1967-06-30

[Stage Direction]
Second report of standing committee on industry, research and energy development-Mr. Hopkins.


Mr. Speaker:: Before calling orders of the day may I take this opportunity to advise hon. members that I have this morning received from the Speaker of the Lok Sabha of India a letter conveying the warmest congratulations of that body on the occasion of our centennial year. I intend to advise the Speaker of the Lok Sabha of the gratitude of members of the House of Commons to the members of the Indian legislature for their courteous action on this occasion.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.



REQUEST THAT PROCEEDINGS BE TELEVISED

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I would now ask the Prime Minister whether consideration has been given by the government to the question of having the house welcome television cameras for the purpose of assuring that across this country during centennial year the boys and girls may have some idea of the operation of parliament. We on this side of the house give this our full support, and I am sure all the Prime Minister has to do is act and action will be taken.


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, the other day I received a copy of a memorandum from an officer of the C.B.C. outlining in some detail how a special program of this kind on the operations of parliament could be undertaken. I believe it was addressed to Your Honour as Speaker, and was referred to me.
I was much impressed by the proposal in the way it was put forward, and I have been discussing it with our own house leader. But it seems to me that to have a program of this kind undertaken next week, which would have to be on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday or Friday, at a time when the house is not likely to be as crowded as is normal would not be the best occasion; especially in view of the plans that were put forward which could and I believe will be very impressive when they are carried into effect. I would think, Mr. Speaker, it would be better to have this done when we resume next September, which I hope would probably be the month.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, does the Prime Minister not think the presence of the television cameras might account for a larger attendance here? Members would not dare stay away.



CONSIDERATION BY HOUSE COMMITTEE OF PROPOSED TARIFF CHANGES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. In view of the far reaching effects which the Kennedy round of negotiations will have upon the economic life of Canada, is it the minister's intention to send the proposed tariff changes to the standing committee on finance, trade and economic affairs before final approval is sought from parliament?


Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, that would be a matter for the Minister of Finance, and I think he intends to deal with these tariff items by way of budget and consideration in the house. The standing committee has just completed its study of the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce, and I do not think these changes need be referred back to it from my department. If they need to be referred to it from the Department of Finance, that is another consideration.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question of the Prime Minister. In view of the fact, as I understand from members of that committee, that an
2144	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry assurance was given to it that these Kennedy round negotiation changes would be submitted to the committee in order that the general public might have an opportunity to make representations, would the Prime Minister take whatever steps are necessary to see that the committee is given an opportunity to examine these proposals?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I will discuss the matter with my colleague, Mr. Speaker.


John George Diefenbaker: As a further supplementary question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, Mr. Speaker, is the minister planning a series of meetings with the leaders of business and industry that will be affected by the wide ranging tariff cuts on imported materials, considering in particular the drastic effects on Canadian manufacturing and industry in textiles, plastics, chemicals, fine papers and other major lines which will be hard hit by the reduction of tariffs especially against the United States?


Robert Henry Winters: Yes, Mr. Speaker, we do propose to tell the business community of the great opportunities that arise from these tariff cuts.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Robert Henry Winters: I should remind the hon. gentleman that in the particular areas he mentioned the concessions granted by Canada were relatively modest.


John George Diefenbaker: Whether relatively modest or not, is there going to be consultation with business-


Robert Henry Winters: I said yes, Mr. Speaker.


John George Diefenbaker: -and is the minister in a position to say what effect these reductions will have in making Canada even more subject to American control?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. B. Patterson (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Veterans Affairs I should like to direct a question to the acting minister. Since the minister previously stated that he expected
[Mr. Douglas.)
DEBATES	June 30, 1967
the Woods report to be tabled by the end of June, has he any further information for the house or for the veterans on this matter at this time?


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, I shall be glad to take this question as notice and have a reply for my hon. friend early in the week.



TELEVISION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. W. Priftie (Burnaby-Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, my question which is for the Secretary of State is in two parts. It concerns the television channel at Barrie. In spite of the quite proper reluctance on the part of the government to interfere, I wonder whether the minister would not consider that perhaps this matter should be held in abeyance until the question of educational television is settled. Second, has the minister received representations from the metropolitan educational television association in Toronto on this matter?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secrelary of Stale):: Mr. Speaker, the procedure followed by the B.B.G. now is that there is an application to the Minister of Transport which must bear his signature and subsequently must bear my signature before it goes to the cabinet for approval or any other action. With regard to the second part of the question the answer is yes; I received such representations this morning.


Hon. Michael Starr (Onlario):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Secretary of State. In view of the complaints to the effect that others who intended to forward or who had forwarded their applications were not given consideration in connection with the outlet in Toronto, can the minister say whether the government will give consideration to that aspect; or are they just prepared to go ahead and allow this pay-off to the trio from Barrie to be consummated?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell you what kind of consideration my colleagues would give to it but as a resident of southern Ontario you may be sure I will be giving it plenty of consideration.
June 30, 1967	COMMONS DEBATES



HIGHWAY SAFETY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Heward Graffley (Brome-Missisquoi):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that statistics published this week demonstrate that in 1966 we set a record in Canada for highway deaths and injuries, and in view of the fact that the same statistics show that in the first half of 1967 we are establishing an all time new record, I would like to ask the Minister of Industry whether the government now is seriously considering the implementation in the near future of the recommendations in this regard of the committee on justice and legal affairs.


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):: Mr. Speaker, we have been holding discussions on this matter with the provinces, and it would be my hope that in the not too distant future positive action will be able to be announced.


Mr. Barry Mather (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, as a supplementary question I should like to ask the minister whether progress has been made in respect of the setting up of the federal board recommended by the committee on justice and legal affairs, which would concern itself with all matters of motor vehicle safety.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I think my answer to the previous question covers that point.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday I asked a question about complaints of a lack of box cars on C.N.R. lines to take grain from congested country elevators. Can the Minister of Trade and Commerce say whether this problem has been drawn to the attention of the Canadian Wheat Board?


Robert Henry Winters: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to advise the hon. member that last night seven box cars arrived at Nokomis on the C.N.R. line. The railways are aware of the situation at this delivery point, and have assured the Canadian Wheat Board that there will be an increased number of box cars arriving at Nokomis in the next few weeks.
Inquiries of the Ministry EXTERNAL AFFAIRS



PROPOSED SALE OF ARMS BY RUSSIA TO ARAB COUNTRIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. L. R. Sherman (Winnipeg South):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Does the minister have any knowledge of plans on the part of the Soviet union to sell arms and other military material to the Arab bloc countries?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I have some information on that subject.


Louis Ralph (Bud) Sherman: May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does the minister intend to make it plain that this country would view with considerable alarm any sales or negotiations in this respect, and would regard such as a direct contravention of the spirit of the United Nations cease fire and the peace efforts which are being made in that area of the world?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, when speaking on behalf of the Canadian government at the United Nations general assembly I urged that there be a halt in the sale of arms by all countries to nations in the Middle East. I was able to point out at the same time that it was not the policy of Canada to sell arms to any country in that area.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Ralph Cowan (York-Humber):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question I should like to address to the Solicitor General. In view of the manner in which the cabinet exercises clemency and extends mercy to convicted murderers, I should like to ask whether the cabinet at this time during centennial year would graciously grant amnesty to the men of the Tilco plant at Peterborough who were convicted of illegal picketing in the wake of a mass demonstration.


Hon. L. T. Pennell (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of any application that has been made for pardons on behalf of these men. If an application is made it will receive the usual careful consideration.
2146	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry INDUSTRY



EFFECT OF TARIFF REDUCTION ON REPLACEMENT AUTOMOBILE PARTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington South):: Mr. Speaker, my Question is for the Minister of Industry. In view of the recent trade agreement under which Canada agreed to lower the duty on replacement car parts from 25 per cent to 15 per cent, can the minister say whether this is a first step in the movement toward free trade in replacement car parts?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I think the house is aware that during the course of the fall the agreement respecting trade in automobiles and automotive parts will be reviewed. During the course of that review there is no question but that the situation in respect of replacement parts will be examined. I should not like at this time to attempt to anticipate what might be the outcome of this review.


Alfred Dryden Hales: I have a supplementary and related question. In view of the fact that Canada gives the car manufacturing companies of Canada a concession of $50 million per year, and in view of the statement the minister has often made, when can Canadian car buyers expect to be able to buy Canadian made cars at a reduced price?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: As I informed the hon. member the other day when this question was raised in the committee, the so-called gift of $50 million to automobile manufacturers was in fact passed on to the consumers in the first year in the form of reduced prices.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.



BRITISH COLUMBIA-INFORMATION RESPECTING DEPARTMENTAL ACTIVITIES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Industry whether he is now in a position to answer the question I addressed to him recently.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Perhaps the hon. member would indicate what the question is because I am suspicious it might be one which was ruled out of order.
{Mr. Pennell.]
DEBATES	June 30, 1967



SHIPPING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to put a question to the Minister of Transport.
Can the minister tell the house whether the locks on the St. Lawrence Seaway, between Montreal and Kingston, will be closed during the next few days for commercial shipping or pleasure boating? I mention the next few days, in reference to the trip of the royal yacht Britannia through the locks of the St. Lawrence Seaway.


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, the details in respect of the passage of the Britannia through the seaway are not at my fingertips, but I will make inquiries and let the hon. gentleman know.


Michael Starr: Why let him know? What has he got in mind?
ITranslation]


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Solicitor General of Canada as minister responsible for the R.C.M.P.
Could the Solicitor General tell us whether instructions have been given to the naval units of the R.C.M.P. first, to prevent pleasure craft from coming close to the royal yacht Britannia while it is berthed at the Marc Drouin dock in Montreal and, secondly after it is made fast in the St. Lambert locks?
I should like to ask the Solicitor General of Canada if instructions on this score have been given the R.C.M.P.?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I do not think the hon. member may ask whether instructions have been given to the R.C.M.P.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Speaker, could I reframe my question so that it may be in order?
Will freedom of movement be given pleasure craft in the Montreal harbour and surrounding areas of Montreal harbour during the forthcoming week end?
June 30. 1967	COMMONS



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE REQUEST FOR TABLING OF INVITATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, is the Prime Minister now in a position to table the letters of invitation sent to the various provinces in respect of the conference on July 5, and the replies?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, after my right hon. friend asked about this the other day I made inquiries and found that all the replies have not been received. I think there are one or two more to come, and I hope they will be received over the week end.



ROYAL VISIT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. Have the commissioners of the Yukon Territory and the Northwest Territories been invited to meet Her Majesty on the yacht Britannia, as well as the provincial premiers?


Lester Bowles Pearson: The invitations to meet Her Majesty on the yacht are given by Her Majesty. I think arrangements have been made for the commissioners to be here during the visit, but I will look into the details.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will these commissioners be sworn into the Privy Council as befits their increased stature and public responsibilities?


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker.



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Labour. With regard to the arbitration board which was set up to deal with the recent railway dispute, I would ask the minister whether he has any indication of how soon the board is likely to report?
DEBATES	2147
Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, I did make some inquiries two days ago, and my information is that the report will probably be completed in or about the second week of July. No definite date is fixed for transmittal to me but I believe it will be some time between the 7th and the 15th.



INQUIRY AS TO REPORT RESPECTING LONGSHOREMEN

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Saint John-Alberl):: Mr. Speaker, further to the question about the Picard report concerning the longshoremen, may I ask whether the minister can give an assurance that to his knowledge none of the contents of this report have yet been made public?


John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: As far as I know, Mr. Speaker, they have not been made public, though I understand that the technical adviser to the commission made certain representations, but they were made in public as part of the hearing.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. Has the government made any decision in respect of the reduction of the land requirement for the building of veterans' homes under the V.L.A.?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I will have to look into that matter, Mr. Speaker.


Malcolm MacInnis: I have a further question, Mr. Speaker. This is the same answer I received two months ago. I would draw the Prime Minister's attention to the fact that when I followed the matter up with the Minister of Veterans Affairs and indicated that the Department of Veterans Affairs were considering such a reduction, the minister denied it. I have in my possession a letter to which I would draw the attention of the Prime Minister-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Is the hon. member rising on a point of order or a question of privilege? This is not a proper question.
2148	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry


Malcolm MacInnis: I am
rising on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The same answer was provided to me two months ago when this question was raised. It was referred at that time to the Minister of Veterans Affairs. When the question was followed up with the Minister of Veterans Affairs he denied that the department was considering such a move. My question was raised at the time because of the difficult housing shortage, especially in respect of our veterans, and I wondered whether the matter could be cleared up. At that time the minister denied that the department would consider such a reduction in land requirements. I have in my possession a letter signed by Mr. R. W. Pawley, director general of the Department of Veterans Affairs, Veterans Land Act, which directly contradicts the answer given in the house by the Minister of Veterans Affairs.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North
Centre): Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question either to the Prime Minister or to the President of the Treasury Board. Will the government over the week end give notice of the legislation to increase the pensions of retired civil servants so we can deal with this matter next week?
Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of National Revenue and President of the Treasury Board):: I do not think this would be possible, Mr. Speaker. The matter is still under active consideration by the government.


Mr. Knowles:: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the government make it clear that this matter will be dealt with before we break for a summer recess?



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. R. A. Webb (Hastings-Frontenac):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the Solicitor General and ask whether he could make arrangements to have the hon. member for Lapointe (Mr. Gregoire) put in protective custody until after the Queen's visit.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.

DEBATES	June 30. 1967



FISHERIES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. M. Forrestall (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries. I wonder whether the minister could advise us if the government can now give the house information in respect of the level of federal-provincial assistance that will be made available to Nova Scotia lobster fishermen in order to overcome the storm damage of earlier this year.


Hon.   H.-J. Robichaud@Minister of Fisheries: Mr. Speaker, I have nothing to add to what I have already said in the house on this question. The matter is under consideration with the government of Nova Scotia.



NORTHERN AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon, Arihur Laing (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):	Mr. Speaker, last Wednesday the right hon. Leader of the Opposition asked me about a wire he had received from the port of Churchill chamber of commerce in respect of our Eskimo school there.
I am sorry I could not answer the right hon. gentleman's question on Wednesday, it would appear the copy of the telegram to the right hon. gentleman had out-raced the original. I suggest that the right hon. gentleman refer to the answer I gave to a question put to me by the hon. member for Churchill on February 24, 1965 as reported at page 11695 of Hansard. At that time I indicated that the Eskimo school would be remaining in Churchill for from three to five years, and that situation has not changed. In the meantime we are happy to be able to use the facilities at Churchill.
John George Diefenbaker: I have a supplementary
question, Mr. Speaker. Is the minister prepared to go a little further and say the three to five years will be extended? It would be most unjust to Churchill if this school were removed.
June 30, 1967



COMMONS DEBATES UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John Robert (Jack) Nicholson: Mr. Speaker, some two weeks ago, in answer to a question put by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition, I stated that to my knowledge 14 year olds did not have to register under the Unemployment Insurance Act regulations. Upon going into the matter further I find that under regulation 18 every employer who employs a person in insurable employment, whether he be 14, 15 or older, must register him. To that extent, I was wrong in my previous reply, and I want to correct it.



POSSIBLE RECOURSE FOR INDUSTRIES AFFECTED BY GENEVA AGREEMENT

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. H. W. Danforih (Kent (Onl.)):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. If it is found that under the trade agreement just signed at Geneva undue hardship is worked on a particular industry, will it be possible for negotiations to be held directly between Canada and the principal country involved or must a universal agreement be sought with all the signatories of the agreement?


Robert Henry Winters: First of all we would want to talk to the company concerned; then recourse would have to be sought through the machinery of GATT if there were grounds for it.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert William Prittie: have a question for the Minister of Transport. Last Monday I asked him about an application from Pacific Western Airlines to the Air Transport Board to provide an additional service from Ottawa to western Canada. Has the minister any further information with regard to the deliberations of the board concerning that matter?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I regret I was not able to make inquiries in my office this morning, because I was detained at a meeting. However, I had asked the board to let me know as soon as anything definite was decided. I had heard nothing up
Supply-Trade and Commerce to last night. I know it is an urgent matter, but it is under active consideration and action may have been taken by now.

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


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Chairman, I know how anxious we all are to deal with the various matters which must be considered before the adjournment. However, according to my understanding the estimates of the Department of Public Works were supposed to come up for discussion today. It was also mentioned by the minister in the course of his remarks that an opportunity would be given us today to deal with the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce.
No member of the house, no matter how studious he is, would be in a position to deal today with the Kennedy round tariff matters which must be discussed before we adjourn. I have read the statements that were delivered and I have tried to make some analysis of them, but it was quite impossible to do this in the short time we had. I suggest the minister should put this over until next week, thereby enabling a study to be made of the subject and an intelligent discussion to take place.
If we take up this matter today we will be able to give it only cursory, uncertain and uninformed consideration. This is a matter of tremendous consequence to Canada, and I suggest that in the spirit of co-operation that has prevailed the minister should agree to this proposal because otherwise these issues, the importance of which to the economy of Canada cannot be overestimated, will merely be touched upon.


Robert Henry Winters: I think that is a reasonable approach to the problem. Under normal circumstances the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce would have been called yesterday but I thought this might have been unfair to hon. members because it would preclude them from asking questions in connection with the Kennedy round tariff negotiations. So I suggested the estimates be held over until today to give hon. members the opportunity to examine the documentations overnight.
I realize this has not given sufficient time so I suggest, to accommodate the right hon. Leader of the Opposition and hon. members, that we proceed with the other items in the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce. I am quite sure the Minister of
2150	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce Finance and I could arrange to be here at a convenient time next week. I refer to the Minister of Finance because the details of the tariff structure are matters more appropriate for the Minister of Finance than for the Minister of Trade and Commerce.


John George Diefenbaker: I think that is a very proper decision. Item 1 could be allowed to stand and could be dealt with next week. I thank the minister for that suggestion.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, on the point raised by the Leader of the Opposition may I say that I think we all agree it makes common sense for us to delay consideration of the Kennedy round until we have had time to study this matter. However, I would like to ask that some consultation take place on matters to be taken up next week. We will only have a short time before we conclude consideration of the estimates on Thursday night. I believe arrangements should be made as to what departments will be under discussion next week. I am not asking that we negotiate in public as to what we should do, but my point is that if we spend a day next week on consideration of the trade and commerce estimates some other matter will suffer. I know what matter I do not want to suffer. Can we have some consultations on this during the day?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, in reply to the comments made by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition and the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre let me say that we have already had consultations relating to the program for Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, and it would be possible on Friday of next week to call, for example, the Department of Finance. If consideration of the trade and commerce department is completed today this would provide an opportunity to deal with the specific problem of the Kennedy round negotiations. So if the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce were passed today there would be no prejudice to a further consideration of the Kennedy round of negotiations late next week, because we could still call the Department of Finance next Friday if it were desirable.
[DOT] (11:40 a.m.)


John George Diefenbaker: I should like to ask the
house leader if there would be any objection to leaving item No. 1 open so there would be no question of the limitation of discussion. I thought we had come to that agreement here, and I hope it will be confirmed, because it is quite satisfactory to have the discussion next

DEBATES	June 30, 1967
Friday. I should like to have item 1 left open, and I can see no objection to that.


Mr. Sharp:: I wonder if I might ask whether the committee would consider whether I, as Minister of Finance, might make a statement supplementary to that made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce yesterday when presenting to the house the document and results of the Kennedy round. I have no desire to take the time of the house, but I think it might expedite consideration of these estimates when we come back to this item if I were to make a statement on behalf of the ministry of finance as to the plans we have for the implementation of these results. Then when the debate occurs it could take place in the light of my comments.


John George Diefenbaker: I am sure all of us would like to hear from the Minister of Finance. I think, however, today is not the day. We could arrange for the matter to come up next Friday, and before that date the minister will have the fullest opportunity to make his statement. We are getting this information piecemeal. Last night we got one part, then we are to get another part today. I know that serials are interesting, but possibly the minister could wait until some time next week to give us his viewpoint.


Robert Henry Winters: Perhaps I might proceed, then, with item 1 of the Department of Trade and Commerce and make whatever brief remarks I have, and then it would be open to any hon. member, including the Minister of Finance, to make any comments he wished. Then I suggest we stand the item and go on and pass the other items of the department, in the hope of returning to item 1 next Friday or to the estimates of the Minister of Finance. Is that agreeable to hon. members?


Mr. Churchill:: There is just one matter I should like to mention in connection with trade and commerce. We are under no obligation, according to the agreement we reached last week, to pass this department in this portion of the session. It is not one of the specified departments we have left with which we agreed to deal. They were transport, national defence, health and welfare, Indian affairs and northern affairs. These departments will be guillotined next Thursday night if we do not pass them in the interval. However, there has been no agreement to complete trade and commerce.


