1967-12-20

RURAL DEVELOPMENT


Mr. John R. Matheson (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to table, on behalf of the Prime Minister, special study No. 7 prepared for the Economic Council of Canada by Helen Buckley and Eva Tihanyi, entitled "Canadian Policies For Rural Adjustment: a Study of the Economic Impact of ARDA, PFRA and MMRA."
Sir, I very deeply regret that French copies are not available at this time, as the study was prepared in English. It is presently being translated, and copies in French are expected early in the new year.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the parliamentary secretary leave to table this document?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


Hon. Roger Teillei (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, on a number of occasions both the Minister of Finance and the President of the Treasury Board have indicated to members of this house that an adjustment of veterans disability pensions was being taken into consideration in the preparation of the budgetary calculations recently announced.
I have also indicated from time to time that the government was aware of the need for an adjustment of veterans pensions, and that we would not necessarily wait to do this until the two studies we had initiated were completed, that is the Woods committee report and the study of pension rates. It is proposed, therefore, to increase disability pension rates 15 per cent across the board effective January 1, 1S68.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: This means, of course, the inclusion of widows, orphans and dependant parents. This will mean an increased expenditure of $30 million in next year's estimates and $7.5 million in this year's expenditures. We will take advantage of the next supplementary estimates to make this effective. Both these increases were taken into account in the estimates of expenditure presented by the Minister of Finance and the President of the Treasury Board.


Mr. G. L. Challerlon (Esquimall-Saanich):: Mr. Speaker, naturally all veterans will welcome this announcement by the minister of an increase in their pensions. I am not quite sure whether the minister said the increase will apply also to dependant children.


Roger-Joseph Teillet: Yes.


George Louis Chatterton: At least the grave error that was made in November of last year, when the minister said there was to be a 15 per cent increase but it would apply to the basic pension only, has not been repeated. That was a grievous mistake; as a matter of fact veterans with families received the smallest increase. The veterans of the country will not be satisfied until there is a permanent basis for establishing their pension rates. The national organizations demand that the pension rates be tied to the salaries of certain types of employees in the civil service.
I hope the minister will use his good offices to speed up the report of the special departmental committee on pension rates. I hope, also, that the minister will soon introduce the amendments to the Pension Act which he announced and promised in 1964, so the inequities that now exist in the act and that will no doubt be reported on by the Woods committee can be rectified.


Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure all veterans who will benefit from this increase will be very pleased that it has arrived almost as a Christmas present. They have waited very patiently throughout the months for the government to make a decision with respect to this very important matter. The 15 per cent increase across the board I am sure will be
December 20, 1967
5652	COMMONS
Increase of Veterans Disability Pensions welcomed by those who will receive it in the near future.
[DOT] (2:40 p.m.)
I hope, as did the previous speaker, that the report of the special committee dealing with the question of rates will soon be forthcoming, because this is a matter of great importance to many veterans; and that an equitable rate will be established in relation to the casual worker and the wages which prevail today. I must say that I can see the response throughout the country to the minister's announcement will be most favourable indeed.
I have one question for the minister. He did not mention in his statement anything about the war veterans allowance. Would he say later whether any consideration is being given to this matter?


Mr, Raymond Langlois (Megantic):: Mr. Speaker, the members of this group are glad to hear the announcement of the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Teillet) to the effect that veterans will be granted a general 15 per cent increase, without any discrimination as to groups.
However, Mr. Speaker, I wish to point out that this presents a contrast with the budget brought down a few weeks ago by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Sharp). Just before Christmas especially, I think that veterans will be very happy about the minister's anouncement.
On the other hand, I call the attention of the minister to the fact that even if we were to grant a general increase of 15 per cent, it would still be desirable, until the measures concerning veterans affairs and allowances are amended, to ensure that no niggardliness is practised as to the degree or percentage of incapacity of veterans. There have been complaints not only on the amount of the pension but also on the procedure to determine the degree of incapacity of a veteran. On this point, I can give many instances of which I am personally aware. I should like to ask the minister at this time to make sure that no niggardliness is shown on this score. It is useless to grant 15 per cent if it is to be taken away in another fashion.
I believe that on consideration of the bill to amend the present legislation, we may deal with this problem and until then, once again, in the name of the veterans, our group welcomes this announcement by the Minister of Veterans Affairs.


Mr. A. B. Patterson (Fraser Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure, as has been stated, that veterans across Canada will welcome the announcement that has been made this afternoon, as we welcome it here in the House of Commons. I am also certain that one of the happiest individuals in the house today is the Minister of Veterans Affairs himself, because in spite of the long delay I believe he has been seriously concerned about this particular problem. Not only will his wish be fulfilled, but the minister's announcement will save him from having to answer the many embarrassing questions which are put to him from time to time.
We welcome this announcement, and we know the minister will continue to press for the establishment of an adequate formula for determining these rates. He pointed out that the increased expenditure in the next year's estimates of the department will amount to $30 million, but I believe the people of Canada, in spite of the recommendations of the Minister of Finance to curtail expenditures, will be happy to bear the costs necessary to assist those who served the country so well.



ADJOURNMENT FOR CHRISTMAS RECESS UNTIL JANUARY 22

Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (Minister of National Health and Welfare) moved:: That when the house rises this week for the Christmas recess, it shall stand adjourned until January 22, 1968, at 2:30 o'clock p.m.; provided always that if it appears to the satisfaction of Mr. Speaker, after consultation with Her Majesty's Government, that the public interest requires that the house should meet at an earlier time during the adjournment, Mr. Speaker may give notice that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the house shall meet at the time stated in such notice, and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time; and
That, in the event of Mr. Speaker being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, the Deputy Speaker shall act in his stead for the purpose of this order.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: That, in addition to the hours of sitting set down for Thursday, December 21, 1967, the house shall meet at 10:00 am. and sit until 1:00 p.m.
December 20, 1967

That after prayers have been said at 10.00 a.m., a Minister of the Crown shall propose a motion "That the house do now adjourn" for the purpose of debating the subject of "housing", provided that the said debate shall be terminated not later than 1:00 p.m. in the said sitting, when the motion "to adjourn" shall be deemed to have been withdrawn and thereupon the sitting of the house shall be suspended until 2:30 p.m.; and
That when the sitting is resumed at 2:30 p.m. the house shall forthwith proceed with the ordinary daily routine of business and such other business that has been appointed or set down for consideration in that sitting.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, we are all in favour of this motion but there is one suggestion I should like to make. Perhaps I might put it to the Minister of National Health and Welfare in the form of a question. In view of the fact that this is special time we are providing, and in order that a reasonable number of members might be able to participate in the debate, I wonder if the minister would ascertain, either now or during the day, whether a house order could be passed limiting the length of time each member might speak. If we make the limit 20 minutes, then more members could take part in the debate tomorrow morning.


Hon. Gordon Churchill (Winnipeg South Centre):: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, perhaps the house leader would take into account the numerical strength of the various parties, if a limitation of time is to be imposed, and make it on that basis.


Mr. Howard Johnston (Okanagan-Revel-sloke):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to lodge something of a protest against this most unusual attempt to brush over what was supposed to be a high minded debate on Friday by shifting it to Thursday morning. It seems to me that just a few days ago we went through the bi-annual exercise of playing fast and loose with the date for the recess. Everybody resolved, with great unity of purpose, that we could forgo one day of the recess in order to debate this topic. I feel that a commitment was made at that time by the people who precipitated the adjournment debate, by the Prime Minister and by the house leader for the official opposition, for the debate on Friday. I find it passing strange we should in any way renege on that commitment to the Canadian people, who I am sure feel that housing is a sufficiently important topic that a day should be allotted to it.
Business of the House [Translation]


Mr. Gilles Gregoire (Lapointe):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare.
In his first motion, the minister said simply:
That when the house rises this week for the Christmas recess-
He failed to specify which day: Thursday or Friday? If we are to sit Friday, Mr. Speaker, then I wonder why, under the terms of the second motion, we could not sit Thursday to deal with the regular business of the house, and Friday, to debate the housing problem. I think the minister should give us some clarification and tell us whether or not we are to sit Friday, supposing that we pass this motion to hold the housing debate on Thursday morning? Could the minister answer this question?


Mr. Speaker:: In speaking now the minister will close the debate.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, it is
proposed that the house will rise on Thursday. The precise time of adjournment was not placed in the order because we are not certain at this point at what moment on Thursday the house will adjourn. It is not intended to sit on Friday.
With respect to the motion now before the house, Mr. Speaker, it was felt-and I think this view was expressed by all parties in the house-that this would be an efficient and useful way to have a housing debate. It will be possible for all points of view to be expressed in this three hour period. In no way is the house ignoring its obligations to the people of Canada, nor its obligation to have a debate on the subject before the Christmas adjournment. I am sure if the time is properly used tomorrow morning it will be possible to have as useful a debate as if it were held later in the week.
With respect to the proposal made by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, I am quite prepared to consult with the other parties to arrange for a 20 minute time limit, and also to take into account the point made by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre. If these two points of view can be reconciled, then it will be possible to have a wider participation representative of all members of the house.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
5654	COMMONS DEBATES	December 20, 1967
Questions

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

Mr. Caouelie: 1.	In what activities has the Halifax relief commission been involved over the past three years?
2.	Who are the members of this commission?
3.	What were the annual expenditures of this body for each of the past three years?
4.	Does the government intend to do away with this body, which was established in 1918?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Minister of Finance):: 1.	Over the past three years the Halifax relief commission has continued to carry out the responsibilities for which it was established, namely, the payment of pensions to those suffering disabilities and to widows of victims of the Halifax explosion of December 6, 1917. In addition, medical assistance in relation to their disabilities is provided for both pensioners and others who were injured in the explosion. The commission is also responsible for the management of the funds and property with which it was entrusted.
2.	A. M. Butler, chairman; F. H. Flinn; W. E. Tibbs.
3.	1964, $114,355;	1965, $114,412; 1966,

These expenditures were made from revenues accruing to the commission from funds donated for relief many years ago by various governments and private donors.
4.	As the need for the assistance provided by the commission diminishes with the passage of time, the federal government will review with the government of Nova Scotia the question of the future of the commission.


C.N.R. EMPLOYEES WITH EXPENSE ACCOUNTS
Mr. Godin: How many employees of the Canadian National Railways had company expense accounts during the year 1966?


Mr. J. A. Byrne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: The management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows: It is company policy to reimburse all legitimate out of pocket expenses incurred by any employee in connection with the business of the company. The control of these expenses is maintained through the company's budgetary and other internal controls. It is not possible to answer the question in
[Mr. MacEachen.l
the form asked as the expenses involved are allocated to the specific phase of the business of the company where the expenditure was incurred.


C.B.C. NORTHERN SERVICE
Mr. Nielsen: 1.	How many employees are employed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in connection with the operation of the C.B.C. Northern Service in the Yukon (a) in Whitehorse (b) in Ottawa or elsewhere, and what is the name, position and salary of each such employee?
2.	(a) What was the cost of the operation of the C.B.C. Northern Service in the Yukon for each of the years since its establishment (b) what was the cost of such operation in the Northwest Territories for each of such years?
3.	What was the cost of the establishment of the "Frontier Package" in Yellowknife, N.W.T., and what is the estimated annual cost of operation?
4.	(a) When is it intended to establish such "Frontier Package" in the Yukon (b) upon the establishment of television services in the Yukon, what communities will be served (c) what is the estimated cost of the establishment of the "Frontier Package" in the Yukon and the anticipated annual cost of operation?


Hon. Judy V. LaMarsh (Secreiary of State):: I am informed by the C.B.C. as follows: 1. (a) 13. (b) Ottawa, 13; Yellowknife, 14; Inuvik, 9; Frobisher Bay, 9; Goose Bay, 10; Churchill, 9; Montreal, 10. Staff in Ottawa and Montreal are also engaged in providing recorded and shortwave programs for the Department of National Defence radio stations overseas and programs for the northern short wave service. While it has not been customary to request the C.B.C. to disclose salaries of individual employees, a list of positions by location is attached.
2. (a) and (b)
Cost of northern service Yukon $		operations Northwest Territories $
1958-59	31,827	14,6451959-60	136,862	75,3721960-61	175,370	128,7031961-62	235,475	199,6891962-63	211,723	263,6081963-64	206,751	298,4651964-65	227,291	303,9431965-66	235,194	356,1571966-67	263,115	450,229
December 20, 1967

3.	Cost of establishing the frontier station at Yellowknife was $48,000. This does not include costs of establishing special recording facilities at Calgary and testing equipment which is also for use in servicing other such stations. Estimated annual cost of operating the Yellowknife station is $22,000.
4.	(a) The corporation intends to submit an application to the Department of Transport in January, 1968, for a frontier station at Whitehorse. This application is expected to be heard at the public hearing of the B.B.G. in April, 1968. (b) Other television stations are planned for the Yukon in addition to that at Whitehorse but exact locations have not been finally determined nor have details of construction and cost yet been worked out.
(c)	The estimated capital cost for the Whitehorse station is $108,700. A larger transmitter than that normally planned for a frontier station will be used, primarily due to the problems of terrain in the area. Also, a tape playback centre will have to be installed away from the transmitter site and linked to the transmitter by microwave to overcome problems arising from the difficulty of access to the transmitter. The estimated annual operating cost for Whitehorse is $45,000. Costs involved with development of other locations cannot be forecast realistically until on-site surveys have been made and detailed engineering estimates developed.
1.	Established positions by location: Whitehorse, Y.T.; Station manager; Clerk; Supervising technician; Technician; Program supervisor; Receptionist-switchboard operator; News editor; Announcer/operators (6).
Ottawa-headquarters northern service and armed forces service: Director; Administrative officer; Administrative assistant; Program liaison officer; Program planning officer; Supervisor of technical operations; Clerical and secretarial (7).
Montreal-production centre northern service and armed forces service (including shortwave):	Production manager; Production
assistant; Presentation officer; Producers (3); Program assistant; Clerical and secretarial (3).
Yellowknife, N.W.T.:	Station manager;
Clerk; Supervising technician; Technicians (2); Receptionist-switchboard operator; News editor; Program supervisor; Announcer/oper-ators (6).
Inuvik, N.W.T.: Station manager; Clerk; Supervising technician; Announcer/oper-ators (6).
Questions
Frobisher Bay, N.W.T.: Station manager; Clerk; Technician; Announcer/operators (6).
Goose Bay, Labrador: Station manager; Clerk; Technician; Receptionist-switchboard operator; Announcer/operators (6).
Churchill, Manitoba:	Station manager;
Clerk; Technician; Announcer/operators (6).


GREAT SLAVE LAKE RAIL LINE
Mr. Schreyer: 1.	With regard to the construction of Great Slave lake railroad, what was the original estimate of the date of completion and of the total cost of construction and what was the actual date of completion and the total cost?
2.	How many road construction contractor firms were involved in this construction?
3.	How many contractors went bankrupt during this operation or within one year after date of completion?
4.	How many settlements regarding claims have been finalized?
5.	How many claims are pending?
6.	On each section of the railway construction project for which separate tenders were called and where the amount of earth moving was not in accordance with specifications, to what amount was the actual in excess of or below that specified for tenders?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows: 1. Original estimated date of completion was December 31, 1966. The original estimated cost was $86,250,000. By order in council No. P.C. 1966-2415 dated December 22, 1966 the date of completion of the line of railway was extended to March 31, 1970 and until the line is completed actual final cost figures cannot be given.
2.	Ten.
3.	The information requested is not within the knowledge of the railway.
4.	5 and 6. As litigation is pending in the courts on certain aspects embraced by these questions, it is not considered appropriate to provide information in view of the sub judice nature of the matter.


RECONSTRUCTION OF TRESTLE ON BRANCH LINE, CHELAN, SASK.
Mr. Korchinski: Does the government intend to continue its policy to guarantee certain railway branch lines until January 1, 1975 and, if so, when will the trestle on the branch line west of Chelan, Saskatchewan, be reconstructed?

December 20, 1967
Questions


Mr, J. A. Byrne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: Yes. The Canadian Transport Commission advises as follows: The railway transport committee of the Canadian Transport Commission, by its order No. R-715 of December 1, 1967, has ordered the Canadian National Railways to reconstruct the railway bridge destroyed by fire on May 19, 1967, on the Chelan subdivision, near Chelan, Saskatchewan, within three months of the date of the order.


STEEL AND NICKEL PRODUCTION
Mr. Godin: 1.	Does the government Intend providing any support towards increasing the steel and nickel production in Canada?
2.	By how much should this production be increased to meet Canadian requirements?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: In so far as the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources is concerned: 1. The government already provides substantial encouragement to the nickel and steel industries through certain mineral incentives under the Income Tax Act. These incentives have contributed substantially and directly to past and present expansion programs of these two industries.
2.	Canadian production of nickel far exceeds domestic Canadian requirements, so much so that about 97 per cent of production must be sold on the export market. Canadian steelmaking capacity is now over 12 million tons a year, more than enough to meet current Canadian requirements of about 10.5 million tons a year.
In so far as the Department of Industry is concerned: 1. The government does not currently have any intention of providing support toward increasing steel or nickel production in Canada.
Both of these industries are in a strong position with the exception of the current problems involving the Sydney, Nova Scotia steel plant. There has been a substantial expansion in Canadian plant capacity in recent years.
2.	The Canadian steel industry supplies approximately 87 per cent of the country's demand for primary iron and steel products and in 1966 exported more tonnage than Canadian steel consumers imported. Some of the imports consisted of kinds of steel not produced in Canada.
[Mr. Korchlnskl.l
Canada consumes only 4 per cent of its nickel production. The balance of output is exported. Canadian capacity is being expanded to supply the growing world demand for this product.


