1967-07-04

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs to place before the house the position of the Canadian government in respect of the several resolutions now before the United Nations general assembly. In particular I would ask him to clarify the position outlined in a speech by Ambassador Ignatieff on the Pakistan resolution calling for the nullification of Israel's annexation of the old city of Jerusalem. Is that interpretation the stand of the Canadian government? Is this a correct interpretation, although contrary to suggestions made by the Prime Minister, according to various representatives of the Jewish faith? Has the government decided to vote in favour of a resolution to nullify the action taken by Israel in asserting municipal government to cover the entire city?


Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, one of the difficulties in answering such a question on orders of the day is that it is not possible to go into all aspects of the situation. There are a number of resolutions before the general assembly at the present time. This particular resolution has not been dealt with and may not be voted on today, according to the most recent information. There are discussions presently taking place in connection with this resolution, and until these discussions have been completed I do not believe it would be responsible to go beyond what I have said.
However, with regard to another resolution, that standing in the name of the Latin American countries, there is a provision in the final operative paragraph that note should be taken of resolutions passed by the 1949 assembly of the United Nations calling for the establishment of an international regime in Jerusalem. This resolution reaffirms earlier recommendations for an international regime,
but proposes that consideration of this question should not be taken until the next general assembly.
We had not voted for the 1949 resolutions but we were in favour of international supervision and protection of access to the holy places of the three great religions. I do not believe at this time I could go beyond that.
The resolution to which my hon. friend referred is in the name of Pakistan. It calls for an expression of opinion from the United Nations assembly asking the government of Israel not to proceed with the annexation of Jerusalem. It does not do so in exactly those terms, but that is the implication of the resolution. That resolution is now being discussed in private consultations.
If Canada were to take the position suggested by my right hon. friend it might be inconsistent with the position we took in our statement at the general assembly, when we said that there should be no precipitate action taken, no freezing of any negotiating positions, and that there should of course be, as Israel will provide, access to the holy places. But let there be no doubt about this; with regard to the Latin American resolution Canada will not agree to the withdrawal of Israeli forces unless it is related to the termination of belligerency, and also to the recognition of the basic issues involved. This was covered in the six points made by the Prime Minister when he spoke here six weeks ago.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, with great respect to the minister I would not consider that statement as much of a clarification. I will come back to the question. On the Pakistan resolution, of which the minister was kind enough to give the purport, is it a fact that Mr. Ignatieff indicated in the assembly that Canada would support that resolution? That is the first question. The second question is this. The hon. gentleman said I had suggested certain action by Canada. That is not so. I asked a question concerning what Canada's stand is going to be. I am trying as hard as I can to understand what it is. That is the reason I asked the simple question, how does Canada intend to vote on the Pakistan resolution?

July 4, 1967
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: My right hon. friend should have no difficulty in understanding the Canadian position-


John George Diefenbaker: I do not know it.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: -because even though my right hon. friend does not like the response, it was stated to him in clear terms. I think everyone else in this house understood it. The resolution is before the assembly, and consultations are being carried on in respect of it. I have indicated that Canadian policy is as stated by me at the general assembly; that is, that there should be no precipitate action and that whatever action is taken in respect of the holy places in Jerusalem should be under the supervision of the United Nations organization.
My right hon. friend shakes his head. I hope that in putting this question he is really doing so for clarification, in an effort to help resolve this problem, and not-


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: -to give the impression that we entirely support the position of one of the parties involved in this situation.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


John George Diefenbaker: I cannot allow that to go.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. There has been a question and a supplementary question by the right hon. Leader of the Opposition. Two answers have been given by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. I wonder whether perhaps we should allow a supplementary by one of the other members.


John George Diefenbaker: I cannot allow the statement to stand unchallenged. I rise on a question of privilege. The minister suggested that the question I asked was not for the purpose of obtaining information, and I must say that I certainly succeeded in getting none; that much is proven. I asked him a simple question. Surely there is not going to be a continuation of the evasion and obfuscation that has been displayed here this afternoon. How is Canada going to vote on the Pakistan resolution? If that has not been decided let the minister say so.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The right hon. Leader of the Opposition has asked the question now for the third time and we have heard two replies, which consumed about ten minutes. I suggest we should now allow a supplementary question by another member.
[Mr. Diefenbaker.)


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs whether Canada has taken any steps to recommend the appointment of an international or United Nations commissioner for the city of Jerusalem or whether she has taken any initiative toward recommending a mediator between Israel and the Arab nations representing the United Nations or any other international body.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: Before the security council there is a resolution standing in the name of Canada, which has not yet been disposed of. It provides for the appointment of a representative of the Secretary General to try to bring about negotiation between the parties. There is likewise provision in the non-aligned resolution for a similar arrangement.


Robert Norman Thompson: I should like to go back to my supplementary question, asking whether Canada has taken any initiative toward recommending the establishment of a commissioner or mediator to act in respect of the conflicting parties in the Middle East crisis. He did not answer that question.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: Mr. Speaker, I thought I said clearly that in the resolution we have put before the security council there is provision for that very suggestion. The hon. member asks if we will agree to appointing a mediator, or if we have taken any initiative in this regard. To this I say yes; in the security council we have done so by a resolution standing in Canada's name and we will also try to do so by our votes in the general assembly if the assembly is called to recommend the appointment of a mediator.



CANADIAN CENTENNIAL


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Paul  Marlin@Acling Prime Minister: Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet I wonder whether I may be allowed to say how proud we were on Saturday when on our behalf you addressed Her Majesty the Queen.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr.   Marlin@Essex Easl: May I also be permitted to say that all of us in this house regardless of party affiliation were moved during the past four days by the stirring demonstration of Canadianism and pride in
July 4, 1967

our country on parliament hill and throughout the land. I think I am reflecting what most of us feel in saying that this demonstration of national fervour was so memorable that we should like to express our thanks to the Secretary of State and all associated with her in the magnificent organization which resulted in these unbelievably rich ceremonies and these outpourings of national fervour.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Hon. R. A. Bell (Carlelon):: Mr. Speaker, following what the Acting Prime Minister has said I wonder whether the house would be prepared to agree that the speeches of Her Majesty, Your Honour and His Honour the Speaker of the Senate be made a part of the record of Hansard for this day.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Speaker, I should like to say that I thoroughly support the statement of the Acting Prime Minister regarding your magnificent address the other day, and the tremendous organization and equally magnificent job that has been done in preparation for our centennial celebrations.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to join with the Secretary of State for External Affairs and other hon. members in expressing deep appreciation to all those who had anything to do with the arrangements for the past week end here on parliament hill and in Ottawa generally.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I heard a good many private members say during the week end "Those who arranged these events deserve full marks", and I think this should be on the record of Hansard. May I also suggest that when the speeches that were made on parliament hill on Saturday morning are appended to Hansard there should also be included a copy of the printed program, so the record of that memorable occasion will be complete.


Mr. Speaker:: Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: For text of speeches and program referred to above, see appendix.]
Inquiries of the Ministry EXTERNAL AFFAIRS



VIET NAM-CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS ADVANCED BY J. K. GALBRAITH

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs with regard to another area of the world. Is the government studying the proposals for de-escalating the war in Viet Nam which have been made by J. K. Galbraith, and is the government giving consideration to supporting these proposals as a means of bringing the war in Viet Nam to an end?


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, the government proposed on April 11 a course which it believes, if the parties would accept it, would provide for disengagement in the demilitarized zone. If that were done we feel, in all equity, that the bombing would also have to be stopped. We feel that these suggestions, which are based on the Geneva agreement, are not out of line with some of the proposals made by Mr. Galbraith.


Mr. Jack McIntosh (Swift Current-Maple Creek):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I wonder whether the minister would also make sure that the infiltration from the north will stop at the same time.


Paul Joseph James Martin: That is something beyond the control of the government of Canada, Mr. Speaker.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs a question. In view of the fact that the United States apparently intends to very considerably increase the numbers of its forces in Viet Nam, will the government give consideration to a suggestion I made some weeks ago, and before we end this portion of the session on Friday put before the house a motion setting out the views of the overwhelming majority of Canadians on the subject of a cessation of bombing, with whatever restrictions should be placed thereon?
Would the government give consideration to this matter and facilitate the opportunity for the house to discuss such a resolution? Also, in order to assure the complete freedom of members, would the government remove the whips? I think if we took such a stand in the Canadian House of Commons the United States would know from its greatest friend -in spite of what I read about the N.D.P.

July 4, 1967
Inquiries of the Ministry convention in Toronto to the contrary- the feelings of the house. I believe the voice of the House of Commons would be worth while and welcomed by the United States.


Paul Joseph James Martin: In reply to the particular question asked by my right hon. friend, let me say I am sure he will realize that vital matters of foreign policy are not settled in the way my right hon. friend is suggesting. He should not be overly moved by any political convention that is being held anywhere in Canada in regard to matters that are as vital as this. In any event my right hon. friend will recall that there was a vote in this house on one aspect of this problem. I do not believe that his approach is the way to formulate or execute matters that have to do with war and peace. I say this as one who at this very moment is engaged, as a member of the government, in considering certain efforts which are being made to try to bring an end to the war in Viet Nam. I hope that would be the attitude of my right hon. friend, with his great experience in these matters and in government.



ROYAL. VISIT RELAXATION OF SECURITY PRECAUTIONS ON VISIT TO EXPO

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, in this wonderful spirit of felicitation, joy and gratefulness I think something should be added to what has already been said. I am so pleased that yesterday the government decided, after weeks of vacillation in the matter, to free Her Majesty from being insulated and isolated from meeting her Canadian subjects in Montreal.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: When that action was taken yesterday the people of the province of Quebec revealed their loyalty, which would not have been possible had there not been an alteration in the program.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, may I deal with the matter my right hon. friend has introduced. I do not recall the right hon. gentleman's exact words but I would like to make it clear that in whatever arrangements were made for Her Majesty's visit to Expo yesterday the government was of course moved by considerations which must be in

the mind of any Canadian government, and which I am sure would have been in the mind of my right hon. friend had he been sitting on this side as head of the government.
However, I do want to say, as one who was present yesterday as was the right hon. gentleman, that as a result of the suggestion made by the Prime Minister that the Queen should ride on the minirail yesterday afternoon she was exposed in the most loving way to the people of Canada who were at Expo yesterday. Let it not be misunderstood; this was a decision taken by the Prime Minister himself, and as a result of that decision the people of Canada who were at Expo were given and took advantage of the opportunity to display in a very heartening way their admiration for Her Majesty the Queen and also I believe for the crown itself.



AIR TRANSPORT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Warren Allmand (Noire-Dame-de-Grace):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transport. Would he tell the house whether he has received from Judge Robinson the second report on air traffic control which I believe was originally due in the month of May?


Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):: I am sorry, sir, but I have not.


William Warren Allmand: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister tell us when he expects to receive this report from Judge Robinson?


John Whitney Pickersgill: I understand the judge has been ill and that is the reason the report has been delayed. I do hope very much it will not be too long delayed.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Howard Johnston (Okanagan-Revelstoke):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Will Canada use its good offices and friendly relations with the state of Algeria to request the release of Moise Tshombe, the former prime minister of the Congo?
July 4. 1967


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secretary of Slate for External Affairs: May I take notice of that question, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. H. R. Ballard (Calgary South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister, and ask him whether the Canadian government will consider making representations to the government of Algeria to prevent the removal of Moise Tshombe from Algeria to the Congo. I realize that this question has already been asked today, but no satisfactory answer was received from the minister.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member is assuming that a satisfactory answer will be obtained by asking the question a second time. I believe that is against the rules.


Paul Joseph James Martin: Mr. Speaker, I do not know what the hon. gentleman's question was. I know you made some very generous remarks about the way it would be responded to, but I do not know what the question was.


[Stage Direction]
INQUIRY AS TO DESIGNATION OF OFFICERS On the orders of the day:
Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton South):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. I should like to ask him whether the government has finalized the designation of the board of directors, the vice president and chairman of the Cape Breton Development Corporation?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: No, sir.


Malcolm MacInnis: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Could the minister indicate when he expects this matter to be dealt with?


Jean-Luc Pepin: In a few days, Mr. Speaker. AGRICULTURE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Ed. Schreyer (Springfield):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the Minister of Agriculture. It has to do
Inquiries of the Ministry with the appointment of the task force about which we have heard so much. I should like to ask him whether he could assure the house that before parliament adjourns for the summer recess he will make a statement indicating the personnel and the general terms of reference of that group.


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Agriculture):: Well, Mr. Speaker, the government looks upon this as an extremely important task force. We want to get the very best possible people for it. I do not believe any undertaking at this time, in the terms in which my hon. friend has referred to it, would be conducive to this end.


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe East):: I should like to address a question to the Minister of Agriculture. In view of the widespread flooding and consequent great loss in central Ontario, has the minister received any communications from farm organizations requesting help?


Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: No, sir, I have received none to my knowledge.



WATER RESOURCES


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. George Muir (Lisgar):: I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs which involves a matter of a more national nature than the questions he has answered so far. I apologize for not giving him notice. Can the minister tell us when the government, in co-operation with the government of the United States, expects to start construction of the Pembina river project in North Dakota and Manitoba?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secretary of Slate for External Affairs: I cannot give the answer to that question. I will take it as notice and reply before we leave on Friday.



VETERANS AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
John (Jack) McIntosh: I have a question for the Minister of Veterans Affairs, but in his absence I will

July 4. 1967
Inquiries of the Ministry direct it to the person assuming his responsibilities. Has the report of the Wood commission been received by the government, and if so will its contents be made known to the house before the summer recess?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Associate Minister of National Defence):: I will take this question as notice.
{Later:]


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: Mr. Speaker, may I now answer the question posed by the hon. member for Okanagan Boundary. I am advised that the committee has not yet submitted its report to the minister; consequently it is not anticipated that the report will be available for tabling prior to the 7th.


John (Jack) McIntosh: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, my riding is Swift Current-Maple Creek.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John Loney (Bruce):: My question
arises from two communications I received from the Minister of National Health and Welfare on June 28 and June 29. The letter dated June 28, 1967 reads in part as follows:
As announced in the press today I have approved a grant, under the terms of the hospital construction grant rules, in the amount of $79,052, towards the cost of new construction and renovations at the Bruce Peninsula and District Memorial Hospital, Wiarton, Ontario.
While I welcome the intent of this communication, I do not believe the facts are-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Please ask the question.


Edison John Clayton Loney: On a question of privilege, I feel the letter is misleading and erroneous. The actual facts are-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I just mentioned to the hon. member that he should ask a question. If he wants to raise a question of privilege that is another matter. We will hear the question of privilege.


Edison John Clayton Loney: The question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, is-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. If the hon. member has a question of privilege which does not arise out of the immediate proceedings in the house, the hon. member has to

give the Chair two hours notice in writing. I realize this is the last week before the summer adjournment and I do not believe we should be too strict in the observance of this rule. Perhaps we might allow the hon. member to ask a question without further reference to his question of privilege.


Edison John Clayton Loney: Ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker.



COMMONWEALTH RELATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Auguste Choquette (Lolbiniere):: Mr. Speaker, as this is the last week of the session, I should like to ask you to be lenient enough to recognize the validity of my question. I should like to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs whether Queen Elizabeth and government authorities conferred with a view to convening in the near future a conference of the prime ministers of the countries of the Commonwealth?


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secrelary of Stale for External Affairs: I believe this question concerns the prime ministers of the Commonwealth countries and not the head of one government of the Commonwealth and the Queen.


Auguste Choquette: Mr. Speaker, appealing to your indulgence once again, since this is the first sitting of the second century of confederation, I should like to take this opportunity to ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs, on the occasion of the second centennial of Canada, if discussions should not be launched with all Commonwealth countries in order to establish a Commonwealth citizenship?


Mr. Speaker:: In spite of all the leniency I am prepared to show the hon. member who quite deserves it, I do not think his question is in order.



HISTORIC SITES AND MONUMENTS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: Mr. Speaker, on June 23, the hon. member for
July 4, 19G7

Essex West (Mr. Gray) asked the following *question of the Prime Minister:
Will the government undertake as an immediate federal government centennial project the placing of appropriate markers at either the birth places or the grave sites of all the fathers of our confederation?
When I announced the policy on March 15 I said each grave would be marked by a distinctive plaque to be designed for this specific purpose, and financial assistance will be provided for the maintenance in perpetuity of the last resting place of these truly outstanding Canadians.


Mr. H. E. Gray (Essex West):: May I ask a
supplementary question. First I should like to thank the minister for his very constructive answer. I should like to ask him whether it would be possible to complete this program by the end of our centennial year as a national centennial project.


Arthur Laing: In reply I would remind the hon. member that we are short of workmen in this particular field at the present time. The demands this year have weighed very heavily upon the department and we are running behind. However, we will make an attempt to finish the project during 1967.


Mr. B. S. Mackasey (Verdun):: In view of the shortage of workers, will the minister consider giving priority to the grave of Thomas D'Arcy McGee, the most eloquent of the fathers of confederation?



LABOUR CONDITIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to ask this question of the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. He was here a minute ago but I do not see him at the moment, so perhaps I could direct it either to his parliamentary secretary or to the Acting Prime Minister. In view of representations that have reached me from the workers at the Lake of the Woods milling plant in Keewatin which was destroyed by fire over the week end, a plant that comes under federal labour jurisdiction, will efforts be made to find alternative employment for people in this town where there is no other work?


Mr. J. C. Munro (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: Inquiries of the Ministry do believe such efforts are being made, but I will bring this question to the minister's attention for his reply.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Edward Richard Schreyer: I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs which has to do with the extra effort many countries are making to deal with the problem of the refugees in the Middle East. I should like to ask the minister if during his talks with officials of the Soviet union at the United Nations he was able to elicit any response as to whether the Soviet union would participate in any way in the program to aid refugees in the Middle East.


Hon. Paul  Marlin@Secretary of Slate for External Affairs: I did not have any talks formally on that subject with Mr. Kosygin when I saw him, or with any other member of the Soviet delegation. We were concerned at that time with the particular resolutions facing the general assembly. I hope the Soviet union will take notice of the suggestion Canada has made for the use of the Palestine conciliation commission, on which two of the great powers are represented. This commission has concerned itself over a considerable period with the question of refugees.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Norman Thompson: I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs in his capacity as Acting Prime Minister. In view of the fact that tomorrow afternoon will be the last opportunity for the public and for the members of the house to see Her Majesty the Queen of Canada, I wonder if the minister would consider postponing the opening of tomorrow's session until 3 o'clock instead of the usual 2.30.


Paul Joseph James Martin: I think the house leader will have something to say on this subject, either now or later this day.


Hon. A. J. MacEachen (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: I understand hon. members may wish to attend the ceremonies on parliament hill and possibly later at the arts

July 4, 1967
Inquiries of the Ministry centre when Her Majesty will be present. I have been discussing the possibility of sitting tomorrow morning and possibly disposing of the business for tomorrow by two o'clock or 2.30 so that anyone who wishes may be free later in the day to attend these ceremonies. I will discuss this matter in further detail with the various party leaders.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, that appears to be a reasonable suggestion. I am just wondering whether the minister would put the question to the house for agreement that we sit at eleven o'clock tomorrow morning. That would enable the business to be reasonably completed with no loss of a day; it would also provide an opportunity for members to see the Queen on the last occasion she will be here on this visit.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, perhaps we could finalize the matter now and decide to meet at 11 tomorrow morning, sitting continuously until 2 p.m.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that so ordered by the house?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: It is agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: I wonder whether the house would want to clarify the matter of the hours of sitting tomorrow by including in the order of the house the provision that private member's hour for tomorrow be suspended.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, if we are going to sit for only three hours tomorrow I think we should suspend private members' hour.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, that is quite agreeable to this side of the house. If it is generally agreeable we could decide now to suspend private members' hour tomorrow and complete the day on estimates.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: It is so ordered.



INDUSTRY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John M. Reid (Kenora-Rainy River):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister

of Industry and relates to a telegram that he received this morning from the mayor of the town of Keewatin. I was wondering whether the minister could indicate what federal assistance is available to the residents of that town as a result of the fire that destroyed the Lake of the Woods milling company building yesterday morning.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I have the impression that this question also is a repetition of one asked earlier today.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, with great respect may I suggest that the question asked by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River is not a repetition of my question. I asked about alternative employment; he has asked about financial assistance. I hope Your Honour will allow the question.


John Mercer Reid: I asked what the federal government could do to assist in cases of this nature, which is quite different.


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):: Mr. Speaker, the telegrams have been received by the ministers mentioned. The government is now giving consideration to this very unfortunate circumstance to see what might be done. However, I think the house is well aware that in disasters of this sort the primary responsibility for rendering assistance rests with the province. In normal cases it is only when the province has requested assistance that the federal government takes action.

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



DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $2,209,800.
The Chairman:: Order. House again in committee of supply. Estimates of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1968, vote No. 1. This vote will be found at page 200 of the blue book; the details are listed at page 203.


Mr. Lambert:: Mr. Chairman, the other day when we had a brief discussion on the first item of the minister's estimates I did not have the opportunity, because time ran out, to make a few remarks on the full report of the committee, limiting myself to that part of the report that deals with the western parks. The
July 4, 1967

minister knows well from the past my interest in this particular matter. I must say that I think the committee members from the government side in particular received their first exposure to the parks on their trip there last December, some of them never having seen them before. I think that this fact is shown up in the type of report that has been prepared and presented. Government members were distinctly under the whip in the matter of following a hard government line on the national parks.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)
I do not think there was any great difference in point of view among members of the committee as to the ultimate purpose of the parks, although there may have been some difference of opinion as to how that purpose would be best achieved. Very definitely, though, we on this side of the house, who have the greatest contact with the parks, did express a fundamental difference of opinion with regard to certain existing factors. The minister can say what he likes about the relationship between the officials of his department and the citizens of the townsites of Jasper and Banff in particular. He can say that the relationship is good, but this is not the case. What has happened is the result of the department taking a hard and uncompromising line with regard to both commercial and residential leases, and there has been a lamentable breakdown in the relationship between the administration and the citizens.
There is one thing the higher officials of the parks branch must remember. They cannot, by a stroke of an administrative pen, eliminate those townsites. They are historical facts. They do exist. Moreover, their existence creates special problems which do not arise in any of the parks outside the province of Alberta. When the decision was taken years ago to route the trans-Canada highway through Banff national park, certain inevitable consequences were entailed. There is no question that hundreds of thousands of tourists who visit the parks or pass through them on their way west expect to stay in the parks. I do not suppose anyone quarrels with that. How are these people to be treated?
I am the last to say that Banff or Jasper should be turned into a Coney Island type of development. On the other hand, there is a change in the needs and desires of the travelling public. They are no longer prepared to accept substandard accommodation. They will not be directed to the nth degree with regard to what they should or should not do while on holiday. We have invited these people. Look
Supply-Indian Affairs at the advertisements put out by the government travel bureau. We have spent scores of thousands of dollars inviting tourists to come to our national parks. What are they to do when they arrive? Take only a flying trip? Not at all. They must be catered to if our tourist program is to be meaningful.
Pressure on the available facilities during the last few years has been scandalous during the peak season. Within a short time there will be a further increase in visitors to Jasper upon the completion of the Yellowhead route. I venture to say that by the fall of 1968 or perhaps by mid-1969 this essential link will have been established west of Jasper, bringing on a veritable flood of travellers. The only thing that will discourage them and give the parks a black eye will be lack of accommodation.
We know there has been hesitation, procrastination and uncertainty with regard to the development of accommodation in Jasper in anticipation of these visitors. It is no use saying that in 1969 or 1970, when we see the tourists coming through, we will build the essential facilities for them. Yet the present policy with regard to commercial leases discourages any meaningful development within the appropriate zoning of Jasper.
I wish to be clearly understood that I support the idea of zoning within the parks of Banff and Jasper. There should be service sections within the towns and then, because there is a complete monopoly by the national parks authorities of the mountain sites accessible by roads to the people of Alberta, there should also be amusement areas-skiing areas -in both places so as to use the facilities available to the full in winter.
We know that the present limited facilities are hard pressed even in winter. People who wish to ski at Jasper and Banff find it hard to obtain accommodation. Whenever I go out to Edmonton in winter I hear continual complaints from friends and acquaintances who love to ski that they find it difficult to get accommodation. Those who are more fortunate and more insistent go south to the state of Montana. This, I think, is the epitomy of idiocy, to insist that Canadians from Edmonton and Calgary should travel to the United States to enjoy week end skiing simply because they cannot get accommodation at Jasper and Banff. We have the facilities if we could only decide how to use them.
It is all very well for people to say there are no provincial parks in the mountains. One has only to look at the mountains from the

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs area north of Jasper down to the United States border to see how little is accessible in relationship to roads and accommodation outside the boundaries of the parks. Scores of millions of dollars have been spent building the roads and a great deal of money has been invested in facilities. How foolish it is, then, to say that these assets should not be used in wintertime. If people want to engage in winter sports they must find another area.
[DOT] (3:30 p.m.)
As yet the province of Alberta has dedicated more than enough land to be given over to national parks use. Its proportion is multifold that of all the rest of Canada, and in that you must take into account what is taken by the crown of Canada for various facilities, One is not going to say, "You are not going to have your winter sports at Elk Island," and I am going to speak about that park later, or "You are going to have your winter sports at Wood Buffalo national park."


