1968-12-09

[Stage Direction]
Fourth report of standing committee on finance, trade and economic affairs, in French and in English-Mr.	Gaston Clermont
(Gatineau).
[Note: Text of foregoing report appears in today's Votes and Proceedings.]


Right Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Prime Minister: Mr. Speaker, I should like to table, with the consent of the house, copies of the English and French versions of Volume II entitled "Education" of the report of the royal commission of inquiry on bilingualism and biculturalism.


Mr. Speaker:: Has the right hon. Prime Minister leave to table these documents?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



PROCEDURE


[Stage Direction]
On the order: Motions:
December 6, 1968-Mr. Blair (Chairman of the Special committee on procedure of the house):
That the fourth report of the special committee on procedure of the house, presented to the house on Friday, December 6, 1968, be concurred in.
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order with respect to this notice of motion. The point of order I wish to raise is to the effect that in the light of the privileges and practices of the house this matter should not be dealt with in the way proposed, and further that consideration should be given to the form of this motion before we reach the point at which it is moved for debate. I do not 29180-231
contend that it is necessary for Your Honour to rule on my point of order today, but in view of the fact that this is the first opportunity for me to raise the point of order I felt I should do so at this moment lest I be out of court if I left it until later.
Standing order 50 reads as follows:
Whenever Mr. Speaker is of the opinion that a motion offered to the house is contrary to the rules and privileges of parliament, he shall advise the house thereof immediately, before putting the question thereon, and quote the standing order or authority applicable to the case.
I do not contend that there is a precise rule or standing order governing this matter. Indeed, there are no standing orders that tell us how to revise our standing orders. I do contend, however, that dealing with the matter in this way is contrary to the privileges of parliament, and I make that contention on three grounds. In the first place I draw the attention of Your Honour and the house to the fact that on other occasions when the rules of the House of Commons have been subjected to a thorough overhaul, it has been done by referring the matter to the committee of the whole house. I contend, therefore, that it is against the privileges of parliament to ask us to deal with this major overhaul with the Speaker in the chair, which gives us no opportunity to deal with the various rules one by one.
May I take a moment to document my contention that the privileges of parliament are clear so far as our past practice is concerned. In 1867, the first time there was any revision of the rules this parliament inherited from the parliament of the former Province of Canada, a motion was made on December 28 to refer the proposals made by the committee at that time to the committee of the whole house.
The next time the rules were revised was in 1876, and the same practice was followed. If you will consult Hansard for that year, at page 905, for March 29, 1876, you will find that the matter was referred to the committee of the whole house. The rules were dealt with seriatim by that committee of the whole house, and subsequently the house gave them both second and third reading.
December 9, 1968

Proposed Changes in Procedure [DOT] (2:40 p.m.)
In other words, it was clear in the early days that these were matters that had to be dealt with as being of substance and importance; that the house had to have an opportunity to deal with the rules individually in committee as well as to pass on them in the house itself.
The next major overhaul came in 1906. Again, if one refers to Hansard of July 9 of that year, page 7459, he will find that Right Hon. Sir Wilfrid Laurier moved the motion to refer to the committee of the whole house the report of a special committee on procedure which had been presented earlier. The same thing happened in 1910 when there was another major overhaul. The motion was made on April 29 of that year, as recorded at page 8336 of Hansard. Again it was Sir Wilfrid Laurier who made the motion to refer the committee's report to the committee of the whole house.
The next occasion when there was a major change in the rules of the house was in 1913.
I will come back to it later, rather than dealing with it at this point, because it presents a very interesting exception to the rule. After that the next occasion was 1927. On March 18 of that year, as recorded in Hansard at page 1337, Mr. Lapointe moved that the report of the committee that had been tabled be referred to the committee of the whole house.
The next occasion was 1944. On March 7 of that year Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King moved that the committee's report which had been tabled be referred to the committee of the whole house. That was the first occasion upon which I participated in a debate on procedure. I remember it very well. It did not get very far; certain members were against it, it bogged down in committee of the whole, and that committee's report was never adopted.
The next occasion was 1955, when we had a very thorough study under the direction of Hon. Walter Harris. The report of the committee was presented and on June 14, as recorded in Hansard at page 4751, Mr. Harris moved that the matter be dealt with in the committee of the whole house, and this was done commencing July 1 of that year. The next major overhaul came in 1965. On that occasion Mr. Pearson on June 8, as recorded in Hansard at page 2129, moved that the matter be dealt with in the committee of the whole house.
So our practice over the years is clear. Changing our rules is not something we do by


a sudden death motion with Mr. Speaker in the chair, which gives us no opportunity to deal with the rules seriatim. It has almost always been done by referring committee reports to the committee of the whole house.
There are some exceptions to this practice, and I draw attention to them quite frankly. These exceptions do not alter the general rule. For example, there have been a number of occasions when committee reports proposed temporary changes. I had the privilege of moving some of them myself. They were moved with Mr. Speaker in the chair. There were a few occasions when the right hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefen-baker) was prime minister, when the same thing was done when some temporary rules were put in for one year, then another year and continued. There was no objection to its being done that way, so it was done on that occasion by adopting a report with Mr. Speaker in the chair.
I submit that in all these instances there was general consent to its being done in that way and they do not invalidate the established practice that whenever there is a major overhaul the committee's report is referred to the committee of the whole house.
The only exception to this rule so far as any substantial change is concerned was in the year 1913. I hope my hon. friends to the right will not take umbrage if I again express some criticism of the Tories of that day. The Tories of today are a little different; they are now Progressive Conservatives.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Stanley Howard Knowles: On
that occasion back in 1913, Sir Robert Borden was prime minister. As all students of history know, parliament was engaged in the naval aid bill debate, which went on and on and on. In due course the government of the day stopped the debate right in the middle of it and brought in a motion to amend the rules. One of the changes proposed in that motion was the introduction of the infamous closure rule, which we now have as standing order 33. The matter was not referred to a committee of the whole house; it was done on a government motion with Mr. Speaker in the chair. But I hope no Liberal will cite that precedent. If he should, I would ask him to read the oratory of Sir Wilfrid Laurier who then sat on the opposition side of the house and condemned the whole practice out of hand. One of the things Sir Wilfrid Laurier complained about was the very fact that the
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
matter was not being dealt with in committee of the whole house. I submit that the position taken by the Liberal leader of that day still holds at the present time.
So that is my first point. The others will not take so long. My first point is that the privileges of the house are clear, the rules are ours, and we have the right to be protected against one motion covering a whole host of rules, some of which we are for and some of which we are against. This denies us the opportunity to consider carefully this important matter. As I said, it has been done every time, except once, by reference to committee of the whole house, and that one time is not a precedent because it was opposed bitterly by the Liberals of the day. Furthermore, even on that occasion it was not a case of a report from a special committee but was rather a straight government motion on the order paper.
The second point I wish to make is that I have found at least one case-there may be others-where concurrence in a report with Mr. Speaker in the chair did not put into effect what was contained in the report. I will not take the time of the house to go into this now-I will be glad to present a memorandum on the point-but I submit there was some doubt as to whether the mere concurrence in a report with Mr. Speaker in the chair without the rules having been considered seriatim in committee of the whole would effect changes in our standing orders.
The third point is that I contend that although this motion seems proper because there is provision in the rules for motions to concur in committee reports, it is a disguised way of making us deal with a complicated question on one vote. May I remind Your Honour that on June 15, 1964, Mr. Speaker Macnaughton had to deal with this issue on the occasion of the flag debate, and those who were here will remember that that motion in its first form contained two separate sections. Some of us contended it was a complicated matter and we had the right to have it divided into its constituent parts. There was a procedural argument about it and Mr. Speaker Macnaughton gave his ruling on the day I indicated. That ruling is to be found in Hansard from page 4303 to page 4306. Mr. Speaker Macnaughton went over our own practices; he also went over the practices of the British House of Commons, and in the end he relied on standing order 1 of our rules which says that if nothing is provided for in our rules we have to go by the practices in the British house.
DEBATES	3641
Proposed Changes in Procedure
The precedents in the ruling he gave on that occasion made it clear that it is the Speaker's duty to see to it that members are not put in the position where they have to vote at once on several phases of a matter, to some of which they may be opposed and others which they may be prepared to support. I submit that this is what we are being presented with in disguise in the fourth report which is mentioned in the motion on the order paper at the moment, which contains some proposals which I for one am quite happy to support. It also contains at least one proposal to which I am strongly and bitterly opposed. I contend that I personally have the right to vote separately on those different rules in committee of the whole, and I contend that parliament as a whole has this right.
I found some interesting quotations in my research into these experiences during the past hundred years. One of them which amused me was back in 1876 when the rules were being revised. The house went into committee of the whole in the proper way. But one member complained bitterly that the changes in the rules were not going far enough. In fact he said, "If we don't watch out the sessions are going to get longer; they will be three months a year instead of two." This was in 1876. I also found many occasions when the chairman of the special committee, usually the Speaker himself, said to the house that the way we must deal with this is not on a partisan basis, not on the basis of government versus opposition, but in the full recognition that these are the rules of the parliament of Canada, a parliament that belongs not to us but to all the people. I submit, therefore, that we should not be confronted with any short cuts. We should deal with these rules in a way that has been made clear by the practices of this House of Commons for the past 100 years.
[DOT] (2:50 p.m.)


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (President of the Privy Council):: I can just deal briefly, Mr. Speaker, with the three points brought up by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre. His first proposition was that it is one of the privileges of the house that the rules should be amended by a procedure whereby a resolution is put in the committee of the whole house. I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that the precedents cited by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre indicated that there are at least two procedures for dealing with
December 9, 1968

Proposed Changes in Procedure changes in the rules of the house. These changes can be dealt with either by way of a resolution to be dealt with in committee of the whole, as indicated in certain examples by the hon. member, or alternatively in the manner of proposals made in a committee and the recommendation that the report of the committee should be considered with Mr. Speaker in the chair. This procedure has equal validity.
I suggest there were really these two options open and we have chosen the one option, namely that of dealing with these very complicated matters through a report of the special committee on procedure and a motion for concurrence in that report. I point out that in recent years, on April 26, 1967, an order of the house was adopted covering some fairly complicated changes in the rules. As the hon. member says, those changes were made on a provisional basis; neverthless they were complicated, and this was done by concurrence in a committee report. This was the case, too, with regard to a permanent change which was made in the rules by concurrence in a committee report recommending a time limit for the ringing of the bells.
There are, therefore, precedents to support both these vehicles for getting house approval of these particular measures. I would therefore disagree with the argument advanced by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre when he says there is only a unique procedure for doing this when you have complicated and perhaps controversial proposals.
I should like to make reference to one other matter which the hon. member mentioned, and that is that this is a complicated question and therefore is not to be decided on one single vote. I point out in the first place that the house decided, and I think it was a wise decision, that changes of the scope which have been considered in the special committee on procedure are perhaps better made by a small representative group of members in a special committee on procedure rather than in the house as a whole. I would say that is so because it was found necessary to hold no less than 26 sessions of that particular committee, and to invoke the assistance of the people at the table as well as other officers of the house for the purpose of drawing up these very complicated changes in the standing orders. I make the basic argument, therefore, that if changes are to be made, those changes should be made in a special committee on procedure because that is the most effective forum for dealing with such an examination.


It is acknowledged at once there is not general support for all the proposals. It is really because of this non-support of the whole of the report of the special committee on procedure that there was not a single report but three reports. The first report was merely for the purpose of explaining the attitude of the committee toward the proposals, and a general description of the changes. The second report contains the principal changes in the standing orders and also those which are the most subject to controversy. The third report on the order paper, the fifth report of the committee, incorporates those changes, which it has been assumed by the special committee on procedure will not be of a controversial nature and will probably find general acceptance in the house.
It is not true to say that the hon. member who has just spoken or any other hon. member will be without a vehicle for expressing his disagreement with what the committee has done, or without a vehicle for getting any committee decision changed. I suggest, given the complicated nature of the subject matter and given the complicated nature of the discussions which have taken place, probably the most appropriate manner for having the proposals changed is by taking the action that is open to hon. members, namely by moving an amendment to refer the report back to the special committee on procedure so the committee might further consider the report along certain lines, which would be suggested in the amendment to the original motion for concurrence in the report.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, the two principal points made by the hon. member are, if I may express the last one first, that the house would not have an opportunity to express its opinion on the various proposals; and in answer I contend this opportunity does exist under the present procedure. The first of his two points is that there is a compelling precedent that requires rule changes of this kind to be dealt with in only one way; and I contend this argument is wrong, and wrong in face of the very precedents cited by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, which indicate that either procedure has been and is acceptable to the house in changing the standing orders of the house.


Mr. Baldwin:: Next year the government will be changing them by order in council.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre suggested in his presentation that the debate on the report be
December 9, 1968

carried out in committee of the whole rather than with the Speaker in the chair. He referred to a number of precedents and rules which he suggests should be considered by the Chair. I have also listened to the arguments brought forth by the President of the Privy Council. To give effect to the very reasonable suggestion of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre I will consider this question between now and tomorrow.
I might say that my natural inclination would be to have the debate in the committee of the whole rather than with the Speaker in the chair, but I will not allow this personal consideration to colour my objective judgment.
Shall the motion stand?


Some hon. Members:: Stand.
On the order: Motions:
December 6, 1968-Mr. Blair (Chairman of the Special committee on procedure of the house):
That the fifth report of the special committee on procedure of the house, presented to the house on Friday, December 6, 1968, be concurred in.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for
Grenville-Carleton.


Mr. Blair:: Stand.


Stanley Howard Knowles: raise the same point of order, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Motion stands.



CENTENNIAL MEDAL


Mr. RobeTl Stanbury (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of Stale):: Mr. Speaker, if the house gives me leave I should like to table the list of recipients, excluding those nominated by the Canadian armed forces, of the Canadian Centennial medal, 1967.
Questions


Mr. Speaker:: Has the parliamentary secretary leave to table these documents?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. Harding: 1.	What was the total amount paid, or estimated to be paid, by the Government of Canada to the provinces for both unconditional grants and conditional grants for (a) the fiscal year 1967-68 (b) the fiscal year 1968-69?
2.	What was the specific or estimated amount paid to each of the provinces by the Government of Canada for each category under the unconditional grants for (a) the fiscal year 1967-68 (b) the fiscal year 1968-69?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of Finance):: 1.	The total amounts paid, or estimated to be paid, by the government of Canada to the provinces for both unconditional and conditional grants for the fiscal years 1967-68 and 1968-69 are as follows: (a) 1967-68, $2,258,301,000; (b) 1968-69, $2,454,057,000.
Not included in these totals is the tax abatement portion of the post-secondary fiscal transfer. In 1967-68, the value of the tax abatement was $227,613,000. In 1968-69, the value of the tax abatement is estimated at $252,941,000.
2.	The estimated amounts paid to each of the provinces by the government of Canada for each category under the unconditional grants for the fiscal years 1967-68 and 1968-69 are as follows:
(a) for fiscal year 1967-68
Share of Income
	Statutory	Tax on certain		
	Subsidies	Utilities	Equalization	Stabilization
		(in thousands of dollars)		
Newfoundland	9,656	375	67,866	_Prince Edward Island	657	66	14,102	20Nova Scotia	2,132	634	77,350	New Brunswick	1,745	34	66,469	_Quebec	4,023	673	249,877	_Ontario	4,624	1,576	-	_Manitoba	2,127	276	43,659	_Saskatchewan	2,155	11	26,733	_Alberta	2,955	2,886	1,551	_British Columbia	1,673	169	-	-
December 9, 1968
Questions
(b) for fiscal year 1968-69
	Statutory Subsidies
Newfoundland	9,656
Prince Edward Island	657
Nova Scotia	2,132
New Brunswick	1,745
Quebec	4,023
Ontario	4,624
Manitoba	2,137
Saskatchewan	2,151
Alberta	2,955
British Columbia	1,672


FEDERAL SUPPORT FOR FILM SOCIETIES, ETC.
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 429-Mr. Roberts: (Supplementary)
Does the Government of Canada provide any financial support for film societies, film museums or cinematheques in Canada and, if so, what has been the amount expended for this purpose for each year since 1963?
Mr. Yves Forest (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: In so far
as the Centennial Commission is concerned the answer is as follows: The following grants were made by the commission during 1967: La Cinematique Canadienne, $33,000.00; Canadian Film Institute, $26,000.00; Association of Amateur Cinematographers, $400.00.
In so far as the National Film Board is concerned the answer is as follows: Since 1963-64 the National Film Board has entered into contract annually with the Canadian Film Institute in the amount of $20,000 for which services, including the maintenance of film libraries, film catalogues and listings by subject and general information for the public on films are provided.
In 1965-66, the board contracted with La Cinematique Canadienne in the amount of $8,000 to produce, co-ordinate and distribute an exhibit in Canada and Europe of the work of Norman McLaren.
In 1967-68 and 1968-69, the Board made grants of $1,000 and $2,000 respectively to the Canadian Film Awards.
In so far as the National Research Council of Canada is concerned the answer is as follows: 1962-63, $24,500.00; 1963-64, $24,500.00; 1964-65, $24,500.00; 1965-66, $24,500.00; 1966-67, $24,500.00; 1967-68, $29,500.00.
[Mr. Benson.)
Share of Income Tax on certain
Utilities Equalization Stabilization (in thousands of dollars)
851	72,675	-150	14,399	-1,438	82,384	-77	75,030	-1,527	285,666	-3,575	-	-626	40,107	-25	18,391	-6,548	-	-383	-	-
The amounts listed are the financial support given to the National Science Film Library which was established in 1962 and which is operated by the Canadian Film Institute under contract with the National Research Council.


AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, CAPITAL COMMISSION
Mr. Code: 1.	Who are the Members of the Agricultural Advisory Committee of the National Capital Commission and, what is (a) the present occupation (b) the experience, of each of them?
2.	What are the terms of reference of the Committee?
3.	In each year 1956 to date, how many meetings of the Committee were held?
4.	What are the major recommendations which have been made by the Committee?


Mr. Russell C. Honey (Parliamentary Sec-etary to Minister of Forestry and Rural Development):: 1. Dr. Grant Carman (Chairman): (a) Director of information, Canada Department of Agriculture; (b) Research officer, animal husbandry division, Department of Agriculture, 1953-59; chief of scientific information section research branch, Department of Agriculture, 1959-1965. Dr. Rosario Pelletier: (a) Special advisor, ARDA, Department of Forestry and Rural Development; (b) 23 years director of experimental farm, Ste. Anne de la Pocatiere; assistant director ARDA since its inception in 1961; consultant with the World Bank (UN) on economic planning, Morocco, 1967; chief of FAO mission for the United Nations in Iran, 1952-54. Dr. Peter C. Stobbe: (a) Director of
December 9, 1968

364S
Soil Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture; (b) Two years Modern Experimental Farm, Manitoba-soil fertility programs; eight years soil surveys and soil classification in Manitoba, Quebec and New Brunswick, Department of Agriculture; twenty years principal correlator and supervisor of soil survey and soil classification programs in eastern Canada, Central Experimental Farm, Ottawa; nine years Director of the Soil Research Institute, Ottawa. Prof. N. H. Lithwick: (a) Professor Economics, Carleton University; (b) Assistant professor of Economics, Carleton University 1963 to 1967; Associate Professor of Economics, Carleton University, 1967-68 and Chairman of the Graduate Program in the Department of Economics; Member, Committee of Management, School of International Affairs, Carleton University; Consultant to the Science Council of Canada, 1967-68. Mr. Howard D. Carr: (a) Credit Policy Advisor, Farm Credit Corporation; (b) Present post since 1963; six years Appraiser and Chief appraiser Canadian Farm Loan Board; five years Settlement Officer, Veterans' Land Act.
2.	The Committee considers and investigates matters relating to the use and development of land in which the National Capital Commission may be interested for agriculture and forestry purposes (i.e.) rental policies, maintenance, rehabilitation farming practice; economic studies.
3.	Since its inception on February 25, 1966, the Committee has met as follows: 1966, 4 meetings; 1967, 3 meetings; 1968, 4 meetings.
4.	This Advisory Committee has considered many matters over the period of its existence. Its recommendations are made to assist the Commission in its consideration of certain matters. Such recommendations, which are subject to approval or action by higher authority, have traditionally been considered as privileged information.


HISTORICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE, NATIONAL CAPITAL COMMISSION
Mr. Code: 1.	Who are the Members of the Historical Advisory Committee of the National Capital Commission, giving date of initial appointment in each case?
2.	What are the terms of reference of the Committee?
Questions
3.	In each year 1956 to date, how many meetings of the Committee were held?
4.	What are the major recommendations which have been made by the Committee during the said years?


Russell Clayton Honey: 1. Mr. W. E. Fancott, November 15, 1960; Mr. W. E. D. Halliday, November 15, 1960; Mr. R. H. Hubbard, November 15, 1960; Dr. R. F. Legget, November 15, 1960; Mr. Eric Morse, November 15, 1960; Mr. A. J. H. Richardson, November 15, 1960; Mr. D. Ritchie, November 15, 1960; Mr. Augustin Potvin, June 26, 1961; Dr. Louis M. Bloomfield, June 3, 1963; Dr. J. E. Bissonnette, June 3, 1963; Mrs. F. R. Crawley, June 3, 1963; Mr. Egide Dande-neault, January 20, 1964; Mr. David Farr, January 20, 1964; Dr. W. K. Lamb, January 20, 1964; Mr. Marc Laterreur, January 20, 1964; Prof. Jean Hamelin, October 20, 1967; Mrs. E. S. Stanley, November, 1967; Mr. C. C. J. Bond, January, 1968; President of the Ottawa Historical Society, January 29, 1962.
2.	The historical advisory committee makes recommendations with regard to policies relating to the administration, preservation and maintenance of any historic place or historic museum of the National Capital region.
3.	The historical advisory committee held its first meeting on March 24, 1969. Other meetings were: 1959, 5; 1960, 3; 1961, 2; 1962, 2; 1963, 3; 1964, 2; 1965, 2; 1966, 1; 1967, 1; 1968, 1.
4.	This advisory committee has considered many matters over the period of its existence. Its recommendations are made to assist the commission in its consideration of certain matters. Such recommendations, which are subject to approval or action by higher authority, have traditionally been considered as privileged information.


ADVISORY DESIGN COMMITTEE, CAPITAL COMMISSION
Mr. Code: 1.	Who are the members of the Advisory Committee on Design of the National Capital Commission, when was each appointed and what is (a) the present occupation (b) the experience of each?
2.	What are the terms of reference of the Committee?
3.	In each year 1956 to date, how many meetings of the Committee were held?
4.	What are the major recommendations which have been made by the Committee during the said years?

December 9, 1968
Questions


Russell Clayton Honey: 1. There are ten members of the advisory committee on design to the National Capital Commission including the chairman. Members are: Dr. T. Howarth (chairman) architect and town planner, May 1964, Toronto; Mr. D. W. Graham, landscape architect, March 1967, Ottawa; Mr. Hart Massey, architect, June 1963, Ottawa; Mr. D'arcy Audet, architect, September, 1964, Hull; Mr. R. Affleck, architect, January, 1968, Montreal; Mr. J. L. Lalonde, architect, May, 1964, Montreal; Mr. J. Gareau, architect, May, 1964, Montreal; Mr. B. Myers, architect, January, 1968, Toronto; Mr. D. Crinion, Architect, March 1967, Ottawa; Mr. J. Issalys, Architect, June, 1960, Hull.
Each member has been selected for his broad experience and knowledge in his profession. All members are in practice or teaching.
2.	The Committee's terms of reference are to consider proposals for the location erection alteration or extension of a building or other work by any person on public lands, or by or on behalf of a department, in the National Capital Region.
3.	Prior to December 1958 the Committee was known as the Architectural Committee of the Federal District Commission.
The Advisory Committee on Design to the National Capital Commission held its first meeting in March 1959.
The number of meetings held by these two committees are as follows: 1956, 9; 1957, 5; 1958, 5; 1959, 6; 1960, 6; 1961, 9; 1962, 13; 1963, 8; 1964, 15; 1965, 13; 1966, 13; 1967, 12; 1968, 8 (to date).
4.	This Advisory Committee has considered many matters over the period of its existence. Its recommendations are made to assist the Commission in its consideration of certain matters. Such recommendations, which are subject to approval or action by higher authority, have traditionally been considered as privileged information.


USE OF SATELLITE IN COMMUNICATIONS SERVICE
Mr. Blouin: 1.	Has the federal government made the necessary arrangements to provide television and communications service everywhere in Canada when the Canadian satellite is in operation?

2.	Will these networks be put into operation with priority being given to isolated areas such as the Canadian North, as indicated by the White Paper submitted by the Minister of Industry on March 28, 1968 and, if so, on approximately what date is it expected that the English and French networks will commence operation?


Hon. Eric W. Kierans (Postmaster General):: In so far as Telecommunications is concerned
1.	The White Paper submitted by the Minister of Industry on March 28,	1968, clearly
establishes the government's policy in that particular field. As for arrangements to provide television and communications service everywhere in Canada when the Canadian satellite is in operation, it is intended to provide these to the maximum but the final decision can only be made when a comprehensive study of the system has been completed.
2.	The comprehensive study mentioned above will provide the government with the necessary information to give an adequate answer to this question, but a prime objective of the satellite system will be to extend TV and communications service to the North.


RETURNING OFFICERS, QUEBEC CONSTITUENCIES
Mr. Dumont: What are the names and addresses of the returning officers of the following constituencies: Beauce, Bellechasse, L6vis, Frontenac, Lotblnifere, Richmond, Compton and Shefford and what amounts were paid to them by the government for their work in the years 1962 to 1968 inclusive?


Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Secretary of State):: For the constituencies mentioned above, the following are the returning officers for: (1) The electoral district as established by the Representation Act of 1952. (2) The electoral district which retained the name of its predecessor but whose boundaries were redefined by the representation order of June 1966. (3) The electoral district created by the representation order of June 1966.
BEAUCE: (1) Roger Bolduc, 169 nord, 4* avenue, Saint-Georges-Est (P.Q.); 1962, $1,853; 1963,	$2,551;	1964, nil; 1965,	$2,730.50.
(Resigned in Nov. 1966). (2) Gerard Cote, 147 est, 13" avenue, Saint-Georges (P.Q.); 1966, $100; 1967, $611.19; 1968, $2,786.99.
BELLECHASSE: (1) G. Labrecque, Saint-Raphael (P.Q.); 1962, $1,600; 1963, $1,825;
December 9, 1968

1964, nil; 1965, $1,750; 1966, nil; 1967, nil; 1968, nil. (2) Albert Patry, Beaumont, (P.Q.);
1966,	$100; 1967, $690. (2) Ovila Prevost, St-Charles-de-Bellechasse (P.Q.); 1966, $100;
1967,	$2,353.86.
LEVIS: (1) Julien Dumont, 96, rue Fraser, Levis, (P.Q.); 1962, $1,619; 1963, $1,864.78; 1964, nil; 1965, $2,006.88; 1966, nil; 1967, nil;
1968,	nil. (2) Evan B. Atkinson, 4, rue St-Felix, Levis, (P.Q.); 1966, $100; 1967, $602; 1968, $2,781.18.
FRONTENAC: (3) Wilfrid Roy, St-Pierre-de Broughton (P.Q.); 1966, $100. Jos.-Luc Roy, 143, avenue Cartier, La Guadeloupe (P.Q.); 1967, $841; 1968, $2,397.90.
LOTBINIERE: (1) W. Desruisseaux, Sainte-Croix (P.Q.); 1962, $1,600; 1963, $1,700; 1964, nil; 1965, $1,750; 1966, nil; 1967, nil; 1968, nil. (2) Horace Bergeron, 99 est, rue Notre-Dame, Victoriaville (P.Q.); 1966, $75; 1967, $628; 1968, $2,646.53.
RICHMOND:	(3) J.-Philippe Bourque,
Chemin Richmond, Windsor (P.Q.); 1966, $100;
1967,	$556; 1968, $2,197.20.
COMPTON: (3) Herve Blouin, St-Isidore-d'Auckland (P.Q.);	1966, $75; 1967, $616;
1968,	$2,518.12.
SHEFFORD: (1) Paul Langlois, 196, avenue du Parc, Granby (P.Q.); 1962, $1,744; 1963, $2,333.69; 1964, nil; 1965, $2,732.58; 1966, $50; 1967, $592; 1968, $2,489.30.


REGISTRATIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT BY STUDENTS
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	What number of High School and University Students were registered with Canada Manpower Offices for summer employment in the months of May. June, July, August, for the years 1966, 1967, 1968?
2.	Of this number, how many were placed for employment and how many was the Department unable to place for employment in each of the above months for each of the above years?


Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: 1. Clients of Canada Manpower centres seeking temporary employment are serviced in order of registration. Students have not been identified in the past as a special group but rather as individuals who were entitled to the same service available to all clients. For these reasons statistics for 1966, 1967, 1968 on student registration at Canada Manpower centres have not been compiled separately and are not available as such.
Questions
2.	For the same reasons mentioned above, the number of students placed for employment and the number the department was unable to place cannot be determined completely. Summer unemployment in the 14 to 24 age group, which had been at a low level in previous years, increased sharply in 1968. An intensive publicity campaign launched in late July, and increased effort by Canada Manpower centres produced a positive effect. A record of student placements was maintained separately from other placements of a temporary nature from July 25 to September 11, 1968. During this period 13,131 students were placed in employment.


BOOKLET &quot;CANADIAN OPPORTUNITIES- HOUSING&quot;
Mr. Nesbitt: Will the Minister of Manpower and Immigration inquire into a booklet published by his department and apparently distributed to prospective immigrants overseas, under the tile "Canadian Opportunities-Housing" in order to ascertain when the "Juliana Apartments" in Ottawa should have been singled out as a typical Canadian apartment dwelling and whether the owners are being charged for the free visual publicity provided by a full-page colour photo?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Yes. The building in question is not described as a typical Canadian apartment dwelling. Rather, in context with a variety of photographs in the pamphlet, it forms only one part of a pictorial description of the different varieties of accommodation available in Canada. None is described as "typical". The apartment building is not identified by its name or the city of its location, nor is this pamphlet distributed in Canada. Under these circumstances, therefore, it cannot be seen how the owners of the building are receiving free publicity.


STATUE OF SIR CHARLES TUPPER ON PARLIAMENT HILL
Mr. Coates: Is the government giving consideration to the erection of a statue of Sir Charles Tupper on Parliament Hill and, if so, when, and, if not, for what reason?


Gérard Pelletier: The government does not have under consideration at this time extending the present sculpture project to include others who have at some time held the post of prime minister, including Sir Charles Tupper.

Decembei 9, 1968
Questions


ELECTRICAL GRID SYSTEM, CANADA-U.S.
Mr. Coales: Have negotiations been initiated by the federal government with the Government of the United States regarding the establishment of a grid system for the transportation of electrical energy between Eastern Canada and the North-Eastern United States and, if so, what progress has been made in these negotiations?


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


REPORTS ON MINE DUMP FIRES
Mr. Coates: Has the federal government secured reports on mine dump fires that are available in the United States and, if so, what has been the conclusion of the reports in the elimination or containment of such fires?


Jean-Luc Pepin: The mines branch, of the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, reviews United States reports, principally by the United States bureau of mines, on mine dump fires, as they are published.
The conclusions vary, dependent on circumstances. The most successful control of mine dump fires has been experienced by the blanketing of the dumps with inert material to exclude air, or by water spraying.


ECONOMIC STUDY OF EASTERN TOWNSHIPS, QUEBEC
Mr. Beaudoin: Does the government propose to undertake a detailed study of the economic situation in the Eastern Townships to determine what could be done to assist them?


Russell Clayton Honey: Not at this time.


MACLEAN HUNTER CABLE TV
Mr. Robinson: 1.	When did MacLean Hunter Cable TV Limited obtain a Canada Department of Transport Land Station License?
2.	(a) In what areas of Canada is this license valid (b) where are the towers located in each case (c) what is the height of each of the towers (d) does the proximity of the towers to aircraft flight paths and airport facilities affect in any way the reception of TV programming?

3.	What authorization was required from the municipality concerned prior to the provision of CATV service?
4.	Will Cable TV installation in any way affect the reception of TV signals for those who do not subscribe to the service?
5.	What charge is made to subscribers for the Cable TV service provided by MacLean Hunter Cable TV Ltd., and/or MacLean Hunter Limited and/or Frederick T. Metcalfe and/or Toronto Cable TV?
6.	Do regulations permit Cable TV service to be provided by use of public utilities such as (a) hydro facilities (b) telephone systems, and (c) any other public or private system?
7.	Are Cable TV operators authorized to place their own equipment of poles and line to provide this service?
8.	Is any consideration being given by the government to the introduction of legislation to provide that Cable TV be treated as a public utility in the manner of telephone service?


Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of Transport):: 1.	MacLean-Hunter Cable TV Limited obtained licences for land stations performing a commercial broadcasting receiving service on the following dates: 1. April 12, 1967; 2. August 11, 1967; 3. September 27, 1967; 4. November 9, 1967; 5. November 9, 1967; 6. December 28, 1967; 7. January 23, 1968; 8. January 23, 1968; 9. January 23, 1968; 10. January 23, 1968;	11. January 23,	1968;
12. January 23, 1968.
2(a) The licences issued were valid in the following areas: 1. Metropolitan Toronto including the township of Etobicoke, North York, East York, York and the township of Scarborough, the villages of Long Branch, Swansea and Forest Hill, the towns of Lea-side, Weston, New Toronto and Mimico, Toronto Island and the city of Toronto and the township of Toronto, and a portion of the township of Pickering; 2. Metropolitan Winnipeg; 3. Welland, Port Colborne, Niagara Falls, Ontario and surrounding area; 4. Welland, Thorold, Port Colborne, Fort Erie, St. Catharines, Niagara Falls, Ontario and surrounding area; 5. Burlington, Freeman, Boyne, Omagh, Drumquin, Streetsville, Clarkson, Oakville, Ontario and surrounding area; 6. St. Catharines, Ontario; 7. Owen Sound and Meaford, Ontario and adjoining suburbs; 8. North Bay, Ontario and portions of Widdi-field and West Ferris township; 9. Guelph, Ontario; 10. Collingwood, Ontario and surrounding area; 11. Midland, Penetanguishene and the intervening area; 12. Huntsville, Ontario.
December 9, 1968


CANADA PENSION PLAN INVESTMENT FUND
Mr. Nielsen: 4.	All securities held by the fund are special non-marketable securities with a term of 20 years and bear interest at rates equivalent at the time of purchase, to the average yield

December 9, 1968
Questions
to maturity on all negotiable bonds of the government of Canada, having a term to maturity of 20 years or more.
5.	The use of the funds invested by the Canada Pension Plan investment fund in provincial securities is a matter for each province.
6.	The funds made available through the Canada Pension Plan investment funds to the federal government are used for general purposes of the government of Canada.


WINTER WORKS PROJECTS, PORTNEUF CONSTITUENCY
Mr. Godin: While the winter works program was in effect, how much was granted to each of the parishes and towns in the present constituency of Portneuf?

Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (Minister of Manpower and Immigration:
Municipality	Federal Contributions 1958-59 to Nov. 21, 1968 (some claims outstanding)
Belair	$107,109.48
Cap Sante	3,640.31
Charlesbourg Ouest	26,144.67
Donnacona	76,846.93
Duberger	36,322.35
Fossambault sur le Lac	2,428.53
Lac Sergent	3,640.30
Lac St. Charles	146,751.66
L'Ancienne Lorette	36,507.55
Les Saules	107,724.98
Loretteville	214,956.36
Neufchatel	107,541.11
Neuville	1,745.79
Notre Dame des Laurentides	36,043.97
Notre Dame de Lorette	188,845.25
Pointe-aux-Trembles	30,768.62
Riviere-a-Pierre	13,607.32
St. Augustin de Desmaures	15,490.45
Ste Catherine	73,814.75
St. Emile	177,233.19
St. Gabriel de Valcartier	7,691.49
St. Gabriel Ouest	42,038.17
St. Leonard de Portneuf	2,089.05
Shannon	32,050.10
Stoneham and Tewkesbury	3,988.93
Val St. Michel	54,173.20
(Mr. Nielsen.]


REPORT ON REGIONAL AIRPORT, VICTORIAVILLE, QUE.
Mr. Fortin: When will the report of the study group considering the possibility of building a regional airport at Victoriaville be tabled?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: Economic and engineering studies have been authorized to determine an airport design and cost to ascertain if federal assistance to the city of Victoriaville for the development of a local airport would be justified. These studies were initiated at the request of the municipalities of Victoriaville, Plessisville, Arthabaska, Daveluyville, Princeville and Warwick, which have accepted the conditions under which federal assistance for airport development may be provided.
The engineering study will not be completed until next summer and there are no plans now to table the reports when completed.