LETTER FROM TRAINMEN'S UNION, SYDNEY, N.S.
Mr. Muir (Cape Brelon North and Victoria): With reference to question No. 282, answered on June 26, 1967 has the board of transport commissioners reported on the matter referred to them by the Minister of Transport?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Yes, the secretary of the union being notified accordingly. A copy has been provided the hon. member.


EVALUATION OF PILOT PROJECT, ELLIOT LAKE, ONT.
Mr. Aiken: 1.	With respect to the pilot project at Elliot Lake in which the Indian aifairs branch is a participant, was there a contract awarded to Dr. Jamieson Bond for the evaluation of the project?
2.	Has the Department of Manpower and Immigration, also a participant in the project, any facilities for research and. if so, for what reason or reasons was the evaluation of the project carried out by contract rather than by the said department?
3.	Has any report of the evaluation been completed and made available to the government and, if so, at what cost, and if such report has been completed, what is the nature of its content and recommendations, if any?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the Departments of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Manpower and Immigration as follows: 1. Yes, an evaluation, particularly of attitudes and social factors.
2.	The Department of Manpower and Immigration has facilities within its organization for carrying out research studies. However, as the department's participation in the Elliot Lake project was limited to arranging occupational training when this was required, the decision concerning the method of evaluating the project would rest with the Indian affairs branch, which had the primary interest in the project.
3.	The report has not yet been received; the cost will not exceed $4,900.
December 20, 1967


PENSIONS OF RETIRED C.N.R. EMPLOYEES
Mr. Knowles: 1.	How many retired employees of the Canadian National Railways are in receipt of pensions of less than $25 per month?
2.	How many are in receipt of a pension of $25 per month?
3.	How many are in receipt of pensions of (a) $25.01 to $29.99 per month (b) $30 to $39.99 per month (c) $40 to $49,99 per month (d) $50 to $59.99 per month (e) $60 to $69.99 per month (f) $70 to $79.99 per month (g) $80 to $89.99 per month (h) $90 to $99.99 per month (i) $100 to $124.99 per month (j) $125 to $149.99 per month (k) $150 to $199.99 per month (1) $200 to $299.99 per month (m) $300 per month or over?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows: The information currently available is the same as was given in reply to question No. 2427 of January 13 last.


C.N.R. PENSION FUNDS
Mr. Knowles: 1. What was the total amount of money on the books of the pension funds of the Canadian National Railways as at (a) December 31, 1964 (b) December 31, 1965 (c) December 31, 1966?
2.	What rate of interest does the C.N.R. pay on this money?
3.	What amount of interest was credited to the above noted pension funds during the year ending (a) December 31, 1964 (b) December 31, 1965 (c) December 31, 1966?
4.	What was the total amount paid out of the above noted funds in pensions during the years ending (a) December 31, 1964 (b) December 31, 1965 (c) December 31, 1966?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows: The information which is contained in the company's annual reports for the years 1964 and 1966, is as follows: 1. The total amounts of the investments, cash and other current assets on the books of the pension trust funds were: As at December 31, 1964, $531,627,361; December 31, 1965, $575,887,009; December 31, 1966, $626,818,658.
2.	The CNR does not pay interest on these assets which are held separately in the pension trust funds.
3.	Net earnings on the investments of the pension trust funds were: Year ended December 31, 1964, $23,830,471; December 31, 1965, $25,932,593; December 31, 1966, $28,763,156.
4.	Total amounts of the pensions paid out of the pension trust funds were: Year ended
Questions
December 31, 1964, $32,145,649; December 31, 1965, $34,575,142; December 31, 1966, $37,595,615.


REQUEST FOR OCCUPATIONAL TRAINING, FORT ALEXANDER INDIAN BAND
Mr. Jorgenson: 1.	Has Chief Dave Courchene of the Fort Alexander Indian band in Manitoba made application or representations to the Indian affairs branch and/or the office of the Department of Manpower in Manitoba for the basic upgrading of forty-two Indian people in his band who are unemployed and eligible for training under the occupational training for adults legislation?
2.	If so, what consideration, if any, did the respective departments give to the request of Chief Courchene?
3.	With respect to his request, did the Indian affairs branch indicate to him that the branch would provide welfare for the people on course in lieu of allowances?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the Departments of Manpower and Immigration and Indian Affairs and Northern Development as follows: 1. Chief Dave Courchene of the Fort Alexander Indian band in Manitoba has not made any direct representation to the Department of Manpower and Immigration. Some 40 persons are currently being financed in courses on this reserve, and other applicants will be considered.
Mr. David Courchene, chief of the Fort Alexander Indian band, has made representation to the Indian affairs branch regarding training for the Fort Alexander reserve.
2.	and 3. Chief Courchene was informed by the Indian affairs branch of the position it would take in the event that the Department of Manpower and Immigration did not authorize the purchase of level IV training, as follows:
(a)	Indian affairs would either purchase the service from the province or operate the course.
(b)	Indian affairs would pay the cost of instruction, including teacher's salary, books, and transportation when required.
(c)	It would not be possible for Indian affairs branch to pay living allowances.
(d)	Most unemployed reserve residents desiring training would be receiving welfare assistance which would cover their living requirements.
(e)	Indian affairs branch does not wish to take people out of employment and to put
5658	COMMONS DEBATES	December 20, 1967
Questions
them in training. If the employed Indian means at present of entirely preventing con-people desire to raise their educational level, ditions that will cause ice to jam in the a possibility of evening courses would be channel from time to time during the winter, explored.	but these blocks are always removed as
quickly as possible.


ADMINISTRATION OF HARBOURS
Mr. Caouette: 1.	Does the government intend to set up an autonomous body for the control of the Montreal Harbour?
2.	Does the government intend to apply the recommendations of the Gibb and Glassco Royal commissions concerning the administration of Canadian harbours and, if not, for what reason?
3.	Has the government taken any steps to make the St. Lawrence River navigable throughout the year and, if so, what are they?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. No.
2.	The Department of Transport has already implemented the recommendation of the Glassco royal commission that the administration of Canadian harbours be decentralized. This is being done by establishing local harbour commissions under 13 Eliz. II, Chap. 32, "an act on the establishment of harbour commissions".
Furthermore, with the regional organization now under implementation, harbour administration will be delegated to the regions.
Generally speaking, the Gibb report was implemented in part by the formation of the National Harbours Board in 1936 under the National Harbours Board Act. Recommendations of the Glassco commission were implemented, in so far as harbours under the jurisdiction of the National Harbours Board are concerned, wherever it was found practicable to do so.
3.	In the St. Lawrence river below Quebec the arrangements to support navigation throughout the winter consist of an organization to maintain up to date information on the constantly changing ice situation and to advise shipping on the conditions that they may expect and the easiest route to follow. Where necessary available icebreakers escort ships through difficult areas.
Between Quebec and Montreal the Department of Transport uses icebreakers to maintain an open channel so that broken ice from up river may move down freely and avoid heavy accumulations that will cause the river level to rise. Suitably constructed vessels are free to use this channel provided they do not impede flood control operations. There is no
[Miss LaMarsh.)


'CONSTRUCTION OF NATIONAL REVENUE BUILDING, OTTAWA
Mr. Aiken: 1.	Has construction recently commenced on a new building for the Department of National Revenue at Confederation Heights, Ottawa?
2.	If so, when was the work started, what is the projected completion date, and the total estimated cost?
3.	What is the purpose for which this building is being constructed?


Hon. G. J. Mcllraiih (Minister of Public Works):: 1. Yes.
2.	The contract for $17,981,000 was awarded on August 18, 1967. The projected completion date is February, 1970.
3.	To provide consolidated accommodation for the taxation division of the Department of National Revenue and for the data centre.


C.N.R. LAY-OFFS, QUEBEC REGION
Mr. Laprise: 1.	Since the layoff of C.N.R. employees in Quebec regions on November 1 last, how many work days have been lost by employees transferred to other sections of their region?
2.	What is the estimated amount lost by these employees?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows: 1 and 2. The company does not maintain records which would readily produce information to answer the question in the form asked. This type of information is not required for purposes of the operation of the railway and would entail considerable time and clerical expense to produce.


CENTENNIAL INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Mr. MacDonald (Prince): 1.	Has the centennial commission recently declared a surplus in its operations and, if so, how much?
2.	Is consideration being given to using all or part of this surplus for the development of foreign aid programmes or for further work by the centennial international development programme?
3.	What plans have been formulated for the continuance of the centennial international development programme?
December 20, 1967

4.	How much money is it estimated has been raised to date under the auspices of the centennial international development programme?
5.	In what cities have events been sponsored by the centennial international development programme?
6.	How many persons is it estimated were involved in the various programmes and events sponsored by the centennial international development programme?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: 1.	The centennial commission has not declared a surplus in its operations. However, it is expected that some of the funds voted in the current fiscal year by parliament to the centennial commission will not be required through economies largely in the administration vote and accordingly whatever amount remaining will lapse as of March 31, 1968.
2.	No. As indicated in the answer to part 1, most of the savings are in the administration vote and cannot be used for programs not under the administration vote.
3.	None.
4.	Total: $1,192,000.
5.	Victoria, Vancouver, Calgary, Red Deer, Edmonton, Regina, Three Hills, Alta., Winnipeg, Brandon, Man., Lakehead, Kitchener/ Waterloo, Hamilton, London, Welland, Scarborough, Windsor, Orillia, Ottawa, Montreal, Fredericton, Moncton, St. John's, Memorial University.
6.	Four million people have been affected by world weekends and marches. 99,000 Canadians marched in miles for millions marches. Over four million Canadians were involved in aspects of CIDP programming.


PRESENTATION OF CENTENNIAL MEDALS
Mr. McCleave: What, if any, arrangements have been made by the armed forces and civilian departments for any ceremonies involving the presentation of the Centennial Medals?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the Department of National Defence and my department as follows: Special arrangements were not made by the armed forces for the presentation of the centennial medal to its members. The medals however, were despatched in bulk to unit commanding officers for presentation to those members under their command. The form of the presentation ceremonies was the prerogative of the unit commanding officer.
Questions
Nominations for the centennial medal in respect of civilian employees of all departments are sent to the Department of the Secretary of State and the medals are subsequently forwarded direct to the recipients by that department by registered mail.


FISHERIES EMPLOYEES IN YUKON
Mr. Nielsen: 1.	How many fisheries officers are employed in the Yukon?
2.	What other employees, if any, are employed by the Department of Fisheries in the Yukon?
3.	In each case, how long have the said employees been so employed?
4.	What is the total cost of the operations of the Department of Fisheries in the Yukon for each of the years since the establishment of a fisheries office in the Yukon?


Hon.   H.-J. Robichaud@Minister of Fisheries: 1. Two fisheries officers are employed in the Yukon, one fishery officer 4 and one fishery officer 1.
2.	One clerical and regulatory level 3.
3.	Fishery officer 4 since Dec. 15, 1964; fishery officer 1 since Feb. 1, 1967; clerical and regulatory level 3 since June 23, 1966.
4.	1966-67, $37,896.00; 1965-66, $29,477.00;
1964-65, $23,278.00; 1963-64, $24,267.00; 196263, $27,747.00; 1961-62, $32,885.78; 1960-61, $25,951.08;	1959-60,	$17,249.93;	1958-59,
$6,010.09; 1957-58, $913.93; 1956-57, $616.51.


DELAYS IN PENSION PAYMENTS, ARMED FORCES PERSONNEL
Mr. Harkness: Are members of the Armed Forces, upon retirement, experiencing delays in the payment to them of pensions under the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and, if so (a) how long are these delays (b) what are the reasons for them (c) have steps been taken to improve this situation and what are they?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Minister of National Defence):: Not normally. Service personnel during the course of their release procedures are informed that they may expect the first payment of any pension they are entitled to under the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act within six weeks of their official release date. On average initial payment cheques are issued well within this six weeks period, the average is 28 days. There are, however, isolated cases where delays are experienced, (a) In such isolated cases delays of from two to four weeks over the six weeks period have

December 20, 1967
Questions
been experienced, (b) Some delays are attributable to the complete review of the administrative procedures leading up to the payment of benefits and to the conversion of the three service pay manual systems to a computer system, (c) Yes, the integration of the services benefit sections will improve the situation and will isolate the problem cases so that they will receive special treatment.


DEVELOPMENT BANK LOAN TO VICTORIA SHINGLE COMPANY
Mr. Douglas: 1.	Did McCarter Shingle and Shake Ltd., 119 Sanghees Road, Victoria, B.C., secure a loan from the Industrial Development Bank?
2.	If so, what was the amount of the loan and the interest charged for this loan?
3.	Has a moratorium been granted on the repayment of principle and/or interest by the Industrial Development Bank?
4.	If so, what was the reason for such a moratorium being granted and how long is the moratorium to last?


Mitchell William Sharp: 1,	2, 3 and 4. It has not been the practice nor is it considered appropriate for the I.D.B. to make information publicly available relating to the affairs of a particular applicant or borrower.


ADDITIONAL LAND FOR NEW WELLAND CANAL
Mr. Saltsman: 1.	How much land has the St. Lawrence seaway authority purchased or expropriated for a new canal from Thorold to Lake Ontario and what has been the cost?
2.	What amount of additional land may be taken over and what would be the estimated cost?
3.	What is the cost estimate for the entire canal project?
4.	When does the seaway authority plan to proceed with this development?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority advises as follows: 1. Approximately 2210 acres at an estimated cost of $7,000,000.
2.	If any additional land is required, the amount should be relatively minor.
3 and 4. The cost estimate is confidential and no decision has been made to proceed with the project.


CEREMONIES AT OPENING OF TELEVISION STATION, HAVRE SAINT-PIERRE
Mr. Ricard: Were special ceremonies organized for the official opening of the television station at Havre Saint-Pierre and, if so (a) what was the nature of the ceremonies (b) who were the participants (c) what was the cost of the ceremonies (d) what amount was paid to each of the participants?


Mr. Albert Bechard (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: Special ceremonies were organized to mark the opening of the new C.B.C. television station at Havre Saint-Pierre. I am informed by the C.B.C. that the chamber of commerce organized a dinner attended by chamber officials and members, the hon. member for Saguenay, the mayor of Havre Saint-Pierre and three C.B.C. French network officials. The corporation arranged for the taping in advance of speeches by the mayor and by the C.B.C.'s director of television programming to mark the opening of the station. Costs absorbed by the corporation involved travelling expenses and taping sessions only.


FALCON JET AIRCRAFT PURCHASES
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	How many Falcon jets are being purchased by the R.C.A.F.?
2.	What Is the total cost of these aircraft?
3.	What will be the operational functions of these aircraft?
4.	When will they be operational?


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: 1. Seven.
2.	Approximately $9,170,000.
3.	The Canadian forces have a service requirement for an aircraft capable of providing faster and more economical transportation, to replace Cosmopolitan and Dakota aircraft being withdrawn from service. It will provide airlift for commanders and/or their staffs between the functional headquarters and the main military centres in Canada for which they are responsible.
4.	Early in 1968.
December 20, 1967


LA LOCHE, SASK.-INTERFERENCE WITH MAIL FOR INDIANS
Mr. Brand: 1.	Has the government received any complaints from the residents of La Loche, Saskatchewan, regarding the unauthorized opening by Hudson Bay Company employees of mail addressed to Indians and, if so, what action was taken in this regard?
2.	Has the government received any complaints from the residents of La Loche, Saskatchewan, regarding the retention by Hudson Bay Company employees of government cheques addressed to Indians and, if so, what action was taken in this regard?


Albert Béchard: I am informed by the Departments of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Post Office as follows:
1.	No.
2.	No.


COMMUNITY PASTURE, SUFFIELD RESEARCH STATION
Mr. Horner (Acadia): Has the Department of National Defence decided to permit the use of the pasture area at the Suffield research station to be used as a community pasture in the coming year?


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: No. Any decision to permit the use of pasture at the defence research establishment Suffield is dependent upon the declaration of an emergency drought situation, and subject also to the nature of usage for defence purposes in progress at such time.


COMPLETION OF BUREAU OF STATISTICS FORMS
Mr. MacEwan: 1.	Under what authority are forms forwarded by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics for completion by various companies in Canada?
2.	What penalties are involved if a form is not completed, and for non-compliance with instructions and under what authority?
3.	What guarantee is provided by D.B.S. to a company to keep information confidential?


Mr. Jean-Charles Cantin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Trade and Commerce):: 1. The Dominion Bureau of Statistics collects information from companies, establishments, organizations and individuals, compiles and publishes the resulting data, under the authority of the Statistics Act, chapter 257, Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952.
Questions
In addition, the dominion statistician is responsible for the administration of the Corporations and Labour Unions Returns Act, chapter 26, 10-11 Elizabeth II which came into force on January 1, 1963. Under this act certain corporations and labour unions are required to supply the dominion statistician with financial and other information.
2.	Under the Statistics Act, section 35, every person who, without lawful excuse, refuses or neglects to answer, or wilfully answers falsely, any question requisite for obtaining any information sought in respect of the objects of the act is guilty of an offence and is liable, upon summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding one hundred dollars or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to both fine and imprisonment.
Under the Corporations and Labour Unions Returns Act, section 6(1), every corporation that fails to file with the dominion statistician a return for a reporting period as and when required, is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty dollars for each day of such default. Where a corporation is guilty of an offence, every officer, director or agent of the corporation who directed, authorized, assented to or acquiesced in or participated in the offence is a party to and guilty of the offence and is liable on summary conviction to the above fine for the offence or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or to both such fine and imprisonment, whether or not the corporation has been prosecuted or convicted therefor.
3.	Under the Statistics Act, Section 6, every officer, census commissioner, enumerator, agent and other person employed in the execution of any duty under this act must take and subscribe an oath, swearing that he or she will not disclose or make known any matter which comes to his knowledge by reason of his employment.
Under Section 15, no individual return and no part of an individual return made, and no answer to any question put, shall, without previous consent in writing of the person or the owner for the time being of the undertaking, be published, nor, except for the purposes of a prosecution under this act, shall any person, other than a person employed by the bureau, or working under arrangement with the bureau and sworn under the above-mentioned oath, be permitted to see any such individual return, part or answer. In addition,

December 20, 1967
Questions
no report, summary of statistics or other publication under the Statistics Act shall contain any of the particulars comprised in any individual return so arranged as to enable any person to identify any of the particulars as relating to any individual person or business. Returns of carriers or public utilities, hospitals, institutions, libraries and universities are exempt from the secrecy provision except returns of a financial nature or where an individual patient or other person might be identified.
Under the Corporations and Labour Unions Returns Act, financial and certain other information is privileged and is available only to an official or authorized person employed for specified purposes. If any such person, including any person formerly employed, contravenes the secrecy section of the act, section 14(7), he or she is guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both such fine and imprisonment.