Arthur Laing: You could.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: The minister, who has air travel facilities at his beck and call, can go up there if he wants, but it is hundreds of miles from populated centres and its limited facilities would be available only to people who have a lot of money. Young people, students and so forth, have as much right to enjoy skiing as anybody else. Therefore I believe an adequate zoning system should be established in the parks at the earliest possible date. There is no use appointing another commission or committee which will bring in another report two years hence. The time to do it is now.
With regard to our national parks there have been recommendations upon recommendations upon recommendations, but the end result has been the same. There has been some limited improvement. However, the demand made upon Banff, for example, far exceeds the facilities that have been provided.
Policy decisions have been arbitrary. Under the planning and zoning restrictions at Banff certain proposals have been turned down out of hand; yet changes have been authorized that were contrary to the zoning regulations. These will form the subject of an interesting study one of these days.
I now turn to the question of leases. I find the minister's attitude with regard to the controversial perpetual leases absolutely incomprehensible. His officials have advised him, and I am not questioning their motives, that there was never authority for the granting of

perpetual leases both prior and subsequent to 1932. The minister first asserted that there was a question about ministerial authority to grant perpetual leases after 1932. That is a debatable legal point. Now he says that there was no authority to do so prior to 1932.
The minister, who is trustee for the crown for the interests of Canadians, not a trustee on behalf of himself or any particular administration, refuses to disclose the memorandum of advice or the reasons for calling into question the jurisdiction to issue such leases. In refusing I think he has taken an entirely wrong position. He has told us, "If the holders of perpetual leases are not satisfied with their position they can go to court." His attitude is similar to that of one late crowned head who once said, "If they can't have bread, let them eat cake."
In fairness to his responsibility to his officials and to the scores, likely hundreds, of holders of perpetual leases, the minister should refer the question of the validity of the leases to the courts. He should not ask a young teacher and his wife in Banff, or some person with limited means, to challenge the government in the courts. Who would pay the costs in such an instance? No doubt there would be solicitor and client costs which would be the responsibility of the individual. It would be very simple for the minister to have a stated case referred to the Exchequer Court or the Supreme Court, most likely the Exchequer Court in the first instance, with permission for intervention on behalf of the holders of perpetual leases. I believe he should take this course immediately instead of trying to wear down and chisel away the individual lease holders who are finding themselves being cornered more and more, without any possible alternative.
In some of the cases about which I have heard, almost administrative blackmail is being utilized to pressure the holders of leases to agree to exchange their leases for limited term leases, and not all of the same term. This is quite unacceptable. This not litigation between two individuals. This is an honest difference of opinion between the law officers of the crown and hundreds of citizens who have as much entitlement to their rights as do any of us in this chamber or in the administration to ours.
In the past there was never any question that they were acquiring defeasible leases of uncertain title. I urge upon the minister that in all justice the crown should settle this matter by causing a stated case to be referred
July 4, 1967

to the superior courts. It is not fair for the minister to tell leaseholders when they seek to renew their leases on the terms contained in them, terms authorized by the minister's predecessors, that unless they agree to new conditions not negotiated but imposed by the minister and his officials they will be deemed to be overholding tenants subject to all the consequences that befall overholding tenants.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
In so far as commercial leases are concerned I should like to draw to the attention of the minister an editorial which appeared in the Edmonton Journal of May 23. I am sure his officials know about it, if he does not. It reads:
This newspaper has said repeatedly that Mr. Arthur Laing's national parks policy is not a valid policy so far as it governs commercial leases. Here's a case in point:
An Edmonton group planned a 77-unit motel at Jasper, assembled $450,000 in cash, arranged $550,000 in mortage funds, obtained the parks department's approval of a site in Jasper town-then cancelled its plans. The reason given: no compensation when the lease expires. The money is still available; so is the building site. But until there is compensation for cancelled commercial leases, say the investors, they won't go into Jasper.
It is conceded that this might be a pressure play, a mandate to call on investment for badly needed accommodation if the terms are right. But is that a valid argument for cancelling the whole thing? Is it not a little more in the interest of the general public to have a parks policy which at one and the same time protects the park from undesirable commercial development-no one denies that the minister has all sorts of restrictions on that score-and encourages desirable development? One of the most desirable, indeed the most urgent, developments required now at Jasper is more decent accommodation. The newspaper editorial continues:
One long time Jasper hotel operator says he could fill another 1.000 rooms all summer; but no major hotel or motel has been built in Jasper since Mr. Laing's no-compensation policy was announced. Of four groups officially announced as having plans to build in Jasper, we are informed, all four have changed their minds.
We don't favour so-called "perpetual leases" and doubt that responsible investors do. Leases should be cancelled when operators fail on performance standards. Leases should have to be renewed regularly. Some leases should be cancelled when the public interest requires a different use of a site. But in such cases, and varying with the cause of cancellation, there ought to be reasonable compensation-by arbitration, if necessary.
I could go into detail with regard to the yeas and nays of the leasehold policy, an abridged version of which I have. After all,
Supply-Indian Affairs who on earth would want to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars and perhaps over a million dollars over a period of years in a commercial proposition when at the end of that term the title is gone and everything

buildings, maintenance and some modernization over a 21-year period

is yielded up to the crown? Who on earth is going to invest even one thin dime during the last five-year period, or perhaps during a period of eight or ten years, in a commercial leasehold property, if at the end of the road there is to be one big fat zero in compensation?
Even now we see the iniquities of the policies of the present minister. Because of the increased demand a store proprietor must modernize and expand his premises. He holds a perpetual lease and has had it for a long, time. But because he wants to make improvements he is told that if he is to get his permit he must yield his perpetual lease and take a limited term lease on which at the end there will be no compensation. Is there no justice between the crown and the individual? What is his alternative? Is it to let his premises run down to rack and ruin so that he loses his capital? Perhaps his life's work is tied up in the good will and continuity of that business. Yet because of administrative reasons, because somebody wants to get hold of something and squeeze it hard, then, unless it is to be contained within a nice neat framework of rules and regulations administered from far away, that man's effort is to be sacrificed. I cite that as an example of many cases and of the general principle.
It is indeed unfortunate that the government majority on the committee had limited exposure to the problem. True, they saw and heard a number of people, some of whom were very dramatic. I hope some of them were ashamed of some of the administrative boondoggling that has gone on with regard to the treatment of these people. I am not limiting that in time either.


Arthur Laing: What is boondoggling?


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: The minister can look it up.


Arthur Laing: I do not think you looked it up.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: In any event these people have been mishandled. I realize that efforts are being made to bring about improvements, and this is all to the good, but for the life of me I cannot see why these people who have certain rights should be denied them. If it is decided that there shall be no more perpetual leases granted, then this is fine in respect of

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs new leases or for the development of further practices. But there are such things as acquired rights. If we were to tell the minister that because of a change in administrative policy his home in Vancouver would be subject to different terms, in respect of his title and right of ownership, than those under which he holds his property now, then I say the hullabaloo would be heard from one end of the country to the other.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. I must advise the hon. member that the time allotted to him has expired.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Chairman, may I ask for the indulgence of the committee to allow me one more minute to conclude my remarks? I think I have said enough on this last point.


Herman Maxwell Batten: Does the committee give its consent to allow the hon. member to continue?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: I apologize to hon. members for requiring this extra time, but there is one further point I should like to draw to the minister's attention. With the development of the Yellowhead Pass route there will be a considerable acceleration of travel through our national parks, not only Jasper national park but Elk Island park. I know that my colleague, the hon. member for Vegreville, would like to speak about this matter if he were here.
Highway 16 east in Alberta bisects Elk Island park which over the years has unfortunately been one of the Cinderellas of our parks system. This park has great potential and although this highway has never been qualified as a second trans-Canada route, as suggested by members from the western provinces, it is being developed. This highway will give greater access to the national parks which lie along it including Jasper, Elk Island, and even Prince Albert national park which is some distance north. Anyone travelling this route could easily turn up toward Prince Albert national park. It would also give access to Riding Mountain national park in Manitoba. These parks are all either along the highway or within reasonable access.
My suggestion is that an immediate study be make, if it has not been already made, of methods to upgrade public reception facilities. I am not suggesting that we should allow the establishment of residential townsites in these parks such as Elk Island, but public

reception services must be upgraded. I am sure this would pay dividends in the form of increased patronage and enjoyment by the public. My suggestion is that we begin a study immediately and within the next two or three years make the improvements. We should not wait for ten years to do so because a lot of traffic will be channeled through these areas and Canadians will then find that their national parks are truly accessible. In order to enjoy these parks one should not have to be a dedicated wildlife conservationist such as some of those we heard from in Banff and Jasper. Their philosophy seemed to be that we should build a ten-foot fence around our parks, lock the gates and throw away the keys. They felt it would be abusive to allow any but simple activities such as bird watching, nature study or peaceful hiking.


Arthur Laing: The attendance at our parks has been increasing by 15 per cent compounded per year for years.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: I do not feel that the one extreme should be the standard, nor do I feel that we should have the so-called Coney Island level of development. That would not be desirable nor acceptable.


Mr. Orange:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to make a few remarks at this stage of our deliberations in respect of the educational program in Canada's north. In the last decade we have observed a fairly impressive increase in the number of young people attending school in the north. We know that 13 or 14 years ago approximately 30 per cent of our young northern Indians, Eskimos and Metis were attending school along with whites. In 1954 and 1955 the federal government recognized its responsibility in respect of the development of educational facilities throughout Canada's north and we have observed the construction of schools in virtually all communities there. As a result approximately 90 to 95 per cent of the young people of school age are attending school. Administrations of the past deserve a great deal of credit for what has taken place in this regard. I think we have now reached the stage when our aims and objectives in respect of education in the north must be redefined.
Having attended the graduation exercises at two of our northern schools in recent weeks I could not help but be impressed by the dedication of these young students. The system developed over the past few years has been directed not only to book learning as part of education but to a broadening of the
July 4. 1967

horizons of our young northerners. At the secondary level of the northern educational system we have observed the young students being given an opportunity not only to move from their local areas to attend other schools but to travel and visit other parts of the country. In this regard I should like to acknowledge the centennial commission's great program for youth exchanges across Canada whereby young Canadians are being given the opportunity of travelling and visiting their Canadian brothers, cousins and friends right from the east coast to the west coast and up to the Arctic ocean. In the gallery at this moment there are 24 young people who are centennial youth travellers. They are spending two weeks in the southern part of Canada and, like other young Canadians, they are visiting Expo and the House of Commons and are spending the balance of the two weeks in the Toronto area.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr, Orange:: Before concluding my remarks regarding education I should like to draw the minister's attention, as I have many times in the past and will continue to do until we get some results, to the fact that those of us who wish to see development in the north recognize that industries based on resources, particularly mining and oil development, are the ones which have a future there. I hope that in the process of developing and adequate educational system the officials of this department together with the territorial government will take into consideration the establishment of a school of mines in the north.
One of the great difficulties we experience in the mining industry in northern Canada is the lack of a stable and adequate labour force. It seems to me if we are serious about populating this area we must use the talents and resources of our young people by encouraging them to participate in developing what will be the basic economy of northern Canada. I hope the minister and the territorial government will re-examine this question and will take the opportunity of working out with industry what is needed to carry out this development. A school of mining for northern Canada would not only assist the industries of the Yukon and the Northwest Territories but would also provide a labour force for other parts of Canada, particularly in the west. I recommend this suggestion to the minister and I hope that when he has a chance to reply he will indicate at least his concern about this particularly important matter.
Supply-Indian Affairs [DOT] (4:00 p.m.)


Edward Richard Schreyer: Mr. Chairman, I listened with interest to the comments of the hon. member for Edmonton West on the government's policy with respect to national parks. Much of what the hon. member said seemed to make sense, although in certain respects I could not help feeling in rather basic disagreement with him. I believe many members will appreciate the difficulties the minister faces in trying to administer our national parks policy in a way that (a) meets the interests of the public and (b) appears to do justice to those who over the years have held leasehold rights in our national parks.
I do not wish to aggravate the problem the minister has in this regard by advancing proposals that might appear to be, at least in the short run, popular. But it seems to me that the minister has a prime duty and obligation to see that the recreational resources of this country are developed and made available to growing numbers of people, and that no one group or clique should be able to avail itself of these resources at the expense of the general public. Of course, it is very easy to state such general requirements, but it becomes much more difficult to try to spell them out in detail and apply such a policy.
The form of leasehold which people in the national parks should be allowed to enjoy is a matter with which I am not prepared to deal at the present time. However, it occurs to me that one suggestion made by the hon. member for Edmonton West has merit, namely, that there should be no fear on the part of the government in allowing some of the cases referred to to go through the process of adjudication by the courts in order to arrive at a determination by an impartial body as to what is the right thing to do.
My personal view is that over the years numbers of people have enjoyed leasehold rights in our national parks and have had to pay annual fees, rentals, or whatever you want to call them, in an amount so small as to make it very difficult for others to understand how the government can allow this situation to continue. Therefore renegotiation is certainly required. If it should turn out that the only feasible course of action is to terminate these perpetual leases, it seems to me that the way to proceed is much the same as that in which the government now proceeds in respect of the expropriation of properties held by persons in full title or fee simple. If the parties who have held these leases can prove they have suffered concrete and substantial financial loss, methods of compensation

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs should be worked out. If the government can proceed to expropriate property held by people in full title, why is it impossible to proceed to terminate perpetual leases in a somewhat similar manner and pay compensation for actual financial loss? Also, why can the government not proceed from there to make sure that no similar, imprudent contracts or understandings are ever again entered into?
It is my understanding that in the course of the past 18 months, or perhaps longer, the federal government has decided it would like to proceed with the establishment of second national parks in those provinces where only one national park exists at the present time. I do not know how old this policy is but I understand that the government has not got very far with the policy of establishing a second national park in several provinces.
I know that the province of Manitoba surveys and studies were undertaken by the appropriate department in consultation with the provincial authorities, to see just where in the province a second national park should be established. I understand that the present situation is one of stalemate or deadlock. This situation exists simply because the policy of the federal government is that if it is to establish a second national park the province must convey the land, without encumbrance and without condition, to the crown in the right of Canada.
On the surface there is nothing to which one can object in that policy. Certainly such land should be conveyed without encumbrance and, one would have to agree, without major condition. But I understand that one of the reasons the province of Manitoba is hesitant to transfer the land from the crown in right of the province to Canada is that the provincial authorities have reason to believe that one area, regarding which there was a tentative agreement, may very well contain mineral deposits, and they would like to enter a caveat on the conveyance of the land to the effect that some mineral prospecting and possibly exploitation will be allowed. I know that in respect of some national parks and provincial parks in other parts of Canada intergovernmental or interdepartmental ill will has been built up because parkland has been used for purposes of mineral exploitation, with deleterious effects on the area as a resource facility.
I hope the federal government will finally show some flexibility in this respect and will choose the area that was tentatively agreed upon as being suitable for a second national

park. I hope the federal government will not abandon that area and proceed to establish a second national park at the opposite end of the province. We already have a national park in northwestern Manitoba and the establishment of a second national park in that general area, which seems to be the only other possible location, would not be very logical.
I should like to refer at this time to the estimates relating to the Indian affairs branch of the department. I realize that in this regard the minister also has a very difficult portfolio to manage. Many people think that in the last two or three years advances have been made and progress is becoming more and more visible. I tend to share that opinion. On the other hand, we need not look very hard for evidence of the fact that many people consider that the Indian affairs branch has not done very much to bring about progress and improvement in the affairs of the people of Indian ancestry. Certainly in many respects there is cause for disappointment but, as I said, there are other visible signs that progress and improvement are taking place.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
I should like to express my own very firm personal view that the department is fortunate in having people who are doing good work in the field. This is not to be taken to imply that those at headquarters are not doing likewise, but my limited experience with the officials of the department in the field indicates that in working with the Indian people they are getting things done and are giving them examples of leadership and all sorts of opportunities to participate in programs of self-improvement.
I can recall visiting three classrooms at a northern Indian reserve in Manitoba about eight years ago and coming away somewhat nonplussed and puzzled by the degree of passivity among the children in the lower grades. I clearly recall thinking that there did not seem to be much prospect of these children becoming enthused about learning and it appeared that in a matter of a few years they would drop out of school. However, just three weeks ago I again visited a number of classrooms on some of these reserves in Manitoba and was literally amazed to see the extent to which the teachers of today have succeeded in instilling in the very young pupils an enthusiasm and an alertness which we would hope to find in schools everywhere. That in itself is cause for optimism because without
July 4. 1967

doubt we must still rely on education most in helping the Indian people to achieve a better standard of living.
It is not so surprising to see progress being made by the department because it has had more money to work with in recent years. It is all very well to have all sorts of programs on paper with fine ringing phrases as to what will be done, but unless the department or agency has the funds with which to give effect to all these plans on paper the whole thing is a fraud. In recent years we have been voting more money and I can say without equivocation that I feel very sure the Indian people are making very definite and decided progress, as is the department.
Some of the provinces have indicated a growing desire to participate more in the programming with respect to Indian affairs. I realize that a constitutional problem is involved and I intend to offer no further comment at the present time. However, if the provinces are really genuine in their expressed desire to enter more into the programming of Indian affairs and community development on Indian reserves, before the federal government accepts such participation it should satisfy itself that the provinces intend to allocate meaningful amounts of money for this purpose. In some respects the entry of the provinces into affairs relating to the Indian people is to be welcomed. I am all in favour of the idea, for example, that the federal government should not continue to expand the educational facilities which it offers but should rather avail itself to a greater extent of the offers made by the provinces to establish joint Indian and non-Indian schools. I believe that in this respect very tangible progress has been made in the past four or five years.
However, apart from that let us consider, for example, the community development program about which we hear from time to time from the provinces. In that connection the provincial authorities seem to have a pretty good concept on paper. Some provinces have appointed provincial civil servants as community development officers who travel to and live among the Indian people. This may sound good but I must say, having regard to all we heard about the community development program and what we had come to expect from it, there is some cause for disappointment because there is not enough money backing that program to allow it to come up to our expectations. I am afraid the federal government will be indulging in wishful 27053-140J
Supply-Indian Affairs thinking if it feels it can disengage itself from some of its programming and leave more to the provinces. However, I do not wish to prognosticate too far into the future for the simple reason that I plead ignorance.
In my humble opinion there are some areas of activity on the reserves which the Indian affairs branch should encourage rather more than it does now. I know that in recent years very definite and genuine efforts have been made to try to encourage the younger Indians especially to take on duties and responsibilities as quasi-civil servants working amoung their own people as welfare and health officers disseminating information on hygiene and other matters. I do not know to what extent this is being done officially but I am glad to say that from my own observations it seems to be working well and the department is to be commended for every effort it makes in this direction. I feel, however, we could go quite a bit further. In addition to having people on the reserves acting as health officers we could train the younger men on the reserves for purposes of law enforcement under the aegis of the R.C.M.P. I am not suggesting that they should form an organic part of the R.C.M.P. but surely it should be possible to devise a training scheme under the auspices of the R.C.M.P. whereby young men from the reserves would be taught law enforcement as it applies directly to their local situations.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
I am not sure that this comparison is a good one but I shall put it forward in any case. I am sure hon. members have heard of the efforts in the United States under the auspices of the war on poverty program, I believe, to train young men from minority groups to help keep law and order in the ghettos. I believe they go by the name of "white hats". Perhaps something along this line could be implemented in Canada in respect of the Indian reserves and the young men of Indian descent. I would be surprised if the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were not at present considering the possibility of doing something like this because I understand that they find themselves hard pressed to get enough constables and officers to allocate to the different provinces as well as look after the problems of law and order in the more northerly parts of the country and on the Indian reserves. It seems to me they would welcome such a proposition as long as it is feasible. It seems to me there would be a greater response and greater effectiveness

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs with young people from a particular environment carrying out functions and duties which up until now have been almost exclusively carried out by civil servants. It would seem to me to be a good idea if more and more of the health officers, welfare officers and ancillary law enforcement officers were obtained through this process.
If this suggestion is followed we will be hastening the day when almost every reserve will have young Indian men and women carrying out the functions of leadership. In this way they may arrive at self-rule in the same way that men and women enjoy local selfgovernment at the municipal level. It is my understanding that the department is not fighting the process. There are some who say that the department should be disbanded or broken up, but certainly I do not subscribe to that kind of thinking. I see the minister is smiling. I really was being serious and I suggest that the functions and responsibilities of the department in connection with Indian affairs cannot be eliminated in the very near future.
No doubt some reserves are on the verge of, if not already, exercising local self-rule. I believe that one or two reserves in eastern Manitoba are already in this category. Out of the six or seven reserves I can think of offhand, one is on the verge of showing the capability of exercising complete local selfgovernment. Two or three are in various stages of preparedness. At the same time I must admit that one is some distance away from this position. Until now no effort has been successful in enabling these people to accept the normal duties and responsibilities of living in a modem society. They have followed their own way of life which did not involve them in the same kinds of problems, and so they did not learn to cope with the kinds of problems we find in our society.
However, I should like to say that while on the one hand the department is to be congratulated for its program in respect of reserve housing and town planning, it has not given priority to something that is rather elementary, the planning of house construction. When one considers the program for the complete electrification of all reserves, one finds it hard to justify why one reserve not many miles away from another that has electricity cannot get it. On some reserves there is town-site housing construction, so it is just a case of establishing priorities. I might say in that connection that despite the statements of the

band council leaders about getting electrification the department has been very sympathetic. However, they have not succeeded in getting the projects completed with the result that people on a few reservations are waiting while a few miles away money is being expended on many of the most modern amenities.
I should like to refer now to the attracting of industry. I know it is hoped that somehow, in same way, not only the reserves but most rural areas of the country will be able to attract industry. If industry were attracted to the reserve areas employment opportunities would be provided for the young people. They would then not have to move away and cut the bonds of attachment. We know that opportunities for the young in these areas are limited. There are, however, a few specific possibilities and since they are specific it seems to me the department should be interested in promoting them. I refer to specific industries, but perhaps "industry" is not the right word. I have in mind the occupation of guiding.
I know hon. members will say that there are many Indian guides, and of course there are. However, there would be a need for many more if both the federal and provincial governments were to incorporate these guides into their tourism policies. The government of Manitoba, as does the government of Canada, spends hundreds of thousands of dollars on tourist advertising in many countries, principally the United States, with considerable success. However, when people come as tourists to go fishing in our northern lakes they very often do so without hiring the services of any of the local population as guides. It seems to me there should be a lot more specific and concrete participation in the encouragement of the hiring of local Indians as guides for tourists.
In many cases certain bands or particular members of a band have a reputation as being efficient firefighters. These Indians are recruited and made use of by government agencies as firefighters. They are paid from $5 to $7 per day for this work. Five dollars to $7 a day at the very most is being paid these people for hours of work, e (4:30 p.m.)


The Assistant Deputy Chairman:: Order, please. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member but the time allotted to him has now expired.
July 4, 1967


Edward Richard Schreyer: Mr. Chairman, if I may have your indulgence and that of the committee I can complete my remarks in about two minutes.


Maurice Rinfret: Does the committee agree?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Edward Richard Schreyer: We are trying very hard through the offices of the Indian affairs branch to open up new employment opportunities and to raise general living standards. Therefore there can be no good reason for tolerating-I use that word advisedly-the practice followed by all levels of government, and to which I think there should be a public reaction, whereby they pay Indians as little as $5 or $6 a day for firefighting. Certainly this is the case in my part of the country.
We should be doing more not only to encourage the setting up of co-ops but to assist the Indians during periods when the going is tough. We all know that work such as pulp-wood cutting and wild rice gathering, fishing and so on is cyclical and that some years are good and others are very bad. Therefore these co-ops need a little more than just initial assistance; they require sustenance during the lean periods. Since in past years we have shown no reluctance to inject a little more money into our over-all efforts to assist the Indians, we should not be quite so cautious and parsimonious about giving the co-ops which are established on many Indian reserves a little more financial assistance. We should exhibit more readiness to help them in the purchase of equipment such as tractors and tractor sleighs for hauling pulpwood, chain saws and so on. We should loosen up the purse strings a bit. If we do not assist them in this direction we shall have to do so in another. If we assist them through the provision of welfare these people are not given the opportunity to work alongside other members of society and solve their problems.
I promised to close in two minutes, Mr. Chairman, and unfortunately there are a few other things I should have liked to mention. However, if the minister takes into consideration what I have said so far I will be most grateful.