PRESS RELEASES, TREASURY BOARD
Mr. Howard (Skeena): 1.	Do the government services presided over by the President of the Treasury Board issue documents which are of the nature of press releases, press communiques, news releases or the like and, if so, how many such documents have been issued since July 1, 1968?
2.	What has been the cost of (a) printing headings or cover sheets (b) typing the stencils (c) mimeographing or other form of duplicating (d) collating and stapling (e) addressing and mailing the said documents?
3.	With respect to the paper used for the said documents what is (a) its quality (b) the quantity used and the cost thereof?
4.	What is the estimate of the number of manhours consumed in the preparation, production and distribution of such documents?


Hon. C. M. Drury (President of the Treasury Board):: Insofar as the Treasury Board secretariat is concerned: 1. Yes; 15.
2.	(a) $29.07; (b) $98.44; (c) $586.03; (d) $96.47; (e) $152.66.
3.	(a) 40M, no. 7 Bond; (b) 45,500 sheets; cost $193.38.
4.	75 (estimated).


PRODUCTION DELAY, DEUTERIUM OP CANADA
Mr. Harries: 1.	When the first contract between Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and Deuterium of Canada Limited was made on February 27, 1964, what was the approximate date when it was expected that the heavy water plant to be built by the latter company would be in production?
2.	Has the expectation stated by Deuterium of Canada Limited and reported in Hansard on November 8, 1967, that production would begin in March, 1968, been borne out in fact?
December 9, 1968

3.	If not, what is the present expectation as to when production will begin?
4.	What is the estimate of the cost of the heavy water that was purchased from abroad between July 31, 1966 and June 30, 1968?
5.	With reference to the delivery schedule referred to in Hansard on January 22, 1968, when do each of the reductions in the prices to be paid to Deuterium of Canada Limited become effective?
6.	Has Atomic Energy of Canada Limited or the appropriate Minister protested to the owners of the company about the two-year delay in the beginning of production?


Jean-Luc Pepin: Atomic Energy of Canada Limited advises as follows:
1.	1 July, 1966.
2.	No.
3.	1 January, 1969.
4.	$29.3 million.
5.	1st reduction, 1 April, 1972; 2nd reduction, 1 October, 1974; 3rd reduction, 1 October, 1979; 4th reduction, 1 April, 1982.
6.	Yes.


JAPANESE PRODUCTION OF MEAT FROM WHEAT
Mr. Southam: What action is the government taking with a view to stepping up wheat sales to Japan in light of the recent announcement by the Japanese Nisshin Flour Milling Company that it would soon start a full-scale production of artificial meat from wheat, starting off with an initial 150 tons of synthetic meat per month.


Jean-Luc Pepin: The Nisshin Flour Milling Company indicate that their project to produce a meat substitute from wheat is still in the experimental stage. They expect to have a pilot plant in operation next spring. The Department of Industry, the Department of Trade and Commerce and the Canadian Wheat Board are keeping in close contact with this development with a view to future wheat sales.


IMMIGRATION FROM WEST INDIES
Mr. Nielsen: 1.	Has the attention of the Minister of Manpower and Immigration been drawn to a statement on November 7, 1968, by the Attorney General of Jamaica, that Canada's immigration policy is "wicked and disgraceful" in the sense that requirements as to skill are being utilized to practise "colour discrimination"?
2.	What criteria are applied to qualify Jamaican immigrants to Canada?
3.	What was the total number of applications for immigrant status in Canada emanating from residents of Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad, Bahamas and all other islands of the West Indies geograph-
Questions
ical group in 1967-68 and of the total number of applications from residents of the West Indies in 1967-68 (a) how many were granted approval for landed immigrant status (b) how many were rejected and, of those rejected, how many were coloured, in the sense of having black skins?
4.	How many were skilled and how many were unskilled?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: 1. Yes. However, the Attorney General, according to subsequent news reports, has indicated that his earlier statement was misinterpreted inasmuch as he had actually been referring to a situation which existed some eleven years ago rather than today.
2.	Canada's immigration policy is universal in application and free from any reference to race, ethnic origin, nationality or religion. Therefore, the criteria applied in the selection of immigrants from Jamaica, are exactly the same as those applied everywhere else in the world.
3.	During the period January 1, 1967 to September 30, 1968, immigrant applications for admission to Canada were received on behalf of 46,083 residents of the West Indies. Of this number (a) 12,496 were approved and (b) 24,999 were refused. Because of the completely non-discriminatory nature of Canadian immigration policy, no information whatever is sought or recorded to reflect an immigrant's racial or ethnic origin.
4.	Former residents of the West Indies who were granted landed immigrant status in Canada during 1967 and the first nine months of 1968 had the following occupational qualifications.
Occupational Qualifications	1967	1968 (to Sept. 30)Managerial	85	27Professional and technical	1153	697Clerical	1406	860Transportation trades	28	33Communication trades Commercial and financial sales	30	18workers	100	75Service and recreation workers	1364	687Farmers	18	26Miners	4	2Construction trades Manufacturing and mechanical	281	175trades	948	633Labourers	181	33Not Stated	203	7Non-workers	2602	2011Total immigration	8403	5284
December 9, 1968
Questions


FIRE DEPARTMENT, POINT EDWARD, N.S.
Mr. Muir (Cape Breion-The Sydneys): 1.	How many members comprise the Fire Department maintained by the Department of Transport at Point Edward, Cape Breton County, Nova Scotia?
2.	What are the names, addresses and ranks and length of service of each member of the present fire fighting force at Point Edward?
3.	Is it the intention of the Department of Transport to maintain this fire fighting force at the present strength and, if not. for what reason?
4.	Will such Fire Department be maintained at the present location and, if not, for what reason?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1.	24 members.
Length of Service
Name	Address	Rank	Effective FromAllison G. A.	37 Clyde Ave., Sydney River	FRI	March 2nd 1951Andrews L. G.	R.R. No. 1, North Sydney	FRI	August 2nd 1954Aucoin S.	1157 Westmount Rd., Sydney	FR2	May 9th 1946Beaton D. M.	14 Bay St. Glace Bay	FRI	December 28th 1966Bennet J. M.	257 South St., Glace Bay	FRI	January 30th 1949Blinkhorn J. F.	5 Macheon St., Sydney	FRI	November 16th 1953Calvert J. S.	4 Bay St., Glace Bay	FRI	December 28th 1966Conrad R. J.	102 Byron St., Sydney	FRI	February 18 th 1967Clarke G. H.	R.R. No. 1, North Sydney	FRI	April 1st 1965Evans R. F.	290 Keltic Dr., Sydney River	FRI	June 9th 1955Finlayson G.	47 Official Row, Reserve	FRI	December 28th 1966MacIntyre J. V.	29 Graham St., Glace Bay	FRI	August 26th 1951Maclsaac D. S.	52 Guy St., Sydney Mines	FRI	April 1st 1948MacCormack D. J.	989 Westmount Rd., Sydney	FR2	May 9th 1946Morrison D.	61 Braemore Rd., Westmount	FRI	July 1st 1966Nelson C. A. C.	554 Kings Rd., Sydney	FRI	February 27th 1967Roberts J. A.	Tower Rd., Glace Bay	FRI	December 28th 1966Ross E. D.	R.R. No. 1 Millville, Bras-d'Or	FRI	September 1st 1950Sheppard T. J.	R.R. No. 1, North Sydney	FR2	May 15th 1945Steele C. F.	25 Seaforth Dr., Sydney River	FRI	October 10th 1952Tellum G.	1041 Westmount Rd., Sydney	FR4	September 4th 1946Tredwell F.	38 International St. Glace Bay	FRI	January 16th 1967Wadden J. A.	R.R. No. 1, Glace Bay	FRI	December 28th 1966Wade W. P.	23 Roselle St., Sydney River	FR2	June 4th 1954

December 9, 1968

3.	Yes.
4.	Yes, as long as the location is a Department of Transport responsibility.


RUNWAY CONSTRUCTION, ROUYN-NORANDA AIRPORT
Mr. Caoueile: Does the Department of Transport intend to reconstruct the runway at the Rouyn-Noranda airport and, if so, when does it intend to carry out this work?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1.	Yes. During fiscal year 1969-70.


WORKS UNDER SECTION 92, B.N.A. ACT
Mr. Caouette: Does the Minister of Justice intend to keep, in the future, a list of the works which have been declared to be to the general advantage of Canada within the meaning of Section 92 of the BN A Act?


Hon. John N. Turner (Minister of Justice):: No. However to the extent that the text of the statutes are electronically stored in machine readable language upon the Revision of the statutes, information of this type will be obtainable by computer search.


METHOD OF FILLING HARBOURS BOARD VACANCIES
Mr. Caouette: When filling vacancies within the National Harbours Board what criteria does the government use to ensure that the whole region is represented and what other pertinent factors must it consider?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: Appropriate considerations of broad regional representation as well as other relevant factors are taken into consideration when filling vacancies on the board.


INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, QUEBEC
Mr. Fortin: 1.	Has the Department of Transport, on behalf of the government, set any final date for a decision regarding the development of an international airport in the Province of Quebec in the near future and, if so, what is the date set?
2.	What sites have been studied by the Department's experts?
3.	Of the sites proposed, have any been eliminated so far and, if so, what were the reasons for such elimination in each case?
Questions
4.	What are the criteria set by the Department's experts for the development of an international airport?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: 1.	Discussions with the province of Quebec are still in progress. It is hoped that a site decision will be announced very early in the new year.
2.	A very large region, defined by the Laurentian mountains in the north, the Quebec-Ontario provincial line to the west, the Quebec-United States border to the south and a line approximately 70 miles to the east of Montreal, was carefully examined and some 20 possible sites were identified.
3.	At present, 17 of those sites identified have been eliminated because they were judged to be less favourable than the remaining three when all criteria were considered. As discussions with the province are still in progress, the specific locations of these sites must remain confidential to preclude land speculation.
4.	The location of a new airport is subject to many complex and interrelated criteria. Some of the major criteria are: (a) Air space utilisation; (b) Noise in relation to urban areas; (c) Accessibility; (d) Distribution of users; (e) Relationship to Dorval airport; (f) Cost and availability of land; (g) Topography; (h) Soil condition; (i) Meteorology.


PRESS RELEASES, NATIONAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT
Mr. Howard (Skeena): 1.	Does the Department of National Revenue issue documents which are of the nature of press releases, press communiques, news releases or the like and, if so, how many such documents have been issued since July 1, 1968?
2.	What has been the cost of (a) printing headings or cover sheets (b) typing the stencils (c) mimeographing or other form of duplicating (d) collating and stapling (e) addressing and mailing the said documents?
3.	With respect to the paper used for the said documents, what is (a) its quality (b) the quantity used and the cost thereof?
4.	What is the estimate of the number of manhours consumed in the preparation, production and distribution of such documents?


Eric William Kierans: 1. The Department of National Revenue, taxation, issues press releases and information bulletins. Since July 1, 1968, eight press releases and four information bulletins were issued.

December 9, 1968
Questions
2.	The cost of (a) printing headings or cover sheets was $94.50; (b) typing and proofreading was $22.44; (c) duplicating (offset press) was $195.86; (d) collating and stapling was $87.00; (e) addressing and mailing was $14.75.
3.	The paper used for the said documents was (a) quality No. 7 bond, white 40M 8"xl3" plain for press releases and 8J"x 11" circular for information bulletins; (b) quantity-for eight press releases 1,625 pages at $3.30 M- $5.36 and for four information bulletins 41,900 pages at $2.51 M-$105.17.
4.	The estimated number of man-hours consumed in:
Preparation
Production
Printing headings Typing and proofreading Duplicating Collating and stapling Distribution
3
8*
8*
23i	43i
Note:-Information bulletins are also reproduced in miniature from the Canada Gazette for business houses, banks and the public, the number being dependent on anticipated demand. (42 Bulletin (20 Oct. 68), 2,000 at $12.00M, $24.00; (43 Bulletin (31 Oct. 68), 12,000 at $4.50M, $54.00; (44 Bulletin (1 Nov. 68), 2,000 at $12.00M, $24.00; (1 (2nd Rev.) (4 Nov. 68), 2,000 at $12.00M, $24.00.


TAXATION ON ASBESTOS MINES
Mr. Dumont: 1.	What is the total amount of taxes derived from asbestos mines in Canada by the Canadian Treasury?
2.	What is the total amount of taxes derived from the mines at Coleraine, Black Lake, Thetford Mines and East Broughton?


Eric William Kierans: For Taxation Division
1.	The total amount of federal income taxes derived from asbestos mines in Canada during 1966 was approximately $12 million.
2.	Of the foregoing amount of $12 million, approximately $3.5 million of federal income taxes were derived from the mines at Coleraine, Black Lake, Thetford Mines and East Broughton.
For Customs and Excise
1.	As practically all asbestos produced by mines in Canada is either exported or sold

for further processing in Canada the sales tax collected is relatively small. During the first nine months of 1968 the total sales tax collected from all asbestos mines in Canada amounted to $1,855.07.
2.	The sales tax collected from mines at Coleraine, Black Lake, Thetford Mines and East Broughton during the first nine months of 1968 amounted to $1,316.67.


CANADIAN PAVILION, JAPANESE WORLD FAIR
Mr. Crouse: 1.	Is it the intention of the Canadian Government to provide a pavilion at the forthcoming Worlds Fair in Japan?
2.	If so, what is the intended cost of this pavilion?
3.	Has a contract been awarded for its construction?
4.	Were public tenders called, and, if not, for what reason?
5.	If public tenders were called, what are the names of the firms who submitted tenders, and the amounts of each tender?


Jean-Luc Pepin: 1. Yes.
2.	$2,070,542.
3.	Yes.
4.	The basic structure of the Canadian pavilion at Expo 70 consists of glue-laminated Douglas fir beams of abnormal size. Public tenders for the provision of materials were not called because: (a) The ability to supply these beams within the time schedule was confined to specialist British Columbia firms. Three firms were invited to tender and the contract was awarded to the lowest bidder; (b) Time and economic factors on an accompanying order of western lumber re-tricted tendering to British Columbia firms. Four firms were invited to tender and one submitted a bid. This firm was awarded the contract.
In Japan it is normal practice to invite only a restricted number of building contractors to tender on a construction project. For construction work at the 1970 world exposition, contractors must be registered by the Osaka prefectural office or the Japanese government and in addition must be approved by the Japan Association for the 1970 world exposition. Because of the structural complexity of the Canadian pavilion the seven largest building construction firms in Japan were invited to tender. The contract was awarded to the lowest bidder.
December 9, 1968

5.	See answer to part 4. Bidders which did submit tenders are the following: Glue Laminated Beams: Glulam Products Ltd., New Westminster, B.C., $171,278; Amfab Products Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., $201,186; T.P.L. Industries Ltd., New Westminster, B.C., $207,482. Lumber:	Glulam Products Ltd.,
New Westminster, B.C.,	$122,853; Facon
Timber Sales Ltd., Vancouver, B.C., No bid; MacMillan Bloedel Ltd., Vancouver, B.C., No bid; Seaboard Lumber Sales, Vancouver, B.C., No bid. Construction: Taisei Construction Co., Ltd., Tokyo, $2,340,000; Fujita General Construction Co., Ltd., Tokyo, $2,430,000; Obayashi Gumi Construction Co., Ltd., Japan, $2,520,000; Takenaka Construction Co., Ltd., Japan, $2,550,000; Kajima Construction Co., Ltd., Japan, $2,552,000; Shimizu Construction Co., Ltd., Japan, $2,565,000; Toda Construction Co., Ltd., Tokyo, $2,571,000.
Note: The Taisei tender was subsequently negotiated downward to $2,055,000. This figure includes $307,654 for some exhibit construction which should be subtracted from the $2,055,000 to produce, along with the Glulam beams and lumber costs of $323,196, a total pavilion construction cost of $2,070,542. Contracts were awarded to Glulam Products Ltd. and Taisei Construction Co., Ltd.


CANADIAN HORTICULTURAL COUNCIL
Mr. Fortin: 1.	What is the annual grant made by the federal government to the Canadian Horticultural Council?
2.	What role does the Canadian Horticultural Council play?
3.	Does this Council report to the government on the use of its subsidies?
4.	How many French-speaking, English-speaking and bilingual persons are employed by the Council?


Hon. H. A. Olson (Minister of Agriculture):: 1.	$8,400.
2.	The Canadian Horticultural Council
performs the role of bringing together nationally the views of fresh fruit and vegetable producers and allied interests. It is not a federal government body but an autonomous group which includes among its members:	florists, nurserymen, beekeepers,
fruit wholesalers, food processors, mushroom producers, potato chip manufacturers and the Canadian Wine Institute. As well, the provincial departments of agriculture are members and there are associate members from allied industries.
3.	Not in detail-although the financial statement is made available.
Questions
4.	In as much as the council is not a public service agency, this information is not available.


DAM CONSTRUCTION UNDER P.F.R.A.
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	Have any changes been made in the operations of the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act?
2.	If so, what is the nature of these changes?
3.	Under the Act does Ottawa still have sole responsibility for dam construction?
4.	What dams will be constructed during 1969?


Russell Clayton Honey: 1. No.
2.	N/A.
3.	Yes.
4.	New projects are under study but final decisions not yet made.


RURAL MAIL ROUTE TENDERS, STELLARTON, N.S.
Mr. MacEwan: 1.	What were the names of the tenderers and the amounts of the various tenders for the R.R. 1, Stellarton, N.S. mail route?
2.	Has the contract been awarded and, if so, to whom and, if not, when can a decision and an award be expected in this regard?


Eric William Kierans: 1. John George Reid, R.R. No. 1, Stellarton, $1,450.00; Mrs. F. Neil Horne, R.R. No. 1, Stellarton, $1,850.00; Ralph Oliver Green, Stellarton, $1,914.00; Walter Keith Greene, R.R. No. 1, Stellarton, $1,920.00; James Boyd MacKay, R.R. No. 1, Stellarton, $2,500.00.
2. No. The contract will be awarded to the lowest tenderer, who upon investigation, can give sufficient assurance of being able to perform the service in a satisfactory manner.


DISCHARGE FROM ARMED FORCES OF YVON LANDRY
Mr. Howard (Skeena): 1.	Was one Yvon Landry, former Sergeant in the R.C.A.F. at Bagotville, Quebec, discharged from the Armed Forces and, if so, upon what date and for what reason?
2.	If Mr. Landry was discharged for medical reasons, is he (a) eligible for and (b) in receipt of a pension?


Mr. D. W. Groos (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence):: 1. Yes, 1

December 9. 1968
Questions
July 1967, under the provisions of QB&O Article 15.01 item 3(a), "On Medical Grounds".
2. (a) Yes. (b) Yes.


RESEARCH INTO PERENNIAL HIGH YIELD WHEAT
Mr. Mazankowski: 1.	Is there any research being conducted in Canada, comparable to the recent development in Russia, of a perennial high yielding wheat, which will meet out milling requirements in this country?
2.	Has the Department of Agriculture endeavoured to acquire any information concerning the development of Russia's perennial high yielding wheat and, if so, what is the evaluation of this information by the Department?


Mr. Florian Cole (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture):: 1. No research on perennial wheat is being carried out at present by the Department of Agriculture. Some years ago research was conducted on perennial wheats. The results led to the conclusion that these wheats did not compare favorably with annual wheats for yield and milling quality and would not be of any advantage to Canadian producers.
2. Research officers of the department have kept informed of the work being done with perennial wheats in Russia. Their evaluation is that these perennial wheats are not competitive with annual wheats currently available.


OUT-PATIENT DEPARTMENT, CAMP HILL HOSPITAL
Mr. Coates: 1. Is the Out-Patient Department at Camp Hill Hospital to be closed on weekends and statutory
holidays after November 30 and, if so, for what reasons?
2.	Will the closing of this Out-patient Department interfere with the admission of seriously ill veterans referred to that Department by their own doctors and physicians?
3.	How many veterans have taken advantage of out-patient services on weekends and statutory holidays to date in 1968 and of that number how many were required to be admitted to Camp Hill Hospital as a result of the examination they received at the Out-patient Department?


Hon. Jean-Eudes Dube (Minisier of Veterans Affairs):: 1. Yes, experience has shown that because of the small number of veterans reporting to that outpatient clinic on week ends and statutory holidays, it would be wasteful to man fully this clinic during these periods.
2.	No; such cases will be taken care of by the duty medical officer at the hospital.
3.	132 veterans of whom 52 (about one patient a week) were admitted to hospital during these periods.


AGRICULTURAL LOANS, QUEBEC
Mr. Caouetle: 1.	What is the total amount of agricultural loans granted by the government each year since 1963 (a) in the Province of Quebec (b) in the constituency of Tdmiscamingue?
2.	What is the average amount of these loans?
3.	How many have been refused for each of these years?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: The Farm Credit Corporation advises that statistics are not maintained on a constituency basis. However, for the province of Quebec and the municipal county of Temiscamingue, the answer is:
1.	2.	3.Total Amount	Average Amount	No. Loans Refused	(a)	(b)	(a)	(b)	(a)	(b)T 6misca-	T6misca-	T emisca-Fiscal Years	Quebec	mingue	Quebec	mingue	Quebec	mingue$	$	$	$	1963-64...	
14,710,400	225,900	12,000	11,300	305	41964-65....	
20,326,500	167,700	15,000	10,500	320	21965-66....	
18,987,200	113,100	16,600	14,200	276	41966-67....	
25,941,200	117,200	17,000	16,800	278	11967-68...	
25,668,800	92,200	18,300	15,300	331	21968-69 (to Nov. 30/68)	
22,333,300	72,000	19,300	14,400	295	2INCOME	TAX ON	SINGLE PERSON	Hon. Eric W	. Kierans	(Acting	Minister of
Question	No.	866-Mr.	Caouetie:	National Revenue): This			information is not	
How much income tax has the average, single wage earner paid over the past five years?
available in the form requested.

December 9, 1968


TORONTO AIRPORT
Mr. Robinson: Is the government considering the sale ol Toronto international airport at Malton and, if so, would such funds be used to establish another airport sufficiently distant from Toronto so as to reduce noise and pollution caused by aircraft?


Paul Theodore Hellyer: The government of Canada does not have under consideration the sale of Toronto international airport (Malton).


PREVAILING RATES WORKERS, CORNWALLIS, N.S.
Mr. Comeau: 1. What is the present number of day staff (prevailing rates workers) employed at Cornwallis, N.S.?
Questions
2. Has any reduction occurred within the past two years and is a further reduction anticipated?


David Walter Groos: 1. 128.
2. No.


EMPLOYMENT OF COAL MINERS
Mr. Harding: How many coal miners were employed in each province for each of the last five fiscal years?


Jean-Luc Pepin: The Dominion Bureau of Statistics reports that:	The average
number of employees in coal mines, in each province, for the past five calendar years, is given in the attached table. This information is only available on a calendar year basis.


AVERAGE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN COAL MINES
[Stage Direction]
Calendar Year	Nova Scotia	New Brunswick	Saskatchewan Alberta	British Columbia	Yukon	Canada1963	6,063	820	196	1,159	657	8	8,9031964	6,217	836	193	1,194	638	9	9,0871965	6,277	824	201	1,186	579	9	9,0761966	5,875	789	195	1,140	559	6	8,5641967	5,703	715	166	1,126	514	3	8,227MILITARY AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL,	INTEREST ON BORROWINGS FROMGAGETOWN BASE	PENSION PLAN FUND
Mr. Simpson: What rate of interest is being charged provincial governments to borrow from the Canada Pension Plan fund?


Edgar John Benson: All securities held by the fund are special non-marketable securities with a term of 20 years and bear interest at rates equivalent at the time of purchase, to the average yield to maturity on all negotiable bonds of the government of Canada having a term to maturity of 20 years or more. For instance, on securities being purchased by the Canada Pension Fund with funds available in November 1968 the rate of interest is 6.76 per cent.


ADDITIONAL TAX APPEAL OFFICE, ATLANTIC REGION
Mr. Fairweather: What plans has the Department of National Revenue to set up a 5th regional tax appeal office In either Saint John or Halifax to serve taxpayers in the Atlantic Provinces?

Question No. 890-Mr. MacRae:
What has been the number of military personnel and the number of civilian personnel at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown on June 30 of each year since this Base was established?


David Walter Groos: Military	Civilian
	Personnel	Personnel
1955	6,810	3851956	8,448	4331957	7,601	6961958	5,255	7131959	6,662	8251960	3,883	8801961	4,328	9601962	4,439	1,0281963	4,532	9471964	4,461	1,1281965	4,122	1,0581966	3,860	9941967	4,381	8911968	4,376	768
December 9, 1968
Orders for Returns


Eric William Kierans: The department has no such plans at present.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Ritchie: By Ministries, including the Prime Minister's Office (a) what is the strength of the staff of the respective ministerial offices (b) what are the names, effective date of appointment, salary, nature of appointment, respectively of each Executive Assistant, Special Assistant, Private and Assistant Private Secretary, hired under authority of Treasury Board Minute?
Return tabled.


MOTOR VEHICLES FOR CABINET MEMBERS
Mr. Coates: 1.	Do the Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers receive a car allowance and, if so, what is the amount of that allowance?
2.	Has the Prime Minister and have any or all of the Cabinet Ministers had motor vehicles with drivers provided for their personal use and, if so, by whom and who assumes responsibility for payment of the service provided and what is the amount of payment?
3.	Which of the Cabinet Ministers, besides the Prime Minister, are provided with a motor vehicle and driver, what is the type of motor vehicle provided and on what basis was the selection of Cabinet Ministers decided upon for this special consideration?
Return tabled.


AMENDMENT OF EXPROPRIATION LAWS
Mr. Fortin: 1.	Does the government intend to set up a committee to amend Canadian expropriation laws and, if so, when will this committee be constituted?
2.	How many expropriations are now in progress and have been going on for one year, two years or three years or more?
3.	When will such an expropriation bill be presented to the House?
Return tabled.


URBAN RENEWAL SCHEMES
Mr. Robinson: 1.	Is the government involved in any urban renewal schemes at the present time and, if so, where and how much money has been paid and/or will be paid in these schemes as the government's share?
2.	What urban renewal schemes are seeking government funds at the present time, where are they
[Mr. Fairweather.l
located, what is the total cost involved and what is the government contribution to be made?
3.	How much money has the federal government paid for urban renewal projects, where are the projects located, when were they commenced and when were they or will be completed?
Return tabled.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: Mr. Speaker, I draw the attention of the house to an unseemly delay in the reply to starred question No. 761. It was presumed that starred questions would be answered within three days. This question has to do with protests from the mayor and other citizens of Rock Island, Quebec, against the construction of a new post office. I think this is the first time in many years that any group within a municipality has protested against government expenditures. This is the first time a municipality has been forced to accept those expenditures regardless of their feeling. I do not know whether that is the reason for the delay, but certainly you would not think it would take such a long time to answer a question as simple as this one.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could deal with this matter. As you may notice, the question is not addressed to any single minister but to the entire government. Therefore to obtain a comprehensive answer to the question it is necessary to seek advice from all departments of government as to whether they received notice of the protest.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: In any event, if the question had been drafted better the answer could have been forthcoming earlier.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: But I point out that, as with the question with respect to the Centennial Medal which had to be answered at such heavy expense today, it does take time to answer some of these questions.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: The hon. member will identify himself even to the Prime Minister if he keeps on like that. Unless there is no communication between government departments, there should be no difficulty in these questions.


Mr. Mcllrailh:: You need a better draftsman.
December 9, 1968


Mr. Lome Nyslrom (Yorkion-Melville):: May I ask the President of the Privy Council when we can expect a reply to starred question No. 185, which was put on the order paper on September 19. It is of the utmost importance economically to Melville.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I shall be glad to look into the matter and see why the question has not been answered. We are waiting to see the right hon. member for Prince Albert identify himself with the Leader of the Opposition.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE RELEASE OF FEDERAL POSITION PAPERS ON CONSTITUTION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Prime Minister has any further information in response to the question I asked him last week respecting the release of working papers and propositions of the federal government prior to the federal-provincial conference?


Right Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Prime Minister: Yes, Mr. Speaker. After the meetings of federal and provincial officials last week it was decided that the federal government would be in a position to release its working papers, or, more precisely, its positions on the constitution on the Friday afternoon preceding the conference; that would be the coming Friday at three o'clock in the afternoon. So far as the provinces are concerned my understanding is that some will release and some may not, but they are advised of our position.


Mr. David MacDonald (Egmoni):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the importance of the matter when it was raised during the last federal-provincial conference on the constitution, will the Prime Minister indicate whether there will be a full discussion of the question of regional disparities, and whether that question will be raised in relation to possible changes in the constitution?


Mr. Trudeau:: The subject of regional disparities is on the agenda we have suggested to the provinces. We have had answers now from most of the provinces. I feel that within a day or two at most we will be in a position to make a firm decision. Perhaps we will make that agenda public, if such is the desire.
Inquiries of the Ministry AIR CANADA



PRESS RELEASE RESPECTING SALE OF WINNIPEG MAINTENANCE BASE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister and relates to the government's announcement that it is authorizing Air Canada to sell its overhaul and maintenance base at Winnipeg. Since this is the question period I cannot throw in any comments I should like to make; probably just as well. May I ask the Prime Minister whether the press release, or whatever statement was made in connection with this matter, can be tabled or even made an appendix to Votes and Proceedings, so we can have as a matter of record the guarantees which I understand the government has given to Air Canada's Winnipeg employees.


Right Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Prime Minister: Yes, Mr. Speaker, if it is the will of the house we have no objection to tabling such a press release. I will get it later in the day, and with the permission of the house table an official copy of that press release; or that might be done presently.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, when it is tabled could it be agreed that it be made an appendix to today's Votes and Proceedings?


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreed?


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, will the house have some knowledge of the contents of the document in advance of the tabling? Agreeing to the tabling in advance of knowing the contents is quite another thing.


Mr. Speaker:: I must conclude there is no agreement at the moment. Perhaps the matter might be considered later.


Gerald William Baldwin: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he has obtained a copy of the press release regarding the Winnipeg Air Canada base so it could now be tabled? Whether or not he has obtained it as yet, I believe the hon. member for Peace River would now agree to its being made an appendix to today's Votes and Proceedings.


Gerald William Baldwin: It is agreed.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.

December 9, 1968
Inquiries of the Ministry CRIMINAL CODE



INQUIRY AS TO INTRODUCTION OF AMENDING LEGISLATION

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Minister of Justice a question. Does the minister intend to bring in the omnibus Criminal Code bill before Christmas so it can be a Christmas present to be studied by the Canadian people?


John Napier Turner: hope so, Mr. Speaker. The redrafting of the bill is currently before the cabinet. If I can obtain the consent of the other parties in the house, which I understand I may be able to obtain, to bypass the resolution relating to one small section in connection with the number of members on the parole board, there is a good chance, if my colleagues will agree, that I shall have the bill available to hon. members before the adjournment.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. From what the Minister of Justice has said I take it that except for one small part of the bill which deals with the parole board it will not be necessary to bring in a resolution. The bill would come in at first reading. Is that the proposition?


John Napier Turner: That is my understanding, sir, yes.


Mr. John Gilbert (Broadview):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Does the government intend to include in the omnibus bill to amend the Criminal Code a measure abolishing corporal punishment?


John Napier Turner: Not in this particular bill, sir.



USE OF DRYING FACILITIES AT LAKEHEAD ELEVATORS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: In the
absence of the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce, the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister without Portfolio from Saskatchewan, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. Has the question of grain drying at the lakehead terminals been resolved on a 24-hour, seven day basis, or is drying still being carried out on a six day basis?


Right Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Prime Minister: I have the impression that this matter has been discussed at some length in the house, but I will gladly refer it to the ministers involved.


Stanley James Korchinski: On a question of privilege, on November 27 Your Honour, in disallowing a motion that this entire subject be debated, ruled that the wheat situation was a continuing emergency. This being so, the other day I asked that the Prime Minister should have at least one minister available to answer questions concerning this problem, for every day on which plant is idle at the lakehead, 260,000 bushels are left undried. Mr. Speaker, we have now lost one and a half months, during which something like 25 million bushels could have been dried at the lakehead.
This question has still not been resolved, and I have no opportunity to ask the ministers directly concerned what is being done about it. Moreover, neither the Minister of Transport nor the Minister without Portfolio, who answers questions in connection with the transport of wheat, is available for questioning. I believe it to be my duty to raise questions on this pressing matter on any opportunity which presents itself. I am sure the Prime Minister can revise the roster and see that one responsible minister is here so that hon. members may receive a reply more satisfactory than an undertaking to refer the questions raised to the appropriate minister provided he is available. Mr. Speaker, he should be available on all occasions, because this problem has been with us for a long time. I suggest I have every right to stand up each day in the house and ask questions which I believe to be extremely pressing and important.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, no one disputes the right of the hon. member to ask questions every day, or every hour on the hour if he wishes to do so. The important issue is not whether he can ask questions but whether the problem itself will be solved, and we are trying to work out a system whereby ministers will have time in which to solve problems and not merely be present in the house to answer questions which have been asked a hundred times before.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


John George Diefenbaker: The right of members to ask questions carries with it as a corollary the right at least to expect an answer concerning matters
December 9, 1968

as serious as the wheat situation on the prairies. At a time when western Canada is in so serious a condition that in November retail sales in the province of Saskatchewan declined by $15 million, over the year 1967, I ask the Prime Minister whether, having regard to the absence of all these ministers, he is not in a position to have one of his colleagues here who is qualified to answer in respect of the very important matter raised by my hon. friend from Mackenzie.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I have indicated that if the opposition parties would prefer us to rearrange this attendance list in a way which is more convenient, with some ministers present on certain days and others on other days, their absences alternated, we would be happy to do so.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: The Prime Minister has indicated in his statement that the ministers are in their offices studying this matter. If he says they are working on this serious problem of damp grain and transportation, can he tell the house what they are proposing to do about it? What suggestions are they making in their offices? That is what we would like to hear.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: If I had the answer to that, the ministers would not be in their offices studying the answers to these problems.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: If the hon. member is trying to establish that the Prime Minister does not have the answers to all the questions asked, I am prepared to concede that; but on Thursday of last week there was occasion for a full debate on this subject.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: The ministers have been studying this problem for six long weeks. How much more time will they need before coming up with any conclusion?


Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Saint John-Lancasler):: A supplementary question for the Prime Minister. I should like to ask him where he gets the right as Prime Minister to deprive cabinet ministers of the privilege of attending sessions of the House of Commons as members of parliament.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr.   Sneaker@: Order. The question cannot be allowed.
Inquiries of the Ministry [Translation]



PUBLIC WORKS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Alexandre Cyr (Gaspe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Public Works.
Is he aware that over the week-end a severe storm hit the coast of the Gaspe peninsula and that waves over 25 feet high caused the destruction of several federal government structures and damaged wharves and fishing coves? In addition, the railway lines have been torn away and' trains are not operating any longer south of Gaspe. Would the minister tell the house whether his department will take immediate steps to rebuild or repair the numerous commercial wharves fishing coves and retaining walls which have been damaged by that tidal wave.


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Public Works):: Regrettably, we have received reports of very serious and widespread damage to marine structures in the Gaspe and the Magdalen islands. The Atlantic region engineers are at present making as rapid a survey as possible of the damage, and in all cases where commerce is impaired action will be taken with all speed.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Rod Thomson (Baltleford-Kindersley):: The question is to the Minister of National Defence. Why have personnel of the department in the civil pay section been working every evening, as well as Saturdays and Sundays, since December 2; and why have they not been paid overtime for this work?


Mr. Speaker:: I suggest to the hon. member that if this question is one of immediate urgency it might be discussed at the time of adjournment this evening.



INSTRUCTIONS TO REPORT FOR WORK NOT IN UNIFORM

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Mark Rose (Fraser Valley West):: Mr. Speaker, if I may I should like to direct this question to the Minister of National Defence.

December 9, 1968
Inquiries of the Ministry Have the officers and men of the Canadian forces who are working here in the capital been ordered not to appear at work in uniform on certain specified days of the week? If this is so, why have such orders been issued?