PURCHASE OF AIRCRAFT FOR USE IN CANADA
Mr. Hales: Is the Department of Transport considering making an amendment to the appropriate air regulations to enable a Canadian citizen to purchase a registered Canadian aircraft for use in Canada and permit him to have the privilege of taking possession of the aircraft immediately that the bill of sale has been duly signed, witnessed, and dated, and commence to operate it for a period of 15 days without the need for any documentation or permission being necessary from the Department of Transport?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: Yes, civil aviation officials have had under study for some time proposed legislation which would amend current regulations relating to aircraft ownership and registration.
New regulatory procedures, as a matter of priority, are planned to be introduced early in 1968, and will permit the continuing use of an aircraft while change of ownership and registration is being effected.


EFFECT OF SULPHUR DIOXIDE FUMES, SUDBURY
Mr. Germa: Will the Minister of National Health and Welfare undertake a survey to determine the effects on workers, of long term exposure to high concentrations of sulphur dioxide fumes at the International Nickel Company plant in the Sudbury district?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The Department of National Health and Welfare would assist the provincial government, if requested, in conducting a survey of this type.


PLUG-IN OUTLETS, SASKATOON AIRPORT
Mr. Brand: 1.	Has the Department of Transport considered providing all-weather electrical outlets for automobile plug-in use at the Saskatoon airport (a) for DOT staff members and other airport employees (b) for the general public?
2.	If not, what are the reasons for non-provision of this service?
3.	If so, when will these plug-ins be made available?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1. (a) Yes. (b) No.
2.	(b) No practical means are available for control and recovery of capital and operating costs by the department for outlets provided in public parking areas.
3.	(a) The installation of outlets, for use of persons employed at the airport, is proposed in conjunction with the plans for extension of parking facilities for which funds are presently included in the 1968/69 capital estimates.


INVESTIGATION INTO OIL POLLUTION, HALIFAX HARBOUR
Mr. McCleave: 1.	What methods of investigation are used to investigate instances of oil pollution in Halifax harbour?
2.	Who carries out such investigations?
3.	What possible sources of oil pollution are checked, and how often?
4.	Have the investigators found instances of oil pollution for which they could not specify the sources?


James Allen (Jim) Byrne: 1 and 2. Pursuant to the oil pollution regulations which are administered by the Department of Transport, upon learning of the presence of oil on the harbour waters, a steamship inspector of the Department of Transport goes to the scene and takes samples of the polluting oil and endeavours, visually and by considering the effects of winds and currents and the statements of any known witness, to trace the source. If there is a possibility of its being a ship, he visits the ship, inspects
December 20, 1967

its oil record book, its pumping equipment, overboard discharges, engine room and bilges, takes samples of oil and questions crew members. The various oil samples are analysed by commercial analysts.
3.	Ships. Oil record books are checked upon arrival. Spot checks are carried out thereafter.
4.	yes.


TOBACCO IMPORTS FROM SOUTH AFRICA
Mr. Brewin: What are the figures for the importation of tobacco from the Republic of South Africa into Canada during each of the last five years?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The figures for the importation of tobacco from the Republic of South Africa
into	Canada during each	of the last five	years	are as follows:	Quantity	ValueYear	Description	Lbs.	$1962	Tobacco, cigar leaf,	unstemmed	159,459	74,3021963	Tobacco, cigar leaf,	unstemmed	122,786	63,0961964	Tobacco, unmanufac-	tured stemmed, n.e.s. 78,410	52,7211965	Nil	Nil1966	Nil	Nil


C.B.C. PROGRAM &quot;HATCH'S MILL&quot;
Mr. MacEwan: 1.	What is the cost of making one production of the C.B.C. programme "Hatch's Mill"?
2.	Are there any sponsors for this programme, or is any revenue obtained by the C.B.C. from the production of this programme?
3.	Are there any natural born Canadians employed as actors or actresses in the cast of this programme and, if so, how many?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the C.B.C. as follows: 1. Cost of making the hour long color programs in the "Hatch's Mill" series varies from week to week, but averages about $100,000 per program.
2.	Yes. There are two sponsors, each of which sponsors a half hour on alternate weeks.
3.	Yes. The village setting for this historical drama series requires a fairly large cast which includes 53 natural born Canadians.
Questions


PURCHASE OF EXPO SECURITIES
Mr. Hales: 1.	What is the total value of the securities purchased by the Dominion of Canada from the Canadian Corporation for Expo '67?
2.	What is the rate of interest charged and the total value of the interest?
3.	Has any of the interest been paid?
4.	Have any of the securities been redeemed?


Mitchell William Sharp: 1. $205 million.
2.	Rates of interest are established quarterly, based on the government's own cost of borrowing for comparable maturities. They vary from 5J per cent on notes issued in 1965 to 5J per cent on notes issued during the fourth quarter of 1967. The value of interest accruals to December 31, 1967 is $13.2 million.
3.	Yes. Interest is payable semi-annually, and all due payments have been met in full.
4.	No.


FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO CORNING GLASS FOR PLANT CONSTRUCTION
Mr. Martin (Timmins): Was any money advanced by the federal government to assist Coming Glass to build their plant at Bracebridge, Ontario, and, if so (a) how much (b) what provisions and safeguards are set down to ensure Corning Glass lives up to labour laws and regulations?


Julia Verlyn (Judy) LaMarsh: I am informed by the departments of Industry and Labour as follows: (a) Corning Glass Works of Canada Ltd. has applied to the area development agency for assistance under the Area Development Incentives Act in connection with a new plant near Brace-bridge, Ontario. The level of assistance has not been determined pending confirmation of allowable capital costs for the project, (b) Labour laws and regulations governing the construction of any such plant would come under the jurisdiction of the provincial authorities.


SALE OF C.M.H.C. HOUSES, ELLIOT LAKE, ONT.
Mr. Martin (Timmins): 1.	Has the price of houses owned by C.M.H.C. in Elliot Lake gone up since July, 1967, and if so, by how much and for what reason?
2.	Has the legal fee for handling transfer of titles of C.M.H.C. houses in Elliot Lake been increased since July, 1967, and if so, by how much and for what reason?

December 20, 1967
Questions


Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minisler of Labour):: 1. Houses sold in Elliot Lake by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation subsequent to October 1, 1967, have been at prices $500 higher than charged for comparable houses sold earlier. Previous sale prices were established in 1961 and were substantially below reproduction cost. The cost of rehabilitating houses for sale has very substantially increased and is the main reason for the price increase. Market conditions generally in Elliot Lake have improved substantially and the increased price is partially a reflection of the more buoyant market.
2. The cost of preparing and registering transfers of titles from Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to house purchasers is borne by the corporation with no legal fees charged to the purchasers. The corporation has no knowledge of the level of charges made by solicitors who may be acting on behalf of purchasers and who were retained by them.


C.B.C. BROADCAST OF MEETING WITH MESSRS. LEVESQUE AND AQUIN
Mr. Blouin: Did a team from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation visit Sept-Iles, Quebec, and broadcast a meeting with Messrs. Rene Levesque and Francois Aquin on the evening of Saturday, December 9, 1967 and, if so (a) on whose authority (b) what are the names of the participants paid by the C.B.C. for this trip and what were the amounts paid by the Corporation for each (c) what were the total expenses for this broadcast, including the return trip-Montreal-Sept-Iles-and how much time did the team from the C.B.C. spend on location?


Albert Béchard: I am informed by the C.B.C. as follows: (a) On instructions from the office of the chief news editor for C.B.C. French networks, a crew was sent to Sept-Iles to cover the meeting with Rene Levesque and Francois Aquin for radio and television, (b) No participant was paid by C.B.C. (c) Total expenses for the radio and television broadcasts amounted to $571. Two days were spent on location.


EMPLOYMENT OF COL. CHURCHILL
Mr. McQuaid: 1. On what date was Colonel Edward Churchill first commissioned by the government to review the design of the Northumberland Causeway?

2.	By what department of government is Colonel Churchill employed and is his employment for any specific period of time?
3.	Since the date of his employment, has Colonel Churchill made any interim report to the government and, if not will the government now ask for an interim report and make public the reply it receives from Colonel Churchill?
4.	Is the Causeway project to be deferred or phased at a slower pace as a result of the reduction in expenditure levels which the government has undertaken to achieve for 1968-69?
5.	What amount of money has been placed in the 1968-69 estimates for this project?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, the answer to part 1 of the question was given on October 16, 1967, in reply to question No. 443, as appears at page 3115 of the House of Commons Debates.
As to part 2, the answer is (a) Department of Public Works and (b) yes. As to part 3 the answer is as follows. Colonel Churchill has had many exchanges in the ordinary course wtih other persons employed by the Department of Public Works. All are confidential in the normal way.
The answer to part 4 is, on December 7, 1967, the Minister of National Revenue stated in the House of Commons that:
The government has decided to defer the placing of any further new contracts for the Northumberland causeway, pending a thorough review of the situation by Col. Edward Churchill, whose services have been retained as a co-ordinator of the project.
The answer to part 5 is, this information will be set forth in the estimates for 1968-69.


IMPORTS FROM RUSSIA OF CHROMIC ACID AND CHROMIUM TRIOXIDE
Mr. Johnston: What was the value of chromic acid and chromium trioxide imported from the Soviet Union in the periods (a) January to December, 1965 (b) January to December, 1966 (c) January to December, 1967?


Jean-Charles Cantin: The value of chromic acid (chromium trioxide) imported from the Soviet Union is as follows: (a) January to December 1965, nil; (b) January to December 1966, $26,000; (c) January to September 1967, (latest figures available), nil.
December 20, 1967

Orders for Returns
QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS	INFORMATION SERVICE,
FOR RETURNS	LABOUR DEPARTMENT


COSTS RESPECTING INDIANS COMPARED TO GENERAL PUBLIC
Mr. Howard: For each of the years 1963, 1964, 1965 and 1966, using the same procedures as were used by the Indian Affairs Branch in compiling the information which it presented to the January 1966 meeting of the national Indian Advisory Board, what estimate exists with respect to (a) the access to loans and credit for farm improvement, new and existing housing, and for other economic purposes had by (i) the general population of Canada (ii) Indians
(b)	the per capita investment in housing for (i) the general population of Canada (ii) Indian housing from Indian Affairs Branch appropriations, band revenues and individual contributions (c) the per capita assistance (relief) costs for (i) the general population in Canada (ii) Indians (d) the average salary or wage (excluding military pay) for (i) the general population of Canada (ii) Indians (e) the average age of death for (i) the general population of Canada (ii) Indians, showing male and female separately in each case (f) the percentage of (i) homes of the general population of Canada (ii) Indian homes supplied with (A) electricity (B) sewer service or septic tanks (C) running water (D) indoor baths?
Return tabled.


CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. Caouelle: In each of the crown corporations described as a "proprietary corporation" under the terms of the Financial Administration Act (a) how many directors are there on each board of directors (b) what is the quorum required for board meetings
(c)	what is the length of the term served by the said directors (d) who determines their salaries (e) what are their salaries (f) who appoints the chairman of the board of directors (g) who appoints the president and general manager (h) what is the length of his term (i) who determines his salary (j) what is his salary?
Return tabled.


PROFITS OF CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. Caouette: 1.	What are, for each of the last three years, the annual deficits or profits of crown proprietary corporations?
2.	What was, for each of the last three years, the part of the profits remitted to the federal government in the form of dividends or equivalent payments?
3.	Has the government a policy regarding profits that applies to those proprietary corporations which show a deficit and, if so, what is that policy?
Return tabled.

Question No. 613-Mr. Regimbal:
1.	(a) For each of the years 1964 to 1967 inclusive, what individuals were employed from time to time in the information and/or public relations services of the Department of Labour (b) in each year what was the total amount of salaries paid for such services?
2.	(a) For each of the years 1964 to 1967 inclusive, what other persons, firms or corporations have been employed and/or retained for the purpose of preparing, disseminating or in any manner dealing with the information and/or public relations services of the department (b) what are the names of such persons, firms and corporations, if any; for what purpose and period was the employment and what was the cost in each instance?
3.	(a) For each of the years 1964 to 1967 inclusive, how many press releases have been prepared for or on behalf of the department and/or the minister, and at what cost (b) for each of the years 1964 to 1967 inclusive, what radio and television time has been purchased by the department; for what purpose and for what cost (c) for each of the years 1964 to 1967 inclusive, what advertising or other space was purchased in domestic and foreign newspapers, magazines and other publications; for what purpose and for what cost?
4.	For each of the years 1964 to 1967 inclusive, what advertising or any other related contracts have been awarded by the department; to whom were the same awarded, for what purpose and for what cost, and were public tenders called in each instance and, if not, upon what basis and by whom was the contract awarded?
5.	Does the department maintain and/or operate any office located elsewhere than in Ottawa for the purpose, in whole or in part, of promoting the public relations of the department and/or the minister and, if so, where are such offices located; what is the cost of the maintenance and operation of such offices; how many are employed in each such office and at what salary or remuneration in each case?
Return tabled.


TENDERS FOR MAIL DELIVERY, OTTAWA
Mr. Smallwood: 1.	Were tenders called by the Post Office Department on or about August 24, 1966, for Ottawa post office combined urban service, delivery of parcel post, special delivery items and clearance of mail receptacles?
2.	If so (a) what persons or firms tendered (b) what was the amount of each tender?
3. What action was taken by the Post Office Department in respect of these tenders and what was the reason for such action?
4.	Were tenders again called for these services on or about November 9, 1966?
5.	If so (a) what persons or firms tendered (b) what was the amount of each tender?
6. What action was taken by the Post Office Department in respect of these tenders?

December 20, 1967
Motions for Papers
7.	What were the terms of the contract awarded as a result of these tenders, and on what date did it become effective and for what period of time?
8.	Has there been any renegotiation or amendment of the terms of the contract so awarded?
9.	If so, what changes, precisely described, have been made and, in respect of each change, on what date did it become effective?
10.	Are wage differentials now being paid in respect of this contract?
11.	If so (a) was there any provision for such payment in the original contract (b) what is the amount per hour of such differential (c) in each month, since the award of the contract, what total amount was paid to the contractor in respect of such wage differential?
12.	Are all hours between runs and collections now being paid for?
13.	If so (a) was there any provision for such payment in the original contract (b) what is the basis of calculation of the total hours (c) in each month since the award of the contract, what additional amount has been paid to the contractor as a result of this basis of calculation?
14.	Is there now an arrangement with the contractor whereby additional allowances are made for one clearance or stop at a given sub-post office, enabling the contractor to double or triple the charges permitted by the contract?
15.	If so (a) when did such additional allowances become effective (b) what additional amount has been paid to the contractor as a result thereof?
16.	Under the provisions of the contract as now in effect and operation with such amendments, alterations, or additional charges as may have been permitted, what is the present actual unit cost to the Post Office Department for each item as compared with the tender originally submitted by the contractor for each item?
Return tabled.


Hon. Michael Slarr (Ontario):: Mr. Speaker, since 42 written questions were answered today, I think it is incumbent on me on the eve of the Christmas recess to congratulate the Prime Minister for prevailing on his ministers to be industrious and answer these questions. I hope this attitude and perseverance will continue in future.


Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, that is about the most gratifying exemplification of the Christmas spirit that I can think of. I wish to emphasize to my hon. friend that I need not prevail on my ministers to do these things; I have to hold them back.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Michael Starr: Hold them back from what?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I will not answer that, Mr. Speaker.


MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Albert Béchard: Mr. Speaker, notices of motions for production of papers Nos. 39 and 41 are acceptable to the government.
Notice of motion No. 37 is acceptable to the government, subject to the usual reservations concerning privileged papers and authorization by the governmental authorities concerned.
Would Your Honour be kind enough to call notice of motion No. 38?
Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remaining notices of motions be allowed to stand.


DEVELOPMENT OF NATIONAL CAPITAL AREA
[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 37-Mr. Bell (Carleton):
That an humble Address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this House a copy of all correspondence, memoranda, briefs or other documents exchanged since the first day of January, 1967, between the Prime Minister, the Minister of Public Works or any official on their behalf and the Premiers of Ontario and Quebec, any Member of the Executive Council or official of either Province, on the subject of development of the National Capital Area.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 38-Mr. Schreyer:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of all correspondence and documents relating to the alleged decision of appointment in 1964 by the Post Office Department of one Mr. Ewald Greening as Postmaster for the Postal District of Libau, Manitoba, and that this order do specifically include such correspondence or documents which would indicate the reason or reasons why this alleged appointment did not in fact take effect.
Hon. Jean-Pierre Cote (Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, the notice of motion is acceptable, subject to the usual reservations.


Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):: No. What are they?


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations or conditions expressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house that notice of motion No. 38 be deemed to have been adopted?