John George Diefenbaker: That being so, Mr. Chairman, I do not believe there should be
June 30, 1967	COMMONS
any agreement to the course suggested by the minister. This course was well planned, since it would enable the Minister of Finance to make a statement today and have the record plastered up. In view of the fact we are permitting the minister to go ahead with something to which there was no agreement, I feel there should be no such element entering into it as the Minister of Finance proceeding to deal with the Kennedy round. We are consenting to the minister going ahead today, provided item 1 is held over. The minister can make his statement, and then next week the Minister of Finance will make the statement he has in mind.


Mr. Scoit (Danforlh):: May I ask a question about this procedure. What has happened to the undertaking given by the minister to the committee that this entire matter would be brought back to the committee for the hearing of witnesses and a thorough investigation? Why is that not going to happen?


Robert Henry Winters: I would have to refresh my memory as to the nature of the undertaking. Frankly, I do not recall giving it in those terms.


Michael Starr: I feel, Mr. Chairman, that we should stick to the agreement at which the house leaders arrived for the culmination of this part of the session. We should concentrate our efforts on those departments we have agreed to pass and for which an appropriation bill could be introduced at the end of this part of the session. I do not see that anything can be gained by giving consideration to the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce without a full discussion of the Kennedy round results. May I suggest that we proceed with the Department of Public Works for the balance of the day, then the Department of Trade and Commerce can be brought up next week and the Minister of Finance can make his statement on the Kennedy round. I feel this discussion is taking up time that could be devoted to the consideration of the Department of Public Works.


Robert Henry Winters: Well, Mr. Chairman, I thought we had reached an agreement on this yesterday.


John George Diefenbaker: No; then the Minister of Finance came in. It could be done simply in this way; leave item No. 1 open and go ahead with the rest of the items in the Department of Trade and Commerce. There will be no objection to that course.
DEBATES	2151
Supply-Trade and Commerce


Robert Henry Winters: Perhaps we should do that. The officials are here, so I suggest we go ahead with the Department of Trade and Commerce leaving item 1 aside.


The Chairman:: Is it agreed now that the committee of supply will proceed with the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce and that vote No. 1 shall stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Herman Maxwell Batten: We shall proceed with vote No. 5, the details of which will be found on page 495 of the blue book.
DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND COMMERCE Trade Commissioner Service-
5. Administration, operation and maintenance. $10,832,100.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I am sure the minister has material in front of him on the basis of which he can make a statement on this $10 million item. I think we should have that statement.


Robert Henry Winters: Perhaps I should make my general statement here, then, because much of it revolves around the trade commissioner service which recently spent a very profitable seven weeks touring Canada in the interests of trade and the general economic health of the country. I will not deal with the Kennedy round at this time.
On June 8 I was privileged to meet the standing committee on finance, trade and economic affairs under the chairmanship of the hon. member for Essex West. The estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce were reviewed very thoroughly at that time. I dealt with the current and projected plans of the department. The proceedings of that meeting have been printed and published, so I do not intend to burden hon. members with a repetition of the department's achievements and intentions as of that day. However, we have been moving forward, and it might be useful if I were to comment briefly upon certain activities which I believe might be of interest to the committee.
Following an almost unprecedented expansion in exports in 1966, sales abroad have continued to advance strongly in the current year. To emphasize the vital importance to the Canadian economy of sustaining strong export growth, a target of $11.25 billion was set last fall as an export objective for Canada's centennial year. Although considered at the time to be a particularly stiff challenge, this target has received the full endorsation and support of the export community.
2152	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce
Developments so far suggest that these high aspirations are in fact well on the way to realization. Notwithstanding the prevalence of less pressing demand conditions this year in some of our principal export markets, particularly the United States and the European community, figures for the first five months of the year show exports up 16.5 per cent or $650 million compared with the same period of 1966. This means that about two thirds of the projected increase for the year has already been achieved.
[DOT] (11:50 a.m.)
The figures for the month of May show total exports of $1,066.7 million, as against $932.9 million for May, 1966, an increase of 14.3 per cent. This includes substantial increases in exports to the United Kingdom, other commonwealth countries and the United States. The figure for the United States, for example, for May is up by 18.2 per cent. For the months of January through May the total amount of our exports is $4,593.3 million as against $3,943.1 million for the period of January through May, 1966, a total full increase of 16.5 per cent.
Even allowing for a diminution in the strength of some of the forces contributing to this early-year expansion, there is good likelihood that the $11.25 billion target will be realized and possibly exceeded. This will represent a creditable showing indeed in a year characterized by significantly slower growth in world trade as a whole.
I have indicated, without going into the Kennedy round negotiations, what steps we plan to make the results available to the business community in Canada. The statistics have been circulated to trade associations and have been sent out directly from my office to some 153 companies. The export advisory board has been invited to Ottawa; they will arrive here early next week. We shall brief them and ask them to carry the message back to their communities. In addition, we plan a series of regional or sectional seminars in various parts of Canada-some in co-operation with provincial authorities concerned with trade, some in collaboration with sectors of our trading community direct-to examine the Kennedy round results and to expedite and recommend ways to exploit specific new exports prospects. I have already communicated, in fact, with the provincial ministers. These seminars will commence this autumn when our businessmen have had time to consider the relevance of the agreements to their individual operations.
{Mr. Winters.]
DEBATES	June 30. 1967
Over and beyond the foregoing, we in the department have commenced our own detailed study of the Kennedy round agreements to ensure that every program and activity in our trade promotion operations is tuned to maximize the realization of the new export prospects. I assure hon. members that our promotional efforts will reflect this as our prime concern. I have every expectation that Canadian businessmen will demonstrate equal resolve and effort. As recommended by the export advisory council, we intend to encourage the formation of export committees within trade associations and to use these channels and that of seminars, regionally and within annual conferences of trade and industry associations, to support our export drive.
As to operation export, which is the item to which the hon. member just referred, final data reveal that 2,144 firms actually held interviews with our trade commissioners during their seven week, highly successful, cross-Canada tour. This figure is a new record for operations of this type. This preliminary review indicates that half these firms are new to the export field or inexperienced in exporting.
The department is analysing all the data of operation export 1967. We feel sure the information derived will be useful in furthering our trade promotional activities and programs. For example, 10 per cent of the participating firms were subsidiaries of foreign parents. That indicates an increasing willingness on the part of foreign subsidiaries operating in Canada to enter the export field. Again, we will be able to identify firms by province and city of residence and degree of export experience, as a step in determining whether the concentrations of such firms warrant, say, a group approach to guidance in the techniques and practices of export. The trade commissioners who took part in the operation have now returned to their posts and are following up on the more than 16,000 interviews they held. The first progress reports on the results will be submitted before the year end.
As hon. members know, exports are only one side of the trade picture; it is a side that helps to stimulate our domestic economy, provide jobs and also helps to bring about a high level of economic performance. Imports, Mr. Chairman, are the other side and as a nation we import almost as much as we export. The importing of goods and services, and importing as an industry, all contribute to our high standard of living. Moreover, it is fair to say that we must import in order to export. Trade
June 30, 1967

is a two-way street and will be more so when the concessions of the Kennedy round are fully implemented. Canadians, I think, too often look abroad for sources of supply without first finding out if the goods and services are available in Canada. As a result, over the past five years while our exports grew to three quarters as much again as in 1961, our imports have grown almost as much.
Last year we had a substantial favourable trade balance. Unfortunately that was not quite as much as was reflected by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics year end figures. I want to inform hon. members of the discrepancy and the reason for it. It was found, in the course of confirming the earlier figures in 1967, that one important port had failed to submit its export figures to the Dominion Bureau of Statistics in time to have them included in the year end figures. The appropriate officers of the D.B.S. did not detect the discrepancy in time; as a result there was fault on both sides.
This has been reported in the press. It has been intimated that the favourable trade balance might in fact disappear. I can assure hon. members that while the trade balance might be reduced as against the figure reported by D.B.S., it will still be favourable. I can also assure hon. members that adequate steps and precautions are being taken to see that there will not be any recurrence of such a discrepancy.
There are other features of the department, very important ones, that I will not deal with at length at this time. I should refer, I think, to Expo '67 because it has received considerable attention in the world, not to mention the attention of Canadians. It has demonstrated that it is a great credit to Canada.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Robert Henry Winters: It will give us a new sense of national pride and status. I doubt whether Canadians ever again, after 1967, will feel that they are the kind of Canadians they were when they entered 1967. I think we shall adopt a new approach, with higher resolve, increased status and a greater pride, in ourselves and our country.
The attendance figures at Expo are striking in themselves. Yesterday, for example, a total of 267,318 guests attended, for a total to date of 16,535,419, which is considerably above the estimates. However, despite the fact that visitors are coming to Expo far in excess of expectations, the corresponding revenues have not been commensurately great. So far,
Supply-Trade and Commerce the people who have visited Expo have spent rather less per capita within the gates than had been anticipated. It is thought that when the flow of United States visitors arrives during the holiday season the slack will be taken up. It may be of interest to note that the total receipts as of June 22 from admission sales, advance admission sales and other revenues from visitors, including revenues from concessions and the performing arts, were expected to be of the order of $59 million whereas actual receipts totalled about $56 million, somewhat lower.
(12 noon)
The success of Expo will not be judged, however, from the financial returns within the gates. We always anticipated a substantial short-fall of revenues against expenditures within the gates of Expo itself. We as a government-and I know this is true of the government which preceded us-count on the financial success of Expo being reflected in its benefits across Canada and in the receipts which will accrue to the treasury through other channels.
I am sure that in the long run the net beneficial effects to Canada, financial and otherwise, will be substantial. I did want to tell hon. members of the great success of the exhibition as an attraction to visitors and point out at the same time that though revenues are not running quite as high as the number of visitors might indicate, the success of Expo is assured.


Mr. Irvine:: Mr. Chairman, I was interested in the statement the minister made with regard to the $100 million discrepancy. I am sure the explanation he has given will satisfy all hon. members.
I was pleased to hear the hon. gentleman repeat what he said last night with regard to the seminars which are to be held in conjunction with provincial ministers. I should like to ask whether members of parliament will be invited to attend these seminars, regardless of the party they may happen to represent. This is a subject of great interest to members of parliament.
I am sure all members will be pleased with the decision to discuss the items involved in the tariff changes next week rather than today. I believe it would be almost impossible for anyone to become conversant with this intricate subject in the very short time during which the details have been available to hon. members.
2154	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce
The minister was asked today whether he would agree to have this matter referred to the committee on finance, trade and economic affairs. In fact, he was asked in one of the meetings of that committee on June 8, I believe, whether these tariff changes would be studied in the committee. It appears to me that the minister intended this to happen and that the members of the committee were also under that impression. This is what the minister said, according to the report of the committee's proceedings on June 8, page 40:
I would be glad to come together with you on an ad hoc basis, on a study group basis, or any other basis you wish to approach it. I think it would be a wonderful opportunity to help to disseminate information about what is going to be the most important development in the trading world in this generation.
I believe this clearly indicates that it was the intention of the minister that the whole question should be studied further by the committee. If we read further, we find mention of the fact that various firms could be invited to give evidence before the committee.
Dealing with the votes under the heading "General Administration", I believe the picture presented is somewhat misleading, though not intentionally so. The estimates are up by almost $4 million. The cost of running the standards branch is to rise by roughly $150,000. The estimate for Expo is down by $1,921,000, which is understandable because last year we were naturally spending great sums of money on this outstanding event. I should like to take this opportunity to congratulate the minister and his department as well as all those people who were in any way responsible for the conduct of its affairs and the construction and administration of Expo '67. I am sure all hon. members who have visited Expo, as I have done, will agree with me that one's heart just naturally swells with pride over the fact that one is a Canadian, and we have such a great achievement.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Alfred Irvine: I think it would be particularly remiss of me if I did not also take the opportunity to congratulate the former administration, first, for selecting the site and, second, for choosing the first committee. They were the ones who actually got the ball rolling; it was their baby, so to speak. Expo is doing a fine public relations job for our country, and I think every one of us should be proud to have even a small part in this affair.
Farther down the list of items are some which are of particular interest to me. From the entry at the bottom of page 492 we note

DEBATES	June 30, 1967
that in 1966-67 the estimate for carrying costs of temporary wheat reserves and payments in connection with the Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act amounted to $40,388,000 while in this current year it is $33,940,000, a decrease of $6,448,000. If the amount of grain being carried in reserve is less, then the cost of carrying these temporary wheat reserves must, of course, be lower. This distorts the final figures set out against these items in that a decrease is shown whereas in fact no such decrease has been brought about.
9 (12:10 p.m.)
For the next item, the Pacific National Exhibition in Vancouver, last year the government spent $1,200,000 and in the current fiscal year will spend $800,000. In the right hand column the decrease is shown as $400,000. I do not think this is right because the item reads:
Grant to the Pacific National Exhibition, Vancouver. towards the cost of constructing a trade fair and sports building at Exhibition Park, Vancouver. the government of Canada's share not to exceed $2,000,000.
Having paid $1,200,000 in the previous year a balance of $800,000 was left. A decrease in expenditure is shown but actually the $800,000 is the unexpended balance of what had been previously committed for this venture.
At the bottom of the page we find listed, as I said before, a decrease of $4,775,600, and I think this is somewhat unintentionally misleading. The actual cost of administration is up almost $4 million and this at a time when we should be saving, not expanding our expenditures.
According to the details given on page 494 there is an increase of 15 per cent in the administrative staff. We are again back to the old empire building program in government at a time when the accent should be on saving, on cutting the estimates and saving the taxpayers' money. At present people are carrying such a fantastic tax load that they have reached the limit in this field. Now we must go to work on the other end and see where we can secure definite savings. As with all other departments, and in particular with the Department of Trade and Commerce, we shall have to work hard with the goal in mind of increasing departmental productivity.


Mr. Johnston:: Mr. Chairman, I would direct the attention of the committee to the list of trade posts abroad under vote 5. The total amount of the estimate for these posts has been increased somewhat, but I gather increases in rates of pay have had quite a bit to
June 30, 1967	COMMONS
do with it. We seem to have closed two offices and opened four others. I wonder why the office at Bombay was closed leaving only one in New Delhi to cover the great subcontinent of India. I notice there are two offices in Pakistan, at Islamabad and Karachi, and I think it possible there would be sufficient co-operation in that area for one of those offices to deal with matters on the west coast of India. I would be interested to know whether this is the case and whether consideration will be given to transferring one office to handle trade affairs in that vast area. It would also appear that we have no office in the great city of Calcutta.
Throughout the Pacific area our offices are few in number. We have two very close together, at Kuala Lumpur and Singapore. One wonders whether it is necessary to have two so close together, especially since the only other one in the area is at Tokyo. We are sadly unrepresented throughout the area of the Pacific rim. I would mention specifically Seoul, the capital of Korea, Bangkok, the capital of Thailand, and Taipei, the capital of Taiwan.
The Prime Minister made a special trip to British Columbia to assure the Canadian west that the government was keenly interested in Pacific trade, was doing all it could to encourage it and in fact was doing so much that the provinces were told not to bother. Yet when we examine the details of the estimates we are bound to wonder how genuine is the Prime Minister's argument and how sincere is the government in its protestations of doing all it can for Pacific trade. I would be interested to know whether there are plans to open additional trade offices in that part of the world during the coming year. It is an area which is sadly unrepresented either by diplomatic offices or trade offices. We do not have offices in several countries where we should have representation of some kind.
One of the offices which has been closed was at Salisbury and one of the new offices opened was at Nairobi. I gather that is an attempt to make up in that vast area of east Africa for under-representation of Canadian interests. It would be more correct to question on the estimates of the Department of External Affairs some of Canada's trading actions in that area, but at the moment I would be interested to know whether the office at Nairobi will be able to represent us fully in that very large and very diverse area of Africa.
DEBATES	2155
Supply-Trade and Commerce


Mr. Hamilton:: Mr. Chairman, I would take advantage of this opportunity to mention a few things about the trading practices of the government in the hope that my remarks will be constructive and enlightening. I do not intend to deal with the effect of the GATT tariff cuts on Canadian industry at this time, but I do wish to point out to the minister that in my judgment Canada still marches along on a set path, showing no imagination with regard to taking advantage of the opportunities that exist for us as a nation in the field of world trade.
Most of the remarks I am going to make I made in the house three years ago and since then I have waited, relatively in vain, to see some indication that the government was going to take action on my proposals. For the interest of the new Minister of Trade and Commerce I am going to repeat in summary the ideas I put forward on October 8, 1964.
First of all, it is very clear that world trade patterns are expanding primarily among the industrial nations of the world. Over the last four years the efforts in the Kennedy round of negotiations were designed to increase this flow. It is equally obvious that the trade patterns of the newly developing nations are not developing at the rate they should. This poses a challenge to us. We in the industrial nations of the world are now faced with two major choices. One is that we should use our great and growing wealth in a combined operation of giving handouts to the newly developing nations to try to keep them afloat, and the other choice is to push self-help proposals. One of these self-help proposals is epitomized in the phrase "trade, not aid."
[DOT] (12:20 p.m.)
The facts of life are that events since the last war indicate that nothing that has been done in the effort to bring the newly developing nations into the world trade pattern has succeeded. We are growing richer; they are growing poorer. All we are doing at the present time under the GATT concept is simply gathering the rich nations of the world into a club where we are building a high wall of tariffs around ourselves and offering a few crumbs to the poor at the door. This is moving our western world toward the first choice, the choice of handouts. This means that we stir the animosity of the individuals who live in these countries and arouse their national opposition. In the interests of Canada and in the interest of world peace I maintain that some nation in the western world must break through the wall of the rich man's club which
2156	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce we have built around our countries and do more than just hand out crumbs at the door.
What I have done before and what I intend to do now is merely outline in simple points some of the proposals that have been made and then record, as I know it, the progress which has been made in respect of them. The first proposal which I think would be accepted by all people who are knowledgeable in respect of world trading patterns is the wisdom of supporting the idea of international commodity agreements. We have had commodity agreements before and we will have them in the future. The main proposal I am making in respect of commodity agreements is one which I believe is now widely accepted by the parliamentarians in every country of the world. It is that commodity agreements should be broken into two groups, first, those dealing with the products of the newly developing nations and, second, the staple products of the industrial nations. In concerning myself first with the newly developing nations may I say that primarily they have a staple product or two to sell. Yet in our traditional bargaining practices we try to force their prices down to the lowest possible point.
We used to have, for example, a sugar agreement, but when Cuba got in trouble with the United States it collapsed. In the last year we have seen sugar prices go down to their lowest level in 35 years. This is a great advantage to many consumers in such countries as the United States and Canada but actually it is the worst thing in the world for us. We may save a cent or two a pound on our sugar, but when we buy from these newly developing nations and force them to take a low price we force them into lower and lower levels of living which only build up grief for us in the future.
I think we should deliberately send our representatives to UNCTAD this autumn with instructions to state that it is Canadian government policy, supported by all parties, that we as a nation will enter into commodity agreements with the newly developing nations so they will receive an enhanced price for their primary products and so that their producers will be given a much better chance to attain a better living standard. We on our part will voluntarily accept any greater costs which come to us in this regard. I know that such an agreement must be backed up by undertakings that those countries which accept the benefit of voluntarily higher minimum prices under the agreement will look after the question of surpluses, will see that

DEBATES	June 30, 1967
the money gets through to the people who need it, and so on. I think, however, that the nations of the world are ready to move in this direction.
What I am asking the minister to do is this. With the ground carefully cultivated for him in advance and with the parliamentarians of all the countries of the world accepting the principle, will he not lead the nations of the world by seeing that Canada takes this step publicly and openly and asks for the support of all people? I am certain that support will be forthcoming because the vast majority of the people of the United States and Canada and all the free countries of the world are interested in the type of help under which people will be helped to help themselves and under which the producers will get a fair price for their products. In this way there will be material benefit in the end for us. First of all, this must be done with the primary purpose of helping these people.
In the negotiations at GATT our negotiators had to be tough and hard in order to get such terrific reductions as 2 per cent here, a half per cent there and so on. They fought for four years. But there are a billion and a half people in the world who need a little help too. This is a new type of concept which could be promoted by Canada at this stage, and I believe it would do 500 times more good than the little bit of gain we have received from GATT. This is the type of thing I should like to hear the minister boast about. I should like to hear him boast that he had put his country into the forefront by trying to help the newly developing nations in a way that they could maintain their pride and make their own way upward in the world.
Second, under commodity agreements there must be a recognition of the fact that much of the world will depend on those of us who are the great producers of basic products such as copper. Canada, Russia, Africa and South America will have to provide a vast share of these products from their mines and forests which the world will need in the future. Surely in the interests of ourselves and in the interests of commerce it is about time we began to put into the rule of law some sort of concept not only of a fair price to the producer but also of protection for the consumers so that there is a minimum price, a maximum price, and between the two the laws of supply and demand will work. This stability of price would do a great deal for the producing countries like South America and Africa which are new countries, as well as Canada which is one of the newer countries of the world.
June 30, 1967