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



VOCATIONAL AND TECHNICAL TRAINING


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Jack Marshall (Humber-Sl. George's-St. Barbe):: I have a question for the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. In view of the impending loss of pay-their only source of income-by students in vocational and adult educational centres due to the closing down of classes for two weeks during the Christmas season, can the minister advise whether anything is being done to remedy this situation?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. It seems to me this question was asked some time ago and replied to at that time.


Jack Marshall: In view of the lateness of the season could we not be given an answer if the minister is willing to make one?


Mr. Speaker:: My impression is that this question has already been asked and answered a couple of times, but I would have no objection to the minister replying if he wishes to do so.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have tried in negotiations with the provinces to provide for uninterrupted training during the holiday period. Under the law we are permitted to provide training allowances on statutory holidays.
In the great majority of cases we have succeeded in providing this uninterrupted training across Canada but we are still negotiating with the province of Newfoundland in the hope that we can provide classroom instruction during this period, thereby making it possible to pay allowances to trainees.


Jack Marshall: Since it is so late in December, would the minister contact his colleague the Minister of Defence Production, who is the minister from Newfoundland, to ask the Newfoundland government to see whether something can be done quickly; because there are only 11 days left?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: We have been in touch with officials of the government of Newfoundland, and we shall continue our efforts.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Sleven E. Paproski (Edmonton Centre):: I would direct this question to the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the right hon. gentleman has been considering reform of the Senate, will he now take into consideration the appointment of Mr. Ernest Manning, the former premier of Alberta?


Right Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Prime Minister: I have heard the representation, Mr. Speaker.



PUBLIC SERVICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Robert Lorne Stanfield: I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State whose name, I believe, is on the roster for today. Perhaps in his absence the parliamentary secretary can answer it, since notice was given by a number of hon. members on Friday last, I think. I should like to ask whether the Secretary of State has a report to make to the house today regarding the displacement of members of the Canadian Corps of Commissionaires in various security positions in government buildings.


Mr. Robert Stanbury (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I am advised by the museum corporation that a policy has been implemented requiring com-missionnaires who come into contact with the public visiting museums to be to a large degree bilingual, and that the staff in the Ottawa area from which these commission-naires can be drawn is some 40 per cent bilingual. I am advised, however, that there have been no dismissals from the corps in connection with the implementation of any such policy, although perhaps there might be some transfers of personnel necessary to bring about this change.
Meetings have been held by the National Gallery with representatives of the company which provides the protective services there in an effort to implement a similar policy for the National Gallery. I understand it has been indicated that there should be no difficulty in implementing such a policy without dismissals of any employees.
December 9, 1968



OLD AGE SECURITY


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Barry Mather (Surrey):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I could direct a question to the parliamentary secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Can he say whether a second look could be taken at the matter of enabling the recipients of old age pensions to receive their cheques a little earlier, before Christmas, in order that it will be possible for them to have a better Christmas?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member again in this case is asking a question which was asked and answered a few days ago.



REQUEST FOR PENSION INCREASE TO EQUAL COST OF LIVING INCREASE

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of National Health and Welfare may I direct this question to the Prime Minister. In view of the suggestion made by Scott Young in his column this morning that old age pensioners will spend their December cheques in a spree on New Year's and thus be in difficulty in January, may I ask the Prime Minister whether the government will reconsider the question of the amount of increase allowed in old age pensions because of the cost of living; in other words, will the government bring in an amendment to the act to permit an increase to equal the actual cost of living increase, so in other words it will not be frozen at 2 per cent?


Mr. Rosaire Gendron (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Health and Welfare is now on a tour of health services in the Northwest Territories. He will be back in the house tomorrow and I am sure he will be happy to answer that question.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Bernard Dumont (Frontenac):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister.
Inquiries of the Ministry
Since the Prime Minister will be going to England soon, could he assure the house that he will protest to the British Prime Minister the sale of arms by England to Nigeria?


Right Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Prime Minister: Mr. Speaker, when I meet the British Prime Minister, I intend to speak to him about a number of matters, and I believe the one mentioned by the hon. member will be on the agenda.


AIR CANADA
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: Mr. Speaker, I had intended to direct this question to the Minister of Transport, but because of the urgent nature of the matter I will direct it to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister tell the house if he has looked into the question of whether the slowdown, work to rule, or whatever it is called of Air Canada personnel will endanger the lives of any passengers or air crew?
Righl Hon. P.-E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):
So far as I know it will not, but I will gladly inquire.


FISHERIES
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Walter C. Carter (St. John's West):: Mr. Speaker, normally I would have directed this question to the Minister of Fisheries, but in his absence I will direct it to his parliamentary secretary. Can he tell the house whether a salt fish marketing board for Newfoundland and other Atlantic region fishermen is being established and, if not, whether a study is being made of the feasibility of setting up such a marketing board.


Mr. E. F. Whelan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Forestry):: I shall take the question as notice and advise the minister the next day he is in the house.


REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John Burton (Regina East):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development. When does the

December 9, 1968
Inquiries of the Ministry minister expect to bring before the house legislation with regard to regional development?


Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Forestry and Rural Development):: I hope during the month of January.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Solicitor General. In view of the unusual success of yesterday's service of justice and mercy, I wonder whether the minister has received requests from other institutions across the country for similar special services.


George James McIlraith: great many similar services were held yesterday in different parts of the country. I am very appreciative of the expression of approval for that program on the part of the hon. member.


Mr. Heath Macquarrie (Hillsborough):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for my fellow Presbyterian, the Solicitor General, and it follows on from the question of the hon. member for Egmont. I ask simply, has the lost been found?


George James McIlraith: Not yet, Mr. Speaker.


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, I want to vary an earlier answer I gave. We are working rather rapidly in the department and the lost has now been found.


Mark Willson Rose: Mr. Speaker, I was just wondering whether my lost previous question has been found.



DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS ASSISTANCE TO PROVINCES TO MEET EDUCATION COSTS

[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. John Lundrigan (Gander-Twillingate):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister take advantage of the opportunities provided by the impending conferences with the provinces to begin discussion of an acceptable and constitutional arrangement to allow extensive federal financial assistance in meeting the crisis in education in Canada.


Right Hon.   P.-E. Trudeau@Prime Minister: Mr. Speaker, the matter of the division of jurisdiction as between the federal and provincial governments is also on the agenda. It is possible some of the provinces might suggest transferring educational jurisdiction to the federal government. I have no information on that.


John Howard Lundrigan: I hope I did not suggest to the Prime Minister that there should be a transfer of jurisdiction over education to the federal government. I asked whether some acceptable constitutional arrangement could be provided. I have a supplementary question. Have any discussions of this kind already been held with the provinces regarding financial assistance in the field of education, and could the Prime Minister say what was the nature of those discussions?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Well, in the past couple of years the federal government has vacated tax room for the provinces so they could increase by hundreds of millions of dollars their expenditures on education.


Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Has the right hon. Prime Minister received a specific request from the province of Newfoundland in the area of education.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Not that I am aware of.


Bernard Dumont: Mr. Speaker, can the Prime Minister tell us if, at the next federal-provincial conference, he will take into account the recommendations made by the Aird commission in 1927?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we take into account wise counsel from the past, but I must say that we are not among those who hold blindly to views from the past.



IMMIGRATION


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. Stanley Haidasz (Parkdale):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Manpower and Immigration what action he has taken or will take in response to the telegram I referred to last Friday, protesting the treatment of a Polish refugee seaman in Toronto and others detained in Halifax who are destined for deportation after they have sought asylum in Canada.
December 9, 1968


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend should be aware that there is no discretion for the minister in these matters. The cases have been heard by the immigration appeal board and as a result of the hearings deportation orders have been issued, which the department is bound to carry out as soon as practicable.


Stanley Haidasz: As a supplementary question, could the minister inform the house when he will act on the government's 1966 white paper on immigration and, specifically, proposals 54 and 55 dealing with refugees and seamen?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, Canada's treatment of refugees conforms both in spirit and to the letter with the international convention and protocol. We have under active consideration at present the formal acceptance of this convention and protocol, which we are scrupulously observing.



POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mark Willson Rose: Mr. Speaker, in view of your ruling on questions of a similar nature I do not hold out great hope for this one; nevertheless I suggest it is most urgent. In the absence of the President of the Treasury Board and the Postmaster General I should like to direct it to the Prime Minister. What plans, if any, has the government to pay the arrears in postal workers' wages dating back to October 1, 1966, and the additional increases granted in October, 1968, before the new year?



TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS


[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the government house leader. In view of conversations between the government house leader and the house leader of the official opposition, would the hon. gentleman agree to refer to the standing committee on transport and communications the report of the Post Office Department so that discussions on the subject of effective work in that department, which will not be otherwise possible, may continue in the committee as per the arrangement?
29180-232J
Supply-Regional Development


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Yes, I will consider that, Mr. Speaker. I also wonder whether I may pose a question to the hon. member and ask whether the opposition is agreeable that the Canadian National Railways and Air Canada reports as well as the expanded terms with respect to the question of Atlantic transportation be included in the terms of reference for study by the transport committee? Is that now agreeable to the hon. member?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Mr. Speaker, it is a somewhat unusual procedure to direct questions to members of the opposition, but I would be very happy to consider discussing this matter with the house leader.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, it is not the hon. member's day to be in the house to answer questions.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, what right does the Leader of the Opposition have to prevent eight of his frontbenchers from attending the house?


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I would expect the Prime Minister to listen more carefully to the Leader of the Opposition. I said it was not the member's day to be in the house to answer questions.

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


The Chairman:: House again in committee of supply on the estimates of the Cape Breton Development Corporation, vote 35, to be found at page 425 of the blue book.



CAPE BRETON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

[Stage Direction]
35. Payment to the Cape Breton Development Corporation to be applied by the corporation in payment of the losses incurred in the operation and maintenance in the calendar year 1968 of the coal mining and related works and undertakings acquired by the corporation under section 9 of the Cape Breton Development Corporation Act and, notwithstanding section 31(2) of the said act, for grants to municipalities on Cape Breton Island not exceeding an amount equal to the taxes that might have been levied for their 1968 fiscal year by the municipalities in respect of the personal property of the corporation if the corporation were not an agent of Her Majesty, $20,000,000.
Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, as most members know, the standing committee on regional development has already given a good deal of examination to the operations of the Cape Breton Development Corporation and the 1968-69 estimates of my
3668	COMMONS
Supply-Regional Development department. I therefore do not propose to give a long statement at this time. It will be more appropriate if I respond later to any new points that are raised. I do want, however, to take advantage of this opportunity to make a brief statement covering certain important points in connection with Devco.
A great number of subjects relating to the operations of the corporation were raised before the standing committee, and, I hope, satisfactorily answered. There is, however, one point of such importance that I feel it should be restated to the house as a whole.
The main objective of the corporation, as is well known, is to rationalize the coal mining operations but to do so only in a way compatible with the social obligations that we have to the miners. There has been, with good reason, a great deal of concern among the people' of Cape Breton and the members of the standing committee about the possible hardship and dislocation which may be caused in the lives of employees. I can assure hon. members that the corporation recognizes its very fundamental social obligations. I can further assure members that the government will be watching closely to ensure that these obligations are fulfilled.
The first step in the corporation's program will be to introduce and implement the proposed pre-retirement leave plan. Until the corporation knows how many employees are going to take advantage of that plan, it is difficult to be specific about the details or the timetable for future operations. Accordingly, the plan is sufficiently flexible to ensure that coal mining operations will be adjusted to the labour force situation, so that no miner has to be discharged before he is entitled to preretirement leave unless there is a job for him to go to.
The corporation will be opening the new Lingan mine. That will in itself provide new work while the mine is being developed as well as after it is in production. In addition, the corporation is busily seeking to attract other industrial developments on the island of Cape Breton. The pace at which operations in the existing mines are reduced will depend on the pace at which, for these reasons, alternative jobs become available for the miners.
This is the essence of the plan. I invite members to consider whether any painful industrial situation of this kind, where an industry has to suffer a major contraction, has ever before been dealt with by methods as farsighted and humane.
[Mr. Marchand (Langelier) .1
DEBATES	December 9, 1968


Mr. Maclnnis:: Mr. Chairman, following the brief statement by the minister in which he has indicated there have been questions and answers in the committee that he hopes satisfied members of the committee, let me review the situation. Because of annual costs to the federal government for the payment of coal subsidies or subventions the federal government saw fit to set up this crown corporation in conjunction with the provincial government in order that the coal mining situation would be somewhat stabilized, thereby giving the miners and these communities some security, which they have been labouring without for a number of years. Job insecurity in that area has been bothering the people for a great many years.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
In brief appearance before the committee the chairman of the Cape Breton Development Corporation indicated that the Donald report was used as a guide. Several days later when he was questioned about this he said no, not necessarily, because they were undertaking certain plans and developments that were not recommended by Dr. Donald. This is not the case. The particular item I referred to was the opening of the mine at Lingan, which the chairman of the board said Dr. Donald did not recommend. At page 129 of Dr. Donald's report it can be seen that he recommended the opening of the Lingan mine and putting it in operation for a five-year period.
I personally did not believe that Dr. Donald's report should have been the basis of this legislation, and I do not think that when the legislation was put together his report was used as a guide. If any one wishes to study the difference between the Donald report and the Rand coal report of 1960 they can see there is a great difference of opinion between these two gentlemen. Mr. Justice Rand went into the coal mining areas and the mines and examined the situation there, and I think the house would agree that he would, therefore, be a far greater authority on the subject than Dr. Donald who brought in a report in respect of coal without even visiting the coal mines. A difference of opinion has been expressed by the chairman of the board. Dr. Donald never visited the coal mines, and he made certain recommendations that Devco did not think he made on the first place. However, they are there.
The intent of the legislation at the time it was drawn up was not only to give protection to the miners but to the mining communities.
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
In this respect I think the service provided to the mining towns also needs the protection of this development corporation. I point out to the minister that the intent of the act is spelled out in the preamble. I will read part of the preamble to the minister. It provides:
And whereas the mines in the Sydney coalfield are faced with imminent closure unless a substantial capital investment is made for their rehabilitation and modernization-
Money has been provided toward that end, but the indications are that no effort is being made by the Cape Breton Development Corporation to rehabilitate these mines. It is said, of course, that it is the intention to broaden the base of the Cape Breton economy. That is all well and good. I ask the minister to explain how he feels the intent of the legislation, drawn up to protect the miners and the mining communities, will be served by the Cape Breton Development Corporation using its energies toward the development of the tourist industry. This, of course, broadens the base of the Cape Breton economy. The tourist industry has been promoted for a number of years. But I do not understand how any move in this direction by the Cape Breton Development Corporation will provide alternative jobs for displaced miners.
I hope the minister will also explain to the house later the approach of the Cape Breton Development Corporation to the early retirement plan. I agree that the early retirement plan could be acceptable to quite a few miners employed under Devco. Here again Dr. Donald did not have an original thought, because the early retirement plan was first introduced in the Nova Scotia mining communities by the Leader of the Opposition when he was premier of that province. It was introduced after considering the limited resources of the province and it was put forward strictly on a social basis. When the provincial government introduced the early retirement plan it saved $16 million, $18 million or $20 million a year spent on coal subventions. Therefore the federal government has every reason to be very generous in such an early retirement plan. I ask the minister to speak to the Devco authorities and see to it that if they are going to put an early retirement plan into effect it at least surpasses the standards set out by the Economic Council of Canada. They should at least see that the early retirement plan provides benefits above the poverty level, as was quite clearly pointed out by the Economic Council of Canada. In other words, I am saying to the minister that
DEBATES	3667
Supply-Regional Development the early retirement plan gives the miners of Cape Breton less than the poverty level. If the federal government is introducing and is going to support this approach, while at the same time saving millions of dollars in subventions, the least it can do is make the plan worth while. The early retirement plan should provide more than the poverty level, which is now the case.
I also ask the minister to explain, since he has a considerable labour background, how the development corporation can compulsorily retire men at 60 years of age when the general agreement under which these men are working calls for retirement at the age of 65. How can they compulsorily retire a miner at 60 years of age when he is working under a general agreement which calls for his retirement at 65? Does this mean the minister supports the breaking down of bargaining units throughout the country?
I point out to the minister a question I asked in the committee. This matter is clearly spelled out in the legislation. I asked whether the early retirement plan was negotiated with the unions. I am sorry I do not have the committee reports here to verify this, but I was told in the committee there was nothing in the legislation which required Devco to negotiate such plans. Nevertheless the legislation distinctly says that any working arrangements should be carried out with all the unions that were certified under the Nova Scotia labour law prior to the coming into effect of this legislation.
I was told by the vice-president in charge of coal that when I referred to negotiating this matter with the unions I was drawing a pretty thin line, because nothing in the legislation required them to negotiate such a plan. If that is the case, nothing in the legislation gives Devco the authority to go ahead with such a plan. I ask the minister to examine all aspects of the early retirement plan and to take into consideration the fact that it provides benefits below the poverty line. They should introduce a plan which would at least make it worth while for those willing to take early or voluntary retirement, whichever it may be. I suggest that to make it worth while would mean a considerable increase in the amounts paid.
I also ask the minister when considering this particular phase of the plan to give some thought to the restrictions placed upon a miner accepting early retirement. There has been disagreement between the mines and the chairman of the board in this respect. In the
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development committee I said restrictions were placed on a miner taking early retirement. The chairman at that time said there were no restrictions. This is not the case. Restrictions are placed on any miner who goes on early retirement in that 50 per cent of anything that he earns over and above $50 is applied against any funds he would receive on retirement. In other words, if he earns $100 a month he can only keep $75 and $25 is applied against the payment he will receive on retirement. I think this restriction should be removed. Also I see no reason why miners who might retire early should subsidize this plan through the unemployment insurance program. If they are going to accept early retirement they should be entitled to their pensions and to whatever benefits they may have from unemployment insurance rather than have to subsidize pensions through payments to unemployment insurance.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)
With regard to job opportunities, I believe in all sincerity that the intention of the legislation was to provide alternative work in and around the mining communities affected. I do not see anything in any of the Devco reports concerning any developments by that corporation although there are many rumours concerning this throughout Cape Breton. I see nothing about their intended investment in an oil refinery in the Port Hawkesbury area, although action was supposed to have been taken in this respect. I have no objections to broadening the base of the economy of Cape Breton, but I want to emphasize again the fact that this legislation was intended to assist the mining communities. Here again I might say that the development of the oil refinery in the Port Hawkesbury area, despite the credit which some people may be getting for it, was done on the initiative of the present Leader of the Opposition when he was premier of Nova Scotia in 1958, at which time he made land deals with the British American Oil Company. I might also say that I have found it surprising that such action has been taken in this area by the Cape Breton Development Corporation when one considers the fact that B.A. has now been taken over by U.S. interests.
I am also surprised to hear, although I have nothing to substantiate this, that Devco has shown some interest in a possible investment in a Holiday Inn. Here again they are emphasizing the tourist trade, but I do not feel that the tourist industry provides Cape

Breton or the mining communities in that area with the incentives for which they were looking and the security which they expected to receive from this legislation. No one expected Devco to bring in industry which would replace the coal mines and only employ 500 or 1,000 men, but it was certainly expected that Devco would make an all-out effort to assist the suffering mining communities. Even though Devco may invest millions of dollars in the Cape Breton area, this possible venture cannot be expected to do anything to serve us in particular or to protect the mining communities involved.
Since the Minister of Manpower and Immigration is here may I remind him that during the last election compaign he indicated that a ski resort would be built in Cape Breton. I am all in favour of it but I do not think Devco should dip into funds provided by parliament to develop the economy of the mining communities of Cape Breton in order to build a ski resort which again will only serve the tourist industry. I think I can speak with some authority on this program. It is not a development which will do much for Cape Breton, and I fail to see how a ski resort can help to develop the Cape Breton tourist industry because it is a recognized fact that skiing cannot take place during what is regarded as the tourist season in our area.
I see no indication that the government intends to fully support the over-all plan put forward by Devco. I believe that the opening of the mine at Lingan, which was forcefully promoted by everyone involved in the mining industry over a period of years, has been brought to the minister's attention. The thought behind the promotion was that the opening of a mine at Lingan would provide coal operators with an opportunity to drastically reduce production costs. It was never intended that Lingan be opened for the purpose of closing down other mines operating in the area. At the time that Devco came forward with the over-all plan to open the Lingan mine, without any thorough study of the plan, I criticized that approach because they were going to close down other mines. Yet, the Minister of Manpower and Immigration, who I hope will have something to say in this debate, indicated at that time that it was a wonderful thing and was a fulfilment of a promise he had made several years ago prior to another election. Since then it has been clearly indicated to him by the mining interests-and I might say here I am speaking of miners and unions-that they are not happy
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
about Devco opening the Lingan mine for the prime purpose of closing other operations. Again I wish to remind the minister that Bill C-135 was passed in this house for the purpose of rehabilitating and modernizing existing operations.
It should also be noted that the phasing-out period recommended in the Donald report was to take place over 15 years. Nowhere is it indicated in this legislation that its purpose is to phase out coal mines in Cape Breton. However, it is certainly indicated in the legislation that an effort should be made to revitalize, rehabilitate and modernize the mining communities. Possibly those mines that do not prove economical after this attempt is made should be phased out after 15 years. It is stated in the Devco report that the prime purpose of Bill C-135 and of the Donald report is to close down Cape Breton mines as quickly as possible. This was never the intention of the legislation. If the minister would examine the legislation closely he would find nothing in it indicating that the Cape Breton Development Corporation should close down coal mines. I should think that any effort on their part to close down coal mines should be made after they have attempted to produce some form of alternative employment. May I remind the Minister of Manpower and Immigration, who has considerable experience with labour unions, that this corporation cannot completely ignore the general agreement under which the miners have been working over a long period of years and tell them they may be pensioned off at the age of 60 or may have to take early retirement at that age.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
I fail to understand the approach that Devco is using. They say these men are going to remain on the payroll, subject to recall. The men will receive a pension from Devco but that pension will be below the poverty line. Despite the fact the pension will be below the poverty line, if the men earn $100 in one month outside the coal operation, their earnings will be returned and applied against their pension. I feel it is a rather coldblooded approach to pension them off arbitrarily at a rate below the poverty line and at the same time place a restriction on the earnings they may be able to receive outside the coal operation. As has been indicated, the men will be left on the company payroll and will be subject to recall. I did not have the opportunity to question the Devco authorities that I thought would be available. I wonder what the position of a man would be under this
DEBATES	3669
Supply-Regional Development early retirement scheme who found it necessary to move with his family to some other part of the province or some other part of the country and was then recalled by the company? Who is going to handle this procedure? If he is not available for work, is this man removed from pension? Presumably the corporation has already prepared itself for a situation that might develop whereby an employee who accepts early retirement can be cut off from pension rights because of his activities outside the mining industry.
The Cape Breton Development Corporation, both the coal and development sections, seems to be concentrating its efforts on the mining activities that are going to be affected by any phasing out. Early retirement should mean that the miners will be provided with an adequate pension. I repeat that the pension falls below the poverty line. I feel that the miners should be given an opportunity to earn whatever moneys they are able to earn when they are on retirement. In addition, I do not believe that the Devco plan should be in any way, shape or form subsidized by unemployment insurance benefits that any miners may have coming to them. This is an area in which the miners have been contributing. I had hoped for an opportunity to examine the Devco officials more closely and get some definite answers with regard to some of these issues connected with the early retirement proposition.
I should like the minister to give consideration to the fact that the early retirement plan should be strictly voluntary. It is something that the government should not support because, in effect, this crown corporation is bringing about compulsory retirement at age 60. I say to the minister again that I am sure he does not want to be a party to any plan of the crown corporation which would violate the general agreement under which these miners have been working for years. I hope that before the afternoon is over the minister will enlighten the house as to what his intentions are with regard to this approach.


Mr. Broadbent:: Mr. Chairman, the act establishing the Cape Breton Development Corporation required that the corporation present a report by October of this year. We received such a report and have had a look at it in committee. At this point I should like to ask some questions that I raised at that time and perhaps the minister could give answers which I hope will prove to be more adequate than the ones received in the committee. It
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development seems to me that the Devco people who prepared this report had ample time to prepare a more adequate plan. I am not suggesting, however, that the six months period available was sufficient for the development of a completely detailed plan. However, this period was certainly sufficient for them to come up with a much more substantial one than they have presented. At the time I suggested that some of the pages of the report reminded me of a university professor who had been on holiday throughout the summer and then on the first day of classes presents to his undergraduates a plan written the previous week end full of some persuasive generalities about what is going to take place but one which is totally devoid of any serious content. The plan is devoid of specific proposals which will arouse interest in those who are going to be affected by it.
Pages 4 and 6 of the report contain a number of generalities and cliches. For instance corporation is going to "attract secondary manufacturing industries, and build up the service industries" and prepare special programs "to develop the full potential of the tourist industry." What details are provided? We get no details. In fact, when we were in committee I asked for details and the answer I got, first, related to the time factor. I suggest this answer is inadequate because it really does not take that much time to give specific information. Surely six months should be enough time to come up with something. The other answer was that everyone has to compete in Canada for industry and therefore they could not make a particular proposal they might have in mind available to the members of the committee. I suggest that this is a very inadequate answer.
If we are to look seriously at a report of this nature and make a thoughtful judgment upon it, we should have had proposals. It may well be that these proposals, for competitive reasons, should not be made available in complete detail to the public; if so, we could have had an in camera session of the committee. Then we could have given some thoughtful consideration to those proposals. I think we could and should have done that.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
I do not want to pass final judgment on Devco, but it seems to me it could develop into another Atlantic Development Board. That board has been in existence since 1962 and we still hear reports that the board is working upon a plan for the maritimes. The plan presented by Devco is really a charade,

not a plan at all. I hope that something more substantial will emerge very soon.
More constructively, Mr. Chairman, I should like to suggest-and this suggestion was made in the committee-that what we need for the area is not a plan that is narrowly defined in terms of immediate economic objectives, such as the Devco plan, but a plan that is much more comprehensive. We need a FRED project, something that will deal not just with economic growth but also with all the related social services and educational and housing needs that are required in the area.
Experience in the United States and in underdeveloped countries indicates that in order to do a serious job in an area such as this something more than merely defining economic objectives is required. For example, assuming, as seems to be the case, that miners will be retired at age 60, what provision is being made for them when they pass that age? These men have a number of years left to live and I should like to know what kind of existence is being planned for them in terms of their recreational and human needs. Are these people who have spent their whole lives working in local communities going to do what the chairman of the board suggested in all seriousness they should do-spend their time fishing? Even though this part of the country is very attractive and has appropriate resources for this kind of activity, I do not think any of us take this suggestion seriously.
If a man who has spent his life working in an industrial capacity is thrown back completely on his own resources at the age of 60, he is going to have a very difficult time to find some meaningful existence for the remainder of his years. It seems to me that something should be done in a much more serious vein in terms of providing some recreational potential for these men, then-wives and their families.
Related to this, of course, is the whole question of the participation of those who are directly affected in the planning process itself, whether through their trade unions or private community organizations. Surely these people should be involved in the development of plans and projects which are going to be designed for their benefit. It seems to me that this factor has been totally neglected.
A particular example of the inadequacy of the existing legislation is the situation of the railway workers. They are a small group in terms of total number affected by Devco, but
December 9. 1968

it is quite clear that they are being dealt with inequitably. The Donald report, as has been pointed out, recommended that if early retirement were introduced it should be voluntarily entered upon. The Devco report states quite categorically that retirement at age 60 will be mandatory. The railway workers in particular are going to suffer a real loss of income if they are forced to retire at the age of 60 rather than 65. According to the figures I have, the legislation provides them with about $3,000 per year. This means they will lose about $15,000 for the five-year period, or about $3,000 a year, because their average wage is approximately $6,000 per year. I ask the minister whether it is equitable to force a man to retire under these circumstances. If retirement is going to be made mandatory, I suggest that instead of the $3,000 that these men would receive annually under the legislation they should receive what their average income would amount to over the five-year period in which they are no longer permitted to work. This relates, of course, to the point that I was making, namely, that it seems to me that the groups most specifically and directly involved in this region have not played the full role they should have had in developing a plan themselves.
I missed the earlier remarks of the hon. member who preceded me and he might well have raised this question, but in case he did not I should like to ascertain from the minister when it is contemplated that the preretirement plan will come into effect. Further, would he assure this committee that those who are directly affected, and more particularly the railway workers, will have the chance to make representations and criticisms respecting the retirement plan either to the minister or to Devco?
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I have a particular question that I should like the minister to comment on if he has the information available. We all know that before the steel company at Sydney became a crown corporation it was losing money. However, we are now informed that over the past year it has likely made a profit of some $2.5 million. My question, which is a factual one, is, why is this the case? Does the minister have any statistical evidence that he could present to the House to indicate why the corporation, when it was privately owned and greatly subsidized by the people of Canada for a number of years, lost money and then all of a sudden when it becomes a public corporation it 29180-233
Supply-Regional Development makes a profit? I should like to know whether this is really a case of the people of Canada subsidizing the profit made by a group of private individuals or whether there is a more acceptable reason to explain the profits that apparently are now going to be made by the company, profits which a few years ago would not have been made. With that point, Mr. Chairman, I shall conclude my remarks.


Bernard Dumont: Mr. Chairman, if we analyse the report submitted by the Cape Breton Development Corporation, we realize that when the state takes a hand-and we now have the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development (Mr. Marchand) to help it in other similar undertakings-in the development of Canada, it is nothing but administration, bureaucracy, when for 35 years on this side of the house we have been asking for the perfect solution.
In fact, I have never been able to understand that it is possible to set the value of a dollar earned by an engineer or a carpenter in any way except by the number of hours needed to prepare plans or to extract ore from our mines rich in resources. I find it hard to understand that we have to say: The dollar is worth less than the products taken out of the mines.
If, in the past, those Cape Breton mines were so rich and if it is expected that within a few years coal will no longer be needed, because of the large supply of atomic energy, we will then have to use something other than coal for heating. If the previous governments had set the value of the dollar according to the value of the product, the value of the production of those mines, it would not be necessary today to talk about such regional development corporations. That situation shows that in Canada, as in all the other countries of the world at the present time, there is something wrong with the economy.
France is now facing a serious economic problem. It must keep a constant eye on the value of the franc, which is subject to fluctuation every day.
The same thing happens here, as in every country in the world. It would be unthinkable that an engineer or a carpenter should decide one morning that a 12-inch rule measures 11 inches only and, a week later, that it measures 13 inches. If the value of the dollar were regulated according to the value of the product, which would be possible in an economy which, in 1968, gives promise of
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development unusual technical developments, we could, thanks to past experience and the unparalleled resources of Canada, enjoy prosperity instead of resorting to national development corporations. In fact, these involve in the long run, as we now see in Canada, deficits which may exceed $1 billion.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
If Canada benefited from the war, if it is a rich country, as everyone likes to say everywhere, why could this wealth, which is measured according to the value of the dollar, not be measured by the working hours in mines or elsewhere? Then, we could have a truly progressive economy, instead of having to analyse the deficits of corporations and listen to the criticisms of the opposition. In fact, if the state is forced to intervene all the time to settle problems, it is because our monetary system does not meet the requirements of a 1968 economy.
I am not well acquainted with the Cape Breton area, but I know from the criticism I have heard that the problems and difficulties of those miners are similar to those of the asbetos miners. For those people, whether they are French, English, American or Canadians in Cape Breton, Quebec City or Vancouver, the real problem is always economic. The dollar never represents the true value of products which are the natural wealth, that is the available consumer goods. This is why I think it is unfortunate that the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development who used to know those problems quite well cannot find another solution but only suggests the intervention of the state to settle the problems in all those areas.
In view of the fact that national production this year will amount to $68 billion, we suggested, in this comer of the house, several remedies. One of them would be to base credit on production. This is just a matter of credit and debit, and the difference between the two of them is an administrative surplus. We should rather be able to grant subsidies to private enterprise when it is no longer economic. It would be a better solution. In fact, crown corporations simply produce administration and confusion, which prevents private enterprise from progressing and taking advantage, in the case of economic hardship, of subsidies which might fill the gap and even allow a surplus.
In a well-balanced economy-production and consumption equating surplus-private 
enterprise would bring to the country overproduction which would increase constantly, thus making possible the development of our country which is tremendously rich, because we are entitled to expect that development in order to continue our advances and to be considered as a large nation. Development corporations should not continue to be taxed in Canada as had to be done in the case of Cape Breton.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, I want to make a few remarks about the estimates of the Cape Breton Development Corporation. In so doing I wish to congratulate the minister responsible for regional development for taking on the responsibilities of this corporation. I wish him all success in this important endeavour.
The Cape Breton Development Corporation Act, passed just over one year ago, was the result of the policy declaration by the government of Canada in the fall of 1965, of various recommendations contained in the Donald report, and of consultations undertaken between the government of Canada and the government of Nova Scotia. The policy declaration made by the government of Canada in the fall of 1965 committed the government to a policy expenditure on the modernization and rehabilitation of existing mines and investment in a new opening at Lingan. Of course, the study conducted by Dr. Donald at that time was ongoing. It has often been suggested in the house and elsewhere that a commitment or promise was made in that statement that $25 million would be made available to the Cape Breton coal industry. The statement itself, of course, made reference to no particular sum, as may be verified by looking at it. The $25 million arose from one of the development proposals that had been undertaken or proposed by Dosco, which had a cost figure of $25 million available. It was more or less an easy way of estimating the commitment that was contained in that early proposal.
The hon. member who spoke earlier mentioned the Donald report. Those of us who have felt that the opening of a new mine at Lingan was a viable proposal, and good sense in the long run, were certainly disappointed by one of the conclusions of the Donald report. In No. 4 of the summary of Dr. Donald's recommendations Dr. Donald recommended that the opening of a new mine at Lingan should not be undertaken. That recommendation at that time certainly
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
appealed to a number of people. The argument was put: What is the point of opening the new mine when the proposal of the report and of the legislation is to phase out gradually coal production on the island of Cape Breton? Does it make sense to open a new mine, in that context? As I say, that recommendation by Dr. Donald certainly dashed hopes at that time for a new mine opening. Without going into the question of preparing legislation, it was a matter of prohibiting the new corporation from undertaking any new opening, as had been recommended by Dr. Donald, or of giving the corporation a chance of making a decision for itself as to the viability of the new opening.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)
The government did recommend in the legislation that the Cape Breton Development Corporation should have the authority to decide for or against any new opening. I am pleased that the corporation in its over-all plan is proposing the opening of a new mine at Lingan. I thought it made sense in 1965. I thought it made sense even after Dr. Donald had recommended otherwise. I think it makes economic and social sense today and I am glad that on this particular point the corporation departed from Dr. Donald's recommendation. In saying this I acknowledge the contribution which Dr. Donald made and the debt we owe him for his proposal that a corporation be established to undertake this job. It is unique in Canada. There is nothing else like it and I think it is breaking new ground. It is entrusted with a mining operation but it is also given broad powers in connection with new development. There is no region in Canada faced with a similar situation which has an instrument such as is available on the island of Cape Breton, supported jointly by the government of Canada and the government of Nova Scotia.
We know that on the federal side we committed $25 million. In the coal sector, the corporation has decided how to spend these funds; it will spend part of the amount on a new opening and part on the purchase of a coke oven from the steel operation, because this was regarded as an important element in Cape Breton production.
On the development side the federal government put a sum of money at the disposal of the corporation, while the provincial government under the leadership at that time of the present Leader of the Opposition committed the amount of $10 million, I believe. It is understood that any savings which may be 29180-233J
DEBATES	3673
Supply-Regional Development forthcoming from the reduction in the large subvention which was being paid for the moving of coal will be directed toward the general strengthening of the island of Cape Breton in future years.
A serious effort was made to get a good board of directors and a good staff. While it is certainly too early yet to make a final judgment on the success of the corporation, I think it has made a good start and that at this stage it deserves the widest possible public support for its undertaking. The hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond talked about the role of the corporation in the mining areas. Undoubtedly the act intended that the purpose of the corporation should be to provide alternative employment opportunities and to strengthen the economic base of the island. I hope the hon. member does not take an exclusivist view about this. The act is intended to apply to Cape Breton as a whole and not to any particular community. I would certainly take a very dim view indeed of the corporation if it hesitated to support viable projects in all parts of the island.
It has made a big investment at the strait of Canso in assisting the B.A. Corporation to establish an oil refinery there. No one questions that all governments are called upon to play a role these days in industrial development, and when I say "all governments" I mean to include provincial and municipal governments. But I do know that without the assistance which was forthcoming from the Cape Breton Development Corporation, the Atlantic Development Board and the Government of Canada, the decision of B.A. Oil to establish at the strait of Canso would have been postponed for an indefinite period. I know this to be a fact. It is a good thing that the Cape Breton Development Corporation seized this opportunity to assist in the immediate establishment of the refinery and help create a growth centre on the strait which will be as important toward a solution of the economic difficulties on the island as any other possible endeavour.
In defending this action I am aware that the corporation has a real obligation to the coal miners in terms of the operation of mines and also in terms of its obligation to provide alternative employment opportunities on a planned basis to miners who may be affected by closures. I believe the over-all approach outlined in the corporation's report has stressed an acceptance of this obligation. Certainly I shall be as eager as any other hon. member to ask the corporation to recognize
3674	COMMONS
Supply-Regional Development this responsibility if at any time there appears to be a feeling that it is being ignored. I hope there will be no such feeling.
The hon. member talked about a comment I made during the election campaign concerning a ski development in northern Cape Breton. I suppose it would have been better had I made the reference at another time because announcements made during campaigns are usually suspect. But in this case, at least, the validity of the announcement was confirmed by action subsequently taken by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in calling for tenders from private promoters to establish a ski development on South Mountain, northern Cape Breton.


