standards of quality set out in the United States Pharmacopoeia, which is a volunteer guidebook sponsored by doctors, pharmacists, chemists and biologists. The argument of this particular firm is that its very minute inspections, which go far beyond the minimum standards, form one of the basic reasons why its product costs many times more than that of a lesser known tablet, but which in the opinion of Bayer ensures superior quality and a greater degree of safety.
I know I have not contributed too much to the debate on drugs, other than to say that although I was a member of the committee I am not convinced we will accomplish very much by implementing all the recommendations of the Harley committee, other than to drive down the already inexpensive substitutes to an even lower cost. But this will do very little, if anything, to convince the doctors to prescribe wherever possible the less expensive drugs, provided of course that they can be convinced that the original product and the alternative product are equal in safety and effectiveness.
I am also a little concerned about other effects of the Harley report. Probably I shall have to withhold my remarks until we examine the estimates of the Department of Industry, or until we resume the debate on the budget, in order to point out that I have never been an advocate of cutting off your nose to spite your face. I am not convinced the solution lies in destroying existing drug industries, which I am fully convinced will be the end result of the recommendations in the report. However, I am not sure these industries have not brought this thing on their own shoulders.
Evidence does show that the margin of profit, gross profit and net profit, of these companies, is double that of the average industry. I believe, however, they ranked seventh in terms of profits of individual firms in Dr. Harley's committee report, well below the soft drinks industry and other industries. Nevertheless they have themselves focused
July 5, 1997

Supply-Health and Welfare the spotlight of public attention on their industry as a result of their inability to control rising prices and to introduce a greater degree of competition among brand names. But at least they are outwardly convinced that their own products have no exact substitutes.
I wonder whether it is parliament's role or the role of doctors to devote a little more time to this particular problem. I was rather intrigued by the fact that at least half a dozen doctors sat on this committee, all members of the same Canadian Medical Association. It would seem to me that there is a cynicism on their part, an unwillingness to co-operate, an unwillingness wherever possible to investigate thoroughly the alternative of prescribing generic drugs for their indigent patients.
I remember the case of someone I know particularly well who was able to have a badly wanted child as the result of taking a drug called progestoral, a very expensive drug costing $14 or $15 for a three, four or five days dosage. Later I became aware of an identical problem concerning a friend of mine with a married daughter who unfortunately had a series of miscarriages, and was considered unable to have children. I referred this young lady to the doctor in question, who prescribed the same medicine, and after two or three months of pregnancy the young lady realized there was a possibility of having a child safely. She was very pleased and the family were very happy, but unfortunately they were unable to afford the high cost of progestoral.
[DOT] (1:20 p.m.)
When I discussed the case with the doctor in question he issued a new prescription written generically. The young lady was able to buy the prescribed medicine with the same basic qualities for about half the cost. I am happy to say that the young lady now has a very fine baby boy as a result of the blessings of modern medicine.
When I took this up with the doctor and asked him, through curiosity, why he did not in all cases prescribe this drug which cost less, he told me that so far as he was concerned, as a result of his many years experience with the brand name progestoral, he knew without a question of doubt the effect this particular drug would have. He said that he took into consideration the economic factor and the ability of the family to pay for the product and wherever possible prescribed the brand name. He added, however, that in other cases where economic factors were


dominant he would reluctantly prescribe a substitute, even though his experience was that the substitute did not have the same percentage of effectiveness that the better known brand had.
I realize that the time allotted to me is nearly up. I should like to serve notice here that I do not think the solution to the drug problem lies solely in the Harley committee report. I believe it requires a voluntary study on the part of the doctors and a new approach by the drug industry in respect of proper pricing. Above all I do not believe the solution is in the destruction of an industry which at the present time employs about
10.000	people in Canada and spends millions of dollars in this country.
This is an industry which is helping to develop our export markets. It spends millions of dollars in research, but unfortunately is charging the public too much. I suggest that when we have the estimates of the Department of Industry before us we are duty bound to review the Harley committee report at that time, in the light of the dire effect I suggest it will have on the industry and the fact that we might have to find
10.000	new jobs for people ranging all the way from bottle washers to those holding Ph.D's and involved in research.