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: No, Mr. Speaker. I rise on a point of order. I think it has been pointed out on a number of occasions that "the usual
December 20, 1S67

reservations" on the part of the ministers are not enough. I think on a number of occasions the Chair has ruled that those reservations must be stated explicitly.


Mr. Cole (Longueuil):: Mr. Speaker, when I speak of the usual reservations, I mean confidential and personal letters which cannot be published.


Mr. Speaker:: The point made by the hon. member for Edmonton West is well taken, and I suggest that ministers or parliamentary secretaries should do more than simply refer in a general way to "the usual conditions". The reservations should be detailed to some extent.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 39-Mr. McQuaid:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the Order in Council or other document appointing Colonel Edward Churchill as Government Co-ordinator of the Northumberland Causeway project.
Motion agreed to.
LEASE OF SPACE IN PLACE DE VILLE, OTTAWA Motion No. 41-Mr. McCutcheon:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of all leases, agreements to lease, letters of intent to lease or other similar documents, relating to the occupancy by the Government of Canada of space in the building known as Place de Ville in the City of Ottawa, together with a copy of all correspondence, briefs or other documents exchanged between the Minister of Public Works or any officers of that Department and the owners of the said building or anyone, acting or purporting to act on their behalf since the first day of January, 1965.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Robert L. Slaniield (Leader of the Opposition):: I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister, who is reported as having taped a message yesterday urging among other things that in connection with South Viet Nam the United States should simply stop fighting, a policy which President

Inquiries of the Ministry Johnson yesterday described as soft headed and pudding headed. I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he consulted with President Johnson or any other responsible United States authority before making this reported statement, which I believe is likely to arouse a profound reaction from United States public opinion?


Lester Bowles Pearson: If I had in fact said what I am reported by the hon. gentleman to have said it might indeed arouse a good deal of interest; that is, had I urged the United States to take this course. That is quite incorrect. I should inform the hon. gentleman that this report arose out of a broadcast which I was recording in Toronto for the New Year, and apparently there was a newspaper reporter inside the studio. He must have been there with the knowledge and approval of somebody, and the report by the newspaper reporter was a report of an interview which is not to be released until January 1. I consider this to be very extraordinary behaviour on the part of those who may have been responsible.
In addition, the report referred to by the hon. gentleman is quite inaccurate. I made no proposal urging anything on the United States. I am asking now, as I have the right to do, for a copy of the script of the broadcast which is to be made on January 1, and I shall make any further statements on the basis of that script which will give a very different impression to that just conveyed by the hon. gentleman's question.


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: I think perhaps I should address a supplementary question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs; it has to do with the same subject matter. In view of the statement of the Secretary General of the United Nations concerning the deepening international crisis and the escalation of the war in Viet Nam-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I cannot agree with the hon. member that this is a supplementary question. It refers to the same subject matter, but I suggest that the substance of the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition related to a statement made by the Prime Minister.


Mr. Fulton:: Could I ask a related if not a supplementary question of the Prime Minister?
December 20, 1967

Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member can only ask a supplementary question now. I am suggesting he should not ask a related question at this point.


Mr. Fulion:: It has to do with the possibility of discussions looking toward the bringing of peace to Viet Nam.


Mr. Speaker:: That is not the point which was raised by the Leader of the Opposition.


Edmund Davie Fulton: I will defer my question until later.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: I was
about to direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister arising out of the reply he gave to the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition. May I ask the right hon. gentleman whether this blatant transgression of honour and integrity in relation to a broadcast intended for January 1 was committed during a recording for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.


Lester Bowles Pearson: No, Mr. Speaker, it was in another station which is owned by a man who also owns a newspaper.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Francis Andrew Brewin: I should now like to address the following question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of the statement of the Secretary General of the United Nations as to the deepening international crisis and the escalation of the conflict in Viet Nam with its tragic story of suffering and agony, can the Secretary of State for External Affairs say whether he or the Canadian government have made or will make at this season an appeal for the extension of the truce and the taking of new and meaningful steps to initiate negotiations between the parties concerned, particularly the National Liberation Front?


Hon. Paul Marlin (Secretary of Slate for External Affairs):: Yesterday in my absence the hon. member gave notice to my office of his intention to ask this question. I do not know whether I can satisfy the hon. member in all particulars, but to the extent that I can I shall endeavour to do so. The views of the Canadian government with respect to the importance we attach to the cessation of bombing as a first step toward resolving this conflict are well known.
The statement made on behalf of the government to the general assembly on September 27 remains the basis of Canadian policy. More recently, when I was in Brussels last week I had the opportunity to discuss this and certain other aspects of the problem with Secretary of State Dean Rusk. I took advantage of this meeting in Brussels to press our view as to the possibility of taking a calculated risk to break the present impasse in the interests of peace. It remains the earnest hope of the Canadian government that the forthcoming holiday season and any actions planned in relation to it may provide openings through which an approach may be made to settling the wider issues involved in these tragic hostilities.


Francis Andrew Brewin: I am very pleased with that statement, even though the minister has not satisfied me entirely. May I ask him as a supplementary question whether he has represented to the United States government that it would be extremely difficult to arrive at fruitful negotiations unless the National Liberation Front, which is in actual control of part of south Viet Nam, was included as one of the parties?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The President of the United States has made it clear on a number of occasions, as has his ambassador to the United Nations, Mr. Goldberg, that this is not an insurmountable problem.


Gordon Minto Churchill: My question is directed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and it relates to the difficulties in Viet Nam. Would the minister make representations to Hanoi and to the Viet Cong leaders requesting them to desist from using flame throwers on peaceful villagers and on women and children?


Paul Joseph James Martin: The hon. gentleman, I am sure, will appreciate that in the position the Canadian government has taken we have acknowledged that it takes two sides to end a war. Our stand as to the cessation of bombing does not overlook the fact that the mere cessation of bombing will not end the conflict.


Gordon Minto Churchill: May I ask a further supplementary question, and perhaps get a clear answer this time. My question refers to the use of flame throwers on peaceful villagers, women and children, by the Viet Cong or those representing Hanoi. Would the minister make representations to these people and

December 20, 1967

express Canada's concern over this barbarous practice?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am sure we all understand the very honourable purpose which the hon. gentleman has in putting this question, but it must be evident to him as it is to all people throughout the country that barbarism of any sort by any country does not satisfy Canadian public opinion.


Michael Starr: Mr. Speaker,
I wish to ask a further supplementary question; but first, with your permission, sir, may I extend to the Secretary of State for External Affairs my congratulations on leading the latest public opinion poll on the Liberal leadership race, the results of which I understand appear today, although it also says that 15 per cent of those who were interviewed do not like any of the candidates.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Michael Starr: My question is, Mr. Speaker, will the Secretary of State for External Affairs not inject himself more forcibly and more actively into an attempt to bring about some form of peace in Viet Nam, particularly at this time of the year?


Paul Joseph James Martin: I am very interested, Mr. Speaker, that my hon. friend should ask this question. He has not asked questions too often in this area, having left that to the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre. I say to my hon. friend very seriously on this very vital question that I am sure that in putting it he has realized fully that no government has been more sincerely dedicated to bringing about peace than this government.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. R. A. Bell (Carleton):: Mr. Speaker, having regard to the very welcome announcement of the Minister of Veterans Affairs relating to disability pensions for veterans, may I ask the Prime Minister if he would not now remove from the government's austerity program the adjustment of pensions for retired public servants, including the armed forces and the R.C.M.P., as unanimously recommended by a joint committee of this house and the other place.

Inquiries of the Ministry


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I have nothing to add to what has already been said on this matter by my hon. friend the President of the Treasury Board, that we hope the time will come soon when we will be able to reconsider it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could this not be dealt with by a supplementary estimate in the same way that the veterans pensions are being handled?



WATER RESOURCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Gerard Laprise (Chapleau):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources.
Would he tell us if the federal government is providing financial and technical aid toward the study of the diversion of water from James bay to the great lakes, a project allegedly undertaken jointly by Quebec and Ontario?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: Mr. Speaker, we have an agreement with the Ontario government to that effect and we are now negotiating a similar agreement with the Quebec government. I for one certainly hope that these negotiations will succeed.



LABOUR RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Labour I would direct my question to the right hon. Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the S.I.U. trusteeship terminates in ten days, and likewise in view of the fact that none of the basic problems inherent in the S.I.U. situation have been solved by the trusteeship, could the Prime Minister inform the house and the public whether the government is considering extending the trusteeship past December 31?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, a great many of the basic problems have been solved by this trusteeship,
December 20, 1967

Inquiries of the Ministry but I shall be glad to look into my hon. friend's question.


Edmund Davie Fulton: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Labour, I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether a decision has been reached in respect of the continuation of the maritime trusteeship, which took over the affairs of the Seafarers' International Union? I ask the question in the light of a report on a news broadcast last night that the government had reached a decision to discontinue this trusteeship.


Lester Bowles Pearson: To my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, there has been no such decision, but I should like to look into this and perhaps make a reply tomorrow.



TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mrs. Margaret Rideout (Westmorland):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. I hope, in the yuletide spirit that surrounds us today, he might be able to tell me when the Newfoundland ferries will be ready to handle commercial truck traffic on a regular basis?


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of Transport):: fn the same warm spirit of the season, Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for her good wishes and also for giving me notice of this question. It is merely coincidental that I have a very happy answer for her. Full service must await the completion of the end-loading docks at North Sydney, which should be in the very near future.
Because of space and loading limitations it has been necessary to limit severely the number of trucks handled, by charging freight rates on vehicles as well as contents. However, in anticipation of the new facilities the Canadian National will institute new rates for the carriage of trucks effective January 1, at $2 per foot of length loaded or empty. There may still be only limited space available for a time, but the new rates will make possible regular commercial truck usage of the ferries.


Mr. Robert Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria):: Since the minister is in such a kind, charitable and festive mood in this holy season will he advise the house, when those ferries go into operation together with the

railway ferries, what jobs will be found for the several hundred stevedores who will be laid off?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: This is a matter of primary concern, Mr. Speaker, and one I know is under consideration by a number of my colleagues in the hope that we can ameliorate the situation and not exacerbate it; and I am sure my hon. friend would like to join us in that hope.



THE CANADIAN ECONOMY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. George Hees (Northumberland):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. In view of the sharp decrease in freight car loadings, an accurate measure of our country's economic activity, and in real output, and the consequent increase in unemployment, I wish to ask the minister does he plan to introduce any new measures to stimulate the economy and increase productivity before he leaves Ottawa to hit the campaign trail?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I did not know that the hon. member was interested in another budget, but I can assure him I have no such intention.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Herbert Wilfred Herridge: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Solicitor General. I apologize for not sending him notice of it but I have been run off my feet with long distance phone calls, to such an extent that I nearly missed the Minister of Veterans Affairs' welcome Christmas message to veterans. There are a lot of people in Vancouver interested in this question and that is why I am asking it. Can the minister inform the house what further consideration has been given to allowing certain officials of the fishermen's union, who are now in confinement, to be paroled during the Christmas season?


Hon. L. T. Pennell (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say that the hon. member's colleague, the hon. member for
December 20, 1967

New Westminster, gave notice of his intention to ask the same question. I can only say at this moment that the matter is still under study.



RESEARCH


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Industry. Now that it has been definitely announced that the space research institute, otherwise known as the HARP program, with its scores of scientists and technicians, is being transferred to the United States, will the minister advise the house just what efforts were made by his department and the government to retain this very special research facility in Canada, in line with the answer he gave me on Monday?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):: Mr. Speaker, I think we will all be glad a position has now been found for the space research institute which, incidentally, separated itself from McGill University some months ago.
As those hon. members will know who read the announcement by Norwich University through the words of its president, General Hamlett, it is proposed to establish an undergraduate faculty in aerospace studies at this university. The government of Canada endeavoured to integrate the objectives of the space research institute in Canada within Canada, but as the ultimate future of the HARP program appeared to lie in the field of intercontinental ballistic missiles, or anti-I.C.B.M.'s, it was felt that neither Canadian universities nor the government of Canada would be prepared to lend massive support to an objective such as this.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Is it not a fact that an amount of $1 million to $1J million would have maintained this institute in Canada?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I think the sums suggested by Dr. Bull were considerably in excess of this.



CRIMINAL CODE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. S. J. Enns (Portage-Neepawa):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Justice. On December 1, in answer to
Inquiries of the Ministry a question by the hon. member for Charlevoix, he stated he intended to introduce the omnibus bill dealing with significant amendments to the Criminal Code very shortly. Does the minister still intend to do that this session?


Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Minister of Justice: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member will look at the Votes and Proceedings of the House of Commons for December 19, he will see that I gave notice that the house would go into committee of the whole to study the proposed resolution to amend the Criminal Code. Therefore, notice was given yesterday.


Richard Albert Bell: Mr. Speaker, would the minister seek unanimous consent at some stage before the house takes recess to have this resolution adopted so the bill might be available to us during the Christmas season, when we will have an opportunity to study it?


Mr. Trudeau:: I am certainly happy to ask the leader of the house to consult with leaders of other parties to see whether this is possible. I would be very favourable to the suggestion, and I welcome it from the hon. member.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe East):: Mr. Speaker, would the Minister of National Health and Welfare be kind enough to inform the house whether some months ago he suggested to medical authorities that medical schools could well be operated the year round to help overcome the acute shortage of doctors?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I answered a similar question on this point yesterday.


Philip Bernard Rynard: Would the minister consider taking this up with the authorities so there will be sufficient doctors to operate medicare with some semblance of efficiency?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It is my understanding that both questions were submitted to the minister yesterday.


Philip Bernard Rynard: Not in that form, with all due deference.
5672	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry SUGGESTED CAMPAIGN AGAINST USE OF ALCOHOL
On the orders of the day:


Mr. Jack Roxburgh (Norfolk):: Mr. Speaker,
I have a question for the Minister of National Health and Welfare. It has been brought to my notice that the federal health department is stepping up its anti-smoking campaign on television.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Maxwell Roxburgh: Thanks for the applause; I hope you will also applaud this part of the question. I should like to ask the minister whether his department has given or is giving consideration to a similar campaign in respect of a product far more dangerous to the people of Canada than tobacco, namely alcohol?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John Maxwell Roxburgh: Let's hear you applaud over there.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John Maxwell Roxburgh: I have not had an answer from the minister. If he does not intend to answer I will have to debate this at ten o'clock after the recess.



AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Theogene Ricard (Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagoi):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Agriculture, I should like to put a question to his parliamentary secretary.
In view of the present foot-and-mouth disease epidemic in the British Isles, does the government, as a preventive measure, intend to put an embargo on the entry into Canada of animals from Great Britain?


Mr. Bruce S. Beer (Parliamentary Secretary fo Minisier of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I will bring this question to the attention of the minister. I know the hon. member will realize that we do have restrictions now on the importation of livestock from the United Kingdom.
[Mr. Rynard.)
DEBATES	December 20, 1967



REQUEST THAT RYE, FLAX AND RAPESEED BE BROUGHT UNDER BOARD

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. E. Nasserden (Rosthern):: Mr. Speaker,
I have a question for the Prime Minister, the subject of which will not cost the government any money. Is it the intention of the government to implement the recommendations of the agriculture committee presented to the house last May 8, namely to bring rye, flax and rapeseed under the operations of the Canadian Wheat Board? If so, will this be done during the coming session?


Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, if you do not mind me replying at the request of the Prime Minister, I should like to say this matter is under continuing study but at the moment there is no such intention.



CANADIAN CONSTITUTION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the right hon. Prime Minister whether, in view of the imminent recess and the obvious importance of the conference to take place between his government and the governments of the provinces in February, he can as yet give the house any information about the agenda.


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I do not think there has been any change since I last reported to the house, but I should like to look into the most recent correspondence and make a short report perhaps in the question period tomorrow.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Perhaps the Prime Minister could give us some indication particularly with regard to the scope of the conference.


Lester Bowles Pearson: As my friend knows there are two specific subjects on the agenda at the moment; the question of a bill of rights, which will cover a very wide field, and the question in respect of the recent report of the bilingualism and biculturalism commission, which will be important.
I might say we have also emphasized that if any province wishes to discuss any other constitutional question we would like to put it on the agenda. I should like to look into this matter, but I do not think any special
December 20, 1967

subjects have been put forward. It is obvious that one of the things we must discuss on this wider basis is the setting up of machinery which will carry on an examination of the constitution.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: I have one further question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the importance of the conversations that have taken place and the importance of all parties in the house being well informed on these questions, would it be appropriate for representatives of other parties in the house to be present as observers at closed sessions, if there are any at the conference?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I would not myself see any objection to this, Mr. Speaker. This is a matter of fundamental importance to the whole country and its future, and it is my thought that the more we could all be involved in this the better it would be for the country.



CONSIDERATION OF NORTH ATLANTIC FREE TRADE AREA

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Max Sallsman (Waterloo South):: should like to address my question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce, Mr. Speaker. In view of General de Gaulle's veto against British entry into the European common market has the British government approached Canada to propose an alternate arrangement for a north Atlantic free trade area?


Robert Henry Winters: No, sir, not to my knowledge.


Max Saltsman: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister a supplementary question. In the absence of a British request along this line, is the minister considering a Canadian initiative toward forming a north Atlantic free trade area?