These countries will have to supply the bulk of this type of product.
There really is a need for an international world commodity agreement which will provide prices which are reasonable at the bottom and at the top and will allow competition between the two levels. After a five year period the two levels can then be renegotiated again. The countries of the world which are trying to build up the industrial segment of their economies prefer industrial price stability on their basic products. This would help us and it would help them.
I think I have said enough in respect of commodity agreements to make it clear that I consider this government has been a laggard in this regard. If the minister would go back over the questions I have asked in the past four years he will find that I have asked about the sugar agreement. First we were told that we had to wait until the prices were low before we could take action. Now the prices are low and still there is no action.
There must be some sort of leadership. It cannot always come from the civil service. 1 know that the Department of Trade and Commerce has a good reputation as a "go, go, go" department compared with other departments which are known as "no, no, no" departments. But everything cannot be done through the civil service. There must be leadership at the political level. There must be the kind of leadership under which we will be able to go to the various cities of Canada and say that these are ideas which we think will in the long run be in the interests of this country and certainly in the interests of world trade and the peace of the world.
I should like to ask the minister to take advantage of the second UNCTAD conference this fall to let Canada take the lead. This is something in which we could take a real pride. If there should be gains or losses in respect of the GATT agreement, we can quarrel about these at home. In view of the needs of people all over the world I would hope that Canada would take the lead in proposing, for the newly developing countries in particular, the type of international agreement which would give these people a better living.
The second proposal I wish to offer is in respect of the necessity today to have international trading companies. As I listened to the minister give a report concerning the increased pressure in the trade promotion drive, it was clear to me that we are still thinking in terms of getting individual Canadian companies into markets all over the world. Let me
Supply-Trade and Commerce assure the minister that we support his concept. I hope, however, that the minister's mind will be flexible enough to agree that if there is a new type of institution which could be established to help this form of promotion we should support it.
The concept I am putting forward is not new in respect of trading companies. They were in existence in the old days. There were such companies as the British East Indian Company, our own Hudson's Bay Company, and others. I am speaking, however, of modern trading companies such as the Japanese have. As a matter of fact we have them in the grain business. I mentioned these before. There is the Argentinian company, the French company and the two American companies. These companies sell the bulk of the world's grain. They certainly can function more efficiently than the small grain companies in Canada. They can reduce the cost of selling goods that are graded and they can be stored and shipped so cheaply that the very small companies cannot compete. I simply say that what has been set as a precedent by the Japanese in their trading around the world and by the grain companies of the three countries I have mentioned should be followed by Canada through the formation of international trading companies.
[DOT] (12:30 p.m.)
I should like to see, as a first step, a Canadian company go into the business of international trading, buying and selling, using modern electronic techniques for recording sales and purchases. In this way goods could be moved around the world very much cheaper than they can be moved by private companies. Through this type of international trading these companies could go into the new countries, Indonesia, China, Ghana and Nigeria, and offer to buy all the goods they have to sell under a grade standard. If they could be shipped and stored they could be sold all over the world. There is money to be made in selling. There is money to be made in the production of these goods but there is also money to be made in selling.
I am simply proposing that we try to get some form of Canadian international trading companies. The big step, of course, is the financial one and I hope that our big banks in Canada will realize that this is a way to make money and will work either individually or in a consortium to back up Canadian entrepreneurs in the setting up of this type of Canadian international trading company.
June 30, 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce Quite naturally I am thinking of these international trading companies selling goods to the new developing nations all over the world, but the money these countries receive from the sale of their goods will provide a Canadian market. We have many things to sell but the customers have to get the money and they do not have the know-how to sell their products. This is particularly noticeable in respect of state trading nations which have not learned the techniques of selling in competition with highly complicated private enterprise in the United States and the western world generally.
The third proposal I refer to as buying and selling agencies of a national type. Let me give one or two examples of what to me are lost opportunities. I have recorded figures on Hansard which indicate that in the last four years-I think it is now five-not a single dollar of Canadian money has been spent on buying rice from China. We buy $10 million worth of rice each year. China is selling rice on the world markets and is buying our wheat on the world markets; yet we in Canada do not buy one single dollar's worth of rice from China. Is this because China will not meet the grade or the price? The answers to those questions do not hold water. There are only six companies marketing rice in Canada and five of them are American. They naturally sell rice from the producing areas of Louisiana and California. They do not hunt markets for other people when they are growing this product themselves.
I say it is in Canada's interest to help the countries that are buying from us by selling their products in this country. Most of the things China produces will not sell here, but this is one product that will sell. We do not produce any rice, except a little wild rice in Manitoba and western Ontario, but we do not buy one dollar's worth of our rice from China. We buy every dollar's worth of rice from the United States. This is the result of a lack of energy on the part of private enterprise and certainly on the part of the government in getting behind private enterprise to set up some sort of group that could buy these products from companies which sell them and then make them available through regular business channels and through the big shopping centres which distribute most of the rice in Canada.
I use this as a small example of the lack of initiative on the part of this government. There are no dynamics. The government just sits still and watches things develop. I am no socialist but I think that private business to

be properly efficient should set up a type of buying agency to bring rice in of a standard grade, put it in the right type of packages and set up the selling apparatus that is apparently required to sell rice in the big shopping chains. The shopping chains themselves will do nothing. First of all, they do not believe in doing anything. They wait for the buyers to come to them. This is a laissez-faire type of operation. The buyers are only interested in goods coming from their distribution agencies. They do not care whether we buy rice from the United States or China. As a matter of fact, most of these shopping chains are tied up with United States interests and naturally are more friendly to their national sources. It is in Canada's interest to give customers a chance to sell. We cannot ask the Chinese to go around with a few bushels of rice looking for markets. This is why we need a buying agency.
Let me give another example. Canada is one of the world's great producers of paper and newsprint. We now hold about 20 per cent of the world market. The world is desperate for newsprint. The reports of the FAO for 1949, 1959, and again in 1964 indicate the serious emergency we are approaching. Yet there has been no effort on the part of our newsprint industry to move into state trading areas in a big way. They only deal with the areas which can provide an enterprise type of operation. State trading nations are customers and they do not want to deal with 29 companies which handle paper; they want to deal with one.
It is about time that somebody with the force of persuasion asked our 29 paper companies in western Canada which produce newsprint to take advantage of the amendments to the Combines Investigation Act of 1959 and form a single export company to go to these state trading nations. One company could act on behalf of the 29 to sell paper to these nations. The same thing could apply on the east coast in dealing with these new countries in Africa, for example, which have to be state trading nations for a good many decades. We need some form of buying and selling agency to bridge the gulf between our highly complicated private enterprise companies and these new countries which will be state trading countries for many years to come. This is the area in which we need dynamics and leadership. I am sure that with a little bit of push these Canadians companies are not going to resist making money for too long.
June 30. 1967	COMMONS
I will go quickly over my fourth and fifth proposals because they are more properly dealt with under finance. In the rapidly expanding business world we need in respect of trade with newly developing nations some form of international clearing house for short term credits. Most of the newly developing nations will have to buy on credit for a good many years and their products will be going to the newly developing nations because they are not sophisticated enough to sell to the industrial nations. They will have to buy and sell on credit. If there was some machinery through which short term paper could be used to expedite the cash flow in both directions it would create a remarkable ability in speeding up sales between these new developing countries and the industrial countries. I had some personal experience in this regard in respect of credits with China. This is the type of experience which leads me to believe it is necessary for those who know a great deal more about this than I to see whether we cannot set up some form of international clearing house for short term paper, up to about three years.
Finally, international liquidity is still the number one obstacle to developing trade with these new nations. They all need greater access to financial trading operations and they also need tremendous amounts of development capital. So far we have only been pecking away at this problem through international associations like the International Monetary Fund and the International Development Fund. We are up against the hard fact that we are using in the international financial situation, not only gold as a media of exchange but also the national currencies of the United Kingdom and the United States. The barriers placed on international liquidity by using these national currencies are such that they represent a great handicap to international trade.
I think the government is doing a pretty good job in the group of ten, according to my understanding of the reports that are made public, but I think we should follow the concept of increased liquidity to try to find a new medium of exchange in order to get away from United Kingdom and United States currency. National reserves accounts show that these countries should be able to carry out their own domestic economic tasks without having the responsibility of the stability of the reserve accounts of other nations. Lack of international liquidity, therefore, is at the moment the greatest stumbling block we have. I hope that all Canadians will support
DEBATES	2159
Supply-Trade and Commerce the efforts of those representing us in the group of ten in trying to get increased liquidity. On the other three points; commodity agreements, international trading companies and buying and selling agencies, we can do all these things if there is any initiative and dynamic action shown by the government. I put these points before the minister in a constructive mood because marking time for four years over GATT and still excluding the newly developing nations will have serious repercussions not only on our trade patterns but on the future trading health and peace of the world.
[DOT] (12:40 p.m.)
There are two or three small matters I wish to raise in conclusion. Some years ago, after great efforts about $800 million was put into the export credits program. It struck me at the time that we were falling behind the export credit facilities provided by West Germany. Four years ago West Germany and Canada were about equal in respect of exports. Yet at a time when we had $800 million behind our export credits program West Germany, a competitor, had $3 billion.
I noticed the difference this made when visiting various countries. We deal with only big orders of $10 million or $24 million. It takes us several months to negotiate these agreements. The export credits policy of West Germany allows their small merchants to meet small merchants of other countries and make a sale of $3,000 or $6,000. Within a few hours the credit arrangements are worked out in Germany.
If we are to send our small companies around the world to enter into world wide competition and ask them to get out and sell in world markets-and there are world markets for them-we should consider a new dimension in respect of our export credits program. We should establish a system of credit that will allow the salesmen of Canadian companies to get credit quickly so they may complete the sale at the earliest possible moment and beat out their competitors. If one of our competitors can offer credit facilities on sales with a value of $3,000 or $6,000, it seems to me that Canadian businessmen should have the same facilities. This means that we must adopt a completely new attitude to export credits. At the moment the government operates this program and it is a function of the department. The banks have not yet done a full job in this respect.
I wish to express a word of sadness about the fate of the international wheat agreement.
2 ISO	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce I know that everyone says we shall now deal with wheat under GATT. We fought for so long during those trips to London in 1932 and 1933 to obtain an international wheat agreement, which was eventually obtained in 1949. In the wheat agreement Canada's voice was one of five. We had a big voice because we are the biggest commercial seller of wheat. Now, according to the news stories, the international wheat agreement is disappearing and we are going into GATT, with 50 nations. We are one voice out of 50. We still do not know whether there will be automatic renewals or automatic price negotiations. We will find out these things as time goes by. I suggest that the death of another international commodity agreement is a reason for sadness. I suggest that we would do better dealing with single products rather than trying to negotiate over the whole spectrum. I hope on another occasion to repeat my views on this subject.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I realize that the Minister of Trade and Commerce has a very difficult role to play. There are certain things which limit his ability to carry out his job most effectively. One is the fact that Canada must brace itself for a tremendous increase in world trade over the next two or three decades, and the Minister of Trade and Commerce is in only a peripheral position when dealing with matters of port development. I know the minister will throw his weight hard behind those members of the government who are trying to meet the problem of port development. We have an unhappy situation on the west coast where rivalry between the provincial government and the federal government has come into the picture. If we can increase our world trade, we do not care who does it. We do not care whether it is done by the federal government and provincial governments working together or whether private enterprise does it. We do not care how it is done as long as the port facilities are developed. This is not just a matter of Vancouver. We have to consider the west coast as the outlet for the interior of British Columbia, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
As far as the discussions which are continuing on the west coast are concerned, I believe the Minister of Trade and Commerce would be well advised to explode a bombshell by saying that he thinks both sides should get together and develop the whole coast. We need more facilities at Prince Rupert. When I consider the lack of development in that area, after the great plans we had a few years ago,
I am dismayed. There is now no access to the

DEBATES	June 30, 1967
Panhandle. I should like the minister to raise his voice on this issue. Even some of the Americans admit that they stole it from us in 1903. It is time we got it back. If we cannot get the whole panhandle, we want sovereignty over access routes. Providing access will be costly, but if we are to develop those areas which are so wealthy and whose products are so close to tidewater we must have access through the panhandle to the Pacific.
I could deal with the question of the St. Lawrence river and the east coast. I could talk about Hudson Bay. All these are places in respect of which the Minister of Trade and Commerce, in the interest of developing world trade, should exert pressure on his cabinet colleagues who are concerned about their narrow responsibilities in this area. This situation should be examined not just from the point of view of Canadian exports but as a move to taking advantage of the great demand at the present time for goods all over the world.
We must remember that Canada has almost everything. We want to move into the world trade pattern not only with basic raw materials but also with finished goods. It would be dreadful if we had to continue fighting, as we have for the last ten years, to get our products into the markets of the world and if businesses have to battle in order to get goods out of the country. This situation exists because of lack of facilities. I do not think we can blame anyone in particular for the situation. The blame must fall on all those persons who should be expressing their views loudly and clearly on the question of port development.


Alfred Dryden Hales: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make just a few brief remarks concerning the estimates of this department. I refer first of all to the item under discussion, the trade commissioner service. I have always had a very high regard for the minister and I know the great success he has had in the business world. I commend him for making the statement not too long ago that he owes part of his success to the fact that he was always taught to make a dollar before he spent it.


Mr. Baldwin:: He should impress that on some of his colleagues.


Alfred Dryden Hales: I give the minister full marks for that. What I have to say may not be too complimentary but I say it in a spirit of constructive criticism. I realize that the trade commissioner service is essential. They are
June 30, 1967

doing a good job. But what is it costing us to do the job?
Other hon. members have spoken about policy and I do not intend to deal with that subject. I shall speak about cold facts and dollar bills. I believe the trade commissioner service is costing this country altogether too much money for the results achieved. I have quickly jotted down the eight trade commissioner offices that we have in the United States. Imagine, Mr. Chairman, we have eight of them-Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, New Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Washington. It is costing this country practically $2 million to operate them.
I should like to know what efficiency exists in these offices. I should like to know whether they keep a trial balance in their ledgers to show how many dollars worth of goods exported from Canada each office has been responsible for to offset the cost of its operation.
[DOT] (12:50 p.m.)
In other words, we are asked to pass an estimate to the extent of almost $200,000 to operate the office in Boston. Can the minister say how many dollars worth of goods that office has been responsible for exporting from Canada to the United States to offset such an expenditure? My question applies to all the other offices. This is the kind of information we would like the minister to give us.
Another point I should like to make is that in several centres where Canadian embassies are located there are also trade commission offices. For instance, in Boston there is a Canadian embassy which under the estimates of the Department of External Affairs is costing us approximately $212,000. The cost of the two offices combined is $411,950. Can we not combine the offices? Can one building not be used for both of them? Could the stenographic and other services be pooled so as to cut down the cost of operating these offices throughout the country?
I think there is a great waste and extravagance in this branch. It is a great bonanza for some of the trade commissioners and I believe it is high time they took off the striped pants and put on overalls, an expression that was used once before. I know that the government has forecast a deficit of $740 million this year and I am sure the minister would want to cut down the expenses of his department as much as possible. I believe this would be a good place to start.
With regard to the trade commissioner service I should like to point out that in the

Supply-Trade and Commerce United Kingdom we have only three such offices, located in Glasgow, Liverpool and London. The total expenditure for operating these offices is $601,000 and yet we spend $2 million in the United States. I think this matter deserves careful scrutiny.
My other remarks concerning the department will have to wait until we come to the standards branch. In conclusion I wish to say that I believe the department is doing a reasonably good job but let us consider carefully how much this work is costing us.


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I would like to say one word on that subject because I have been very much aware of the need to stress an atmosphere of cost consciousness and I have applied myself to helping to deal with this problem. Nothing worries me more than the very large expenditures in relation to the revenues accruing to the government. The pressure of public demand is such that in many areas it seems almost irresistible but I feel, as the hon. member does, that there are areas where more careful control of expenditures should be exercised. However, I do not believe the trade commissioner service is one of them. I have looked at this branch very carefully. This is not a striped pants branch of the government but rather an overalls branch.
The hon. member knows as well as I do that selling involves service in areas that are already developed, as well as sales development. In some of the areas where we have moved we think there are opportunities for Canadian sales that are not being exploited so we start a sales development program. Boston is not one of these. It is one of our most well established selling areas, particularly for the eastern part of Canada where fisheries products are a major item of our exports.
Even though I have had some knowledge of that office I was surprised, when I visited Boston recently, at the volume of goods sponsored through the trade commissioner service there. But I must say frankly that it would be wrong to contemplate a dollar for dollar return for the amount of sales effort that is made in each particular office because a sales program could never be developed on that basis. For example, we contemplate, as soon as we can afford it, making a large effort in the South American countries. It may be some time before we get a return from that area, but that is part of the sales development program.
We closed our office in Bombay, to which the hon. member referred, because we were
June 30, 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce not realizing commensurate returns, and we are concentrating all our efforts in India in the sales office in New Delhi. We are watching these matters as closely as we can. We audit and we have accounting systems, but I know the hon. member would not expect me to say that we can expect a dollar for dollar return for all the sales efforts that are being made in every office. What we must consider is the overall sales program of the government. Of course I do not want to take credit for the sales program of the country, but let me say, with respect to the remarks made by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle, that the total sales effort of the country has been quite remarkable and for that I give full marks to our dynamic private enterprise. However, I do think a contribution has been made by our Canadian representation abroad and particularly by the trade commissioner service in the climate which they have created.


Alfred Dryden Hales: I wonder whether the minister could answer the two questions I have asked him. The first one is whether a record is kept by each of these offices of the sales that are made and, second, whether steps have been taken to amalgamate the embassies and trade commissioner offices located in the same city and thus cut down overheads?


Robert Henry Winters: Yes, we do that. Evaluations are made and we know quite accurately on the basis of what our statistics reveal the volume of Canadian export sales serviced by each trade commissioner. We cannot attribute all these sales to each trade commissioner because it would be wrong to say that the commissioner makes a sale. His job is to create an environment in which private enterprise can sell rather than become an extension of the sales branch of any particular enterprise in Canada. This cannot be done, although sometimes I feel we tend to move more and more into that area, but we are glad to do it and we are pleased to represent Canadian business abroad.
In our last operation, "Export 1967", I feel we did in fact become the sales arm of a myriad of smaller companies across the country which do not have sales facilities of their own and the possibility of doing their own market research and market analysis. So we brought the trade commissioners to them. That was an expensive operation but I believe it is an investment in future sales. We do break down on an accounting basis the amount of sales made in any one area serviced, but not necessarily generated, by the particular sales trade commissioner.
[Mr. Winters.1


Alfred Dryden Hales: Could the minister answer my question about the amalgamation of the offices?


Robert Henry Winters: We try to do so in most areas where both offices are located in the same building. This is not possible in London, for instance, where the establishment is too large. But in most areas we do combine the services. There are some offices in which we actually do a representational job in addition to the sales effort. In areas where we do not feel representation by a trade commissioner is justified, we ask the Department of External Affairs to service sales opportunities for us. There is very close co-operation between the two departments.
[DOT] (1:00 p.m.)


Mr. Mongrain:: Mr. Chairman, I should like, first of all, to ask you to be lenient with me because I have a few remarks to make which may not be completely in order. I trust you will be lenient.
I should like to say once again to the house that I completely dissociate myself from the words spoken in the last few days by the member for Lapointe (Mr. Gregoire) with regard to the visit of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth.
I am one of those who feel that the timeliness of maintaining or abolishing the monarchy in Canada can be discussed. But, that is another matter to be discussed in due course, according to the normal procedures of the house. But, in the present circumstances, this is more a matter of Canada welcoming what we call in my province "de la tres grande visite" (very special company). It will give us the opportunity of extending to Her Majesty our well-known hospitality with our usual good manners.
I think that, on this point, the member for Lapointe has gone too far. I dissociate myself from him, Mr. Chairman, and say in my own name and in the name of my electors that I am happy to pay homage to Her Majesty the Queen, to admit that there is a situation in fact-she is the Queen of Canada-and that she fulfils her role with considerable dignity, and we are more than proud to greet her today; in fact we have affection for her, because she has up to now fulfilled her role with dignity and high purpose. And once again I repeat that even though I sit in this house next to a member suffering from an illness called independence, I would not want anyone to think that it is true of the majority in the province of Quebec. It has been noted
June 30, 1967

that this is a very small exception, and the member for Lapointe himself stated yesterday that he thought he was the only one to have such feelings.
It is said in the province that there is a black sheep in every family. Well, he is ours in the province of Quebec.