Mr. Mongrain:: Mr. Chairman, in all the speeches made by Her Majesty the Queen during her visit here in Canada, I am sure that all my colleagues will agree with me that she said a great many true things and that she reminded us, as members who have mainly the duty to legislate, of the urgency of some priorities.
I should like in particular to quote an excerpt from the speech which she made here in the front of parliament a few days ago when she said:
This country is fortunate and prosperous more than most others. But not all of its people are free from want or hardship. There are still wrongs to be righted and sufferings to be relieved. There is still a contant effort of accommodation to be made so that all the people in this great country may live together in friendship and harmony.
Mr. Chairman, I think that the opportunity comes our way now, during consideration of the estimates of this department, which we are doing at this time, once more to appeal to those in a position of authority in the country, so that they take an even more sympathetic attitude towards misery, the destitute, the poor, the have-nots, the low-income people and the disabled.
July 5. 1967

I am not suggesting, Mr. Chairman, that this government, or the preceding ones, have done nothing to alleviate poverty. I am one of those who realize, as everybody else, that, of course, some needed pieces of legislation have been passed in order to alleviate poverty in many sectors, such as unemployment insurance, old age pensions, the minimum guaranteed income, allowances for disabled persons, the Canada Assistance Plan, health insurance, hospital assistance, family allowances. That is all very fine, but I feel that, in our time, it is particularly urgent to alleviate poverty and I think it would be a fine opportunity to review perhaps our entire policy of assistance to those who are deprived of a reasonable and adequate amount of worldly goods.
And to prove once again, Mr. Chairman, the urgency for such a concern for our governments, I should like to quote from the recent encyclical of the Holy Father, entitled "Populorum Progressio," dealing thoroughly with the social situation today, in 1967.
It will be agreed that this study emanates from an authority, if we recall that the Pope consulted a great number of sociologists, that he considered seven or eight drafts of that encyclical and that he suggested all sorts of amendments before approving the final text.
I would like, Mr. Chairman, to draw inspiration from such an authority and suggest even to those who are not Roman Catholics to glance through that document which takes a revolutionary and, audacious stand towards the urgency of the social problem we are now facing.
And if I may be allowed a little joke, I would even say that when I read that encyclical I had the impression that the Holy Father has become a supporter of the New Democratic party, that he tends a little towards socialism, because some of his statements are quite advanced.
And I am sure that if the hon. member for Verdun (Mr. Mackasey) has read the encyclical, he must have found it extremely difficult to take the New Democratic party to task as he did earlier. I noticed that he did not fustigate it on the social question but rather on the question of the special status.
Therefore, Mr. Chairman, I quote verbatim and I am doing it, as I said before, not with the intention of blaming anyone but in order to encourage the government in its efforts to alleviate misery among Canadians and even among other peoples which suffer also from hunger and poverty.