Robert Norman Thompson: Mr. Chairman, I do not intend at this time to attempt to deal with parks policy in any way but will limit my remarks to several constituency matters that are of some importance. We will await the answers to some of the questions raised by
Supply-Indian Affairs the hon. member for Edmonton West. I should like to say to the hon. member for Springfield, who has just spoken, that we are not only concerned about those who have held these park leases in the past but also about those who may hold them in the future. It is not only the recreational or conserva-tional aspects of the parks which are important. The essential services which go along with the development of the parks are also vital to the kind of development that most of us in this committee are anxious to see take place.
I would draw the attention of the minister to a matter with which I know he is familiar and which is of sufficient importance for me to impress upon him. I am referring to the David Thompson highway. The Yellowhead pass route has already been discussed this afternoon. Reference has been made to the problems that exist in Banff national park as they relate to transcontinental highway No. 1 as well as to the facilities that must be provided to meet the needs of commercial traffic. The David Thompson route, however, might well have been developed before either of these other routes had the necessary information been available to those who were responsible for laying out the original Canadian Pacific route through the mountains and later the Grand Trunk route to the north.
The David Thompson route follows the Saskatchewan River west of my home city of Red Deer, through Rocky Mountain House, through the coal mining centre of Nordegg and surrounding communities, up to the headwaters of the Saskatchewan, across the Banff-Jasper highway, up to the Howse River, over the great divide and down the Blaeberry River to a point just at the eastern foot of Rogers Pass near the town of Donald. It cuts from 80 to 90 miles off the route to the Pacific coast from any point in central Alberta or central Saskatchewan. This means that the city of Red Deer is approximately equidistant to the Pacific coast as the city of Calgary, and consequently the route saves many miles and transportation costs for all freight and tourist traffic from central Alberta and central Saskatchewan.
The provincial government of Alberta let this year the final contract for construction of that part of the highway between Nordegg and the eastern boundary of Banff national park. On August 5 the opening ceremonies are scheduled to take place at the Saskatchewan River crossing on the Banff-Jasper highway, at that point where the David

July 4. 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs Thompson route goes eastward to join up with highway 2 just north of the city of Red Deer. Not only is this route tremendously scenic, Mr. Chairman, but it is not subject to severe snowfalls in winter. Neither does it have the grades that one would normally associate with and expect to find on mountain highways.
With the construction to trans-Canada standards of grade as far as the Banff national park, the completion of the route is now a matter of urgency. Not only must the four miles be completed to join up with the Banff-Jasper road-I understand this construction is well under way at the present time-but everything possible must be done to see that the road over Howse Pass which will connect up with trans-Canada No. 1 at Donald is completed as soon as possible.
Those who support the Yellowhead route have in the past opposed the development of this route. In my opinion, in view of the volume of traffic that can be expected over the Yellowhead route, it would be of tremendous advantage to the national parks if the David Thompson route were completed because it would result in tremendous savings in transportation costs. Not only is it a much shorter route, as I have already indicated, but the construction of the road is comparatively easy. The grades involved are very minor indeed having regard to the type of mountainous country through which the proposed highway passes.
I therefore hope the department will not wait for the government of British Columbia to build its 28.5 miles, I believe it is, of the road from the western border of Banff national park, but will take the initiative and develop the route through the very narrow waist of the park at House Pass.
e (4:40 p.m.)
Not only would it cut some 80 or 90 miles off the distance to the Pacific coast but it also offers the advantage of attracting much of the commercial highway transportation which now goes through Banff national park by way of Banff and Lake Louise, bypassing altogether the bottleneck presented by that difficult road and the costly type of construction involved between Field and Golden. I believe much of the commercial transportation which now passes through the Banff bottleneck and which has been the cause of much of the dissension in connection with park policies would prefer to take the new route instead of No. 1 highway which it presently follows,
IMr. Thompson.]
bearing in mind that the distance to be travelled is shorter and the grades are less steep. Banff park narrows to a distance of only 20 miles approximately where the Thompson route crosses it, resulting in less interference with recreational development. I would remind the minister that this heavy commercial traffic has been among the causes of the difficulties which now exist in the park, and if these could be alleviated by providing an alternative commercial route the minister would face fewer problems than he does at the present time.
From the Saskatchewan River crossing going east this highway makes a figure eight out of the circular route from Calgary to Edmonton through Red Deer and from Edmonton to Jasper and Jasper to Lake Louise and eastward to Banff and Calgary. It would be extremely attractive to tourists because they would only have to travel half the distance to see some of the most spectacular mountain scenery there is anywhere in the world, whether on the northern or the southern half of this route now being created.
I trust the minister will be able to have the first four miles of incoming road between the Jasper-Banff road and the eastern park boundary completed by August 5 for normal travel, together with the necessary bridge across the river at the park boundary. With most of the highway already completed, a park gate is needed very quickly because the volume of traffic passing into the park is already large. A new park entrance would facilitate the work which the employees of the parks branch must perform in controlling traffic and collecting entrance fees. It would also assist tourists travelling through the area. I believe budgetary provision has been made for this expenditure for at least one year, if not for two.
Another important need concerns the provision of facilities to-handle tourist traffic at this particular point. There is already a need for vastly expanded camping facilities, and provision must likewise be made for the building of motels. Anyone who has travelled through the park between Jasper and Lake Louise appreciates that there is extreme pressure on existing facilities. Although much has already been done to increase facilities I believe there is need for a crash program. If the increase in the last two or three years is any indication of what will happen in the next two or three years, great attention must be paid to the provision of both campsites and motels. Action is needed now, without delay, since this highway is to open on August 5.
July 4. 1967

The highway department of the government of Alberta is to be congratulated on the vision it has shown in the development of its portion of the new highway. The potential of this highway does not just involve those who live along the route nearly as much as it does the development of the over-all tourist industry in Banff and Jasper, and the consequences which will flow from a more economical route over the mountains, affecting all western Canada.
I have drawn the attention of the minister to the importance of these developments and to the need for extra effort to be made to provide facilities for handling a growing tourist influx into the parks through this new entrance, but I emphasize as well as the desirability of completing this road from the Saskatchewan River crossing so as to join No. 1 highway at Donald station.


Mr. Bigg:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank the minister for his co-operation in supplying the buffalo meat for the biggest buffalo picnic in Canada's history. Had it not been for the co-operation of the hon. gentleman's department, that picnic would certainly have been a failure. I want to go on record as thanking both the hon. gentleman and his department for their part in its success.
One of the most important duties which the minister has assumed is responsibility for heading the department of Indian affairs. I happen to think it is among the most important departments in the government, though very often it fails to get the attention it deserves. Our Indian people are the senior citizens of Canada and the fact that the twentieth century has left them far behind is no excuse for a rich young country like Canada, which has profited from living in their land, continuing to neglect their important and pressing needs. I do not think we shall ever reach the Indian people and enable them to take the place in Canadian life they deserve and be as prosperous, as well educated, as well placed in our industries and professions as they should be unless we really get to understand them. They are a proud race, like all the families of mankind. They have just the same capabilities and just the same desires as all of us. But they have been left high and dry. I shall say nothing in recrimination; I will try to make a positive contribution.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
Let us forget the errors of the past and press on with a positive answer to the Indian problem. We have to help the Indian restore
Supply-Indian Affairs his pride in himself. If we can do that all the other problems will fall into their proper places. The most important thing we could do would be to appoint a deputy minister of Indian or Eskimo origin. We can find such a man if we look for him. There are such men in our country as the Rev. Ahenakiew, an Anglican minister who is a full-bloded Cree. We have several Indians who are versatile enough to belong to the R.C.M.P. The minister has several members in his own department who are excellent men. There is Mr. Kelly who went to New Zealand and studied the native problem there. There is Mr. William Bull of Alberta who on several occasions has been elected chief of the Goodfish reserve. There is Mr. Steinhauer who is very prominent in northern Alberta on the Saddle Lake Reserve. He at one time ran in an election for member of parliament. I look forward to the day when we will have several members of parliament of native origin.
The old pride which the Indians had and which lies dormant in them must be brought to the fore if they are to have any hope. It is not just a question of money. We can spend hundreds of millions of dollars but as long as we are paternal with these people, not friendly, understanding and co-operative, the money will go down the drain.
It is almost useless to try to raise the standard of living of an Indian on a reserve without raising the standard of living of the whole tribe. We can send an Indian boy to school and put him through high school, but when he goes back to the reserve later he is a whitewashed crow. His very vocabulary will make him unpopular with his fellows. Unless we educate all the Indians as much as we can we are merely giving some of them the white man's ways. Unless they want those ways it is useless to ram them down their throats. Probably many people within the sound of my voice think that all the Indians need is homes like ours with hardwood floors and Crane plumbing. But Indians might be happier in good tents, temporarily at least, if the tents were warm and well stocked. They might be happier to spend money on clothes, what they call fine feathers.
I suppose some hon. members may say, "All right, if you know these people so well, what is your solution"? I am speaking primarily of western Canada because I know that area. Some of the reserves there have the most excellent ranching land in Canada but in many cases it is going to waste. I could take members out there and show them large stretches of virgin prairie owned by Indians.

July 4. 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs Yet today at a time when beef cattle are at a premium there are no cattle on these lands or, if there are, they are owned by white men. The Indians are beginning to understand that if this grazing land can make money for white men there is no reason why it should not make money for Indians.
I suggest that we go to the Indian, consult with him, find out how much of the white man's ways he wants, how much discipline he will supply himself and by communal effort. We should give them whatever they want and allow them to be their own administrators. Indians, like any other branch of the human family, will take pride in doing things on their own. Some hon. members may try to downgrade this idea by saying it is nothing but a form of communism. But perhaps Indians need a form of communal living because they are not yet ready for the twentieth century.
We should try to restore the Indians' pride in themselves. We should provide them with a workable plan for a way of life close to their old accepted way of life when they lived off buffalo herds or by individual trapping in the woods. If some Indians want to be ranchers we should help them to become ranchers. If some of them want to remain in the woods perhaps we could work them into the tourist industry as guides.
Many Indians are very capable with their hands. They are efficient at manufacturing in the home. They are certainly capable of maintaining outboard motors. They like fine feathers. These Indians would be at a premium if they dressed in their own beautiful native costumes made of hand-tanned leather, which is still available and which we can help them to get. If they did this and acted as guides, then our American relatives and European visitors would get some of the colour of our rich Canadian culture.
The Indians must have autonomy. They are taught from the cradle to hate us. This is a negative approach. But I do not think they would hate us if we really extended to them the kind of friendship we would expect if we were in their place. If we did that they might teach their children to love us and eventually accept the best part of the white man's ways.
Where Indians have had economic security they have progressed. They are capable of all the skills of the white man. They are just as capable as the white man with their hands and their heads. As hon. members know, Caughnawaga Indians get premium wages in steel construction work. Their native skill in

trotting along logs through the forest gave them sure footing. Now they raise their children to expect to be somebody when they reach their later teens. They have pride in themselves. They trot along the high steel of skyscrapers in New York, Montreal, Edmonton and Winnipeg and they show us that the red man is truly noble, like the rest of the human race, when he has a chance.
I hope the minister will pay heed to this plea on behalf of the Indians. There are legal hitches. The Indian Act needs to be revised. The treaties need to be revised. Of course the Indians are afraid to touch the treaties because they feel the treaties were not kept in the past. Again I beg that the Indian claims commission, promised for 50 years, be brought into being. Let it be a commission for the Indians, not merely the enlargement of another arm of government to make jobs for white men. Let it be a commission which will correct those errors we committed when we did not keep our side of the treaties. Such a commission can help bring about a new deal for Indians, one that is long overdue. But that commission will not work if the Indians feel it is just another piece of bureaucracy and not an honest attempt at friendly co-operation.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)
I have read one or two draft bills. One of them contained a suggestion that there should be a commission made up of three appointees. One member of the commission would be a member of the judiciary, one would be an appointee of the government and the third would be an appointee of the Indians. The subclause immediately following said that the Indian appointee would be subject to removal at the whim of both houses of parliament. This would be a mistake which would negate the whole effectiveness of this new commission. The Indian appointee must be subject only to the wishes of the Indians themselves. We have had at least 100 years of delay and, if this should cause further delay, a few more months would not make any difference. This man must be an Indian appointee and his tenure of office must be subject only to the wishes of the Indians themselves. Canada is a great and large country. There are many tribes involved. I believe it would be well nigh impossible to pick any one Indian and say that he represents the native people of this country. If we were to pick a Mohawk, perhaps the west coast Indians of British Columbia would think that he would know little about their ancient fishing rights.
July 4, 1967

Therefore I suggest that when this commission is set up it should be a flexible so far as the Indian appointee is concerned. By all means let an independent judge sit as the chairman of the commission, and the government, of course, would have to have an efficient civil servant who knows the act and the conditions under which the government has worked over the last 20 years or so. However, so far as the Indian appointee is concerned I suggest that this commission, which certainly will have to move across the country in order to deal with these problems one at a time, should accept an appointee from the Mohawk tribe or from the family of tribes as the case may be.
It might be possible to get the Bloods, the Peigans and the Sarcee to agree on an appointee but so far as the Crees are concerned I believe the great family of Crees should have its own appointee. In this way the Indian appointee would be one who would know the problems of the Indians in a particular part of the country. I have heard that one of the reasons the commission has not yet been set up is that there is not unanimity among the Indians. If this is what is causing the bottleneck now, it can be avoided by making the appointment of the Indian representative flexible.
Some people have said that it would be dangerous to open up all the treaties. It has been said that this might cost us a good deal of money. Well, Canada is a country which always pays its debts. This is something which should concern the claims commission. If we do owe these people money, larger pieces of territory, or considerable mineral rights which they have been unable to use, then let us establish this commission and find out what the facts are. I am sure that when all the facts are placed before us we will not hesitate to pay these people what we owe them. I am sure we will not hesitate to place at their disposal some of the tremendous resources of this country in order to bring them in this second century of Canada's history to the place of honour which because of their friendly acceptance of us they so rightfully deserve.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Chairman, my remarks at this time will be very brief. They stem particularly from the fact that our national and historic resources come under the jurisdiction of the minister whose estimates we are discussing at the moment. More particularly my participation at this time is, of 27053-141
Supply-Indian Affairs course motivated by the very welcome announcement made by the minister during the question period when, in answer to a question placed on the order paper some time earlier by the hon. member for Essex West, he reiterated the statement made in March that the resting places or graves of the fathers of confederation would be considered as historical sites and consequently would be eligible for some type of financial assistance from the department concerned.
Before I speak directly and specifically about this problem. I should like to pay tribute to this division of the department. Living as I do on the island of Montreal I have had no direct contact with the work of this section of the minister's department in latter years, but I recall with a certain degree of affection the existence of the park which we used to call simply the Plains of Abraham situated in the city of Quebec, and the role that park plays in that communiry. I recall, of course, the period of my life when I lived in the city of Quebec between the ages of 10 and 17. That period coincided with the depression years. The few persons here who have lived through the depression years will know that many Canadians compensated for the lack of money by using a little initiative in utilizing their leisure time. High in the order of priority in this regard in the city of Quebec were the Plains of Abraham. That park is a tremendous credit to the department.
It is perhaps true that the Plains of Abraham are known best for their historical significance, but to the residents of Quebec, the Plains, which is the name we used for the park, was a meeting place where the citizens could enjoy picnics and otherwise make good use of their leisure time by using the park for recreation. However, like most people, during my early days I paid little or no attention or gave any credit to the battlefields commission which is charged with the responsibility of maintaining the park. I suppose that like most citizens of Quebec I assumed the park was maintained in some miraculous fashion by the city of Quebec or the provincial authorities or was endowed by private interests. It was, of course, only when I grew up and became a little more interested in politics and a little more aware of things around me that I realized that this place of beauty was maintained by a particular department of the federal government.
I think it is to the everlasting credit of successive governments, both Conservative and Liberal, that the overriding policy in the

Supply-Indian Affairs park has been to maintain the beauty of its sitting. This park has been a tremendous boon to the tourist trade. It is one of the foremost tourist attractions. Many hundreds and thousands of tourists who will visit Quebec, during our centennial year, will of course visit this park. So I should like to congratulate the minister.
I note in the estimates of the department that very little increase has been designated for this branch. This puzzles me a bit because I believe that like many others it is suffering as a result of increased salaries and the increased cost of maintaining parks and sites.
Today, as a result of a question asked by the hon. member for Essex West, the minister repeated the assurance he gave the house on March 15 that something will be done about the graves of the fathers of confederation which in many instances are badly in need of restoration. My interest in the subject arose quite naturally as a result of representations made to me by various organizations on the island of Montreal, particularly the St. Patrick's Society. I was prevailed upon to ask whether there was some department of government which would assume the moral and financial responsibility of looking after the resting places of those wonderful men who 100 years ago had the vision of forming this country known as Canada.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
Like that of most backbenchers, my route to the very kindly and sympathetic ear of the minister was a long and tortuous one. I commenced my approach rather naively by going to the Minister of Public Works. After many months of sympathetic correspondence we mutually arrived at the conclusion that I was dealing with the wrong department. After six months of rather harrowing experience I then rather naively transferred my efforts to the centennial commission, presuming that in a country which was about to celebrate its centennial the resting place of Thomas D'Arcy McGee should be more important than the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. When one watches television on Sunday night and observes programs such as the Walt Disney program or others from the United States to which we are exposed culturally in Canada, it is quite easy to understand why the average youngster in Canada is familiar with the exploits of Abraham Lincoln but knows relatively little about the father of confederation who was assassinated within sight of the parliament buildings.

July 4, 1967
I was informed on several occasions that while my project was a very suitable one centennial funds for this type of endeavour were not provided by the federal government but rather were the joint responsibility of the federal, provincial and civic authorities. I started over again and approached these three levels of government with the hope that some financial assistance could be provided for this project in which I was interested. After many months of letter writing I was again assured that my project was a very wonderful and touching one for centennial year but unfortunately the funds for this type of project had been exhausted and I was from 60 to 90 days too late.
It was at this time the suggestion was advanced by the then minister without portfolio, the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George, that I turn my efforts in the direction of the minister of northern affairs, whose estimates we are considering at this moment. I am very pleased to say I found it much easier and more simple to convince him of the validity of my case than any of the other avenues which I explored for some 12 to 15 months.
Let me leave this suggestion with the minister in the hope that he may expand a little when his opportunity comes later in the evening to answer some of the questions. On March 15 the minister announced that after a series of meetings with that branch of his department that I refer to as the historic branch but which is actually the natural historic and resources branch, it was felt normal and natural that the graves or resting places of the fathers of confederation should be considered as historic sites. I am sure hon. members will agree with that decision, particularly in view of the fact that we are discovering perhaps for the first time what it means to be a Canadian.
The spontaneous efforts of the people of Canada during this last week in breaking away from or putting aside our inferiority complex, make it more important that we should realize and cherish the efforts of the fathers of confederation. The fact that this country is only 100 years old makes it possible for us to do something to remember these people. Their speeches are recorded in Hansard and there are other ways of remembering them. But it does seem to me as it did to the minister that we could do something else such as providing assistance to an organization such as the St. Patrick's Society of Montreal to restore to its proper condition the resting place of Thomas D'Arcy McGee.
July 4, 1967

In his remarks of March 15, in which the minister announced that the department was prepared to render financial assistance for the restoration of these resting places, he created some puzzlement by his use of the phrase "financial assistance". That term implies that somebody or some corporation or society must exist to assist financially. How or who do you help financially in those cases where no society or corporation exists? In the case of the Thomas D'Arcy McGee project fortunately, there is a body in existence that can be helped financially. I refer, of course, to the St. Patrick's Society.
It is not difficult to visualize that in other instances there are no such societies. I have made representations to the minister asking him to elaborate further in defining "financial assistance", because it seems to me this is the key phrase in his statement of March 15. I suspect the minister will want to discuss this point and I hope that when he does he will point out that financial assistance can vary from one project to another from 10 per cent to 50 per cent or perhaps up to 100 per cent depending on how elaborate or simple the project is.
In the particular case of Thomas D'Arcy McGee I am happy to say that McGee sat as a member of the two major parties which existed at that time. We were not faced with the curse of socialism 100 years ago. In any event, Thomas D'Arcy McGee entered the house as a Liberal, although unfortunately in a moment of weakness he became a Conservative. I notice that an hon. member on the front benches of the opposition removed his glasses after hearing that remark. In a serious vein, Thomas D'Arcy McGee was a great father of confederation and certainly the complete cost of the project I have in mind should be absorbed by the minister's department, I hope that at the first opportunity the minister will re-assure me.


Mr. Baldwin:: Mr. Chairman, everyone who has held the portfolio held by the present incumbent has realized a great sense of responsibility. I know that his predecessor, the hon. member for Brandon-Souris, was keenly interested in the north and its development. He came to know the area and to love it. He did great things here in Ottawa and elsewhere to create a feeling of development in the north. I realize this very well because in 1961 when a ceremony was held at the opening of the Pine Point railway the hon. member for Brandon-Souris climbed on a caterpillar tractor to carry out the usual ceremonial functions. We 27053-1415
Supply-Indian Affairs saw him disappear over a hill, heading north, and it took some time to find out how far he
had gone and bring him back.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)


An hon. Member:: They could not stop the machinery.


Gerald William Baldwin: I am advised, Mr. Chairman, that they could not stop the machinery. I think there is a great opportunity for a minister who holds this portfolio to do what I believe one British prime minister said when asked what his achievements were. He was referring to North America and he said, "I have helped call into being a new world to redress the balance of the old." I know the present minister feels this way. God knows, there is enough to redress in the balance of the old world and the old part of Canada.
There are a great many things to be done. I shall not go into detail at this stage because I have made my views known from time to time. However, I think it is of interest to point out that Dr. Deutsch, chairman of the Economic Council of Canada has become very interested in the question of the north and northern development. He made two trips to the territories in company, I believe, with the minister and some of his officials. He stopped on the way at the town of Peace River. Unfortunately I was not able to meet him. The interest of Dr. Deutsch in the north is pointed up in the third report of the Economic Council of Canada. I think this should give the minister an opportunity to do a little arm-twisting with his colleagues, particularly the Minister of Finance, who sits quite close to him, when the occasion arises. The problem is in getting the money and spending it in the right places.
I have made one suggestion to the minister and I make it again. I believe it would be very suitable, particularly this year, if the minister would take the initiative and convene an international meeting of those nations which have jurisdiction in the north, that is, Canada, the United States in right of Alaska, the Soviet union and the Scandinavian countries. I suggest it would be very appropriate to convene such a meeting in Yellowknife. Representatives of these countries should be brought together to consider ways and means of peacefully exchanging and pooling information dealing with northern development. We in Canada have made progress in this regard. The Russians have made progress in areas in which we perhaps have not been able to. But I believe that in a spirit of detente this is an excellent area in

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs which these people can come together and pool their information.
In certain areas there is no question of security or classification. There is a common interest in the world to bring into a reasonable degree of economic development those parts of the north which are suitable for occupation, exploitation and development. I do not think there is any question about this. We know that for different reasons the Russians have been able to establish cities of a million or half a million people far to the north of our largest settlement of Yellowknife. There are, of course, geographical and political reasons for their being able to do this.
I believe it is now common knowledge that in Russia there is a system of incentives which persuades people, particularly the young, to go to these areas. On the North American continent today the two nations, in particular the United States, are spending billions and billions of dollars in space exploration and development. This is very essential and a start had to be made in this field. However, it seems to me it is also very essential that we be prepared to devote a reasonable part of our national economy for the purpose of seeing what parts of the north can be developed and, where there are resources, what we can do with them.
I have said over and over again that a country that concentrates its resources and population in one limited area, as we are doing in Canada, is looking for trouble. The cost of policing, sanitation, building houses and educating children grows increasingly higher in these areas. There is an increasingly large number of problems in connection with these areas. Now is the time to work together with other nations and lay out a plan for the development and utilization of the north.
We know it will not be too many years before parts of the world, particularly this continent, will be running short of certain strategic materials. I do not know to what extent the Paley report has been followed or to what extent people in the United States are examining it. But I remember there was a feeling a number of years ago that certain strategic materials required for industrial use and development would be in short supply. It is the tendency of human nature to wait too long to take the steps which need to be taken to see that there is a rounding off and a normal development in this regard. This applies to our continent and this country. I hope fMr. Baldwin.]
the minister will give some thought to convening such an international meeting as a preliminary step to solving these problems. The increasing use of commodity pipe lines and changes in trade development and the exchange of goods will in the not too distant future, I believe, bring us to a period of time when the north will have great strategic importance, not necessarily in terms of defence strategy but in terms of trade and communications.
I listened with interest to the hon. member for Athabasca who spoke about our Indians and the Indian problem. I do not think we have an Indian problem, although it is often referred to as such. There are a number of Indian people who have problems. There are a number of Indian bands which have problems. This is why it is extremely difficult for us, sitting here in Ottawa, to formulate proposals on a broad, national scale which will be suitable for application to the Indian people in all parts of Canada. I suggest that we must have-and I believe the department is moving in this direction-a great measure of decentralization in order to give to the officials in the various areas, the superintendents and regional directors, a greater measure of authority and independence so they will be able to apply the general policies laid down in Ottawa broadly in a way which will best benefit their districts. We in Ottawa have a tendency to feel, when we appropriate $10 million or $20 million for a certain project, that the money will trickle down and will ultimately be used by individuals in those areas that we believe need improving. But this is not always the case. All too often the way the money is used is a matter of discretion on the part of independent civil servants who are on the firing line.
From what I have learned I believe that the policy I suggest has been applied to some extent but I should like to see it accentuated. It means getting the very best people that we can in these areas, people who will be responsible for dealing with the Indians, and giving them not carte blanche but at least within certain limits the right to modify policies according to circumstances in a way which will best benefit the Indian peoples with whom they are dealing and the areas where they live.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
I should like to give the minister an example of what I mean. In the community of Hay Lakes, with which I think the minister is familiar-it is not too far from the famous
July 4, 1967