An hon. Member:: How many were
received?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Up to the present, none, but it is not likely that private developers will be ready to submit tenders until they have had a chance to observe snow conditions in the area during the current winter. I hope private developers will come forward because such a development would have an important effect upon the tourist industry in northern Cape Breton. This ski development has nothing to do with the Cape Breton Development Corporation; it has been sponsored by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, the department responsible for the administration of national parks. This development is supposed to take place in Cape Breton Highlands national park.


Mr. Muir (Cape Brelon-The Sydneys):: Would the hon. gentleman allow me to interject for a moment? I could be wrong, but I believe my hon. friend was referring to a proposed ski resort in the Coxheath area which was mentioned by the president, Mr. Orde, in the committee.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: He referred to my having made an announcement about a ski resort, and the only ski resort I have talked about in public was this proposal for northern Cape Breton.


Mr. Coates:: Would the minister tell us whether this is the same ski resort as the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria, as the constituency then was, announced when we were in office but which was later cancelled?
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)


Allan Joseph MacEachen: I have never kept track of my hon. friend's promises. In any event I

DEBATES	December 9, 1968
hope that this particular tender will receive a good response and that we will have this development apart from any past history.
I should like to conclude by a reference to the over-all plan. The over-all plan is not in any way specific about dates and times of closure of any mine. It is a general plan. I believe that in the time at the disposal of the corporation it was too much to expect it would have been possible for it to do much more than it put forward in that particular plan. I was reassured by the testimony of the chairman of the board before the committee and in private about the attitude of the corporation in respect of the schedule of closures of mines. As I understand it the act requires that the government of Canada approve the report and that it be sent to the province of Nova Scotia for examination by the lieutenant governor in council. I believe that has been done. To my knowledge no objection has been taken by the provincial government to the general concept of the plan. At this stage I do not think it would be helpful if a conflict developed because the solution to this particular problem in Cape Breton is bound to require the support of both the federal and provincial governments since both are committed to the long term purposes of the Cape Breton Development Corporation. For myself I am delighted that the corporation has been established, that it is moving, that it has made certain significant proposals and is getting down to the very tough work of developing a method of adjustment for this very important Canadian problem.
Members of the house who are not from the province of Nova Scotia ought at least to be made aware that the coal industry in the island of Cape Breton has been the mainstay of the economy of Nova Scotia and that it has been accepted that this industry should be phased out over time. It seems to me that this indeed represents an attitude of acceptance that is not always easy to develop. It is an acceptance, however, that is based on the expectation that the phasing out will go along with a phasing in of alternative employment opportunities. That is the mandate the Cape Breton Development Corporation has had and it is the mandate the parliament of Canada will expect it to fulfil.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the minister would permit one question, although his comments could provoke others. Would he
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
agree that the legislation refers specifically to the phasing out period as a 15-year period? Would he also agree that the projected plans of the Cape Breton Development Corporation do not set out anything specifically concerning what the intentions of that board are? The minister will also recall that during the time this legislation was before the house it was continually emphasized that not only the jobs of the miners but also the mining communities would be protected. Would he not agree that this was the case and that we were given this assurance at the time of the passage of this legislation.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: The minister of regional development will be answering with regard to the policy behind the legislation. The broad purpose of the bill itself was set out in the preamble. Certainly no one need be in any doubt concerning the position that has been accepted by the parliament of Canada.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Chairman, I do not rise to be controversial, although I must express a little surprise at the Minister of Manpower and Immigration going back to the undertaking of the fall of 1965. I would not have raised this myself, but I must say quite frankly I do not believe it was actually done in conformance with the undertaking given in the fall of 1965. I say this simply because I do not wish to sit here quietly while the Minister of Manpower and Immigration gives the impression that what has actually been done constitutes in effect the opening of the Lin-gan mine and modernization of existing mines.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Chairman, there obviously is a very great difference of opinion between myself and the Leader of the Opposition. I was attempting to argue that without the policy declaration of 1968 the Cape Breton Development Corporation would hardly have taken the form it did.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: As I say, I do not wish to prolong any controversy but just wish to make it clear that the opening of a new mine and the phasing out of the other mines with the possible exception of mine 26, which as I understand it is the plan, was not contained in the assurance of 1965 which definitely gave people the impression that the existing mines would continue to operate but under improved conditions. I do not wish to argue the point. I simply want to make the point that I cannot agree with the Minister of Manpower and Immigration when he says that the
DEBATES	3675
Supply-Regional Development policy statement of 1965 has in fact been carried out by the government of Canada. I cannot accept that statement. I must say that the fact that the minister felt it necessary to go back to 1965 and go over the ground indicated to me that he perhaps has a little something on his conscience in this regard. However, I do not wish to thresh old straw today unless the minister chooses to continue to do so.
There is a vast problem involved here. I hope the Cape Breton Development Corporation will concentrate heavily on an attempt to develop alternative jobs as well as give its attention to humane ways of phasing out existing employment in this whole industry to the extent it is considered necessary. I should like in particular to associate myself with the remarks of the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond with regard to retirement pensions and the means test. I do not wish to be unfair about this, but as I understand it the pension is reduced to some extent if a person on a pension earns money. I suggest this is unfortunate. I v/ould hope this policy in fact would be reviewed and that a man who is retired and has the good fortune or perhaps the enterprise to supplement his income would be permitted to earn this additional income without his pension being decreased, because to the extent that his pension is decreased as a result of additional earnings he becomes a prisoner of the pension he is receiving. As I have suggested in other circumstances, there is far too much imprisonment within the pension and welfare structure in our country today. I would hope that this situation could be reconsidered in connection with the Cape Breton Development Corporation so that a person who has retired on a pension at the age of 60 would receive that pension as of right and indeed be encouraged to supplement that pension by being able to retain any supplementary earnings without his pension being reduced.
There is a great deal that could be said on the subject of development in Cape Breton Island. I simply hope that Devco in co-operation with the government of Nova Scotia and these agencies can make a very determined effort to attract additional industry to the area. There has been some success in this regard, and I hope the emphasis will be placed upon development and not simply upon phasing out the coal mines. I say this most earnestly.
3676	COMMONS
Supply-Regional Development [DOT] (4:50 p.m.)
Before I sit down I should like to ask the minister whether he can give us any information about the government of Canada or Dev-co, whichever is the appropriate agency, reaching an agreement with the Dominion Coal Company or other companies on the price to be paid for the coal resources or the mines as operating units. Can the minister tell us whether any agreement has been reached in respect of the price to be paid for the mines?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, I must be a very naive member and a very uninformed former union leader because I would normally have expected a report such as this, coming before the house-independently of political parties because it is not exclusively the work of the people on this side, but a joint effort with the Nova Scotia government and labour unions-to stir up at least a little enthusiasm and satisfaction with what a corporation, which I do not own personally but which belongs to all Canadians, has managed to do, something extremely difficult, while safeguarding the fundamental interests of the workers.
I confess that I am disappointed, not because there is criticism-that is normal, even what seems perfect can always be criticized-but because there is a lack of enthusiasm, a lack of gratitude towards those who worked. I do not mean the government but those who really try to help the miners and help the development of Cape Breton, Not only is there is no enthusiasm, but there is even an attempt to minimize the efforts that were made, and I shall explain it.
The hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond (Mr. Maclnnis) spoke of a $2,400 pension for bachelors with no dependents, and of a $3,000 pension for those with dependents. There is more than that, Mr. Chairman. A bonus of $50 for each year of service up to a maximum of $500 is given to those who are forced to retire and they receive a comparable sum when they reach 65, which is the normal retirement age.
The provisions in the act concerning the leave prior to receiving the pension also provide for the payment of a certain percentage to compensate for the 2 per cent increase in the cost of living.
Mr. Chairman, I have spent my whole life negotiating collective agreements and trying to protect the workers. I have known a great

DEBATES	December 9, 1968
many affiliated unions both in the C.L.C., the old C.I.O. and the central which I represented. I have seen all sorts of agreements concluded in similar circumstances. Not a single one of them, Mr. Chairman, remotely resembled this one or could be compared to it, whatever the strength of the unions represented. The Canadian government, in co-operation with the government of Nova Scotia, the miners and their representatives, seems to understand the problem rather better than some of the hon. gentlemen in this house.
All these people, in my opinion, are creating an extremely interesting precedent. I have not seen anything like it, Mr. Chairman, not even when I had to deal with other industrial concerns, for example the shipyards in Lau-zon. The hon. member for Frontenac has left, but he could perhaps have compared the two cases earlier. The George T. C. Davie company decided to close down because it is not making enough money. Workers are dismissed without any pension or any protection whatsoever. Nevertheless, they are Canadian citizens like you and me, as the coal miners of Cape Breton. They are human being who have responsibilities, who enjoy life; but they have received nothing at all. They will have to get unemployment insurance and if they cannot find a job, they will be distitute. That is one case among others.
It is not because I regret what is happening in Cape Breton Mr. Chairman, because I do not regret it. I feel that what is going on in Cape Breton should happen everywhere in Canada. We should not allow people to be harmed as they are very often when plants are shut down. They are merely left with their small pension or they have to obtain unemployment insurance, because they have no other choice. Here are workers who remain with an uneconomic business which costs the Canadian government $28 million a year. Every ton of coal extracted costs the government and the company $15 and brings $6. It takes a long time to make money that way.
This is a truly unprofitable undertaking and if it had been administered by private individuals-that is to say, if the government had not taken an interest in it, and here I am talking about the Nova Scotia government as well as the federal government, it was not a matter of pettiness-they would have laid off those people years ago. They would have closed the coal mines and, in fact, those people would be in the most dire need.
December 9, 1968

But under an agreement, the Devco-of course that is its task and, no matter how it is interpreted, reading the preamble to the act is enough to be convinced-was set up to put an end to the production of coal in Nova Scotia unless it becomes profitable. That is the very objective of the undertaking and it is clearly stated in the Act.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)
It is very well to refer to past speeches or statements, but the legislation which was passed by the Canadian parliament, is very clear. But according to the legislation, workers must be taken care of and given human working conditions, and Devco does that.
The hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond wonders by what right-and he appeals to my trade union experience-an employee can be forced to retire at 60, or be encouraged to retire between 50 and 55?
Unfortunately, there is in our society no legal right to a function. Under what statute do I breathe? I do not know. Under what statute is an employee without work dismissed? None that I am aware of. No worker, except in very special cases, has a legal right to the job he holds. That is why, every day, employers lay off workers who are no longer needed, and the unemployment insurance or other social welfare programs take those workers in charge.
I do not need to find a statute that authorizes Devco to do the same. Furthermore, the hon. member could read section 18 of the Act, which provides for the retirement of coal miners. I do not have to refer to other statutes. If that were the only problem to solve, it could be done easily. It is clear that Devco has not only the right to do such a thing but, according to the law, everything shows that it has the obligation to retire miners who are no longer needed, but also to make sure at the same time that those people are treated in a human way.
The honourable member suggests that I be more generous with regard to the pensions. I could be, it is not my money. However, I feel that for 150 reasons-for which I am not responsible-the workers of Cape Breton are really, at the present time and compared to the rest of the Canadian workers, getting very special treatment, which I would personally like to see generalized and incorporated in our statutes.
I do not mean that the Cape Breton miners are exploiting the Canadian society. That is not true. That is not what I mean. What I
Supply-Regional Development mean is simply that they are fortunate in having, at the present time, the government of Canada as an employer; and that does not mean that the government members are the only ones who take into account and protect the interests of those people.
Obviously, that money comes from the Canadian taxpayers. Perhaps $10,000 a year, $15,000 or more could be given those miners. But, keeping in mind the average salary and what is now going on in our Canadian society, I feel that the coal miners in Cape Breton are not ill-treated. On the contrary, they are getting better treatment than any of the workers I have ever known, and surely I have known as many as most of those now sitting in this house.
Naturally, they will not go to Florida with $3,000 a year, plus two $500 bonuses and a 2 per cent increase in their annual income. They will certainly not buy yachts on that kind of an income. But there are many Canadians wo do not go to Florida, who do not own yachts and who do not have a $3,000 annual pension, that is normal in that field. The member is shocked and says that the miner in fact is paying the Canadian government or Devco a subsidy. Let us not carry absurdity too far. The whole undertaking now exists thanks to government subsidies. It could not survive a single day were it not for the money of the Canadian government. So, to say that the miners pay a subsidy to Devco is really, to my mind, overstepping the mark.
Mr. Chairman, as far as coal is concerned, I believe the house has good reasons to be happy; those who are responsible for the setting up of Devco have made a very good job of it. I hope the Devco's authorities will soon come to an agreement with the Miners' Union so that the collective agreement will be signed and, thus the purposes of the legislation achieved.
The case of the railwaymen has been mentioned earlier. I think that the point raised is important and serious. The solution will not be easy to find, and I do not intend to discuss it here, in the house, this afternoon. However, I am prepared to admit that a particular problem exists there and I shall no doubt have the opportunity of discussing the matter with the people involved in order to try to find a solution to this problem. Apart from that, I think that the Devco plan corresponds exactly to the letter and spirit of the legislation passed by the House of Commons.
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development
Mr. Chairman, if I may express a wish, I would like some day all workers in Canada to enjoy the same kind of protection in the same circumstances. If the labour unions ever succeeded in reaching that goal, I think they could congratulate themselves.
As to development, at this time one can talk indefinitely about it. The member for Oshawa-Whitby (Mr. Broadbent) seems surprised that after eight months no definite development plan has been brought forward. Perhaps he knows more than we do on the subject, but at all events I would have been surprised if there had been one.
When I think of ARDA in the lower St. Lawrence, when I consider what is happening now on Prince Edward Island, and what happened to all the programs established not only by us but also by all provincial governments, I suggest that after eight months, it would be unfair to cast stones at Devco and blame it for not having found magical solutions to the development problems Cape Breton Island.
Certainly some elements for solution, have been found and efforts are being made, but I think it is too early to either applaud or to criticize.
Personally I think that Devco should be congratulated. The opening of the Lingan is considered by some to-day as a mere trifle, but for me and for the miners I have met, it is more than a trifle, it is truly a harbinger of hope, and that is what counts for them; I believe that the miners must be happy, even if some people here, in the house, see the dark side of everything-as dark as coal. In my opinion, Devco has done its work well.
On the other hand, I think it is too early to judge. However, I am well aware that construction of a motel has been discussed. Obviously, Devco does not intend to develop the tourist industry as it would be unwise in the first place and rather childish. However, if some economic development is to be achieved in Cape Breton Island and if technicians are to be attracted there, there are housing problems to consider. It will be necessary for Devco to accommodate these people in Sydney if they are invited and are interested. This is quite a secondary aspect and it has no bearing on development as such. This is indirectly connected and it is somewhat premature, I think, to blame Devco at this point.
I was asked why Dosco was making money at the present time, since it was taken over 
by the government, while as a private enterprise, it was losing money. There are several reasons, and not just one, as some would seem to think.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
I do think that this example would not be enough to prove that any government corporation is necessarily more efficient than private enterprise, precisely because Dosco assets were obtained at a very good price. In fact, what we will pay for Dosco will certainly be a terrific bargain which does not happen every day. Capital costs are much lower and besides, at the present time, there is a good morale among Dosco workers which did not exist previously. It seems that a new cooperation prevails and even that the present unity of management is also one of the reasons why the company now makes a profit. There is also the market, since the railway track market is rather prosperous at present and Dosco benefits therefrom.
I do not think one can come to any conclusion, but if one wants to know why Dosco is now economically sound, whereas it was not before, I think it is not enough to say simply that the state took over, although I am not ready to speak favourably at this point of the efficiency of the managers of Dosco before the state took over.
Anyhow, the hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stanfield) asked me whether an agreement had been reached with Dosco and with the companies which had businesses before. I know that negotiations are taking place. Unfortunately, I do not know what stage has been reached, and I can give no information on the subject at this time. I know that lawyers are meeting and that discussions are taking place, but I am completely in the dark as to their results.
Mr. Chairman, this is a most interesting experience from a human point of view. I am referring to Dosco and Devco. This experience shows that the interests of the workers can very well be looked after. The government of Canada and those who dealt with the situation on behalf of the government of Nova Scotia-a highly industrious area, trying to expand and to cooperate-should be commended. Hats off to them. This is one of Canada's worthy projects and I hope it will be carried through.


James Hugh Faulkner: The Chair is ready to recognize the hon. member for Cape Breton-The Sydneys, but may I ask first whether the
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
hon. member for Oshawa-Whitby is rising to ask a question?


John Edward Broadbent: I have a question with reference to what the minister said in reply to a number of my questions. In turn, I want to ask him a question with regard to his reply.


James Hugh Faulkner: The hon. member for Cape Breton-The Sydneys.


Robert Muir: Mr. Chairman, I thought the minister rose just to answer the question posed to him by the Leader of the Opposition. However, he went on to deal with other remarks. I would have spoken at that time but I did not want to interrupt him.
I had not planned on saying anything much in this debate because we spent some hours in committee with the officials from Devco; in fact we had two meetings with them. Frankly, they were much more enlightening than the minister has been up to the present point. The only problem we had in the committee was that the chairman seemed to be herding the committee members like a fussy old schoolmarm. He kept hurrying us along although there were a few other questions we wished to put to the officials. He was in a great hurry. Perhaps he was afraid we might ask something which might embarrass either the government or Devco.


Jean Marchand: Ask it now.


Robert Muir: The
minister should relax. A few moments ago we were almost deafened by a man who was carried away by the sound of his own voice. I hope he will relax and allow us to say a few quiet, mild words because we certainly did not interrupt him when he was speaking. I might say in passing that after listening to such verbiage and verbosity I can now understand why the C.N.T.U. did not get very far in the province of Quebec when he was their leader. In any event, we will deal with that later.


Jean Marchand: You can deal with it now.


Robert Muir: The
minister is in a very touchy mood today. It is shocking. I see he had to bring in the representative in the cabinet of the province of Nova Scotia to bail him out, so now he is getting very important. In any event, I was glad to hear the minister in his opening remarks reaffirm and confirm what Mr. DEBATES	3679
Supply-Regional Development Gerald Blackmore and Mr. Douglas Fullerton, vice-president of Devco, said. They stated there would be no lay-offs of coal miners, no one would be put on the street and absolutely no one would be displaced until alternative employment was found for them. I was very glad to hear the minister reaffirm that statement. However, we have not seen much evidence of it. I fully agree with the minister that it is only seven or eight months since Devco started its operations and they have not had too much opportunity to produce very much in the form of new industry. But they are working hard and I have good faith in them to the extent that I think they will do the best they can to try to bring in new industry. They have made some steps along that line up to the present time.
The minister suggested that questions be put to him. I shall be glad to do so and I hope he will be in a position to answer them. My first question concerns the decision concerning pre-retirement. Were the amounts of $2,400 and $3,000 decided upon on an actuarial basis as is done by life insurance companies with regard to pensions, or how was the decision reached that $2,400 would be paid to single employees without dependants and $3,000 to married employees?
Second, does the minister not feel that the program which has been placed before us by Devco puts too much emphasis on tourism? Tourism is very important and I am glad to see that the corporation will promote it as much as possible and to the best of its ability. However, I am sure that the minister, despite his feelings of great importance today, will agree with me that-


Jean Marchand: The hon. member is childish.


Robert Muir: wish the minister would relax. I am afraid I might raise his blood pressure a few points. This bothers me no end. However, I am sure that even he will agree with me that not everyone can operate a motel or a service station, just as not everyone can operate a restaurant. However, these facilities will provide service, and thus tourism will be promoted. Nevertheless, great emphasis is put on tourism and I hope that Devco has not overemphasized it to the extent of forgetting something else.
There is another question I would like to put to the minister. There are approximately 2,000 men on pension on the island of Cape Breton. They are receiving the magnificient
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development sum of $35 a month and up. Will Devco give any consideration to bringing up the level of income of these people through a superannuation allowance because, as I mentioned in committee, when a large number of people are put on allowances of $2,400 or $3,000 this will definitely have an impact on the whole economy of Cape Breton island? Has this matter been considered by Devco? I asked that in committee and the answer was that Devco had considered it but they did not know if it would affect the total economy to such a great extent. Will the minister go into that matter with Devco to see if some assistance can be given to those people who were pensioned off prior to Devco taking over?


Jean Marchand: From what
year?


Robert Muir: Perhaps the minister could go back a period of ten years because he spoke about the great amount of money that would be saved. I think the minister should know that there are quite a number of people in Cape Breton who have received the magnificent sum of $35 a month from Dosco, and this is being continued by Devco. This does not constitute a large amount of money at the end of 12 months. It is surprising that the minister, who has had great experience with unions, should consider this to be a good pension. Frankly I think it is peanuts and an insult to men who have spent up to 50 years working underground, crawling around like rats in water in very hazardous conditions. This was the pay-off they received when they were finally forced to leave, some of them because their health was broken and they could not continue working in the coal mines. Perhaps out of the goodness of his heart the minister will go into this question with Devco to see if some consideration could not be given to these unfortunate people on pension.
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)
Another question I would like to ask the minister is what consideration is being given to the opening of a new mine on the north side of Sydney harbour? I am sure the minister is very familiar with all this. The Princess colliery is operating on the north side and two or three other mines on the south side of Sydney harbour. They are all scheduled for closing by 1973 under the plan put forward by Devco. Mr. Blackmore said in committee that production per man had gone up tremendously. In view of this I asked him 
whether he would not consider maintaining the Princess colliery in operation. He could not say very much at that point, but he did say that we would have to wait and see what develops because what might be a good situation today might be a bad one tomorrow. Could the minister advise whether any consideration has been given to opening a new mine? The miners now have to go out more than three miles under the Atlantic ocean to get the coal and the long hauls involved in bringing the coal to the surface naturally increase the cost of production. While the phasing out of the Princess mine was taking place it would be possible to prepare new slopes on the other seams. By opening a new seam, naturally you are going to get cheaper coal because it is not going to cost as much to bring the coal to the surface. I was hoping the minister could take that into consideration in his discussions with Devco, since I am sure he works with them quite closely.
I should like to reply to some of the points that were made by the cabinet representative from Nova Scotia. He stated that the $25 million to which reference was made some years ago was never promised. I must advise him, and I am sorry he is not here at the moment, that this promise was used in Liberal advertising prior to the election of 1965. With regard to his remarks concerning the points brought up by the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond, I may say we are all in favour of expanding the economy of Cape Breton Island. We are very pleased that the provincial and federal governments have gone into the oil business on the strait of Canso. We are very happy about any progress that is made in maintaining industries or bringing new industries into any part of Cape Breton Island. I think that what was worrying the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond, and what worries me, is the fact that this development is 90 miles away. In the Glace Bay area and the Sydney Mines area mines are being closed down. What is going to take their place? We have people there almost of working age and there will be a number of people displaced. I would think it would only be right and proper to establish some industries close to the particular areas affected. This is the crux of the question at the moment. Is Devco going to give consideration to promoting industries in these areas?
Before I leave the cabinet minister from Nova Scotia, I may say I was glad to see him here today because I have been a bit worried about that hon. gentleman. He has no part to play in this house any more. He used to be
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
the fair-haired boy under Mr. Pearson but he has become the office boy under the present Prime Minister. I would hope that the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development, who has the ear of the present Prime Minister, would use his influence to see that the cabinet representative from Nova Scotia stays close to the Prime Minister and takes an important part in the operations of this government. I say this in all sincerity. When the Liberals had only 49 members he did a lot of hard work to bring the Liberals back to the government side of the house. During that period the present Prime Minister was calling all those 49 members, including Mr. Pearson, some unpleasant names. The cabinet representative from Nova Scotia is quite capable and I hope he will not be ignored continually. We may be on different sides politically, but I think the people of the mari-times, particularly the people of Nova Scotia, dislike to see the Prime Minister of this country ignoring the cabinet representative from Nova Scotia in the manner in which he has.
While the minister was speaking, Mr. Chairman, he mentioned the situation at Lau-zon. It is not a good situation. In the same breath, he intimated that the millenium had come to Cape Breton and that all these coal miners, including the union head, Mr. Marsh, should rush to Ottawa and kiss the hand of the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development. He said that not a damned thing had been done for all these people at Lauzon, but look what the government is doing for the people in Cape Breton. The situation is a little different.
As I said, Mr. Chairman, I had no intention of entering this debate but as a result of listening to the minister and others I thought I should say a word. We spent a number of hours in committee going into Devco. We questioned the representatives from Devco quite thoroughly and they were quite happy to answer questions. They did not have any problems at all except that they were cut off by the chairman. The minister mentioned also the millions of dollars that had been spent in protecting the coal mining industry in Cape Breton and Nova Scotia. I would remind him, as I am sure he must recall, that indirectly many industries in Canada are protected by tariffs which are a form of subsidy. I mention only the white goods industry and the electronics industry. Name me an industry that is not protected. Millions of dollars have been spent under the Emergency Gold Mining
DEBATES	3681
Supply-Regional Development Assistance Act. Many industries are protected. All the money successive governments used to protect the coal industry gave employment to Canadian National Railways workers and kept the dollar moving.
We hope we can find a solution under Devco, as the minister has suggested. We wish Devco well. I could not wish anything better for them. In conclusion, after listening to the minister all I can say at the moment is that a fellow by the name of Dwight Eisenhower said that in politics one should take everything seriously except one's self. I commend that remark to the minister after his actions today.


John Edward Broadbent: I have one question for the minister, Mr. Chairman, and then a couple of comments. For the sake of clarification, may I ask if I understood the minister correctly to say that before the compulsory retirement section is implemented, particularly with reference to railway workers, their union representatives will have an opportunity to renegotiate or reassess the proposals?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, I think they will have the opportunity to discuss their problems, yes.


John Edward Broadbent: I should like to comment on a couple of other matters. I noticed the minister did not reply to one point I raised, namely, the matter of a FRED program being a very important requirement in connection with any serious development of the Cape Breton area. This would be necessary to provide some kind of recreational facilities. Would this not be an important part of the Devco plan for the area? Would the minister like to comment on that?
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)


Jean Marchand: Devco was
specifically set up to phase out the coal mines and at the same time to try to find alternative employment for the workers concerned. So its role is quite limited. We are now setting up this new department of regional economic expansion, and it will be the duty of that department to do just what the hon. member is suggesting, to see, if we do need a FRED plan, that there is over-all development not only in Cape Breton but throughout the whole maritime region. This is not the objective of Devco but the objective of the department of regional development.
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development


John Edward Broadbent: What I was suggesting, Mr. Chairman, was that this should be part of Devco's objectives.
With reference to my comment about the lack of concrete proposals in the plan that was presented to the committee, the minister said that the time had been too brief for this, that the issues are very complex and that we could not expect much more. In my earlier comments I think I suggested that I agreed with that at least in part. It certainly is a very complex problem and I do not think that any sensible person would expect the presentation of a whole range of programs.
However, we did expect a few things, and in this context one of the points I made was that the chairman of the board himself suggested to the committee that there were specific projects he had in mind but which he could not reveal to the committee because the public should not know about them. My point is that as members of parliament we should be kept informed. If it is necessary that these proposals should not be given broad publicity, then the committee should hold in camera sessions. Certainly I think we should have been able to make a more sensible assessment of what is being done.
I enjoyed the minister's comment about the relative efficiency of privately-owned versus publicly-owned enterprises. My point was not necessarily that it can be inferred that publicly owned enterprises are more efficient; I simply asked the non-rhetorical question whether the minister had any information which would lead the committee to draw some conclusions in this respect. Obviously, as a result of what information he did have in this regard the question still remains very much an open one, at least to me.
I was interested to note that the minister referred to the high level of morale which perhaps had contributed to the efficiency of the enterprise. This may be an indication that the sense of involvement and immediate concern evidenced by those who work for an enterprise has a direct relationship to its efficiency and may point to the necessity for some kind of legislation in this area to involve those who work in our enterprises at a higher level of intensity.
May I conclude with one general observation with reference to the minister's rather ringing defence of what is being done by Devco. I share the minister's belief that what Devco is doing compared with what has been done in public enterprises elsewhere in the country, and certainly in private enterprises, 
represents a very significant improvement. But I do not think he should suggest that it is up to the members of the opposition to stand and laud the government for what is being done; I do not think that is our function. The situation is an improvenent as a result of which most of the workers have benefited to a substantial degree.
I am a member of the opposition, and although the minister is not personally responsible he is a member of the cabinet that must be held responsible for what the government has done in the last few years for the average person in this country. Here one cannot make the same kind of defence. There is no capital gains tax. The Freedman report, which was published three years ago, still remains to be implemented. The government has failed to do a whole range of things that could be done for our workers, not only in the province of Nova Scotia but all across Canada. Certainly the government cannot take any pride for things done on this score.


Mr. Forresiall:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to ask the minister a short question. About a year ago a firm assurance was given to the house by one of the minister's colleagues-I apologize for not remembering which one- that as a result of any of Dosco's actions on the island of Cape Breton there would be no immediate follow through to dispose of such facilities as the marine slip in the Dartmouth and Halifax shipyards and the Trenton works. Can the minister give us a further reassurance at this time, inasmuch as the agreement may be nearly concluded, that the status quo of one year ago will still prevail? If not, has Devco made any representations to Dosco in connection with other holdings of that company in Nova Scotia?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, as I have said, I am not in a position to give any information in this field; I just do not have the information at hand.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Chairman, may I put a question in view of the minister's earlier remarks to the hon. member for Oshawa-Whitby. With regard to the possibility of the development program being extended beyond the basic terms of reference of Devco, is any consideration being given by the minister's department to some form of restructuring of Devco, as a result of which it may lose its status as a crown corporation?
December 9, 1968


Jean Marchand: Devco is authorized by the law to promote industrial development on Cape Breton Island. The only restriction is that the development be industrial. Devco is not a substitute, of course, for the department. The department has its own duties. What Devco is going to do is specially for the benefit of the coal miners and affects all communities on Cape Breton Island.
I do not know whether the hon. member's question relates to the possibility of there being a FRED plan for this region. If so, I think it is a little too soon to answer that question. First of all, we have to set up the new department and define its powers. I cannot answer that question at this stage.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: I think we know what Devco is doing now. The minister speaks for Devco though it does not actually come within his department. Nevertheless, what Devco is doing is quite different from various other programs of the government, and I am wondering what the future position of Devco is going to be as a result of the restructuring that is obviously going to take place.


Jean Marchand: Devco's objectives are laid down by law, and it will continue to be a crown corporation trying to fulfil the same ends.


Mr. Skoberg:: Mr. Chairman, the minister may have answered this question previously, but can he tell me whether the effective date of the implementation of the pre-retirement plan has yet been decided?


Jean Marchand: I did not give any date. Even though the plan that has been outlined may not be part of the negotiations being conducted with the union, Devco has discussed the matter with the union. Probably as soon as there is some kind of understanding the plan will be implemented.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)


John Leroy Skoberg: When the minister speaks of a union no doubt he is referring to the United Mine Workers Union. Other unions mentioned today will also be involved. I remind the minister that on page 164 of the Donald report there is a suggestion that an early retirement agreement will have to be negotiated by management and labour. Up to this time there has been consultation with labour, but no negotiation. I am concerned about some of the railway unions involved, particularly the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen
Supply-Regional Development and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen. I ask the minister to make sure that no retirement plan is implemented until all the unions have had an opportunity to be heard.


Jean Marchand: Of course, it all depends on what we mean by negotiation. There have been meetings and discussions with all unions. As you know, it is not a contributory plan. Devco pays the full bill, and that is another reason to hold negotiations. As I said, there have been discussions with all unions, including the railroad unions. I know that on this particular point there have been difficulties, as I mentioned a few minutes ago. I do not know if I shall have to meet personally the representatives of the unions but I know the Devco people are going to, and I am ready to meet them too in order to iron out this situation.


John Leroy Skoberg: The minister said, when talking about the pension, that the company pays the whole shot. But is this not a compulsory retirement plan which the company makes available to employees who have worked for Devco for some time?


Jean Marchand: Of course, once it is adopted it is compulsory. It is compulsory for those who were 60 years of age and over. Now it is only compulsory for those who are between 55 and 60 years of age. But the whole plan will be part of the regulations of the company.


John Leroy Skoberg: I am sorry if I did not make myself clear. Was the pension available to the employees of Devco prior to this time a compulsory or voluntary plan?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, I am afraid I am not aware of this. I will seek the information and pass it on to the hon. member.


John Leroy Skoberg: Mr. Chairman, I hope that all unions and all representatives of the employees involved in this Devco operation will be given an opportunity to be heard before the implementation of any pre-retirement plan. That is very important, and the Donald report spoke about this matter. Unless the company can bring about good management-labour relationships a very serious situation could result, especially if some of the bargaining units were left out of the negotiations.
3684	COMMONS
Supply-Regional Development


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to sound officious but may I point out that I know something about the background of developments in Cape Breton. Actually the pension payable by Dominion Coal Company to Dosco coal workers is not a contributory plan. It is a very modest pension. For many years efforts have been made by governments of Nova Scotia to get a contributory pension plan established. The government of Nova Scotia more than 20 years ago offered to contribute toward coal royalties, under a three-way business arrangement, in order to get a contributory pension plan established. For a variety of reasons it was not so established. Any pension payable by the coal company-


Robert Muir: Was
at the will of the coal company.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: As one hon. member says, it was at the will of the coal company. The pension was not contributory and was quite inadequate.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, at one time I argued before the Minister of Finance that Dominion Coal Company did not pay a pension to its employees but a gratuity. The minister saw fit to tax that gratuity.
In my general remarks earlier this afternoon I hope I did not leave the impression that everything is wrong with the Cape Breton Development Corporation. The minister took that interpretation and, by shouting the way he did, only succeeded in drowning out the House of Commons interpreter.
Several of the minister's remarks are in complete disagreement with certain answers he gave to my hon. friend from the N.D.P. The minister referred to negotiations with the unions. A thin line must be drawn between negotiations and discussions. As the vicepresident in charge of coal said at one time, there is nothing in the legislation requiring Devco to negotiate with the unions. I asked him whether the matter we are interested in this afternoon had at any time been discussed and he said, yes, it had been discussed with about 90 per cent of the members of one union but not with the members of all unions involved. The hon. member from the N.D.P. asked a question about this matter. I understand that only one union was involved. I think it is correct to say that a retirement plan was drawn up and presented to the United Mine Workers for approval. Possibly such a plan was presented to other unions, but there was absolutely no negotiation.

DEBATES	December 9, 1968
When the minister says that there have been negotiations with unions I think it will be found that he erred.


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, I do not understand in what I am wrong. Is it because I used the word "unions"?


Donald MacInnis: I think the minister referred to negotiations or discussions with the unions involved. This is not the case. I think it will be established by reading the reports of the area development committee that this was not a negotiated plan. According to the information presented to the committee, this plan was drawn up and presented for approval.
The minister spoke of how well Cape Bretoners are treated, implying that we ought to be most grateful for the grant which the federal government pays toward maintenance of coal operations. I think reference was made to a subsidy having been paid over a period of 40 years. By the same token, would it not be interesting to look at the protection afforded the uranium industry in which the Prime Minister is personally involved, since part of that industry has dealings with his constituency?


An hon. Member:: Cheap.


Donald MacInnis: At the same time let us look at that colossal white elephant which will require subsidies, subventions or what have you from now until eternity. I speak of the St. Lawrence seaway which was to benefit the area between Montreal and Toronto.