Robert Henry Winters: No, Mr. Speaker, we are not. This has been one of the possible developments of an avenue of freer trade which has been on the minds of a number of people. Recently I had some preliminary conversations in London and elsewhere, but there was nothing definitive about them. I expect I will be seeing several ministers of the United Kingdom government later this month, and undoubtedly they will bring me up to date on the post-de Gaulle veto and anything else they may have on their minds with regard to the trading situation.
Inquiries of the Ministry INDUSTRY



COPPER-STATEMENT ON PRICE INCREASES

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Henry Winters: Mr. Speaker, I wonder
whether I might have your permission to reply to a number of questions asked recently about the price of copper.
The strike in the United States which began in July has closed down practically all major United States copper producers. It is already apparent that some 700,000 tons of production, or approximately half the United States annual output of copper, will be lost before full production can be restored.
In the disturbed copper situation, which has continued since 1965, copper in all forms has remained under export control in Canada. As a condition of their freedom to export refinery copper the government has the assurance of the producers that realistic requirements of domestic consumers will be met. The supply situation within Canada is therefore normal.
The United States strike has had its impact on world market prices. The London metal exchange price for copper had been easing downward before July. Since then it has advanced from a level of 44 cents U.S. to exceed 60 cents U.S. in November. The New York quotation for copper, the so-called "E. and M.J. export refinery price", averaged 47.3 cents U.S. in October and 54.7 cents U.S. in November. The Canadian producer's price to domestic consumers at 51 cents Canadian is therefore lower than any other market quotation at present.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I hope the time taken up by this statement is not being charged against our 30-minute question period.


Robert Henry Winters: I might say, Mr. Speaker, that this statement was in reply to a number of questions which have been asked.


Mr. Nielsen:: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether the minister would complete the reply he was making a moment ago, if it is not very much longer. I am sure we are all interested in it.


Robert Henry Winters: I am grateful to the hon. member, Mr. Speaker. In the situation to which I have already referred, the confused situation of world pricing, much will depend on the level of the United States producers' price established after settlement of the
5674	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry strike. In view of the easing world market prior to the strike it may be reasonable to expect some decline from present levels. The probabilities, therefore, are that the present level in Canada will be temporary, but we will keep this situation under close review.



TRANSPORTATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transport. On Monday last the minister promised to report on the studies going forward with respect to railway line abandonment. Has the minister got his music on that subject with him today?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: I am afraid I do not have it with me, Mr. Speaker.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the minister report on this matter before the house rises for the Christmas recess?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: I will make a special resolution to do that if at all possible, Mr. Speaker, so we can wind up the year on a happy note.



INCOME TAX


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. E. Pascoe (Moose Jaw-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the right hon. Prime Minister. Is it now government policy to make it mandatory for all Canadians to obtain social security numbers before filing this year's income tax returns, as indicated in a recent notice sent out by the Department of National Revenue?


Lester Bowles Pearson: I would like to look into this matter, Mr. Speaker, but my impression is that this is the law now.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. J. M. Forrestall (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, my question is related to a series of questions

DEBATES	December 20, 1967
asked earlier of the right hon. Prime Minister. Has his government given any consideration to endorsing the appeal of His Holiness the Pope with regard to the designation of New Year's day as a day of total world peace?


Lester Bowles Pearson: Mr. Speaker, we would be very happy indeed to give our endorsation if it would help in this respect. I would also like to go a little further and hope we may soon reach the time when every day will be a day of peace.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)



BROADCASTING


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, December 19, consideration in committee of Bill No. C-163, to implement a broadcasting policy for Canada, to amend the Radio Act in consequence thereof and to enact other consequential and related provisions-Miss LaMarsh- Mr. Rinfret in the chair.
The Deputy Chairman:: When the committee adjourned yesterday, clause 2 of the bill was under consideration.


Mr. Cantelon:: Mr. Chairman, before commencing my remarks I would like to point out that as reported in yesterday's Hansard at the top of page 5649 I am supposed to have answered "Yes" to a comment of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. There were many other comments made by hon. members at that point and it is understandable that they were not all caught by the Hansard reporter. I was in fact replying to a comment made by the hon. member for Acadia.
Last night when the house adjourned I was attempting to make the point that my constituency is very poorly served by television coverage and that the constant postponing of providing better coverage by means of a new C.B.C. station in Saskatoon has aroused a great deal of antagonism. The minister knows this very well, for I presented her with a petition from Unity and district which made very plain the need in that area. It was ignored, or perhaps it would be fairer to say that it did not have enough effect on the cabinet to prevail on them to approve the station.
December 20, 1967	COMMONS
Many representations have also been made to this effect by the hon. member for Saskatoon. Neither of us has been able to move the minister and the government to take action in this regard. However, we are still hopeful that another attitude will be taken and that the government will decide to proceed with this long delayed requirement and build the station and its Luseland satellite this coming year.
Again and again members of this house have attempted to persuade the programmers of the C.B.C. that the people disapprove of shows like "Waiting for Caroline" and "The Paper People". We-and I speak, I am sure, for the large majority of my constituents- stand strongly behind the views so ably expressed by the hon. member for Okana-gan-Revelstoke, and especially his quotations of the comments of Sheila H. Kieran. It has never been my practice in this house to repeat arguments already made, so I will content myself with this expression of support of the views which the hon. member expressed.
I have received many letters from constituents, and to reinforce those views I would like to read a paragraph from one. It is typical of the many letters I have received. I received it this morning from-


Maurice Rinfret: Order. The chair has a little difficulty hearing the hon. member for Kindersley. I would ask hon. members who are in the chamber and wish to hold yuletide conversations to kindly go into the lobbies, where there are comfortable chairs and a wonderful Christmas spirit. We will now tune in to the hon. member for Kindersley.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Reginald (Reg) Cantelon: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was saying that this letter is typical of the many I have received. I received it this morning from Primate, one of the small towns in my area, and it reads in part as follows:
There is another matter which I would greatly appreciate your help with, is the discontinuation of the t.v. show Festival. This show is a distorted and filthy portrayal of the Canadian image. I do not believe that the filth displayed on this show to portray seductiveness is in any way justifiable. Perhaps the Canadian producers want to creat a Canadian image which is different from other nations, but the rubbish that is on this show is entirely disgusting.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
DEBATES	5675
Canadian Policy on Broadcasting


Reginald (Reg) Cantelon: Sometimes it is suggested that as M.P.'s we have no right or responsibility to criticize the C.B.C. Perhaps I am mistaken, but this seemed to be the tenor of the remarks of the hon. member for Burna-by-Richmond. This is an absurd suggestion. The C.B.C. is a public enterprise, established by parliament and largely financed by the taxes paid by the people. The people know this. They send us their views. We agree with them. We state them.
We do not criticize the private networks. We would not need to, even if we thought we had the right, which of course we have not. The private networks and stations have to please the people in order to live. They live on advertising revenues, which would soon disappear if the people disliked the programs. Do you ever remember seeing a program like "Waiting for Caroline" or "The Paper People" on the private networks? Of course not. The people do not want them and will not pay for them. Therefore the private networks do not show them.
But the C.B.C. gives us such programs, although they offend the sensibilities of the great mass of our people, that great mass of solid, moral, law-abiding citizens which constitutes the strength of this nation. So I believe it is our responsibility to present their feelings to the minister and to hope she will use her influence with the C.B.C. to stop such kooky shows.


Mr. Jamieson:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to begin by doing something that was not done earlier, and that is to wish a happy birthday to the minister who is responsible for this bill. I want to assure her that, in the interest of giving her a birthday present, I will not impede the passage of this bill, and I hope everyone else will do the same.
However, there are a number of things that I would like to say in a general way in connection with this legislation. The first of them is to commend the minister and those who are responsible for the legislation because I think it can be said in a general way that this is the best piece of broadcasting legislation we have had. It is far better than any of its predecessors, and I think also it is a justification for the substantial amount of time and planning that went into the various factors in the consideration of the bill before it was finally brought into this chamber.
I think the minister would be the first to agree, however, that the legislation has a
December 20, 1967

Canadian Policy on Broadcasting great many weaknesses, and that they are almost inevitable and unavoidable for the very reason that broadcasting is unlike any other area of governmental or parliamentary activity when an attempt at control is required. I do not think it is necessary to go into detail as to why this is so, but of course we are dealing in broadcasting with creative forces, and wherever creativity is involved there are bound to be legitimate differences of opinion.
As I said in commenting at the time the resolution was introduced, any of us who are so naive as to believe that legislation will give us good broadcasting are bound to be disappointed. There is of course another reason why legislation in the broadcasting field must of necessity have many shortcomings, and that is the fact that we are also dealing with what is essentially a means of communication. I believe that today there is general agreement, which perhaps did not exist a decade or so ago, that broadcasting is for all practical purposes an extension of the press, in the modem sense of that term. It is a news medium and a medium of information as well as one of enlightenment and entertainment, and whenever the state involves itself, albeit of necessity, in the broadcasting field, it is in fact getting itself involved in something which has an effect on public attitudes and public opinion.
So we have a situation where, despite the best efforts of legislators-and may I say as an aside that I was impressed by the nonpartisan attitude of the broadcasting committee in debating this bill-any form of bill relating to broadcasting has to be inadequate on that account. I myself, perhaps based on my experience, am not as sanguine as some hon. members, perhaps including even the minister, about the efficacy of this bill to resolve the problems which now exist in Canadian broadcasting. I can understand, and perhaps share to a degree, the belief that good men in positions of importance which this bill assigns to them can do a great deal to iron out the differences and the various controversies that have developed. However, at the same time I think it must be said that there is bound to be a continuation of these controversies and difficulties, and the best will in the world will not solve all of them.
One of the things that we have tended to do in this parliament and that has been done throughout the country has been to be rather critical, and perhaps on occasion justifiably

so, of those who up to now have held positions of importance either on the regulatory side or within the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. But as one who has had some experience in working with the chairman of the Board of Broadcast Governors and with the former president of the C.B.C., I want to say that I do not know of any two more dedicated men in the country. While inevitably they became the subject of a good deal of criticism, and while inevitably there were those of some competence in broadcasting who on occasion might have taken decisions different from those taken by these gentlemen, I do want to say that I believe Mr. Alphonse Ouimet, for example, deserves a great deal of credit and has given good service to the people of Canada over a great many years. I want to wish him a well earned retirement.
I also want to say a few words of commendation, because they appear to be so rare these days, for the chairman of the Board of Broadcast Governors, and by and large for the actions of that board over the past several years since it was established. It is always easy to pick out those points in the decisions of the board on which there can be criticism and argument, but anyone who is close to broadcasting knows that for every one that has been contentious there have been dozens and indeed hundreds of decisions which have been sound and which on balance, I am sure hon. members would agree, produced the best over-all system of broadcasting of any country of comparable size and geographic and language difficulties in the world. I should like to go on record as saying that the two gentlemen to whom I have referred, and many of their associates, can take a great deal of credit for this achievement.
We are in a situation where the president of the C.B.C. has retired and where from all accounts we are to have two new top executives as soon as this legislation is passed. I am inclined to share the concern and fear of the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond, who spoke last night about the fact that despite the undoubted talents of the two men who, it is rumoured, will be appointed to the positions, neither of them has any practical experience in the broadcasting field. I believe this will create for them quite serious difficulties, and it will certainly be vitally important that they get from those who are now in the corporation in both high and low level positions full co-operation and a willingness to help them in every way they can,
December 20, 19B7

not only to administer the corporation properly but to acquire the basic knowledge which will be so essential if they are to carry out the mandate implicit in this legislation.
The fact that the two main positions within the corporation will be held by newcomers, whether or not they be in fact the gentlemen whose names have been mentioned, makes it absolutely vital in my view that there be some continuity in the higher echelons of the broadcasting regulatory authority. Having said a few moments ago that I believe Dr. Andrew Stewart has done a good job, and having heard recently of his wish, which I gather has been expressed officially, to retire soon from the position of chairman of the Board of Broadcast Governors, I urge the government to take the steps necessary to try to retain the services of Dr. Stewart at least during the transitional period. I predict that we will have an absolutely chaotic situation in Canadian broadcasting from the administrative and regulatory point of view if we suddenly find that there has been a total and complete change in the top management of the regulatory bodies.
There are a number of specific areas in this legislation to which I should like to refer, and I will do so briefly because I do not intend to make additional comments, in the interest of trying to get this legislation through quickly. But there are three or four comments I should like to make on provisions which I would like to see improved in this bill, and which I commend to the minister either for direct action by amendment in some form or other or for clarification purposes. One of these has to do with whether or not the C.B.C. per se is on all four with the wording in the legislation concerning the objectives of the national broadcasting service. Here I am referring to that portion of the legislation which states rather emphatically that if there is a conflict at any time between private interests in broadcasting and the objectives of the national broadcasting service, they must be resolved in favour of the national broadcasting service.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)
During the committee study on this bill I asked the minister whether or not this meant that in any argument between private and public broadcasting the C.B.C. point of view should and must automatically prevail. I suggested then, and I suggest now, that it is a mistake to believe, and some of the comments made in this chamber in recent days

Canadian Policy on Broadcasting confirm my view, that we should automatically equate the C.B.C. as a corporation with the national broadcasting service, or even with the public interest. In other words, it is wrong to assume that the C.B.C. and the public interest are always on all fours. I would ask the minister, if it is not possible to change this wording, which I personally do not like particularly, if she would give assurance to this house that the new council, as it is now to be called, will not automatically be required under the words found in this legislation, automatically to make a decision where a conflict arises in favour of the C.B.C.
I believe there are many cases where it will be perfectly easy to demonstrate that the C.B.C's case is not necessarily one that is automatically in the public interest.
I know, Mr. Chairman, that no one is more aware than the minister of the inevitable difficulties which are going to be encountered in the immediate future. These are going to mushroom over the next three or four years because of the intentions set out in this bill in terms of describing a broadcast undertaking. I am aware of course of the reason that cable television systems, for example, have been embraced within this bill. Having held conversations with certain television operators in the cable field and others, I can understand the degree of their concern over the intentions expressed here.
However, I am not so much concerned as perhaps some other members are about the immediate or direct application of this legislation to cable T.V. systems. I think that they will be able to live with it. I think some form of integration between conventional broadcasting and cable systems is the answer if we are going to direct the whole of broadcasting. The end result of any form of activity of this sort by C.A.T.V. or conventional system is, of course, indistinguishable so far as the viewer is concerned.
There is no doubt that some of the activities in the cable field could have an economically detrimental effect in so far as free television is concerned. What I feel is going to be far more important, and what raises many questions, including constitutional questions, is the developments which are going to occur in the electronics field over the next four or five years, some of which are already evident in certain parts of this country. Only a week or so ago some of the most responsible engineering authorities both in the United States and Canada seriously raised the question at a broadcast symposium as to why
December 20, 1S67

Canadian Policy on Broadcasting we should use the spectrum at all. There is a strong and growing body of conviction that the day will come when broadcasting will cease to use the spectrum in the conventional fashion we are employing it today. In fact, in the great majority of cases, with the possible exception of satellite transmission, the whole of television and the whole of broadcasting will be carried by cable or some means which does not make any use of the air waves.
I suggest that the authorities here will have really grabbed a tiger by the tail if they attempt constantly to modify and change legislation in order to try, and it will be a futile effort, to bring all of these various forms under some form of national or governmental control. I caution those who are going to have this responsibility against this pitfall, whatever I may think or whatever other members may feel about the validity of the present definition of a broadcast undertaking.
I could go on at considerable length to express my doubts about the appeal procedure or the referral procedure that has been included in this bill with regard to matters which are originally approved by the new council and subsequently referred to the governor in council. I will merely content myself with saying that I believe this section is going to be very difficult to work, and that it is going to create all manner of problems for those who must make a decision. The council is established as the licensing authority. The decision of the council must be referred to the governor in council, and it can then be referred back to the council. If it so desires, the council can sustain its original decision. However, the governor in council can then decide not to act on the council's ruling and decision. It seems to me that this is really a shuttlecock operation which is not going to operate very satisfactorily in the long run. If there were more time, a more reasonable way, a better way to get at this problem might well be divised.
The proposal to establish a $100,000 fine for a breach of the regulation is a totally unrealistic and meaningless proposal. I suggest it ought to be removed. I suggest this for a number of reasons. In the first instance, the presence of this figure in the bill tends to suggest that broadcasters, be they public or private, have some sort of capacity for a kind of massive defiance of the public will or the laws of the land. I do not believe this is true. The minister said, in her comments before the committee, that the vast majority of