Rainbow lake oil area-some years ago a white man was engaged by the band council to inaugurate a system of cutting logs and get the Indians involved in this work. He was to teach them the essential mechanical trades and help them develop a self-contained enterprise. This man made very substantial progress in his first year and a half of operation. He was able to provide the oil companies with lumber much cheaper than they could get it flown in.
At that time there was no highway into this area. I flew in there on two or three occasions and I talked to him. At one time it looked as if he would be able to set in motion an economic operation which would give year round employment to the 40 or 50 men who made up the majority of the heads of households in this area. Unfortunately, because of red tape and restrictions some difficulties developed. Eventually the man had to leave because of problems which arose with the local superintendent as a result of difficulties with the lines of communication in getting the equipment which was necessary, and so far as I know nothing more was done. Here was a situation where 40 or 50 adult Indians and their families would have been able to initiate, develop and continue an economic program which would have given employment to a large percentage of potential wage earners in the district. These are the sort of opportunities for which we should look, particularly in the northern part of Alberta, in the territories and in the northern part of Saskatchewan.
As a result of the sudden influx of people in connection with oil exploration and the development of the oil industry, the traditional sources or earning a living such as fishing and trapping have been taken away. These people have been suddenly exposed to civilization. They are untrained, unprepared and incapable of earning a living. At this time there is a special urgency about many of these cases.
However, I feel that our great problem lies with the education of the Indian children. In my part of the world in northern Alberta the Grouard vocational training school has been providing education to many Indian children who might otherwise have dropped out of school. I had the good fortune of welcoming three of these children to Ottawa not long ago. The boys had come here to study forestry and mechanical trades such as welding and the girls were taking beauty counselling and nurses' aides courses. It is my belief that in normal circumstances these children would
Supply-Indian Affairs have dropped out of school had it not been for this vocational training scheme.
This is the kind of thing on which the government should concentrate. We must bring these people one stage further and give them the opportunity to take one more step up the economic and social ladder. It is a difficult and heartbreaking problem and I know very well what is involved, but I urge the minister, if he happens to be in that district, to go to Grouard, look at the vocational training school there and see the Indian and white children working together at their desks and in the machine shops. I think these children will be far better able to enter into the economic and social life of this country than their fathers and grandfathers were.
The hon. member for Athabasca spoke about the Indian claims commission. This is a very difficult problem. If the claims commission were to be invested with the complete authority that is required to deal equitably-I stress that word-with all of the justified complaints of the Indian people and if this were to bring remunerative results, it would mean a tremendous amount of money. Not long ago I read about a decision of the supreme court of the United States according to which Florida belongs to a tribe of Indian people who under that judgment are entitled to take over Florida. I do not know what they would do with Miami Beach and the gambling houses there. However, if a court were to look at some of the original treaties and agreements made between representatives of the crown and Indian representatives over the last 50 or 60 years, it would be compelled to come up with a decision that these were fraudulent agreements obtained under false pretences and on the basis of promises which were never kept. If these treaties were to be interpreted in the light of modem conditions they would all have to be declared illegal. However, we as practical people know this is not possible.
In any event, we know that we have made great progress in this country, and what we want to do now is to give the Indian people an opportunity to participate in the reaping of the benefits which should and must be made available to them. This is the conundrum which will face the minister and the government when they come to enact the Indian claims commission legislation. They will have to consider on what terms it should be drafted. I would suggest that before the judgment of the government becomes final the minister might give thought to letting a committee look at this whole matter and

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs make suggestions and proposals regarding it. Of course its terms of reference would have to be drawn up fairly carefully. This is a matter in which the work of the standing committee might be of benefit to the government before the legislation is drawn and brought down.
I was present and saw the Indians from Quebec perform their folk dances on June 30. I know that Her Majesty visited the pavilion of the Indian peoples at Expo during the course of her sojourn there yesterday. I am sure she read the messages left there by the Indian people regarding the injustices which they feel have been meted out to them. These are not injustices which this generation alone must sustain but injustices over a period of the last 100 years for which the people of Canada must bear the responsibility. As I watched the Indian people dancing here and as I read about Her Majesty's visit to the Indian pavilion I thought that something must be done now so that when we pat ourselves on the back and tell ourselves what wonderful fellows we are and what a wonderful birthday party we are having we will realize that we are not entitled to that feeling without accepting some degree of blame and involving ourselves in a meaningful program to help these people.
The minister has made some announcements with respect to housing and I know that the government is heading in the right direction. But time is not on our side. I would hope that all members of the house will resolve, in a nonpartisan way and without allowing their views to be swayed by political consideration, that at this time when we are celebrating our centennial something more meaningful will be done to bring the level of the original settlers of Canada, the Indian people, up to a stage where they can share and will have the right to share, as they should have had before, in a far more material way in the birthday party which we are having in Canada.


John Mercer Reid: Mr. Chairman, I should like to endorse the appeal made to the minister by the hon. member for Peace River so far as it concerned the decentralization of Indian affairs services. Since I came to Ottawa I have witnessed the federal government wallowing incompetently in areas where it had invaded both provincial and municipal authority. In view of the fact that the Indian problem is not just a general one involving national Indian policy across the country but one concerning Indians in specific locations, a

program of decentralization and concentration in these areas instead of trying to deal with the statistical average Indian would be of great benefit to the Indians of Canada. I think
we want to get more return for the effort and energy we are extending in trying to help the Indians.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)
There are, it seems to me, three types of problems connected with the Indians. They can be loosely categorized as, first, urban problems related to those Indians who have migrated from reserves to cities and those Indians who live on reserves adjacent to cities. Then we have the rural based Indians who live near rural townsites. Third, we have the Indians of the far northern areas. It is the latter two types with which I should like to deal for a few minutes because many of the people who inhabit my constituency belong in these categories.
We have found a variety of difficulties in trying to bring the Indians up to a more equitable standard of living. We must, I believe, provide them with an opportunity to make a place for themselves in Canadian society. I have found the Indians, generally speaking, to be interested in earning their own way. A great many of them resent the welfare handouts which we give them. As a matter of fact, some of them go so far as to say that we give these welfare handouts much more easily than we give them the tools and education they need to make their own way.
I have an example of this which I should like to mention at this time. One of the few natural resources available to the Indians for exploitation in northern Ontario is fish. Indians can fish both summer and winter. There is a company in Keewatin called Shoal Lake Fisheries Limited which set out to attempt to exploit the fish resources of Lake of the Woods in the northwest part of Ontario. Originally it supplied the Indians with capital equipment in the form of nets, outboard motors, boats and all the other necessary paraphernalia. The capital amount was to be paid back out of the earnings the Indians made from fishing.
Several things have gone wrong with this plan. First of all, there has been an out and out failure by the Department of Transport to enforce its own regulations concerning commercial aircraft in the north. There are a good many freebooters, people who own small aircraft and who on occasion will take a flight up north looking for an Indian who is fishing.
July 4, 19G7

When they spot one they will land and offer to buy his fish for which they pay cash. They take the fish and Shoal Lake Fisheries has to take a severe loss because it is not able to buy the fish that the company equips the Indians to catch. In addition, the company cannot collect any of the money invested in capital equipment.
There are other areas in which the department of Indian affairs has taken a different attitude. I have a letter here from which I should like to quote. It was written to the Ontario Development Corporation at Toronto by the president of Shoal Lake Fisheries Limited. The company is having a great deal of difficulty finding the necessary capital to expand because their accounts receivable are so great. This, in turn, is related to the fact they are unable to collect the money which they put out for equipment because they have not been able to get the fish which the Indians have been catching. The situation is simply this. They were advised by the department of Indian affairs to cease providing the Indians with capital equipment. The Indian affairs department claimed they would provide the capital equipment because they had funds put aside for this purpose. The letter reads in part:
We would like to point out that this statement regarding the availability of funds is probably quite true, however, no one has advised the Indians nor our organization as to how these funds may be put in the hands of the potential fisherman.
Then the letter goes on to deal with a meeting held recently in Toronto. One of the local Indian chiefs, along with some officials from the Ontario Development Corporation, met with officials of the department of Indian affairs. I should like to read from the letter again:
At this meeting Mr. Greene-
He is an Indian chief.
-stated that he was unable to obtain government financing which would enable him to fish commercially.
That is the end of the statement. Chief Greene is a chief at the Shoal Lake reserve which is adjacent to Lake of the Woods. If I may, I should like to continue the quotation:
If we discontinued advances completely, a number of Indians would not be in a position to fish commercially and again would rely on welfare funds (more readily obtainable than fishing equipment from the department of Indian Affairs), as a means of livelihood.
So there seems to be a certain ambivalence here in departmental policy. On the one hand, they protect the Indians in a certain area and
Supply-Indian Affairs they protect the fish production. They see that the Indians receive a just price. The department takes no loss. At the same time, they expose a private entrepreneur to all the risks in developing Indian fishing when he is at the same time helping the Indian. The company has to take all the risks and has no protection at all. It seems to me that this is the type of operation that the Indian affairs branch should step into. I agree that in many cases it is necessary for the department to educate the Indians in modern, twentieth century money management. At the same time, it seems to me unreasonable to discriminate against this company, the only fish processor in northwestern Ontario. I bring these facts to the attention of the minister respectfully in the hope he might look into them and rectify the situation. I think it can be done without too much difficulty.
There is another matter which I hesitate to raise because it is a very sensitive one. I certainly hope hon. members will not misinterpret what I am going to say now. This point involves particularly the town of Kenora which, as hon. members will recall, was the scene of an Indian march about two years ago. This occurred on November 15, 1965 and was the subject of my first speech in the House of Commons. Since that time Kenora has become an even greater centre for the Indians than it was before. I refer to the very difficult question of policing. The Indians treat Kenora much in the same way as people from other rural areas treat a big city. They come in and have a good time. This leads to certain consequences. In the wintertime the police are absolutely necessary to prevent the Indian people from dying of exposure. In summer the police are just as necessary. The Indians themselves have suggested that one way around the bind of policing costs would be for the Indian affairs department, in co-operation with the municipality, to hire Indian policemen.
Two things would be accomplished in this way. Attention would be directed to one of the problems and the town would be assisted in financing this project. The tax base of the town is extremely limited, so it does require some assistance in dealing with this problem. Since the Indians themselves have recommended this idea of providing an Indian police force, it seems to me that the Indian affairs branch would be well advised to investigate this suggestion to ascertain if some form of arrangement could be worked out. I think it has certain possibilities and I should

July 4. 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs like to see serious consideration given to it. The problem the town of Kenora faces-


Edward Richard Schreyer: May I ask the hon. member a question? Can he tell us whether there are any Indians on the Kenora police force?


John Mercer Reid: To my knowledge there are none. There was some talk, if memory serves me correctly, of an attempt to hire one some time ago. However, there was no one available who could take the police course. In all honesty, I think they are looking for some relief from the pressure of providing this assistance. They are also looking for some opportunity for the Indians to bring about improvements themselves.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
The town of Kenora, the town of Fort Frances, the district of Red Lake and the town of Sioux Lookout all have serious difficulties in dealing with this problem because they are all urban centres for the Indians living in the neighbourhood. They do not have the finances to provide all the services required of them for the people living within their own municipal borders let alone deal with the problem they are facing as centres for a large indigenous Indian population.
However, these centres have been trying to make some progress and in the town of Kenora, through the facilities offered by the University of Manitoba adult education branch, the authorities were able to sponsor a series of ten lectures given by distinguished anthropologists and other experts on Indian affairs to explain to the people of Kenora, who have never faced this problem before, exactly what was going on, the type of crosscultural conflicts that were beginning, why the Indian was as he was, and what were the possibilities for change. Much to the surprise of everyone concerned with the project the response was overwhelming. The sponsoring committee was caught without sufficient seats and without a sufficiently large hall a number of times.
The second thing they did was to set up a branch of the Ontario Alcohol Research Foundation which now has some very meagre facilities in the way of attempting to provide counselling and assistance to those Indians who run afoul of the juice of the grape. They have run into problems of financing and the reason for this goes back to the time of the march on the town of Kenora. Because of the confused conditions which existed at that tilme, a number of commitments were made

without prior consultation with the proper authorities and the local people to their credit went ahead without getting formal written confirmation. As a consequence they arrived at a point where they had the facilities but did not have any money with which to operate them. They have had their problem solved for a year or two now, and I must congratulate the minister because his department is now providing more assistance than it did before. But they still have a problem in trying to deal with the situation as a whole.
Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, progress is being made by the local association. We have in Kenora another institution known as the Kenora Fellowship Centre, though there is a drawback so far as provision of assistance from the federal government through the department of Indian Affairs is concerned in that it has the stigma of having a religious affiliation. I understand that the policy of the department now is that any body which has a religious affiliation is looked upon with very deep suspicion, and in the end result, generally speaking, any financial assistance given is very minimal or none at all. We are attempting to broaden the base of this fellowship centre. I believe its membership is 50 per cent Indian and 50 per cent white, and the church in question is the Presbyterian church.
I do not particularly like this policy of the Indian affairs branch in discriminating against religious associations in this way. The simple fact is that, while the House of Commons did nothing for the Indians for many years, it was the religious associations that ahnost singlehandedly provided any kind of services to the Indians. The House of Commons has now finally decided to look into the matter of providing some assistance but it is trying to sweep out the old crew with a new broom, and I think this is unfair. The department should be providing some form of assistance to the Kenora Fellowship Centre because here is a body that has been set up on a community basis without any assistance from the federal department of Indian affairs yet because it has a religious affiliation it is being discriminated against, and so far no assistance has been forthcoming.
I understand I have a few minutes left, Mr. Chairman, so I should like to say a few words about program 5. We have been able to utilize program 5 to a great extent in my constituency. While this has caused a great deal of discontent in certain quarters as well as a great deal of criticism, I think the over-all effect of the program has been most beneficial
July 4, 1967

both to the Indians and to the communities concerned.
In the first place it does away with a great deal of the discrimination the Indians have had to face in that the Indians are involved in this program along with other people. It has had a great effect in providing the Indian for the first time with a great deal of self-confidence. He has been able to go into the classroom and compete with white people and has been able to find out that he is their equal. While you and I, Mr. Chairman, may admit this, the Indian has not admitted it as a fact. I think he has always considered himself to be a little below the white man, so this program has had an impact in increasing his self-confidence. It has had an impact in making him aware that the world is a much larger place than he thought.
It has also provided the opportunity to help us integrate the Indians into our communities. Like all integration this will be difficult. There are a lot of rough edges and there will be many incidents. But it is coming, it is worth while, and I for one look forward to it.
I understand that the minister of Indian affairs will be coming to the Kenora area on August 19 to attend the centennial celebrations of the Indians who come under treaty No. 3 in northwestern Ontario. I am looking forward to welcoming him at that time, and I am also looking forward to introducing him to the many people who are engaged in these local community activities that deal with Indian affairs.
The other point I should like to make is that I understand that some time this month the department of Indian affairs is sending some senior officials to northwestern Ontario specifically to deal with those areas north of the lakehead. At this time I should like to request the minister to send those officials, if possible, to the Sioux Lookout, Red Lake, and Kenora areas where they will be able to see the pattern of Indian development in this part of northwestern Ontario. A great deal has to be done and a great deal can be done, particularly in the Red Lake area where there is a shortage of manpower for the gold mines in that vicinity. The Indians have been tried for this work and have demonstrated that they are satisfactory employees if provided with the necessary counselling services and housing accommodation. I think that this would be an invaluable experience for the minister's officials and it cannot help but improve the lot of the Indians in that area.
Private Bills


Herman Maxwell Batten: Order. It being six o'clock and in order that the house may proceed to the consideration of private members' business, I do now leave the chair.



PROCEEDINGS ON ADJOURNMENT MOTION


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. It is my duty, pursuant to provisional standing order 39A, to inform the house that the questions to be raised at the time of adjournment tonight are as follows: the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), Public Service-legislation to increase pensions of retired civil servants; the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Choquette), External Affairs -establishment of new consulate closer to Florida; the hon. member for Bruce (Mr. Loney), National Health-construction at Wiarton, Ontario.
The house will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely private bills, public bills.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
The house in committee on Bill No. C-114, to incorporate United Investment Life Assurance Company-Mr. Wahn-Mr. Batten in the chair.
Herman Maxwell Batten: May I point out to the committee that this bill was amended in the standing committee and that the text of the amendment was printed in Votes and Proceedings of June 28, copies of which are available at the table.
Perhaps I should also point out that an error was made in the printing of the amendment in Votes and Proceedings of that date. At page 278, lines 13 and 14 following the heading "clause 8" should read: "the Company and so long as sections 16C to 16E of the said Act do not apply, then". I might add that I have checked this correction with the official amendment and it is a proper one.
On clause 1-Incorporation.


Mr. Peters:: Mr. Chairman, I did not follow the wording of the change which has just been read but I presume it amounts only to a grammatical correction in any case.

July 4, 1967
Private Bills
We have had something to say about this interesting bill on several occasions. It appears to be the standard form of incorporation but I believe a great departure has been made in two or three different ways. We are dealing with a life insurance company and I am of the opinion that there is absolutely no need for additional life insurance companies in Canada. This opinion, I may add, is shared by many of my hon. friends. Therefore I think we might reach a conclusion simply on the basis of whether or not Canadian interests would be served by the creation of another life insurance company which would do nothing more than is done by any other such company.
One of my hon. friends on the committee dealt with this point at some length. He is much opposed to the creation of any new life insurance companies for the simple reason that they would serve no purpose and in many cases they would even be detrimental to the economy. Obviously, if the business is spread around somebody in this field will starve to death. If there are enough insurance companies, their agents selling insurance will not be able to make a living.
There is another aspect which we must take into consideration before creating new life insurance companies. As I told a friend of mine not long ago, the activities of such companies are more detrimental to the Canadian economy than are those of the banks. Some of these companies probably have more assets to distribute than one of the smaller banks in Canada. The money collected by them does not just sit in the treasury. It continues to grow and the expansion of these funds is formidable. The result is that unless we are totally committed to the free enterprise system-


Mr. Byrne:: Hear, hear.


William Arnold Peters: I can well appreciate that the hon. member would applaud in any case. The free enterprise system means to some that everyone is able to do everything he wishes to the detriment of himself and others. There must be some limitation upon the number of people engaged in a particular field or no one will be able to make a living from it. If belief in free enterprise means that everybody does the same thing, one is coming close to the communist philosophy.
This company, I understand, is not a normal life insurance company. It is being formed by an investment company which over a period of time has been selling mutual 
funds in a satisfactory way. At the present time United Accumulative Fund Limited which will own and operate this company possesses something like $300 million in assets. This makes it a sizeable enterprise, no matter how you look at it, not one of the shoestring type which believe they are going into the business to manufacture money as many of the promoters of small life insurance companies believe. This company has decided that while it is necessary for an individual to establish some sort of retirement fund for his future it is just as necessary for him to provide himself with short-term life insurance to cover the period in which his investments are not large enough to provide the result he wishes to achieve. It is said that on a short-term basis term insurance is the answer.
I am one of those who agree. I think it is safe to say that an insurance policy bought today will never produce the standard of living or the equivalent of the value of that policy at any other time in our history. Even the Minister of Finance would be hard put to answer if he were asked to say whether on a short-term basis $1,000 invested in an endowment policy today would ten years from now provide more money or less money or more purchasing power or less than the same amount at the time of investment.
[DOT] (6:10 p.m.)
People who bought $1,000 worth of insurance 20 or 30 years ago now find it has a purchasing value of only $400 or thereabouts. But the $1,000 that they invested originally formed a large part of their wages or other resources. In this respect this company has gone a long way toward solving a problem that has always concerned me, that of companies selling endowment plans without any stipulation to provide for escalation to meet increases in the cost of living. The federal government was not that foolish. When we passed the Canada Pension Plan we included an escalation clause to provide for increased cost of living. To my knowledge no insurance company does this, and this company in going into term insurance does not make such provision.
I have seen the figures and have been surprised at the amount of accumulated funds this company has in its mutual investment plan. There have been fantastic gains in the mutual field. Holdings in the mutual fund have increased substantially over the last 20 or 30 years. But if a person had invested in this mutual fund 30 years ago and died in the interim, his estate would not have received
July 4, 1967

Private Bills
the accumulated gains that otherwise would have been paid had he lived. I understand that under its mutual fund this company buys some 60 individual stocks and has been successful in protecting its investments, but it still sells term insurance to investors in the fund so that relief is provided investors' relatives if an investor suddenly dies.
This is a highly controversial field. I have received representations from insurance companies that are highly pleased about mutual funds being combined with an insurance company. I would agree with these representations if the insurance concerned was anything but term insurance. A mutual fund will rise and fall according to two principal factors. One is the business acumen behind it and the other is the fluctuation in the nation's gross national product.
Under the Ontario workmen's compensation plan 100 per cent disability compensation paid to a miner 30 years ago amounted to about $80 a month. Today that compensation is in the neighbourhood of $400 a month, but no provision is made to increase the amount according to the cost of living factor. Year after year the compensation board reports to the government without recommending any form of escalation with respect to the compensation paid.
Endowment policies issued by insurance companies do not take into account escalation in our standard of living. Term insurance protects only on a short-term basis. It is the type of insurance that a company takes out on a young executive, someone it hopes will make a contribution to the company. It is the type of insurance taken out on a partnership. In this respect the bill attracts my support. I am sure it will encourage other insurance companies to put escalation clauses in their policies.
There are other reasons which lead me to support the bill. One is the type of amendment that has been accepted by the company. It is in keeping with statements we heard last night when coming out of the N.D.P. convention which showed a growing interest on the part of many people in the necessity to have Canadian ownership and control of large corporations in Canada. This company has gone a long way toward satisfying the wish that I am sure all members of parliament have to see greater control of corporations fall into the hands of Canadians. The way it has done so is quite complicated and unique, but the company is to be highly commended for its effort to satisfy this aspiration of Canadians.
[DOT] (6:20 p.m.)
The people in this company with whom I have dealt are Canadians. They have agreed to accept the amendment. Although initially the money put up for this company will be almost 100 per cent American and will be supplied by a group called United Fund Management Limited, under the terms of the amendment after a period of 10 years voting control over the insurance company will fall into the hands of Canadian representatives. As I see it, it will mean that the control will remain with the Canadians who have bought stock in the company because the non-resident, be it a corporate entity or otherwise, will not be able to vote either by proxy or in person if the control is over 50 per cent.
I think this is a great step forward. I know there are many members on the other side who have not paid any attention to these insurance companies and in fact have paid no attention to private bills. It is my opinion, however, that some of the things which happen during private members' hours warrant a much greater degree of attention than they receive. I believe that the development and the future of Canada to a great extent are involved in many of the bills which are presented during private members' hours.
This company, being large and wealthy, apparently will be the kind of company in respect of whose operations we in Canada would like to have some say. We would also like to be assured that it will operate in the interests of Canada. In the main the sums of money which are accumulated by insurance companies are invested in the United States rather than in Canada. It is surprising that although many of these companies are Canadian their investment picture indicates that they are investing their money in the United States. Canada finds itself in the peculiar position of always having to have subsidiary companies enter the country. When they do so they bring in money which in many instances we have lent them from our own Canadian companies. They bring this money in to invest in our natural and other resources. At the same time we have no control or say in respect of their investment or the subsidiary nature of the operations.


Maurice Rinfret: Order, please. I regret to interrupt the hon. gentleman but the time allotted to him has now expired. Shall clause 1 carry?