I should like to say, Mr. Chairman, that I have listened carefully to the hon. member for Qu'Appelle. I will not venture to make a sweeping expose of my opinion of foreign trade because I recognize that I am only a student while the hon. member for Qu'Appelle is a master in this field. I have listened to him carefully and I realize I have learned a lot from him. I know the minister is a very broadminded person, so he must have been taking a lot of notes while listening to the hon. member for Qu'Appelle.
However, while listening to the hon. member I could not help but feel he had a marked leaning toward our socialist friends, so much so that he felt bound to apologize by saying that he was no socialist. I do not believe he needs to apologize. A good idea is always a good idea whether it comes from a socialist, a Conservative or a Liberal. It must have been a good idea because he felt he was taking something away from the socialists. I hope he is doing so for the good of the country, and I repeat that he does not need to apologize.
I listened to the hon. member for London who praised the government for Expo. I think it is very opportune that we do so, and I join with him not only in praising the government but all those who were or are responsible for this exposition. I believe it is an outstanding achievement in Canadian history. I do not suppose such an achievement will be repeated. We discovered other countries that we did not know too well and other countries discovered Canada. I am happy in the realization that they also discovered Quebec and Montreal.
I believe Expo will have many good results. It will promote national unity. It has done so already in that it was started by a Conservative government and was completed by the Liberals. This is proof of the fact we can achieve unity in some fields. I am sure the exposition will be a fresh stimulus to research and to new discoveries for industry. It will help Canada expand its foreign trade and will develop a sense of national pride in this country, a new sense of Canadianism. Everyone who has taken part in the realization of this wonderful achievement should be praised and

Supply-Trade and Commerce we should rejoice in the fact that it augurs well for the future of the country.

Mr. Chairman, I am now returning to specific questions which I would like to put to the minister. As I said, I confess my incompetence in the field of foreign trade, and I presume that if I have the opportunity to listen for some time to authorities on the matter, like the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Hamilton) and the hon. Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Winters), I will eventually acquire some knowledge.
But there is one thing that is I find quite obscure; I suppose it is that way also in the mind of many Canadians. I see that there are some 70 foreign trade officers in the Department of Trade and Commerce and I wonder, like many others, what their specific duties are? For instance, are those people in those foreign cities simply as contacts between the government or the Department of Trade and Commerce and those foreign countries? Would their duties be simply a matter of fulfilling some specific tasks assigned to them by the department on occasion or would they be, for instance, in a position to give information to Canadian businessmen who might need it? Would they be, for instance, at the service of Canadian businessmen who might want to travel around the world to promote their own businesses? Could they depend on those people, the representatives of the Department of Trade and Commerce, to guide them or to tell them where they could make new contacts? Could those agents, occasionally, distribute literature which could be sent by a province, a municipality or again a company which wants to do some promotion abroad? I am not referring only to massive distribution but to distribution in places where we might find new customers.
[DOT] (1:10 p.m.)
Mr. Chairman, I think that the department has made some commendable efforts to popularize that idea and make the Canadian people understand what they can do to promote external trade, but I do not think that we have yet reached what could be called the popular classes of society. In my opinion, such material has reached only enlightened people such as hon. members and some business people who follow a little more closely the activities of the Department of Trade and Commerce.
I wonder whether it would not be possible to popularize trade a little more, so that all our businessmen, all our industrial commissioners, all the members of our municipal
2164	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce councils could know exactly what kind of co-operation they can expect from the Department of Trade and Commerce as far as foreign trade is concerned.
The thing is not only to buy from other countries, I imagine, but also to sell our own goods. I shall now deal with another subject which is perhaps irrelevant, but may prompt the minister to initiate fuller discussions with those of his colleagues who are concerned.
I am one of those who, after having discussed the matter with many businessmen, are worried about the future of our external trade, because of the rising cost of living in our country, which stems from numerous causes, of course, but which is due in great part to the fact that salary increases are out of line with the increase in productivity.
I wonder if it would not be possible to make information more readily available, that is, to popularize information, so as to make all labour leaders, and the workers themselves, aware that if salaries keep increasing prohibitively, we shall hardly be able to compete with other countries in the field of international trade.
I know that we are already experiencing difficulties in certain fields, because other countries are able to produce at a lower cost than we are. I do not, however, mean to blame the labour unions and the Canadian workers for this. I simply wish to reach a conclusion which I think is obvious to all those who are concerned with the rapidly rising cost of living which will soon affect our foreign trade, if it has not already done so.
I wonder whether perhaps the time has not come for the government to take steps so as to set a ceiling on the cost of living, not only concerning salaries but in all fields, in order to put a stop to this escalation and prevent us not only from facing inflation at home tomorrow, but from finding ourselves at a great disadvantage in regard to other competitive countries in the field of foreign trade.
In my opinion, Mr. Chairman, all this could be summed up by what I said earlier. I think it would be appropriate to intensify, by popularizing it, our whole literature or propaganda, if you wish, all the information published by the Department of Trade and Commerce, so that each Canadian and especially the businessmen or those who have a certain responsibility toward businessmen, such as the members of our municipal councils, may know the kind of co-operation they can expect from each of the officials of this department, who are working in foreign

DEBATES	June 30. 1967
countries, and so that they may themselves take part in this project or program which the department is trying to implement on a wide scale by encouraging our businessmen to expand their foreign trade in order to improve our trade balance with other countries.


Mr. Gilbert:: Mr. Chairman, I wish to ask the minister a few questions about vote 5. I notice under trade commissioner service that in the Hong Kong office there is a marked increase from $144,000 odd to $198,000 odd. Why is that? Is that the office which conducts trade with the People's Republic of China? I understand that it does conduct such trade. Information I have received indicates that in 1965 our sales to China totalled $104 million, of which $103 million was for wheat. In 1966 our sales to that country totalled $184 million, of which $183 million again was for wheat. My information also indicates that our imports from the People's Republic of China in 1965 totalled $14 million and in 1966 $20 million. That shows a trade imbalance between Canada and the People's Republic of China. I ask the minister for his views with regard to our present trade policy with respect to that country. What will be our future trade policy in the light of events which have taken place recently in Hong Kong? Will they affect our trade policy in respect of the People's Republic of China?
I also wish to know the minister's views about our trade policy with respect to India, particularly the amount of wheat we sell to that country and the aid we can give its poverty-stricken people. I also wish to ask about our trade policy with regard to the West Indies. Many Canadians think that there should be strong trade agreements with countries in the West Indies and that more trade could be developed not only with the West Indies but with South American countries also.
Possibly the minister could express his views about the possibility of an international sugar agreement as there is no such agreement at the moment. How would such an agreement affect the sugar beet growers of Canada and their accesss to markets?
I also wish to ask the minister about his views on the world textile market and Canada's trading policies with respect thereto. While he is at it, possibly he could make a few remarks about the positions of nickel and copper in our trading policies.
These are some of the general matters with which I should like the minister to deal. He
June 30, 1967

might also state this country's position in regard to the export trade bank and the government's participation in that bank. If we are to develop our exports, possibly there should be more vigorous participation by the government in the activities of the export trade bank. Would the minister comment about this matter?
My final remarks concern the application of some principles that the minister set out last year when he talked about the guiding principles of good, corporate behaviour. Many Canadians are disturbed at the actions of subsidiaries of United States companies which are doing business in Canada and the behaviour of those subsidiaries with respect to Canadian foreign policy. I should like to know the minister's present views about the corporate behaviour of some of these companies. Would he also say what they have done to create a climate of good will between our two countries? These are some of the matters I should like to hear the minister express himself on, Mr. Chairman.


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, that is a pretty full slate. I shall try to answer the questions roughly in the order in which they were asked. If I miss any I am sure the hon. member will not mind refreshing my memory, as I did not make a note of his questions seriatim.
I think he referred first to the Hong Kong office and to the increase of approximately $53,000 in the estimate. He will note that we added two officers to the office. We also obtained new office premises which involved us in the acquisition of more space at higher cost. That office has become quite a centre of operations because most of our negotiations with China are through Hong Kong. We have no access to mainland China at the present time. Our main item of trade with China is wheat, which they are taking on time and paying for on schedule. Our wheat contracts are in good shape.
It is hard to be precise in answering what our trading policy is with that country to which we have no direct access in the geographic sense. They come to Hong Kong and we go to Hong Kong, which is not a good arrangement, but the trade we do apart from wheat is not very great. We are hoping that our trade will become greater. We are also hoping that the opportunity to sell more wheat to China will continue. We shall probably do so through Hong Kong, though certainly if we could open a direct channel to Peking-I hope we can do so very soon because

Supply-Trade and Commerce our present way of doing business is frustrating-it would be most beneficial.
I think the hon. member asked next a question about sugar.


John Gilbert: Yes.


Robert Henry Winters: The hon. member asked about an international sugar agreement. The hon. member may recall from my previous statements that we are pressing for an international sugar agreement. This would be one way to benefit the lesser developed countries which are so reliant on sugar to support their economies. We have stated to the British commonwealth countries of the West Indies that we would make available to them the residual amount of tariffs under the preferential tariff structure, which would mean about 29 cents a hundredweight in respect of sugar that they sell us this year, up to a total amount-I have forgotten the exact figure but I think it is for 275,000 tons. This should be helpful, but we think the long-term solution lies in a world sugar agreement. We have proposed this and we understand that Dr. Prebisch who is responsible for broader collective commodity agreements such as this will visit us this fall and we hope to advance the cause of a world sugar agreement.
[DOT] (1:20 p.m.)
What is next on the list?


John Gilbert: Textiles, nickel and copper.


Robert Henry Winters: As to textiles, the hon. member has probably had an opportunity to read the material I tabled last night concerning the Kennedy round concessions made by Canada as against the access gained by Canada to other countries, and I think he will recognize that here too we have been able to minimize the impact of the Kennedy round concessions on the textile industry. Many of the textiles which now enter this country from oriental countries do so on the basis of a voluntary quota system. This system is working well and I see no reason why it should not continue to work well.
Perhaps I should refer to a note I have on my desk to the effect that Dr. Prebisch, the director general of UNCTAD, expects to visit a number of capitals to discuss the possibility of new international agreements this year, and he will probably visit Ottawa. In the meantime, contingency plans are being made to convene a conference this fall.
June 30, 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce
On the subject of nickel, this commodity is still in short supply. We are helping the producing companies to co-ordinate their programs in order to see that Canadian requirements are met, at least to the limit of consumption in Canada during 1966. This program is working reasonably well, even though it means that the companies have not been able to serve their foreign markets as well as they would like because they are giving some measure of preference to domestic requirements.
The world copper situation has improved; supply and demand are pretty well in balance. I do not think anybody is in short supply. There are a number of big operations which have come into production, or are just coming into production, and this is helping the situation. The world copper supply is not in bad shape.


John Gilbert: I mentioned the export trade bank.


Robert Henry Winters: I presume the hon. member is referring to the Export Credit Insurance Corporation which insures exports and also reimburses banks on a non-recourse basis. We finance exports by private companies as part of a program which has played a significant role in increasing our exports abroad.
I have asked the officials of the corporation to generate ideas for improving the application of export insurance to Canadian exports and I have asked the advisory council whether they have any ideas on the subject. 1 have also asked members of the banking fraternity if they can generate ways and means, within the structure of the banks themselves, of providing better support facilities for Canadian exports. While I believe the present arrangements are working well, there is always room for improvement and I am trying to find ways and means of bringing improvement about.


John Gilbert: I appreciate the answers the minister has given me. Only this morning I happened to read an article in which the need for greater effort in this particular field of participation in our export endeavours was indicated. I appreciate the active consideration which the minister is giving to this problem.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to speak for very long. I realize that as a result of the agreement which was made this morning I am prevented from dealing in detail with results of the Kennedy round. As a


matter of fact, quite apart from the agreement which was reached, anyone examining the material which was made available will understand that the sheer bulk of this information would prevent any intelligent discussion now. However, under this item I am able to deal with trade in general and the benefits which flow to this country from the use of our trade commissioners.
I am all in favour of the minister's view, as he expressed it in reply to my hon. friend from Wellington South, that this service is not a frill but a hardworking agency essential to our economic development and to trade relations between Canada and countries abroad. I might even suggest to the minister that from time to time trade commissioners who have returned to this country should be asked to appear before the standing committee to give hon. members some indication of the success they have had in their work and what they hope to achieve in the future. I do not propose that this be done wholesale, as it were, but occasionally it would be of benefit to all concerned if members were given an opportunity to examine some of these commissioners and listen to their views.
I stand here as an unrepentant, unrestricted and, at times, very isolated believer in the greatest possible measure of free trade. I am still optimistic, even after being here for more than nine years. This, of course, means complete free trade, and to achieve complete free trade is almost as difficult as it is for politicians, particularly privy councillors, to reach heaven. Nevertheless, what we have achieved so far is very substantial. I only wish we could have done more.
I am one who believes it was unfortunate that the United Kingdom did not enter the European Common Market early enough to take advantage of the provision in the United States trade expansion act under which a 100 per cent tariff reduction might have come into effect with results even more far reaching in the future than those which have now been achieved. When the treaty of Rome became effective we saw the freer movement of labour, capital and goods within the four corners of the E.C.M., the tremendous expansion of trade which occurred, the development of industry and commercial activity, the general increase in the standard of living in the countries concerned, and surely these are the best arguments anyone could use as to the benefits which flow from freedom to trade and exchange goods and services among all parts of the world.
June 30, 1967

One of the reasons for the levelling off, at least, of trade and industrial activity within the common market nations today is that having reached a substantial degree of trade expansion they now find themselves restricted as a trading market by the common tariff barrier they have erected against other nations and trading blocs in the world. In any event this is my view, and I think it is one held by many other people. I have no hesitation in expressing my satisfaction that we have been able to go as far as we have. I understand it is not unlikely that further legislation will be sought by the executive of the United States from congress. I assume the minister will be kept posted as to the extent of such legislation and I hope it will be matched by the efforts which we make on our side. This is particularly essential considering the position of the undeveloped nations.
[DOT] (1:30 p.m.)
I know this is trite. I know these cliches are used over and over again by people in public life not only in Canada but in other parts of the world. But cliches are clichds because they are statements and restatements of facts, of what is obvious, and they are uttered every so often as evidence of the truthfulness of the facts contained in the statements.
At present some 25 or 26 nations of the world which have the lowest per capita income have the highest rate of population growth. Conversely 30 nations with the highest per capita income have the lowest rate of population growth. The effect of this is very simple. Inside a comparatively short period of time, instead of half of the world being hungry, three quarters of the world is going to be very hungry. Nations are like people, and when that happens they are going to look about and seek ways and means of taking what they have been deprived of. We as one of the great trading nations, as one of the developed nations, must play our part through the aid of the trade commissioners' offices and all the other various weapons which we can place at the command of the government.
Much is being done in the furnishing of aid by Canada and other countries. Not so many years ago I noted that even if we took all of the aid in the form of capital goods, loans, cash, and the dispatch of trained people with certain expertise and knowledge to assist in the development of the underprivileged nations, and added to that the actual dollars or sterling earned by them through the sale of their products, there would still be an enormous gap amounting to $10 billion or $12

Supply-Trade and Commerce billion between what they were earning and what was being given to them and what they required to produce in their own country the plant and the capital goods they need to make their standard of living a reasonable one.
Because of this the developed nations should stretch a point wherever possible to take from those countries, even at some sacrifice to us from time to time, a greater measure of their products than normally might be the case, especially from countries with whom we can develop suitable trading arrangements. In other words, it is not adequate to continue developing solely a system of aid. These underdeveloped countries must lift themselves up, so far as possible, by their own efforts. Only in this way will what we seek be gained. In our trade relations with developing nations we should seek from time to time to accept from them, at a lower tariff rate than would normally be the case, goods which we can use in Canada and thereby provide additional capital to assist those nations.
That is all I propose to say, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to make my position clear because I probably will not be here during the latter part of next week when this issue is to be debated. My views are very strong. I have held them with conviction for a long time. I only regret that during my years in this chamber there has not been one example of an intelligent discussion and debate on the question of foreign aid. We have touched on it concurrently and incidentally when dealing with other matters. I believe that on an issue so important to Canada it is important that we debate it in the house and in committee.
One of the reasons that we will be entering into discussion of the Kennedy round of negotiations is that there has been a great deal of apprehension about the outcome. I recall two or three years ago asking the minister's predecessor to consider producing a white paper which, without harming the efforts of our negotiating officials at Geneva, would give an indication of the government's views and intentions so that we could have an intelligent debate in the house and arouse national interest in the issue. That did not happen, but from now on I hope this is a matter we will pursue more diligently.
With the assistance of the minister and the use of committees we can achieve a greater consciousness of our trade relations with other countries, of the trade agreements which have been made and the trade agreements which are being contemplated. This is only a
2158	COMMONS
Supply-Trade and Commerce start. We shall go on to achieve more trade agreements of this kind in the future.


Mr. Regimbal:: Mr. Chairman, I would like to refer for a few moments to the comments of the minister about Expo.

Before doing so I would like to ask him one question. In the course of his remarks he mentioned that the number of visitors to Expo had far exceeded the most optimistic forecasts. Could he give us an indication whether this increase applies equally to foreign visitors and domestic visitors?


Robert Henry Winters: I am sorry I cannot give a breakdown but I suspect we have been receiving more local visitors in proportion to the total than was anticipated. I would guess from the level of expenditure that Montrealers in particular have been patronizing Expo in a very great way which, of course, is right and proper. We anticipate that the proportion of foreign visitors, particularly from the United States, will increase substantially now that the schools are closed and families can travel with their children to Expo.
[DOT] (1:40 p.m.)


Roger E. Régimbal: This brings me to the point I would like to make. I suspect that the overflow of visitors is mainly due to the fact that Canadians have taken Expo to heart, particularly, as the minister mentioned, the local people within a radius of approximately 100 miles of Montreal. They have gone all out to visit Expo and have reacted with great enthusiasm to what they have seen and experienced. I think it is worth while to note that the vast majority of these people are French speaking Canadians. When questioning local people on the grounds it is not uncommon to hear them say that they have visited Expo eight, 10, 12 or even 14 times. If there is any lesson in respect of unity and pride which can be taken from Expo I think it is the overwhelmingly enthusiastic interest which has been shown by the people within this radius of Montreal.
The lessons to be derived certainly are far reaching. It is worth noting that in a small city like Lachute at least 90 per cent of the school children above grade four have visited Expo where they have had a great lesson in Canadian pride and the potential of Canadian accomplishment. I believe it is true that one cannot visit Expo without leaving it a little bit more Canadian. I think it is worth
DEBATES	June 30. 1967
while to note that French speaking Canadians have gone all out for this all-Canadian venture. I believe that out of it will develop a great degree of Canadian pride from coast to coast. I believe it will provide a great contribution toward an all-Canadian unity. I believe it is more than likely that this will be the main byproduct of Expo.
It is particularly important that this be underlined at this time because in past months we have read on occasion certain statements which have been made by radicals in all quarters. These people who speak of separatism and independence unfortunately receive much coverage in the news media across the country. I believe we should take this opportunity to underline that these people who often try to put forward the idea that they are speaking on behalf of French Canadians have no mandate and no authority to speak in that manner.
When speaking to various groups across Canada in past years I have had the opportunity to say that my name is Roger Regimbal, my constituency is Argenteuil-Deux-Montagnes and that I come from "la belle province de Quebec". I say that I am French but reasonable. The essential footnote to add to that, however, is that there are millions like me in the province of Quebec but unfortunately they do not get headlines. Therefore we should take an opportunity like this to underline for the benefit of all Canadians that French Canadians are aboard, are very much a part of this enterprise, and wish to be identified as being a part of it.
I believe that the enthusiastic response to Expo by Quebeckers, old and young, is without doubt an indication, contrary to the impression which might be given by the outlandish statements made by certain individuals, that when the chips are down and it is time to act and show solidarity and pride in Canada, French Canadians like other Canadians, no matter in what domain, whether it be industry, commerce, or finance, will deliver the goods.