An hon. Member:: Shame.


Donald MacInnis: Did anyone ever say clearly what the cost would be to support this white elephant? We hear talk about subventions on coal over the years. What was invested in the seaway? More than $500 million, and it will be a burden on the Canadian taxpayer forever. If they want to begin cutting out these things which they claim they are supporting, why not cut out the seaway?
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)
I see some hon. members are laughing. I invite them to check into this. They will be able to verify my statement that the seaway was built for the purpose of providing hydro for the sake of Ontario and Quebec. It was supposed to bring the farmers six cents more on every bushel of grain sold. But the farmers have the same problem today as they did then. It has been before the house day after
December 9, 1968

day for the last three weeks. They are still looking for box cars to carry their grain.
The minister implies that Cape Breton should be grateful for what is being done for the island. I suggest members should look around at what is being spent in support of other industries in this country and keep in mind that on the very day the corporation came before the committee saying that one of its biggest problems was transportation, an announcement came from the west coast that Kaiser was thinking about shipping coal from Cardiff, Wales. And the development corporation complains about a transportation problem!
Certainly we have a transportation problem, but it is mostly underground. Dr. Donald never went down to see it, though. The government put so much faith in his report they were willing to condemn the report of a previous commissioner who maintained there were 190 million tons of Cape Breton coal which could still be economically mined. Dr. Donald never went to the Cape Breton coalfields. He never went into a mine. But the previous commissioner did, and if the minister would read his report, which is available to him, he will see it is estimated there that 190 million tons of Cape Breton coal could still be economically brought to the surface.
The minister referred to the preamble to the bill. I would ask him to look at it closely and show me where there is authority given to the corporation to phase out this coal mining operation over a five year period in accordance with the plan to which reference has been made. I will read the preamble:
Whereas it has been estimated that the realistic working life of the Sydney coalfield on the Island of Cape Breton is only about 15 years and that as a result of rising operating costs the future operation of the mines in the coalfield will require the continuance on an increasing scale of the subsidies and other government assistance which have been provided over a period of almost 40 years-
They are rubbing it in. For 40 years the government has been helping them, it says.
And whereas the mines in the Sydney coalfield are faced with imminent closure unless a substantial capital investment is made for their rehabilitation and modernization and as a result of the aforementioned factors and the substantial dependence of the people of Sydney and the surrounding area and of the economy of the Island of Cape Breton on the coal mining operations in the coalfield, a critical situation exists on the island which is a concern to Canada as a whole;
And whereas it is considered desirable and the governments of Canada and Nova Scotia have agreed that a Crown corporation be established
Supply-Regional Development to promote and assist the financing and development of industry on the island to provide employment outside the coal producing industry and broaden the base of the economy of the island, and to acquire the interests of the major coal producer in the Sydney coalfield and reorganize and operate the mines with a view to the rationalization of coal production therefrom and the progressive withdrawal of the corporation from such production in accordance with a plan that takes into account progress in providing employment outside the coal producing industry and in broadening the base of the island's economy;
Where in that preamble does the corporation get the idea, as expressed on October 1,. 1968, that it can close down this mining operation? It is stated here in the second paragraph of the report: "It is the intention of the corporation to reduce coal mining employment as quickly as possible." Let the minister show me how the corporation has been guided by the preamble to this bill, or, for that matter, by any portion of this legislation.
The minister should become acquainted with the terms of this measure. I would refer him to what appears a little farther on in section 19 where it is stated:
(b) in accordance with approved budgets, paid to the corporation from time to time as required by it amounts not exceeding in the aggregate twenty-five million dollars for the purposes of reorganizing and rehabilitating the coal mining and related works and undertakings referred to in section 15 and for preparatory work in connection with conduct by the corporation of coal mining and related operations.
If the minister would read what section 15-says he would find it does not detract from the argument I am making now. The people of Cape Breton have been waiting for the fulfillment of promises made to them by this and previous governments with respect to the coal operation. They do not consider that the present and previous governments have taken into account the manner in which the nation was served by Cape Breton miners during the war when coal was so urgently needed. The corporation said it would spend $25 million on reorganizing the industry and rehabilitating the men concerned. Now it comes out with a report promising: We shall rid you of these men in five years.
The hon. gentleman talks about his concern for the unions. He says he believes there should be discussion with the unions. At the same time, the man in charge of the coal division of the corporation says before the committee that there is nothing in the legislation which requires the corporation to negotiate. According to him, these matters had not been discussed with the unions involved, and we were "drawing a thin line".

December 9, 1968
Air Canada


Jean Marchand: Not at all.


Donald MacInnis: The minister is contradicting what he himself said a few minutes ago. He used the word "unions" and implied that this question was discussed with them and would continue to be discussed with them.


Jean Marchand: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman, it was stated in the committee that nothing in the law compelled Devco to negotiate with the unions, and that is true. But Devco had discussed the proposed retirement plan with them.
Progress reported.



AIR CANADA


Mr. J. E. Walker (Parliamentary Secretary to Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, might I have the unanimous consent of the house to revert to motions for the purpose of tabling a press release relative to the Air Canada base in Winnipeg?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Has the
parliamentary secretary leave to revert to motions?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


James Edgar Walker: I wish to table this press release, in English and in French. I believe it would be agreeable to hon. members if it were printed as an appendix to today's Hansard.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Is that agreeable?


Stanley Howard Knowles: believe the agreement was to have it printed in Votes and Proceedings but I would have no objection to it being printed as an appendix to Hansard as well-or instead.


James Edgar Walker: In Hansard, I think. It covers the hon. member's point.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: For text of press release, see appendix.]



HEALTH, WELFARE AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS THIRD REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE

Mr. Gaston Isabelle (Hull):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the house would revert to presentation of reports by standing and special committees?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Does the house agree to revert to that item?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Joseph Gaston Isabelle: Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to table the third report of the standing committee on health, welfare and social affairs, in both official languages of the country.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: It being six o'clock the house will now proceed to consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely notices of motions.



EXTERNAL AID


Lorne Edmund Nystrom: That, in the opinion of this house, the government should give consideration to including in its external aid program family planning assistance to developing countries requesting such assistance, and that the Government of Canada should take a more active role in the United Nations and in its specialized agencies in supporting measures dealing with world population problems.
He said: Mr. Speaker, hon. members will recall that about two weeks ago just after I returned from the war-torn region of western Africa I spoke in this house from an international perspective concerning family planning and the need to bring a certain amount of international feeling into it in an effort to see the problem from this type of perspective. In the debate on Biafra-Nigeria I said that this is an international problem. I said that the Nigerian-Biafran problem should concern all of humanity. I said it was a tragedy of the human race. I said that we are all brothers and should start thinking like brothers as if we are all part of a great united nations society. I said also that an ailment which affects one segment of society is a sickness which affects the whole of society.
As a result of such things I believe there is a growing awareness in the international community of international affairs and problems. People are becoming restless because of the type of thinking, the uncertainties they see in the world, the conflicts which are precipitated by the ability to make modern weapons, and the political institutions that are squabbling throughout the planet. People are restless because of what might happen if
December 9, 1968

we should have a conflict in the world. People are afraid of the bomb. Therefore the challenge in the world today is a challenge of a preventative nature in respect of an international disaster. In order to prevent such a disaster we must have some kind of policy throughout the world. We must first diagnose some of the symptoms of the disease which is plaguing our planet and devise some kind of a remedy. Today in the world we have a multitude of problems such as economic and social disparities, death, war, poverty, insecurity, fear, prejudice and discrimination. We have modern problems involving cybernation and technology in respect of our institutions and industry. There are problems of pollution and urban sprawl. But there is one major factor which underlines one of the problems in our modern society and that is the problem of population explosion.
What is population explosion and how significant is it in Canada? I should like to quote a few statistics in an endeavour to define the problem which confronts each and every one of us. Modern medicine and transport have brought a drastic decline in death rates so that population continues to increase at a progressively faster rate. In the year 1600, for example, there was a world population of 500 million people. It took a few hundred years to double that population from 500 million to one billion people.
In order to try to illustrate this I should like to backtrack a bit. In 1961 there were three billion people in the world. By the year 2,000 it is expected there will be 6.8 billion people. By the year 2050 it is expected there will be 25 billion people and by the year 2110 or 2150 it is expected there will be 150 billion people on the face of the world. The population is exploding in a geometric progression. This is the reason it grows so fast.
I should like now to quote some of the things Mr. Mel Thistle said when he was addressing the National Research Council. I believe some of these quotations will help illustrate once again the problem which is confronting us. These words might make some members of parliament sit up and face this problem. He said:
I hope this figure will seize you, and make you realize that before you personally die, chances are there will be at least twice as many people as there are now, and that your own personal children will live to see eight times as many people burdening the earth as we have this moment. Have you any idea of what 25 billion people will be like?
External Aid
It is about eight times as many people as we have today. Then he mentions a geometric possibility:
If we keep up our present rate of procreation ... the time is not far distant when the surface of the earth entirely will be converted to human beings, we will be expanding at several times the speed of light.
That is what is meant by the population explosion. We must take a sort of over-all national view of this because man's unprecedented numbers are placing a relatively tremendous and increasing demand on all parts of the environment-air, water, food and space. In this context no nation dares choose automatically for immediate selfish ends. To survive as a nation, choice must tend more and more to be in the best interests of humanity.
I do not think most people understand that the physical environment of the world is not infinite. The physical environment of the world contains many unrenewable items. Many of these items are already starting to be exhausted. In the United States, for example, today the people of that country are consuming about half the present world supply of unrenewable items and resources such as metals. When the population of the world doubles I wonder how many unrenewable items these people will consume. This in itself is a very frightening thought. I believe that these illustrations point out that something must be done and must be done very soon.
It is vitally necessary for countries with severe unemployment, under employment and rapidly growing populations to consider the problem of population control with the utmost seriousness. Some people argue that it is nonsensical to consider a population policy for the underdeveloped countries. History, they say, has frequently demonstrated that a close link exists between high income and low birth rate. They maintain that the birth rate will not fall unless incomes rise. They say it is a waste of time to suggest population control to governments of low income and developing countries. These critics buttress their arguments by stating that in many underdeveloped countries there are a large number of social and economic factors which make a high birth rate inevitable. There is the desire to have a surviving son, for example. Other factors are religious taboos against interference with procreative functions, a source of security in old age and the need of a large family to maintain a small or marginal farm. The critics also claim it is not possible to except a progressive attitude in the

December 9, 1968
External Aid
developing countries when illiteracy rates are so high. They say that for these reasons any population control program would meet with little response.
I maintain that these views are precise but very debatable. To begin with, historical experience is hardly an adequate guide in a field where governmental action has been notoriously absent or undertakings have been negligible and disorganized. The chances of a population policy succeeding cannot therefore be discounted or ruled out. It remains sensible to propose such a policy as an alternative way of using resources to aid the advancement of underdeveloped countries. If economic growth is to be achieved then huge amounts of capital are required, and if this capital is to be created within an underdeveloped country by the country's own efforts it is necessary to direct resources from the production of goods for current consumption to the production of capital goods. This requires a cut in present personal living standards. If living standards are already virtually at the subsistence or poverty level, then such diversion is impossible.
[DOT] (6:10 p.m.)
This situation is often described as the vicious circle of poverty. It is described as such because when a country has limited resources per head it is poor, and because it is poor it can devote only few resources to creating new capital rather than producing goods for immediate consumption. Because little new capital can be produced, capital per head remains low. Because capital per head remains low the country remains poor. It seems to me this is tragic testimony that the natural methods of population check are still in evidence in our world today. These are pestilence, war and mass starvation. We could give many examples of these and Biafra is only one. People are starving all over the world and it is time that we as members of the human race opened up our eyes and started to do some planning. Canada as one of the more affluent nations has to take the lead in this activity.
The resolution now before the house is not compulsory nor does it infringe upon individual or the rights of countries. It only offers assistance in family planning and points out that many countries need this kind of assistance. Canada should take a more active role in international organizations and in trying to solve the world population explosion problem.
[Mr. Nystrom.l
I do not wish to say much more about this subject and I should like to hear the opinions of other hon. members. I hope this resolution will be allowed to pass for the consideration of the government of Canada because this is only one of a number of things we must do if we are going to create a viable world and a viable future for all members of the human race regardless of ethnic background, race, creed or colour of skin. This is something we can offer to do and I should like to see Canada as one of the better off countries in the world take this issue in stride.


Joseph Gaston Isabelle: Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to take part in the debate on the motion of my colleague concerning family planning.
Naturally, I am in favour of family planning in Canada, as I am for it throughout the world. But, I do not really agree with the motion, although the philosophy on which it is based has merit. I feel that were it to be adopted things might become a bit tricky, as it would conflict with section 150 of the Criminal Code which forbids publicity on, and I quote:
-any means . . . intended or represented as a method of preventing conception or causing abortion or miscarriage-
Now, as we are now dealing with contraception, it seems to me Canada would be ill-advised to give its support, through an agency, to fostering what is forbidden at home by the Criminal Code.
The philosophy on which my colleague bases himself has great merit, as I have already said. Three or four days ago, the president of India, Doctor Hussein, said that if the family planning program did not prove effective in India, its population of 500 million today would within the next 30 years grow to a billion people.
It is said that in India family planning is not readily accepted. I wonder what tomorrow holds if that program does not become a fact. I do feel that it does not fall to Canada to interfere in the affairs of other countries, in any way whatsover, and particularly in India where tradition is a way of life. From time immemorial, the Hindus have lived on a mystic plane. Cows roam the streets and it seems that a law cannot be passed to solve that problem. Now, if a country cannot even accept a law to protect the health of its population, one can imagine what troubles the government of India will have on its hands if it dares interfere with the women.
December 9, 1968

In another connection, I should like to say that Canada is not the guardian angel of the whole world. To hear some of the members speak of the problems in Nigeria, Biafra, Africa, Czechoslovakia, Russia, of the French students, of those of Quebec and Toronto, and Vancouver, one would think that the government of Canada should solve them all.
Canada is still growing and it has not yet reached maturity. Proof of this is that we still have growing pains and, like a good father, the government of Canada is awaiting the outcome, knowing full well since that we are still at the growing age, that we will know better days and that everything will one day become orderly.
As regards family planning, my colleague said the Canadian government or other governments dissociated themselves from this important question. Yet they could do this through certain organizations. If we intend to deal with it, we will have to consider its legal aspect. We can certainly not act in an illegal way and try to apply one of our laws in a foreign country. We would have, first of all, to amend the Criminal Code and I think we are coming to that, especially in the field of birth control.
It was said, moreover, that this problem belonged to the external aid program and that this organization could do something in that field. But it does not behoove such an organization to deal with problems of that kind. There is available a very well developed agency called the World Health Organization to which Canada has contributed financially. Many countries are making studies about health needs throughout the world. I think, therefore, that one day, through the World Health Organization, we should try to bring help to other countries in that field, if we can. We might be able to radiate in the world through that agency, as we have often done, especially in Lagos where one of the most modern schools of anaesthesiology in the world was set up thanks to our government's co-operation.
[DOT] (6:20 p.m.)
We did not give any money but we supplied the personnel and the equipment. We simply taught them how to do things and they learned very quickly, so that Canadians were able to withdraw from the program. That undertaking was lauched by the University of Toronto and today it has become one of the best schools of anaesthesiology in Africa.
Canada can give assistance, in various ways, in the field of family planning, which
External Aid
presents a very delicate problem, since it relates to the very privacy of the individual. Up to recent years, man was not especially concerned with the problem of his reproduction. In fact, nature ensured some sort of balance. There were illnesses, outbreaks of contagious diseases, wars and a very high rate of infant mortality. It must be said also that the population in the year 1600 took 250 years to double, but this has completely changed today. Formerly, when people wanted a family of two children, they had to have four or five, because of the high rate of infant mortality. So the increase in the world population was slow. Now, there is a population explosion because our sanitary measures and preventive and prophylactic methods have enabled man to develop tremendously.
In the Middle Ages, it was necessary to have five children to be sure to keep one or two, and to reach a decent average.
There is another factor which should be considered. It is pointed out in an article which my colleague, Dr. Mongeau of Montreal, the president of the Family Planning Association was kind enough to give me.
There is also a quite important physiological need for family planning. The Criminal Code should be amended as soon as possible to allow family planning which is urgently needed in 1968.
Nowadays, large families are no longer necessary, because we know that human life has been considerably extended thanks to modern technical and medical methods. It is now established that a woman who bears a child, needs 2 years to recover. The former custom of having children every 8 or 9 months, is out-of-date. In fact such a practice can have harmful psychological and physiological effects on the mother and I think that in 1968, it is the duty of young married couples to practise family planning. It is absolutely necessary that the mother should recover, physically as well as physiologically before thinking of having another child.
We know that nowadays, it is quite a psychological problem for a husband and wife to live together, and practise continence. I know that some members use without moderation a fruit that is no longer forbidden to them. That every appearance of the man in the house should entail the birth of a child nine months later, is a thing to be avoided. Some light psychological traumas must be prevented, because the strange thing about family planning is that it is always related to love.

December 9, 1968
External Aid
The other day, I saw on a wall, in Paris, a poster that made me laugh. It said: The more I make the revolution, the more I make love, and the more I make love, the more I make the revolution. It was at the beginning of the term at the Sorbonne.
I suggest this shows clearly how people think in some parts of the world. This is the reason why Canada should not meddle too much in international affairs, since we are a people of wise men. We have always been considered as such by the whole world.
There are also sociological needs. The word stress is gaining momentum. Prolonged continence between husband and wife creates a kind of vacuum. They seem bored, both of them. At a certain point, they outgrow the love stage. Love becomes stabilized and cold, and then it often degenerates into hatred.
This is why family planning is one of the essential needs of the Canadian nation. There is no question in Canada of having any population explosion. We are only 21 million and our country could contain a great deal more. That is why we should not panic and start family planning on a large scale. It is necessary for the individual but not collectively.
Statistics could be quoted at length. Moreover, apparently the proportion of the population now living in cities is 61.6 per cent higher than in 1951, and it should be 72.14 per cent this year and 80 per cent in 1980.
Therefore, everybody will go to live in the cities and some solution to the problem will have to be found. I think the only solution is family planning. It is quite a feat today to bring up a large family, to educate the children and show them a bit of the world. Those who come to our offices always come to ask our advice about this problem.
I do not want to start a discussion, but I think one is often faced with a dilemma, and it is difficult for a doctor today, in view of our present laws, to give good advice, because he could be taken to court. It is rather ridiculous, but it is a fact and nobody says anything. No association has spoken out against section 150 of the Criminal Code. It is only in the last year or two that some hon. members asked, by means of a private bill, that this section be removed. Since this was asked, however, everyone has been saying: What is happening in Ottawa? They are dealing with matters of morality. It is terrible, it is simply awful. Members of parliament are dealing with matters which are none of their business. However, no progress can be made

with regard to family planning unless that section is repealed.
Talking about family planning, it is always difficult to make plans concerning individuals. Everyone has his own individuality, his own views. We are all made of flesh and blood. Some are good looking, others are ugly. Those who are ugly will never become good looking and those who are good looking, one day, will become ugly. It is somewhat paradoxical, but it is still a fact.
If one wishes, planning can be applied to a corporation. There could be planning for progress as far as groups of men are concerned. In West Berlin a rather amusing development occurred with regard to morals.
I was impressed. In the Express of March 1968, babies born in Berlin are mentioned. This is to show you that, at the individual level, it is difficult to undertake family planning.
Certain groups of architects had met and decided to build, in West Berlin an ultramodern residential district. They had anticipated everything, except that three and a half times more children than in the rest of the city would be born there. It is strange because everything had been planned; a difficulty was encountered because they had thought that a very small number of children would be born in that district, but at a given time, it had exceeded their forecast.
With 270,000 widows and a tremendous number of retired people, Berlin actually has the lowest birth rate in all Germany. It amounts to exactly half the national rate. No welfare legislation has been able to raise that rate. Government authorities tried everything, but nothing changed.
Thus, in the Humberstag, the district I am referring to, which was supposed to receive the same type of people, that is, retired men and widows, homes had been erected and public benches carefully provided where they could enjoy the sun until dusk.
[DOT] (6:30 p.m.)
Today, baby carriages go down ramps provided for passenger cars, expectant mothers occupy public benches and nurseries are sorely lacking in this so-well-planned area. Humberstag oddly registers 534 births per 15,521 inhabitants as compared to 100 for 10,000 in the eastern section of the city, thus exceeding briskly the German national average. Town planners and sociologists remain puzzled before this phenomenon and various theories have already been put forward.
December 9, 1968

The New York experience of 1965 is quite fantastic:	a peculiar population explosion
occurred nine months after a gigantic power failure, which put the city council on the track of the most likely explanation.
One Berlin town planner admits that there is so little entertainment in Humberstag-this famous plush place which had been built- that the tenants go to bed early, with the result that more babies are bom there than in all the rest of West Germany.
In view of the complexity of the problem, I am in favour of intelligent family planning so that we avoid hara-kiri, or putting an end to the white race. That is what is happening with the use of the pill and other contraceptives.
But there certainly could be good, intelligent family planning, at the hands of people who know the problem and who know how best to make available the necessary information so that it can be used. Everyone does not understand what "family planning" is. There are girls in Canada who take the pill. That is not family planning. On the other hand, some women are afraid of taking it because they fear cancer. They believe they may get cancer, grow heavy about the hips, or have various aches and pains; and so they imagine, that they have no information with regard to that problem.
According to the Criminal Code, we may not distribute that information. I do not want to end my days in jail for having told a woman: You have had fifteen children; perhaps you could start taking the pill tomorrow morning and planning your family. I should think that with fifteen children, she has had enough; but I do not want to wake up in jail. I cannot say these things because I much prefer the atmosphere of the House of Commons to that of a jail.
Women should also be given a chance. We should have some sort of planning course similar to the one given by the Montreal Family Planning Association which is really quite advanced and has given excellent results.
In any event, I agree with my colleague. When the Criminal Code has finally been amended, I do think I will give him a helping hand so that together we may work towards that end and, through the World Health Organization, for instance, participate in a worldwide family planning program, because I know some countries are in dire need of it.
External Aid
Not so long ago, I was speaking to an education minister of Africa and I asked him: How many children do you have, Mr. Minister? I have nine, he replied. I added: Do you not find that nine children is a lot of mouths to feed? To which he replied: That is God's wish. I said no more. But I feel that bill might help those countries; but as I said a while ago, there is a lot of mysticism in those countries. Perhaps, having won their independence-but even that is not too sure

they might approach the problem from a nonsentimental angle. I hope they will do that and become a bit more practical. I think that everybody will benefit from it.
Love will flourish more than ever in Canada, and I know very well that governments are opposed to revolutions, as the Frenchman wrote on the blackboard: When I make the revolution, I make love! The more I make love, the more I make the revolution!
Governments can stop revolutions, but they will never be able to fetter love.
I am sure that with family planning, Canada will become the land of love.


Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweather@Fundy Royal: Mr. Speaker, I do not propose to make love or indulge in a revolution, but I would remind the hon. member for Hull that there is an amendment to the Criminal Code, section 150, which is contained in Bill S-15, passed by the Senate of Canada on November 19, which presumably awaits some activity in this House of Commons. So that his problems, in so far as that quite archaic and outmoded section of the Criminal Code is concerned, will be at an end. It is a rather interesting further example, if we need any more examples, of the public being light years ahead of legislators in so far as amendments to our public legislation are concerned.
I want to indicate my support for the motion and to commend the hon. member for Yorkton-Melville (Mr. Nystrom) for bringing it forward. It calls on the government to include in its external aid program family planning assistance to developing countries. In requesting such assistance it recommends that the government take a more active role in the United Nations and its specialized agencies in supporting measures dealing with world population problems. I do not have before me a list of statistics about the population explosion in the world. However I have one simple fact, that on the basis of present trends, if

December 9, 1968
External Aid
there are not widespread initiatives by governments, by the year 2,000 the present population of the world, which is about three billion three hundred million people, will be seven billion. This is a prospect that I am sure should cause people in positions of responsibility very serious misgivings.
In the few minutes I have I want to comment on what I think is an important element in the motion, and that is contained in what to me is a clear understanding that assistance in this regard should be given to developing countries that require it. There is no suggestion in the motion of any efforts to coerce a country into instituting a program of population control. I think it would be a very serious thing if the western so-called developed and rich countries were to tie aid, assistance or funds through the World Bank, or any other initiatives that we might want to take in the development field, to an undertaking by the recipient countries to institute population control. I am afraid there is a tendency to use methods that amount to coercion. I suggest that these methods are now gaining favour at high levels in the international community, and I would like to object in the strongest possible terms to any suggestion or possibility that our country become a party to such methods, either in respect of aid programs financed by international agencies or through our own external aid program.
What I have in mind is that on September 30 of this year Mr. Robert S. McNamara, president of the World Bank, spoke to the board of governors of the bank and left the very clear impression that the World Bank would give preference in the allocation of development funds to those countries that have initiated programs of population control. Mr. McNamara, to my knowledge, has never denied that this is implicit in his remarks to the World Bank. Indeed the press reports written by those who covered Mr. McNamara's speech were almost unanimous in making the interpretation that he intended that the World Bank would give a preference to countries which had initiated programs of population control. I repeat that Mr. McNamara has never challenged that interpretation of his remarks.
What concerns me is that the first person who volunteered his enthusiastic support for Mr. McNamara's statement was none other than the Canadian Minister of Finance (Mr. Benson). According to a press report carried in the Toronto Globe and Mail of October 2, referring to the speech of the minister in

Washington, our Minister of Finance said that-
*-he specifically endorsed the former U.S. defence secretary's intention to link birth control programs with injections of development funds.
The Leader of the Opposition raised this matter during the question period on October 1, but it was not until October 7 that the minister was back in Ottawa and offered an interpretation of Mr. McNamara's speech, and therefore of the minister's own support of it,-which has not been offered by anybody else, including Mr. McNamara. On October 7 the minister said it should be apparent that Mr. McNamara did not envisage giving first preference for World Bank loans to countries which are willing to initiate population control. It is apparent to whom? I ask because the minister himself quoted from the speech of Mr. McNamara, outlining the plans and intentions of the World Bank as follows:
First: to let the developing nations know the extent to which rapid population growth slows down their potential development, and that, in consequence, the optimum employment of the world's scarce development funds requires attention to this problem.
[DOT] (6:40 p.m.)
The statement was phrased delicately and skilfully, I suggest, but there is no doubt as to what it means. What it says, in effect, is this, that scarce development funds must be sent where there is optimum potential development. Rapid population growth will stunt potential development, and therefore scarce development funds must be sent to developing nations that are willing to control rapid population growth. To insist, as the editorial noted, that development funds will go to countries conditional on those countries embarking on programs of population control, should of course be quite unacceptable to Canadians. To establish or support such a policy would inspire deep resentment and bitterness amongst the very countries that it is our objective to help. Most of them, of course, are not people of the white race. This policy would be construed by people in those countries as evidence of a feeling of racial superiority on the part of the wealthier countries. In the long run, it could only be a serious setback to world progress and harmony.
Perhaps at some time during this debate, although I see it is rapidly drawing to a conclusion, or at any rate at any early opportunity, some spokesman for the government will,
I hope, dissociate our country categorically from any such policy. In an editorial, the
December 9, 1968

Globe and Mail commented on Mr. McNamara's speech and said:
The danger lies in the interpretation that is already being put on his words-and reports of Finance Minister E. J. Benson's supporting speech on Tuesday back this interpretation. This is that the bank will link its development loans (for all sorts of projects) to readiness by the recipient government to start a family planning program.
Washington has, with certain success, tied some of its alliance for progress aid to Latin American governments' acceptance of tax and agrarian reforms. But if Mr. McNamara attempts the same method for population control, it could badly tarnish the new image he is hoping to give the bank. Persuasive co-operation is one thing; economic coercion would set him in the role of anti-Pope, trying to answer encyclical with sanctions.
In his annual report last week to the General Assembly, U Thant offered a different perspective. The population problem remained a major source of anxiety, he said, but a turning point had been reached in December, 1966, when the assembly adopted a resolution that recognized the urgency for action. Some 20 developing countries had already launched measures to moderate population growth, and others were contemplating similar schemes; but the transformation of traditional attitudes toward the family, U Thant warned, would be slow.
The problem is of utmost importance-significantly it is the theme of this month's international teach-in at the University of Toronto-but Mr. McNamara may need to learn a lesson from U Thant, that a delicate rather than a dragooning approach is most likely to bring results.
As I said, I think the motion of the hon. member for Yorkton-Melville (Mr. Nystrom) is obviously a progressive step. It represents an intelligent, enlightened approach by our country. Let us by all means give family planning assistance to developing countries that desire it, but let us not associate ourselves with those who would take what I believe would be a backward step, by trying to bring economic coercion to bear upon countries in order to influence their domestic policies in this regard. We have had too much evidence of late of some people who criticize our welfare scheme by trying to suggest, for instance, that the entitlement of unmarried mothers to grants should be cut off if they have another child. This type of thinking, I am sure, is reprehensible to members of this parliament.


Bernard Dumont: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Yorkton-Melville (Mr. Nystrom) has put on the order paper a notice of motion which he is presenting today and which reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government should give consideration to including in its
External Aid
external aid program family planning assistance to developing countries-
I did not know that in presenting his notice of motion, the hon. member would give such detailed explanations. I realized that he was very much impressed by his recent visit to Biafra. He saw for himself that thousands of children have died there since the beginning of the war. He has probably been given figures.
Personally, I do not appreciate the puns of the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Isabelle) who makes me think of a young girl standing at the corner of the street and saying:
I am for planning, I am against planning, therefore I shall like to be kidnapped, I should like not to be kidnapped.
It is rather funny to hear the hon. member, but since this notice of motion has been introduced and because it might have very serious effects, I will analyze the few figures which my learned colleague has quoted when introducing his motion.
I am quite disappointed that he should see in planning the solution to the problem. I am referring to a very large country whose population reaches the 650 million mark and which lives under the Communist regime. There was also on the democratic side a country which could have offset the Communist thrust if planning programs had not been implemented. I am referring to India which some day could have prevented the Communist Chinese from eventually dominating the world, thanks to the planning program advocated even by former prime ministers of Canada with the help of the World Bank. We can see programs being applied which will make the population of India decrease tremendously and the natural order of things will be upset.
When introducing his notice of motion, the hon. member told us that, at the present time, there are a lot of people without shelter. Do we lack materials or workers who would be willing to build houses? The Supreme Being-and I know that the hon. member is one of those who believe in Him-wanted every one to have a shelter and to eat three times a day. This is a question-and once more I put the motto forward-of making financially feasible which is physically possible. The hon. member will agree with me that science and intelligence have allowed men to achieve wonderful things which might make it possible perhaps tomorrow for human beings to reach the moon or other planets where they could live if, for instance, there

December 9, 1968
External Aid
were too many people on earth. In Canada, as was mentioned by the hon. member for Hull, we do not have to worry about that, because there is room for millions of citizens.
[DOT] (6:50 p.m.)
I shall never be in favour of family planning, as family education is the thing. I still recall the words of a well-known Cardinal who said once: I am the thirteenth child in my family. He was not unwanted.
I knew an honourable senator who was the tenth child in his family, and also I knew the twelfth child, who became a member of parliament.
All this, Mr. Speaker, to say that there will never be too many intelligent people at the service of humanity.
The Supreme Being alone regulates everything in this world. We are but a drop of water in the ocean, we individuals. And that is why, as long as it will be possible to provide education for children, if a couple decides, to have so many children, they are free to do so. And since under the commitment made at the foot of the altar we accept responsibility for a family, we must show courage before that population explosion, that increase in population which is taking place today. We should ask instead for a system that would allow each and every citizen to have a home, a place to live decently.
I remember having read in history books that in our own province of Quebec had it not been for large families the French language would never have survived.
During the war of 1939-45 thousands of soldiers fought on the battlefields for that freedom which enables us today to speak freely still in this parliament. In the province of Quebec thousands of soldiers were not afraid-forced by conscription, I admit it-to go overseas to preserve that freedom.
How can we be sure that tomorrow we will not have to be even more numerous than we are now to fight back some invader who might want to drive us from that piece of land where it is good to live, where it is possible to get three meals a day. That is the problem. People are left in a state of misery they do not deserve, thousands of people who have not only life but intelligence.
All one has to do to find examples is to look around. Once it was thought that a way had finally been found to cope with the problem of the spruce budworm. Airplanes were used over the Gaspe peninsula to kill the

spruce budworm with the help of DDT. However, as a proof that natural forces remain at work, forever maintaining the needed balance, by destroying the spruce budworm-on which fed thousands of birds- people also destroyed the lake and river salmon. So, in the Gaspe peninsula and in thousands of other places where this insecticide was used, people are deprived of a product which could be sent to Biafra had it not been destroyed by human beings. This goes to prove that man sometimes is self-destructive. Therefore, such a notice of motion cannot and should at no time be accepted.
Let God alone have the right to decide, if we systematically violate the laws of nature, what will happen to-morrow. Who can tell us that to-morrow, 650 million communist Chinese will not invade our territory? What forces will we have to oppose them? One of my friends went to China to deliver three ships built in Lauzon-this same shipyard which has been in the news lately-purchased by the government of Chiang Kai-shek. When he arrived in the capital, in Shanghai, the Communists were about to assume power. Mao Tse-tung was coming with his armies to drive out Chiang Kai-shek. My friend was in a position to ascertain that in the democratic system which existed in China in the past, people had not worried about misery. The problem had not been settled, and Mao Tse-tung, through an evil instrument, through communism, enrolled all these people and found in the soil enough to give food to 650 million Chinese. And my friend said to me that if ever each of those Chinese was given a rifle, it would be the end of life on earth.
Today, fifteen years later, we are faced by the problem of 650 million Chinese who have been enrolled by the communist system which gives them a decent living, gives them rifles and sends them to conquer the world, and we are powerless before communism, because capitalism does not have the answers.
Only we, on this side of the house, have always had the courage to ask for a system which, while making financially feasible that which is physically possible, would allow every citizen to live happily, to be ready to stand up and demand justice if those 650 million Chinese tried tomorrow to invade our country. We should say: I am ready, I stand up and fight because life is good.
The capitalistic system is outmoded to-day and we do not have the courage to request the establishment of a monetary system
December 9, 1968	COMMONS DEBATES	3695
which would allow us to find sufficient time to live and be happy. And to combat efficiently this perverse ideology called communism, I have found only Social Credit, the credit to society.
This is the reason why, on the contrary, I want the population to grow. I have seven children and I do not believe that I have one too many. If some hon. members in this house have a family and think they have one child too many, let them come and discuss the matter with me and I am sure that we shall part as friends, since they will be convinced that we should set an example and prove to the whole world that the mind is at the service of human beings, provided we establish a system allowing us to distribute such plentiful riches.
If my hon. friend takes pleasure in saying thousands of Biafrans are dying in Nigeria at present, I say to him that there are also in Western Canada 664 million bushels of wheat and we do not know what to do with them. Let us go back in history. I know that Joseph stored grain in order to be able to feed people during, the seven lean years. As for the wheat which is so abundant at the present time, we should send it where it is needed, for with that wheat, that daily bread, Biafrans would not be dying any more. Let us stop selling arms and protest to those countries who want people to kill one another. Instead of permitting a continuation of such a massacre, we could see to the establishment of a democratic system-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. member, but the hour assigned to consideration of private members' business has now expired.

It being seven o'clock I do now leave the chair.
At seven o'clock the house took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The house resumed at 8 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Faulkner in the chair.
James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. The house again in committee of supply on the estimates
Supply-Regional Development of the Cape Breton Development Corporation. The hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, before six o'clock I was presenting arguments to the committee that had to do with the over-all plan provided by the government with respect to the Cape Breton Development Corporation. I could not understand why the minister had become so exercised. He said something about subsidies for Cape Breton coal operations going back over 40 years.


Jean Marchand: I never said that.