July 4. 1967
Private Bills


Edward Richard Schreyer: Mr. Chairman, the closing remarks of the hon. member for Timiskaming have given me an opportunity to make some further observations with regard to the incorporation of this insurance investment company and many others like it. During the course of the past few years, both in the federal parliament and the provincial legislatures, it seems to me that during private members' hour or private members' day, whichever is applicable, there has been a tendency toward the passage of more and more bills of this kind.
I believe many members would agree that there has been a proliferation of financial institutions in this country. Some will say, of course, that as our economy has been growing and developing it is the normal order of things to have an increase in the number of financial institutions such as finance companies, trust and loan companies, investment companies and the like as a means to provide some support for the development of our national economy. Surely, however, there must be some point at which it can be said with accuracy that the number of such institutions has gone beyond the optimum point. This is my distinct impression and I gather from the remarks of my colleague, the hon. member for Timiskaming, that it is his impression as well.
I do not believe that at either the provincial or federal level in this country there has been a definitive study of the number of such institutions which would be desirable. I realize it would be very difficult to ascertain just what the optimum number should be, but it seems to me we should make some effort in this direction. Otherwise we will just carry on passing the necessary private members' bills to incorporate an ever growing number of such firms. In the general order of things, when it becomes clear in the business and financial community that there have been too many incorporations, a process of merger and amalgamation then takes place. This is all part of the wheeling and dealing of the business world. Some of this is to be expected and perhaps some of it is even to be welcomed, but surely some of it does result in gross inefficiencies and affects the economic structure of this country.
With specific reference to Bill No. C-114, during the committee hearings the superintendent of insurance was questioned fairly closely by certain hon. members concerning whether or not the subject matter of this legislation was acceptable and met all the standard requirements and forms. It is rather [The Assistant Deputy Chairman.]
interesting to read some of the evidence in this regard. We find in the minutes of proceedings and evidence of the committee on finance, trade and economic affairs that apparently the superintendent of insurance is of the opinion that it is a bit irregular to incorporate a life insurance company which will specialize in term insurance. It would seem that his opinion is that the record over the years has been a rather poor one in so far as specialized term insurance companies being able to maintain solvency is concerned. Yet in the end he offers the opinion that perhaps this company will survive or remain solvent, not because it is a specialized type of insurance company but rather in spite of that and because of the power of a rather large and well established parent company in the United States. I believe the name given here is Waddell and Reid.
I do not intend to say anything in connection with the relationship between the corporation seeking to be established here and the fact that it will specialize in term insurance. I wish, however, to make some reference to the fact that in the opinion of the superintendent of insurance this specialized insurance corporation can remain solvent because of its backing by a parent firm in the United States.
This leads me to make some reference to the foreign ownership and control aspect which is involved here. I think I must disagree a little with my colleague from Timiskaming when he offers the opinion that the amendment, which will be new clause 8 of the bill, will provide an adequate safeguard that the corporation to be established will ultimately come under Canadian ownership and control.
[DOT] (6:30 p.m.)
The effect of the amendment as I understand it is that the majority ownership will eventually come into Canadian hands, but that control of the company might not, because of the interconnection of the operating company, another holding company, and the corporation which would be established by this bill. While there may be even a large degree of Canadian ownership it seems very evident that the control will remain effectively in the hands of the operating firm and one of the intermediary holding companies for an indefinite period of time. That is how I understand clause 8. If I am wrong I would accept a correction.
A private member is really hard put to-determine just how he should react to and vote on a bill of this kind. It would seem on.
July 4. 1967

the one hand to be relatively innocuous or harmless to keep on incorporating an ever growing number of this kind of financial or insurance corporation. When one thinks about them one must conclude there is an optimum point beyond which we should not go in this proliferation. To go beyond that point would only serve to hurt the economy and increase the cost of essential production. They are not really the kind of organization that produces anything. They will eventually do nothing but increase the cost of providing a financial service.
In a way I was somewhat surprised that another financial concern should want to incorporate yet another life insurance company, particularly because of the reaction of life insurance companies to the recommendations of the Carter commission report. These companies were not in favour of being forced out of business, and their reaction to some of the recommendations of the commission report was so negative and reflected so much of the black side one would have thought we would never again see legislation through which groups of financiers were seeking to incorporate another insurance company. The reaction would indicate that these people felt it very unprofitable to implement the recommendations of this report.
I must also react somewhat negatively to one aspect of this bill because it appears that the people behind it are really seeking to use a specialized kind of term insurance as an ancillarly operation to their main operation of selling mutual funds, stocks or shares. It seems that this kind of operation is more of a promotional one, and one must wonder out loud whether this in itself is sufficient justification for granting incorporation through this bill.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I have found a chart which indicates a point I was trying to make earlier. Before referring to it let me say that I believe the hon. member for Springfield is correct in his assessment of what this amendment does. The fact that Canadians may control 50 per cent of the stock of the company does not necessarily mean they control its operations. I know of some companies which have 90 per cent of their stock owned by Canadians, but their operations are not controlled by Canadians. I have heard it said that certain people who own only 3 per cent of the stock of a company control those companies. I do not know how they do this, or what is behind this type of phenomenon, but
Private Bills
I know it can happen. Let me give one example. United States control of the stock of the Bell Telephone Company of Canada is very small, but this company is in some way interrelated with the Bell company of the United States. That company has manufacturing companies which serve identical purposes. The United States company does control the Canadian company, and the influence of the United States company is much greater than would normally be the case in relation to its holdings.
I have not yet learned how this situation can occur but I am sure there are members in this house who do know. They certainly are not going to tell us because it would not be in their interest to do so. I was always of the opinion that if you owned 50 per cent of the stock of a company you could control it, but obviously this is not so. They tried to teach me at the university how this situation could occur but they were not very successful. Perhaps I should enrol again to find out, but I am not really sure that one could learn by taking an economics course.
The hon. member for Springfield is probably quite right in that this amendment does not go as far as he would like, but even he, with his greater knowledge in this field, must agree that it has gone a hell of a lot further than the original bill. It certainly goes a lot further toward what we want to accomplish than the next bill on the order paper.
I also agree with the hon. member for Springfield that it seems strange to amalgamate a term insurance company with a life insurance company, hard pressed as these life insurance companies are today. Let us not kid ourselves, they are spending a lot of money in attempting to incorporate about 20 or 30 companies each year. If they keep this up we will not refer to these companies by their names, but rather by number, and we will have to add the letters of the alphabet to that reference before long.
This chart I have, put out by United Investments and dated March 31, 1967, points out that the purchasing power of a dollar had dropped by 20 points from 1957 to 1967. It also showed that during the same period values on the Toronto Stock Exchange climbed 90 points.
[DOT] (6:40 p.m.)
So we see there has been an increase in stocks, and I presume there is a relationship-although I would not hazard a guess as to how you calculate it or what it is-in the gross national product of our country and,

July 4, 1967
Private Bills
although perhaps even more remote, in our standard of living. The Toronto stock market figures indicate that this has gone up to 90. In March, 1967, this company went up to 160 points. It seems to me, therefore, that if the standard of living in any degree follows the increase in the Toronto stock market, namely to 90, the fact that this company has gone to 160 proves that it has been a relatively good investment. Also the purchasing power of the dollar going 20 points the other way has not been a good thing.
It is very interesting to study some of the tables put out by the company. The table I have in my hand deals with mutual investment funds over an eight year period to December 31, 1965. If you invested $10,000 in 1957, by 1965 you would have accumulated $26,700. I think this would be a fairly good type of insurance policy. It means that at the end of this period you would have accumulated almost three times as much as you had invested. I believe this is not unreasonable when compared with the increase in our standard of living.
This table also indicates that if you had invested your money in a trust company at 4J per cent, by 1965 your investment would have increased in value tremendously. If you had invested $4,200 at 9 per cent interest-I suppose the 9 per cent applies to the mortgage and insurance field-at the end of the period your investment would be worth $20,000. Some very interesting conclusions can be drawn from the figures contained in this table. I must confess that I do not understand some aspects of the matter. However, if one had been born near the time of confederation, the table indicates that if you had invested $100 in 1871, by 1961 that investment would have been worth $325,000, and now it would be worth $360,890. I suppose this shows that our grandparents did not put their money in the right place.
I am not necessarily a proponent of mutual funds, but if the stock market, the standard of living and the cost of living continue to bear a relationship there is really no point in buying insurance. I have an endowment policy with an insurance company, so I know what I am talking about. You are as lucky as hell if you get your money back at the end of 20 years. The only way you can really win is by dying in the first year of the policy. If you die at any time later than this you have made a poor investment. I should have put my money into mutual funds some time ago, rather than into insurance. It seems to me that term insurance is for a person who wants

to take a gamble on the cost of living, the standard of living and increases in the stock market. He would be able to gamble in this respect with short term investment.
There are charts here that I do not understand. Mr. Humphrys should explain some of them to us because I do not understand them all. For this reason perhaps I should not quote them, because we will all become confused. I quote from a table dealing with a yearly insurance premium of $45 invested at 9 per cent. This gives you the figure of $114 and a yearly cost of $160. It would give you, if you died at 35 years of age during the initial year, $10,000. Your accumulated value of the investment would be $125. Your total benefit realized on death at 35 years of age in the first year of the policy would be $10,125. The table goes on to show that at age 64 you would have $525 worth of insurance but you would have a total asset of $17,569. From then on you would pay no more money on the term insurance, but by the time you reached 75-if any of us are that lucky-you would have $43,982 to leave to your heirs, I presume, because most of us find you can't take it with you.
For these reasons this type of insurance policy lends itself to a great deal of consideration. The day should be here when every hon. member who has insurance is taking a look at that insurance. Since becoming interested in these companies I have realized that I have never been a financial success, because I bought this type of life insurance, which has no value. It has certainly been a damned poor investment. Unless I had died in the first year of the policy the investment is not really worth while. It is too late now to do anything about that, and I will be lucky to get my money back at the end of the insurance period. If the value of the dollar keeps going down I will not get a quarter of my money back. They have taken 75 per cent of my investment and I shall not benefit from it unless we have another depression; and none of us wants that.
Those members who are really serious about the proliferation of insurance companies will have to consider carefully this aspect of the matter in terms of what people are getting out of the insurance companies and how they are to get their money back. I do not mean how they are to get their money back in terms of dollars, because I am sure that if you buy an insurance policy worth $1,000 you will get $1,000 back, in terms of dollars. But if the dollar is worth only 50
July 4, 1967

cents you will not get back $1,000 in purchasing power but only $500. If the value of the dollar drops lower than 50 cents, you will get even less back, although in terms of actual dollars you will obviously get them back.
I do not know of any member of parliament who stood up in this house and opposed the escalation clause in the Canada Pension Plan. But this is really what we are talking about. Whatever money is invested by an individual, we want him to have the kind of retirement that the money would buy when invested. If you look over the history of the last 20 years you see that the insurance dollar is worth only about one third its original value by the time a person retires. The escalation clause in the Canada Pension Plan will prevent this situation developing.
I do not know whether the sponsor of the bill wishes to explain the other point raised. It is my understanding that the amendment will provide Canadian ownership, to a degree, over a period of time.
0	(6:50 p.m.)
I was not so much impressed by the wording of the bill-because frankly the legal terms were not totally understandable to me-as by the fact that the officials of the company who discussed this matter with several of us were interested in establishing a Canadian company that would be working for the interests of Canadians. Obviously their interests were the same as were ours. Of course the conflict arises in that whoever has the money has the right of decision. However
1	believe this amendment will cover some of the points that I have been making and I hope it will receive the support of the committee.
The Assislanl Deputy Chairman: 1 regret to interrupt the hon. gentleman but the time allotted to him has expired.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 2 to 9 inclusive agreed to.
Preamble agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Tardif):: When shall the said bill be read the third time?


William Arnold Peters: By leave, now.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Wahn moved: the third reading of the bill.
Private Bills


Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, I rise now to speak on the motion. As a preliminary I should like to quote the words of the hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr. Wahn) spoken at the start of the committee proceedings. He said the following:
Mr. Chairman, since this bill was given second reading in the house there have been discussions between the officials of the company and interested members with a view to adding to the bill a provision which is designed to assure a degree of Canadian ownership over a period of years.
Apparently that result is to be accomplished within a ten year period. However, I am speaking now in view of the fact that I was one of the members involved in discussing the matter of Canadian ownership of insurance, trust and other companies both in this session and earlier. I was one of those who entered into discussions with the officials of the company, although almost invariably in the past we have resisted the invitation of company officials to enter into discussions with them, because we consider that in Canada lobbying does not form part of our deliberative and parliamentary process and that in any event it should not be engaged in by a small number of people. In this case I was not referring in particular to the United Investment Life Assurance Company or its subsidiaries, but to other insurance or finance companies seeking to be incorporated. In view of the fact that my colleague, the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters), I and others have over the years been in the forefront in promoting the concept of Canadian ownership, we have been subjected to invitations to meet privately with corporate officials and invariably we have resisted such invitations. In this situation the company officials came voluntarily to us to express their agreement with what we had said publicly, not to dissuade us from our course but to try to work in co-operation with us with a view to attaining what was our aim, which also happened to be the aim of the company. All this is now of course a matter of public record. I merely mention this to indicate that this is not a matter about which we are very happy, partly because of the aspect of lobbying although perhaps it was necessary in the circumstances.
It may well be that as a result of the consultations which have been held between the promoters of companies and members of the house who are not on the government side-because invariably in the past company officials have been in contact almost exclusively with the chairman of the committee,

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs who is a government member, or with members of the government party because they thought that this was the best way to attain their objectives-there will be a change in the rules and procedures of this house. It may well be that we are in the process of embarking on a new way of dealing with legislation.
The reason that I am making this point is that I was one of those involved in the discussions that led up to what I consider to be a desirable end, and therefore found it necessary to make this brief comment before the bill receives third reading.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Tardif):: Order. The hour for the consideration of private
members' business has now expired and the house will now resume the business which was interrupted at six o'clock.

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



DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT

[Stage Direction]
1. Departmental administration, $2,209,800.
Maurice Rinfret: Order. Since it is seven o'clock the committee stands adjourned until eight o'clock and I do now leave the chair.
At seven o'clock the committee took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The committee resumed at 8 p.m.
Philip Bernard Rynard: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask the minister about the work that is being carried out by the Company of Young Canadians in the areas of the north. How many ventures or how many projects have they undertaken? I am asking these questions because of the many rumours suggesting that this group leaves a great deal to be desired. I am dealing with the matter now because this is one of the fields in which the Prime Minister felt the Company of Young Canadians would be very active and useful. I am a little bit disturbed because I have a report here which would indicate that perhaps they are not as useful as the Prime Minister thought they would be. The report reads:
[DOT]-an unkempt collection of youthful layabouts held a five day meeting. The 69 members who

turned up for some or all of the sessions spent $4,738 on transportation alone; $226 on telephone calls and $3,930 on food and accommodation. All this produced not so much as a single report; the parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister advised the house that none could be expected, although he believed a member of the staff had made some record of the sessions.
Now, Mr. Chairman, that is a very disturbing statement. I raise the matter also because of the cost. There are only 66 volunteers in this Company of Young Canadians, and that is 2,440 short of the number the Prime Minister expected. In spite of this, the estimates covering this group have gone up to $2,445,000. This is the amount that will be provided in the next year. I believe these questions deserve answers. What have they done in this department of young Canadians in comparison with the accomplishments the Prime Minister expected? Their figures break down to about $37,000 per volunteer, or about equal to a tax of 12 cents on every man, woman and child in Canada. This is not very good for a government that finds itself, in boom times, with one of the largest deficits ever faced in the history of Canada. This deficit situation is constantly eroding the fixed income and pensions of those who have retired. It is also increasing the cost of living, and now we have the highest cost of living in this country of all time, coupled with the highest taxes.
Perhaps there are other instances, Mr. Chairman, in which this company did not perform very well. Since we are considering the estimates of the Indian affairs branch, I should like to know just what functions this group performed and what the Canadian taxpayer is going to get for his $2,444,800. I should like to know also how many Indian hospitals are operating today, and how many are operated by the Indian affairs branch? Has there been a decrease? How many have been taken over by the provinces or municipalities? I should like to know, too, how many doctors are now employed by the Indian affairs branch and how great has been the decrease, if any, over the last few years?
Then, Mr. Chairman, I should like to know how many of these doctors operate under medicare plans, that is when they are outside of the Northwest Territories or in the provinces. Does the provincial hospital commission check the regulations of the hospitals under the Indian affairs branch.
[DOT] (8:10 p.m.)
I am also very interested in the government's educational program. Out of a total budget of $100 million, as the minister says we
July 4, 1967

are spending $47 million on education. Integration into the educational system is proceeding quickly. This is all to the good if the end results are proving fruitful. Indian children are attending school in my home town and are doing very well. I think it is very worth while to integrate Indian children with white school children in our town schools, with all the advantages of the generally superior facilities in those town schools.
I should like to know from the minister how many children are attending the primary and secondary schools. I also want to know the method of payment involved. Perhaps I should know the answer, but I do not know whether a per capita tax basis is used or not. I should also like to ask the minister whether any Indian reserves have been sold outright or abandoned, how many have been put on a long term lease and what properties have been leased across Canada by Indian reserves. I ask the minister what part his department has played in these negotiations. Does some body or company who wants to develop the area deal with the Indians directly and, if so, what part does the department play in those negotiations? It is important to see to it that any deals that are made are equitable and the money properly invested in securities.
I should also like to ask the minister whether the department has made an assessment of how many Indian reserves on islands are close enough to the mainland for it to be practical economically to build a bridge or causeway to the mainland. I have spoken to the minister about this matter before, and I should like to give him a case in point. I have in mind Christian island, which is a mile and a half across from the mainland. The deepest point in the channel is approximately 17 feet. This island is about seven miles long. Many school children come across to the mainland to attend secondary school at Midland and Penetang', and they cross by boat. In the stormy part of the year and when the lake is frozen over it is difficult to get across for about a month. Not only that, Mr. Chairman, but often they have to stand on the wharf and wait for the boat morning and night, and it can be pretty cold.
Has the department looked into the economic aspects of this situation? I expect the costs would be shared, because the provincial government has already installed hydro and there is a radio telephone system on the island. Many properties on the island have been rented, but the only transportation to the mainland is by the boat Hooey. As the number of cottages on the island increases the
Supply-Indian Affairs situation worsens, and on many occasions the boat is loaded and people wait on week ends. Roads are being built on the island so there will be cars taken across. These cars have to be ferried across by scow.
At this point I should like to congratulate the minister on being someone you can talk to, who will listen to your argument or the point you are raising with him. The minister pays the most careful attention and I congratulate him on this. I realize he has a big department to manage. I also know that ten years ago the provincial government and federal government both said that in another ten years a bridge or causeway to Christian island would be feasible economically. Boom times have been prevailing ever since, so I should like to know what both these governments have in mind in this regard and particularly this government, as they have the administration of the island.
I should like to explore this matter a little further by asking the minister to look into the economics of the situation. What does it cost to keep this boat in service and to keep it manned? What is the cost of maintaining the facilities at Cedar Point? For years a new dock had to be constructed every second year or so, as the minister will discover on looking over past estimates, but about seven to eight years ago the government headed by the present Leader of the Opposition constructed a dock with a proper breakwater which has proved to be trouble free. I should like to know what could be gained by building a causeway and opening up the island in that way. As I say, houses on the island are being rented so some sort of policy must have been set. If we are going to continue to use the present dock, let us utilize it to the full, which may mean additional costs in facilities.
I realize that the minister will have to consult with the provincial government before he can give me an answer, but if he follows his general practice I will hear from him during the next month whether this project is economically feasible. As I say, I have raised the matter before and both houses indicated ten years ago that such a project would be feasible in ten years time. In the meantime there has been great growth and I should like to know whether they feel this project can now go ahead.
If it is proceeded with it would be of great advantage to the Indian children. They would get to school more easily. At the moment the buses wait at Cedar Point, being parked out

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs at night and having to start cold in the mornings. These Indian children do not find it easy to reach school and I know that the minister would like to help them in whatever way he can.
The minister has mentioned integration of Indian children, which I am sure is a wonderful idea. However, I was a little puzzled by a report I saw in a Toronto newspaper one day which indicated there might be 15,000 Indians in that city who were experiencing difficulties. They were not being assimilated into the community, but sticking together in their own groups. Just last week an Indian girl was strangled to death in a certain part of the red light district in Toronto-that is, if they have a red light district; I do not know whether they admit to that or not. But if it is true there are 15,000 Indians in Toronto many of whom are not being assimilated and looked after properly, then what is to be gained by taking these Indians from their reserves and placing them in a society in which they do not mesh?
I should like to know what the minister has to say on this score because I think it raises a very important point. It is not good enough to take Indians off the reserves or encourage them and send them to our big cities where we let them disintegrate morally and socially. I cannot vouch personally for the truth of this story, but it was in the press and perhaps the minister read it, and generally when there is smoke there is fire.
I should like to dwell for a few moments on the restoration of Cahiague in my area which is situated in the neighbourhood of Warminster. The minister has been very sympathetic to this project, but I understand that it is not going ahead very quickly this summer. A lot of work has been done by Professor Emerson in the past. The northern end at Martyrs Shrine has been developed and hundreds of thousands of dollars spent. I was there last Saturday and saw that the whole Indian village has been restored. Yet I am told that Cahiague in former times was a bigger Indian city-if they called them cities-than Fort Ste-Marie.
[DOT] (8:20 p.m.)
I am all in favour of what has been done at the shrine. I wish to congratulate all parties concerned, including the provincial government and the federal government which did play a part in this restoration-the Department of Public Works dredged the river and gave other help. However, I suggest the minister should consider once again the position
(Mr. Rynard.]
of some of these historic sites and ask himself whether we should not be doing something more than is being done at present. The hon. gentleman has probably studied this question and is as well aware of these things as I am. He knows that this area is rich in historic value-rich in the spiritual values of yesterday. The Jesuit priests came to this area-Father Caron was among those who came up with Champlain-and it was here that every one of those Jesuits that followed him paid the supreme sacrifice for their Christian ideals. It was to Christian island that these people fled-I think there were only 29 of them left after the Iroquois attacked and slaughtered most of them. I should like to see further attention paid to this site because I feel our efforts are probably lagging behind here.
In closing, let me say I realise there are differences of opinion with regard to the way in which Indian affairs should be handled. It is true one can take Indians from the reserves and settle them in the big cities. But what is the use of doing this if we-and they-lose sight of the very reasons for which they were moved into the cities.
In conclusion, I should like the minister to turn his attention to the matters I have brought up. He has always done so in the past and I hope for an answer from him either this evening or in the near future.


Mr. Roxburgh:: I simply wish to record in Hansard a very special event which took place last Friday, June 30-the presentation of a piece of true Indian pottery by Mrs. Oliver Smith of the Six Nations Indian Reserve at Ohsweken in the County of Brant to Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. In return, Mrs. Smith was of course received by Her Majesty. What greater honour could anyone, any nation, receive?
We who know these true Canadians and live near them are greatly honoured and privileged to have such a lovely lady as Mrs. Smith, who comes from the historic Six Nations Reserve, represent us on such occasions.
I should like to add a piece of information, which possibly few members have heard. Mrs. Smith, who represented us in presenting this piece of pottery, is none other than a sister of Tonto, that great television star. Might I also add that her very lovely daughter, an educated daughter who has taught school, won the Miss Ontario beauty contest a few years ago.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
July 4, 1967


John Maxwell Roxburgh: Mr. Chairman, the Indians of the Six Nations form one of our most progressive groups of true Canadians in educational and cultural matters. We call to mind such names as the Andersons-incidentally, the present chief is an Anderson-the Jamiesons, the Montagues, the Montures, the Kings, the Moses, the Hills and many others. Last, but not least, we think of the Longboats and of that great distance runner Tom Longboat who made a name not only for his nation but for Canada.
A few moments ago I said the Six Nations represent advancement. Let me add that they do not forget the past-and it is most important that no nation, no people, should forget the past, because if they do they have no guide by which to enter the future. They produce a pageant every autumn, acting out the history of their nation and of Indian life in a natural setting of water and trees. Hundreds of people attend this colourful program each year, leaving with increased knowledge of the Indian people and their ways. But to me, and I am sure to the Indians, most important of all is the fact that in performing this pageant they are keeping before their children, and future generations of their people, the wonder of their ancient history and culture. May it last for ever.


Howard Earl Johnston: I should like to raise a point which I believe has been brought up annually for some years-I recall my hon. friend from Cariboo drawing attention to it last year. I refer to the tax imposed on those who have to enter national parks for business purposes, not intending to spend time in the park, as a park.
A toll station has been set up on the trans-Canada highway in British Columbia and a toll is charged, ostensibly for admission to the park. Admittedly one payment is good for entering all the national parks in Canada for the rest of the year in which it is made. However, this is not of much use to a member of the public whose travel in a national park has been undertaken for purposes not at all concerned with the park itself, and who would not be visiting any of the other national parks during the course of the year.
[DOT] (8:30 p.m.)
It seems to me there is an injustice here and a principle that is being violated. There is taxation of a section of the population with nothing given in return. The problem has been heightened by the fact that the commission on redistribution, in a complete lapse of
Supply-Indian Affairs good sense or reason, put together my constituency and that of Kootenay East to make a new hybrid called Okanagan-Kootenay. The main bodies of population lie at opposite ends of the new constituency. The meeting point for these two groups of people must be half way between them, and that makes it the town of Golden.
All of the political parties in the area are in the course of reorganizing constituency organizations. This means that during any given year hundreds of people from all the varied political parties-and they are all represented in that region-will make the trip to Golden for purposes that have nothing to do with the national park through which they travel. Yet they will have to pay the toll, and coming as they do from the park-like beauty of the Okanagan it is quite possible they would not feel the urge to visit any other national parks.
I wonder what is the revenue obtained through this means and whether it is not within the capability of the department, so ably served by the minister, to come up with some solution that would separate park visitors from people just using the trans-Canada highway. In our literature on the trans-Canada highway we boast that it is toll free, but at that point in British Columbia it is not. This fee becomes for many people a toll to use the trans-Canada highway and not a toll to visit the national parks of Canada. I submit that legitimate park visitors should be separated from people who have to travel this route by necessity, or else the tax should be applied evenly across the country, whereby $2 would be collected from all automobile users and applied to the upkeep of the national parks. I think some equitable system could be worked out by which this toll could be removed from people who have to use that highway for purposes other than visiting this national park.


Mr. Fawcett:: Before dealing specifically with Indian affairs, Mr. Chairman, I would like to say I think the minister should be commended for what appears to be a much more realistic and reasonable approach to the whole problem of Indian affairs than we have witnessed for a good many years. From the numerous press releases and circulars that cross my desk, it seems to me the minister is very interested in his department and is trying to do a good job with the means available to him. I have just one question I would like him to answer later, and it concerns the integration project at Elliot Lake.