Supply-Health and Welfare
I see here, for instance, and I quote literally:
Today the peoples in hunger are making a dramatic appeal to the peoples blessed with abundance. The Church shudders at this cry of anguish and calls each one to give a loving response of charity to this brother's cry for help.
Further on, Mr. Chairman, the Pope wrote this:
We considered it our duty to set up a Pontifical Commission in the Church's central administration, charged with "bringing to the whole of God's people the full knowledge of the part expected of them at the present time, so as to further the progress of poorer peoples, to encourage social justice among nations, to offer to less developed nations the means whereby they can further their own progress":
A little further, in a chapter entitled "For Man's complete development", the Pope says:
Freedom from misery, the greater assurance of finding subsistence, health and fixed employment; an increased share of responsibility without oppression of any kind and in security from situations that do violence to their dignity as men; better education-in brief, to seek to do more, know more and have more in order to be more; that is what men aspire to now when a greater number of them are condemned to live in conditions that make this lawful desire illusory.
It will be agreed that the appeal of Our Holy Father the Pope is certainly moving.
This is another excerpt which I find a little further:
At the same time social conflicts have taken on world dimensions. The acute disquiet which has taken hold of the poor classes in countries that are becoming industrialised, is now embracing those whose economy is almost exclusively agrarian: farming people, too, are becoming aware of their "undeserved hardship". There is also the scandal of glaring inequalities not merely in the enjoyment of possessions but even more in the exercise of power.
And the Pope continues in that vein. We could almost quote this whole encyclical, since it is so appropriate and it meets so well today's needs. A little further, he says:
We must make haste: too many are suffering, and the distance is growing that separates the progress of some and the stagnation, not to say the regression of others.
Once again, another excerpt in the same encyclical:
There are certainly situations whose injustice cries to heaven. When whole populations destitute of necessities live in a state of dependence barring them from all initiative and responsibility, and all opportunity to advance culturally and share in social and political life, recourse to violence, as a means to right these wrongs to human dignity, is a grave temptation.
Mr. Chairman, I shall not take your time to read the rest. A great many of those excerpts
2292	COMMONS
Supply-Health and Welfare could be quoted but I want to limit myself to those two testimonies: the appeal of Her Majesty the Queen and the encyclical of our Holy Father the Pope, so that the cry of misery which cannot make itself heard alone by the people who suffer, may be heard again today in this house. I am speaking of the poor, the sick, the aged who are deprived of the necessities, especially of the handicapped. And I am doing so, Mr. Chairman, in view of the forecast of those who reflect on our future that within thirty years, by the year
2,000,	conditions may be such that 20 or 25 per cent of the people will no longer have the opportunity to work and earn a salary.
[DOT] (1:30 p,m.)
This means that, with industrialization, with excessive automation, people who are suffering and unemployed today will suffer more and be even more unemployed if the governments fail now to make projections with the most modern scientific data and prepare, in the light of these projections, to pass legislation which will enable every Canadian to enjoy what is called a reasonable minimum of well-being.
Mr. Chairman, there are still people who consider it visionary and demagogic to claim that there is suffering among us and who are very happy in all their statements to discover that we are living in a country of abundance. However, a study of the official statistics will show, for instance, that in 1966 3,500,000 Canadians lived in poverty. Of course, there are various degrees of poverty: there is destitution, poverty, hardship, which is the lot of marginal classes, and among those 3,500,000 Canadian citizens, 1,300,000 suffer from some physical disability and for the most part do not have a sufficient income to enjoy at least a reasonable level of comfort which can be expected by people living in an affluent democracy.
To support my theory, I should like to quote more eloquent figures from the report of an investigation carried out last year, I believe, in the city of Montreal. I am not suggesting that there is more poverty in Montreal than anywhere else, but I am quoting a specific case, to convince those who think that there is no poverty in our country.
This study shows that:
In the City of Montreal itself, 423,418 persons, or 38 per cent of the total population, and in the metropolitan area,-
This is the greater Montreal area.
-706,830 persons, or 33 per cent of the whole population, live in poverty-
[Mr. MongrainJ
DEBATES	July 5, 1967
Not only in poverty or in misery, Mr. Chairman, but in an unbearable misery for some of them, while many others endure distressing hardship.
For the benefit of those who would like to go to the source of this information, I am quoting from "Le Travailleur Canadien", edition of May 1967, which deals with the results of that survey. I quote again:
Moreover, 17 per cent of the entire metropolitan population lead a hand-to-mouth existence. If we take these people into consideration also, then the total number of people in the metropolitan area who live in misery, poverty or hardship rises from 706,830 to 1,032,000, or 48.6 per cent of the total population-
Mr. Chairman, I believe that this reveals a serious flaw in our capitalist system, and if this same system does not deal with these cases of hardship in order to find a solution as soon as possible, social upheaval will surely ensue.
For instance, poverty is defined as follows in that article:
Poverty-families and individuals are poverty-stricken: in general, any family of four whose total income is less than $2000 per year and any individual without a family whose income is less than $1000 a year.
And a little further on, the article says:
Over 55,800 families out of 217,000, or 20 per cent of Montreal families are poverty-stricken, as well as over 27,000 suburban families, or 14 per cent.
All the same, those figures speak for themselves and are alarming, Mr. Chairman, and if the popular saying: it's no use preaching to a hungry man, is kept in mind, all sorts of social evils are to be dreaded, if no way is found to give those people a minimum of reasonable comfort to which they are entitled.
I know that some people have found solutions. For instance, I read in a newspaper from last year that the dean of the department of agriculture of the University of Alberta ascribed to large families a great deal of hardship in the country. Therefore, he suggested, and I quote word for word an article which appeared in La Presse on March 10, 1966:
If the parents object to limiting the number of their children, the government should compel the father to submit to sterilization-
No more nor less.
-or see to it that the mother resort to contraceptive devices.
During a dinner in a social club on Tuesday, Mr. Bentley-
July 5, 1967