Robert Henry Winters: I should like to say that I believe the hon. member deserves a great many headlines today.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, as one who happens to come from a different part of Canada I should like to thank the hon. member who has just preceded me for his statement and for his correction of the bad impression given by some people in this country with regard to certain sections of it. I might

June 30, 1967

say to him that there are some people from western Canada who sometimes create a bad impression of that wonderful land.
These words have to be spoken. I hope they get the attention they deserve. I believe that unnecessary attention has been given to a small minority which constantly is given the privilege of appearing on television or on radio to express views which are so far removed from the views of the vast majority of the people that they are really ridiculous. I believe a great disservice is rendered to Canada by the news media which play up these minority views.
We had one example the other day when the hon. member for Lapointe attempted to upset the proceedings of this house and destroy the expression of unanimous respect which we were showing to Her Majesty the Queen by the resolution passed by the two houses. That was played up on television as if it were a major incident. Actually what should have been played up on television were the remarks of the party leaders which expressed the thoughts of the members of this house rather than the play for publicity by one member who sits as an independent and carries no weight at all in this House of Commons.
I did not rise to speak on this subject, Mr. Chairman, but I was interested in what my colleague said. I express my regret that the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce have reached the House of Commons just at a time when the attention of so many people is engaged elsewhere because of the royal visit. This is a department which deserves great attention from the House of Commons because of its importance to our economy and because of the good work that the trade commissioners have been doing over the years in so many posts abroad. I should like every year, when the opportunity arises, to pay my tribute to the work done by the people in the department and particularly by the trade commissioners with whom I had a very pleasant experience during a relatively short interval.
I know of no department that is of greater interest. I know of no department that is more efficient than the Department of Trade and Commerce. I do not believe there is any department which does more abroad for Canada than it does. I do not wish to appear to be downgrading the Department of External Affairs which also works abroad, but the expansion of our trade has always seemed to me to be more important than some of our activities in diplomatic circles. For many

Supply-Trade and Commerce years now I have advocated that greater emphasis should be placed on our trade commissioner service and on the employment of trade commissioners rather than on some of our activities in external affairs, because the information which we receive from some of the smaller countries of the world as a result of our external affairs activities is not of the same vital importance to the development of Canada as is the information that the trade commissioners supply in respect of the development of our economy.
1 note that there has been an increase in the number of trade commissioners, to which I raise no objection. I should like, however, to ask the minister certain specific questions. Apparently he has opened two or three new posts. I should like him to mention these and tell us why they have been opened. I also notice that he has closed one. Perhaps we might also have an explanation about that. Will the minister please enlighten me in this regard? I have always felt moderately competent in geography and I seldom feel at a loss to determine where various cities are located, but the name following Hong Kong is new to me. I do not know how to pronounce it and I do not know where it is. I am sure the minister has this information at his fingertips or will receive a message from above.
[DOT] (1:50 p.m.)


Robert Henry Winters: It is in Pakistan.


Gordon Minto Churchill: May I ask the minister to reply to my questions about the opening and closing of these various posts?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, we are closing the one in Bombay because we find we can obtain better efficiency through operating our facilities in India in New Delhi. The office to which my hon. friend has just referred in Islamabad, which is in Pakistan, is being opened because, as I understand it, this is to be the new capital. We have just opened an office in Nairobi to serve the developing area of central Africa. We have opened an office in Belgrade to take advantage of what we think are better trading opportunities in the socialist countries in eastern Europe. That is all I can say at the present time.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I understand you have
opened another one in San Francisco.


Robert Henry Winters: We are opening a tourist office there and I will provide supplementary information in this regard in a few minutes.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The minister has said nothing about closing the post in Salisbury which
June 30. 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce came about as a result of the activity to which I have raised objections on other occasions, namely, the imposition of sanctions against Rhodesia. I have expressed the hope that now it has become evident that the imposition of economic sanctions against that country has not been effective in achieving the objectives that were set out at the commonwealth conference, steps will be taken to remove those sanctions and re-open trade with Rhodesia.
When this matter was discussed earlier in the House of Commons and the sanctions were imposed the impression was left with us that within a matter of a few months they would be effective and that the political settlement desired by some of the leaders of the commonwealth would be achieved. That has not been the case. I hope the minister will use his good influence to see that there is a lifting of these economic sanctions in order that we may once again establish a trade mission in Rhodesia and resume trade with that country.
We trade with virtually all the countries of the world. We have grave differences with some of them in respect of political matters but we have not hesitated to engage in trade with communist countries with which we are frequently not in agreement. We continue to trade with various countries which have suffered a number of coups d'etat. Their governments have been upset and unitary governments or military dictatorships have been established. We have continued to trade with them but we have cut ourselves off from trading relations with Rhodesia. It is a country which has not been subject to military dictatorship or any serious internal trouble but which has had a political difference of opinion with Great Britain.
For 43 years Rhodesia had the right to act independently in respect of all matters except defence and foreign policy. Yet Canada at the urging of various people immediately swung into line and severed relations with Rhodesia. I think that diplomatic relations should be resumed and that trade relations should also be resumed. Why should we continue to trade with certain other countries which have effected bloody revolutions and where the heads of state have been assassinated or disposed of in one way or another and not trade with Rhodesia? Canada's response in many of these instances has been an immediate recognition of the new government. Yet in respect of Rhodesia we broke off relations and imposed economic sanctions. This is a blot on our record.

We have heard on many occasions that one way toward maintaining peace in the world is through friendly trading relations. Yet with this country of the commonwealth we have broken off trading relations and set up a barrier. We can afford to have a difference of opinion in respect of how the government of Rhodesia should operate but surely this should not extend to the realm of our trading relations. Can we not maintain our trading relations with Rhodesia despite our difference of opinion in respect of political matters? We continue our trading relations with Nigeria which appears to be on the verge of a civil war. We are entering into and have carried on trade with nations in Europe which are under Russian domination. We have not hesitated to trade with Russia, although we have never approved of its form of government. So it goes all down the line, even with the African country of Ghana, the government of which was upset and the premier expelled. We immediately recognized the new government and continued our trading relations. We have maintained our trade post there. I ask this question of a minister of the crown who in our opinion on this side of the house ranks as being one of the more reasonable members of the treasury benches.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Watch out, Bob.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Will the minister use his good influence to change the opinion of the Canadian cabinet and insist on re-opening trade relations with Rhodesia? How can we ever get to understand a country unless there is some communication? We are now cut off from Rhodesia which is one of the more developed countries of Africa, having been developed in a material sense by European whites. The native population is not oppressed in the way the native population is oppressed in some other countries of Africa. There has not been bloodshed or genocide there such as we have read about in other countries which have gained their freedom. Yet Canada adopts this attitude of breaking off trade relations with Rhodesia. I should like to know why this attitude continues when the imposition of economic sanctions has proved to be ineffective. I ask the minister to do something about this.
[DOT] (2:00 p.m.)
I have one final question for the minister. I was hoping to find a really awkward question for him. Under the last item of vote 5, "Unallocated and miscellaneous" there is an increase of between $700,000 and $800,000,
June 30, 1967	COMMONS
which strikes me as being rather unusual. Has the minister an explanation for that?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, could the hon. member refer me to the page?


Gordon Minto Churchill: It is page 497.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is over $800,000.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, it is over $800,000. My subtraction was poor.


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, while I am getting that information I should say that the hon. member was quite right in his reference to the office in San Francisco. We did open one in January, 1967. We financed it out of general appropriations until we could get an estimate for it this year. That is why it did not show up in the estimates last year but has this year. We also closed the office in Salisbury. I share the regret of the hon. member about this. In days gone by I had opportunities to do business in Southern Rhodesia and always enjoyed it. It is a fine place in which to work and a good place to conduct operations. But the relationship between the Canadian government and the government of Southern Rhodesia had to be viewed in the broader context of our commonwealth relations and in fact our position in the United Nations.
Once that was determined, quite apart from our trading relationships we had no option but to close the office because we were not doing trade. A number of Canadian enterprises there have suffered severely because of this. It is one of those situations in which nobody gains. Our trade has been impaired and our relations have been impaired. I suppose this is part of the sacrifice one must make in support of a principle. But I share the hope that this principle can be worked out in the near future because nothing would please me more than to get back on good, friendly relations with Southern Rhodesia and, from the point of view of the Department of Trade and Commerce, to get back on good, sound trading relations with the very fine country of Southern Rhodesia.
If the hon. member would permit me, I will get him the information on the item "Unallocated and miscellaneous". I do not have it before me at the moment but expect to have it in a few moments.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, while the minister is waiting for word from on high perhaps I might ask him a question with reference to a matter on which he made a
DEBATES	2171
Supply-Trade and Commerce reply a while ago. Before I do so may I say that the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre has referred to the situation in Rhodesia as being simply a matter of a political difference of opinion between that country and the United Kingdom. I saw the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre moving in his chair and thought he was going to rise and object that I had not quoted him correctly. However, I believe I did. I would like to make the point that we think the issue over which that difference arose is a pretty basic one, namely, the rights of people regardless of colour. In any case, I agree with the position taken by the Minister of Trade and Commerce in his reply to the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre.
Some time ago when the minister was answering the hon. member for Broadview with regard to our trading policy with the People's Republic of China, he indicated that the negotiations have to be conducted at Hong Kong. If I understood the minister correctly, he said that he found this situation quite unsatisfactory and hoped it would not be long before we had an office of some kind in Peking. I should like to ask-


Robert Henry Winters: I did not say "an office in Peking"; I said, "direct contact in Peking."


Stanley Howard Knowles: All right, I accept that correction. The minister says that he said the government would like to have a direct contact in Peking. Precisely what the minister meant by that is what I wanted to ask. Did he imply the opening of an office by his department, did he imply that the hope was that we might soon open diplomatic relations with mainland China, or what did he mean by that reference?


Robert Henry Winters: No, Mr. Chairman. All I meant was that when we negotiate with somebody we like to be able to do so face to face on their home ground and face to face on our home ground. We do not necessarily have to open an office to negotiate a business transaction with people. I am not prepared at this stage to say whether we will open diplomatic offices in a formal way or trade offices in a formal way. All I am saying, and nothing more at this stage, is that I like to be able to come face to face with people on their home ground when we are doing business with them.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Those are fine words, but I wish the minister would say what they mean.
June 30, 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce


Robert Henry Winters: That is all I mean. I would like to have freedom to go to Peking and would like to be able to invite our Chinese friends with whom we do business to come here and negotiate with us. I think it is not entirely satisfactory to do it in a neutral place such as Hong Kong. That is all I mean.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Why don't you do it?


Robert Henry Winters: Because of circumstances of which my hon. friend is very well aware. We do not receive a ready response to our requests to visit Peking, nor do we receive a warmhearted response at all times to invitations we extend to them to come here. It is just a modus vivendi we have worked out to meet current circumstances. We have lived with it, but it is not the best way of doing business.
Mr. Chairman, may I answer the question posed by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre? I am told that the figure of $1,004,830 shown on page 497 for 1967-68 corresponds to the total of the two figures shown in the 1966-67 column as $202,555 and $761,700, which together total $964,255. So the differential in the two figures is only $40,575.


John Gilbert: Mr. Chairman, one of the many questions I asked the minister was with regard to his views on the application of the principles of good corporate practice. I notice that in the statement he made to the committee he said there was information available concerning surveys in 1964 and 1965. I understand that the President of the Privy Council has a task force assembled to study foreign ownership in Canada. I was wondering whether it is going to study the application of these principles of group corporate practice. Would the minister express a more up to date opinion on this matter than that contained in the statement he made to the committee?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, it occurred to me just a moment ago that this was part of the series of questions the hon. member had asked and I had overlooked dealing with it. It slipped my mind. There is very little I can add to the report that was tabled in the house a relatively short time ago, which was a condensation of some 250 returns representing some 800 companies; there was consolidation by a considerable number of them. Since that time we have received about 70 returns. They are being processed now. There are one or two, figuratively speaking, that are still outstanding but the companies concerned said they would submit them. They are therefore
[Mr. Knowles.J
all complying with our request for this information which is now being processed.
[DOT] (2:10 p.m.)
On the overall they show quite a normal method of corporate conduct, and I think it is fair to say that the subsidiaries of foreign companies in Canada operate in very much the same manner as do our domestically owned companies. In some cases they do so a little better. On the whole they tend perhaps to conform a little better to the principles of good corporate citizenship as now defined. Of course, when striking an average there are some which do better and some which do worse. Some are not quite as good as we would like them to be. One or two of them have said that their corporate policies are determined in the head office. However, we intend to pursue the matter with them and I do not believe there is any ill intention on their part. We have made all the material relating to this subject available to the committee presided over by the President of the Privy Council, and I think it will be very helpful to him in conducting his own analysis.
This is not just a one-shot operation. We have asked the companies to continue it on an annual basis. It is very hard to observe their conduct from a single return. This can only be done by observing trends, and we are trying to accumulate sufficient information to enable us to do so.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I regret I did not understand the minister's explanation of the last item of vote No. 5 under the heading "Unallocated and miscellaneous". It may be all very well to say it is a combination of the two items which appear in the 1966-67 column, but surely the same practice is not in effect for 1967-68. In 1966-67 the Minister of National Revenue used a sleight-of-hand procedure and extracted money from the contingency fund and from other sources in order to avoid the difficulty which he was having over the voting of interim supply. I do not know whether the 1966-67 figure means that the department paid back to the contingency fund $761,700. That may be all right for 1966-67, but why should there be over $1 million in the unallocated and miscellaneous fund for 1967-68? The minister does not have to go through the same procedure as the Minister of National Revenue did.


Robert Henry Winters: The reason for unexpended moneys is to be found, for example, in the office in Salisbury for which we budgeted but
June 30. 1967

which was not opened. We had some unexpended funds in Havana and in Belgrade where the office was not opened as early as was anticipated. There were some unexpended funds in Colombo, Geneva, the United Nations office in New York and all other embassies where we do not have representation where minor expenses were incurred by the Department of External Affairs on a recoverable basis. The sum total adds up to the figure indicated.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I do not know what the Auditor General will think of this but I do not think much of an unallocated sum of $1 million.


Robert Henry Winters: It is better than to have an over-expenditure of $1 million.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The minister is expected to be specific in requesting supply from the House of Commons and to give us the specific items. This has been done all the way through vote No. 5 up to this item. I would not call it a slush fund but some people who are not as careful in their use of language as I am might do so. I can see the minister is anticipating the employment of 22 more people for whom provision must be made. This would come under "miscellaneous". It seems to me that $266,765 is adequate for the office in Paris where 22 or 23 people are employed, but here we have an unallocated sum of $1 million. If it were not for the fact that we are here on a Friday afternoon when all sorts of interesting activities are going on in town I would move to have that sum reduced to $1.
I gave the minister a few seconds in order to devise a better and more palatable explanation of this unspecified appropriation of funds. The minister says it is better to have it this way than to overspend, but the practice of bringing in supplementary estimates has been well established and when a department overspends, makes a mistake or has to enlarge its activities, supplementary estimates are brought in to cover the amount of money that is expended. However, the Minister of Trade and Commerce is expansively asking for a blank cheque for $1 million. I do not want to be too hard on him because he agreed with me with regard to Rhodesia, which is good.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Did the minister agree with the hon. member?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, he sympathized with the point of view expressed and he did not agree with the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre.
Supply-Trade and Commerce


Stanley Howard Knowles: In that case I withdraw what I said about him.


Gordon Minto Churchill: The hon. member was an exponent of a one man, one vote policy in Rhodesia with which I disagree completely. I do not want to be too hard on the minister, but I wonder whether he has a better explanation for this unallocated sum.


Robert Henry Winters: The only supplementary information I can give is that out of the total amount of $1 million, $687,150 relates to funds provided for retroactive salary revisions which were allocated from the financial contingency fund. These were not prorated to individual offices. It was set up in this way at the request of the Treasury Board.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Should it not have been set up separately as it was in 1966-67?


Robert Henry Winters: Perhaps it should; I am not sure. I do not know the precise reason for that. The only reason I know for doing it this way is that it was done at the request of the Treasury Board and I understand it carries the judgment of the Auditor General.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
10. Canadian Government Exhibition Commission, $5,258,000.
Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, let us not rush through this item. As I said earlier today, we are not under any obligation to pass the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce under a guillotine procedure, as we are with regard to four other departments. These estimates may very well be concluded later. I think we should be a little careful about rushing things through today and voting money without obtaining an adequate explanation.
However, this is not my only reason for rising at this point. The Canadian Government Exhibition Commission is a very active branch of the Department of Trade and Commerce and it does not always receive the recognition it deserves. There are 125 people working in that branch and they are continually on the job preparing government exhibitions in various places around the world. I think that the minister, who takes some pride in his work, would not mind at this stage taking a few minutes to tell us what this commission is doing and what, for example, it has done over the last year as well as what are its plans for the future. In the course of his remarks he might tell us whether they are already starting on work for the world's fair which will be held in Tokyo. The
June 30, 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce Canadian Government Exhibition Commission is too important a section of the Department of Trade and Commerce to pass without attention. It is a very worth-while commission and the public should be informed through the House of Commons, and for the sake of the members as well, just what the commission is doing, e (2:20 p.m.)


Robert Henry Winters: I agree, Mr. Chairman, that this is an important part of the departmental function and it is a very good operation in my opinion. The commission is responsible for setting up Canadian exhibits around the world when we participate in fairs. I believe it does a highly creditable job. It was responsible, among other things, for setting up the display in the caravans that are operating under the general jurisdiction of the Secretary of State. I had an opportunity to see one of these caravans and was extremely impressed by it.
There is a great list of fairs and shows around the world in which Canada participates. One recent example was the air show in Paris where the department set up the exhibit and helped to service it. This air show was attended by my colleague, the Minister of Transport. Perhaps he could give his own opinion on whether or not the exhibit was suitable.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Why didn't you go instead?


Robert Henry Winters: The Minister of Transport has more direct responsibility for aviation than I have, and it was an air show. There is a long list of fairs in which we participate but I am sure the hon. member would not want me to mention them.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Would the minister mention half a dozen of the more important ones?


Robert Henry Winters: Yes. For example, we are participating in the Alaska centennial celebrations in Alaska, which will take place from May 27 to September 1, 1967; the international exposition for 1988 which is known as the hemisfair, in San Antonio, Texas; the Japan world exposition, which is known as Expo '70 and is scheduled to be held in Osaka in 1970. The Canadian government has agreed to spend there an estimated amount of $11.2 million.
We held a competition to which we had a response from over 200 architects and architectural firms. The 200 entries were narrowed down to six finalists from which we selected a design which was unveiled just last


week. The winning firm of architects is a well known firm from Vancouver by the name of Erickson-Massey. I believe the design they have produced is highly imaginative and will attract considerable attention. Our participation in Osaka will cost $11.2 million, including everything, but the building itself will cost very much less than that.
This is a creative branch of the department, and I think the work done in this field is in keeping with that done by any other country in the world. If the hon. member would like me to give details on what we have done or what we will be doing, I will be glad to give them.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I think it is very important that there should be a more detailed list given. I realize the list is given in the annual report. However, an opportunity is presented here to attract the attention of members who might not, because of pressure of work, read the annual report. There is an opportunity, despite the press releases issued by the minister's office, to draw the attention of the news media to this branch. I presume there are business enterprises in Canada that sometimes do not take full advantage of the opportunities provided by these exhibits. The minister might also tell us what part, if any, this branch played at Expo '67 in Montreal.


Robert Henry Winters: At Expo '67 in Montreal the trade fair people played a prominent role in laying out the exhibit in the Canadian pavilion and they were consulted widely with regard to other layouts. I feel that as a result the Canadian pavilion is a very good place. I have a long list of fairs in which the Canadian government is participating. I could give a few examples. In January there was the SAE Automotive Engineering Congress and Exhibition in Detroit; the National Boat Show in New York; the International Hardware Trades Fair in London. In February there was the National Sporting Goods Association Convention at Chicago. In March there was the Boston Gift Show, Boston; the Salon International de l'Agriculture, Paris; the Netherlands Industries Fair, Utrecht; Daily Mail Ideal Home Exhibition, London; Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Conference and Exhibition in New York and the Canadian Housing Exhibit, Paris. In April there was the International Children's and Babies Fair, Cologne; the American Society for Tool and Manufacturing Engineers Exhibition, Chicago; the International Engineering Exhibition, London and the International Fur Fair, Frankfurt. In May there
June 30, 1967

was the American Institute of Architects Convention, New York and the Salon International de l'Aeronautique et l'Espace, Paris. In June, there was the Barcelona International Samples Fair, Barcelona; the Supermarket Institute Show, Cleveland; the 36th Poznan International Fair, Poznan, and so on. Do you wish me to read the others?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Go on, that is very good.