breaches of regulations which have occurred have been inadvertent and, in her view, action should not have been taken at all. I, for one, cannot visualize a breach of a regulation which would in any way command this kind of economic suicide, and really that is what it would be for a broadcaster to risk this kind of fine.
In my view, what is more ridiculous is that in the back part of this bill, which covers radio, we find the fine is something like $2,500 for a person who sends out a false s.o.s. distress signal to ships at sea. Surely there is nothing that anyone could conceive of in terms of the conventional responsibilities of broadcasters that would warrant a $100,000 fine, when a man in radio can send out false distress signals or commit other offences equally severe and face a potential fine of something like $2,500. Everyone who has appeared before our committee, everyone who has expressed an opinion on this, has agreed that the figure is meaningless. They all agree that no magistrate or judge, under any circumstances, would be liable to impose a fine anything like this figure. I suggest that it is an amount that is rather meaningless and therefore cannot be justified. It will not convince broadcasters, be they public or private, to come along in the fashion and with the encouragement that is the whole reason behind this bill.
There are only one or two other matters on which I want to comment, although I should like very much to deal with the subjects raised by the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke last night. I do want to say I feel there is definite improvement in this bill, in so far as the regulation of political broadcasting is concerned. I, for one, do not think the bill goes far enough. It seems to me that in this day and age we ought to regard broadcasting as we regard any other form of mass media. We cannot control the newspapers. There would be a great howl if we attempted to do so, and properly so, in so far as political material is concerned.
I see no reason why the broadcast media should not be treated in precisely the same fashion as the other media. May I recall for the benefit of members that I was one of three on a committee, the other two being the heads of the C.B.C. and the B.B.G., who brought in precisely that kind of recommendation. If we cannot go that far, if there is not a sufficient amount of enthusiasm for my view to permit us to do this, then I think the improvements which are envisaged in this bill are very much worth while.
December 20, 1967
We have recommended that the so-called ban on political broadcasting be reduced to a period of one day rather than two. We have allowed the new authority to give more latitude in the presentation of political broadcasts which surely we all agree, whatever our political convictions, are the dullest material on the air these days. We have eliminated some of the restrictions which were in the old legislation.
One of the things, of course, which is going to be watched most closely by parliamentarians in the next little while is whether or not we are still going to have placed before us these controversies in the broadcasting field with which we are still incapable of dealing. This will depend very largely on whether the machinery established for the resolution of differences between the C.B.C. and the new Canadian radio and television council is effective. Here again, I am not convinced that any commission can resolve these. In some cases they will inevitably involve matters of principle, difficult issues. I do not envy a responsible minister, indeed I do not envy any parliamentarian sitting in this house because I say we are going to continue to have these hot potatoes placed in our laps. I think we ought to examine this matter much more carefully and be prepared, if it does not work, to bring in the necessary amendments.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
The real reason that this situation exists, it seems to me, is that we are still not prepared-and this is not a matter that has been raised by only those on one side of the house; it seems to be something that is believed by numbers of members in all parties-to say what ought to be said, and that is that the Canadian radio-television council is the ultimate authority and that the C.B.C. is responsible to it. There are many instances throughout the legislation where an "out" is provided for the C.B.C., and unless my guess is very wrong and my experience taught me nothing we are going to see the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation taking advantage of these "outs" on every occasion when they can get elsewhere what they are looking for from the C.R.T.C. Therefore I say once again that the day must come when the C.B.C. is made subject to this authority in the same way as other broadcasters.
Further, Mr. Chairman, may I say we simply cannot deal with this matter in its totality until we see the financing bill which is going to follow this one, and which will set
5679
Canadian Policy on Broadcasting up the system under which the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is going to be financed. When that day comes, which I presume will be early in the new year, we will have to examine carefully whether the various assignments given the corporation are justified in relation to the very large sums of public money which we will be asked to expend.
I also believe, Mr. Chairman, that there is a great need to examine the whole concept of statutory grants. Personally I believe in this principle, but I contend it will be meaningless unless the C.B.C. are told clearly and emphatically, having been given a certain amount of money, that they will have to live within their means. If there is again a loophole which enables the corporation to come back annually or whenever they feel like it to change their so-called statutory grant, then the financial control over the corporation will be no better than it is today, and conceivably could be worse. Therefore the next stage in this important debate will be when we receive the financing bill.
Having filed these reservations, Mr. Chairman-and some may regard them as serious reservations-I still say that this is a good bill. As the minister has stated, it will depend a good deal for its implementation on the wisdom, the sense of responsibility and the awareness of those who are given the important jobs on the council and in the corporation. However, I do not believe that we have yet reached the stage-and I wish we had on this eve of Christmas, 1967-when we can say that parliament can at last free itself from a role for which it is really not suited, which is acting as a day to day arbiter of public taste in the functioning of our broadcasting system.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, what I have been trying to say up to now is that the criticisms that we hear are valid. But let them not blind us to the fact-and anybody who has seen television and listened to radio programs in other countries I feel would have to agree-that Canada is served extremely well by its broadcasting system today. By that I mean both the corporation and the private elements. I hope that this bill will enable all of us to serve Canada even better.


Gilles Grégoire: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few comments with regard to clause 2 of Bill No. C-163. My first remark

5680	COMMONS
Canadian Policy on Broadcasting deals with subclause (b) of clause 2 which reads as follows:
(b) that the Canadian broadcasting system should be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians so as to preserve and strengthen the cultural, political, social and economical fabric of Canada;
However, Mr. Chairman, it so happens that, in Canada, several radio and television stations are operated while the majority of their shareholders are not Canadian citizens nor Canadian residents but American citizens, which is contrary to legislation.
I should like to refer, as an illustration, to the two television stations in Quebec: channel 4 and channel 5 which are not owned by Canadian citizens. In answer to a question which I had put on the order paper, the hon. Secretary of State (Miss LaMarsh) said that those two television stations operated under an order in council. In Quebec, there are three television stations, the C.B.C. and two private stations owned by American interests.
Mr. Chairman, I think that the hon. Secretary of State will admit that it is an abnormal and unacceptable situation. The present legislation, even before it was amended, specifies that our radio and television broadcasting stations must be owned by Canadian citizens.
In subclause (b) of clause 2 it is clearly stated, and I quote again:
(b) that the Canadian broadcasting system should be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians
In Quebec, the only two private television stations are owned by American subjects. The result is that those two television stations present regularly news commentaries, three times a day on the French station and three times a day on the English station, and they are identical commentaries, translated back into English, since those two stations are owned by the same American company. When comments are made on a decision taken by the federal government or by the Quebec government or by a municipality, it is always the American point of view which is put forward during the news commentaries of those two Quebec stations, either the English or the French station. It is always the American point of view on, or reaction to, the events occurring in Canada and Quebecers, as a result, are overwhelmed by American reactions.
I think this is not at all normal, since an attempt is being made to have Quebecers think or figure according to what the Americans think, because these editorials of the

DEBATES	December 20, 1967
two Quebec television stations are prepared according to American ideas or reactions since such stations belong to Americans.
There is a young squirt who reads these editorials, possibly with some assurance, but everyone knows that he is not writing them; nevertheless, they are regularly given over the Quebec television, either on the French station or on the English station.
So, Mr. Chairman, I believe that the former legislation stated that television and radio stations in Canada "should belong to Canadians." The new legislation restates it, but the cabinet passes orders in council, allowing the operation of the two Quebec stations even though they are owned by American citizens. I wonder if the Secretary of State accepts this situation. I believe, in the circumstances, that subclause (b) should be amended so that it will no longer provide that:
-the Canadian broadcasting system should be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians-
-but read as follows:
-the Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
No longer "should", because that is a statement of good intentions achieving nothing. What we need is to write the principle firmly and precisely in the legislation thus:
The Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians-
Further, the minister should grant a maximum delay of a few months to require these American concerns to sell the shares they own in these two Quebec television stations. I believe this is completely normal since the minister, when drafting her bill, admits that "the Canadian broadcasting system should be effectively owned by Canadians." Why not then clarify the principle and include it in the legislation by providing that "the Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians"?
Then, the good intentions of the minister would be written in the legislation and the owners of such companies would have a fixed period to sell their shares on the Canadian market. It would be easier as barely two or three years ago-three years I think-when the B.B.G. granted a licence for the operation of a C.B.C. television station in Quebec city, some Quebecers had applied for a licence to operate a private station there. Therefore, since some Quebecers are interested in private television in Quebec city, why
December 20, 1967	COMMONS
leave it under the control of American citizens?
The fact that the minister mentioned subclause 2 shows her good intentions; but this does not go far enough, and I feel the bill should be much more specific. That is why I intend to move an amendment to clause 2(b). Therefore, I move:
That subclause 2 (b) be amended by substituting, in line 11, the word "shall" for the word "should".
so that the amended paragraph would read as follows:
-the Canadian broadcasting system shall be effectively owned and controlled by Canadians so as to preserve and strengthen the cultural, political, social and economic fabric of Canada;
Therefore, I move that amendment and I would ask the Secretary of State to accept it, since her views and good intentions are already known with regard to the Canadian ownership of our radio and television stations.
I submit that amendment, trusting that the Secretary of State will readily accept it. At the same time, she could perhaps tell us, indeed assure us, that her department will see to it that, as soon as possible private radio and television stations controlled by foreigners are handed over to Quebec interests, and that those foreigners sell their shares on the Canadian market.


Maurice Rinfret: Order. For the guidance of the members of the committee, I shall read the amendment proposed by the hon. member for Lapointe:
That subclause 2 (b) be amended by substituting, in line 11, the word "shall" for the word "should".


Edward Nasserden: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make some general remarks about the C.B.C. and broadcasting in Canada. We have had a broadcasting system in Canada for about 30 years now and many who look closely at that system say that it has failed to carry out its initial and primary purposes. On the other hand, when some of us realize that certain milestones in broadcasting have been passed, we are satisfied with some progress that has been made so far.
I think every member of parliament receives many letters criticizing the extremes of programming content of certain C.B.C. programs. Some of the feature programs particularly, which are said to reflect the changes taking place in our society, have been found objectionable by some. In our society the population has been moving from 27053-358i
DEBATES	5581
Canadian Policy on Broadcasting urban to rural areas. Those who live in rural Saskatchewan, as well as those who live in the urban areas of that province, find it hard to believe that some C.B.C. programs reflect the realities of Canadian life today.
The members of this parliament and of future parliaments will be charged with the responsibility of directing the broad stream of broadcasting in our nation in the years ahead. Since we endow producers and directors of programs with great responsibilities, they should be Canadian citizens, especially when they work within the C.B.C. I do not know how many of them are not Canadians but I have been told that in the administrative hierarchy there are some who cannot claim Canadian citizenship. I believe that a corporation like the C.B.C. or any crown corporation which is involved with the objectives that are set forth in this legislation, should be staffed at senior levels with citizens of this country. Those citizens should have a true interest in pursuing objectives that are national, and peculiar to this nation.
I feel that the way we allocate our broadcasting stations in Canada enables some to obtain greater privileges than others. Some of those privileges are much more valuable than we thought they would be a few short years ago. Those stations which have been established should be more strictly supervised than they have been. I say that because I can think of one or two staions which have almost become a law unto themselves. They wield a tremendous influence in certain areas of the country. The course they pursue with regard to national objectives is questionable.
I believe, sir, that Canada has room for more television stations than she has presently; primarily, I am speaking of privately owned television stations. Stations should not be given a monopoly in the area they serve. I recognize that new stations must establish themselves if they are to become a strong factor in the communications media of an area. Yet I believe that other stations should be allowed in areas which are already served by an existing station. I think that those who grant licences ought to be freer with their allocations than they have been in the past. Competition will not hurt our broadcasters; it may raise the over-all tone of broadcasting in this country.
When I said that producers and directors ought to be Canadian citizens, I did not mean necessarily that the artists who appear on the C.B.C. must be Canadians. Obviously, artists from other countries are welcome to take
5682	COMMONS
Canadian Policy on Broadcasting part in some programs. But the top administrators and the more important producers and directors of the C.B.C. ought to be Canadians. I must impress on the minister the necessity of making certain that Canadians have a voice in what programs are to be broadcast in this country.
The hon. members for Saskatoon and Kindersley have asked for television stations to be established in their areas. The hon. member for Saskatoon especially, for the past year or two, has asked for a television station to be established in Saskatoon. Demands have also been made for a French television station to be set up on the prairies, though, as I understand, the advent of such a station is some way off. Past legislation has decreed that there be English and French networks in Canada, but as I look at Saskatoon I cannot see that a French television station in that area has any prospect, at the present time, of paying its way. Where a limited number of French speaking people live on the prairies, radio or television stations in the area might carry programs in English and French. This would be possible if there were other stations in the field in these areas; their presence might go a long way toward ending some of the difficulties we have encountered. I cannot but feel that some action is needed in Saskatoon either to provide a C.B.C. outlet or to allow private individuals to provide one. If Canada does not intend to spend any more money to set up television stations, then surely we should consider allowing others to provide them if they are willing to make the necessary funds available.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
This leads one to the whole question of whether the C.B.C. should be in the station business at all. I realize it is a little late to bring up this point now, nevertheless, when one considers the amount of money involved in setting up a station and the lucrative possibilities which such stations present today we are bound to reflect on the fact that we have seen nothing but deficits in the C.B.C. accounts year after year, and that the forecast for the future is unchanged. The prospect is surely one which encourages us to consider whether we are justified in providing funds for the setting up of stations by the C.B.C., possibly at the expense of assistance which might develop the talents of Canadian artists and give them a real incentive.
To my mind, the development of Canadian talent is one of the great problems facing television in this country. I think the failure to develop our own talent adequately is one

DEBATES	December 20, 1967
of the reasons we have so many poor programs from the C.B.C. today. We have asked the corporation to seek out Canadian talent. In many instances its efforts have been found lacking, and as a result some of the programs have been vulgar, lacking in taste, even shocking to a great many people. It seems that programs of this kind were the only ones which could be relied upon to draw attention, at C.B.C. headquarters. This forces us to ask what qualifications are set by officials in senior positions when they determine who are to produce and direct the programs which go on the air.
I do not believe any easy solution will be found. We still have a long way to go. The federal government, together with provincial governments should devote more attention to providing incentives for the development of real artistry-the creation of a pool upon which the C.B.C. could draw. It is my belief that as a result of the way in which the two networks have been set up in Canada there has been an overwhelming inclination to draw talent from the corporation's centres in Montreal and Toronto.
Talent which might be developed in the outlying parts of Canada has been overlooked to some degree, though I am firmly of the opinion that talent exists in many parts of this country outside Toronto, Montreal or Ottawa. I do concede that it needs encouragement and development. I would go further and say there is a useful field of work open here for some agency of the government, some segment of the C.B.C. itself.
Before going further I wish to congratulate the minister on her birthday today we could make that unanimous, all round the house.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Edward Nasserden: We hope the broadcasting bill will set a new standard of broadcasting in this country, that it will serve the purpose for which it was originally designed, that is, to build a stronger Canada, and that it will lead to the development of talent in this country, giving employment to Canadian artists so that they will stay at home, rather than go abroad. The fact is that many Canadian performers have been obliged to go abroad. The C.B.C. could not discover them, but somebody else did. This lends weight to the argument I was making earlier-that there should be some section responsible for searching out and encouraging the talent we have here in Canada.
December 20, 1967


Mr. Barnett:: I have been listening with interest to the speeches which have been made during this discussion. I was particularly interested in what was said by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo, because of his background in the medium now under consideration. I do not intend to comment on his speech in any detail, but I will say I agree with him when he says that the officials who have just retired or who are about to retire from the corporation and give up their responsibilities in this field certainly served as public servants to the best of their ability during a tumultuous period in the history of broadcasting. To this extent we owe them our appreciation for their efforts.
I was also interested in the speech made last night by the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke. I was surprised he appeared to be so diffident about raising the question he dealt with at that time. Perhaps it was only the lateness of the hour which caused him to express himself as he did when he told us he intended to discuss the undiscussable, namely the question of good taste in broadcasting. I have never felt that this is a subject about which one should be inhibited in any way when speaking, and I should like to make reference to the hon. member's proposal for dealing with this problem. Let me refer to his remarks as they appear at page 5648 of yesterday's Hansard, where he had this to say:
I would suggest that In the final stage of considering the legislation we should give serious thought to amendments which will set down a little more firmly guide lines for the Canadian radio television council not only for C.B.C. broadcasting but also in the private area, because I think it is important for us not to abdicate this great responsibility.
I am not quarrelling with the objective the hon. member had in mind, nor am I quarrelling with his remarks critical of certain programs. Indeed, I shall myself have some critical things to say about some programs before I conclude. However, I do not subscribe to his idea that one can legislate good taste. As far as the bill is concerned, the guide lines laid down in it appear to be fair and sensible. I believe the question of good taste in broadcasting is something which has to be left in the hands of those who operate the broadcasting system, subject to the reaction of the Canadian people and in particular of this parliament.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)
This brings me to a point I would like to raise for the consideration of the committee.

Canadian Policy on Broadcasting It is that in this bill we have not in any way touched on a very important aspect of this whole matter, the relationship to parliament of the broadcasting system and the Canadian radio television council. Often over the years that I have been a member of this house I have heard the idea expressed that the broadcasting system and its operation were responsible to parliament, and not to the government. While there has been lipservice paid to this idea, it really seems to me that this question of the relationship to parliament has never been defined, has never really been dealt with in a way that created a satisfactory situation.
In dealing with this piece of legislation which, as the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo said, most members consider to be a forward step, I think we should give some attention to this aspect of the matter. I for one have never felt that the arrangement, whereby one of the ministers of the crown acts as spokesman or go-between betwixt parliament and the Board of Broadcast Governors and the C.B.C., has been a satisfactory one. The desultory questioning on orders of the day and the assurances given by the responsible minister that he or she would bring an hon. member's remarks to the attention of the president of the C.B.C., or what-have-you,. have been so unsatisfactory that in some ways they have been responsible for a lot of the general discontent with the operation of the broadcasting system in recent years.
Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I would like to add that in my view the various ministers who had that responsibility during the time I have been a member of the house, including the days when the late Dr. McCann was minister of national revenue and played that role, and when the late former member for Digby-Annapolis-Kings, who was also minister of national revenue, played that role, all were most meticulous in trying to maintain the attitude that the broadcasting system was not the tool of the government but was responsible to parliament. The present minister has very meticulously given the same kind of response when members of this parliament have put questions to her.
There has been some reference to some of the present minister's comments, as an individual member or citizen, with respect to certain aspects of the management of broadcasting. Indeed there has been some furore about her comments. I would remind the committee that this is not a unique situation. I recall that when a number of years ago the
December 20, 1967

Canadian Policy on Broadcasting Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent led the government an occasion arose when there was an extended debate in the house about whether he, the prime minister, could make a representation to the president of the C.B.C. as a private citizen.
It is for this reason, as well as taking into consideration the suggestion put forward by the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke, that we should seek to legislate in more detail the matter of programming, in relation to whether it is in good taste or bad taste, whether it is poor programming or good programming, that I wish to put forward the view that we in this chamber ought to be giving some serious thought to another way in which we could express our views on the question of broadcasting.
If the concept of the responsibility of parliament as an institution for the operation of broadcasting, rather than of the government, is to have any real meaning, then this national forum should set up some kind of machinery or mechanism of its own through which, from time to time, members could channel the views of their constituents, as well as their own views on the nature of various programs. When the hon. member for Kindersley was speaking he tried to imply that the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond suggested we did not have any right to criticize C.B.C. programming. That was not my understanding of the remarks made by the hon. member for Burnaby-Rich-mond. But what did strike me, if I heard it correctly, was the comment by the hon. member for Kindersley, that there was some distinction between our right as members of parliament to criticize C.B.C. programming and to criticize programming carried by privately owned stations or network.