The name of this erudite professor is Mr. Bentley.
-Mr. Bentley said that the population problem is so serious that anyone who has more than three children is uninformed and not very intelligent.
Mr. Chairman, I have seven children; I plead guilty. Some sociologists propose empirical solutions, but that is obviously not the way to solve the problem. Incidentally, His Holiness the Pope answers this very question in his encyclical, for he says that those who advocate compulsory birth control by means imposed by the government are in a sense heretics, and that we should try instead to use the wealth which Providence has bestowed upon us and distribute it equally among the needy. In order to do that, of course, we will have to go a little way towards what we call socialism, Mr. Chairman. At home, we usually tell the socialists, the members of the New Democratic Party that they are Liberals in a hurry.
Well, I suggest to the members of the Liberal party that the time has come to change gear and become Liberals in a hurry also because the needs of the times are urgent and social upheaval is cause for concern.
In further support of this theory, I should like to quote another authority much more competent than I on the matter, His Eminence Cardinal Leger of Montreal who said, in a speech before the St. Lawrence Kiwanis in May last and I quote:
It is not true that a Christian should have a sickly fear of State intervention in the economic life. Nor is it true that a Christian should be obsessed by anti-socialism.
And here is where the cardinal is also becoming a socialist.
The truth of the matter is that inertia of public authority is to be feared just as much as this totalitarian concept which would stifle all initiative among the citizens. Obviously, some large undertakings can be carried out efficiently only by the State and only the State can create some security and social assistance programs. In this case, it is not reticence but dynamic co-operation or yet a highly developed spirit of initiative which must be found among all Christians involved, one way or another, in the affairs of the State.
Mr. Chairman, this is the point: Those who rightly claim increased aid, those who are deprived of a minimum well-being are told that there is a limit to what the State can do. Indeed, if pensions are paid and grants given, they must be paid for through taxes just as it may be true that the saturation point will eventually be reached and that taxation will become prohibitive. But that is precisely where I feel the government should try to
Supply-Health and Welfare seek more daring and more modern solutions and that is probably where some points of my New Democratic friends program might be agreed to, for instance when they suggest that the State should have available some highly profitable public concerns whose income is now turned over solely to some rich individuals and which could then be distributed to the have-nots, too numerous in our society. By so doing, the fantastic increase in taxes which usually accompanies the generous social legislation implemented by the government could perhaps be avoided.
[DOT] (1:40 p.m.)
Mr. Chairman, once again I repeat that I am making these remarks not to blame the government but rather to let the voice of our destitute be heard as loudly as possible.
Amongst those who suffer, amongst those who are destitute, there are surely old people. Today, people are old before their time. For instance, Mr. Chairman, at 45 one cannot find employment these days. The way things are going, and thinking about what I said a while ago, considering what life will be in 30 or 35 years from now, the eligible age for old age pensions will have to be lowered from 70 or 65 years to 40 or 45 if people are not to die of starvation.
But let us talk about those who have reached 65 years of age, whom it is agreed to call old people and to whom a $105 old age security pension was granted recently. I say that is not even enough under the present circumstances because a $105 pension nowadays is not worth more than perhaps the sum of $50 twenty years ago, Mr. Chairman. Moreover, in my opinion, not enough thought has been given to providing those senior citizens who can subsist on their pensions with something to do to occupy their time, so that they will not get bored or vegetate.
I suggest that we should follow the example of Sweden which in 1950-53 appointed joint committees to consider the case of retired old people.
Many of them would still be able to render some services if they were retrained for jobs that they could carry out at their age. The fact is that if they are in good health, they also have a vast experience, and the committee studied the matter of aged workers in Sweden.
I quote textually:
The study of statistics concerning the distribution by age in the various occupations, manpower rotation and unemployment, took also into account interviews with personnel officers concerning the policy of business firms towards elderly workers.
July 5, 1967

Supply-Health and Welfare
I submit that we should try to find means to keep at work those elderly persons who can still work, who want to work and who have acquired experience, instead of condemning them to idleness, and letting them die slowly.
I should also like to plead the case not only of those old people whose income is insufficient and who are left to die slowly from boredom or idleness to which they are condemned, but also for another group of needy people who, in my opinion, are not treated yet as they should be, who suffer still from a mentality worthy of the middle ages and who cannot ask for help. I mean those who suffer from mental illness. There was a time when people were ashamed to talk about them. Today, people are a little more broadminded but I think that in that field also it will be necessary to increase the help given to those who suffer from mental illness.
I should like to pay a special tribute to the Canadian Mental Health Association, a nonprofit organization which tries to improve the well-being of all those suffering from any kind of mental illness.
For instance, Mr. Chairman, I was surprised to read in their literature passages like the following, which I will quote in English so as not to distort their thinking.
According to the Canadian Mental Health Association:

Mental illness hits more Canadians annually than all other diseases combined including such disablers as cancer, heart disease and tuberculosis.