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs
It was decided to open up about 20 of the abandoned houses at Elliot Lake and move some 20 Indian families from 200 miles north of Sioux Lookout into them. I understand the men of the families were given $15 a day to cover expenses for themselves and their families while they were sent to the school of continuing education at Elliot Lake, in order to gain technical and vocational training of some sort. I am not sure how far this project has moved along and I would be very interested to know whether it is meeting with success, because I understand it is one of the first attempts to integrate Indian and white populations.
There is one Indian reserve in my riding. I spent some time there and was astounded to find that only about half of the homes on the reserve were being occupied. I am speaking of the Mattagami Indian reserve, about 24 miles north of the Canadian National main line. The Indians told me one of the reasons they were moving out of the reserve was lack of facilities, particularly lack of a decent road to get into and out of the reserve.
There was a serious problem in the winter months if anyone on the reserve got sick. I believe at one time the provincial department of lands and forests kept a road clear during the winter months, but then its efforts slackened. In fact it stopped plowing the road for a time, and the only way the Indians could reach outer civilization was by snowshoeing out to the village. However, an arrangement was made between the Indian agent and the provincial department of lands and forests as a result of which the department agreed to keep the road cleared. But this is not an easy proposition, and in times of bad storm it is not unusual for this little community to be isolated for two or three days.
When there I also inquired about the financial status of the Indians. Those best off made around $1,200 a year, and over all their annual earnings varied between $600 and $1,200 a year. Naturally they were having a difficult time getting by. It is an area where groceries and other things fetch high prices.
At one time it was a good trapping area, but as most hon. members know, trapping today is not a very profitable enterprise. As a result these Indians are in a precarious position, particularly during the winter months. Their houses, in effect only shells, are in a deplorable condition.
Some of the Indians have moved into the nearby village, where they have obtained employment, are doing reasonably well, and

have integrated to a reasonable extent with the white population. I inquired what they thought was the best solution to their problem. They said they felt they were being discriminated against, and felt that employment could be found for them in their natural environment up in the north woods. They were a little dismayed that the provincial department of lands and forests were using students, and what I believe are called junior rangers, during the summer months to clear out parkland, of which there is a considerable acreage in the area. They felt this was an area where they could definitely do just as good or a better job. They also believed it would help them solve the financial problems. I realize this is a matter which would have to be worked out in conjunction with the provincial government, but I believe it is something worth looking into.
[DOT] (8:40 p.m.)
My colleague, the hon. member for Springfield, mentioned the matter of guiding. Any of us who come from the northern part of any province realize that guiding can be a quite profitable means of employment. I believe it is regrettable that something is not done to ensure that any party going into the woods must be accompanied by a guide. Here again I understand that this is something which has to come under the jurisdiction of the provinces. I think, however, it should be pointed out that any party which goes out with an Indian as a guide does not leave a forest fire behind when leaving the woods. I think this also is something well worth considering.
I was quite interested to read a press release in the Toronto Globe and Mail dated February 20, 1967, wherein it is reported that the minister stated that 215,000 reserve Indians would be given their emancipation, as he put it, under new legislation which would be brought out by his department. I am wondering how this is progressing and whether it is feasible.
I believe it was the hon. member for Peace River who made a statement with which I agree very much. He said that you cannot adopt an over-all policy for Indians in general, but that each area must be dealt with on the basis of what is required in that particular area. I believe this is quite evident. I have received correspondence from Indians in various parts of Ontario and of British Columbia, and it would seem to me that the problems in one area do not apply in so far as another area is concerned. What we must
July 4, 1967

realize more than anything else, I believe, is that it is necessary to place ourselves in the position of the Indian, so that we will understand his thinking. After all he is being subjected to our rules and regulations with very little say in regard to how they affect his destiny.
I believe the minister's idea of giving self rule to the Indians, if it can be carried out effectively-and I realize this cannot be done overnight-would be one of the biggest steps forward, because I think it is the only way the Indians will eventually integrate with the white population and become self sufficient citizens.
Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to take up very much more time. In passing I should like to say I was quite impressed by the remarks made by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River prior to the supper recess. Having been in that area I realize the great problem there. I should like to commend him for his very forthright statements in connection with the problems, and also for the comments he made with regard to the manner in which he thinks these problems should be handled.


Mr. Noble:: Mr. Chairman, I promise to be very brief. I should just like the minister to clear up something concerning which I attempted to obtain an answer the other day. During his term of office has he taken any initiative in the development of a national park in Ontario. Surely he must realize there is a great need for a national park development in this province. We have here a concentration of industrial workers who in ever increasing numbers will be in need of much more recreational and park accommodation in the years ahead.
Does not the minister think that no time should be lost in acquiring and preserving for posterity some of our Ontario wilderness areas, which are disappearing at a rapid rate. In these areas our many species of wildlife might have a haven suitable for their continued reproduction. A sizeable national park in Ontario would bring big dividends for time unlimited.


Frank Howard: Mr. Chairman, perhaps the debate at this time on Indian affairs at least, which is the subject matter in which I have a stronger interest than some others which come under the minister's jurisdiction, may be rather futile and simply a bit of an exercise. I say "futile" in the sense that such a debate may have little opportunity to influence government policy which, I believe, is
Supply-Indian Affairs the prime purpose of debate. It also may provide little opportunity for public expression of some of the feelings which the native Indian people have about their own destiny and the activities of the government.
One of the matters which has interfered with an opportunity to go fully into the matter of Indian affairs in any great depth has been that of time. If we harken back just a few years I believe we will see that over the last three fiscal years, including this one, there has not yet been an opportunity, at least that was realized, to go with any great detail into the matter of Indian affairs and government policy. In 1965 there was not much opportunity for debate, because that was the year in which we had a summer recess of parliament, with the promise that the estimates would be considered in the fall of that year. Instead of having the estimates we had an election, which interfered with any orderly consideration of matters in parliament.
The estimates in respect of the expenditures for 1965 really were considered retroactively, or after the expenditures had been made and at a time when we were in a new session to concern ourselves with the spending program for 1966. During the last session the estimates of the Indian affairs branch were referred to a committee. That committee made what I considered to be an extremely wise decision. It expressed the hope and desire that very soon the members of the committee would have an opportunity to visit Indian communities and the Indian people in order to examine at first hand as much as they possibly could the situation in the Indian communities, and in order to have an opportunity to speak intimately with the native people with regard to their feelings concerning Indian affairs.
[DOT] (8:50 p.m.)
We have gone over this ground before, but I want to mention only briefly in passing that for one reason or another the committee found itself frustrated in its desire to carry out what is conceived to be a legitimate undertaking. The first thing that happened was that the committee decided it would be advantageous to break up into subcommittees, allowing easier handling of the situation and more visits to more communities. Accordingly a report was made to the house, but somewhere along the line there was a substitution by government in respect of committee authority, disallowing the subcommittees.

July 4. 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs
Last year in the fall, when the committee finally got around to meeting, tentative arrangements to visit a number of Indian communities were made. One community was in Quebec and the others were in the southern part of Ontario. It was found then that an insufficient number of members expressed a desire to make the visit. Consequently they could not be made because of a lack of quorum, and they were cancelled.
This cancellation caused a tremendous amount of ill feeling on the part of the native people in the communities to be visited because the advance arrangements which had been made were cancelled. The committee then came back to the house and asked again for authority to divide into subcommittees. This authority was forthcoming and the subcommittees did visit the Indian communities of Caughnawaga and St. Regis. I might add that prior to this, members of the committee had travelled to meet with the provincial advisory council, or board, of Ontario. Subsequent to the visit to Caughnawaga the committee laid out a tour of some of the communities of British Columbia, but this trip was cancelled. I might add that in conjunction with the British Columbia trip it was planned that some of the committee members en route to British Columbia would take the opportunity of stopping in Winnipeg to hold a watching brief in an Indian-Metis conference there.
These proposed trips were beset by obstacles, and the end of the session arrived. Because the committee early in the session last year conceived the idea of making visits to Indian communities in order to obtain an assessment of Indian affairs, it was decided to give only a scant or cursory examination of the estimates. Accordingly it reported the estimates to the house, where they were considered very briefly. Last session a time factor militated against any examination in depth of Indian affairs. During this session we are faced with the rules which impinge upon our consideration of these estimates. I am not complaining about these rules as they were agreed to by the house; nor am I trying to be objectionable in what I am saying. I am trying to make what I consider to be a factual statement, indicating that during this and the past two fiscal years there has been no opportunity to go into a detailed examination of Indian affairs.
To that extent I suggest that we may well be indulging in a futile exercise in attempting to influence government policy in respect of Indian affairs. That should be the purpose of

our debate; that is, to put across a point of view in the hopes that it will be accepted. It may well be that we are engaging in an exercise of futility because at least a part of the debate in parliament should reflect public thinking. I am rather inclined to think that this parliament is behind the times in trying to reflect the thinking and feelings of our native people in relation to government policy.
The minister in his opening remarks on June 9 pointed out that perhaps the salvation of the Indian people rested in the hands of those of the younger generation, and I think he made mention of the age of 26 years. It is true the wealth and progress of any group rests in the hands of youth because our future leaders come from that group. The younger people among the native population are of a different sort than their parents or elders. The older Indian people were more gentle, trusting and more resigned to accept their lot and position. Speaking in general terms, the older Indians expressed their dislike for government policy by ignoring it. In other words, instead of attending meetings for the purpose of discussing certain matters which might influence their position they avoided them. They showed their objection by non-participation.
As I say, younger people have a different concept and philosophy. They have been struck by the situation which exists in societies outside the Indian community. As a result of education and participation in the armed forces during the second world war, coupled with greater mobility, these young people have been able to travel, even with their limited resources and incomes, and have found out what is the situation in society outside the reservations. They want to know why there is this difference, and the answers they receive are not satisfactory. These people are very dissatisfied because of this new knowledge, coupled with their understanding of the history over the past decade of deceit on the part of non-Indian explorers and governments. I am sure the minister will not disagree that in years past there has been a great deal of mishandling of the rights of Indian people. Because of this history and the knowledge that they have been unfairly treated at the hands of non-Indians our Indian communities are becoming discontent. As a result they may take stronger action than we would like to see.
We must recognize that forces of discontent exist in these Indian communities, and these
July 4, 1967



people are beginning to discuss how they can use their strength to gain what they consider to be just and right.
[DOT] (9:00 p.m.)
Practically every day in the past few years they and we have been able to read about the civil rights movement in the United States, which is a movement on behalf of a group of people who are distinct because they have skin of a different colour from ours. The native Indian has an affinity with them in that regard and in regard to the matter of fundamental rights. I hope we can overcome the combination of these two forces by exhibiting conscientiously and deliberately in every program of the government, by example and precept, the fact that government, government forces, parliament and the non-Indian community has respect for the native Indian people as a group and as individuals. I hope we can exhibit attitudes that will beget trust on the part of the Indian people toward government policies. I hope we can convince them that we will honour all the dealings that take place with their peoples.
It is no good engendering this trust in just one, two or a dozen instances. It must be a persistent, deliberate, conscious policy carried out at all levels of government and in all dealings that government has with our native people. It will take a period of time to overcome the inheritance the Indian people have in so far as their dealings at the hands of government and non-Indians are concerned.
Mr. Chairman, I might mention a few things in this regard to indicate, at least in so far as an assessment of this matter by the native people is concerned, where there is or has been a lack of openness and trustworthy dealings. Some time ago when the minister's predecessor was in office he announced the formation of an interdepartmental committee to deal with hunting, fishing and game rights of the native people. This was the result of persistent questioning in the house by members following the decisions made in connection with the Migratory Birds Convention Act, and a few other court cases of that sort.
When the announcement was made about the establishment of this committee the general understanding of the native Indian people was that the committee would be able to come up with some recommendations and suggestions as to what should be done. The minister at one stage when I inquired into this matter said the policy of the government was to let the courts-I am paraphrasing what he said-delineate the areas of dispute;
Supply-Indian Affairs in other words, let the courts make the decisions for or against the native people on hunting and fishing rights in respect of whatever instances were brought before the courts. This supposedly would give some guide line to government, which could then act upon the decisions made by the courts. The government could then see what legal impediments might exist in the way of doing something to cope with the disgruntlement of the native Indian people over loss of their hunting and fishing rights.
It is the minister's responsibility and duty, if he feels it is in the public interest, or for some other reason, not to make public that report of the interdepartmental committee, even though the minister said a precis of the report would be prepared and made available to all hon. members. I have been away from the house for the past week, but I do not think it has yet been prepared. In any event, this is the sequence of events: First, there was the announcement that this matter would be dealt with by an interdepartmental committee; then there was the announcement that the report of the interdepartmental committee would not be made public, and then the declaration that the courts would make decisions that would lay out the areas where disagreement might exist. This has all built up in the minds of a number of native Indian people with whom I have spoken and who have been watching this matter with some interest the understanding that once again government has not been true and faithful to them.
I am not saying that this is in fact the thought in the mind of the minister. I am sure it is not. But I tell him this is the thought in the minds of a number of native Indian people. This is what should be paramount and what should motivate our efforts in doing all we can to assist native Indian people. We must exhibit to them the full degree of respect that is necessary and show them that we are trustworthy in our dealings. That is just one example, Mr. Chairman.
Another example involves my own province of British Columbia. There not too long ago the minister of municipal affairs, Mr. Campbell, announced that the provincial government was desirous that Indian reserves should become municipalities, and he hoped that one of the Indian communities in his constituency of Campbell River would become the first Indian community to become a municipality. This on the surface may sound good, but in fact in so far as British Columbia is concerned it could very well mean that any Indian band which decided to

July 4. 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs become a municipality would lose every inch of its reserve land. None of them want to do this.
A few years ago there was a move by the Metlakatla people, near Prince Rupert-this was 15 or 20 years ago-to become a municipal structure under the laws of British Columbia. I ask the committee to remember that the Metlakatla people still feel the influence of Mr. Duncan, a missionary who was sometimes rather brutal and cruel in his dealings with native people but none the less had an influence upon them which exists in large measure today both amongst the people in Metlakatla, British Columbia, and their brothers and cousins in Metlakatla, Alaska. They desired to become a municipality. One of the difficulties that arose was that if those people became a municipality they would become enfranchised as a band under the Indian Act; in other words, they would lose as a band, and each individual in it, status as an Indian within the meaning of the Indian Act.
[DOT] (9:10 p.m.)
The minute that came to pass, the provisions of an order in council passed by the provincial government would come into play. This is the damaging part. I should like to make reference to order in council 1036 made July 29, 1938. It is still in existence. The members of the executive council in attendance at that cabinet meeting and who made this order in council were Mr. Hart, Mr. Weir, Mr. Wismer, Mr. MacPherson, Mr. MacDonald and Mr. Pearson. That is not our Prime Minister but a gentleman who used to be the minister of labour of British Columbia. This was at a time when a Liberal government was in office in British Columbia under Hon. John Hart. This order in council relates to the land question in British Columbia, which still has not been solved. It points out that certain lands set out in the schedule to the Indian affairs settlements act-and the lands are the reserves which were set up at that time and which still exist except those parts which have been sold or surrendered-would be conveyed to the federal government to be held in trust for the native people. This was subject to condition, and the important part is that this is made subject to the condition that in the event of any Indian tribe or band in British Columbia at some future time becoming extinct, any lands hereby conveyed for such tribe or band and not sold or disposed of as heretofore provided, or any unexpended fund being the proceeds of any such sale, shall be conveyed or repaid to the grantor. In

other words, if an Indian band-and let us remember that the word "band" is legally defined in the Indian Act, and not a hereditary concept of a political or social unit of Indian people-becomes extinct, the reserve lands which it held previously revert to the provincial government. The two lawyers with whom I have discussed this matter, one of whom is very learned and knowledgeable in the field of Indian affairs and land titles, are of the opinion that if an Indian band becomes enfranchized, it then becomes extinct as an entity under the Indian Act and its reserve lands go back to the province. This was the barrier that prevented the people in Metlakatla some 15 years ago from becoming a municipality, the barrier being that the provincial government in Victoria, when Mr. Bob Sommers was the minister of lands and forests, refused to give up its authority, which it relegated to itself under this order in council, and refused to give up its rights to the reserve lands. So the Metlakatla people, who were desirous of becoming a political unit in British Columbia, found that if they decided to make any progress whatever in their political structure they would lose their reserve lands.
I submit that the same situation exists today. When Mr. Campbell, our minister of municipal affairs, starts speaking about the desirability of the Indian bands in British Columbia becoming municipalities, the native Indian people who know of this order in council and who have concerned themselves about the land problem in British Columbia for more years than I have been alive, say to themselves "You are not speaking with a straight tongue, Mr. Campbell, because you are asking us to become municipalities, and if we do so, the land that we now hold as reserve land will end up in the hands of the provincial government, plus the money from the proceeds of the sale of that land."
This is another example of the type of government pronouncements which are not backed by an honest and faithful declaration, which makes the Indian people sceptical of government dealings. The British Columbia Indian reserves minerals resources act, an agreement entered into by the government of Canada and the province of British Columbia in 1943, and endorsed by a statute of this parliament, is another example of bad faith on the part of governments. That act still exists on the statute books.
I gave two or three examples to point out that not only must the government declare, as the minister has done on a number of
July 4, 1967

occasions, that it is the government's intention to act honourably and faithfully and to develop a trustworthy relationship between the Indian people and the government of Canada, but must support such a declaration by action. Where this is not so, words become futile and will not have the beneficial influence that they should have in developing a decent rapport between the government and the Indian community.
There are many other items with which I could deal if I had the time to do so. I will only say that this is the third year in a row when parliament has not had the time to examine Indian affairs in any depth and to engage in a debate by an examination of the department, by making proposals and hearing the minister's comments and views regarding the merit of any proposal. My understanding of what parliament is doing with respect to the estimates of this year, is that we have three quarters of an hour left in this session to deal with the estimates of the department.
The committee on human rights and Indian affairs, which it was hoped last year would have some really worth while work to do, has not even been called together in this session. There was no effort made on the part of those who may have been nominated for office to call the committee to consider what we might do. It is too late now. This part of the session is almost at an end and we will have to wait until September or October before the committee can be called together.
May I say again in closing that there are too many examples of untrustworthy and unfair decisions which do not jibe with the laudatory statements made by the government concerning the work done in this field, and unless the two are put together we will not get too far in promoting and advancing the cause of our native Indian people. In fact that task may well be taken out of our hands by the native people themselves, because at the present time their mood is one of rebelliousness.


Mr. Bower:: Mr. Chairman, tonight I should like to bring a point to the attention of the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development which I brought up in the last session but with no positive results whatever. However I wish now to repeat, and I am sure the people of my consituency expect me to repeat and to keep on repeating, the plea that I am about to make. I refer to what I may call a deficiency or insufficiency of parks in my area in western Nova Scotia. I know that hundreds of thousands of Canadians and
Supply-Indian Affairs Americans know of our famous Cape Breton Highlands national park. The spectacular scenery and the breathtaking beauty of that park is renowned. I can safely say, moreover, that it has been a self-liquidating concern.
Tourism in Nova Scotia is second only to the fisheries in importance. And certainly the Cape Breton Highlands park has aided and fomented the tourist business. The Cape Breton national park is in the extreme north east of the province. Until a few years ago there was no park whatever in the western part of the province, where tourism plays a significant part in our economy; but about four years ago the government laudably decided to establish what was first known as the Western Nova Scotia national park. However, the fact that it does not extend into the west end of Nova Scotia may be one of the reasons why it is now called the Kejimkujik national park. Contiguous to the Kejimkujik park, which is located more in the central part of Nova Scotia than in western Nova Scotia, is an area known as the Tobeatic game sanctuary which is on provincial crown land. I believe, and the people of my constituency believe, that Kejimkujik park should be extended to include the Tobeatic game sanctuary area. I realize that part of the Tobeatic game site area is leased and is under active exploitation for pulp wood but that area could easily be left out. The rest of it should be included in the park so that the western part of the province does have the benefit of a national park.
[DOT] (9:20 p.m.)
The present Kejimkujik park entrance is 150 miles away from the western end of Nova Scotia and under those conditions is not the magnet for tourists in western Nova Scotia it should be. Kejimkujik therefore does not serve as fully as it might as a tourist attraction. However, with the extension westward to include the Tobeatic area, it would serve that purpose. All that is necessary is to extend the existing roads from Shelburne, Yarmouth and Digby into the western end of the Tobeatic area. Kejimkujik at the present time, I believe, is considered of minimum size for a national park, but with the extension I recommend it would be of adequate proportions.
If western Nova Scotia does, as we hope it will, receive its share of secondary industry, then an adequate area for recreation would be desirable, quite aside from the attraction for tourists. 1 ask the minister to study with me a map that has been prepared by interested people from my constituency showing just

July 4, 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs how this could be done. I feel federal assistance could be given, as was done under the roads to resources program for the development of access roads to the area. I might add further that these roads could traverse the province connecting to the west end of the enlarged national park, and they would also serve for the transport of produce from the Atlantic shore to the bay of Fundy and to Digby.
According to an answer recently given in the house by the Minister of Transport, an adequate ferry service is soon to be developed from Digby to Saint John, thereby connecting that whole area of western Nova Scotia to the trans-Canada highway and the railroad systems into central Canada. There is another purpose that a road system I suggest would serve, and that is the development of access to an emergency airport for the Yarmouth international airport on the occasions fog prevents landings at Yarmouth.
This has to come or we will be subjected forever to a very second rate type of air service. I realize that some of these features pertain to other departments, but they are part of a package job. I ask the minister to consider this matter seriously. I shall be very willing to co-operate with him and to show him the maps to indicate how this proposal would benefit the constituency.


Mr. Gauthier:: Mr. Chairman, without taking too much of the time of the committee, I do not want to miss the opportunity to draw to the minister's attention an area in my riding, Pointe-Bleue, with which the department is now concerned.
The minister is aware of the current projects in Pointe-Bleue. First of all, I wish to commend him and the government for their intention of handing over to the Indians within a few years the management of their own affairs. I hope that this transfer will be made systematically, but as fast as possible.
I also wish the minister all the co-operation possible from his officials in the completion of that task. We have been hearing about this event in Point-Bleue for some years, but I am afraid that the work is not always as efficient as the minister would like it to be, probably because we are lagging behind, in the reservations, as far as Indian competence is concerned. And I know what I am talking about, because I keep in close touch with those people. I have noticed that as soon as an Indian improves himself a little,-as soon as he gets some education and polish, it seems that a

strange power drives him outside his reservation to earn his living.
He is even offered a very interesting salary to do the same work. A young man, who might be a school teacher at Pointe-Bleue, is offered a higher salary to teach outside Pointe-Bleue, probably-and I am not saying that I am convinced of that, but it is a fact and I want to point it out to the minister-in order to get him away from the others, because he could become an enlightened and intelligent chief, able to lead his group.
I still trust the group of civil servants, most of whom are not Indians. I am still confident that they are sincere in their work, that they want to give a clear advantage to the Indians in order that they might apply for the jobs to which they are entitled. I have spoken about the matter in the house before and I went so far as to attack publicly an agent of the reservation. I shall not do so to-night, because he has been replaced. We now have a Mr. Gosselin who does an excellent job. 1 trust he is sincere and will put into practice the ideas the minister has expressed with regard to the reservations, namely, that, at long last, their management should be handed over to the Indians.
Conceivably, the officers of the Pointe Bleue reservation, 90 per cent of whom are white people, are highly interested in keeping their jobs, but certainly this is not in the interests of the Indians, who would be ready and capable to take over, so as to get into higher positions and, finally, in a few years, carry out government policies themselves.
I am sure that the minister is not aware of all those small transactions which do not often come to light, but which are very effective and always detrimental to the Indians.
I listened earlier to the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) who is much more familiar than I am with Indian affairs, and since I have been watching the activities of civil servants, I find that few are at fault, because most of them are doing a fine job, and I commend them for it. But even if there were only one or two, it would still be enough to delay the work of the department. That is why I call the minister's attention this evening to the things that we see. Let nobody think that we are keeping our eyes closed.
The minister announced the building of a sewage disposal and water distribution system in Pointe-Bleue at a cost of $1,500,000. I congratulate him but I regret that the project should be stretched over a period of five years. For 15 or 20 years at least, they have
July 4, 1967

been asking that the village streets of the Indian reservation be paved or that a few feet of sidewalk be built for there are no sidewalks and no paved streets in the reservation.
[DOT] (9:30 p.m.)
As a result, the Indians will be in the midst of a construction upheaval for five years. During five years, the village will be upside down, precisely at the time when the provincial government will be paving the approaches to the reservation, as has been announced for the summer or at the beginning of the next year. For another five years, the village will be a ploughed field.
I have already suggested to the minister that a contractor would be interested in doing the work so as to pave the streets and build the sidewalks the same year. The same contractor is willing to wait five years for payment in accordance with the agreement, that is approximately $165,000 or $200,000 per year, according to the estimates of the department.
Well, I think that the minister should consider that proposal; the department would not find it too costly, the work could be done during the same year at the Indians' satisfaction.
The reservation is now made up of some 1,300 or 1,400 inhabitants. It is quite a big village and it seems to me that they have been living in the dust long enough to ask the federal government to do something for them. In all the small municipalities of 700, 800 or 900 inhabitants in my riding, streets are paved. But in Pointe Bleue, because that reservation comes under the federal government, nothing has been done.
The present project is of course better than nothing, but it would be ideal if the department considered the completion of their water and sewer systems during the same year, for they already have a housing project which is making good progress. Then, the possibility of paving the streets and building sidewalks could be considered.
Mr. Chairman, I do not want to speak longer; I just wanted to deal with that specific point, the amount to be spent in Pointe Bleue in the next few years. I am sure that if the minister looks squarely at the situation and if he takes into consideration the requests made by the band council of Pointe Bleue, he will do something.
I would have liked also to talk about the assistance that could be given to the Indians, especially in the field of private industry, in 27053-1421
Supply-Indian Affairs the reservations. I do not have much time tonight, because we must be through by ten o clock but, next fall, when we continue the study of those estimates, I will deal with the assistance as well as the protection that the government should give the Indians in the reservations.
Today, it is impossible for an Indian to go into business because he cannot get the necessary financing. As I said previously, the Hudson's Bay Company is still all powerful in the reservations. Unless the Indians are given an equal opportunity, there will be no point in transferring to them, some day, the administration of their own affairs. The private interests within the reservations must be respected in the first place.
Recommendations and reports are fine, but when you cannot implement them, it is useless to multiply investigations. You are bound to go around in circles and there is no escape.
There is a group of serious men in the Pointe-Bleue reservation who long for the day when they may at last do like all inhabitants of other municipalities, that is, set up their own businesses, and borrow money to operate their own affairs. I am convinced that if the minister makes an investigation-not through a royal commission but a private one directed by serious people-he will probably get to the heart of the matter and then he will be able to devise a policy, at least with respect to the Pointe-Bleue reservation.
If the Indian has lost confidence in the white man, who can blame him?
[DOT] (9:40 p.m.)