Mr. Prittie:: The Prime Minister himself complained today.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Yes, today the Prime Minister complained about a broadcasting matter which, from the context of his remarks, related to a privately owned operation. But this leads me to suggest that the members of the official opposition should make up their minds on whether they support this legislation or not. I would draw the attention of the hon. member for Kindersley and of the hon. member for Rosthern to the very beginning of the clause now under consideration, which sets out, as it has been so often set out in the past, that Canadian broadcasting constitutes a single system and that all persons licensed

to carry on broadcasting have a responsibility for programs they broadcast, but also have the right to freedom of expression.
I would like to put that on all fours with the right of members of parliament to freedom of expression, taking literally the text of this bill which sets up the broadcasting system as a single system. It is on that basis that we should consider our role with respect to what we think programming should be, and with respect to the other activities of broadcasters.
Instead of trying to set out guide lines in detail concerning what is good taste and poor taste, as suggested by the hon. member for Okanagan-Revelstoke, I think we ought to consider what role we might play in this area, through proper discussion from time to time of broadcasting and its content. I hope to make some critical comments about a certain program if time permits, Mr. Chairman, but I do not feel this is a satisfactory way to do so. While I am trying to make my comments relevant to the bill, certainly as relevant as those of other hon. members have been, nevertheless I would point out that each time a broadcasting bill or financial proposal relating to broadcasting comes before us, we tend to use it as an occasion to criticize programming. This has resulted in rather desultory and undirected discussion about the content of programming.
I think we should consider taking a new approach to the question of the responsibility of parliament for broadcasting. Instead of having a minister as our spokesman or go-between in matters concerning the new Canadian radio-television council, I think we might have Mr. Speaker perform this role, as our spokesman to the C.B.C. and the regulatory body.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)
What has given rise to this thought in my mind was the procedure adopted in relation to another aspect of life in this country. I am referring to the procedure laid down in the bill which set up the redistribution commissions. As hon. members will recall, there is provision under the rules for debates on what the redistribution commissions have done. A copy of such debates is sent to the commissions by the Speaker of the house, as an official expression of the views of the members of the house. There is also provision under which the house can give its expression of opinion by way of a resolution. It does seem to me consideration might be
December 20, 1967

given to something, perhaps not exactly parallel but somewhat similar to that, in connection with the matter of broadcasting. This could be done without any direct relationship to the bill. It could be done by an arrang-ment under our rules whereby from time to time there could be a motion "that this house express its opinion to the C.B.C." or the Canadian council on radio and television. This motion would be debatable and amendable. We could then have a discussion which could be centered on the matter of programming, or the general policy in respect of the extension of broadcast facilities into coloured television or to areas such as referred to by the hon. member for Kindersley, or to that area of the country from which I come. Such a debate would provide proper focus for the expression of the views of members of this house and, through them, the people of Canada.
It seems to me there is a helpless feeling on the part of many Canadians about this business of merely being able to write to their member, who asks a question of the minister, who in turn then says she will draw the remarks to the attention of the proper official, whoever he may be. They can simply write to the C.B.C. and get a reply from the president on matters of programming. I am not suggesting there is no place for this type of comment on programming, but there are times when certain issues develop which should be focused in this house. If there is going to be any real meaning to the concept of the responsibility of parliament for the broadcasting system, some kind of focus of that sort is necessary, and this is something we should do after we have dealt with this bill.
Contingent upon that I think is an acceptance on the part of members of this house of the principles of the broadcasting system as they are set out in this bill. If there have been suggestions that people like myself and the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond have been a little hesitant in our criticism from time to time of the C.B.C., it is perhaps because we have believed as strongly as any in the idea and value of a public broadcasting system. We have been concerned over the years with attempts by members of the Conservative party, although not exclusively, to subvert the concept of public broadcasting, and it seems to me there was an example of that sort of thing in the remarks made last night by the hon. member for Oxford. The same sort of criticism has been expressed much more strongly during previous sessions

Canadian Policy on Broadcasting by hon. members in that part of the house, but I think this is dying out. I hope there will be a recognition of the spirit and the realities set forth in this bill.
The hon. member for Rosthern questioned whether the C.B.C. should operate television stations. His remarks were the echo of something expressed much more strongly during previous sessions by members sitting in that part of the house. It seems to me that if we could bring this out in the open, as a right of parliamentarians during a proper debate, and in some way convey our criticisms of programming to the responsible authorities it might be possible to establish a much more satisfactory relationship between ourselves and the broadcast authorities than obviously has existed in recent years.
Having said that, I must add my share of blood-letting by drawing attention to the sort of thing which I hope will come to an end with the adoption of this bill. I have always felt that if one is going to criticize he should do so specifically and in relation to particular programs or actions. The one I should like to draw to the attention of the house is a program which was of great concern to some of my constituents. It was called "Young in a Small Town", which was carried on "Camera West" August 20 last. This program focused on one of the communities in my constituency. Certainly most of the constituents of that area considered it to be a very unfair portrayal of the situation as it exists.
Let me say first of all that the C.B.C. Times, about which some others have spoken, in describing this program displayed a very cheap and sloppy piece of journalese when, in referring to the Albernis on Vancouver island, it said:
Huge complexes of pulp mills, shingle mills, saw mills, and plywood manufacturing plants dominate the towns with their soaring smoking chimneys and the cacophony of machines

This is just a sloppy and inaccurate piece of writing. Perhaps it would be more accurate if it had referred to a huge complex, because there is one pulp mill, one shingle mill, two saw mills and one plywood plant. Later on it refers to the young people with big cars who roar around the country, and it mentions that the population of this area is approximately 20,000. At another place in this article it states:
Week ends is the time for "blowin' up the gas" and great hordes of these youngsters head for the larger cities of Nanaimo and Victoria on the island or Vancouver on the mainland-
December 20, 1967

Canadian Policy on Broadcasting
I do not know what the estimate of the producer or the writer of this article would be in respect of great hordes, but it certainly sounds like this means the 20,000 people living in the Albernis roar out of the towns on week ends. The writer might have been more accurate if he had said 50 or 100,-and I have travelled that highway often myself.
I wrote to the president of the C.B.C. about this program. I had to admit that I had not seen it myself but had heard a lot about it from many people. When I became aware of the widespread and official concern of the community, which was expressed by the mayor and the city council as well, to the regional director of the C.B.C., I made a point of carrying out a rather broad inquiry. I said in my letter:
I may say that I did not myself actually view this program, but have had it discussed with me by a great many people who did see it. If I may make my own observation as a result of these discussions, there would appear to be a consensus that the social situation outlined does not exist as an element of the life of the Albemi community and also of many others in Canada today. The main brunt of the criticism appears to have arisen from the fact that it was presented in documentary form, focusing on a particular community and, therefore, in presenting one narrow facet of life in this community on a nationwide hookup, thereby created a very distorted image of what the community actually is.
This was underlined by the kind of blurbs that were written about the program in the C.B.C. Times.
I then said in my letter:
Had the social situation been presented in the form of a play or in some way which did not pinpoint it on a particular community there would, I believe, have been much less valid grounds for objection to the program.
In the reply I received to that letter the comment about the program was completely ignored, and I was told:
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
As you have so aptly observed, the social situation outlined is common to virtually all parts of North America. This is pointed out in the letter which Mr. Caple sent to the mayors of Alberni and Port Alberni-*
With regard to the investigation into the program, in my view either the producer of the program completely brainwashed the regional director of the C.B.C., and through him the president, or they are simply refusing to recognize the incorrect approach taken in the program by pinpointing a particular community in a way that made it appear that the community was involved to a greater extent than any other and completely dis-

torting the situation as far as that area is concerned.
As one of the aldermen of the cities pointed out, the impact of this program was such that someone in Nova Scotia who heard that a friend of his was moving from Alberni to another community wrote saying he was so glad his friend was getting out of this horrible place. This is the kind of distortion to which the people of the Albernis were objecting. They were not denying the existence of a social situation; they were objecting to the form of the program which was carried on a national hook-up and gave the impression that this was the main characteristic of the community. If the community had not been mentioned by name, and the program had televised scenes of the area and used them as a documentary, I do not think there would have been so much ground for criticism.
The latest comment on the matter, as a result of further protest and the suggestion that there be a fresh look at the matter, is that the program was not staged with a view to distorting the situation. In this connection I should like to quote part of an article which appeared in the Nanaimo Free Press of December 15. The article points out that Mr. Caple said that none of the scenes were staged or edited with intent on the part of the C.B.C. to reflect adversely on youth generally in the community. Perhaps the intent was not there, but the fact is that the program did reflect adversely on the community and its youth. The fact is that scenes were staged. There are a number of people in the community who know they were staged and any attempt on the part of the producer, Mr. Caple, or anybody else to deny it is not very convincing.
The people producing the program got two or three high school students, who happened to be driving fairly nice cars, owned by their parents, to go round and round the school in order to create the impression that all the students of the high school were driving this kind of car. The producers provided beer to young people on the beach on the west coast so they could portray them drinking beer on the beach. In view of these facts my constituents cannot be convinced that the program was not staged.
The situation that was portrayed is one that exists; nobody in the community is quarrelling with that. They are quarrelling with the fact that the whole situation was enlarged and distorted to create the impression across the country that this was the
December 20, 1967

main characteristic of the community. This is what the people are objecting to, and it is what I am now objecting to on their behalf. I have made my point-


Maurice Rinfret: Order.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, I may be allowed to conclude with one sentence. While I have expressed the views-


Maurice Rinfret: Order. I
regret to interrupt the hon. gentleman but the time allotted to him has expired, unless the committee gives unanimous consent for the hon. gentleman to continue.


Mr. McCleave:: Let him finish his sentence.


Maurice Rinfret: Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Thomas Speakman Barnett: I conclude by saying that having made these comments I feel, as I said earlier, that this is an unsatisfactory way of having to do it and I hope the members of the house will give consideration to my earlier remarks about a different way of dealing with this sort of situation.


Mr. Horner (Acadia):: Mr. Chairman, I would not like this bill to pass without making some comments and putting forward my hopes and aspirations with regard to what can be done under the C.B.C. or under the proposed Canadian radio commission which will, if the bill passes, be the governing body in respect of communications in Canada. In my opinion clause 2 of the bill legalizes and condones what one might call the brainwashing of the Canadian public. I think this is a dangerous thing. As the previous speaker said, you cannot legislate taste. It is dangerous, also, to spell out exactly what you want broadcasters to do.
As the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo said, this bill will provide many loopholes for the C.B.C. to use. I agree with him wholeheartedly. Clause 2 provides that the programming provided by the Canadian broadcasting system should provide reasonable opportunity for the expression of conflicting views on matters of public controversy. Nowhere does the bill spell out that the Canadian broadcasting system should provide reasonable opportunity for the expression of neutral views, non-partisan views, or even that both sides of the conflict must be portrayed. It just says that it is all right for the C.B.C. to project across Canada matters of public controversy and conflicting views.
Research
When you study the bill clause by clause you wonder what we are really trying to do here. Are we trying to regulate broadcasting? Are we trying to define what we want Canadians to listen to and see? Are we, on the other hand, creating for the C.B.C. an enormous loophole by means of which they can avoid any real responsibility?
When introducing this bill the minister said that she and previous ministers had experienced a great deal of difficulty in providing any regulatory authority in respect of broadcasting in Canada. This bill will certainly not enhance the minister's position in this regard.
Mr. Chairman, may I call it five o'clock?
Progress reported.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. It being five o'clock the house will now proceed to the consideration of private members business as listed on today's order paper, namely notices of motions and public bills.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)



RESEARCH


Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East) moved:: That, in the opinion of this house, the following matters should be referred to the standing committee on agriculture, forestry and rural development with the authority to call for persons and papers and report its deliberations with recommendations :
1.	The use of animals for medical research purposes, their care and utilization, and procedures for government licensing and inspection of, and control over, all premises using animals for laboratory research or medical training;
2.	The treatment of animals as pets and, as far as federal jurisdiction permits, recommendations regarding legislation providing penalties for those abusing animals, and any persons making a business of raising or catching animals for sale to research individuals or centres and not keeping the same in a humane manner;
3.	The most humane method of trapping furbearing animals, and consideration as to whether the Canadian seal hunt should, and could on a practicable basis be discontinued; and
4.	Consideration of the entire Canadian picture relative to the maintenance of fish, bird and animal wildlife and the regulations required for conservation.
He said: Mr. Speaker, the remarks which I intend to make are based on voluminous files which are the result of one year's intense inquiries and research on the subject matter of this motion, inquiries with respect to which were sent to various countries of the world. Hon. members will have noted that

December 20, 1967
Research
this motion has been on the order paper since May 9, and therefore there has been plenty of time for the purport and the implication of its wording to be studied and understood. I sincerely hope that all hon. members who have read the motion will note that it is not dogmatic in its terms and that it makes no specific recommendation. It outlines serious matters which, in my estimation, are not only worthy of, but demands, the attention of the house and the study, investigation, hearing of representations and recommendations from a select standing committee of the house.
Perhaps there is only one aspect of the motion on which hon. members might wish an explanation, that is the suggestion that the four points contained in it should be referred to the standing committee on agriculture. The reason for this is that on making inquiries and investigations throughout a number of countries in the world I have found that these matters were being always referred for study either to a royal commission or to the agricultural committee of the legislative body of the country, and that when action was taken by the legislative body, the enforcement of regulation and the inspection of the licensing was undertaken by that country's department of agriculture. It is because I have discovered this to be the procedure in other countries of the world, and particularly the United States and the United Kingdom, that I suggested reference of the subject matter of this motion to the select standing committee on agriculture.
First of all I should like to deal briefly with the fourth point in the motion, which is the consideration of the entire Canadian picture relative to the maintenance of fish, bird and animal wildlife and the regulations required for conservation. I am certain that every one in the house is interested in conservation, but wishful thinking, or pious or sanctimonious utterances are not sufficient. We need action, and that action must be taken soon. As a result of research I have discovered that there has been a brutal massacre of wildlife on this continent. In the past 150 years 60 species of birds and animals have been exterminated by the greedy and the ignorant. Experts in the United States and Canada have informed me that about 80 other species of birds and animals are on the danger list and face the same fate. Surely I need only mention what is happening to our big horn sheep, our grizzlies and our polar bears.
Last year we heard about so-called sportsmen using helicopters to locate polar bears

and grizzlies and shooting them from the plane, with the result, the experts say, that these species are dangerously near extinction. So the fact some species of birds and animals are being exterminated is sufficient reason to refer this important matter to the committee for study.
I want to say immediately that I realize that action is required on a federal, provincial and, in some aspects, on an international basis. However, someone must give the lead, and I respectfully ask hon. members this question: Who would be better qualified to give the lead than the House of Commons of Canada? This is the reason for point 4 of the motion.
In the past two years in particular a great deal has been said about seal hunting by the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Robichaud), and we accepted what he had to say. However, experts in the field who have witnessed seal hunts have criticised the way in which they have been carried out. So much has been said and publicised concerning seal hunts that this matter is now of world concern and interest.
I hope all hon. members have noticed that I have not been dogmatic on the subject and have not even taken sides on it. I have been careful not to do this because of the importance of the humane treatment and conservation of animals, the necessity for studying the most humane method of trapping furbearing animals, and consideration as to whether the Canadian seal hunt should, and could, on a practicable basis be discontinued. We will not get a satisfactory answer to questions through asking questions on orders of the day. This should be a matter of study and representation. First let the truth come out, and then let the all-party committee on agriculture make its recommendations on the basis of evidence.
This leads me to points 1 and 2 in my motion which concern the treatment of animals as pets, and their use for medical research. This is without doubt a most controversial matter and one which should be considered without bias and without prejudice. We must recognize the feelings of animals when we consider their use in medical research in an effort to find methods of helping human beings. We have no legislation that governs this in Canada. Many of us, I think all, if they knew the facts, are vitally concerned.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
May I introduce what I have to say on this phase of the subject, Mr. Speaker, by quoting
December 20, 1967

the first paragraph of a submission made to a previous minister of justice. The heading of the submission is "The Protection of Animals Used in Scientific Research," and the paragraph reads:
Medical research has made great strides in recent years, and one of the contributing factors has been the possibility of testing new techniques and materials on animals prior to applying them to human patients. Many people have accepted the use of animals for this purpose in the belief that man is justified in inflicting some suffering on animals if it leads to permanent relief of human suffering. They have assumed, however, that no more pain would be inflicted than was absolutely necessary for the purpose and that the animals would be given all the care and attention they require. Unfortunately, there is overwhelming evidence that this is not always the case.
In these massive files on my desk, Mr. Speaker, I have reports of investigations by the Congress of the United States as well as a report of the departmental committee on experiments with animals, headed by Sir Sidney Littlewood in the United Kingdom. This report was filed in April of 1965. I have magazines, books and reports from many countries of the world which contain material that is absolutely horrifying. We see here irrefutable proof of the unnecessary pain inflicted in the name of human beings. Evidence was given before a committee of the Congress of the United States about three years ago concerning dogs being kept in small cages without exercise for up to seven years; about intermittent electric shock being applied to dogs over a period of six months in order to produce a state of chronic fear. Evidence was given before the royal commission of the crushing of the legs of over 400 dogs in a press, without any anaesthetic from the time of this procedure until death some 24 hours later.
We read that dognapping reached such proportions in the United States that on March 25 last year the house agricultural committee approved legislation aimed at curtailing the activities of dognappers who sell pets to research centres. The bill gives the department of agriculture in the United States licensing powers over persons who sell cats and dogs for research purposes, and over the institutions which buy them. We hear people say that this cannot happen in Canada. However, we have no licensing control; we have no authority and no knowledge of what goes on. According to evidence given to the committee of the United States Congress, over 100 million animals a year are used for medical and scientific purposes in that country alone. In the light of all these facts, I say 27053-3591
Research
this is a matter for investigation by a committee of this House of Commons.
We say it can't happen here, and yet I read this from one of our newspapers:
Officials from the Montreal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals raided a dog kennel Friday near Granby, 40 miles east of Montreal, and brought back 60 dogs only seven of which were expected to live-
The dogs, suffering from hunger, distemper, mange and cuts, were brought to Montreal in three S.P.C.A. ambulances along with two dozen rabbits and chickens.
We read also that 13 year old high school students are using animals for experimental diagnostic purposes. This is right in the record. We have no provision whatever for dealing with the matter. I know there may be conflicting jurisdiction, provincial, federal and international, but someone must take the lead. I can think of no better source of leadership than this House of Commons referring the study of this matter to a committee. The committee could study the use of animals in medical research in our country, study whether or not there should be licensing and inspection by federal or provincial authorities, not only of those who catch or raise these animals for research but also of the; universities or laboratories that use them.
We have the right, sir, because the animals feel pain, to have an interest and concern in every phase of animal protection, animal use and the conservation of our wildlife. In this way, members may receive the benefit of representations made to the committee, receive knowledge of the use of animals and what we can possibly do about it.
I am not going to speak any longer, except to say this: In the past two or three weeks I and other members interested in this matter have done our best to obtain the opinions of other members. We have yet to find one who does not agree that this is a matter worthy of study or worthy of reference to a committee. I conclude my remarks therefore in the hope that since the motion is not dogmatic, but merely asks for a study, that it will be accepted by all members.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)


Mr. Cowan:: Mr. Speaker, would the hon member answer a question, or is his time up?