Donald MacInnis: I mentioned some subsidies which are paid in other parts of the country, and after that the minister decided, just for the sake of comparison, to talk of the problem of the shipbuilding workers at Lauzon. When one considers that the problems of those workers stem from a lack of shipbuilding policy on the part of the government, I fail to understand why he mentioned the subject. I asked the minister, "Why do you not introduce some sort of shipbuilding plan into that area, rather than throwing the workers out in the cold?"
The minister also referred to steel unions. He made uncalled for remarks in reference to the success of steel operations under the Nova Scotia government. Probably, as a matter of conscience, a government member speaking before 20,000 Cape Bretoners said the government was searching desperately for ways to assist them; yet not long after that the government cold shouldered a request for help in this steel problem.
The Leader of the Opposition asked, when speaking of this matter, what price is to be paid to Dosco and what is being negotiated with Dosco, what it is intended shall be bought from Dosco, and under what formula. Does the government intend to follow the formula set out in the powers of acquisition clause of Bill C-135 of the last session or will it follow what the Prime Minister laid down in this recent pronouncements with respect to offshore mineral rights? Perhaps some may think that a question like this ought not to be asked during this debate, yet I think it important enough to raise at this time. I wish the minister would explain what is meant by the powers of acquisition in this legislation. It seems that those powers give the government authority to purchase from Dosco lands beneath the waters adjacent to Cape Breton.
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development
I have always contended that this piece of legislation, which grants a crown corporation authority to acquire land beneath the seas adjacent to Cape Breton, is a tacit recognition that the right to minerals under the sea in such an area vests in Nova Scotia. As I said, I shall be interested to know what is to be purchased from Dosco and at what price. Also, are the powers of acquisition under the bill not a tacit recognition that the mineral rights I have referred to vest in the province? Or, on the other hand, is it intended to follow the pronouncements of the Prime Minister in this regard, given without the advice of the Supreme Court of Canada?
The minister made statements about negotiations having gone on with unions. He talked of more than one union, using the word "unions". He also spoke of "negotiations". I point out that Devco officials coming before the committee said there were no negotiations. Those officials said they had dealt with one union only, after the retirement plan had been finalized. I point out that prior to the time the Devco people said there were no negotiations and prior to the meeting in which those officials said they had talked to about 90 per cent of the membership of one union, the minister said these words, as reported on page 3010 of Hansard for November 21, 1968:
I understand that negotiations with the unions are still continuing on this subject.
The minister did not seem to know what was going on, yet suddenly he has become all knowing on the subject. The Prime Minister did not seem to know what Devco was. When the question was addressed to him he referred the matter, in the presence of the minister, to another minister, and then in turn to a third minister. As I say, the minister who should have answered was sitting there at that time. The Prime Minister did not know who was responsible until the report was presented to him.
[DOT] (8:10 p.m.)
The legislation specifies that there are other unions involved in this. I do not suppose the reference to these other unions would have been included if they had not meant that Devco should have been talking to their representatives before the finalization of any retirement or pre-retirement plan.
Before the day is over I think the minister will be quite familiar with the legislation he was supposed to have known before he came
[Mr. Maclnnis (Cape Breton-East Richmond) .J

into the chamber. Let me refer to page 16 of this act, section 35 (2):
Each trade union that on the day preceding the coming into force of this act was certified under the Trade Union Act of the province of Nova Scotia as a bargaining agent for persons employed by the companies in connection with the works and undertakings declared by subsection (1) to be works for the general advantage of Canada shall be deemed to have been certified under the Industrial Relations and Disputes Investigation Act on the day this Act comes into force as the bargaining agent for the person so employed by the companies in respect of whom it was so certified as bargaining agent.
Here is a clear indication in the legislation itself that Devco should at least have to talk to the various unions involved. The minister spoke of his experience with trade unions. He said that if Devco so wished it could arbitrarily pension men off at the age of 60.


Jean Marchand: The hon. member did not understand what I said. I never said that.


Donald MacInnis: I did not understand a lot that the minister had to say about this particular development plan. The fact remains it is pretty hard to understand him when he does not understand the legislation put forward.


Jean Marchand: Speak for
yourself.


Donald MacInnis: The minister made mention of the preamble while talking about the over-all plan presented by Devco. This over-all plan says: "It is the intention to reduce coal mining employment as quickly as possible." I invite all members on the Liberal side to read the preamble in this legislation and tell me how those two statements can be reconciled. There is nothing in the preamble to indicate that it is intended to phase out these mines. In fact, the preamble says that every effort should be made to revitalize and modernize the mines.
Does the minister think that miners in Cape Breton should be grateful for what is being done with respect to pensions? Perhaps the hon. gentleman would take the opportunity when he gets to his feet to tell us what the pension set-up will be for the chairman and the other officers of Devco. I remind each and every member of the committee that under the act setting up the corporation the chairman and the president are appointed for seven years. The phrase used is: "not exceeding seven years". The governement is giving them a pension. Are these pensions to be just
December 9, 1968

below the poverty line? The minister says the miners of Cape Breton should be grateful-


Jean Marchand: I never said that.


Donald MacInnis: The legislation provides that the chairman and the president shall be appointed for seven years, and it authorizes the setting up of pensions for these gentlemen. If the minister is thinking of the pensions to be paid to the miners he should reflect on the pensions to be received by those appointed to this corporation for a period not in excess of seven years. He is setting up pensions for men who have given seven years service. But men who have given more than 40 years service to mining will in many cases get less than the poverty level as recognized by the economic council.


Jean Marchand: On a point of order, I never said the miners should be grateful. I did not say that, either in English or in French. Stop saying nothing.


An hon. Member:: That's a new one.


Donald MacInnis: Well, does it have to be in the minister's exact words? I am paraphrasing what he said.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Donald MacInnis: Why did the minister compare what was being done for the Cape Breton miners with the action taken in the Lauzon situation?


Jean Marchand: I said that all the other workers should be treated in the same way.


Donald MacInnis: I will go along with that, if you treat every worker in the same way as you are treating the president of this development corporation, whom we appointed for seven years. Let the minister get up and tell us that he and his colleagues are going to receive a pension below the poverty line.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Donald MacInnis: What is	bothering you? I recommend the reading of the act.


Jean Marchand: The act is there.


Donald MacInnis: You will find it all set out on page two in section four:
The chairman and the president shall be appointed by the governor in council after con-29180-2344
Supply-Regional Development sultation with the lieutenant governor in council of Nova Scotia, to hold office for a term not exceeding seven years.


Jean Marchand: Can they be reappointed?


Donald MacInnis: To familiarize ourselves further with the legislation, let us turn to page 14, section 28 (e) which says the board may decide-
-respecting the establishment, management and administration of a pension fund for the president, the officers and employees of the corporation-
And after all that we are told: Be grateful for the below poverty line pensions to be provided for miners who in some cases have put in 40 years of service or more. I say to the minister that a lot of things need to be straightened out, and when the committee reports to the house I shall if necessary raise this subject on a question of privilege and prove from the written words in the records of this house as against the written words of the report of the committee proceedings that the statements made by the minister are not in line with the answers to certain questions given by some of the Devco officials.
As I stated earlier, the minister became agitated when I maintained that Devco should be channelling its energies in a certain direction. The tourist industry in Cape Breton is not a field which will generate jobs for miners.


Jean Marchand: I agree.


Donald MacInnis: Where, in the over-all plan presented by Devco, do we find any specifics? The minister talks about this report. In general, what has been undertaken by the corporation cannot be criticized because we cannot put our fingers on anything to criticize-we have not seen anything yet in the way of alternative job opportunities which the corporation is supposed to provide before any miner is displaced. I believe them when they say no miner wiil be displaced until alternative work is provided. But this approach along the lines of an early retirement plan, together with the idea of attrition, is not what the legislation intended. Whatever the minister may say was the intent of the legislation, it was clearly understood through questions and answers back and forth across the house when the bill was being debated that the welfare of the mining communities concerned would be taken care of. On a number of occasions assurances were given that nothing would be done which would be detrimental to the jobs of the miners or to the communities in which they live.
[DOT]3698	COMMONS
Supply-Regional Development
It has been suggested by one of the Liberal members to my right that we should buy them all a Cadillac.
[DOT] (8:20 p.m.)


An hon. Member:: You are hearing voices.


Donald MacInnis: There is one voice I am not going to hear too long without doing something about it. As has already been said in this house, the hon. member must keep it up so that he will be recognized by his own Prime Minister.


Mr. Perrault:: You are being psyched. I did not say a word.


Donald MacInnis: This reference to buying them all a Cadillac is just a callous approach, such as the Liberal members have in respect of this particular problem. If there is a similar problem in Lauzon, then it is their responsibility to bring it before the house to see whether there is anything that can be done about it. I doubt whether the minister knows what it is all about, but at least they could put the tab in operation so far as the Lauzon workers are concerned. There are a number of questions which remain unanswered by the Devco people, not only before the committee but also in the consultations between the minister and the Devco corporation. This afternoon I made some remarks of a critical nature respecting what I think Devco should be doing and where they should be channelling their energies. Because of that the minister allowed himself to be exercised. Now I should like to ask him whether he will assume his responsibility and answer some of the questions which have been presented to him, and then I shall have further questions as we go along.


Jean Marchand: Which question?


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. For the past 20 minutes and probably for 20 minutes before dinner I had indicated on a number of occasions certain questions which I thought the minister should take the responsibility for answering. I even repeated questions put to him by other hon. members, including the Leader of the Opposition. When I resumed my seat he then wanted to know what question I asked. I think that is a flagrant abuse of the approach to the whole situation.

DEBATES	December 9, 1968


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, I will speak somewhat reluctantly, as I am convinced that my words will be distorted. I thought that by speaking in French, I would make myself better understood, but things seem to be even more confused.

In respect of the question concerning negotiations with the unions, when I answered a few moments before the adjournment of the house at six o'clock I said that there were negotiations, but I said it depends on how one defines negotiations. If the reference is to negotiations in order to reach a collective agreement, that is not what I had in mind. Of course there were no negotiations of that type. However, if you mean discussions and meetings between the union and the employer, there have been discussions not only with the mine workers but with the other groups. Is that clear? I do not know why the hon. gentleman insists on using the term "union". Of course I used it; why not?


Donald MacInnis: Is the minister asking me a question?


Jean Marchand: No. I just told the member I used the term union.


Donald MacInnis: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman. My point of order arises from the fact that the minister clearly indicated he was speaking to me and asked if it was clear. Therefore, on that particular point, I say, no it is not clear. The inference from the hearings of the area development committee will prove that point.


Jean Marchand: If this is not clear, then I am sorry because I cannot do better than that. I must use words to express opinions or ideas. It is very clear to me. I say there have been discussions. There have not been formal negotiations in the sense that those discussions were supposed to lead to a formal collective agreement.

With regard to the second question, the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond said: "Where is it written in the act that Devco eventually intends to stop operating the coal mines?" Then he read the preamble, and it said precisely what I tried to explain to him. However, he said: "You can see that is not what it says". I shall therefore read the
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
third paragraph of the preamble again, Mr. Chairman; it says:
The atm of the corporation of-

-in the Sydney coalfield and reorganize and operate the mines with a view to the rationalization of coal production therefrom and the progressive withdrawal of the corporation from such production in accordance with a plan that takes into account progress in providing employment outside the coal producing industry and in broadening the base of the Island's economy;

Is that not clear? That is what it means.
However, the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond reads it and says just the opposite. He says: "You can see that the aim is not to stop operating the coal mines". What can one do? I thought it was only when I spoke French that he did not understand, but apparently he does not understand me when I speak English either. Therefore I might as well give up.


John Leroy Skoberg: Mr. Chairman, I am glad to hear the clap. I am sure this means that the Liberal members have not read the report of the hearing. I have one direct question for the minister. I am given to understand that the miners may be on their annual vacation as of December 20. I wonder whether this is correct.


Jean Marchand: Yes, I guess so, Mr. Chairman.


John Leroy Skoberg: I am also given to understand that on January 2 the pre-retirement plan will be effective for the miners. They are to be given their holidays at that time and the pre-retirement plan will then go into effect.


Jean Marchand: I would not like to give any definite answer at this stage because there are still discussions taking place between Devco and the unions. I have no final report on this and, therefore, I would not like to say that this will happen in December or at the beginning of January, because it might be otherwise if there is some different understanding.


John Leroy Skoberg: Before the dinner hour the minister nodded his head in agreement when I asked if he would answer any general representation particularly from the rail union people such as telegraphers, trainmen and engineers. Would the minister give the assurance that there will be no pre-retirement
DEBATES	3699
Supply-Regional Development plan before all the representatives have had an opportunity to appear before him.


Jean Marchand: I have already met with the representatives of those unions. If they want to see me again I am ready to see them. If the miners reach an agreement with Devco on the pre-retirement plan I cannot say that I will postpone the implementation of this understanding. But I do say that before anything is done for those employees I am ready to wait until I have met with the representatives of those unions.


John Leroy Skoberg: If I understood the minister correctly, this could become effective for the miners as of January 1-I am referring to the pre-retirement plan-but not necessarily so for these other employees to whom I have referred. Is that correct?


Jean Marchand: It will depend on the agreement Devco can reach with either the mine workers or the other groups. This I do not know. If the railway groups are not satisfied and wish to present arguments I can assure you that no final decision will be taken by Devco before I have met and discussed this with the railway employees.
[DOT] (8:30 p.m.)


John Leroy Skoberg: I am sure that cleared this up and I thank the minister. I am also quite sure the minister will realize that the Canadian railway labour and executive association intend to meet with the minister in this regard.
My other question relates to whether the pensions for pre-retirement, being $2,400 for single individuals and $3,000 for married employees will bear any relationship to the number of children the married men may have. A married couple may have one child or ten children. I also understand that unemployment insurance benefits will be included in this package of $3,000 or $2,400. Is that correct?


Jean Marchand: That is correct.


John Leroy Skoberg: Do the ministers feel it is fair and just for these people in this country to pay into this fund, from which they expect to derive benefits, and have those benefits included in this package deal for pre-retirement benefits? These people have paid into the fund for many years. Does the minister think it is fair to use this part of the fund in order to provide these pre-retirement pensions? I should like to ask the minister to
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development reconsider this matter, in so far as including unemployment insurance benefits with amounts of the pre-retirement fund?


Jean Marchand: On that point Mr. Chairman, I think that we can do like the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond and say that the pension is not high enough. There is a lot to be said for that.
I also find that $3,000 a year is no fortune, as I said earlier. But the amount can be discussed.
However, when one takes into consideration the fact that unemployment insurance benefits serve in the definition or the accumulation of the amount, I feel it is unfair because in setting up the pension, these benefits are taken into account. These people enjoy special conditions where the state creates a pension of $3,000 a year, out of public funds, for someone who is, say, 55 years old. Under the circumstances, the amount cannot be divided and one cannot say: Do you think it is fair that they should lose their right to unemployment insurance? When in fact, the state has added to those benefits a considerable amount taken out of public funds.
If is the same as if we said to someone: The State is willing to give you $20,000 a year if you agree to give up your unemployment insurance benefits; and then that someone would come up and say: That is unfair because I have already contributed towards those benefits. I doubt that the matter can be discussed objectively on that level and I believe the member is right. If this were done, the ordinary worker would have no other income, and if the state gave him nothing else, I would naturally be first to blame those who acted in that fashion.
The over-all amount must therefore be taken into consideration and a decision reached on whether it is reasonable or not. But, to my mind, reference should certainly not be made to vested right under the Unemployment Insurance Act to its benefits, because of the amount that has been added.


John Leroy Skoberg: I should like to ask one further question following those remarks. Does the minister agree that these people who are used to making considerably more than $3,000 but will be reduced to that pre-retirement level and that this creates a situation which


will downgrade their standard of living considerably? I am referring now to these particular classifications within the employee group of the Devco corporation?


Jean Marchand: In this regard, as far as the miners are concerned, this will represent an average of about 75 per cent of their income. They are entitled to more income. It is expected that nothing will be subtracted from the first additional $50, and that for all amounts above the $50 only half will be subtracted. This will mean they will get approximately the same income. I do not say it is a very high income, but I do not think they will be badly treated. I think the hon. member probably had in mind the railroad groups. In this regard there is no doubt that there would be a sharp decrease in their income. This is why I mentioned that this is a particular case and perhaps we can find some kind of a solution. This does not involve a very large number. At the present time I think there are 22 of these employees.


John Leroy Skoberg: Would the minister then agree on a percentage of about 75 per cent? Would that be realistic or would it be in that vicinity? In other words you would not downgrade a greater number and thereby lower that standard of living? Does the minister suggest that this is a realistic percentage?


Jean Marchand: I think the only suggestion I should make at this stage is that we will discuss ail these problems with the interested parties.


Donald MacInnis: In order that the minister fully
understands there are some questions which have been left unanswered, let me say that the pensions of these miners appear to be something of particular concern. I should like to ask the minister what the new development corporation plans to set up in the way of pensions for someone who is only to serve for seven years?


Jean Marchand: You are refer' ring to those who will serve seven years?


Donald MacInnis: I refer to those who have been appointed to these jobs under the legislation, which require them to serve a period of time not exceeding seven years. Perhaps the minister could explain to the house what sort of pension setup these men will have.


Jean Marchand: I think the hon. member is referring to the president who can
December 9, 1968	COMMONS
be reappointed. In any event, the law is there and I do not intend to discuss a law which is on the statutes as approved by this house. That is not my purpose.


Donald MacInnis: The hon. minister was agitated
earlier this afternoon when questions were put to him about the plans of Devco. Let me refer again to the fact that the chairman, the president and other directors are to be appointed. They all cannot be reappointed, and I should like the minister to indicate what plans Devco has in respect of their own pensions?


Jean Marchand: To my knowledge, Mr. Chairman, no plan has been presented to us with regard to the pension of Devco senior officers.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, could the minister satisfy his curiosity, having regard to the specific plans put forward by Devco in respect of these pensions?


Jean Marchand: My curiosity for the time being is related to the miners and employees, not the president of Devco.


Donald MacInnis: Apparently the minister has misunderstood my question. I wanted to know whether he had concerned himself with the plans of Devco in respect of providing alternative work for the miners to be replaced.


Jean Marchand: Yes, Devco is concerned in this regard, as the hon. member knows very well. Devco is trying to find new jobs for those who are likely to be laid off. 1 do not think Devco has laid anyone off without being sure in advance that a job was available. If there is no job, there is the preretirement plan which applies.


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Chairman, is the
minister personally aware of any proposal for the development of alternative industry in the area by Devco?


Jean Marchand: Not personally, no.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
40. Payments to the Cape Breton Development Corporation in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council, in respect of the rationalization and operation of the McBean Mine in Pictou County, Nova Scotia, and to and in respect of former employees of Acadia
DEBATES	3701
Supply-Regional Development Coal Company Limited, and to authorize Cape Breton Development Corporation to manage and operate the McBean Mine pursuant to the terms of an agreement between the Corporation and The Pictou County Research and Development Commission and Thorburn Mining Limited, $930,000.
Item agreed to.
1. Administration, operation and maintenance, including Canada's fee for membership in the international commission on irrigation and drainage, $17,887,200.
David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Chairman, I wonder whether the minister would like to say something at this time to inform the committee as to the position of the government in respect of regional development, or does he suggest we simply have a debate on these estimates?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, with regard to the estimates, we deal now with the aggregate of all the programs which were implemented and which the department under my leadership has inherited.
It is quite difficult for me at this time to make any comments or projections since these were already existing programs which the house is aware of, and which hon. members have already had the opportunity of discussing. When we study the new estimates the house will expect the minister, and rightly so, to give explanations and also to make projections so that it may know exactly in what direction the department is going.
At this time I shall try to give all the explanation I can about these estimates.
[DOT] (8:40 p.m.)


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Chairman, 1 must admit I am somewhat disappointed that the minister has decided not to make any statement to the committee, because it seems to me that we have been going now for far too long with very little by way of explanation as to what activity is at the moment taking place within the proposed new department or related to on-going programs which have now been placed under the responsibility of the minister.
It is close to half a year since the reorganization was announced by the government, and there was considerable discussion before that going back almost a year. We are on the verge of having in Ottawa a very important conference on the constitution. This will take place in a very few days. At the last such meeting one of the main points raised at the conference, originally by the premier of Nova
3702	COMMONS
Supply-Regional Development Scotia, was the whole question of regional disparity.
It is believed, not only by the premier of Nova Scotia but by the Prime Minister himself, that one of the basic issues that concerns us at this time is the question of regional disparity and its effect upon national unity and the future of this country. We had tabled in the house this afternoon a further document from a very expensive commission which studies one problem confronted by this country. Now we have a very brief opportunity of examining the estimates of a department that is charged with attempting to deal with one of the very basic questions of national unity, that of regional disparity.
This problem is not new; it is one that goes back to the beginning of this century and before. It has been suggested it is part and parcel of confederation, which is 100 years ago. I am, quite frankly, disappointed with the way the government has handled this problem. In spite of the fact that we are dealing with estimates which by and large have been spent, and with a department that has not been created, the minister has not been able to offer to the committee this evening any concrete proposals, setting of goals or indication of priorities. This government has failed to deal seriously with the problem of regional disparity. I speak for the people of my province and those of many other parts of the country who have been hoping the government would be serious in dealing with these questions.


An hon. Member:: Speak for yourself.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: I am. You can
speak later, if you wish. The approach to the problem of regional disparity seems to be somewhat in conflict with some of the actions already taken by the government. Anyone who remembers back to the latter part of this summer, just prior to the reconvening of parliament, remembers the announcement that the winter works program was to be abandoned, and must have wondered what thoughts were going through the heads of the leaders of our government when they were considering summarily to abandon a program which, allowing for all its faults, had achieved a good deal in shoring-up many of the areas of difficulty and chronic unemployment.
We were then delivered a budget which we thought might outline some of the fiscal and

DEBATES	December 9, 1968
monetary priorities which are inherent in carrying out a program of regional development initiated by the government, at least in its initial stages. Instead, Mr. Chairman, we saw that this was a rich man's budget; that increased taxes were being levied on the lower income segment of our society. Then we saw a conference among federal and provincial ministers of finance in which it was suggested that in the foreseeable future the whole question of social welfare programs might be turned back to the provinces. This suggestion failed to recognize that such a program would create great economic hardship for the provinces and areas that the program was supposedly going to raise up under some kind of over-all program of regional development.
Tonight the minister suggests that he really has nothing to say to the committee in this respect. It is true that a short while ago he spoke to the committee of the house regarding regional development, but I know he would agree with me that there is not a great deal new that would indicate the directions to be taken by the government and the seriousness with which it viewed the program. It was really, in the main, a repeat of an earlier speech the minister made to the Atlantic Provinces Economic Council. This is the only thing we have heard today after almost half a year of waiting for action in this regard. I am wondering whether all we are having is a little bit of light housekeeping. I wonder, also, whether in fact there is on the part of the government a serious intention to deal with one of our great problems, that of national unity, because the problem of regional disparity is closely linked with it.
We want to hear the minister's views with regard to the programs being grouped together in his department at the present time. We want to know when the big plans, the programs for increasing employment in the near future, as contrasted with the more long range programs that will be covering a period of some 15 years, we are told, will be launched. What about some of the programs that have already been launched and which now seem to be faltering? I think of the Northumberland strait crossing, which is a program near to my heart. Apart from its long term economic value to Prince Edward Island, this program would improve the economic situation of the government of Canada in the way of costs of ferry construction and operation. What about a project like this, in
December 9, 1968

terms of what it would do to this area of the Atlantic region during its construction period? We have not heard what the government intends to do in this respect.
We have not heard about the government's intention with regard to other programs such as the corridor road, which would greatly alleviate one of the basic problems in the Atlantic area, that of transportation. We would like to know a good deal more about other programs. We heard the minister's announcement in September with regard to the area development agency for Saint John, Halifax-Dartmouth and Fredericton, including them in this program. We are now told these things will happen only when amendments are made to the program some time in the new year. We want to know what will happen to some other programs now in operation. The P.F.R.A. program has done some good things with regard to conservation in the west. We are told that this program will be restructured. We wonder whether it will be expanded in its restructuring in the future. We wonder what is the reassessment in regard to these programs which are now under consideration. So far in this discussion we have been told none of these things, and frankly I think the Canadian people, especially those primarily involved, are greatly disappointed.
I would be interested to know what the minister means when he talks about regional development. This is a kind of loose and amorphous term which we would like defined. It has been used now for some months, perhaps some years, but very little definition has been given to us by the government with regard to what they mean. Does every person who lives in an area in which there is a slightly higher unemployment situation or a lower productivity situation suddenly look around him and say, this is one of the areas going to be tackled seriously in a program of regional development? If you live in the maritimes you might make that assumption. But do you make this assumption if you live in northern Alberta, rural Manitoba, parts of Ontario, or the interior of British Columbia for instance? What are the definitions we are to give to the words "a program of regional development"? To be more specific, what are our priorities and goals in this respect?
[DOT] (8:50 p.m.)
Surely to goodness even the setting up of the department would be a rather shallow or hollow task, unless there has been some public 29180-235
Supply-Regional Development discussion of what our goals are. Are the goals of this new department primarily directed toward reducing chronically high unemployment in certain areas of the country, or are they related to increasing productivity, and if so at what levels? Do they deal in any realistic fashion, in a way that can be measured to determine the success of the program, with the question of income disparity, or do they deal, with the very disturbing problem facing the Atlantic region, one with which A.P.E.C. has been so concerned, namely that of out-migration? We have had no statements or indications, or indeed no opportunity for any discussions, and it disturbs me greatly that what may in fact be happening behind the scene is a subtle reorganization of a series of programs and projects, a kind of patchwork quilt which in the end will mean not much more than what we have known to date, and that is very little.
I wonder also whether in our thinking of the problem of economic disparity we are thinking only in what I would call narrow, limited and perhaps unrealistic ways of exclusively economic questions, or whether we are facing what in fact to me are some of the basic issues with regard to regional disparity, that is the social questions. If we are looking at the social questions and if, as the minister suggests, this is indeed part of the responsibility and concern of this projected new department, then surely to goodness we have already got off on the wrong foot because we know that as a result of constitutional problems, when it comes to a matter of social questions and social issues we must have a considerable amount not only of consultation with various provincial government officials, but of effective co-ordination and co-operation.
Unless I have been badly misinformed, there seems to have been little evidence to date that such is taking place. I am afraid we are going through the traditional federal pattern of failure. A program, a project or a concept is now being evolved within the department or with a group of federal officials, and when we have finally evolved our position we will then agree to enter into some kind of negotiation with the various regional representatives. Whether they be provincial officials, municipal officials or officials of other kinds of voluntary agencies, will not be clear, but what we will in effect be saying is that we know here in Ottawa what all the goals and priorities are in the various regions
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development that we will tackle seriously, and then we will tell them what we are going to do.
We have been down that road before, and we only have to look back to see how unsuccessful it has been. I think that if we are going to take this seriously, what should be done even now before this department is fully formed and so structured that there is little room for manoeuvrability, is to have the kind of full and frank public discussions that are badly needed. The Economic Council of Canada in its latest report put it very clearly when talking about regional development when it said that full participation of provincial governments in the planning exercise, as well as in subsequent decision making and implementation, is essential. This is where I fault the minister and his departmental officials. If there has been such a discussion, it has been held in the greatest secrecy. We have had some secret meetings in the past, but this will take the cake because even the vaunted sleuthing of Peter C. Newman has not been able to unearth useful conversations and consultations at this level. Even if they have taken place, their validity would have been questioned, inasmuch as many public bodies closely interested and concerned in this issue have not been called upon to participate. I refer to a few that come to my mind, bodies such as the Atlantic Provinces Economic Council, the Nova Scotia Voluntary Economic Planning Board and various industrial estates that operate as crown corporations in the Atlantic provinces, to mention the ones with which I am most familiar. Seemingly we have not come close to tackling this, but instead have followed the usual federal pattern of failure by evolving our plans here. We have evolved our plans in Ottawa and then stated that it was our position, like it or lump it.
I want to turn now to one specific agency under the minister's responsibility, which I am afraid is going to disappear and perhaps even create less of an opportunity for effective consultation and co-operation with the Atlantic region. I am referring to the Atlantic Development Board. Rumours have it that this board will cease to exist as an autonomous board. It may have some kind of an advisory capacity, but that will be a pretty limited function. For the last six years now the Atlantic Development Board has been dispensing money on a variety of projects without too much rationalization, except for the oft stated remark that all of this will be useful in the future development of the Atlantic region. It is strange that we have actually


spent tens of millions of dollars in the Atlantic region without having any kind of plan or system whereby we might effectively evaluate whether or not we have been putting our money in the right places, or getting any value from it.
One of the most important things that the Atlantic Development Board could have done, and yet might do, is to produce some kind of plan, and yet we are told that to date we have a series of unco-ordinated surveys, and far too little consultation with those who have done similar work either at the provincial or at the federal level. More than a year ago the then minister of national health and welfare, the present Minister of Manpower and Immigration, indicated that we might be very close to having such a plan. However, it has not yet seen the light of day, and we are told that by the first of next year all we will have is a series of studies. I can speak for part of the maritimes that I know best. We have been studied to death, and what we want now is a little concrete planning, some direct planning, some planning that says something about the goals and priorities that can, should and will be achieved.
There are a couple of other things that I would like to refer to briefly because I think they are important to the future success of this department, and I have not written off its success yet. I am simply stating here that the concern that many people have that this is nothing more than a shuffling process is becoming more and more fortified by the lack of a clearcut statement by the minister, and the lack of open discussion, effective consultation and real planning with the various provincial and municipal bodies that will have to participate. In many cases if regional development is to be more than just a slogan or the title of a new department, this process must take place.
I think also that we must realize that what will be done and what is being done now in the joining of any of these programs will not be sufficient in itself. What should concern the members of this house and what will concern all of those interested in regional development is the question as to what effect all government policies having to do with productivity, with income and unemployment are tailored to get at these pocket areas of regional disparity across the country, what kind of effective machinery will operate at an interdepartmental level, for instance, to effectively co-ordinate the kind of decisions that may be made, not only in abandoning certain things,
December 9, 1968	COMMONS DEBATES	3705
which may have an economic impact on a region, such as the abandonment of military installations, but in initiating programs that other departments have established. What is needed is an over-all rationale, because without that rationale we will be simply putting a band aid on a very large sore, which will do little to alleviate the basic problem.
We regard regional disparity and regional development as one of the fundamental concerns of Canadians in our time. I would like to see the minister indicate, not only in his remarks here this evening, but by his action in effective consultation with the provinces, that more is being done about it than just the setting up of a new department and the restructuring of some of the programs that are presently in the department.
The reason for our concern about regional disparity is that perhaps half of the provinces in this country are not on an equal footing with the rest of the country. There is one Canada that is known quite well to those who live in the central part of this nation, extending from Montreal to Windsor. There is another Canada on the fringe which seeks to join the rest of this country in sharing in its natural resources, in its wealth and in its affluence.
[DOT] (9:00 p.m.)
This cannot be done, I suggest, simply by a shuffling of programs or by a bit of patching here and there. It can only be done by a determination of the government to tackle the problems seriously and to do this, not unilaterally but with the most effective and far reaching kind of co-ordination and co-operation with other responsible bodies that has ever been seen. As yet, we have not seen an indication of that. We look forward to seeing it very shortly.


Mr. Harding:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to say a few words on the problem of regional development. I am rather mindful of the time, and the fact that other members would like to speak, so I will not make my remarks too lengthy. First of all, I should like to point out to the minister that I have not been impressed with the work done by his department to date. I am going to be very frank, Mr. Chairman. I have had questions on the order paper for two and a half months seeking information from the minister's department. If this is an indication of how your department is going to handle regional development, then it is a mighty poor start. It is absolutely and utterly disgraceful for questions asked by members to remain on the
Supply-Regional Development order paper for this length of time, when many of them are simple questions seeking information which should come to a member so that we know where we are going. We find these questions stay there day after day, until finally the estimates are passed by the house.


Jean Marchand: Which questions?


Randolph Harding: There are six. Last week I rose on a question of privilege because I had not received answers to these questions. Here we are, the last day for the consideration of estimates, and no answers have been received. If this is an example of how your department is going to work, I am afraid you are off on the wrong foot.


Jean Marchand: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman. Are you sure these questions do not refer to the Department of Manpower and Immigration, rather than to my department?


Randolph Harding: Yes, I am sure; some of them may refer to manpower but some of them refer to your department.


Jean Marchand: Which ones?


Randolph Harding: I am not going to go through them now. If they refer to manpower, then-


Jean Marchand: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Chairman. This is a very serious accusation against my department. I should like to know to which questions the hon. member refers. I see here a series of questions, but they all relate to the Department of the Manpower and Immigration. There is not a single one that relates to my department. If there is one, please mention it right now.