Mr. Harkness:: I should like to speak briefly in connection with our national parks. I am much afraid that in recent years the general policy with regard to the administration of the national parks has become sadly distorted as compared with what was undoubtedly the original purpose of parliament when the parks were set up. This purpose was to set aside certain areas in Canada so that the people would have full opportunity to enjoy them. Because of the difference in the types of parks there has been a considerable number of errors made as far as the administration of the parks is concerned.
The mountain parks with which I am particularly familiar, having been a resident of Alberta for 50 years during which period I have visited them frequently, are a totally different proposition from the much smaller parks in eastern Canada with which I have

July 4. 1967
Supply-Indian Affairs also become acquainted to some extent, particularly during the period when I was minister of this department, or its predecessor.
There has of course been a very strong lobby on the part of so-called conservationists to preserve the large western parks particularly as wilderness areas, and I have a great deal of sympathy with this point of view as long as it is not carried to excess. More recently there has been a great deal of difficulty in connection with the ownership of leases or leasing rights to land in the national parks. All this, along with the constant desire of the officials of any department to produce a tidy administration has obscured the basic purpose of our parks, which was to provide areas in which all the people of Canada should have the opportunity to relax and enjoy themselves and those parks.
In our mountain parks, unfortunately, this opportunity has never been provided, because in order to provide such an opportunity facilities must be made available, and this has never been done in the large parks in western Alberta and adjacent areas of British Columbia. Nothing like the amount of low-cost accommodation which would make it possible for the average Canadian to spend a few days in the parks with his family has been provided.
In order to cater for these visitors a considerable number of things have to be done. First it is necessary to provide camp sites. The parks administration has provided a considerable number of new camp sites during recent years and the situation has improved, but there are still nothing like as many camp sites as there should be to accommodate the large numbers of people who should be accommodated and who wish to be accommodated, to say nothing of those who will be visiting the parks in the future years.
Second, there has to be a greater provision of trailer camps. A large number of people who cannot afford to stay at a motel or in a hotel, paying between $10 and $20 a day, come in trailers, and there is still nothing like the number of trailer camp sites necessary to accommodate the people who presently wish to use them, to say nothing of the demand which will undoubtedly arise in the years immediately ahead.
Third, there must be a considerable increase in the number of low-cost motels and cabin camps. The first thing I attempted to change in the administration during the brief period I was minister in charge of national parks was the regulations laying down

specifications to be met before a trailer camp or motel could be put up. I am all in favour of having motels or cabin camps looking as attractive as possible, but you can have very attractive low-cost cabin camps or motels which blend in well with the natural surroundings of a park without the person who puts them up being required to spend a very large amount of money doing so.
This has been one of the great shortcomings of the parks throughout the entire 50 years I have been familiar with them. People have not been allowed to put up accommodation which they could rent during a comparatively short season at a price which an average low-income Canadian could afford to pay. It is no use having national parks which are available only to visitors with money or to Canadians with money. If these parks are to serve their purpose they must contain facilities which will enable our low-income group to spend some time in them. This has not been the case, it is not the case now, and it is one of the deficiencies which more than anything else needs to be corrected.
In addition, if people are to visit these parks and enjoy them you have to provide much better access by road than presently exists, and considerably more riding and walking trails. These are things in which the parks administration has in my view been deficient throughout the years. There has been on the part of a considerable number of people the idea that these large western parks should be preserved almost completely in their natural state and that it is a bad thing to put a road through, or a walking trail or a riding trail. But if this is not done, nobody can enjoy the parks, and the purpose for which the parks were set aside is defeated. It is in this respect that the general policy with regard to the parks has been wrong, in my submission, and must be corrected. Action becomes increasingly important as cities grow, as people are crowded together more and more and as there is greater necessity for them to get out into a wilderness, or semi-wilderness, area and enjoy their surroundings.
During the last two or three years the issue which has probably caused the minister the greatest amount of trouble has been that of leasing regulations. I would say that any leasing regulations which are to work from a practical point of view must give security of tenure to the person who has put up a building or bought it from somebody else. Under the present regulations a motel owner, for instance, has security of tenure for 21 years which is not sufficient to allow for the type of
July 4, 1967

development necessary if the people of Canada are to get into the parks and enjoy them.
At Lake Louise a motel site has been offered for tender three times, yet the department has received no bid because there is insufficient security of tenure to justify the investment of a large amount of capital. This will be the situation in all the parks unless we adopt leasing regulations which give sufficient security of tenure to encourage people to build accommodation essential to the enjoyment of the parks by our population. A great deal of the difficulty arises from the fact that there is a desire in any bureaucracy for a nice, tidy administration. I think the national parks branch should forget about a tidy administration and follow a policy which would enable the parks to be used by all the people of this country, rather than one which to a large extent excludes the majority of the people.
[DOT] (9:50 p.m.)
I would have liked to say a few things about Indian affairs but I note it is ten minutes to ten o'clock, and one or two of my colleagues wish to make some remarks.


Mr. Leblanc (Laurier):: Mr. Chairman, I do not mean to prolong the debate on the estimates of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, but since the hon. minister (Mr. Laing) is here, I should like to take this opportunity to tell him that on June 15, 1967, I asked in his absence a question on the situation at Frobisher Bay concerning the Eskimos. I should like here to thank the hon. minister without portfolio (Mr. Chretien), who answered me at that time.
My question dealt with Frobisher Bay and item no. 25 of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. I have received no further answer, oral or written, since June 15, and I hope to be given one in the near future with regard to the following points which I mentioned in my intervention:
This was the program for the 1967-68 period: Construction of 70 houses for government employees; construction of 100 houses for the Eskimos; construction of adjacent roads; planning for the construction of office and store buildings; preparation of plans for living quarters of 100 bachelors; preparation of plans for building a technical school.
I pointed out that item No. 25 of the estimates of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development for 1967-68 did not provide any money for part of the program I have just mentioned and, in particular, no money for carrying out the construction
Supply-Indian Affairs program of 70 houses for government employees, no money for the preparation of plans for the construction of office and store buildings, no money for the preparation of plans to build living quarters for 100 bachelors.
I also added:
Due to the fact that Frobisher Bay has no basic resources and is entirely dependent on the government for its existence, this attitude by the department is causing a feeling of frustration and instability among the population-
Therefore, I ask the hon. minister whether he could not answer my very urgent question.


Mr. Nesbitt:: Mr. Chairman, I have very few observations to make in view of the time, but first I would like to say that I think the minister, since taking over this department, has been very encouraging to Indians in what he has done. Most hon. members have been pleased with the announcements he has made, particularly with regard to housing for Indians and other improvements. However, it is my experience that, despite his good intentions, and no doubt those of the senior officials of his department who may have suggested some of these things to him, many of his well-meaning plans have become sadly frustrated, due to the attitude of junior echelons in his department.
I have some knowledge of this, as I happened to be honorary chief of one band of Indians in Ontario, and visited them within the last two days. With respect to the question of housing there is something very interesting that should be brought to the minister's attention. A great deal of money has been put up by the government, with the approval of all hon. members, to provide Indians with better housing. It is the policy of the department that the Indians themselves do as much as they can themselves to help build their new houses. However, apparently the officials in the department seem to think bathrooms are not necessary for Indians.
This is strange to me because I am quite sure C.M.H.C. would not stand for houses being built without bathrooms in areas adjacent to large metropolitan centres. As most hon. members who have experience of dealing with C.M.H.C. know, it is almost impossible to get a loan from the corporation to build a house unless the plans include all kinds of sanitary provisions. But apparently this does not apply to Indians. As a result the inference many people get is that Indians are regarded by some departmental officials as some kind

July 4, 1967
Supp ly-Indian Affairs of second class citizens, and I would ask the minister to look into this matter.
Surely bathrooms are not a luxury in the southern part of Ontario and elsewhere, although they may well be in the far north permafrost area. Where Indian children are attending public schools and high schools which have these facilities, they should not be denied them at home.
The department has also done a lot to promote policies under which Indians on reserves are helped to carry on businesses for themselves. One example I have in mind is the building of a marina in the Georgian bay area. This is a good project. The Indians have hired an expert, who has run other marinas, to give them advice on the project. But the Indian agent comes prowling around every week and says, "This is wrong, that is wrong; this should be done, that should be done." I suspect he knows nothing about the work involved.
Further, tenders have to be invited for even the most trivial amounts of material. The manager that the Indians have employed says he could save money if he had authority to purchase material locally. Also in this regard, the department sends down large quantities of material that serve no useful purpose in the construction of the project. Only this afternoon I happened to see at this marina a large pile of stuff sent there by the department which is useless, and is just going to waste.
This brings me to another matter which I think should be considered by the appropriate parliamentary committee, namely the question of the usefulness of Indian agents in view of the government's new policies. I am not suggesting they should be gotten rid of at once, but if the Indian people are to achieve their own welfare this form of paternalism, particularly when it is exercised by people who are not always as competent as they might be, is unwise. I hope the minister will give consideration to the points I have raised.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
Indian affairs-
5. Administration, operation and maintenance including expenditures on works on other than federal property, grants, contributions and special payments including those specified in the sub-vote titles in the Estimates, recoverable expenditures under agreements entered into with the approval of the Governor in Council with the Governments of the provinces and Territories and with local school boards in respect of social assistance to persons residing on Indian reserves other than Indians and the education in Indian schools of children other than Indian

children, authority to make grants and contributions pursuant to agreements entered into with the Governments of the provinces or the Territories or other groups or authorities approved of by the Governor in Council for the provision of welfare and other services to Indians, and authority to provide, in respect of Indian commercial activities, for the instruction and supervision of Indians, the furnishing of materials, the purchase of finished goods and, notwithstanding any other Act, the sale of such finished goods, $84,264,700.
10. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment including construction or acquisition of works for Indian bands, the operation and control of which may be transferred to the Indian bands at the discretion of the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, expenditures on works on other than federal property, assistance to Indians and Indian bands for the construction or acquisition of housing and other buildings and related works, land and equipment, and recoverable expenditures under agreements entered into with the approval of the Governor in Council with the Governments of the Provinces and the Territories and with local school boards in respect of the education in Indian schools of children other than Indian children, $33,913,000.
Northern program-
20. Administration, operation and maintenance, including grants and contributions as detailed in the estimates; authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the amount of the share of the Government of the Northwest Territories of expenditures on education and vocational training and for other services performed on behalf of the governments of the Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory; authority to sell electric power and fuel oil (and to provide services in respect thereof), in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council, to private consumers in remote locations when alternative local sources of supply are not available; authority to provide in respect of Indian and Eskimo commercial activities for the instruction and supervision of Indians and Eskimos, the furnishing of materials, the purchase of finished goods and, notwithstanding any other Act, the sale of such finished goods, and authority to make payments to Indians and Eskimos under social assistance, welfare housing and child welfare programs, $33,777,900.
25. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment including authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the amount of the share of the Government of the Northwest Territories of expenditures on education and vocational training; authority to make recoverable advances in respect of services provided and work performed on other than federal property when only the department is capable of performing such service or work; authority for a program of construction and acquisition of housing for Indians and Eskimos and the sale of houses to Indians and Eskimos on such terms and conditions and at such prices as the Governor in Council may approve, including the sale to Eskimos at a price $1,000 less than cost for one-room and one-bedroom houses and $2,000 less than cost for larger houses; and authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current fiscal year not to exceed a total amount of $26,047,000, $21,614,800.
July 4, 1967
COMMONS DEBATES	2243
30. Northern mineral assistance grants-To authorize in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council, northern mineral development assistance grants to individuals and corporations, in order to assist in the mineral and economic development of the Canadian north, and to authorize total commitments in respect of development assistance grants in the current and subsequent fiscal years not exceeding $9,000,000; estimated amount required in the current fiscal year, $3,000,000.
32. To authorize interim payments to be made in respect of the current fiscal year to the Governments of the Yukon Territory and the Northwest Territories on account of future payments, including payments in respect of the amortization of outstanding loans, to be made under financial agreements to be entered into between the Government of Canada and the Commissioners of the Yukon Territory and the Northwest Territories; estimated amount required, $9,500,000.
Conservation-
National parks, historic sites and monuments, wildlife resources conservation and development including administration of the Migratory Birds Convention Act-
35. Administration, operation and maintenance including grants as detailed in the estimates, payment to national battlefields commission for the purposes and subject to the provisions of an Act respecting the national battlefields at Quebec and authority to make expenditures on the proposed new national park in the area of Kejimkujik Lake in Nova Scotia, $19,820,000.
40. Construction or acquisition of buildings, works, land and equipment including expenditures on works on other than federal property, authority to make expenditures on the proposed new national park in the area of Kejimkujik Lake in Nova Scotia and, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, authority to make commitments for the current fiscal year not to exceed a total amount of $20,436,100, $19,936,100.
Indian Affairs and Northern Development- Northern program-
L45. Loans to the government of the Yukon Territory for capital expenditures, on terms and conditions approved by the governor in council; the loans provided for in a financial agreement to be entered into between the government of Canada and the commissioner of the Yukon Territory to be reduced by the amount of any loans made hereunder; estimated amount required, $5,000,000.
L50. Loans to the government of the Northwest Territories for capital expenditures, on terms and conditions approved by the governor in council; the loans provided for in a financial agreement to be entered into between the government of Canada and the commissioner of the Northwest Territories to be reduced by the amount of any loans made hereunder; estimated amount required, $2,800,000. Northern Canada Power Commission-
L55. Advances to the Northern Canada Power Commission for the purpose of capital expenditures in accordance with section 15 of the Northern Canada Power Commission Act, $2,650,000.
Maurice Rinfret: This concludes the estimates of the Department of
Proceedings on Adjournment Motion Indian Affairs and Northern Development. It being ten o'clock it is my duty to rise, report progress, and request leave to sit again at the next sitting of the house.
Resolutions considered in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.
[DOT] (10:00 p.m.)



PROCEEDINGS ON ADJOURNMENT MOTION

[Stage Direction]
A motion to adjourn the house under provisional standing order 39A deemed to have been moved.

['-because I assure him this is the first time I have been informed that these citizens to whom he has referred are prominent in any political party. May I just say, Mr. Speaker, that there is quite a large flow of information from the Department of National Health and Welfare to various groups in all parts of Canada in respect of the payment of hospital grants. In such circumstances, the normal practice is certainly to advise the members of parliament at the time the official release from the Department of National Health and Welfare is put out. With respect to both these cases, that procedure was followed. The hon. member for Bruce, who raised this grievance, received information with respect to both these grants. He was good enough to write me and express his appreciation not only for the action taken but for the letters advising him of these grants. They were sent to him on the day\nspecified and in conjunction with the official release from the department.\nIn addition to that, Mr. Speaker, we do send out the information to hospital administrators and interested citizens. I notice that in respect to a number of hospitals that have been covered by these press releases letters have gone out to the chairmen of the hospital boards and to the hospital administrators. In some cases it is apparent that there cannot be perfect synchronization in the delivery of these letters. As my hon. friend suggests, it is obvious that other interested persons who were entitled as citizens to this information also received it and made use of it in this way.\nNo effort was made to upstage the operators or administrators of the hospital, nor indeed was any effort made to upstage the hon. member, who is as free to use this information as any of the other persons to whom it was addressed. I assure my hon. friend that no effort is being made to play politics in providing this information. This is public information and we want the widest possible dissemination of it. I am afraid that I cannot agree with him that somehow it is bad citizenship if this information is put in the newspapers by a person who happens to be identified with a political party as well as with a hospital.\nMotion agreed to and the house adjourned at 10.29 p.m.\n[The following items were passed in committee of supply this day]:']
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, the present government has done a good many mean and cruel things, but I suggest that nothing it has done is as mean or as cruel as what seems to be shaping up with regard to our retired civil servants. This issue of increasing the pensions of retired civil servants has been with us for a long long time; indeed in my experience-it has been with us for over 20 years. Finally in June of 1966 the present government consented to refer the matter of raising the pensions of retired civil servants to the special joint committee on the public service of Canada. That reference was actually made in January of 1967.
On May 8, 1967, that special joint committee made its report to both houses of parliament recommending that increases in the pensions of retired civil servants and also the pensions of retired armed forces and R.C.M.P. personnel be made. Since that time I have raised the matter in the House of Commons ten or a dozen times. Every time, until very recently at any rate, the answer has been to the effect that the matter was under active consideration. We were in fact led to believe before the committee made its report that if it made a unanimous recommendation, the government would act upon it. It is now more than eight weeks since that recommendation was made and yet here we are within a few days of taking a summer recess and it begins to look as though nothing is going to be done before parliament recesses for its summer break.
On May 8 the President of the Treasury Board (Mr. Benson) assured me that the matter was under active consideration, the matter being the precise recommendation that increases be made. On May 15 the same Pres-sident of the Treasury Board told me the
July 4, 1967
2244	COMMONS
Proceedings on Adjournment Motion matter was presently under study. On May 25 the same President of the Treasury Board told me the government was making progress on the matter. On June 2 I put my question about this matter to the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson). I asked him whether it would be dealt with before a summer break. His answer was, "We will do our best". I thought that answer was worth something. I am beginning to think it was not worth the time it took him to say it. On June 12 I again put the question to the Prime Minister. He told me that the matter was under urgent consideration. I put it to him again on June 15 at which time he reminded me of his statement of three days earlier to the effect that the matter was under active and urgent consideration. As a supplementary question, I asked him why it could not be placed on the order paper within the next few days. I was brought to order at that time by the Chair and it was then that I decided to raise the question on an adjournment motion.
On June 22 I again asked whether there would be any action on this matter before the house rises for a summer break and again I was told by the President of the Treasury Board that the matter was under active consideration. On June 26, in the absence of the Prime Minister and the President of the Treasury Board, I put the question to the government house leader, the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Mac-Eachen), who assured me that he would bring the matter to the attention of the Prime Minister and the President of the Treasury Board.
On June 30, last Friday, I asked the President of the Treasury Board whether, in view of the attention that has been given to this matter, he could get the legislation for increases in civil service pensions on the order paper so we could deal with it this week, before parliament recesses for a summer break. His reply was that he did not think this was possible although the matter was receiving the consideration of the government. That means, unless I do not understand the plain meaning of words, that the government has no intention of acting on this matter before this house rises for the summer recess.
On the last two or three occasions when I asked this question I have been greeted with impatient murmurs from the other side of the house. The only audible words I could get were: Why don't you wait; this is going to be done? To say to old retired servants of the federal government who have been waiting for months and years for this increase that


they should wait still longer, that they should wait until the fall, is the ultimate in cruelty.
I am sure that between now and the fall other matters will arise which will be given higher priority and it will be October or November before we get to this legislation; and it will be December or January before any increases are added to the cheques of these retired civil servants. Many of these people will not need the increases because they will have died before the increases come through. If, as I believe, the government has made up its mind that it is going to go along with the recommendations of the special joint committee on the public service of Canada, and if, as I believe, the government is going to act on this matter in the fall, why not do so now? What rhyme or reason is there to putting off any longer the action that must be taken on this issue?
In my view this House of Commons should not break for a summer recess until it has dealt with this matter. I feel very strongly about this. We have a house order that requires certain business to be completed by Thursday night of this week, and no individual member can stop that, but there is still the question as to whether we are going to rise on Friday for a recess of a period of time not yet stated, and I for one feel we should not do that. I for one will not agree to our rising on Friday unless the government gives us the satisfaction of answering this important question.
To my knowledge these people have been put off for 20 to 25 years, those who have been around that long. The government has been dilly-dallying and boondoggling with this issue for many months, since it came to power, and for weeks since the committee made its report. I insist that the time for action is now, and by "now" I mean before this house rises for a summer break.


Mr. John R. Matheson (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, the question raised by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) in respect of pensions for retired civil servants is an important one which has been raised in the house on several occasions during the present session. I do not know that I can add anything to what the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) has already said in answer to the hon. member's question.
This matter was considered most carefully by a joint committee of the house and the other place at the last session of parliament. No less than eight meetings were held with
July 4, 1967
COMMONS DEBATES	2245
evidence received from 21 witnesses representing all possible interests. A report was filed by that committee late this spring containing certain recommendations which the government undertook to consider. These recommendations, as the hon. member knows, were supported unanimously by the members of the committee. I need not go into the details as to what the committee's report of May 8 recommended.
Suffice it to say that the six suggested requirements of the report compel, because of their ramifications, most earnest and conscientious consideration by the government. The Prime Minister has already given assurance that the government has this matter under active and urgent study.
[DOT] (10:10 p.m.)
The President of the Treasury Board, because of his important commitments today, is unable to be here tonight. He, likewise, has given this same assurance on previous occasions. I can do no more than reaffirm these assurances and say to the hon. member and the house that just as soon as the government is in a position to make its position known, it will lose no time in acquainting the house of its intentions with regard to this important matter.



Auguste Choquette: Mr. Speaker, I must first of all thank the parliamentary secretary to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, the hon. member for Rosedale (Mr. Macdonald), for having willingly added a few additional minutes to his arduous day in order to answer my question.
A few years ago, the Canadian government decided to open a consulate in Louisiana, more specifically in New Orleans. Since then, it has been found that the consulate has fallen far short of expectations at the time of its establishment. It is not that the representation over there is deficient, that the choice was untimely, but rather that the activities that had been expected did not materialize.
And these consulates, scattered here and there, more often serve as commercial posts rather than centres of diplomatic activity.
That is precisely the case with the consulate at New Orleans which, with that in Los Angeles, serves the southern states. That consulate, when all commercial activities are finally added up, gives far from impressive results.
Proceedings on Adjournment Motion
Therefore, that is my first reason for proposing that the consulate should be closed and replaced by another one that could perhaps be located in the state of Florida.
The second reason in favour of such a consulate in the state of Florida is precisely that thousands of our nationals are found in Florida throughout the year, whether as tourists or as people who, after several years of hard work, choose to retire there. Consequently, the presence of those thousands of Canadian nationals is more than enough to warrant the establishment of a place for reference, of a consulate in Florida, a much more appropriate location than Louisiana.
The third reason I would like to give is the following: the state of Florida is much more important, on the basis of population and on the basis of area, than the state of Louisiana.
The fourth reason is that the state of Florida is more industrialized and the space research centre which is located there represents a growth factor for all kinds of activities, the scope of which is difficult to anticipate.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, the last reason I would like to submit is that the establishment of the consulate in Florida would, first of all, permit the establishment of a relationship between the Caribbean and Canada and then with the other southern states on the Atlantic coast which are an uncommon tourist attraction for thousands of Canadian citizens.
For all those reasons, I believe that it would be appropriate to repeat the suggestion I made at the beginning, that is to close the consulate in Louisiana, because it is not useful enough, and to open a consulate in Florida either at Tallahassee, Tampa or Miami, to give better service to the Canadian people who regularly visit the state of Florida.


Mr. D. S. Macdonald (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I must first of all say that it is always a pleasure to have an opportunity to reply to the hon. member for Lot-biniere, one of most lucid and intelligent speakers in this house, in short, one of the greatest speakers in the history of the house.
I rise tonight first as the supporter of New Orleans which is the natural location for a Canadian consulate. It is one of the greatest centres of the United States. Located in the middle of the southern United States, the consulate is handy for the visitors coming from the west from Texas as well as those coming from the east, from Florida and the great state of Louisiana.
2246	COMMONS
Proceedings on Adjournment Motion
It is the old capital of the Acadians, the place where jazz was born, the location of the famous Bourbons street and it is also the place where lives the famous Mr. Garrison, outstanding lawyer.
The hon. member has set forth some striking arguments in favour of the opening of another consulate closer to Florida. Of course, the problem is always the inevitable question of expenditures, the eternal problem of realizing a proper balance between economy and service.
The government will review periodically the matter of Canadian consular representation in the United States, and I can assure you that, when the next opportunity occurs, it will take into account the remarks made, as I said earlier, by the very intelligent member for Lotbiniere.