Some hon. Members:: Go ahead.


Ralph Bronson Cowan: I should like to adress a
question to the hon. member for Vancouver East. His notice of motion makes reference to the method of trapping furbearing animals and asks that consideration be given as to

December 20, 1967
Research
whether the Canadian seal hunt should and could on a practicable basis be discontinued. I should like to ask the hon. member whether he feels that the hunt for defective human foetuses and the murder of babies should be abolished in the same way as the mere hunting for baby seals?


Harold Edward Winch: Mr. Speaker, if the question were applicable I would answer it, but as it :is not I will not do so.


Mr. Andrew Chatwood (Grand Falls-While Bay-Labrador):: Mr. Speaker, I must admit that having given the resolution moved by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) quite a bit of consideration before rising to speak to it, I was impressed by the comprehensive area covered by the hon. member. As he himself mentioned, I think all members are much concerned with the treatment of animals and also with the future wildlife of our country.
Along with this, Mr. Speaker, we have very deep and real concern about assuring the people of our country of the opportunity to live and continue to live a good life. When the hon. member referred to the vast and extensive file that he has on record, he reminded me of the fable of Pandora's box and I kept wondering just what was inside his file. I was hoping that perhaps we were going to be allowed to view some of the material he has in this heavy file. However, if the file were opened perhaps, like Pandora's box, it might cause more harm than good.
I did hope while he was speaking that the house would give this resolution deep and serious consideration because it deals with a matter which is important and of interest to us all. I hesitate to agree with the hon. member for Vancouver East in his suggestion that the question be referred to the committee on agriculture, because certainly some of the matters mentioned are better dealt with by other committees. The seal fishery is under the jurisdiction of the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Robichaud) and at the present time is well regulated by that department.
The problem of disappearing species, both of bird and of animal life, is something that has been with us since the start of the world. Of course we no longer have the dinosaur or the other large animals; due to the change in world conditions they have long since ceased to exist. On the other hand we have had an increase in certain types of animals which perhaps were not so numerous in the past.
The question raised by the hon. member concerning the use of animals for medical
fMr. Cowan.]
research is one which is of concern to all of us. The question whether or not animals should be used for medical research is perhaps easy to answer; I think that if medical science is to advance at all such research is a necessity. Transplanting of organs from one dog to another took place long before it was tried with humans. There have been many amazing cases over the past years when knowledge gained from experiments with animals has been used for the furtherance of mankind and to save lives.


Ralph Bronson Cowan: Think of insulin.


Andrew Chatwood: Yes, the hon. member reminds me of insulin, a very important discovery.
I should like to comment a little further on the third item in the resolution which deals with the most humane method of trapping furbearing animals, and also asks for consideration of whether the Canadian seal hunt should and could on a practicable basis be discontinued. Although the hon. member stated that he had no particular feeling one way or the other on these items, his suggestion that the seal hunt be discontinued grates on me because I feel very strongly that it plays a vital part in the Canadian economy.
First with regard to the trapping of furbearing animals, while this is a matter to be considered by manufacturers of the traps and also by the trappers taking fur, 1 doubt whether the agriculture committee-and I do not see the connection between the agriculture committee and the trappers in our northern lands-could improve on the method used. The furs that are trapped in my area have been reduced in number over the past years, as has the number of people engaged in trapping. Nevertheless I think it is still well recognized that the Labrador mink is the best and that the quality of Labrador mink is superior to other varieties.
With reference to the seal fishery, Mr. Speaker, the hon. member's suggestion that this can be discontinued on a practicable basis amazes me. The whole idea seems impossible to me and I should like to make a few points to illustrate why. The Canadian seal hunt is, of course, tied in with seal hunts in other parts of the world. In various sections of his speech the hon. member for Vancouver East referred to information he has received from many countries of the world regarding other aspects of the treatment of animals, both as pets and for use in research.
December 20, 1967

I think the Canadian seal fishery is basically divided into three areas that call for consideration. The first geographic area is the gulf, where the whitecoats are taken. The seal fishery in the gulf is limited to the whitecoats and this is closely supervised. Method of killing and quantity taken are controlled by federal government regulations. The amount is set each year and reviewed each year on the basis of size of herds. Over the past years the limit has been kept to 50,000 pelts, and at the present time this appears to be a reasonable quantity so as to maintain the seal fishery in the gulf. Should the herd become depleted the amount would be lowered; should the herd increase in number by an unwarranted amount then the limit would be increased.
The reason for controlling the number of seals taken in the gulf is based on the point made so well by the hon. member for Vancouver East, namely that we must conserve our wild animals, our fish, our birds, indeed wildlife in general in the country. The method of taking seals in the gulf is designed to conserve what is a vital industry to the area. The seals come down to this area to whelp and to breed and are there for a period of 75 days. During this time they are feeding for about 60 days, and in this wild feeding the adult seals eat about 15 pounds of fish a day. If 50,000 seals fed themselves at the rate of 15 pounds of fish a day each, this would have a direct effect on the fishery industry in the gulf area. This would affect fishermen along the coast of Quebec, and Newfoundland, and the other maritime provinces. The industry in the gulf supports approximately 40,000 men. That is not a matter that can be lightly dismissed.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
In addition, if seals were not taken in the gulf, they would eat large quantities of fish. That would have a direct effect on the fish that could be taken by our fishermen. The seals that come south also carry an enzyme or disease which attacks herring. If the seal herds were left unchecked, this disease would attack our herring schools and the herring that could be caught would be reduced. All this comes back again to the question of conservation and the balance of nature.
It is all very well to say that if nothing were taken from the sea nature would balance the seal fishery and the growth of other species of fish. But the balance of nature is
Research
not left to take place unchecked. Other species of fish are taken from the sea, and they will continue and should continue to be taken. If we did not control the seal herd we would thus reduce the amount of fish that could be taken by our fishermen in the area. In addition, sports fishing in our rivers would be affected since seals, by multiplying, would not find sufficient fish to catch at sea and would come up our rivers to attack and eat our sports fish.
The second area of sealing with which we ought to be concerned is the area of seals which are taken from the shore by fishermen who live on the shore. This area of the seal fishery involves a large area and a great number of men. The income that each individual obtains from this aspect of the seal fishery is not as great as the income of a sealer who goes to the front in a larger vessel to catch seal. At this time I am talking about those fishermen who take seals from the shore. This activity involves the province of Newfoundland and the Labrador coast; it involves also the province of Quebec in its coastal areas and certain areas of the maritime provinces where fishermen take seal from the shore to supplement their income.
The shore fishermen, if there is ice, go over that ice to take seals. If there is open water between the ice and the shore they go off in small boats through the ice in order to get at the seals. The number of seals that they take is not large; the amount of income is not large and these fishermen work hard and often risk their lives in this hard method of earning a living.
This fishery means a great deal to those fishermen at this time of year. The few seals they take mean a great deal to them. The fishery supplies them with meat from the body of the seal, and with furs, which are sold. It also brings in a small amount of income at a time of year when many fishermen have no other income. Thus it is of vital importance to them. The income they derive, at a time when other types of fishery bring them no income, is used in the spring of the year to outfit them for the summer fishery. Thus, taking seals from the shore is of vital importance to our fishermen, since the fishery provides them with food and with income with which to outfit themselves for the summer fishery.
The third aspect of the seal hunt that should be considered is the well known and well publicized seal hunt which is commonly called "at the front". Larger vessels come to

December 20. 1967
Research
the front ice, where the seals are. The sealers leave their ships, kill the seals and bring back the pelts. The dollar value of this part of the seal fishery to the men at the front, in a good year, would be over $1,000 for each man taking part.


Gordon Minto Churchill: Would the hon. member permit a question? Does he oppose referring paragraph 3 of the notice of motion, that paragraph dealing with the most humane method of trapping fur bearing animals and consideration as to whether the seal hunt should continue, to a committee for study?


Andrew Chatwood: 
Mr. H. W. Danforth (Kent (Oni.)):: Mr. Speaker, though the remarks of the hon. member who has just taken his seat displayed great knowledge of and interest in aspects of the seal fishery, I hope that the fact that he has made a speech does not mean that the government will not look with sympathy on this notice of motion. Speaking for the official opposition, I wish to add my full support to the motion of the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch). Knowing the hon. member, as I do, I am convinced that such a motion has been presented before parliament strictly because of his concern, as a human being, for the well being of the domestic and wild animals of this country. I do not think it is put forward in the hope of any political gain which might derive from it, and in these circumstances I cannot but give my full support to this proposal, one which is put forward from the heart as this seems to be.
Turning now to the affairs of this house and the request that this subject be placed before the committee on agriculture, forestry and rural development, let me say at once that out of sheer desperation I would support any reasonable request for a subject to be discussed by this committee, in the hope that the committee might be reconstituted, especially at a time when agriculture is in such dire straits. We on the opposition side of this chamber are becoming very impatient-tired of sitting on our hands simply because the government declines to refer anything to the standing committee on agriculture to enable us to get on with the business of this great industry.
It is not my intention to repeat the arguments so ably put forward by the hon. member for Vancouver East, nor is it my intention to prolong my part in this debate. I would prefer to give the house an opportunity to arrive at a decision on this issue. I am sympathetic toward the motion because it has been presented in the fairest way in which a motion could be presented, that is to say, it does not take sides; it merely asks that the matter should be considered and that the
December 20, 1967

committee in its wisdom, after hearing witnesses, should then propose to the government what action it feels should be taken.
There is no doubt that the public conscience is seized of the way in which animals are treated in this nation. The humane society has been doing tremendous work and has been expending tremendous energy trying to focus public attention on cases of ill treatment which might otherwise have gone unnoticed. There is of course another side to this question. Charges which may be ill founded, or based only on rare instances are often made against individuals or sections of the population.
Under the proposal now put forward these people would have the opportunity to put their side of the question before parliament in order that they might be acquitted of any guilt or condemnation. This is why I am surprised at the attitude taken by the hon. member who has just spoken. He was seemingly preoccupied by a desire to protect the sealers and those who make a living from this particular industry, but I believe that if he were really concerned, following the publicity which has been given to this issue in the last 12 months, he would be delighted at the prospect of a forum which would hear both sides and before which all points of view would be put forward for the benefit of parliament.
I feel that the standing committee on agriculture is the very forum in which these matters could properly be considered. This is tied in with measures to conserve fish, birds and animal wildlife. Especially I should like the committee to deal with a subject which I believe is of great concern to the people of this nation, namely the use of chemicals in the agriculture industry for the control of noxious weds and insects, and the effect of such use upon domestic animals, wildlife, birds and fish.
Such a study might enable us to decide whether we are permitting mass murder by the use of such chemicals, wiping out species which are really of special benefit to us. It might also help us to determine whether there are residues from such chemicals which seep into the soil affecting the health of human beings. The Department of Agriculture is already doing splendid work in its efforts to keep the use of such chemicals under control, and to test them before they are released for general application. But there is always a gnawing suspicion that not enough is being done. From time to time we hear of accidents, perhaps when control has
Research
not been sufficiently exercised, as a result of which fish die by the thousands in their ponds or streams, or a particular species of bird life is destroyed over a wide area, and these losses are assessed as being the result of the use of chemicals in agriculture.
In the committee on agriculture we have a forum where these important questions could be studied. The committee would have power, as the motion puts it, to send for persons, papers and reports to help it in its deliberations.
I approve of this prospect. It would give us an opportunity to listen to the views of knowledgeable people on all aspects of this question, and to lay before the parliament of Canada sound recommendations which might clear up once and for all the suspicions to which I have referred and the conflicting claims as to what is being done and what could be done.
Instead of prolonging my remarks I intend to resume my seat in order that we may have ample time in which to pass this motion, since I think its passage would be of great benefit to the people of this country and to the wildlife which we should all appreciate so much.


Mr. R. J. Orange (Northwest Territories):: Just before he resumed his seat, the hon. member for Kent (Ont.) (Mr. Danforth) told us he intended to do so in order that the house might have an opportunity to deal with the motion before us. He seemed to forget that one of the prerogatives of members who sit in this chamber is the opportunity to speak out on subjects which concern them.
I intend to say a few words with regard to this motion the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch) has put forward today. Before doing so I should like to acknowledge the spirit in which he made his observations. I understand his concern. However, I am not sure that this particular notice of motion as worded would secure the results he has in mind.
Looking at the motion I see it refers to the use of animals for medical research purposes, the treatment of animals as pets, the most humane method of trapping furbearing animals, and so on. The notice of motion also refers to the Canadian seal hunt and to consideration of the entire picture relative to the maintenance of fish, bird and animal wildlife and the regulations required for conservation. I am sorry that it does not refer to two other matters which affect Canadian animals.
Research

December 20, 1967
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
I refer to animals used for commercial purposes and the manner in which commercial slaughterhouses treat them. Like most hon. members I have visited slaughterhouses, and I have been appalled with the conditions under which cattle, sheep and fowl are treated in them. Yet tonight, before the evening is out, there will be hardly any of us in this house who will not sit down and partake of the flesh of animals which in many cases were not humanely slaughtered.
The notice of motion does not deal with hunters-people who participate in the sport of hunting birds, deer, caribou and other big game. I think that in hunting there is probably more cruelty than there is in the treatment of animals for medical research purposes, or than there is in the treatment of pets. I recall being invited to joint a hunt a number of years back, not far from Ottawa. When we took off early in the morning the idea was to stake out a deer. Being rather fortunate, or unfortunate on that particular day, we came across the tracks of a deer. The party of about 12 or 14 people split up and took off across farmers' fields.
Suddenly a deer, or what appeared to be a deer, shot across a field. Mr. Speaker, it sounded like the Battle of Britain all over again. Rifles and shotguns were being discharged in all directions. At the end of the shoot, fortunately there was the same number of hunters as before it started. The group I was with took off to see if it could find the deer. Unfortunately someone had hit the deer, but where, I have no idea. There was a trail of blood as far as we could follow it, until we reached water. Whether or not the deer was seriously wounded or ended up with a little bit of buckshot in it, I cannot tell.
I admire the spirit of the hon. member's proposal, but I think we should take into consideration all aspects of cruelty to animals. The third section of the hon. member's motion deals with the most humane method of trapping furbearing animals. I believe only the best possible traps should be used by Canadian and other trappers.
When a trapper takes off through the bush and sets his traps, he sets them at certain distances apart, according to his knowledge of the terrain. Then he leaves the set traps for one, two, three or four days. He returns to his trap line after one, two, three or four days, hopeful of finding mink, lynx and muskrat in his traps. The traps are designed so that the animals may be killed immediately when the traps are sprung, in order that the fur of the animals will not be destroyed.
In talking about furbearing animals I think we must take a hard look at the effect of the fur trade on certain parts of the Canadian economy, particularly the economy of the Indian and Eskimo people. Trapping is a rather hazardous occupation. It is one that produces rewards only with hard work. The price of fur varies in wild gyrations. We have had an example of this with respect to sealskins.
Until the unfortunate publicity arose over the seal hunting in the Gulf of St. Lawrence the price of sealskins, which has a direct bearing on the economy of the Eskimo people in the Arctic, averaged in the vicinity of $18 to $24 per skin. Today one can go into the Arctic and buy good sealskins for $2 or $4 each. This publicity has had a fantastic and most unfortunate effect on the economy of the Arctic. I do not suggest there is any relationship between the seal hunt in the Gulf of St. Lawrence and the manner in which seals are hunted and trapped in the Arctic. But because the word "seal" is now a bad word, fur manufacturers throughout the world are no longer interested in sealskins. Consequently there is a great deal of-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I regret I have to interrupt the hon. member but the time assigned for consideration of private members' business has now expired.
It being six o'clock this house stands adjourned until ten o'clock tomorrow in the forenoon, pursuant to special order adopted this day.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, December 21, 1967