Robert Henry Winters: In August we will be participating in the New York Gift Show, New York; the Belfast Telegraph Ideal Home Show, Belfast. In September, there is the International Autumn Fair, Zagreb, where I had the pleasure of visiting last year, and the International Trade Fair, Brno, where I also had the pleasure of visiting. There is the National Office Furniture and Equipment Show, Chicago, the International Exhibition of Fine Foods and Provisions, Cologne and the International Dairy Cattle Fair at Cremona.
In October, Mr. Chairman, there is the German Industries Fair, Berlin; the National Shoe Fair of America, Chicago; the Salon Technique International de l'Equipement Hotelier du Materiel de Cafeteria et des Industries Connexes, which is an exhibition of hotel, cafeteria and catering equipment in case hon. members did not understand my brand of French. This will take place in Paris. Then there is the American Society for Metals Show, Cleveland; Electra '67, Johannesburg; the International Fair for Sports Goods, Camping Equipment and Garden Furniture, Cologne; Pacific International Trade Fair, Lima. In November, there is the International Building Exhibition, London; Salon International du Batiment, Paris.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It is 2.30.


Robert Henry Winters: Do you wish me to finish the list?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes, finish the list.


Robert Henry Winters: In December there is the National Association of Home Builders Convention, Chicago. Then, there are a number of regional lumber shows in New York, Minneapolis, Kansas City, Charlotte, Omaha, Houston, Orlando and Oklahoma City.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. Pursuant to an order of the house passed yesterday the sitting of the committee of supply is suspended until four o'clock.



SITTING SUSPENDED

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Trade and Commerce SITTING RESUMED
The committee resumed at 4 p.m.
The Assistant Deputy Chairman:: Order,
please. House again in committee of supply, estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce, Vote No. 10. Shall vote 10 carry?


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
15. Canadian Government Travel Bureau-To assist in promoting the tourist business in Canada including a grant of S55.000 to the Canadian Tourist Association, $9,991,000.
Gordon Minto Churchill: One minute, Mr. Chairman. I do not want to delay matters but we have about 50 minutes at our disposal and we are dealing with a department of considerable interest. The minister himself is anxious to give a great deal of publicity to his operations in this department, and I want to help him.


Robert Henry Winters: Thank you.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I was associated with this department for a number of years and I know how valuable it is to Canada.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Yes. Many ministers on the government side have had some association with that department. It deserves attention. Though I do not advocate that the minister should beat the drum all the time, nevertheless I want him to draw to the attention of the House of Commons the advantages that this department brings to Canada as a whole and how the Canadian Government Travel Bureau assists in promoting the tourist business in Canada.
This item ought not to be passed without comment. Here is an opportunity for the minister once again to emphasize the value of the tourist business and of the government travel bureau. He can give us information about what the bureau has been doing under his stewardship. I assume that, as other ministers of trade and commerce have our present minister has taken some interest in this aspect of his department and is prepared to tell the committee what is going on, what his forecast of future operations is and if there is to be an expansion of this service.
Because of a number of elections and the postponement of the study of estimates, as well as other, similar considerations, we have not had a chance during the last three years to pay the same attention to departmental activities that we have paid in the past. As I said before, we suspended today's session
2176
June 30. 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce For understandable reasons we are working under a slight disadvantage today and cannot give to this department all the attention it deserves. Nevertheless I shall ask the minister to inform us about some matters and to put on the record what this travel bureau does, how effectively it is working, what its future prospects are, as well as letting us know whether he has any suggestions toward improving the service, if it needs to be improved. He can say whether he wants the support of the members of the House of Commons in his activities, in that regard.
Sometimes ministers of the crown find that their colleagues in cabinet cause them the greatest difficulty. If they can go to a cabinet meeting and say, "The House of Commons is in favour of this proposal," that strengthens their hand in cabinet. Then there is that awful establishment called Treasury Board which rides roughshod over members of the cabinet who are not on the Treasury Board committee. I shall not recount again, as I have in the past, my experiences with Treasury Board a few years ago; but I still bear the scars. Perhaps the present minister has a different approach to Treasury Board. Maybe he is on Treasury Board himself.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)


Mr. Monteith:: I rise on a question of privilege, as one who was a member of Treasury Board at the time to which my hon. friend is referring. He seemed to imply that ministers who were members of Treasury Board found their requests for funds dealt with much more rapidly than those who were not. I take exception to that statement.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Well, in that case, I have been under a misapprehension for a number of years, obviously. Of course I am bound to accept the statement of an hon. member made here in the House of Commons. It is my good fortune to meet this hon. member frequently in private, however, and we shall discuss this matter privately on some occasion and not burden the committee with it.


John Whitney Pickersgill: Perhaps the hon. gentleman will permit me to ask him a question before he goes on to another point. Does the exchange we have just heard indicate that he and the hon. member for Perth are now joining in the leadership race?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Well, I already have a mover and a seconder, but neither of them has as yet committed himself to vote for me.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I see no obstacle in the way of any member of this party putting his name up for leadership. As a matter of fact-this is just an aside, Mr. Chairman-I was talking to the leader of the New Democratic Party last night and I asked him how they managed things in his party. He informed me that according to their constitution there will be a vacancy as of Monday. I said: "Then you will be relieved of all your responsibility." He agreed. The burden would then be carried by the joint co-chairmen of the convention. I asked him what he would do if some statement were made of national or international importance. "Oh," he said, "I would carry on as house leader and, in that capacity, I would deal with the statement."


Stanley Howard Knowles: Order.


Gordon Minto Churchill: I expressed the hope that the hon. gentleman would be re-elected, you know; his party can go on making mistakes if it wishes. I said I was not certain he would encounter any opposition, but I had discovered there was a surplus of candidates in the Conservative party, and we might supply some assistance in that way. His suggestion, in return, was that we might work out a lend lease program which would be of benefit to both parties.


Maurice Rinfret: I hate to interrupt the hon. gentleman. If he had included the words "trade and commerce" in the remarks he has just made, they would not have been out of order.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Well, Mr. Chairman, a lend lease program is, in effect, a trade exchange, and that is what I was coming to. I do not know how this interruption occurred.


Stanley Howard Knowles: It was caused by a colleague of yours on the front bench.


Gordon Minto Churchill: No, it was an interruption by the Minister of Transport, who is frequently irrelevant. I was talking about the Canadian Government Travel Bureau, and I will now sit down and let the minister answer my questions by giving us a short resume of the activities of this bureau.
If he wants support from the committee with regard to these activities, then provided he can indicate to us that he has a knowledge of the subject we shall endeavour to support him; and this, in turn, may have a persuasive effect on his cabinet colleagues and on
June 30, 1967

Treasury Board-and it was because I mentioned Treasury Board that a sensitive member of this house rose and made some objection.


Robert Henry Winters: I will try to meet the rigid standard of acceptance put forward by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre. I have a long association with this operation dating back, now, to 1948 when I assumed responsibility for the Canadian Government Travel Bureau.


Gordon Minto Churchill: It has vastly improved since then.


Robert Henry Winters: It was then part of the department of reconstruction and supply operated under the direction of Mr. D. Leo Dolan, who had a great maritime background and heritage which he acquired largely, I think, through his association with Senator William Dennis who first sponsored what was to become the Canadian travel bureau.
We went through the pangs of building up this operation for which I was responsible until 1953, at which time it was passed to my successor, who was the Hon. Jean Lesage. I greatly enjoyed my association with the Canadian travel bureau which was then in its infancy. I officiated at the opening of its first office in the United States, in New York. We thought it was a great step forward and we wondered whether or not we could stand the expenditure. It turned out to be a good investment. This is now being followed up, and I think today we have some 23 offices abroad and are on the point of opening several others. The budget of the bureau used to be relatively modest. It is something of an experience to realize that we are now spending $10 million a year on tourist activity. Translate this in terms of results, the amount which derives from this investment of money, and the figure is just as startling-perhaps even more so. Last year, total gross revenue on this account, as far as it can be estimated-and there are no precise yardsticks-was of the order of $840 million, which was a record.
Even so, Canada experienced a net deficit on travel account, showing that Canadians are the greatest travellers in the world. On a per capita basis I think Canadian tourists spend more money than any other tourists. This may be attributable to the fact that we live in such close proximity to the great and friendly United States, and its vast opportunities for travel and purchasing.
Supply-Trade and Commerce
This year we are aiming at a total gross revenue of more than $1 billion. This will be a landmark of achievement and I think we will reach the target. If we do, we can forecast with some confidence that Canada will have a net favourable balance on travel account for the first time in our history, as far as I know.
An important development is the number of inquiries which are being generated by these 23 offices of ours around the world. I participated this year in the opening of an office in Paris. We opened another in Seattle a few days ago, and my hon. friend from Peel officiated on my behalf. During the year 1966 there were 1,808,000 inquiries, and these are now all handled by computerized devices.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
It is a marvel of modem ingenuity to see the way these inquiries are processed, replied to expeditiously, kits of material made up, all mechanically sorted, put in envelopes and dispatched. That was an all time record, more than the number of inquiries received by any other travel bureau in the world. But in the five month period this year from January through May we had the astonishing number of 2,350,000 inquiries received, thereby setting an all time record of inquiries, and giving an indication that this is going to be the greatest travel year in Canada's history. A great deal of the interest is owed to Expo '67 and all our other centennial celebrations.


Gordon Minto Churchill: And the Pan-Am games in Winnipeg.


Robert Henry Winters: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I hope to have the privilege of attending them, and I expect to see my hon. friend at them, perhaps in the 100 yard dash.
I do not know, Mr. Chairman, how much more I have to say to qualify for approval of these estimates, but perhaps what I have said is an indication of my interest in this great government operation.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Standards branch-
20. Administration and operation, $4,323,200.
Mr. MacLean (Queens):: The minister has expressed great hope that as a result of the Kennedy round negotiations there will be a tremendous opportunity for Canadian manufacturing generally to find new markets throughout the world. This brings me to the fact that most of the world in which our manufacturers will find markets for their goods is already on the metric system. This trend will continue because the metric system
June 30, 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce has tremendous benefits from the point of view of being practical. Of course it is used universally in science. It would be a great benefit if it were applied to engineering and manufacturing because it would simplify standards, right down to such things as thread measurements, sizes of buildings, manufacturing stock, etc.
The money under this vote is for the standards branch, a branch of government that operates very unobtrusively. The average person tends to forget that it exists at all, and I think it is a criterion of good government when people are not continuously aware of a branch of government because of the irritations it causes. Over the years the standards branch has been doing an excellent job. Standards are the very basis for trade. Historically, standards were the first thing that had to be established for exchange and trade.
I confine my remarks at this time to recommending that the government expedite as much as possible the study, and perhaps development on a gradual basis, of the metric system and its application to our manufacturing concerns, so that they will have the opportunity and the capability of competing with Common Market countries in the markets which the minister hopes will be opened to a greater extent to Canadian industry. I would appreciate it if the minister would bring the committee up to date on the government's thinking in this field, on what has been done, and on what is contemplated will be done toward this objective.


Robert Henry Winters: Of course, Mr. Chairman, we must guide ourselves by developments in the markets of the world. Our biggest market is the United States, which is still on the current standards system of inches, feet, and so on. However, I believe the trend around the world is toward the metric system. The British have indicated their readiness to adopt it, and I think have given themselves a period of some five years to phase into its adoption.
Certain segments of our economy have already come into the metric system, notablj' the photographic industry and the pharmaceutical industry. We are keeping very closely attuned to these developments, and as markets in the world develop an acceptability of the merits of the metric system we will go along with them. I do not think I can go beyond that at the moment.


Alfred Dryden Hales: Mr. Chairman, I believe it is the standards branch which is responsible for enforcing the Gas Inspection Act, the Electricity


Inspection Act and the Weights and Measures Act. These respective statutes stipulate that the fees are to be regulated so that they will cover the actual costs of inspection, but from the latest figures available to me it appears that the branch lost $735,000 on its operations in 1966. That is not the actual cost. If all the costs involved were charged to the department the loss would have been over $1 million. Why does the minister not follow the statutes in this respect, and thereby wipe out this deficit? This is something which should be watched more carefully, in view of the fact that the estimates for the whole department shows a loss of $1,672,400.
The staff of the whole branch has been increased by nine, and there is an increase of $10,000 for office supplies. The increase for travel is $31,000, yet no effort is made to have the branch pay its own way. Is consideration being given to a reassessment of fees so that it will not continue to show a loss on its operations?
This branch is also responsible for checking all measuring devices. I refer in particular to odometers, which are those parts of speedometers that register mileage travelled. I understand that nearly all speedometers imported into Canada come from the United States, and about a year ago it was stated that these speedometers, when tested, were consistently found to be 3.5 per cent over-rated. In other words they were not giving the true picture so far as mileage was concerned.
This has a direct bearing on the car rental business. People who rent cars would like to know they are paying for the actual miles they travel. People who keep close tab on gas mileage, and oil and tire performance, also want to know they are getting the true picture. Are checks being made on these speedometers which are put in Canadian cars?


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, I thank the hon. member for Wellington South for his intervention and I congratulate him on the homework he has done on this branch, which normally remains in the background but which does such valuable work in checking the system of weights and measures we have in Canada.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)
For some time, I think perhaps dating back to the reign of the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre, we have had in mind doing something about this branch by way of broader legislative authority in order to bring it up to date. The legislative program of this
June 30, 1967

house in respect of items which have high priority has been so heavy that we have been unable to deal with this, but it is our intention as soon as possible to bring before the house legislation which will revise some aspects of the statute. We do not need to do this in order to charge fees which are more in line with the expenditures. We are looking into this matter and perhaps I will have more to say on this at a later date.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
2.9. Canadian Government participation in the 1967 World Exhibition, Montreal, $6,750,800.
Gordon Minto Churchill: This vote I imagine is acceptable to the house because of the general interest in the world exhibition in Montreal and because of the general success of that enterprise. I wonder whether the minister at this stage might review this from the beginning. In addition to the estimate which appears here, perhaps he would indicate the total amount of money we have voted over the years in respect of Expo '67. In so far as he has the information, he might also give us the figures for attendance at the fair and the forecast with regard to the financial success of the exhibition.
The reason I ask for this is that although a tremendous amount of information appears in the daily press, radio and television, nevertheless I think it should be recorded in Hansard at this particular stage so that the progress to date will be included in our permanent records. This will all come out later, of course, when the world fair is over and the totals are added up, but I think an interim report at this stage would be helpful.
It is very appropriate that this should come under the Minister of Trade and Commerce. It is interesting to note that two very active and major figures on the staff of Expo '67-without in any way detracting from the work which has been done by others -are former members of the Department of Trade and Commerce. This is an indication of the type of able people who are employed by that department. They have had an opportunity at an international exhibition to show to everyone that we have in Canada men who are fit and capable to do things at an international exhibition which are comparable in standard to what has been done by people of other nationalities at other world exhibitions. There may be others, but I am referring to Mr. Andy Kniewasser and Mr. Leslie Brown, both of whom were very active and capable members of the Department of Trade and
Supply-Trade and Commerce Commerce when I had the pleasure and honour to report to parliament for that department.
The engineer who was largely responsible for the construction of the site and for the general arrangements surely must be, somewhere along the line, a relative of mine. I have not quite discovered the close connection, but he appears to exhibit the characteristics of the Anglo-Saxon clan to which I belong.
Although I have not said anything in the house about Expo '67 from the time of its origin, I think this is one of the great accomplishments of Canada. I had the pleasure of attending the world fair in New York in 1939, and had an excellent opportunity to see that fair in detail. I also had an opportunity to see the world fair in Brussels in 1958. Therefore I have had an opportunity to make a comparison. In so far as my recollection is concerned, those two world fairs, important as they were, have been exceeded by the extent of, and the emphasis placed upon Expo '67. Time of course has moved on and technological improvements have occurred. Nevertheless, the world fair in Canada this year, in Montreal, has set a standard which will be hard to match in the future, not only from the standpoint of the number of countries which have participated in the fair-this is a major achievement and one which I am sure must be an all time record-but also from the standpoint of the standard of competence which has been displayed at the fair.
As Canadians we naturally are very proud of having such a successful exhibition in our country. We are fully cognizant of the fact that this has attracted world attention to Canada and will result in better relations between Canada and other countries. It will also stimulate trade. We are grateful to the countries which have undertaken to participate in the fair. Thanks to a great many people-the director general whose career in external affairs is well known to the members of the house, and the competent staff -Canadians have found that in this centennial year we have been able to put on display to the world a fair which surpasses any previous world fair. I am sure we are all grateful to those who have done the planning, who have worked hard and who have participated. We are also grateful to the members of the Department of Trade and Commerce for their contribution.
So, at this stage I should like to ask the minister to give us some of these facts, so that they will be recorded in Hansard and so that
June 30, 1987

Supply-Trade and Commerce we will have an official statement of what has transpired with regard to the amount of money expended and the attendance at the fair. Then the minister, from his greater knowledge of the whole operation than is available to me, may wish to mention some other aspects which he considers important. He might indicate what he believes will be the permanent beneficial results from this great Canadian achievement.


Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Chairman, this particular item covers the Canadian participation through the Canadian pavilion only. The total amount voted for this is $21 million. I am glad to note that this is one of the projects at Expo which is operating within its budget. In this regard I think we must recognize the good work Mr. "Les" Brown has done, and I thank the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre for his recognition of that. I believe the Canadian pavilion is a great credit to Canada. It is recognized as such by all Canadians who have visited it, and there have been fine and glowing tributes paid to it by visitors from abroad.
In respect of the broader picture of Expo itself, although it does not come under this item and I do not have all the facts and figures at my disposal for that reason, I should like to say a few words about it. I did refer to this earlier today, before the hon. member took his seat in the house. I said that the total attendance now exceeds 16J million people and is far in excess of the number which had been estimated up to this date.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)
The mere fact that so many people have visited the site has required the corporation of Expo to spend additional amounts of money, and this is increasing the requirement for capital. It was thought there might be a deficit of something in the order of $137 million in respect of Expo itself. It was hoped that the increased number of visitors through the turnstiles would increase the amount of revenue correspondingly. We still hope that will be the case, but to date it has not been, presumably because many of the visitors are from the local area, who come in in the morning and leave in the evening, without spending a great deal of money on the site. With the summer season now in full flight and increasing numbers coming from abroad there are indications that the amount of money left at the site per capita will increase. By whatever yardstick you use to measure, perhaps with the exception of a strict financial balance sheet approach, this is going to be a

great Canadian accomplishment and a great Canadian asset.
We are already concerned about the disposal arrangements for Expo. The master plan which was tabled some time ago indicated an amount of some $74 million which the C.C.W.E. hoped will be realized through salvage and the disposal of assets. We have established a committee under the tripartite governments-federal, provincial and city-to make recommendations to the Corporation of the World Exhibition as to how these assets can be disposed of to the best advantage, and the amount budgeted actually realized.
Hon. members will recall that under the terms, the participating countries are required to remove their buildings from the site, and leave the site in good repair unless other provisions are made. A number of nations have indicated they would like to contribute their buildings, and the mayor of Montreal has indicated he would like to have some of them. This, together with the other arrangements for disposal on winding up in due course, are under consideration. It has already been agreed that La Ronde, which is the amusement area, will continue in operation for a period of some two years under the tripartite arrangement. I expect to bring legislation before parliament in the fall seeking authority to continue participation in this operation for a period of two years, after which it is the intention of the federal government to dispose of its share of the assets, presumably to the city of Montreal.
I am sure we all agree with the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre that this is a great success, and with the compliments he paid to the commissioner general, Mr. Pierre Dupuy, the assistant deputy commissioner, Mr. Andre Kniewasser, and to the chief engineer, Col. Churchill. There was one man he omitted to mention, because he was referring only to those with previous government service. I refer to Mr. Shaw, the deputy commissioner general, who has been a tower of strength in making a success of Expo. He has made a great contribution around which the whole program has in great measure revolved.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I merely want to say to the minister that I am sure all members of the committee extend their congratulations to him and to his department, and to those who have been responsible for the unqualified success which has attended Expo. I have talked to many people who have visited almost all the world fairs over the years, and
June 30, 1967

one of them said to me that this is the greatest fair he had seen in his lifetime and the greatest he ever expected to see. This is a fine tribute to all those, including the minister, who have planned and carried out this very large undertaking. If Canadians ever suffered from an inferiority complex, this ought to dispel it.
It is only natural, living beside the country which has the most advanced technology in the world, that there are times when we wonder whether we can do things on as grand a scale, with as much success and with as much flamboyancy as our United States neighbours. Certainly Expo has demonstrated that the governments of Canada, federal, provincial and municipal, in co-operation with the business community and the general public, when they have a common purpose to achieve can do great things together, and Expo is a living example of that type of accomplishment.
We have only seen part of the picture and I think the summer months will add even more lustre. There will be bigger crowds, and before the end of the season I am sure Expo will be far beyond the finest expectations of all of us, including the minister.
At a time like this when we are having a party it is bad manners to ask how much it cost, but I should like to ask the minister two questions for the purpose of clarification. He mentioned the world exhibition and said the total cost was to be something like $21 million.