Edison John Clayton Loney: Mr. Speaker, earlier today I posed a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare arising from two communications I received today dated June 28 and 29 respectively. I say that part of the information contained in the text of the communications was misleading and erroneous. The letter of June 28 reads as follows:
As announced in the press today I have approved a grant, under the terms of the hospital construction grant rules, in the amount of $79,052, towards the cost of new construction and renovations at the Bruce Peninsula and District Memorial Hospital, Wiarton, Ontario.
The part which I claim is misleading and erroneous is the statement "as announced in the press today", that is on June 28. The actual facts are that the announcement was made on the front page of the Wiarton Echo on June 22 and must have gone out from the minister's office at least a week prior to that date, under the caption "Federal Grant to Hospital".
[DOT] (10:20 p.m.)
I read the letter which is addressed to the editor of the Wiarton Echo:
We would like to use some valuable space in your paper to make the following announcement:
"We have been informed by the Hon. Allan J. MacEachen, Minister of Health and Welfare, that a grant of $79,052 has been approved under the hospital construction grant rules toward the cost of the new construction and renovations at the Bruce Peninsula and District Memorial Hospital, Wiarton, Ontario."
Kent Lamont, President, Bruce Liberal Association.
[Mr. Macdonald (Rosedale).l
DEBATES	July 4, 1967
I ask the minister, who are "we"? Why was the board of governors not informed directly by the minister? Is he deliberately downgrading the efforts of this group? It certainly seems to me, sir, this is a reflection on their integrity.
The second letter is dated June 29, 1967, and reads:
You will have received my letter of yesterday's date informing you of the federal assistance for the Bruce Peninsula and District Memorial Hospital, Wiarton, Ontario. Today-
That is June 29.
[DOT]-an announcement is being made to the press that I have approved a grant of $90,097, under the terms of the hospital construction grant rules, toward the cost of the construction and renovation program being carried out at the Kincardine and District General Hospital, Kincardine, Ontario.
The actual facts in this case are these: An announcement was made on June 28, which is prior to this, and it must have gone out from the minister's office during the last week. The following appears in the Kincardine News:
Word has been received from Murray Gaunt, M.L.A., Huron-Bruce of the following communication from the Hon. Allan J. MacEachen, Federal Minister of National Health and Welfare: "On June 15 under the terms of the hospital construction grant rules, I approved a grant in the amount of $90,097 towards the cost of new construction and renovation at the Kincardine and District Hospital".
This information was received by Mr. A. E. Greer-
May I say here, that Mr. A. E. Greer is an executive officer of the Bruce Liberal Association.
-chairman of the public relations committee of the board of governors of the hospital.
Why did the minister make the announcement in this way? Why was the board of governors not informed directly by the minister? Why must the minister bring politics into this, with all the scope we have in the house for politics? I thought the last place we would find this type of action would be the Department of National Health and Welfare.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Oh?


Edison John Clayton Loney: The hon. member says, "Oh". The board of governors is a volunteer group. They volunteer their service, their capabilities, their time and their experience. I think it is degrading, as I said a few minutes ago, to treat them in this manner. In this instance there was no effort at playing politics. There were no representations made through me as the elected member of the district. I did not make any representations to the minister's
July 4, 1967
COMMONS DEBATES	2247
Proceedings on Adjournment Motion
office on behalf of the board of governors. There have been no political implications.
My question to the minister is this: Why, when ministering to the needs of those people residing in the communities which will be served by these improved and much needed facilities, does the minister engage in such an amateurish way in low, petty politics of such a despicable nature?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I regret that I am not as
well informed as to the identity of the various persons who have been informed about the hospital grants as is my hon. friend-


Stanley Howard Knowles: Oh, come, come.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: -because I assure him this is the first time I have been informed that these citizens to whom he has referred are prominent in any political party. May I just say, Mr. Speaker, that there is quite a large flow of information from the Department of National Health and Welfare to various groups in all parts of Canada in respect of the payment of hospital grants. In such circumstances, the normal practice is certainly to advise the members of parliament at the time the official release from the Department of National Health and Welfare is put out. With respect to both these cases, that procedure was followed. The hon. member for Bruce, who raised this grievance, received information with respect to both these grants. He was good enough to write me and express his appreciation not only for the action taken but for the letters advising him of these grants. They were sent to him on the day
specified and in conjunction with the official release from the department.
In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, we do send out the information to hospital administrators and interested citizens. I notice that in respect to a number of hospitals that have been covered by these press releases letters have gone out to the chairmen of the hospital boards and to the hospital administrators. In some cases it is apparent that there cannot be perfect synchronization in the delivery of these letters. As my hon. friend suggests, it is obvious that other interested persons who were entitled as citizens to this information also received it and made use of it in this way.
No effort was made to upstage the operators or administrators of the hospital, nor indeed was any effort made to upstage the hon. member, who is as free to use this information as any of the other persons to whom it was addressed. I assure my hon. friend that no effort is being made to play politics in providing this information. This is public information and we want the widest possible dissemination of it. I am afraid that I cannot agree with him that somehow it is bad citizenship if this information is put in the newspapers by a person who happens to be identified with a political party as well as with a hospital.
Motion agreed to and the house adjourned at 10.29 p.m.
[The following items were passed in committee of supply this day]:


[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 20, 25, 30, 32, 35, 40, L45, L50, L55.
27053-143£
[Stage Direction]
July 4. 1967
Ceremonies marking the
[Stage Direction]
in the presence of
[Stage Direction]
on Parliament Hill, Ottawa.
July 1st, 1967
[Stage Direction]
YOUR MAJESTY:
On this memorable milestone in our history-made more memorable and joyful by your gracious presence-after a century of sun and storm, we beg to tell Your Majesty that our devotion to the Crown has grown in depth and strength, and to speak humbly of our affection for your person.
To express to Your Majesty our loyalty and affection and our gratitude for the presence in Canada of Your Majesty and His Royal Highness the Prince Philip on this historic occasion, the following humble Address has been passed by the Senate and Commons of Canada:
[Stage Direction]
By the Grace of God of the United King-clom, Canada and Her other Realms and
Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith:
MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN:
We, Your Majesty's dutiful and loyal subjects, the Senate and Commons of Canada in Parliament assembled, wish humbly to convey to Your Majesty this expression of our deepest loyalty, affection and respect, and of our appreciation of the presence in Canada of Your Majesty and His Royal Highness the Prince Philip at the celebration of the Centenary of Confederation.
We pray that Your Majesty may continue to reign for many years as our gracious and beloved Sovereign.
July 4, 1967
[Stage Direction]
We, the Members of the House of Commons of Canada, beg leave to express to Your Majesty, on behalf of the Canadian people, our loyal and affectionate greetings. We extend to Your Majesty and to His Royal Highness the Prince Philip, a most cordial welcome to Ottawa on this day of deep historic significance for all Canadians.
[Stage Direction]
YOUR MAJESTY;
Your visit in this year of the Centennial of Confederation is a great honour and a great joy; we are particularly happy to express our sincere affection and loyalty.
Canadians from sea to sea are represented here to assure Your Majesty of their unfailing devotion to your person as Queen of Canada. Your presence among them confirms in their hearts the special place which the Monarchy holds in our development as a nation; your words contribute to bind our people together, to encourage them in the pursuit of their ideal and to strengthen their will to enrich the Canadian mosaic, reflecting more particularly their dual origins.
The achievement of the Fathers of Confederation therefore deserves to be pursued in accordance with the principles that marked the birth of our country, recognizing now as then that the Crown is the cornerstone of legislative power and that it is also the fount of honour and justice.
[Stage Direction]
One hundred years ago today, a new Canada was born. The British North America Act of 1867, to which Your Majesty's revered predecessor, Queen Victoria, gave the Royal assent, was an act of faith in the people and in the Parliamentary institutions of the new Canada. The intervening years have witnessed an increasing fulfilment of the hopes and aspirations of those who believed in the destiny of our people and of our land.
In a very real sense, the Canadian experience with unity of political purpose in a rich diversity of cultures provided a meaningful precedent for the evolution of the Commonwealth, and expression of international neighbourhood perhaps unique in the history of man.
The Crown has become the spiritual keeper of the ideals of freedom and equality that bring together the nations of the Commonwealth. We Canadians are proud and grateful to be linked, through Your Majesty, with these sister nations in the pursuit of peace and progress for all mankind.
As we enter the second century of Confederation, may we, in Canada, express our faith and confidence in the future of our country and its continuing development as a member of the Commonwealth of which our Queen is the head.
Therefore, I am proud to tender to Your Majesty the following address of loyalty on behalf of the Canadian House of Commons:
[Stage Direction]
By the Grace of God of the United Kingdom, Canada and Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith:
MOST GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN:
We, Your Majesty's dutiful and loyal subjects, the members of the Senate and Commons of Canada in Parliament assembled, wish humbly to convey to Your Majesty this expression of our deepest loyalty, affection and respect, and of our appreciation of the presence in Canada of Your Majesty and His Royal Highness the Prince Philip at the celebration of the Centenary of Confederation.
We pray that Your Majesty may continue to reign for many years as our gracious and beloved Sovereign.
[Stage Direction]
July 4, 1967
[Stage Direction]
Mr. Speaker of the Senate
Mr. Speaker of the House of Commons
I thank you both most sincerely for the Loyal Addresses which you have read on behalf of Parliament and for your welcome to my husband and myself.
One hundred years of Confederation; what a simple statement but what a remarkable chapter in Canada's history. It is altogether right and fitting that Sovereign and people should meet together here at the heart and centre of Canadian existence to give thanks on this great occasion.
Canada is a country that has been blest beyond most other countries in this world. Although there have been all the possibilities for human anguish and conflict, the pages of Canada's history during the last hundred years have hardly been stained by serious misfortunes. The problems which faced the statesmen of 1867 and the national problems which have had to be met in the intervening years have been solved, with rare and minor exceptions, through discussion and through an effort of tolerance, goodwill and understanding.
When I visited the scenes of those historic discussions at Charlottetown and Quebec, three years ago, it came to me how quietly this nation had been created by men sitting around a table. Not the least important service rendered by Sir John Macdonald, Sir Georges Etienne Cartier and the other Fathers of the Confederation, was this tradition of calm consultation which they established.
Let no one underestimate the imagination and daring shown by those men one hundred years ago. They created one nation of this great country which reaches from sea to sea, a land rich in the things that man needs for a good life, enough to provide for a varied and growing population and to help meet the world's needs as well. They also created a nation that has grown and prospered in an
atmosphere of freedom, where differences are respected, and where the rights of individual men and women to work out their own salvations have never been long denied. These are profound reasons for our thanksgiving.
On this day of celebration it is right that we should remember with gratitude the men and women who have held responsibility and authority-at the time of confederation and down through the years in the National Capital as in the Provinces-for their contribution to the birth and growth of Canada.
I can think of no more valiant and fitting representative of the people I have in mind than the late General Vanier, soldier, patriot and servant of Canada.
I have spoken of the great men, the men whose names have an honoured place in Canada's history, but we must not forget that we owe as much to the unsung work and steadfast lives of great numbers of more humble people. The men and their families who made the clearings and worked the land, and who built the roads, railways and canals. The greatness and stability of this country also rests on these firm foundations. I am thinking of the eager immigrants who came with such high hopes and had to face the dread of cholera; of the early settlers on the prairies struggling through the harsh winters; of the fishermen determined to wring a livelihood in the storm and danger of unfamiliar waters; of the many thousands who went back in two world wars because they believed so strongly in their own freedom. It is these, the ordinary people of Canada, who have given flesh and sinew to the plans of the Fathers of the Confederation.
[Stage Direction]
It is a hundred years of nationhood that we celebrate today. But let us not forget the earlier centuries of arduous labour that came before Confederation. I am not likely to overlook the contributions made by those of British stock who came here from elsewhere in North America or who were settlers from
July 4, 1967
[Stage Direction]
the old world in the new. Even more extended in time, and as deep in impact, have been the contributions made by Canadians of French descent. Ever since Champlain founded his Habitation at Quebec-and planted rose bushes around it-this air has been sweetened with the French tongue and French culture and sharpened with French intelligence and French resource. It is one of the marvels of history that a society planted so precariously in the wilderness should not only have survived but should have flourished so triumphantly, still loyal to its past and open to everything that is new. From all I hear, from everything I know, I am sure that the contributions of French Canada to the life of the country as a whole will prove even ampler in the future than they have been in the years gone by.
Tomorrow I sail down the St. Lawrence to pay a visit to Expo 67. I have no doubt that I will find there a great mirror held up to the future. It will be possible to catch glimpses of what may be expected in the further exploration of space, in new methods of travel and communications, in the growth of new technologies. Such a future clearly holds as large opportunities for imagination and daring as any that have existed up to now. And the qualities that have made this country what it is will also enable Canadians to share in such a future to the full. On the basis of the natural and human resources that are available here, the broad industrial development, the many centres of learning and research, and the skills found here, there should be few limits to what Canada is capable of. Above all, the energy and resourcefulness of Canadians may be relied on to carry them forward successfully whatever the swiftness of the changes that we will witness.
Sustaining a human perspective will be possible, I am inclined to think, only if we have the courage to probe within ourselves as well as into space. And in thinking about the future we must not be too much distracted from the problems that we can see about us in our society today. This country is fortunate and prosperous above most others. But not all of its people are free from want or hardship. There are still wrongs to be righted and suffering to be relieved. There is still a constant effort of accommodation to be made so that all the peoples in this great country may live together in friendship and harmony.
[Stage Direction]
Confederation have given Canada the economic strength which has made it possible for her to help the needy countries in their economic development; it has made it possible for Canada to provide forces to help keep the peace where it has been threatened, and, above all, it has given increasing power and authority to Canada's voice in world affairs. This power and authority derives from the internal national unity and it can only be sustained and flourish if that national unity prospers.
From the very earliest days, the name of Canada is associated with prodigious voyages; first the voyages of the seamen from Bristol and St. Malo in their tiny ships, then the explorers who went by canoe up the Ottawa to the Great Lakes and along the waterways of the Middle West to the Rockies and beyond. With the beginning of this new century the whole Canadian nation embarks on another great voyage. May it bring peace and prosperity, happiness and harmony and a just reward for the work and endeavour of each one of you.
[Stage Direction]
July 4, 1967
[Stage Direction]
A HUNDRED YEARS AGO today, our ancestors witnessed the birth of a new nation. Now, a century later, some twenty million Canadians share the heritage of freedom and material prosperity for which, on this historic occasion, all will wish to join in thanksgiving to God.
The roots of twentieth century Canada lie deep in the traditions of many peoples. Our society and system of government have evolved through generations of political adjustment and social change. We have sought to take the best from the past and to mould our institutions to meet the demands of today's world. It is fitting that we should recollect and acknowledge our debt to the wisdom and vision of the Fathers of Confederation who set the course for Canada's development. It must be our resolve to preserve and nourish all that is worthy in that inheritance and transmit it to those who will be our heirs.
Throughout this day, people are coming together across the land to celebrate the Centennial of Confederation. In the nation's capital, the Senate and Commons have assembled in the presence of Her Majesty the Queen of Canada. Here, visible to all, is our treasured institution of Parliament, of which the spirit and sinew resides in the people themselves.
The future is charged with excitement and challenge. Let us now, in humility, but with confidence in that future, dedicate ourselves to the task ahead.
9.30 a.m. Music by the Band of the Canadian Guards and the Peace Tower Carillon.
10.00 a.m. Parliamentarians and guests are seated.
10.05 a.m. Arrival of the Prime Minister, the former Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet.
10.10 a.m. Arrival of the Speaker and officials of the House of Commons.
10.15 a.m. Arrival of the Speaker and officials of the Senate.
10.20 a.m. Arrival of His Excellency the Governor General.
10.27 a.m. ARRIVAL OF HER MAJESTY.
Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Hightness The Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, will be met by the clergy officiating at the service.
10.30 a.m. SERVICE OF THANKSGIVING AND DEDICATION
The officiating clergy will be assisted by the Centennial Choir and the Band of the Canadian Guards.
[Stage Direction]
A Fanfare of Trumpets will be sounded as Her Majesty the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh mount the dais. God Save the Queen is sung, after which all are seated.
The Address from the Senate will be read and presented to Her Majesty the Queen by the Speaker of the Senate. The Address from the House of Commons will be read and presented by the Speaker of the House.
July 4, 1967
[Stage Direction]
O Canada is sung. The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh will go in procession down the broad walk. A Fanfare of Trumpets will be sounded as the Royal Procession reaches the Centennial Flame. Departure of the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh. The Speakers and mace bearers will return in procession to the Centre Block. Departure of the Prime Minister, parliamentarians and guests.
Musical Programme
Presented by the CANADIAN GUARDS' Band, Director of Music: Captain C. A. W. Adams, C.D., L.R.A.M., A.R.C.M., and the Peace Tower Carillon, Dominion Carillonneur:
Robert Donnell
1.	Century of Progress
2.	Medley of Canadian Folk Songs
3.	Gaspe from "Three Canadian Impressions"
4.	Suite from Merrie England
5.	Marche Vanier
6.	God Bless Our Queen
7.	Coronation March from "Le Prophete"
8.	Homage March
9.	"La Citadelle"-Selection of Quebec Folk Songs
10.	My Country from "The Planets"
11.	Royal Visit
CENTENNIAL CHOIR, Director, Nicholas Goldschmidt.
McAnespie arr. R. Donnell B. Bogisch E. German R. Milne M. Toone G. Meyerbeer E. Grieg
arr. by C. Adams Gustav Holst J. Gayfer
Order of Service
Parliament Hill, July 1st, 1967. OFFICIATING CLERGY
Mr. Lavy N. Becker, B.A., M.A., M.H.L.,
Chairman, Canadian Interfaith Conference.
Right Reverend Timotheos,
Bishop of Rodostolon.
The Right Reverend Wilfred C. Lockhart, M.A., Ph.D., D.D., Moderator of the United Church of Canada.
Reverend D. P. Neufeld,
Executive Secretary,
Mennonite Central Committee.
The Right Reverend John Logan-Vencta, O.B.E., M.A., D.D., Moderator of the Presbyterian Church of Canada.
His Eminence Maurice Cardinal Roy, Ph.D., D.D., S.T.D., Archbishop of Quebec,
Roman Catholic Primate of Canada.
The Most Reverend H. H. Clark, B.A., D.D., D.C.L.,
Anglican Archbishop of Rupert's Land,
Primate of All Canada.
Rabbi S. M. Zambrowsky,
Chairman of National Religious Affairs Committee,
Canadian Jewish Congress.
[Stage Direction]
July 4. 1967
Call lo Worship
Mr. Lavy N. Becker
Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, and the people whom He hath chosen lor His own inheritance.
O come, let us worship, and bow down, and kneel before the Lord, our Maker. For He is the Lord our God; and we are the people of His pasture, and the sheep of His hand.
O Lord My God (Beethoven)
Prayer of Invocation
Right Rev. Timotheos
O Lord our God, great, eternal, wonderful in glory, who keepest covenant and promise for those that love Thee with their whole heart, who art the life of all, the help of those that flee to Thee, the hope of those that cry unto Thee: Cleanse us from our sins, and from every thought displeasing to Thy goodness. Cleanse our souls and bodies, our hearts and consciences, that with pure heart and a clear mind, with perfect love and the calm hope, we may confidently and fearlessly pray to Thee;
And to Thy Name be the praise for ever. Amen.
Our Faiher, Who Art in Heaven...
The Right Rev. Dr. W. C. Lockhart
Our Father, who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy Name;
Thy kingdom come;
Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread;
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trespass against us;
And lead us not into temptation,
But deliver us from evil.
For Thine is the kingdom, the power,
and the glory, for ever and ever. Amen
Responsive Reading
Rev. D. P. Neufeld	The Right Rev. J. Logan-Vencta
Clergy: Response: Clergy:
Response:
Clergy:
Response:
Clergy:
Response:
I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help. My help cometh from the Lord, which made heaven and earth.
He will not suffer thy foot to be moved: he that keepeth thee will not slumber.
Behold, he that keepeth thee shall neither slumber nor sleep.
The Lord is thy keeper; the Lord is thy shade upon thy right hand. The sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the moon by night.
The Lord shall preserve thee from all evil; he shall preserve thy soul.
The Lord shall preserve thy going out and thy coming in, from this time forth, and even for evermore.
July 4, 1967
[Stage Direction]
Hymn
All people that on earth do dwell,
Sing to the Lord with cheerful voice,
Him serve with mirth, His praise forth tell Come ye before Him and rejoice.
Know that the Lord is God indeed;
Without our aid He did us make;
We are His folk, He doth us feed,
And for His sheep He doth us take.
O enter then His gates with praise,
Approach with joy His courts unto;
Praise, laud, and bless His name always,
For it is seemly so to do.
For why the Lord our God is good;
His mercy is for ever sure;
His truth at all times firmly stood,
And shall from age to age endure. Amen.
Scriptural Reading
The Prime Minister
Be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous. Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing. For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile. Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him speak peace, and ensue it. For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers; but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil. And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? But and if ye suffer for righteousness sake, happy are ye; and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled.
The Centennial Anthem Scriptural Reading
His Eminence Cardinal Roy
I entreat you, then-I, a prisoner for the Lord's sake: as God has called you, live up to your calling. Be humble always and gentle, and patient too. Be forbearing with one another and charitable. Spare no effort to make fast with bonds of peace and unity which the Spirit gives. There is one body and one Spirit, as there is also one hope held out in God's call to you; one faith, one baptism: one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But each of us has been given his gift, his due portion of Christ's bounty ... to equip God's people for work in His service, to the building up of the body of Christ. So shall we all at last attain to the unity inherent in our faith and our knowledge of the Son of God-to mature manhood, measured by nothing less than the full stature of Christ.
Let us speak the truth in love; so shall we fully grow up into Christ. He is the head, and on Him the whole body depends. Bonded and knit together by every constituent joint, the whole frame grows through the due activity of each part, and builds itself up in love.
The Centennial Hymn Prayer of Thanksgiving
The Most Rev. H. H. Clark
Almighty God, of whose righteous will all things are, and were created; Thou last gathered our people into a great nation, and sent them to sow
[Stage Direction]
July 4. 1967
beside all waters, and multiply sure dwellings on the earth. Deepen the root of our life in everlasting righteousness. Make us equal to our high trusts, reverent in the use of freedom, just in the exercise of power, generous in the protection of weakness. With all Thy blessings, bless Thy servant Elizabeth, our Queen, with all members of the Royal House. Fill her heart with such loyalty to Thee, that her people may be exalted by their loyalty to her. To our legislators and councillors give insight and faithfulness, that our laws may clearly speak the right, and our judges purely interpret them. May wisdom and knowledge be the stability of our times, and our deepest trust be in Thee, the Lord of nations, and the King of Kings. Amen.
A Litany of Re-Dedication
Rabbi S. M. Zambrowsky-The Right Rev. Dr. W. C. Lockhart
Clergy: Remembering our heritage with gratitude and our progress with humility, let us now re-dedicate ourselves to those moral and spiritual principles which have been the foundation of our freedom. O Lord our God, that all our people may live and labour, dream and build, fulfilling their destiny under Thy providence:
Response: We re-dedicate ourselves, O Lord.
Clergy: That all may share a common purpose, striving for unity, honoring our many origins, cultures, and religious faiths:
Response: We re-dedicate ourselves, O Lord.
Clergy: That we may grow in brotherhood, without fear, without arrogance, without servility, in constant pursuit of righteousness:
Response: We re-dedicate ourselves, O Lord.
Clergy: That we may not think of ourselves alone, but of all mankind, acting within the family of nations with understanding and generosity, with patience and wisdom:
Response: We re-dedicate ourselves, O Lord.
Clergy: That in all our earthly tasks we may so order our lives as ever to confess Thy care and rule:
All: Hear us and help us, O Lord our God, and to Thy Name be the glory forever. Amen.
Hymn-Now Thank We all Our God
Now thank we all our God,
With heart, and hands and voices,
Who wondrous things hath done,
In whom His world rejoices;
Who from our mother's arms Hath blessed us on our way With countless gifts of love,
And still is ours today.
O may this bounteous God Through all our life be near us,
With ever joyful hearts And blessed peace to cheer us And keep us in His grace,
And guide us when perplexed,
And free us from all ills In this world and the next.
July 4, 1967
[Stage Direction]
The Benediction
The Most Rev. H. H. Clark
May the God of peace Himself give you peace at all times and in all ways. Those things which you have learned, and received, and heard, and seen do. And the God of peace be with you. Amen.
The Canadian Guards Band,
Captain C. A. W. Adams, C.D., L.R.A.M., A.R.C.M., Director of Music.
Dominion Carillonneur,
Robert Donnell.
Centennial Choir,
Nicholas Goldschmidt.
The Centennial Anthem,
Words: Robert Choquette Music: Healey Willan.
The Centennial Hymn,
Words: Kenneth A. Moyer Music: Rex Le Lacheur
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, July 5, 1967