Secondly:

The cost of mental illness to the Canadian economy reaches $600 million, enough money to provide a free university education for 50,000 young Canadians.
The federal government spends only 5 cents per person per year on research into mental illness, although the causes of mental illness are known in only a few instances.

That is an astonishing revelation Mr. Chairman: 5 cents per person per year.

Upwards of one third of the population has suffered with at least some temporary disability because of mental or emotional illness.
If no further progress is made, at least one of every ten babies born in our centennial year will spend some part of its life in a mental hospital.
There are over 100,000 emotionally disturbed children in Canada.


We have proper facilities for treating less than 400 of these children.
Nearly half the hospital beds in Canada are occupied by the mentally or emotionally ill.
Canada is woefully short of psychiatrists, psychologists, occupational therapists, social workers, nurses, aides, all so necesary to care for and treat our mentally ill.
[DOT] (1:50 p.m.)

In my home town, Mr. Chairman, people say a very cruel thing: that apparently only the very ill are confined; there are many others who are not confined and who could, if they were looked after, become an asset to society instead of being a burden or a liability. Mr. Chairman, after referring to the mentally ill whose condition could be greatly improved, I should like to deal briefly with the handicapped, the disabled who very often are unable to leave their homes and lack the money required to buy all their medicine, who live and wallow in a perpetual boredom which lessens the talents they may have. Even though they are physically handicapped, many of them are sound of mind, and I feel that more attention should be paid to those disabled in order to help them lead a more useful personal life.
I would like to give as an example a case in my own city that was handled with some success. A group of disabled persons established an association whose members are given all kinds of small jobs and make repairs in shops. The group was given a bus which is used to bring the disabled to popular events. Those people thus feel less miserable about their disability.
Mr. Chairman, to go back a little to what I was saying a while ago, I should like to mention one case which I find cruel. It happened back home, a few weeks ago. In a certain family, there is a young girl of some 17, 18 or 19 years of age, I do not remember exactly, who in addition to being mentally ill is also physically ill, and both most seriously. She is paralyzed, lives in a wheel-chair and has grown, with the years, extremely difficult to get along with. Indeed, she sorely tries the family to the point where the education of the younger ones suffers due to the fact that the parents have grown ill. The situation has become unbearable. The family therefore applied to have the girl placed in a suitable institution. Months go by; no place is available. Finally, they turn to the authorities. They go to see the mayor, the member of parliament, the vicar and everyone pleads
July 5, 1967

the case of the patient. Still, no place can be found. They have to wait.
One day, a member of the family justifiably got into a wrath and called the chief of police and told him: I have a hunting-gun here, and if you do not come and get the sick girl and have her admitted this very day in an adequate institution, well, I will kill her. The chief of police went to get her and placed her in an institution. She was admitted; there was room then.
Well, Mr. Chairman, if such drastic action is necessary to place mentally ill people in institutions, there is something wrong with society. If it is true that there is no room, let us build institutions lest entire families should suffer such a martyrdom. After all, we must consider that there are younger children who suffer from their being in contact with those mentally ill people.
Mr. Chairman, I will summarize my plea with the following words. I should not like my words to be interpreted as a blame against this government or its predecessor. However, I should like to point out that we are approaching a critical point where the social issue will be increasingly urgent and that we will have to revise all those measures brought in throughout the years and which, very soon, will not meet the needs of our society which has the right to enjoy a minimum of comfort in this rich country of ours.
Perhaps it would be appropriate to say something about the two thirds of humanity that are starving, but it would be beyond the subject we are allowed to deal with here, under those estimates. Let me just say it is inadmissible that so many Canadians should go without the basic minimum. We must absolutely provide for that. In that connection, I am one of those who approve the persistent requests of our friends from the New Democratic Party. I should like to congratulate in particular our colleague, the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway (Mrs. Maclnnis), for her appeal of a while ago.
I should like to point out also that kind of missionary zeal shown since many years, in spite of difficulties of all kinds, by a Quebec woman, Mrs. Therese Casgrain, in order to relieve those Canadians who are suffering in this affluent country.