Robert Henry Winters: That is for the Canadian pavilion.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Is this amount covered under vote 29? I noticed the figures for the fiscal years 1964-65, 1965-66 and 1966-67 amount to just about $29 million. I think we have already spent $14 million. Will this total amount cover the entire cost?


Robert Henry Winters: Yes, I understand this will cover the entire cost. The $21 million should be adequate to cover the operation.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: The other question I should like to ask relates to Expo itself. The minister mentioned something about an anticipated deficit. I think he referred to a short fall this morning, which is a much nicer way of expressing this situation. He suggested the deficit would be $137 million. He also referred to an amount of $74 million as a salvage and disposal value. Has this amount already been subtracted before calculating the anticipated $137 million deficit, or will that deficit be 27053-139
Supply-Trade and Commerce reduced by $74 million, if we are able to realize that amount?


Robert Henry Winters: No, we have assumed that there will be $74 million recovered through salvage and disposal of assets in the calculation of that $137 million figure.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: So the $137 million will be the deficit after we have recovered the $74 million, assuming we are able to recover that amount?


Robert Henry Winters: That is a correct observation, Mr. Chairman.


Maurice Rinfret: Shall vote 29 carry?


Gordon Minto Churchill: Mr. Chairman, I have one final comment to make, and I do not wish to appear to be delaying the procedure of the house unduly. I did want to give an opportunity for the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam to make a speech this afternoon. For that reason I provided him with a topic, as he faces a leadership convention next week.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to thank the member for Winnipeg South Centre for giving me the opportunity of shining in such brilliant company. The only difficulty is that he put me at a great disadvantage by having to follow such an outstanding orator as himself. On a comparative basis this has placed me at a great disadvantage, particularly having to go before the convention. I intend to hold him to his promise to enter into a lend lease arrangement, in that some Conservative members are going to be present next week. I assure the hon. member that we will send them back to him completely untouched and untarnished. To avoid your calling me to order, Mr. Chairman, let me assure you that these comments have to do with trade, but not commerce.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Special-
32. Grant to the Pacific National Exhibition, Vancouver, towards the cost of constructing a trade fair and sports building at Exhibition Park, Vancouver, the government of Canada's share not to exceed $2,000,000, $800,000.
Item agreed to.
Dominion Bureau of Statistics-
1. Administration and Operation including the fee for membership in the Inter-American Statistical Institute and a contribution of $500 to the International Statistical Institute.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
Gordon Minto Churchill: We have a few minutes left, Mr. Chairman, and perhaps the minister
June 30, 1967

Supply-Trade and Commerce would deal with another matter. The Dominion Bureau of Statistics is another vital factor in the operation of Canada's economy. Very considerable alterations and improvements have been going on in the Dominion Bureau of Statistics over the last few years, because of the realization that is abroad as to its valuable work and the need for enlarging it. We have a few minutes left, and I wonder whether the minister would tell us something about that bureau, which has done such good work in the past.


Robert Henry Winters: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would be glad to say a word on behalf of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, which I think is one of the finest organizations of its kind in the world. I am constantly amazed at the volume and the broad sweep of information collected and disseminated by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. Hon. members might note that a great percentage of the answers in reply to questions asked on a wide variety of subjects comes through this organization. The subjects range from the consumption of snuff in Canada to the number of whales caught in the north Atlantic ocean.
One might almost say that the bureau has been in a constant state of growth because of the pressure of the demands that fall upon it from various departments. Last year it undertook the census, and this required a considerable amount of extraordinary expenditure. But it was done expeditiously and well. The Dominion Bureau of Statistics is endeavouring to computerize its operations and it has done so to a very large extent. The bureau has a very fine computer operation which enables it to get out the information required quickly. They are constantly working toward accelerating the pace with which information is made available, because the value of any information depends, (1) upon its correctness and (2) upon the speed with which it is made available to those who use it.
This information is made available to the consuming public of Canada, the various trade associations, provincial governments, and many others. The bureau has a wide variety of users and it is important that this information be made available expeditiously and correctly. We are spending a great deal of time and effort in building the bureau into the kind of organization that can meet those tests.


John Angus MacLean: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate what the minister said with regard to the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. I notice
(Mr. Churchill.]

that there has been a growth in the bureau over the years. I am wondering whether there is any way of assessing how much of this growth results in increased benefit to the taxpayers, and how much of the growth in what we might generally term the public service-and I include all branches of the public service-is due to Parkinson's law. Of course, we have to recognize that this is a complicated age and there is a greater and greater demand upon public services of various kinds. These services can be of great benefit and no doubt are of great benefit, but sometimes I am appalled by the fact that we are told that because of automation, new electronic gear, and all this sort of thing, a service becomes very much more efficient, but the net result is that it costs more to provide that service.
I should like to mention an example of this sort of thing. The Minister of Transport made a very attractive statement the other day with regard to the telephone service of the government. A new system was evolved in the last year or so, and every call that is made is costing the taxpayer less money. Nevertheless there has been a very considerable gross increase in the cost of telephone services to, I think, practically every department of government. The answer to this of course is: Well, the government has become much more efficient and the departments use the long distance telephone service much more frequently than was the case when it was more expensive. It is also said it is much more efficient to make a long distance telephone call than it is to write a letter. But there is no evidence that there is any reduction in the cost of the traditional means of communication. We seem to go on and on in this way.
I would like to think there is a very close examination of the necessity for and value of any new service that is provided. I hope I am not misunderstood. I am all for providing every service that is reasonable for helping the economy and the general development of our country. But I think we have to be selective on occasion. I believe we have to select the things that give the greatest benefit for the money spent on them. There will undoubtedly be occasions when we cannot afford certain things, in the sense that they are not justified in the circumstances, and if as a result of deciding that we are to have a wide collection of attractive things the cost to the taxpayer continues to rise at a greater rate than the general growth of our country.
If this trend were to continue indefinitely, the tax burden would become heavier and
June 30, 1967

heavier. This growing tax burden will have exactly the opposite effect on our economy, our ability to compete in world markets and raising the standard of living for all Canadians, because if all these costs are passed on to the consumer-and it is inevitable that they are, in some form or another-the cost of living will go up and therefore for a given income the standard of living will go down.
I do not wish to create the impression that I hold the view that the Dominion Bureau of Statistics is particularly guilty or vulnerable in this regard. I assume that under the present minister a very careful watch is kept on a tendency to empire building, if you want to put it crudely.


Mr. McCutcheon:: Mr. Chairman, I have just one comment to make to the minister. I wonder whether he has read the report of the joint committee of the House of Commons and the Senate and the recommendations of the committee in connection with the service provided by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. This committee ran into a problem all through its hearings. The problem was that the items relative to the price of food were weighted with this, that and the other thing in such a way that nobody, not even the economists, could give a true comparison with market fluctuations.
One of the recommendations was that the service of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics in this particular field should be overhauled and speeded up, and the reports brought out so that they were readily understandable by the general public. I wonder whether the minister has any comment in this regard.


Robert Henry Winters: No, Mr. Chairman, other than that we are striving toward that end. As I mentioned, as always there is the demand for the earlier presentation of this sort of material. I have not read the report in full but I have seen references to it. To the extent that the Dominion Bureau of Statistics can improve its efficiency and update its making available of information, we will try to do this.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)
May I say in reply to the hon. member for Queens that we have been taking a good look at the growth to which he referred. I have been spending a fair amount of time on this point recently, together with the officials of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and Treasury Board, to see to what extent Mr. Parkinson has been at work there. There has
27053-139S
Leifr Eiriksson Day
been pressure from other departments requiring information and it is a problem for Treasury Board and the other departments to screen out what is essential. Once it is set out for the D.B.S. as a program approved by Treasury Board or by the government, it is up to the D.B.S. to render the best service it can with their program. The selection of programs is not its primary function; that is a matter for determination by the government, but if these things are not carefully watched there is a danger of Parkinson's law being applied to full effect. This is what we have to guard against.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Maurice Rinfret: With the exception of Vote 1, this concludes the consideration of the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce. Shall I rise, report progress and request leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house?


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


The Deputy Speaker:: It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members business as listed on todays' order paper, namely public bills and private bills.



LEIFR EIRIKSSON DAY


Mr. Eric Stefanson (Selkirk) moved: the second reading of Bill No. C-7, respecting the observance of Leifr Eiriksson day.
He said: Mr. Speaker, Bill No. C-7, respecting the observance of Leifr Eiriksson day, is a very short bill. The explanatory note says that:
-the purpose of this bill is to commemorate the fact that Leifr Eiriksson was the first European to land on what is now Canadian soil.
I am not asking the government to declare a national holiday but merely to declare a Leifr Eiriksson day to commemorate or give recognition to the fact that Leifr Eiriksson was the first European to land on that part of North America which is now Canadian soil.
On September 3, 1964, the president of the United States, Lyndon B. Johnson, issued a proclamation designating October 9, 1964 as "Leifr Eiriksson day", in recognition of the discovery of North America about the year 1000 A.D. In view of the fact that the United

June 30, 1967
Leifr Eiriksson Day
States has seen fit to declare a Leifr Eiriksson day, it would be only appropriate that Canada do likewise.
I have suggested that the first Monday in August be recognized as Leifr Eiriksson day. My reason for suggesting that day is that on that day the annual Icelandic celebration is held at Gimli, Manitoba. Manitoba has the largest Icelandic settlement on this continent, and Leifr Eiriksson being of Icelandic descent I felt that this would be an appropriate day. The implementation of this suggestion would not cost the people of Canada any money; it would, however, give recognition to what is now known as factual history. That is the important issue.
I wish to read a short article from the Canadian Press which appeared in the Saturday, June 10, 1967 issue of the Winnipeg Tribune. Under the heading "Ontario Displays Vinland Map" it says:
The Vinland map said by Yale university scholars to be proof that Canada was discovered by Norsemen at least two centuries before the voyages of Columbus will be on display at the Royal Ontario Museum for three days next week.
The map, about 11 inches by 16 inches, was drawn on parchment about 1440 from source materials dating back to the 13th century voyages of Leifr Eiriksson, researchers say.
In the upper right hand corner is a large island labelled Vinland, with two river outlets thought to be the gulf of St. Lawrence and the Hudson straits.
This is the same map as was referred to in an article in the October 11, 1965 issue of the Washington Post written by staff writer Howard Simons, in which he outlines that Yale University and British museum scholars had unearthed evidence that Leifr Eiriksson had discovered North America about five hundred years before Christopher Columbus. I would recommend this article for perusal by all those who are interested in history and the preservation of historic facts.
Another article which I would recommend for study entitled "Leifr Eiriksson Discovered America" is contained in the 1965 winter edition of the Icelandic Canadian. In the same edition there is an article entitled "Some Notes on Leifr Eiriksson's National Origin and the Source on Greenland and Vineland" written by Professor Haraldur Bessason. Mr. Bessason is professor of Icelandic at the University of Manitoba, and he has done a great deal of research on this subject.
The observance of a Leifr Eiriksson day will not in any way effect Canada's recognition of the sailings of John Cabot and Jacques Cartier, or the achievement of Samuel de

Champlain who was the first European to establish a permanent settlement in Canada.
I wish to quote from a letter written by Dr. P. H. T. Thorlakson to the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Martin), dated January 7, 1965, giving a brief account of the early Viking voyages of discovery and exploration to the western hemisphere, and a brief reference to the recent archaeological discovery in Newfoundland. It reads as follows:
Eiric Thorvaldson, more commonly referred to as "Eric the Red" because of the colour of his hair, was the first explorer and colonizer of Greenland. In the year 985 A.D. he sailed westward from Iceland on a voyage of exploration. Having selected the west shores of Greenland as the sites for new settlements, he returned to Iceland to arrange for the transportation of his own and several other families to this new land. It is recorded that 35 ships sailed from Iceland but only 14 arrived. Some were driven back, others were lost. With Eric's family was his famous son, Leifr, born in Iceland. Their family home in western Greenland was situated at Eiricsfjord and was called Brattah-lid.
Some 15 years later, Leifr was sailing from Iceland to Greenland to visit his father when he was driven off course to the westward and southward by strong winds. He landed in a country which, according to the available records, had never been reached before by Europeans. When he finally arrived at his father's home, he reported the discovery of this new land situated to the west and south of Greenland.
In the year 1007, Thorfinn Thordarsson-better known as Thorfinn Karlsefni, an Icelander who had married Gudrid, the widow of Eiric's son Thorstein, set out to explore and establish settlements in this new land. His expedition consisted of 160 persons and several ships. They sailed from Greenland towards the southwest. He sighted a barren land covered with flat stones, "Helluland" and further south he came to a wooded land, "Markland". He recognized both these lands from the earlier description by Leifr. Thence they sailed far to the south. Finally, on their starboard side, they saw a long coast line with a sandy shore indented with bays. A river entered the ocean at this point. Here they landed and set forth to explore the country. Inland, they gathered ears of wild grain and an abundance of wild grapes. This was Vineland (Wineland) the Good originally described by Leifr Eiriksson.
Thorfinn Karlsefni and his adventurous colonists stayed in this new country for at least three years. During the first autumn (1007) a son was bom to Gudrid, the wife of Karlsefni. The child was named Snorri. Many notable Europeans, including the celebrated Icelandic-Danish sculptor Thorvaldsen, trace their lineage to this first child of European blood born in North America.
In the year 1917 the Icelandic sculptor, Einar Jonsson, was invited to the United States by Dr. Henry Goddard Leach on behalf of Mr. Bum-ford Samuel. By the provision of her will, the late Mrs. Bumford Samuel established a fund which was to be used to erect statues of representative pioneers of America in Fairmont park in Philadelphia.
June 30, 1967



[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
As a result of this visit, a statue of Thorfinn Karlsefni, created by a gifted Icelandic sculptor, was placed in Fairmont park in 1918, to memorialize these early attempts at settlement and as a tribute to the first European pioneer in North America.
In a book entitled the "Life of Christopher Columbus" written by his son, Ferdinand, is recorded the visit of his father to Iceland in the year 1477, fifteen years before he landed in central America. In a letter from Christopher Columbus to his son, quoted in part only in this book, it is stated that the explorer sailed from Bristol, England to Iceland in February, 1477.
Historians believe that Christopher Columbus' decision to visit Iceland was no doubt made after he had read the works of Adam of Bremen, who was one of the most distinguished scholars of Europe in the eleventh century. Adam of Bremen had recorded the story of the propagation of Christianity in northern Europe. After describing conditions in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Greenland, he stated: "The same king (Svend Estridson) also informed me about the discovery of one more region in that ocean-a region named 'Vinland', because grapes grow there spontaneously, produces the best wine; and corn too, without being sown in abundance."
This book, written by Adam of Bremen, was published between the years 1072 and 1076 in the manner that books were published before printing was invented.
The early discovery, explorations and attempts at colonization of North America, were memorialized by the government of the United States when they presented a statue of Leifr Eiriksson to the people of Iceland on the 1000th anniversary of the founding of the Althing-parliament-in 1930.
Canada, I believe, has now a most cogent reason for officially acknowledging the first recorded discovery of North America by designating an official "Leifr Eiriksson day". For the first time, we now have a day which has great significance to these early events and to our Canadian history. In September, 1964, a pierced stone weight used in spinning was unearthed in the northermost tip of Newfoundland at I'Amse aux-Medows. The discovery on Canadian soil of this soapstone spindle whorl indicates that the early Viking settlers included women, corroborating the accounts of the early Viking settlements along our eastern seaboard which are recorded in the ancient Iceland sagas. The day of this discovery may appropriately be chosen by Canada as "Leifr Eiriksson day" but no doubt other days of the year should also be considered.
A plaque, a centennial gift to Canada was presented by Canadians of Icelandic descent on April 14, 1967, and placed in the new library and Archives building in Ottawa. I just want to quote from the Winnipeg Free Press for Saturday, April 15, 1967. The article is headed "Plaque Marks Canada's Discovery" and states:
Prime Minister Pearson unveiled a bronze plaque in the new national library and Archives building here Friday as a centennial gift to Canada by citizens of Icelandic descent.
Dr. P. H. T. Thorlakson of Winnipeg, president of the Canadian Icelandic centennial committee, presented the plaque to commemorate discovery of
Leifr Eiriksson Day
the eastern coast of Canada by mariners of Iceland and Greenland in the late tenth century.
Mr. Pearson said the plaque "makes us more conscious than ever of the varied origins of our national existence."
He said it is now well established that the first discoverers of what is now known as North America were Vikings long before Christopher Columbus, John Cabot and Jacques Cartier came.
Noting on the trilingual plaque that Icelandic is the most economic language in the number of words used, Mr. Pearson jokingly suggested he would like to see it adopted as the official language of the House of Commons.
The plaque shows an open book and quill recalling work of Icelandic scholars who preserved eleventh and twelfth century records, and a replica of a Viking ship, along with two historic excerpts from The Saga of the Greenlanders, first written in Iceland about 1200 and preserved in a vellum manuscript.
Part I records the sighting of the new land by Bjarni Herjolfsson of Iceland in 986. Part II describes the voyage of Leifr Eiriksson some years later and his landing on Vinland-part of the coast of North America.
The heading on this plaque is, "A chapter of Canadian history-discovery of the western hemisphere". The introductory paragraph at the top of the plaque reads as follows:
This plaque commemorates the discovery of the eastern coast of Canada by mariners from Iceland and Greenland in the late tenth century.
The historic excerpt reproduced below is from Graenlendinga Saga (The Saga of the Greenlanders) first committed to writing in Iceland about A.D. 1200 and preserved in Flateyjarbok (The Flatey Book) a vellum manuscript compiled in Iceland about A.D. 1390.
Part I records the sighting of new land in the west by Bjarni Herjolfsson, of Eyrar, in Iceland in A.D. 986.	'
Part II describes the voyage of discovery of Leifr Eiriksson some years later and his landings in Helluland (Flatstoneland), Markland (Woodland) and Vmland (Wineland). These explorations led to an attempt at colonization by Thorfinnr Karlsefni, whose son, Snorri Thorfinnsson, was born on this continent.
Archaeological research in western Greenland and eastern Canada supports these ancient Icelandic records of exploration and colonization.
In conclusion, by the acceptance of this plaque, the government of Canada has recognized that mariners from Iceland and Greenland were the discoverers of the east coast of Canada and, indeed, of North America. The United States has given recognition to the fact that Leifr Eiriksson was the discoverer of North America and also that he was of Icelandic descent. I think it would be fitting if the government of Canada saw fit to recognize this historic fact in a similar manner.