Randolph Harding: These questions are listed on pages 39 and 40 of today's order paper. Some of them no doubt refer to the manpower department, Mr. Chairman, but they are tied in, hand and glove, with the minister's department. I want to point this out. The winter works program has gone down the drain. So far as I can make out, nothing has been introduced in our area to replace this particular program.
There is one point I want to raise with the minister. I believe he has had an interview with a group of people from the city of Nelson in my area, with regard to regional development. The minister, I understand, gave them a very courteous interview. I am very
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development pleased that the interview took place. However I believe the delegation went home not much wiser than when they came here. This is the thing that is worrying a large number of regions all across the Dominion of Canada, but I speak specifically for the province of British Columbia.
I was very interested in the remarks of the preceding speaker. He spoke very generally, but I think he hit the nail right on the head. We are wondering what the minister's plans are. We have been given to understand from other ministers that a new program, an incentive program, is going to be introduced. The idea behind the program is to liquidate the pockets of high unemployment across the country, as well as the areas in which there is a large degree of regional disparity. What I should like to point out to the minister is this: I do not think we can afford to neglect any area in Canada. Even if an area has a relatively high degree of employment, such as the area of Kootenay West which I represent, where the earnings per capita compare favourably with some of the best areas in Can-da, conditions can change. What is happening rapidly in my area, as well as in many other areas, is that in some of the larger towns and the rural areas we are seeing unemployment creeping in, and it is getting worse. This condition must be checked or what can be classed now as a relatively good area will soon reach a stage where it will be one of the depressed areas. This is why we are so interested in seeing programs developed on a regional basis to deal with these problems.
I think the minister is well aware of the incentive program that was introduced in the Okanagan. I do know this program has cost the government some money, but it has been very successful. Some industries have been brought into the Okanagan area which would never have come there unless some type of incentive had been arranged. The result, of course, has been industrial development and an increase in permanent jobs in that area. This is what we are after. As the minister knows, the brief which was presented to him by the city of Nelson, referred to the loss of industry in that area. There was a reference also to the rapid rise in taxation in the district, and the very low industrial base upon which taxation is imposed.
This situation is rather alarming, particularly when we know that the area has all the attributes for real progress. Around Trail and Rossland we have the C.M. and S. complex

and a great deal of industrial activity. In the northern section of the constituency there is a good climate and we have the resources, hydro power and manpower. We cannot afford to neglect all these things. I am going to suggest that programs be investigated in conjunction with provincial, municipal and regional governments in an attempt to do something about keeping the employment picture in this part of British Columbia very good.
[DOT] (9:10 p.m.)
There are two or three other points I should like to make, Mr. Chairman, before I sit down. It is always interesting to hear about the new incentive plans that are to be advanced by the present administration. Surely the minister, in this first semester of this session of a new parliament, should be able to give us some idea of what is going to happen in other parts of Canada, other than the developments he has drawn to our attention in relation to the Atlantic provinces and parts of Quebec. I think we are entitled to this information. I also suggest to the minister that in his closing remarks this evening he deal with the points that have been raised.
I understand that at least seven or eight other members would like to make brief comments about regional development so I will not take much more time. I understand that questions of manpower come under the minister's department; if they do not they certainly fit hand in glove with the department's operations. Unemployment and incentives must go hand in hand.
One last point, Mr. Chairman, that I almost forgot and it has to do with the minister's department. In my constituency there is a town called Creston. As far as manpower services are concerned, Creston is bracketed within the east Kootenay area, which has a fairly high employment rate as a result of C.M.S activities around Kimberley. However, in other respects Creston is really divorced from the east Kootenay area although, as I say, it is included in the employment figures for the whole area. Creston is an area with a very high rate of unemployment. It is in a pocket almost by itself. This is a region into which the department should move and provide the incentive for setting up new industries, thus cutting down the severe rate of winter unemployment. I just draw that to the attention of the minister and trust that his department will look at the matter this coming year.
December 9, 1968


Mr. Fairwealher:: Mr. Chairman, I shall not speak for very long but I do want to raise one particular matter on this estimate. The minister has treated me very courteously in this regard and knows how I feel on this issue. I am particularly glad that the member of the cabinet from New Brunswick is in his seat, because I am sure that the combination of these two ministers means that something will be done in regard to a grant to the University of New Brunswick that was severely cut back by Treasury Board, in spite of a recommendation for capital funds made by the Atlantic Development Board.
I feel particularly strongly about this issue because some people in the maritime provinces are beginning to feel that the Atlantic Development Board is now just a series of initials, that it has no power. If each submission of the Atlantic Development Board to Treasury Board is going to be subjected to such severe curtailment as in this particular case, then I think the people of the Atlantic provinces will have legitimate reason for complaint.
I am going to take the somewhat unusual course of reading three letters, for which I take full responsibility, as I believe is the rule. I will identify the senders and in every instance give the names of the addressor and addressee. There is no mystery about this and it is not a partisan matter; it is the wish of a member of parliament from New Brunswick to see that one of the important resources of the Atlantic area receives just treatment.
The first letter is addressed to me and is from the vice-president, administration, B. F. Macaulay, of the University of New Brunswick. The letter is dated September 6, 1968 and reads as follows:

I write to you concerning developments associated with the university's request for a capital funds grant from the Atlantic Development board.
Then Mr. Macauley says he will outline the
history of their requests and the federal treasury's grant award. He then encloses supporting data.
The letter continues:
In August, 1964-*
This is the reason for some of my frustration.
-the university made a submission to the Atlantic Development Board for a grant of $1,850,000 for capital expenditure to provide research and graduate student space and to purchase additional equipment and library resources for research purposes, all of which include only areas of direct

Supply-Regional Development relevance to the social, economic and technological advancement of the Atlantic provinces. The Board recommended a grant of $1,500,000 and this amount was Anally approved by treasury. Of this amount $1,038,000 was to support the space requirements. You will note this sum is indicated and its allocation to various areas are indicated in column 1 of the attached analysis of submissions to Atlantic Development Board and Supporting Grants.
It continues:
Although the new buildings containing the space being supported by grants have been constructed, with the exception of the extensions to the chemistry, biology and geology buildings, and most of the equipment and books have been purchased, none of the supporting grant money has been received over this four year period. This delay has apparently been due to slowness in completing the associated agreements, and the agreement between the province of New Brunswick and the federal government is still not signed.
This was last September; perhaps the minister can indicate whether the agreement has been signed since.
In April of this year it became obvious to us that increasing academic requirements and the rapidly rising costs of construction would make it impossible to build the extensions to the chemistry, biology and geology buildings with the Atlantic Development Board grants requested in 1964. Accordingly, we requested our architects to give us new estimates of the cost of these buildings, and we prepared a new submission to the Atlantic Development Board, dated April 1, 1968. This second submission was based on three considerations-increase in building costs; increase in size of the space required; and 100 per cent support for those areas where 50 per cent support was requested in the Arst submission, including the extensions to the chemistry, biology and geology buildings. The increase in grants and the total grants requested are shown on the attached tabulation sheet.
The Atlantic Development Board recommended-
I want to emphasize this.
-that the maximum increases resulting from all three of the considerations in the preceding paragraph should be granted. This would have given us an increase of $2,318,200 and a total grant of $3,356,200. Consideration of these grants by treasury board was considerably delayed by the federal election, but when our submission was considered treasury only approved increases in the grants for increased building costs and the increased space requirements, but not for 100 per cent support in the areas where 50 per cent support had been requested initially. This decision was made in the face of the recommendation by the Atlantic Development Board for 100 per cent support. The result is that our request for increased grants has been cut by $1,262,200.
[DOT] (9:20 p.m.)
While the Atlantic Development Board and the Treasury Board were considering our second submission tenders were called for the extensions to the chemistry, biology and geology buildings so
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development that we could have firm prices on which to base our decisions. To our dismay the total bids for the three buildings came in at $504,415 over the estimates given by our architects.
So we find ourselves in the serious position of suffering from the additive effect of our requested grant being cut by $1,232,200 and the construction bids being $504,415 over the estimated price. The result is that we cannot proceed with the construction of the three buildings, nor can we consider some other badly needed buildings which we had hoped to get on with, had we had full support. I think the attached tabulation sheets will indicate our position quite clearly.
Because of the seriousness of the implications in the letter from the vice president of administration attempts were made, through correspondence and other ways, to see whether the request of the University of New Brunswick, fully supported by the Atlantic Development Board, could be met. The letters from the premier of the province of New Brunswick and the minister of economics and resource development-I think it is-Mr. Higgins support the request of the University of New Brunswick.
Many people in the maritime provinces- and not just chauvinistically, either-legitimately feel that if there is one area where we can fulfil a useful role in trying to conduct a bootstrap operation, if one may call it that, it is within the various campuses of the Atlantic provinces. I am making this pitch for the University of New Brunswick, but I should be happy to make it for the University of Moncton, Mount Allison, Dalhousie, St. Francis Xavier, or any of our universities. Here is a pressing and obvious need. As the hon. member for Egmont said, we have been studied forwards and backwards and up and down. And here was one request that was supported by the A.D.B. and ruthlessly cut back by Treasury Board.
I wanted to read a number of letters into the record but I feel guilty about taking up any more time. I have letters to the deputy minister from the president of the University of New Brunswick, letters to Dr. Weeks and other letters, but I will not take any more time. I see the President of the Treasury Board is at the table, no doubt studying the implications of my request. I hope he can persuade his colleagues to support my reasonable request. I hope that those hon. gentlemen will see their way clearly to doing something- and I hope that something will not be another study. The need is pressing. As I was saying, there are people in the maritime provinces who feel that our universities can support the
[Mr. Fairweather. I
sort of role that is performed, in the field of superior education, by institutions such as Boston and Cambridge in the state of Massachusetts. We are ready to undertake this job but we must have support, not only from the Atlantic Development Board, but from the minister and his colleagues.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: Mr. Chairman, I do not feel like making a speech at this time, although I am pregnant with several-I think our permissive society allows us to use such expressions. Before these estimates pass I wonder if the minister would indicate to the committee with reasonable precision the amount that is contributed by the government of Canada to the Economic Improvement Corporation-the E.I.C.-of Prince Edward Island, which is progressing with a comprehensive plan for the improvement of our province. We want to know how much financial assistance is being given by the government of Canada. Corollary to that, and this is also important, can the minister indicate to the house, and thereby indirectly to Prince Edward Island, when it is likely that we can expect that an agreement between the two governments will be signed so that the things which have been promised to our province in this important field can be brought to fruition.


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, with regard to the first question, I will try to obtain the information and give it to the hon. gentleman before ten o'clock. I do not have it at hand. As to the second question, I cannot say when an agreement is going to be signed because it is supposed to be an agreement between both parties. I hope it will be signed soon, but I cannot tell you when.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: I understand the premier of Prince Edward Island indicated that this will probably take place early in December. Does the minister feel that this is an optimistic, pessimistic or realistic suggestion.


Jean Marchand: I think, Mr. Chairman, that this is a realistic assessment, but I cannot really say, because as I mentioned before, this is supposed to be an agreement between both parties.


Mr. Corbin:: Mr. Chairman, my remarks
will be brief.
Still, I should like to say how surprised I am at the remarks of the hon. members for Egmont (Mr. D. MacDonald) and for
December 9, 19G8	COMMONS
Kootenay-West (Mr. Randolph Harding), who claim to be astonished that the minister should remain mum about his plans and projects concerning the policies of his new department.
To my mind-and I am not defending the minister for I know full well that he is quite capable of doing so himself-it must be admitted that it is no time for him, when we are asked to pass the estimates for what was left when he took over his new portfolio, to comment on the new policy he is in the process of formulating with the help of his officials and other wise men.
The attitude of those two members surprises me for they know full well, that those things must be considered and reconsidered; plans intended to bring a long term solution to the problems of regional disparities cannot be set down on paper just like that, overnight, or even in six months, in spite of what some people maintain. I therefore cannot approve the attitude of my honourable opponents. I even feel that, under the circumstances, their criticism is somewhat unfair.
[DOT] (9:30 p.m.)
Obviously, we are all anxious to know the plans of the new department, whatever party we belong to; but I feel that such eagerness should simmer down to a healthy patience. Let us give the minister time to think out the new policies he intends to implement. It would be useless to criticize all those projects at this time; it would only further mix up and delay the plans he intends to put before the house.
In this regard, I might mention the long term project some of my electors are working on. For instance, the members of the NorthWest area Development Council, which takes in almost three quarters of my riding, have now been studying for four years the problems of regional disparities and economic development.
In spite of their long hours of sitting, and long nightly studies, they have not been able to find a magic solution to their problems and they are still at it. It is then hardly surprising that the government cannot on short notice submit a concrete project that would solve the problem of regional disparities. I might have mentioned as well one group of people in the Riley Brook region of the Upper Tobique who have during recent months been reviewing the problems of economic disparities.
Criticisms are good but patience is better; those who can wait will learn in due time what has been accomplished by the minister
DEBATES	3709
Supply-Regional Development and his team. The minister must be completely free to do his work and plan the organization of his department. I think all hon. members should now give him this opportunity. He should not be pressured into giving us merely a rough draft of the project he intends to introduce at the very beginning of the year.
Mr. Chairman, those were the few comments I wanted to make.


James Aloysius McGrath: During the passage of the estimates of the Atlantic Development Board I drew attention to problems surrounding the closing of mines on Bell Island. In the course of my examination of actions taken by the Atlantic Development Board it became obvious to me that the programs they had brought in to meet this emerging situation had, in fact, proved unsuccessful.
After the mines closed down in 1966 the board, acting on the advice of a committee, decided on a program of forced migration, feeling there was no solution to the problem caused by the closing of this industry and that the only answer would be to provide the residents of that unhappy place with a subsidy under whose terms the government of Canada in co-operation with the government of Newfoundland would provide home owners with a subsidy of $1,500 per home if they would leave the island. In other words, they would be able to sell homes which as a consequence of closing the mines had become practically worthless.
Officials of the Atlantic Development Board admitted in effect during the course of the committee hearings that the program had not been successful. They had set out to reduce the population of the island to the elderly and the very young. But after two years the island still has a population of 6,500 people including the old, the young, and more than 2,000, ablebodied people who are virtually unemployed and are forced to live on relief.
Until the closing of the mines the population of Bell Island was 14,000, or at least that was the peak population. These people had brought into being an incorporated municipality, a modern 50-bed hospital, a technical and vocational training school, high schools and all the things which provide modern amenities. Like most people, Bell Islanders are loyal to their community, proud of their accomplishments, proud of their schools, their hospital, the town hall and all the other things they have developed through their labours and as a consequence of their taxes. It
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development was with a heavy heart that many of them decided to write off their homes and their investment in the community, with its schools, its hospital and all the other necessary requirements of a town of 12,000 or 14,000 people. But since they could not provide their families with a livelihood on Bell Island, they decided to move elsewhere. Many others feared the consequences of such a move. They were uncertain about what they would face if they left the security of their homes, hesitant to move out into the world for which they had not been trained and whose problems they were not prepared to meet. Many people preferred to stay.
This brings me to the point of my remarks. After two years of failure on the part of the federal government and the provincial governments to come to grips with this problem, Bell Island stands today, and I hope the minister hears my remarks, as a mute testimony to bureaucratic bungling and government inefficiency.
The government has failed to meet this problem right in our own environment. A community of 6,500 is still resident on Bell Island, the vast majority of whom are living on relief. This, to me, indicates a complete incapacity on the part of the government of this country to live up to its responsibilities. Poverty is no longer a problem of regional disparity. It is widespread, it is national. I have no less an authority for saying this than that of the economic advisory council. Hon. members are probably familiar with the fifth annual report of the Economic Council of Canada which brings this national disgrace into focus. Canadians will continue to live in poverty in this country as long as we have a government, as long as we have bureaucracy, which does not have the heart to take seriously conditions such as exist today on Bell Island.
I have seen poverty, as have other hon. members. It is a relative thing. It is what you make it. Poverty, to my mind, is not the starvation of Biafra, tragic as that may be. Poverty is the problem of Canadians who have been deprived of their national heritage, deprived of their pride, deprived of their right to earn a living. Poverty to me is a situation where children are brought up in environments where their parents have no opportunity to work. Heads of families are degraded by public welfare, people are being destroyed before our very eyes. There are people who are dead; they are dead because they have no other source of income, save a government
[Mr. McGrath.l
cheque which comes to them once a month and for which they have to plead that they are in poverty. Mr. Chairman, the minister who will be speaking to the house tonight hopefully will have something to say about this matter. How can we deny that there is a situation, when there are 6,500 Canadians who are on relief. These people are ignored by the government of Canada, they are ignored by the government of their own province and they are ignored by a minister who does not see fit to listen to my remarks. Yet, this supposedly is a government in a just society. It is a government, within the ministry of which sits the minister of regional development, that great exponent of the just society, who now chooses to ignore me. He does not know what I am talking about, and just chooses to ignore what I say. Surely the federal government, working in close co-operation with the government of Newfoundland, must now recognize that it has failed in this deliberate program-and I repeat "deliberate program"-to reduce the population of Bell Island to the aged, the infirm and the very young. They have failed because we still have today in this country a community with 6,500 people containing not only the aged, the infirm and the very young, but also some 2,000 able bodied people on relief who are prepared, and in fact want, to work for a living.
[DOT] (.9:40 D.m.)
This great exponent of the just society, this minister who represents the working population of the province of Quebec, ignores what I say. Mr. Chairman, I realize the minister must listen to a lot of things. I know he has to listen to representations. I know the passage of his estimates must represent to him an absolute bore, as indeed parliament represents a bore to the Prime Minister. But I say to the minister that the sufferings of the people in my constituency, as in all of Canada, surely must command his attention. I hope the minister of regional development will see fit to reply to my remarks, even though he has so far seen fit to ignore them. I hope he will be able to say what the representatives of the Atlantic Development Board said before the committee, when they said that the government of Canada does not have an answer to this problem, and then I hope he will say that the government of this country is prepared to look into it with a view to using the expertise they have at their disposal and the vast resources they have at their
December 9. 1968

disposal to alleviate the real tragedy that exists today in this country, where there is a community of 6,500 people without jobs and without hope who look to this government for an answer.


Jean Marchand: Mr. Chairman, may I have one moment in order to give an answer which I promised. The amount is $600,000.


Raymond J. Perrault: Mr. Chairman, we have
listened with a great deal of interest during the past hours to the voices of gloom, doom, disaster and worse. I think there are very few people in this house, certainly from the maritime provinces, who would regard these Jeremiah voices as their authentic voice in this parliament of Canada. We have not heard one optimistic word all day about the future of the great maritimes. There has not been one optimistic word. We have heard nothing but condemnation of the efforts being made by the government of this country, this country of great potential, to lessen the regional disparity. We have been told that nothing is being done in the maritime provinces. We do not find in any of the budget speeches of the province of Nova Scotia in recent years words which-


Mr. Nowlan:: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman.


Raymond J. Perrault: I hold in my hand-


Albert Béchard: Order. The hon. member for Annapolis Valley on a point of order.


John Patrick (Pat) Nowlan: Mr. Chairman, since the
Prime Minister is unable to tell us who this man is, I would like to know-


Albert Béchard: Order.


John Patrick (Pat) Nowlan: -whether he is a member and what his name is.


Raymond J. Perrault: You see, Mr. Chairman, this typifies the kind of destructive, negative opposition we have heard in this house today. Those in the opposition, who are so concerned about the facts, may some day wake up to a realization of what actually is being done to lessen the regional disparity in this country. I hold in my hand the facts about the kind of aid that is being extended to the maritime provinces. I hope that my friend from Nova Scotia, who had nothing but words of condemnation for the government would note

Supply-Regional Development this. The Federal contribution to Nova Scotia, its municipalities and certain provincial institutions in 1961-62 amounted to $56 million, in 1962-63 to $65 million, in 1963-64 to $69 million, in 1964-65 to $77.64 million, in 1965-66 to $95,246 million, in 1966-67 to $132 million and in 1967-68 to $181 million.


Mr. Peters:: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. May I ask the hon. member what the source is for the figures he has just presented to the house.


Raymond J. Perrault: Mr. Chairman, I would be delighted to table all these figures. I will make them available to the house. Here are
the figures-


William Arnold Peters: On a point of order-


Albert Béchard: Order, please.


J. Michael Forrestall: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a question of privilege.


Albert Béchard: The hon. member for Timiskaming on a point of order.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Chairman, I am rising on the same point of order. It is a rule of this house that when the source of figures which have been presented to the house is asked for the hon. member must give that source. I only asked for the source because I think it would be of interest to hon. members.


Raymond J. Perrault: I shall be delighted to do so. The source is the Dominion Bureau of Statistics official figures. If you would like explicit information I think you could extract it very easily. The Leader of the Opposition, when he was premier of Nova Scotia did not condemn the Atlantic development fund and other programs of this kind. I resent very much the fact that-


James Aloysius McGrath: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Raymond J. Perrault: We listened to you and now you sit down.


John Patrick (Pat) Nowlan: You make a lot of sound and no sense.


Raymond J. Perrault: There is a program for improvement of poverty, increased economic efficiency and more vigorous competition.
[DOT] (9:50 p.m.)
Great progress is being made on the path to reducing economic disparity. I want to say I
December 9, 1968

Supply-Regional Development am immensely encouraged by the information and indication from the minister that we are going to see a new set of criteria established for the so-called slow growth areas. Up to this time the criteria have related to the number of unemployed people in this country. I believe that the number of unemployed people is not a valid criteria as to whether a certain area requires assistance. I hope that the minister can perhaps give us some indication of these new criteria. Surely the criteria-


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a question of privilege.


Raymond J. Perrault: Surely the criteria-


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. Will the hon. member resume his seat.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. I know the hon. member will not mind being interrupted at this point by the suggestion that in the six minutes left perhaps the minister would like to speak to the estimates in reply-


Some hon. Members:: Order, order.


Raymond J. Perrault: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I should like to refer to a point of order.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. Will hon. members resume their seats. I understand the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond is rising on a question of privilege.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order because of the attempt made to table the document to which the hon. member referred. I draw Your Honour's attention to the fact that since this was not received by the chair, or properly tabled, and if such a document is to be tabled, similar figures should be provided by that hon. member for each and every province in the country.


Raymond J. Perrault: Mr. Chairman-


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. I am advising the committee that the document was not tabled.


Raymond J. Perrault: I simply want to say that I
premeditated the member's request. I had made statistics available to the table relating to every province in Canada, including British Columbia, Ontario and Saskatchewan, Alberta and all the rest. The facts are available.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. I should like to repeat that these figures were not tabled, nor was the document tabled. I understand the hon. member for Cape Breton-East Richmond is rising now on a question of privilege.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, with all honesty I should like to say-


An hon. Member:: You haven't had a valid
point of privilege for five years.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I should like the hon. member to withdraw his remarks.


An hon. Member:: Make it six years.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, I should like the hon. member to withdraw the remarks, that he premeditated	my move in requesting
that similar statistics be made available for all provinces.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. May I suggest to the committee that I think the suggestion by the hon. member for Egmont was a reasonable one. If the committee wishes to hear from the minister in the last few minutes we should make provision to do so. On the other hand it is important to recognize that the hon. member has this time to use if he wishes.


Raymond J. Perrault: Mr. Chairman, I simply say to the hon. member that I anticipated his desire.


Donald MacInnis: I say to the hon. member, you are a liar.


Raymond J. Perrault: That is an unparliamentary expression but I shall just consider the source, Mr. Chairman. I shall complete my remarks and sit down very shortly. I urge the minister to tell us whether we are going to have a set of criteria which will take into account realistically the areas of slow development which exist in the country. Surely if a viable income base can be established anywhere in this country, in the maritimes or in British Columbia, let us provide assistance for such economic growth. If a viable income base cannot be established, then let us improve our manpower mobility program, our retraining program and simply leave the labour force where it exists. I think I echo

December 9* 1968	COMMONS
the feeling of many Canadians when I say that we are improving in the mobility of labour and doing an excellent job of retraining labour, in spite of what the opposition says. Surely the time has arrived to attempt to co-ordinate the educational facilities which exist in this country and all provinces. It is ridiculous to say to a man who wants to go to work in Manitoba-


James Aloysius McGrath: I rise on a question of privilege.


Raymond J. Perrault: Surely the hon. member who is now speaking is using a surreptitious way in which to prevent the minister speaking, by using up the time of the committee-


Some hon. Members:: Order, order.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. The procedure in the committee is that when an hon. member rises he should allow the Chair to recognize him.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Chairman, with great respect, I point out to you that the hon. member who now has the floor is speaking surreptitiously in a way to prevent the minister from replying, and is thereby inflicting closure on the committee.


Raymond J. Perrault: I want to point out to the house that had these interventions not occurred there would have been six or possibly ten minutes for the reply. The fault lies on this side of the house in failing to listen to what 1 have had to say so the minister could reply. I conclude by saying-


An hon. Member:: Hurrah.


Raymond J. Perrault: If the federal government could work with the provinces, universities and school boards across the country to obtain a better agreement with respect to acceptable standards it would be easier for families in Canada to transfer from one province to another, and for university students to accommodate that switch as well.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. It being ten o'clock it is my duty, pursuant to the provisions of the special order adopted September 20, 1968, as amended December 4, 1968, to interrupt these proceedings and forthwith, without any amendment or debate, put every question necessary to dispose of the main and supplementary estimates now before the committee of supply. Accordingly, the chair proposes to continue with the department now
DEBATES	3713
Supply-Regional Development being considered and proceed in alphabetical order, through those departments which remain before the committee of supply.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. With the unanimous consent of the committee perhaps the minister could reply to some of the representations that have been made tonight.


An hon. Member:: No, you took up all the
time.


James Aloysius McGrath: I repeat my request, for the unanimous consent of the committee to hear from the minister.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. If there is unanimous consent, of course, we could hear from the minister. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


An hon. Member:: Hickory, dickory dock.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. Item agreed to.
General-
1.	Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including Canada's fee for membership in the International Commission on Irrigation and Drainage, $17,887,200.
5. 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 Province of New Brunswick of the cost of the Petitcodiac River Dam Project and the share of the Province of Nova Scotia of the cost of the Avon River Causeway Dam project, $11,657,400.


Gerald William Baldwin: What department are we dealing with now?


James Hugh Faulkner: We are dealing with the
estimates of the Department of Forestry and Regional Development. We previously completed two votes in respect of the Cape Breton Development Corporation, namely 35 and 45. Items no. 1 and Item no. 5 have been carried. We are now considering item number 10.
10. Grants, subventions and payments as detailed in the Estimates, $30,911,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Regional Development-
General-
L85. Advances in accordance with agreements entered into pursuant to the Atlantic Provinces Power Development Act $53,102,000.
[Stage Direction]
December 9, 1968
Supply-Items Passed
Mr. Crouse:: I should like to ask whether this new department has been set up in respect of regional development. I thought we still had a Minister of Fisheries and Forestry. I raise this question because of the conflict between the ministers and the two departments.


An hon. Member:: They don't know what's going on.


James Hugh Faulkner: Those are the estimates I have before me and those are the estimates we have been considering. We will now consider the estimates of the Department of Agriculture.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE Administration-
1. Departmental Administration including the Canadian Agricultural Services Co-ordinating Committee, contributions to the Commonwealth Agricultural Bureaux, and a contribution to the Agricultural Economics Research Council in an amount equal to one-half the contributions to the Council from other sources during the fiscal year but not exceeding $50,000, $8,520,375.
Research-
5. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including the costs of publishing departmental research papers as supplements to the "Canadian Entomologist", $34,965,600.
10. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $5,571,300.
12. Grants as deailed in the Estimates and Canada's fee for membership in the International Society for Horticultural Science, $800,400.
Production and Marketing-Administration-
IS. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including the administration of the Agricultural Stabilization Act, and contributions to assist in the Marketing of Agricultural Products subject to the approval of Treasury Board, $2,448,800.
17. Grants, Contributions and Subsidies as detailed in the Estimates, $144,750,000.
Items agreed to.
[DOT] (10:00 p.m.)
Animal and Animal Products-
20. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $8,478,500.
Items agreed to.
25. Grants, Contributions and Subsidies in the amounts and subject to the terms specified in the sub-vote titles listed in the Details of the Estimates, $7,908,400.
James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote 25 carry?


William Arnold Peters: No, Mr. Chairman.
[The Chairman.]


Some hon. Members:: On division.


James Hugh Faulkner: Carried, on division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
Plant and Plant Products-
30. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $8,394,400.
35. Grants, Contributions and Subsidies as detailed in the Estimates, $130,000.
Health of Animals-
40. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year from packers requiring special services, $17,000,400.
45. Grants, Contributions and Subsidies as detailed in the Estimates, $1,766,600.
Board of Grain Commissioners-
50. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including Canada's fee for membership in the International Association of Cereal Chemistry and authority to purchase screenings, $8,784,000.
51.	Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $1,502,000.
Canadian Dairy Commission-
55. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $303,000.
Canadian Livestock Feed Board-
(Formerly the responsibility of the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development)
60. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $301,800.
65. Freight Assistance on Western Feed Grains including assistance in respect of grain storage costs in accordance with the terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council, $21,600,000.
Farm Credit Corporation-
70. Estimated amount required to provide for the operating loss of the Farm Credit Corporation for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1969, $6,000,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That completes the estimates of the Department of Agriculture.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: How many billions of dollars have been passed in five minutes?


An hon. Member:: What's a million?


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. The committee will now deal with the estimates under the title Communications.



COMMUNICATIONS

[Stage Direction]
General-
1. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including the administration of the Radio Act and Regulations issued thereunder and authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current fiscal year for
December 9, 1968
[Stage Direction]
this Vote not to exceed $8,894,100 and to spend revenue received during the current fiscal year, $4,971,100.
James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote 1 carry?


Some hon. Members:: On division..


James Hugh Faulkner: Carried, on division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
5. Research Satellite Program-To provide for the design and instrumentation of a series of satellites to carry out a scientific research program agreed upon jointly by the United States National Aeronautical and Space Administration and the Defence Research Board, $3,500,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote 5 carry?


Some hon. Members:: On division.


James Hugh Faulkner: Carried on division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
10. Payments to the Canadian National Railway Company as detailed in the Estimates and Canada's share of the cost of the International Radio, Telephone and Telegraph Organizations listed in the Details of the Estimates, $509,000.
Post Office-
15. Postal Services including Canada's share of the upkeep of the International Bureaux at Berne and Montevideo, $346,622,000.
Communications-
Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation- LI. Loans to the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation in accordance with Section 14 of the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation Act for additions and betterments to facilities, $10,500,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates under the title Communications. The committee will now deal with the estimates of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs.



DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS

[Stage Direction]
2.	Departmental Administration, $907,400.
James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote No. 1 carry?


Some hon. Members:: On division.


James Hugh Faulkner: Carried, on division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
5. Bankruptcy Act-Administration, $931,100.
10. Combines Investigation Act-Administration, $1,354,200.
15. Corporations Branch, $280,000.
Supply-Items Passed
20. Patent Division, Copyright and Industrial Designs Division and Trade Marks Office including contributions to the International Office for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works and the International Office for the Protection of Industrial Property, $4,522,400.
25. Consumer Affairs Branch including a Grant of $30,000 to the Consumers Association of Canada, $6,004,400.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. The committee will now deal with the estimates of the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.



DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
A-Department-
Administration Services-
1. Departmental Administration including Canada's fee for membership in the Pan-American Institute of Geography and History, $4,555,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote 1 carry?


Some hon. Members:: On division.


James Hugh Faulkner: Carried, on division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
5. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment including Common-use Field Survey Equipment, $631,000.
Mines, Minerals, Energy and Geosciences-
15. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including the administration of the Explosives Act, the purchase of air photography, the expenses of the Interdepartmental Committee on Air Surveys, the National Advisory Committee on Control Surveys and Mapping, the National Advisory Committee on Research in Geological Sciences, the National Advisory Committee on Research in Mining and Mineral Processing, the Canadian Permanent Committee on Geographical Names, the National Committee for Canada of the International Astronomical Union and authority to make recoverable advances not exceeding the amount of the share of the United States Government of the cost of binding annual reports and maintaining boundary range lights, $35,879,700.
20. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $4,530,000.
25. Grants, contributions and subventions as detailed in the Estimates, Canada's fees for membership in the International Organizations detailed in the Estimates, Canada's share of the cost of the Geological Liaison Office, British Commonwealth Scientific Conference, London, England, and Canada's share of the cost of the Commonwealth Committee on mineral processing, $1,464,000.
Water and Coordination of Renewable Resources
Programs-
40. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including the expenses of the Saskatchewan-Nelson
[Stage Direction]
December 9, 1969
Supply-Items Passed
Basin Board and the Atlantic Tidal Power Programming Board including the recoverable expenditures relating thereto, recoverable expenditures incurred in respect ot Regional Water Resources Planning Investigations and Water Resources Inventories and authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the amount of the shares of the Province of Manitoba and of the Province of Ontario of the cost of regulating the levels of Lake of the Woods and Lac Seul and the amount of the share of provincial and outside agencies of the cost of hydrometric surveys, and the expenses of the National Advisory Committee on Geographical Research and the National Committee for Canada of the International Geographical Union, $30,457,400.
45. 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 shares of provincial and outside agencies of the cost of hydrometric surveys, $11,202,000.
50. Contributions to the Provinces towards the construction of dams and other works to assist in the conservation and control of water resources in accordance with agreements entered into between Canada and the Provinces, Canada's fees for membership in the International Hydrographic Bureau and the International Geographical Union, and grants and other contributions as detailed in the Estimates, $5,889,300.
B-Atomic Energy Control Board-
55. Administration Expenses of the Atomic Energy Control Board, $392,000.
60. Grants for researches and investigations with respect to atomic energy, $3,920,000.
C-Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-
(Research Program) -
65. Current Operation and Maintenance, including expendable research equipment, $58,919,000.
70. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $9,681,000.
D-Dominion Coal Board-
75. Administration and Investigations of the Dominion Coal Board, $150,000.
80. Payment to New Brunswick in the fiscal year 1968-69 of $2,800,000 and annual payments in each of the four fiscal years commencing on the first day of April, 1969 and ending on the 31st day of March, 1973 of $4,050,000 to assist the Province in its program of rationalization of the Minto coal fields, in accordance with terms and conditions set out in an agreement entered into between New Brunswick and Canada with the approval of the Governor in Council, and to authorize in accordance with the agreement the transfer to New Brunswick of the rights, benefits and obligations existing and outstanding under all loan agreements entered into pursuant to the Coal Production Assistance Act with coal producers in New Brunswick, the principal sum of which, carried as an asset of Canada, amounted to $597,314 as of March 31, 1968; amount required for 1968-69, $3,397,314.
National Energy Board-
85. Administration, $1,602,000.
Energy, Mines and Resources-
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited-
L5. Loans in the current and subsequent fiscal years to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, in such
[The Chairman.)
amounts and on such terms and conditions as the Governor in Council may approve, to finance the construction of the Candu-BLW 250 nuclear power station in Quebec; to share in the construction of the Pickering Generating Station under agreement between the Federal Government, the Province of Ontario and the Hydro Electric Power Commission of Ontario; to finance the construction of manufacturing facilities and a laboratory for the Commercial Products Division at South March; to finance the construction of housing and other works near the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment, $51,000,000.
L10. Loans to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in such amounts and on such terms and conditions as the Governor in Council may approve, to finance the purchase of Canadian-produced Heavy Water for resale to Canadian and foreign users, $4,600,000.
L15. Loans to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in such amounts and on such terms and conditions as the Governor in Council may approve, to finance the construction of transmission facilities in connection with the Nelson River Power Project, in accordance with an agreement between Canada and Manitoba; to authorize Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to construct, control, lease and dispose of the said transmission facilities, $40,000,000.
L20. Loans to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, subject to such terms and conditions as the Governor in Council may approve, to make an advance payment to Deuterium of Canada Limited based on the value of one year's production ljy that Corporation of heavy water, $16,400,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That completes the estimates of the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources. The committee will now deal with the estimates of the Department of External Affairs.


Mr. Lewis:: Mr. Chairman, how many millions of dollars of estimates have we voted so far?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please.
DEPARTMENT OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS A-Department-
1. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including payment of remuneration, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council and notwithstanding section 7 of the Financial Administration Act, in connection with the assignment by the Canadian Government of Canadians to the staffs of the International Organizations detailed in the Estimates, and authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the amounts of the shares of those Organizations of such expenses, and authority, notwithstanding section 7 of the Financial Administration Act, for the appointment and fixing of salaries of Commissioners (International Commissions for Supervision and Control in Indo-China), Secretaries and staff by the Governor in Council; and authority,
December 9, 1968

notwithstanding section 7 of the Financial Administration Act, for the appointment and fixing of salaries of High Commissioners, Ambassadors, Ministers Plenipotentiary, Consuls, Secretaries and staff by the Governor in Council; assistance and repatriation of distressed Canadian citizens and persons of Canadian domicile abroad, including their dependents; cultural relations and academic exchange programs with other countries, $44,591,300.


James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote No. 1 carry?


Some hon. Members:: On division.


James Hugh Faulkner: Carried, on division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
10. Construction, Acquisition or Improvement of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $7,000,000.
15. Assessments, grants, contributions and other payments to International (including Commonwealth) Organizations and International Multilateral Economic and Special Aid Programs as detailed in the Estimates, including authority to pay assessments in the amounts and in the currencies in which they are levied, and authority to pay other amounts specified in the currencies of the countries indicated, notwithstanding that the total of such payments may exceed the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of January, 1968, $33,362,850.
External Aid Office-
30. Salaries and Expenses, $4,003,000.
35. Economic, technical, educational and other assistance as detailed in the Estimates, $138,500,000.
International Joint Commission-
40. Salaries and Expenses of the Commission and Canada's share of the expenses of studies, surveys and investigations of the Commission, $484,100.
External Aid Office-
L25. Special loan assistance to developing countries and to recognized international development institutions in the current and subsequent fiscal years, subject to such terms and conditions as the Governor in Council may approve, for the purpose of undertaking such economic, technical and educational assistance as may be agreed upon by Canada and the developing countries or recognized international development institutions, $106,000,060.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of External Affairs. The committee will now deal with the estimates of the Department of Finance.
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE Administration-
1. Departmental Administration including administration of the guaranteed loans Acts, the Inspector General of Banks' Office, and payments to provinces as detailed in the Estimates, $3,970,500.


James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote No. 1 carry?


Some hon. Members:: On division.


James Hugh Faulkner: Carried, on division.
Supply-Items Passed
(The following items were agreed to:)
3.	Grant to the YM-YWCA toward the cost of construction of a building in Ottawa, $700,000.
5. Payments, computed in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council, to the Government of each Province in respect of income tax paid by corporations whose main business is the distribution to or generation for distribution to the public of electrical energy, gas or steam; the said payments to be made in respect of such part of the income of the corporation for the taxation year ending in the calendar year 1966 (as determined under and for the purposes of the Income Tax Act) as is derived from the said distribution or generation in the Province to which payment is made to the extent of that part of the amount so determined that the number of days in the taxation year that are in 1985 are of the number of days in the taxation year, and in respect of similar income of such corporations for any taxation year ending in a calendar year prior to 1966 that was not taken into account in computing payments made in respect of that taxation year, $2,500,000.
Municipal Grants-
10. Grants to Municipalities in accordance with the Municipal Grants Act and Regulations made thereunder, and grants to municipalities in lieu of redevelopment charges in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council, $45,850,000.
15. Grants to provinces in respect of a fiscal year commencing after December 31, 1966, and in respect of Federal property situate therein, where a real estate tax has been imposed or levied on property by a province to finance services that are ordinarily provided throughout Canada by municipalities, the grants to be calculated, subject to terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council, in the same manner as grants to municipalities under the Municipal Grants Act, $2,000,000.
TariiT Board-
25. Administration, $315,000.
Royal Canadian Mint-
30. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, and to authorize, notwithstanding Section 17 (2) of the Currency, Mint and Exchange Fund Act, the payment, out of revenues received by the Royal Canadian Mint from the issue of coins, of compensation on terms and conditions approved by the Treasury Board to owners of coin vending machines or their agents in respect of the purchase or modification of coin selectors, $2,567,300.
32.	Payment to the United States Mint, notwithstanding the Currency, Mint and Exchange Fund Act, in respect of the manufacture of coins of the currency of Canada pursuant to an agreement to be entered into with the approval of the Treasury Board between the United States Mint and the Royal Canadian Mint, $210,000.
35. Construction or Acquisition of Equipment, $216,000.
Municipal Development and Loan Board-
45. Administration, $12,000.