Mr. Lalulippe:: Mr. Chairman, I shall not
take long, since it is already getting late. I would have many things to say, but I will
Supply-Health and Welfare make only a few remarks. I would have a table to record in Hansard so as to show that we have a substantial production and that we can reasonably finance social welfare by means of that production, and especially the surplus and capitalization.
Well, I will simply say a few words so as to define the individual, the human being. As we are confronted with civilizations which ignore, which despise man, no task is more urgent and more imperative than to come to the defence of man, to the defence of the human being.
To defend man in order to save him, to establish a social order where man will be recognized and respected, that is the basic problem facing mankind today. From the realistic point of view, man is simply a complete individual and a member of the human community. He is an entity made up of a body, a soul, an intelligence, a will, a character, a conscience, a number of needs and aspirations, a world of feelings and ideas.
Let one of those numerous and often contradictory aspects be ignored, let one be given excessive importance over the others, and man suffers, his stability and that of the whole social structure are endangered. The individual must be taken as a harmonious and complex whole.
As a member of the human community, outside which he cannot be conceived, man cannot be separated from his natural environment: family, profession, association, humanism; man can only live in a fertile soil. This reed must have the roots of an oak. Without his roots, man weakens and dies. He becomes a thing, an animal drifting through life, just like a ship is tossed about by a storm. Alone, man is just a wreck drifting away. The diversified infinity of elements which constitute man causes each human being to be an autonomous and unique reality, different from all others.
All men have a unique personality, a unique history, a unique purpose; each man, each woman bears deep inside a truth, a vocation. The characteristic of man, and his specific quality, lies in his own truth, his vocation which is not to be found in any other man, or in any other woman, but belongs to this unique being living in a unique world.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I would have many other things to add, but I will mention the table I want to put on record so as to explain

July 5. 1967
Business of the House
it in a tew words, the revision of the Bank Act which was made in 1944 and in 1967 provides us with very significant stages in the evolution of our Canadian economy, under the leadership of businessmen and politicians.
After 23 years, it is possible to determine those areas that have gone forward, backward or remained stationary. This will enable us to decide precisely where it is necessary to change the trends of our national economy in order to reach our goal; that is the welfare of every human being in our Canadian population, again from the economic viewpoint.
The following table will bring forward its own conclusions. Therefore, I shall place this table on the record in order to avoid taking more time. These figures show the total production in 1944 and in 1967. And the figures from 1944 to 1967 have multiplied five times, for example, the 1944 production was $11,-
400,000,000 and that of 1967 was $62 billion. Five and a half times more in 1967 than in 1944.
Consumption and expenditures were $10,-
120,000,000 in 1944, as compared to $40 billion in 1967, that is four times more.
Capitalization and profits amounted, in 1944, to $1,280,000,000 and, in 1967, to $22 billion, or 17 times more.
I want this table to appear in Hansard, because it would take too long to quote everything.


Maurice Rinfret: It being two o'clock it is my duty to rise, report progress and request leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house.
Progress reported.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we will begin with the estimates of the Department of National Defence, and we would also like to take the third reading of the Interpretation Act.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I suggest we do it now.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: That would be fine.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Provided another minister can be found. While the one minister we have is looking for another one, I wonder if there are not a couple of motions with which we could deal now.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.

[DOT] (2:00 p.m.)

Assistants for members-subject matter OF MOTION referred to special COMMITTEE


Mr. Jim McNulty (Lincoln):: By leave of the house I move:
That notice of motion reading as follows:
"That, In the opinion of this house, in view of the growing burden of responsibilities of members of parliament, the government should give consideration to the provision of experts and specialized personnel to assist members in the discharge of their duties similar to the assistance that has been made available to members of Congress and Senate in the United States.'' Standing in the name of the hon. member for Moose Mountain (Mr. Southam) as notice numbered 39 on today's order paper, be deemed to have been withdrawn and that the special committee on procedure of the house be empowered to consider and report upon the provisions thereof.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: the third reading of Bill No. S-6, to revise and consolidate the Interpretation Act and amendments thereto, and to effect certain consequential amendments to the Canada Evidence Act and the Bills of Exchange Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


James Carroll Patrick McNulty: I understand, Mr. Speaker, there is agreement amongst all parties that private members hours be suspended on Thursday, July 6 and Friday, July 7.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Tardif):: Does the house agree to suspend private members hours on Thursday and Friday of this week?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I thank hon. members for their co-operation, and wish to say that we will call the defence department estimates tomorrow. If those are completed, we will continue with the estimates of national
July 5, 1967

Business of the House
health and welfare, and transport, on the Friday, as was agreed some days ago, we understanding that, in accordance with an shall begin with item 1 of the Department of order of the house, these departments will be Trade and Commerce to permit a discussion passed by 9.30 and we will have the supply of the Kennedy round.
bills covering ten departments and interim It being five minutes after two o'clock, the supply by that time tomorrow evening. On house adjourned, pursuant to special order.

Thursday, July 6, 1967