Mr. John R. Matheson (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, Leifr Eiriksson is a symbol, a symbol of

June 30, 1967
Leifr Eiriksson Day
those adventurers whose spirit of inquiry defied danger and death. They are like the men who saw fit to climb Everest, a number of whom were lost, but finally Everest was conquered. The only explanation they could offer for their effort was that it was there. There was no greater purpose than adventure itself. These fierce Norsemen sailed the wild sea and discovered this land in which we live. I am reminded of these lines: Forth sped the Viking bold E'en through the Arctic cold,
On, ever onward ...
Three weeks we westward hove,
And when the storm was o'er,
Cloud-like we saw the shore Stretching to leeward.
The hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Stef-anson) is an excellent representative of his Viking ancestors. To him and to those pioneers who played a part in ushering in the drama of this new world, we say, "Skol". I believe in the importance of symbols, whether they be flags, shields or badges. I believe in heroes. I believe it was Carlyle who wrote of heroes and hero worship. Probably it is so that great ideas have been carried in the hearts of mankind by human example. Leifr Eiriksson is a symbolic hero as were John Kennedy, Winston Churchill and Pope John. They were all great human symbols.
Leifr Eiriksson has become part of the thought structure, the symbolism of the entire western culture. I believe that any great thought must be conveyed by some human life, even though the historic facts concerning that life may be uncertain and vague. I suppose, sir, on a day such as this all of us are thinking of that very special and precious human being who is a symbol to us and who is with us today. Her life has been a living symbol of service, from every call of duty she has never flinched, never wavered, like her brave father before her. I once saw her in uniform-a slip of a girl. It has been her glory to exemplify for her people honour and moral worth and we rejoice in her presence for our centennial celebrations.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)
I think it is interesting to remember that some of her ancestors, for several centuries, used the title "Dux Normannorum" or "Dux Normanniae". I am not clear when this practice was discontinued or whether in fact it is discontinued. It is interesting to note how these fierce Norsemen conquered successively France, Scotland and then England.
Leifr was the son of the great clan chief Eric the Red, who was referred to as the

strong and noble leader of the Norsemen. These stout hearts, with their great muscles, blond hair and blue eyes voyaged to the Faeroes, the Orkneys, the Hebrides, the coast of Normandy, to Iceland, Greenland, and even to Canada itself.
My hon. friend from Selkirk (Mr. Stefan-son) who had the ingenuity to bring this motion before the house had every right to bring it. Before rising to speak I received a note from my good friend from Red Deer who will follow me, also of Scandinavian origin, in which he urges me not to talk against this bill. It would be hard for me to do so. My grandfather, John Matheson, was born in the northern part of Skye. His mother was Flora Nicolson-pronounced Nick-olsen. They spoke Gaelic. I am told that all these northern highlanders could easily understand Norwegian when it was spoken slowly. They were Vikings just a few generations removed. The Vikings were the people who-and no archaeologist and historian today can be precise as to where this was-somewhere around 1,000 A.D. touched down in our land.
I have read various historical accounts of these people and the comments by Samuel Eliot Morison, the great professor of American history. He suggests that relics such as the Kensington rune stone and the Beardmore weapons, which have been the subject of much research by archaeologists, are clumsy forgeries. I believe on the evidence now available he is wrong.
Notable European scholars, and here I am thinking of Paul Herrmann who wrote "Conquest by Man", suggest that there is much evidence, from artifacts of all kinds, to show that there were definite Scandinavian inroads very early in our history. I am intrigued by the account of Paul Herrmann, how in August, 1898, a Scandinavian by the name of Olof Ohman, in Solem near Kensington in Minnesota, discovered, by knocking his axe against a tree, a rune. I know that this matter has been the subject of controversy, but many people who are more authoritative on the subject than even the eminent Professor Morison is, regard this rune as evidence that Norsemen appeared in this land at an early time.
The stone spoke of a journey of eight Swedes and 22 Norwegians from Vinland. May I read the text of the runic inscription: (We are) 8 Goths (Swedes) and 22 Norwegians on (an) exploration-journey from Vinland over the West (i.e. through the western regions) We had camp by 2 skerries (i.e. a lake wherein are two skerries) one day's-journey north from this stone
June 30, 1967



We were (out) and fished one day Alter we came home (we) found 10 (of our) men red with blood and dead. Ave Maria.
Save us from evil
On the other side of the stone were chipped these words:
(We) have 10 of our party by the sea to look after our ships (or ship) 14 day's-journey from this island. Year 1362.
It is interesting to compare this date with the date of the attack on Rhodes and the early migrations of the Crusaders to the far east. It is interesting that there were then valorous men in armour on this side of the water. There are some suggestions that Bjarni, son of Herjulf, touched down in Canada perhaps a few years earlier. Certainly, as the hon. member for Selkirk has indicated, Lief stands above others and is the man worthy of being characterized as the symbol of this fearless and intrepid people.
Leifr Eiriksson, the Norse discoverer of North America, was probably born in Iceland. He was the son of Eric the Red, spent his youth in Greenland and in 999 A.D. visited Norway where he was converted to Christianity. He was commissioned by King Olaf Tryggvason to carry the religion to Greenland. According to "Saga of Eric the Red" in the collection of sagas known as "Hauksbok" it was on the return voyage from Norway to Greenland in about A.D. 1000 that Leifr Eiriksson, blown off his course, discovered hitherto unknown lands in which he found grapes, self sown wheat and a species of tree called Mansur.
He landed, secured specimens of this vegetation and continued on to Greenland where he was successful in introducing Christianity. There are various versions of this story but it is clear that the Norsemen from a very early period passed through some parts of our country-perhaps through the southeast corner of the United States, probably through Newfoundland.


An hon. Member:: I think that is quite
right.


John Ross Matheson: Do I hear an interjection by
an hon. member?
It is interesting to note that archaeologists suggest that Bjarni Herjulfsson, while in his twenties, undertook the great voyage of 985 A.D. in which he navigated from some spot in western Iceland to this country and probably landed at, or saw first the flat landscape of Hamilton inlet in Labrador. After two days they sighted land anew-high mountains and
Leifr Eiriksson Day
glaciers, as in Greenland. They had sighted the southern part of Baffin island.
The Heimskringla records that Bjarni reported the voyage to Eric the Red, the uncrowned king of Greenland and that Eric's oldest son, Leifr, bought the ship from Bjarni and obtained a crew of 35, and the consent of his father, Eric, for a new voyage of exploration. Unfortunately, Eric had a fall from his horse; as a result it was left to his great son to take on the responsibility of that voyage of discovery. Thus Leifr discovered Vinland-a land laden with vines and grapes.
We do not know where Vinland is. We do not really know at what point on the coast Leifr landed. It may have been Massachusetts, but also, possibly, it may have been Virginia, Florida, New England or Newfoundland. The winter frost was so light that the grass had scarcely withered. In any event, it is clear from the evidence of the artifacts that from early years the Norsemen touched down on our shores. I see my hon. friend nodding his head; I should add that from early days the brave Irish, too, may have explored these parts.
While on the subject of where Leifr Eiriksson landed it is interesting to note that in Mallorytown, Leeds, in my constituency, they have been working under water for about a year and a half on what is believed to have been a British gunboat of about the year 1812. It is a flat lapstreak vessel. Though all the experts suggest that the boat is a British gunboat about 150 years old, and it has been studied by our northern affairs people for many months, my private theory is that it is Leifr's boat. Of course I may be wrong.
0 (5:30 p.m.)
The importance of this bill is that Canada is a country of rich ethnic variety. Her Majesty was reminded of this variety when she saw the talent on the hill this afternoon-Ukrainians, Chinese, French, Estonian, Italian, Indian, German; one could go on-yes, and Jewish. All this is evidence of the contributions which have been made by people of many races-Africans, Slavs, men and women of both oriental and Caucasian descent.
Some writers theorize on this. Roy Matthews in an article which I would commend to hon. members entitled "Canada, The International Nation," says we must not get trapped in a bicultural and bilingual set-up which relegates others to third class status. Hon. members will appreciate that I am speaking today as a Norwegian.

June 30, 1967
Leifr Eiriksson Day


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Ross Matheson: In this article, which appeared in that excellent periodical, the Queen's Quarterly, Mr. Matthews writes:
The way to avoid such a prospect, in my view, is to ensure that the dilemma does not take on the form of a bilateral confrontation. Diversification is the secret: and this is the essence, again, of my plan for an "international nation." I would never imagine that Canada could escape from its unique situation vis-a-vis the United States; the relationship with our huge southern neighbour will always be paramount in our affairs and my scheme is shaped to recognize that fact implicitly. Likewise, I have no intention of suggesting that the special position afforded the English and French groups under Confederation should be weakened; I accept this factor as a valuable part of our Canadian heritage. What I seek to do is to weave these relationships into a wide and more satisfying design without in any way reducing their significance.
This respect for all has been eloquently expressed in a series of speeches by Her Majesty. She has sought always to encourage the best in us, not only in her realm of Canada but wherever in the world she is recognized as head.
In northern mythology there are three Norns or goddesses who are regarded as dispensers of fate. They are Urdur, the past- and perhaps we have been too preoccupied with Urdur in Canada-there is Verdandi, the present-and ours is a challenging present, and we would not change it for any other day-and there is Skuld, the future.
To the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Stef-anson) and to all the strong people from northern lands who have enriched this country we say, God bless you, and may there be many more in Canada in the years ahead by natural increase and, I hope, by immigration.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, because I should like this bill to pass, my remarks will be brief. I think it is fitting and appropriate that at this time when we are thinking of the history of our land in a special way we should have speeches this afternoon about a particular aspect of our history, namely the occasion when the first European found himself on the shores of what is now our land.
I think it is fitting that we should take note of the background of our history, and it seems to me that what the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Stefanson) asks is little enough, namely that one day in our calendar should be known as Leifr Eiriksson Day. I should like to support this bill not only because of the link it suggests with the history of 900 or a thousand years, but also because in my view it is fitting

for us to recognize the great contribution to the life of Canada which has been made by Canadians of Icelandic descent.
I come from a part of this country where we are particularly aware of this fact. Indeed, all over Canada there are Icelanders and people from Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland who have made a valuable contribution to the life of Canada. But in my part of Canada we are particularly conscious of what people of Icelandic origin have done in helping, along with people of other origins and with all of us who are here, to build this land into the one we are celebrating just now, as it becomes 100 years of age.
For these two reasons, because of the respect it shows for an important aspect of our history, and because of the recognition it gives to people of Icelandic descent in this country, I should like to see the house accept the bill proposed by the hon. member for Selkirk.
I am interested in the fact that the bill does not ask for a holiday in the sense that it would be another day on which people would be free from work. However a most interesting day has been chosen, namely the first Monday in August, which is already celebrated as a holiday in terms of freedom from work in many parts of the country, under the name "civic holiday".
I hope it will not sound like a commercial on my part if I point out that I myself have a bill on the order paper, Bill No. C-57, which seeks to amend the Canada Labour (Standards) Code to provide that the first Monday in the month of August shall be a holiday, along with the others listed in the Labour (Standards) Code. I did not attach any name to that suggested holiday when I put it in my bill. I have received a number of suggestions as to what it might be called; perhaps it could be given a number of names. Anyway, I see no reason at all why both these bills should not be passed. Let us have a holiday in terms of freedom from work on the first Monday in August every year, and I see no reason why that holiday should not be called Liefr Eiriksson Day.
I have pleasure in supporting the bill introduced by the hon. member for Selkirk.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: I rise to support this bill with a good deal of sentiment. As a descendant of some of the early pioneers in our land who came originally from Norway I have a strong family tie with the Nordic background of Liefr Eiriksson.
June 30, 1967

I would remind the hon. member who has just spoken, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), whose support for this bill I appreciate, that while Liefr Eiriksson was born in Iceland it was his father, Eric the Red, who first colonized that island in 970. Those Norwegian adventurers, seeking more productive lands, who discovered Iceland and settled it, went on further to Greenland and then further still to the eastern shores of Canada. Thus, Liefr Eiriksson not only has ties with Iceland, where he was born, but with the Nordic adventurers who came from Norway and who were the real discoverers of the new world of which Canada is today such an important part.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)
I think it is significant that this bill is being discussed today on the eve of Canada's centennial. I cannot think of anyone more worthy to sponsor it than the hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Stefanson). On a day when we are considering the history of our nation relating to the 100 years just about to end, it is good that we should look further back into our past and identify the beginnings of our history.
I also appreciate the scholarly presentation which the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Matheson) has made. I do not want to be repetitious but I think it would be good to add a little detail to his remarks so that we may have on record more detail of how Leifr Eiriksson came to be the first Canadian of Scandinavian stock to reach what is now Canada.
The story of the life of Leifr Eiriksson falls into three parts. First came his Atlantic trip from Greenland to Norway in 999 A.D. He had gone to Greenland with settlers from Iceland. His father, Eric the Red, was the key leader in that adventure. As I say, in the year 999 A.D. he returned to Norway where, as the hon. member for Leeds has already stated, he came to know the king of that country but, more important than that, he came into contact for the first time with Christianity and became a Christian.
The second phase of his life follows his discovery of what he called Vinland, North America, in the year 1003 A.D. Following this discovery he returned to the Norwegian colony in Greenland and spent his life in stewardship there from 1004 to 1065 A.D.
These Norsemen were the first Europeans to leave their coastline and venture into uncharted seas. As their homeland was not, and still is not a rich land, 70 per cent of it being
Leifr Eiriksson Day
covered by mountain, glacier and moor, they went abroad seeking new lands with which to enrich themselves.
It was on the island of Iceland that Leifr Eiriksson was born in the year 970 A.D. Some ten years later his father founded the Greenland colony. Neither Iceland nor Greenland were a very great improvement upon their native land of Norway, so they continued to seek adventure farther away. Considering this, it is not strange to find in the story of Leifr Eiriksson that when he was 20 years of age he went back to Norway and, as I have mentioned, went to the court of King Olaf and came into contact with Christianity. From there he returned to Iceland, and later landed on the eastern coast of Canada.
It was a really astonishing performance. Although it is true that the hulls of the boats of these early Vikings were masterpieces of naval architecture, they were open, and they could only sail before the wind. They depended on oars to face into the weather, and also for a great deal of their propulsion. No craft was more than 50 foot long.
Whereas Christopher Columbus crossed the southern Atlantic, the Vikings sailed the Arctic without benefit of compass. They steered by the stars and by the birds. Having discovered this land in the year 1003, in the following spring they returned to Greenland. One can imagine the rejoicing and the jubilation in that colony of a few hundred souls when Leifr Eiriksson returned. It is no wonder they christened him Leifr the Lucky.
Today general recognition is advancing of Leifr Eiriksson as the discoverer of Canada and the western world. His voyage to North America in the year 1003, and then later the colonizing expedition of his brother, who set up the first colony of 160 people, are things which are now becoming established as facts of history. No one has done more to establish those facts than Professor Helge Ingstad of Norway, who himself has done much of the archeological work in Newfoundland, which has turned up the evidence of that first colony through artifacts directly related to that early period in history.
Today there are many people who believe that Columbus' discovery nearly 500 years later was directly due to the voyages of Leifr Eiriksson. At all events the Norsemen's claim to the original landing seems to be accepted. So, Mr. Speaker, I believe that we should seriously consider accepting this bill today so that there might be one day in the year, such

June 30, 19S7
Leifr Eiriksson Day
as that suggested by the hon. member for Selkirk, that would give recognition to the first European to land in Canada.
Such an act would not only be fitting but would also be encouraging to our students of history and to all our young people, helping them to pay more attention to the great historic heritage of this country. Therefore I give my support to this bill. I agree with those who have already spoken on it, that it would be very fitting for the house at this time to give approval to it and thereby officially set a day in the calendar to be known as Leifr Eiriksson Day.


Mr. F. J. Bigg (Athabasca):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to see this bill passed and therefore will be very brief. We are known by our heroes and I think it is fitting that today, the last day in our experimental first 100 years, we officially recognize one of the great heroes of the western world, Leifr Eiriksson.
Canada has made a great contribution as a melting pot of nations to this top part of North America. We have no great errors to live down. This experiment which is now 100 years old has been a success, and I join with the hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Matheson) in hoping, nay in praying that we will not bog down in any bicultural or bilingual quarrel, but that we will use this great experiment of the last 100 years to move forward into the next 100 years and prove that the experiment is only beginning.
The town of St. Paul in northeastern Alberta, embracing the three great cultures prevalent in that area, is the most successful centennial town in Canada. I only hope that here we can add one more tribute to the many heroes we have had by following the lead of the hon. member who has proposed this bill.
There has been much talk about symbolism this afternoon. I think it is rather significant that the number of this bill is C-7, the number of stars in the great dipper which was such a great boon to navigators. If we pass this bill it will be a tribute to an individual hero, a man who did not take his lead from the mob, a man who stepped out on his own, who expected help from nobody, and made the whole world a better place in which to live. Therefore I join with others who have spoken in saying that this bill should be given second reading.

[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)


Mr. Guy LeBlanc (Rimouski):: Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate, as a French Canadian from Quebec, this opportunity to say a few words here tonight on Bill No. C-7, an act respecting the observance of Leifr Eiriksson day. Under this bill, the first Monday in the month of August would be known and observed as Leifr Eiriksson day throughout Canada.
Personally, I sincerely wish that this bill can be passed tonight, since Leifr Eiriksson is the man who, in all likelihood, according to old relations of the Scandinavian people, was the first to set foot on American soil.
Why observe Leifr Eiriksson day? What can Canada get out of it? I realize that there are in this house more descendants of that great people than I expected, of that ancient people that settled Iceland first from the Scandinavian countries, Sweden, Denmark and especially Norway.
The hon. member for Selkirk (Mr. Stef-anson) who introduced the bill is a direct descendant, through his parents of Icelandic settlers. He might be also a descendant of Sigurd Stefanson who probably was a surveyor, a very able geographer at that time, taking into account the facts known to the men of those days because, unless I am mistaken, Sigurd Stefanson who probably was a survey-peans who prepared a chart of the North Atlantic on which appear the Scandinavian countries of Europe, and those countries Leifr Eiriksson called Helluland, Markland and Vinland.
Our Scandinavian compatriots, descendants of the ancient Vikings, are perfectly justified, as we all are, to be proud of their forebears. When it occurred to me that I might speak on this bill, memories of things I had read came back to me and, in the last few hours, I took the opportunity to refresh my memory a little on such epics, souvenirs of the gruelling voyages undertaken by these kings of the fiords, the heads of families and clans as were the Vikings, knowing that in those days every Norwegian family owned its own fiord and defended it with all the strength and the valour of its brawn and heart.
Descendants of the Scandinavian peoples are justified in their pride for their ancestors and we can understand that they are proud to promote this project of observing Leifr Eiriksson day.
June 30, 1967

Their ancestors, between the years 600 and 800, were fishermen as well as sailors and traders. They travelled on every sea in light boats called drakkars.
Those Vikings did not have the compass to guide them, but it seems that they were gifted with a special instinct to find their way and not get lost hopelessly on the wide seas of the globe.
According to the sagas-chronicles which, in French literature, would probably correspond to mediaeval verse-chronicles such as the Song of Roland, which some of us have heard about and others have probably read

Leifr Eiriksson was the first to set foot on Canadian soil, on the American continent.
However, it seems likely-and we have tangible proof, such as writings and artifacts discovered through archaeological research -that other Europeans had come to America before then, even before the Christian era.
We know that Liefr-


Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the hon. member for Rimouski (Mr. LeBlanc) a question. In view of the fact the hon. member is completely in favour of the bill, as well as-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member who has the floor does not appear to have relinquished the floor.


Robert Norman Thompson: Would it not be good to let it pass now?


Louis Guy LeBlanc: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member would allow me to conclude.
Others had come before Leifr Eiriksson. We find that, a few years before his voyage to America one of his Norwegian fellow-citizens, by the name of Biami, in the year 986, being lost in a storm and having passed south of Greenland, came to the coast of Newfoundland, went up along the shores of Labrador, reached the Land of Baffin, and finally rejoined his friends in Greenland.
It was following the accounts of Biarni, who had not set foot on American soil, that Leifr Eiriksson, because of his adventurous mind and his ambition to find wealth and establish a settlement or a new country, where he could be king, made the same journey as Biarni, but in the other direction.
This is a reason to be proud of the courage and gallantry of this man, who can serve as an example and an inspiration for all good Canadians, whatever their origin may be.
Business oj the House


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hour provided for private members business has now expired.



INTERNAL ECONOMY COMMISSION


Mr. Speaker:: By leave would hon. members give their consent that we revert to motions for the purpose of allowing the Speaker to table in English and in French an extract from the minutes of the meeting of the commissioners for internal economy, June 29, 1967, relating to salary revisions of the staff of the House of Commons. For the information of hon. members this extract will be published in today's Votes and Proceedings. Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

John Angus MacLean: Mr. Speaker, would the government house leader like to restate the business for Tuesday and Wednesday of next week. I understand that we will not be sitting on Monday.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday we plan to consider the estimates of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. If these estimates should pass on Tuesday we will then call the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare. In any event we will call those estimates on Wednesday. On Thursday it is proposed that we begin with the estimates of the Department of National Defence.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)
As hon. members are aware, we have various supply bills to consider on Thursday. At some point next week, following consultation, it is proposed that we call the third reading of the Interpretation Act, which is the only outstanding legislative item intended for this part of the session. This is not likely to cause or require any prolonged debate. That is the proposed program as of now.


John Angus MacLean: Do I understand that it is not intended that we deal with Vote No. 1 of the estimates of the Department of Transport? That item was allowed to stand.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: June 30, 1967
Business of the House
If those estimates are passed earlier than 9.30 on Thursday we might call the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce. In any event, I think it is more or less understood that we will call the first item of the estimates of the Department of Trade and Commerce on Friday next.


Mr, Knowles:: To complete the record, should the minister not point out that the Department of Transport estimates are to be called and passed before Thursday night.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the estimates of the Department of Transport will be called and passed at some point before 9:30 on Thursday. We have already considered those estimates for two days in committee,
and it may be that they can be passed without a great deal of debate.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Do not forget the pensions of retired civil servants.


Mr. Speaker:: It being six o'clock, this house stands adjourned until 2:30 p.m. next Tuesday, according to a special order passed last Monday, June 26.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put.
[The following Items were passed in Committee of Supply this day:]
department of trade and commerce 5, 10, 15. 20, 29, 32.
Dominion Bureau of Statistics
1.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, July 4, 1967