December 9, 1968
Supply-Items Passed
Insurance-
55. Supervision of Companies and Actuarial Services, $1,467,300.
Department-
L28. To authorize the Minister of Finance to make contributions out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund to the International Development Association in the fiscal years 1968-69 1969-70 and 1970-71 of an amount or amounts not exceeding in the whole $75,000,000 U.S., in addition to the amounts provided by section 4 of the International Development Association Act and Appropriation Act No. 10, 1964, including authority for the Minister of Finance, on behalf of the Government of Canada, to issue to the Association in respect of such contributions, pending cash requirements by the Association, non-interest-bearing and non-negotiable demand notes in such form as the Minister may determine; notwithstanding that the contributions may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of September, 1968 which is, $81,081,000.
L29. To authorize the Minister of Finance in the current and subsequent fiscal years to place on deposit in an account in the name of the Receiver General of Canada in the Bank for International Settlements, Basle, Switzerland, US or Canadian dollar amounts not exceeding in the aggregate US $100 million, notwithstanding that this amount may exceed or fall short of the equivalent in Canadian dollars, estimated as of September, 1968, which is, $107,343,750.


James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of Finance.



GOVERNOR GENERAL AND LIEUTENANT-GOVERNORS

[Stage Direction]
5a. To extend the purposes of Governor General and Lieutenant-Governors Vote 5 of the Revised Estimates for 1968-69 to authorize reimbursement to the Lieutenant-Governor of the Province of New Brunswick of the costs of travelling and hospitality not claimed during the fiscal year 1967-68, $2,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: This concludes those estimates.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. Did we not pass these estimates some time ago?


James Hugh Faulkner: No, not that particular vote.



DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT

[Stage Direction]
Administration-
1. Departmental Administration, $2,940,700.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item 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
[The Chairman.]
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, $101,201,000.
10. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment including authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the amounts of the share of Provincial Governments of expenditures on roads and related works and equipment, 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, $34,237,000.
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 make advances and payments to the Government of the Northwest Territories for activities or portions thereof transferred to the administration of that Government during the current fiscal year by the Government of Canada; 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, $40,466,300.
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
December 9, 1968
[Stage Direction]
Government of the Northwest Territories of expenditures on Education and Vocational Training; authority to make advances and payments to the Government of the Northwest Territories for activities or portions thereof transferred to the administration of that Government during the current fiscal year by the Government of Canada; 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 $26,195,600, $22,265,700.
33.	Payment to the Government of the Northwest Territories in accordance with an agreement between Canada and the Northwest Territories, the agreement to provide that the Government of the Northwest Territories will not impose, levy or collect individual income taxes, corporation income taxes, corporation taxes or succession duties, as defined in the agreement; the payment to the Government of the Northwest Territories under the agreement to be calculated on the following bases:
(a)	A subsidy of eighty cents per head in respect of the population of the Northwest Territories as determined by the 1961 census;
(b)	A grant in aid of the Government and CouncL of the Northwest Territories of $30,000; and
(c)	An operating grant in the amount of $5,104,660 which, when added to the payments under paragraphs (a) and (b), will equal the estimated operating deficit of the Government of the Northwest Territories in the current fiscal year;
together with payments in respect of amortization payments on outstanding loans for capital expenditures in the Northwest Territories, as provided in the agreement, $6,392,100.
34.	Payment to the Government of the Yukon Territory in accordance with an agreement to be entered into by the Minister of Finance with the approval of the Governor in Council on behalf of the Government of Canada, and the Commissioner of the Yukon Territory, on behalf of the Government of the Yukon Territory, such agreement to provide (on such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon) that the Government of the Yukon Territory will not impose, levy or collect the taxes specified in the agreement, the payment to the Government of the Yukon Territory to be calculated in accordance with such agreement; payments in respect of amortization payments on outstanding loans for capital expenditures in the Yukon Territory, as provided in the agreement; and to authorize interim payments to the Government of the Yukon Territory prior to the signing of the said agreement (the amount payable under the agreement to be reduced by the aggregate of all interim payments), $5,576,300.
Supply-Items Passed
Conservation-
35.	Administration, Operation and Maintenance including grants as detailed in the Estimates, payment to the 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, $22,217,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
40. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment including expenditures on works on other than Federal property and authority to make expenditures on proposed new national parks in the areas of Kejimkujik Lake in Nova Scotia and in New Brunswick and Newfoundland, $19,230,900.
Indian Affairs-
L35. To provide that the total amount of outstanding advances at any one time with respect to loans to Indians under Section 69 of the Indian Act, notwithstanding subsection 5 thereof, shall not exceed $2,400,000; additional amount required, $400,000.
L40. To increase to $2,000,000 the amount authorized for loans to Indians and Eskimos by Loans, Investments and Advances Votes L51a, Appropriation Act No. 9, 1966, L51g, Appropriation Act No. 2, 1967 and L51a, Appropriation Act No. 7, 1967, which votes authorized loans and advances to Indians and Eskimos for the construction or acquisition of houses and land in areas other than Indian Reserves, including authority to forgive repayment thereof, $999,999.
Northern Program-
L45. To increase to $990,000 the amount authorized for loans to the Government of the Yukon Territory by Loans, Investments and Advances Vote 672, Appropriation Act No. 2, 1962, as amended, which Vote authorized the making of mortgage loans for low-cost housing to residents of the Territory; additional amount required, $350,000.
L50. To authorize loans to the Government of the Yukon Territory, in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council, for the development of a townsite at Anvil, Yukon Territory, $500,000.
L55. To increase to $150,000 the amount authorized for loans to the Government of the Yukon Territory by Loans, Investments and Advances Vote 762, Appropriation Act No. 2, 1961, which Vote authorized the making of second mortgage loans to residents of the Territory for the purchase or construction of houses in the Territory under the National Housing Act; additional amount required, $50,000.
L60. To increase to $7,780,064 the amount authorized for loans, in the current and subsequent fiscal years, to the Government of the Yukon Territory, by Votes L45, Appropriation Act No. 5, 1967 and L45c, Appropriation Act No. 1, 1968 which Votes authorized loans for capital expenditures on terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council; additional amount required, $2,780,063.
\
[Stage Direction]
December 9, 1968
Supply-Items Passed
Northern Canada Power Commission-
L65. Advances to the Northern Canada Power Commission for the purpose of capital expenditure in accordance with section 15 of the Northern Canada Power Commission Act, $8,200,000.
Northern Transportation Company Limited-
L70. Loans to Northern Transportation Company Limited in the current and subsequent fiscal years, in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council, to finance the acquisition of transportation facilities for use on the Mackenzie River and Central Arctic Coast, $6,000,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY. TRADE AND COMMERCE Trade and Commerce-
General Administration-
20. Departmental Administration, $2,146,271.


Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
25. Trade Development including fees for membership in the International Organizations listed in the details of the Estimates, $19,889,800.
30. Canadian Government Travel Bureau-To assist in promoting the Tourist Business in Canada including a grant of $60,000 to the Canadian Tourist Association, $10,274,900.
World Exhibitions-
35. Canadian Government Participation in World Exhibitions, $2,394,000.
C-Dominion Bureau of Statistics-
40. Administration and Operation including the fee for membership in the Inter-American Statistical Institute and a contribution of $500 to the International Statistical Institute, $27,405,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce.



DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

[Stage Direction]
1.	Administration, including grants and contributions as detaileed in the Estimates, gratuities to the widows or such dependents as may be approved by Treasury Board of Judges who die while in office, and authority to make recoverable advances for the administration of justice on behalf of the governments of the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory, $5,892,200.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of Justice.



LEGISLATURE

James Hugh Faulkner: The committee will now deal with the estimates of Legislature.
[The Chairman.]


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I would like a standing vote on estimates 1 and 5, which are for the Senate.


James Hugh Faulkner: For the clarification of the members of the committee the vote is on vote 1 of the estimates of legislature.
The Senate-
Members of the Senate-
1. Allowance in lieu of residence to the Speaker of the Senate, $3,000.
Item agreed to: Yeas, 90; nays, 13.


James Hugh Faulkner: I declare vote 1 carried.
[DOT] (10:10 p.m.)
5. General Administration, $1,604,100.


James Hugh Faulkner: Shall vote 5 carry?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: I wonder if hon. members would agree that the count on vote 1 stand for vote 5?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: No;
please call a vote.
Item agreed to: Yeas, 93; nays, 18.
House of Commons-
Members of the House of Commons-
10. Allowances in lieu of residence to the Speaker of the House of Commons, and in lieu of Apartments to the Deputy Speaker of the House of Commons; allowances to the Deputy Chairman and to the Assistant Deputy Chairman of Committees, $12,500.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
15. Expenses of the Canada-United States Interparliamentary Group, of delegates attending other inter-parliamentary conferences, expenses connected with visits of delegates to and from other legislatures, Canada's share of the expenses of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association including the assessment for membership in the Association, and grants as detailed in the Estimates, $190,800.
Item agreed to.
20. General Administration, $9,192,100.
Item agreed to.
Library of Parliament-
25. General Administration, $723,900.
Item agreed to.
James Hugh Faulkner: That completes the items in the estimates of legislature. The committee will now consider the estimates of the Department of Manpower and Immigration.
December 9, 1968



DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION

[Stage Direction]
(The following items were agreed to:)
Departmental Administration-
1. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $4,771,300.
Item agreed to.
Development and Utilization of Manpower-
5. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including the administration of the Manpower Mobility Regulations and payments in respect of persons who are being afforded occupational training under the Adult Occupational Training Act, $154,449,000.
Item agreed to.
10. Grants, Contributions and Subsidies in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the sub-vote titles listed in the Details of the Estimates, $204,435,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Immigration-
15. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including trans-oceanic and inland transportation and other assistance for immigrants and settlers subject to the approval of Treasury Board, including care en route and while awaiting employment; and payments to the Provinces, pursuant to agreements entered into with the approval of the Governor in Council, in respect of expenses incurred by the Provinces for indigent immigrants and $36,000 for grants to Immigrant Welfare Organizations, $23,692,000.
Item agreed to.
Program Development-
20. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $5,522,600.
James Aloysius McGrath: I am rising on a point of order, Mr. Chairman. You are calling these items much too quickly for us to follow. I suggest you slow down. I don't care if we are here all night. We are voting millions of dollars, and I suggest we slow down our procedure.


James Hugh Faulkner: There is no objection at all to observing the request of the hon. member. Shall vote 20 carry?
Item agreed to on division.
(The following items were agreed to):
25. Grants, Contributions and Subsidies as detailed in the Estimates, $775,000.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Supply-Items Passed
Immigration Appeal Board-
30. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $588,000.
Item agreed to.
James Hugh Faulkner: This concludes the estimates of the Department of Manpower and Immigration. The committee will now consider the estimates of the Department of National Defence.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE

[Stage Direction]
(The following items were agreed to):
A-Department-
Administration-
1. Departmental Administration, Operation and Maintenance including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, and subject to allotment by the Treasury Board, for total commitments of $2,778,219,375 for the purposes of Votes 1, 5, 7, 10, 12, 15, 20, 25 , 30 , 35 and 45 of this Department regardless of the year in which such commitments will come in course of payment (of which it is estimated that $1,079,322,000 will come due for payment in future years) and authority to make recoverable advances under any of the said votes and, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year, subject to the direction of the Treasury Board, in respect of assistance rendered to the United Nations, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization or any member thereof, any member of the British Commonwealth or any provincial or municipal government and in respect of charges for supplies and services as authorized by Treasury Board and made pursuant to regulations under the National Defence Act, $6,465,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
5. Grants to Military Associations, Institutes and other organizations as detailed in the Estimates, $246,375.
Item agreed to.
Emergency Measures Organization-
7.	Administration and Operation, $2,896,800.
Item agreed to.
10. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, including authority to make recoverable advances not exceeding in the aggregate the amounts of the shares of the Governments of the Provinces of the costs of joint programs, $249,000.
Item agreed to.
12. Grants to Provinces and Municipalities for Civil Defence and related purposes and authority to make recoverable advances in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the Treasury Board, $3,750,000.
Item agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
December 9, 1968
Supply-Items Passed
Defence Services-
15. Operation and Maintenance and Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Major Equipment and Development for the Canadian Forces, $1,488,557,000.
Item agreed to.
20. Grants to the Town of Oromocto, $2,000,000.
Item agreed to.
Defence Research-
Defence Research Board-
25. Operation and Maintenance, $32,411,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
30. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $11,044,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
35. Grants and Contributions as detailed in the Estimates, $7,400,000.
Item agreed to.
Mutual Aid-
45. Contributions to infrastructure and the military costs of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the transfer of defence equipment and supplies and the provision of services and facilities for defence purposes in accordance with section 3 of the Defence Appropriation Act, 1950, not exceeding a total of $19,986,000 including the present value of defence equipment or supplies or the cost of services made available by the Canadian Forces estimated in the amount of $4,686,000 and provided by appropriations for those Forces in the current and former years in respect of which, notwithstanding sub-section (3) of section 3 of the said Act, no amount shall be charged to this appropriation or paid into a special account; provided by this vote, $15,300,000.
Item agreed to.
General-
48. To authorize, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act and section 11 of the Surplus Crown Assets Act, the payment into the special account in the Consolidated Revenue Fund referred to in National Defence Vote 48 of the Main Estimates for 1965-66 of revenues received during the current and subsequent fiscal years from the sale during the current fiscal year of surplus buildings, works and land not exceeding an aggregate amount of $10,000,000, $1.
Item agreed to.
Pensions and Other Benefits-
50. Civil Pensions as detailed in the Estimates and to authorize in the current and subsequent fiscal years in respect of members of the Royal Canadian Air Force on leave without pay and serving as instructors with civilian training organizations operating under the British Commonwealth Air Training Plan who were killed, payments to their dependants of amounts equal to the amounts such dependants would have received under the Pension Act, as amended,
[The Chairman.]
had such service as instructors been military service in the armed forces of Canada, less the value of any benefits received by such dependants under insurance contracts which were effected on the lives of such members of the Royal Canadian Air Force by or at the expense of the civilian organization, $10,514.
Item agreed to.
B-Defence Construction (1951) Limited-
55. Expenses incurred by Defence Construction (1951) Limited in procuring the construction and maintenance of defence projects on behalf of the Department of National Defence and procuring the construction of such other projects as are approved by Treasury Board, $2,295,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
James Hugh Faulkner: This concludes the estimates of the Department of National Defence. The committee will now consider the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare.



DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE

[Stage Direction]
(The following items were agreed to:)
Administration-
1. Departmental Administration including recoverable expenditures on behalf of the Canada Pension Plan, and $500,000 for Health Grants and Welfare Grants, under terms and conditions approved by the Treasury Board, for research and demonstration activities in the field of Mental Retardation, $4,466,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Health Services-*
5.	Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including recoverable expenditures on behalf of the Canada Pension Plan and authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year for prosthetic services, $7,249,000.
Item agreed to.
6.	Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $570,000.
Item agreed to.
Health Insurance and Resources-*
8.	Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including grants as detailed in the Estimates, $1,600,000.
Item agreed to.
9.	Grant to the Narcotic Addiction Foundation of British Columbia in accordance with terms and conditions approved by the Treasury Board, $200,000.
Item agreed to.
December 9, 1968
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Items Passed
10.	To authorize General Health Grants to the Provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the Estimates and under terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $40,370,900, $31,196,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
15. To authorize Hospital Construction Grants to the Provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory upon the terms and in the amounts detailed in the Estimates and under terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $33,671,500, $18,000,000.
Item agreed to.
27. Amount to be credited to the hospital insurance supplementary fund established by National Health and Welfare Vote 17a, Appropriation Act No. 9, 1966, for payments in respect of the cost of insured services incurred by a person who, through no fault of his own, ceased to be eligible for and entitled to insured services under the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act, $21,000.
Item agreed to.
Medical Services-*
20. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the total of all amounts to be paid by the Governments of the Provinces and Territories under agreements to be entered on terms approved by the Governor in Council with such Governments in respect of health assistance to persons residing on Indian Reserves other than Indians and to residents of the Territories other than Indians and Eskimos, $40,728,000.
25. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment including payments to hospitals and other institutions which care for Indians and Eskimos as contributions toward the construction of hospitals and related facilities, $1,386,000.
Food and Drug Services-
30. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $8,763,300.
35. Construction or Acquisition of Equipment, $469,000.
Welfare Services-
40. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including recoverable expenditures on behalf of the Canada Pension Plan, and grants as detailed in the Estimates, $9,784,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
41. Family Assistance, under such terms and conditions as may be approved by the Treasury Board, in respect of children of immigrants and settlers, $5,780,000.
45. National Welfare Grants-To authorize, on terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council, National Welfare Grants to Provinces and Welfare Agencies including Schools of Social Work, and to individuals in the form of scholarships and fellowships, $2,450,000.
Medical Research Council-
50. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $303,000.
55. Scholarships and Grants in aid of Research in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council, $26,943,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of National Health and Welfare. The committee will now consider the estimates of the Department of National Revenue.
DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE Customs and Excise-
1. General Administration, Operation and Maintenance including authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year from firms and individuals requiring special services, $61,429,000.


Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Taxation-
5. General Administration and District Offices including recoverable expenditures on behalf of the Canada Pension Plan, $62,725,600.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Tax Appeal Board-
10. Administration Expenses, $211,300.
Item agreed to.
James Hugh Faulkner: This concludes the estimates of the Department of National Revenue. The committee will now consider the estimates of the Department of Public Works.



DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS

[Stage Direction]
1. General Administration, including grants as detailed in the Estimates, $31,015,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
Accommodation Services-
5. Maintenance and Operation of public buildings and grounds, including the provision, on a recoverable basis, of accommodation and related services
[Stage Direction]
December 9, 1968
Supply-Items Passed
for Canada Pension Plan purposes, and authority to provide assistance to (a) the International Civil Aviation Organization in the form of office accommodation at less than commercial rates and (b) the Ottawa Civil Service Recreation Association in the form of maintenance services in respect of the W. Clifford Clark Memorial Centre in Ottawa. $96,707,800.
10. Acquisition of equipment and furnishings other than office furnishings, $1,512,500.
15. Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, public buildings (including expenditures on works on other than federal property); provided that no contract may be entered into for new construction with an estimated total cost of $50,000 or more unless the project is individually listed in the Details of the Estimates, $79,761,800.
Harbours and Rivers Engineering Services-
20. Operation and Maintenance, $8,082,000.
25. Construction or Acquisition of Equipment, $495,400.
30. Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for, harbour and river works (including expenditures on works on other than federal property); provided that no contract may be entered into for new construction with an estimated total cost of $50,000 or more unless the project is individually listed in the Details of the Estimates, $23,905,000.
Roads, Bridges and Other Engineering Services-
35. Operation and Maintenance including authority to make recoverable advances in amounts not exceeding in the aggregate the amount of the operating expenses of the New Westminster Bridge, $7,099,100.
40. Construction, acquisition, major repairs and improvements of, and plans and sites for the roads, bridges and other engineering works listed in the Details of the Estimates, provided that the amounts within the Vote to be expended on individually listed projects may be increased or decreased subject to the approval of Treasury Board, $10,895,000.
Trans-Canada Highway-
50. Construction through National Parks, $212,000. Testing Laboratories-
55. Operation and Maintenance, $1,143,200.
James Hugh Faulkner: This concludes the estimates of the Department of Public Works. The committee will now consider the estimates of the Secretary of State.



SECRETARY OF STATE

[Stage Direction]
(The following items were agreed to:)
Department-
1.	Departmental Administration, including grants as detailed in the Estimates, $1,513,500.
2.	Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment-National Arts Centre, $11,500,000.
[The Chairman.]
Citizenship-
5. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including grants and contributions for language instruction and citizenship promotion, and grants to organizations as detailed in the Estimates, $4,550,200.
Translation-
10. Translation Bureau including $50,000 for grants for post-graduate studies in translation, $4,885,000.
Canada Council-
25. Grant to the Canada Council, within the meaning of section 20 of the Canada Council Act, to be used for the general purposes set out in section 8 of the Act, $20,580,000.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-
30. Grant in respect of the net operating amount required to discharge the responsibilities of the broadcasting service, $151,100,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:) Canadian Radio-Television Commission-40. Salaries and Other Expenses, $1,714,000.
Office of the Chief Electoral Officer-45. Salaries and Expenses of Office, $165,500. Company of Young Canadians-
48. Payment to the Company of Young Canadians, $1,900,000.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
National Arts Centre Corporation-
50. Payments to the National Arts Centre Corporation to be used for the purposes set out in the National Arts Centre Act, $1,078,000.
National Film Board-
55. Administration, Production and Distribution of Films and other Visual Materials, $9,426,300.
60. Acquisition of Equipment, $573,700.
National Library-
65. General Administration including a payment of $140,000 to the National Library Purchase Account for the purpose of acquiring books, in conformity with section 12 of the National Library Act, $1,585,000.
National Museums of Canada-
70. Administration, operation and Maintenance including the payment of $1,050,000 to the National Museums Purchase Account for the purpose of acquiring works of art, artifacts and objects in conformity with section 10 (1) of the National Museums Act, and grants as detailed in the Estimates, $7,198,500.
Public Archives-
75. General Administration and Technical Services, $2,267,000.
December 9, 1968
[Stage Direction]
Public Service Commission-
SO. Salaries and Contingencies of the Commission including compensation in accordance with the Incentive Award Plan of the Public Service of Canada, and the Public Service Bilingual and Bicultural Development Program, $13,391,200.
Some hon. Members:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
85. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, including the Public Service Bilingual and Bicultural Development Program, $614,700.
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation-
L100. Loans in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Governor in Council to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation for the purpose of capital expenditures, $25,000,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Secretary of State. The committee will now consider the estimates of the Solicitor General.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, I rise on a point of order. I wonder whether it is correct for the Chair to say that the committee is going to consider the estimates. Would it not be better to say that we are going to vote on the estimates?


James Hugh Faulkner: That is probably a fair distinction.


James Aloysius McGrath: On the same point of order, would the Chairman call the page number when he calls a new department, to expedite the passage of the estimates?


James Hugh Faulkner: Order, please. If I put it
more slowly, would this serve the same purpose?
[DOT] (10:20 p.m.)


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Chairman, for clarification would Your Honour when calling the first item of any department also call out the page on which that item is to be found?


James Hugh Faulkner: Estimates of the Department of the Solicitor General will now be considered. Item 1 is to be found on page 468 of the blue book and details thereof at page 470.



DEPARTMENT OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL

[Stage Direction]
(The following items were agreed to:)
Department-
1. Departmental Administration including administrative expenses of the Committee on Corrections
Supply-Items Passed
plus such fees, salaries and expenses as may be approved by Treasury Board for members and the panel of consultants and staff named by the Minister to advise and assist the Committee, and grants as detailed in the Estimates, $1,266,000.
Correctional Services-
5. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including compensation to discharged inmates permanently disabled while in Penitentiaries and a contribution of $25,000 to the Township of Brighton, Ontario towards the reconstruction of a road, $48,623,000.
10. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $19,422,000.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police-
National Police Services, Federal Law Enforcement
Duties and Provincial and Municipal Policing
under Contract-
15. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, including grants as detailed in the Estimates and authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year, $67,583,000.
20. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $6,546,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Solicitor General.
The committee will now consider the estimates of supply and services, to be found at page 481 of the blue book. Vote 40 is at page 483.



SUPPLY AND SERVICES

[Stage Direction]
Canadian Commercial Corporation-
40. Administration and Operation, $2,387,000.
["Why didn't you vote against them?\nResolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in."]
James Hugh Faulkner: Shall the item carry?


An hon. Member:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
['On division.']
James Hugh Faulkner: The committee will now deal with the estimates of the Department of Transport, vote 1 to be found at page 496 of the blue book.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT Department-
1. Departmental Administration, $8,292,200.


Thomas Miller Bell: Where the hell is the minister?


James Hugh Faulkner: Is item 1 agreed to?


An hon. Member:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
3.	Reimbursement of the Department of Transport working capital advance for the value of stores which have become obsolete, unserviceable, lost or destroyed, $200,000.
[Stage Direction]
December 9, 1968
Supply-Items Passed
Marine Services-
5. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including tees for membership in the International Organizations listed in the details of the Estimates, pensions, grants and contributions as detailed in the Estimates, the payment of expenses, including excepted expenses, incurred in respect of Canadian distressed seamen as defined in section 306 of the Canada Shipping Act and, in respect of the Canadian Coast Guard Service, authority to make recoverable advances for transportation, stevedoring and other shipping services performed on behalf of individuals, outside agencies and other governments and authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current fiscal year for this Vote not to exceed a total amount of $59,905,800 and to spend revenue received during the current fiscal year, $49,787,800.
10. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land, Vessels and Equipment including payments to Provinces or Municipalities as contributions towards construction done by those bodies, $46,628,000.
Railways and Steamships-
15. Payments to the Canadian National Railway Company (hereinafter called the Company) upon applications approved by the Minister of Transport made by the Company to the Minister of Finance, to be applied by the Company in payment of the deficits, certified by the auditors of the Company, arising in the operations in the calendar year 1968 in respect of the following:
(i)	Canadian National Railways System, (subject to recovery therefrom of accountable advances made to the Company from the Consolidated Revenue Fund)
(ii)	Ferry Services:
Newfoundland Ferry and Terminals; Prince Edward Island Ferry and Terminals and Yarmouth, N.S.-Bar Harbour, Maine, U.S.A., $39,293,000.
20. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works and Land, Dock and Terminal Facilities, including improvements to Terminal Facilities owned by Newfoundland, and of Vessels and Related Equipment as listed in the Details of the Estimates provided that Treasury Board may increase or decrease the amounts within the Vote to be expended on individually listed projects, $8,338,000.
25. Payments, grants and contributions in the amounts and subject to the terms specified in the sub-vote titles listed in the Details of the Estimates, $21,855,000.
Air Services-
30. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including the administration of the Aeronautics Act and Regulations issued thereunder and authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current fiscal year for this Vote not to exceed a total amount of $131,314,600 and to spend revenue received during the current fiscal year, $92,573,600.
['On division.']
James Hugh Faulkner: Is item 30 agreed to?
[The Chairman.]


An hon. Member:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
35. Construction or Acquisition of Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment including national airports (as determined by the Minister of Transport) and related facilities, contributions towards construction done by local or private authorities with respect to such airports; amounts to be paid in settlement of claims for compensation by persons whose property is injuriously affected by the operation of a zoning regulation made under authority of paragraph (j) of subsection (1) of section 4 of the Aeronautics Act, and authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current fiscal year not to exceed, for Airports and Other Ground Services a total amount of $45,404,700, for Radio Aids to Air and Marine Navigation a total amount of $17,268,000 and for Meteorological Services a total amount of $4,496,000, $62,031,500.
40. Grants, contributions, subsidies and other payments as detailed in the Estimates, and Canada's assessment for membership in the World Meteorological Organization, $3,251,000.
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-
45. To reimburse Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for expenditures on housing research and community planning, for the amounts of loans for sewage treatment projects forgiven to a Province, municipality or municipal sewerage corporation, for contributions made for an urban renewal scheme or pursuant to an urban renewal agreement, for losses resulting from the operation of public housing projects, and for net losses resulting from the sale of mortgages from its portfolio, $38,100,000.
['On division.']
Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Chairman, when you call item 50 may I say that we should like a standing vote on Jack Pickersgill's estimates.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.
Canadian Transport Commission-
50. Administration, Operation and Maintenance including the degaussing of Canadian Government ships and Canadian-owned merchant ships of 3,000 gross tons to 20,000 gross tons of Canadian registry or United Kingdom registry if subject to re-transfer to Canadian registry under special intergovernmental arrangement, $4,600,900.


James Hugh Faulkner: The question is on item 50. Is the committee ready for the question?
Item agreed to: yeas, 70; nays, 42.


James Hugh Faulkner: I declare item 50 carried.
55. Payment of operating subsidies as approved by Treasury Board to regional air carriers, $3,000,000.


An hon. Member:: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
December 9, 1968
[Stage Direction]
(The following items were agreed to:)
60. Amount to be credited to the Railway Grade Crossing Fund, in addition to the amount to be credited to the Fund under the Railway Act in the current fiscal year, for the general purposes of the Fund and, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to authorize the making of commitments totalling $48,967,000 (in addition to any commitments in respect of which amounts are appropriated under this or any other Act) in the current and subsequent fiscal year, $10,000,000.
65. Steamship Subventions for Coastal Services as detailed in the Estimates, $11,033,300.
National Harbours Board-
70. Payments to National Harbours Board, subject to the provisions of section 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, to meet reconstruction and capital expenditures during the calendar year 1968 as detailed in the Estimates, $7,450,000.
75. Payment to the National Harbours Board to be applied in payment of the deficit (exclusive of interest on advances authorized by Parliament and depreciation on capital structures) expected to be incurred in the calendar year 1968 in the operation of the Jacques Cartier Bridge, Montreal Harbour, $430,000.
80. To authorize expenditures by the National Harbours Board, either by itself or on behalf of or in co-operation with others for the construction of retaining walls along the banks of the St. Charles River between the proposed dam at the mouth of the river and Scott Bridge at Quebec Harbour; such amounts to be credited to the National Harbours Board Special Account and to constitute an absolute grant without interest, notwithstanding sections 28 and 29 of the National Harbours Board Act, $2,000,000.
St. Lawrence Seaway Authority-
85. Operating deficit and capital requirements of Canals and Works entrusted to the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority with the approval of the Governor in Council, and to authorize, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act or any other Act, the disbursement by the Authority of revenues derived from the operation and management of such Canals and Works, $2,400,000.
90. Payment to the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority, upon application approved by the Minister of Transport, made by the Authority to the Min-inster of Finance, to reimburse the Authority in respect of the Welland Canal deficit incurred by the Authority during the calendar year 1968, $9,855,000.
['On division.']
Some hon. Members:: On division.


Thomas Miller Bell: 
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Department of Transport.



James Hugh Faulkner: The committee will now deal with the estimates of the Treasury Board to be found on page 544 of the Blue Book.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Item 10 has been carried.


James Hugh Faulkner: The first vote is vote 15 on page 545.
National Research Council-
15. Administration, Operation and Maintenance, $45,033,000.


Gerald William Baldwin: On division.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
(The following items were agreed to:)
20. Construction or Acquisition o t Buildings, Works, Land and Equipment, $5,399,000.
25. Scholarships and Grants in aid of Research, $59,017,000.
30. Assistance towards Research in Industry under terms and conditions approved by the Governor in Council including authority, notwithstanding section 30 of the Financial Administration Act, to make commitments for the current year not to exceed a total amount of $7,300,000, $6,100,000.
James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the estimates of the Treasury Board.

December 9, 1968
Supply-Items Passed


DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
James Hugh Faulkner: The committee will now deal with the estimates of the Department of of Veterans Affairs. These estimates are to be found on page 556.
Administration-
2. Departmental Administration, $5,742,000.
Welfare Services, Allowances and Other Benefits-
5. Administration, including the expenses of the War Veterans Allowance Board, $6,596,400.
20. War Veterans Allowances, Civilian War Allowances and Assistance in accordance with the provisions of the Assistance Fund Regulations, $108,680,000.
25. Other Benefits, including Education Assistance, Hospital Insurance Premiums or payments in lieu thereof re recipients of War Veterans Allowance and Civilian War Allowance, repayments under subsection (3) of section 12 of the Veterans' Rehabilitation Act in such amounts as the Minister of Veterans Affairs determines, not exceeding the whole of amounts equivalent to the compensating adjustments or payments made under that Act, where the persons who made the compensating adjustments or payments received no benefits under the Veterans' Land Act, or where, having had financial assistance under the Veterans' Land Act, are deemed by the Minister on termination of their Veterans' Land Act contracts or agreements to have derived thereunder either no benefits or benefits that are less than the amounts of the compensating adjustments or payments, and grants as detailed in the Estimates, $3,446,200.
Pensions-
20. Administration, $3,201,000.
25. Pensions for Disability and Death, including pensions granted under the authority of the Civilian Government Employees (War) Compensation Order, P.C. 45/8848 of November 22, 1944, which shall be subject to the Pension Act; Newfoundland Special Awards; Burial Grants; and Gallantry Awards (World War II and Special Force), $225,229,000.
Treatment Services-
30. Operation and Maintenance including authority, notwithstanding the Financial Administration Act, to spend revenue received during the year for hospital and related services, $53,780,000.
35. Hospital Construction, Improvements, Equipment and Acquisition of Land including contributions to Provinces and other authorities towards such costs, $6,569,000.
33. Treatment and Related Allowances, $3,030,000.
Soldier Settlement and Veterans' Land Act-
40. Administration of Veterans' Land Act; Soldier Settlement and British Family Settlement; upkeep of property, Veterans' Land Act, including engineering and other investigational planning expenses that do not add tangible value to real property, taxes, insurance and maintenance of public utilities; and to authorize, subject to the approval of the Governor in Council, necessary remedial work on
[The Chairman.]
properties constructed under individual firm price contracts and sold under the Veterans' Land Act and to correct defects for which neither the veteran nor the contractor can be held financially responsible, and for such other work on other properties as may be required to protect the interest of the Director therein, $5,414,000.
45. Grants to veterans settled on Provincial Lands in accordance with agreements with Provincial Governments under section 38 of the Veterans' Land Act, grants to veterans settled on Dominion Lands in accordance with an agreement with the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development under section 38 of the Veterans' Land Act and grants to Indian veterans settled on Indian Reserve Lands under section 39 of the Veterans' Land Act, $110,000.


James Hugh Faulkner: That concludes the business of the committee of supply for the time being. Shall I rise and report certain resolutions-


Thomas Miller Bell: On a point of order, I just want it to be recorded in Hansard for all posterity to see that the government, with its huge majority, has crammed through billions of dollars without the opposition having a chance to say anything about it.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


An hon. Member:: Why didn't you vote against them?
Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.



WAYS AND MEANS

[Stage Direction]
House in committee of ways and means, Mr. Faulkner in the chair.
Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Resolved, That towards making good the supply granted to Her Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending the 31st March, 1969, the sum of $1,575,007,182.08 be granted out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[DOT] (10:30 p.m.)
James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Chairman, before the resolution is concurred in, let the record show that if the government has its way this is the last time the house will have an opportunity to have a discussion on a supply vote.
Resolution reported and concurred in.
Mr. Drury thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-141, for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service for the financial year ending March 31, 1969.
December 9, 1968


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Faulkner in the chair.
On clause 2-
Donald MacInnis: Mr. Chairman, might we have an explanation of this from the President of the Privy Council.


James Hugh Faulkner: It is my understanding that there is no debate allowed at this point.


Donald MacInnis: On a point of order, Mr. Chairman; I fully understand that the Prime Minister refuses to allow ministers to come into the house, but I now see a minister refused the opportunity to speak when he rises to his feet.


[Stage Direction]
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 3 to 6 inclusive agreed to.
Clause 1 agreed to.
Schedules A and B agreed to.
Thomas Miller Bell: Mr. Chairman, while you are contemplating, I should just like to ask whether this is not a new record of western democracy so far as billions of dollars being spent?


An hon. Member:: A million a minute.
Bill reported.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: When shall the said bill be read a third time?


Some hon. Members:: Now.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: the third reading of the bill.


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


Gerald William Baldwin: On division.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the President of the Privy Council what business we will be conducting tomorrow, and when he proposes to introduce the bill dealing with the anti-dumping legislation?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Yes, Mr. Speaker. We will be dealing with the first two items under the name of the hon. member for Grenville-Carleton, firstly the motion for concurrence in the fourth report of the special 29180-236*
Business of the House
committee on procedure of the house. I expect that the bill on anti-dumping will be considered during the course of this week and that the government will be ready for final approval. We will have to consider the matters under the ways and means resolution preceding it. The exact time in that regard will depend on the time it takes to conclude the procedure committee report.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the house do now adjourn.
Motion agreed to and the house adjourned at 10.40 p.m.
[The following Items were passed in Committee of Supply this day:]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 12, 15, 17, 20, 25 , 30, 35 , 40, 45, 50, 51, 55, 60, 65, 70.

[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 15, LI.

[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25.

[Stage Direction]
5a.
[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 20, 25, 33, 34, 35, 40, L35, L40, L45, L50, L55, L60, L65, L70.
[Stage Direction]
20, 25, 30, 35, 40.
[Stage Direction]
1.
[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25.
[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30.
[Stage Direction]
December 9, 19S8
Items Passed
[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 15. 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 50, 55.
[Stage Direction]
1, 2, 5, 10, 25, 30, 40, 45, 48, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, L100.
[Stage Direction]
1, 5, 10, 15, 20.