1969-04-30

[Stage Direction]
Eighteenth report of Standing Committee on Finance, Trade and Economic Affairs-Mr. Gaston Clermont (Gatineau).
[Editor's Note: The text of the foregoing report appears in today's Votes and Proceedings.]


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, hon. members will recall that the house made an order referring the report of the Canadian National Railways and Air Canada to the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications. As the house will also recall, the 1968 Annual Report of the C.N.R. is now available, and if the house is agreeable I should like to recommend an order whereby the report of the C.N.R. for the year ended December 31,
1968,	and the report of the Canadian National Railways Securities Trust for the year ended December 31, 1968, both tabled on April 24,
1969,	be referred to the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications. If the house is generally agreeable to that, perhaps that could be made an order of the house.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: It is so ordered.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Hon. Milchell Sharp (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I promised
the other day that I would make a brief statement on the passport situation. The passport office is going through its peak period-12,500 applications were received last week-and the present volume of applications is expected to continue with only slight easement until mid June.
I realize that this situation has created inconvenience for some members of the travelling public, and the following measures have been taken to cut down the delays:
(a)	We are in the process of adding additional accommodation to the passport office which will improve the efficiency of operations and provide room for additional staff. Simultaneously as the program of renovation proceeds, we are adding additional staff;
(b)	Nine departmental staff who in the past have had experience in passport work have been drafted on a temporary basis. In addition, during the course of the next two weeks some 27 students who worked in the passport office last summer will be returning to their jobs;
(c)	The passport office staff has increased its daily overtime and will work Saturday until the present situation is resolved. The implementation of this policy takes into account individual staff problems, and we hope that Saturday work will not be required beyond the present week.
(d)	Three additional telephone lines, for a total of six, have been installed in the special ternoon, has been on the amendment moved
(e)	The staff of examiners has been reorganized in groups of five, each working under a leader. During the course of this week each group leader will be equipped with a telephone. If a form is not properly filled, he will be able to speak to the applicant by telephone to let him know what more information or documentation is required. This should cut down on time consuming exchanges of correspondence;
(f)	During the course of a few days I intend to launch an advertising campaign to assist the public to obtain passports without undue delay.
May I add that all applicants could assist the passport office by initiating their applications at an early date, by taking greater care

April 30, 1969
External Affairs
in the completion of their applications, and by insuring that they have submitted the necessary documentation, photos and fee.
I should perhaps add answers to a couple of questions that were asked me and which I promised to answer. The first was a question about the repayment of refunding of fees to persons who cannot obtain requisite service or who cannot obtain their passports. If the passport office is unable to issue a passport for various reasons, or an applicant fails within a reasonable period to reply to a request for additional information or documentation to substantiate his entitlement, the fee is automatically refunded after due warning by two follow-up letters.
If an applicant informs the passport office that he is forced to cancel his travel plans, photographs and any documents submitted will be returned and the fee refunded. If in such a case an application has reached the stage in production where the document is being prepared, or already has been issued, the document is however forwarded. I suggest that at this stage it would be unreasonable for the passport office to refund the fee in view of the administration costs that have been invested. In any event, the passport when issued is normally valid for five years. The chances are, therefore, that the cancelled trip might be taken in the season or in an ensuing year.
[DOT] (2:10 p.m.)
There was also a question about payment of overtime to the staff of the passport office. There is no authorization to pay clerical employees for overtime at rates higher than those already established by the Treasury Board. When collective bargaining agreements have been ratified by the union membership, overtime will be compensated at time and a half and employees working on Sundays and holidays will be paid at a higher rate.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweather@Fundy-Royal: I think Members of Parliament will agree that despite all the difficulties under which they work the employees of the passport office have shown patience in the face of what amounts to intolerable working conditions and hours. It is because the passport office enjoys such a low priority-I say this with great frankness-in the affairs of the department, that these conditions have not been remedied long ago.

I hope that when the minister begins his advertising campaign people will be told in plain language how to go about obtaining not only birth certificates but citizenship. There has been a crisis in this division for some months. Many hon. members have hesitated to raise this matter, feeling that to do so might only add to the problems which the overworked division is experiencing. I am glad the minister has finally recognized that conditions are altogether intolerable. Members of all parties have been subjected to forceful importuning over the last few months by citizens whose mail, telegrams or telephone calls have not been answered by the passport office.
I regret the program did not include the simple step of opening offices in other cities in Canada, as announced by the government some months ago. Heaven knows, there are plenty of facilities in our major cities for the receipt of passport applications. The government might follow the example set for some years in the United Kingdom, by decentralizing its passport system so that people could obtain passports in many places across Canada.


Mr. Max Saltsman (Waterloo):: The calm statement we have just heard from the minister belies the absolute chaos which exists in the passport office at this moment. We are facing an emergency situation and the government has been caught completely unprepared.
It is a situation which is intolerable. There are more people travelling today than ever, and these people are being seriously inconvenienced. At every airport in this country there are cases of passengers waiting for passports which have not arrived and which will not arrive.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Max Saltsman: I do not know the reason for those comments from members on the other side. Apparently they do not admit there is any kind of urgency here, though I believe every member of this house knows that there is an emergency. Indeed there is a tendency for this house to bog down because Members of Parliament are almost totally occupied looking after passport problems. Something has to be done about this.
I was over at the passport office yesterday, and the way in which those girls have to
April 30, 1969

Questions
work under existing conditions is absolutely inhuman. How those girls can stand it, I don't know. Telephones are ringing and the girls are running around. The more confusion that exists, the fewer passports issued. No relief is in sight as far as I can see.
The idea of regional offices, whatever their merit may be, does not offer any solution; I wonder whether it could be a solution anyway. In regard to unemployment insurance the government asked the public to use the mails. It is now talking of reversing the process.
I do not think that the government does have a policy or has one clue about what to do in this situation. The minister talks of refunding the money paid for passports. Is he also going to refund the money people lose because they could not make a charter flight? There are more significant expenditures involved than just the passport fee.
The passport office was designed to operate at a nice, leisurely pace. That leisurely pace has now disappeared. I hope the minister will reply to the suggestion that an emergency does exist, and that he appoint an emergency controller for the passport office immediately to investigate what the problem in the office is, and get the situation cleared up. The minister's statement today is not one designed to instil any confidence for the future.


Mr. Gilbert Rondeau (Shefford):: Mr. Speaker, if we were not aware of the facts in respect of the passport problem, we could believe that the opinions expressed by the hon. member who has just resumed his seat are exaggerated. But, it happens that we have had to help several persons to obtain their passports. We, of the Ralliement Creditiste, are experiencing the same difficulties and we must address the same criticisms to the minister because he has not taken in time the necessary steps to prevent such occurrences.
On the other hand, we are not blaming the officials of the passport office who, up to now, have fully co-operated with us.
However, since there has been in the last few months such an increase in the number of applications for passports, the minister's statement was, I think, too long in coming. We also believe that he did not resort to the proper means to alleviate the situation, because the problem is growing worse every month.


Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister) moved: for leave to introduce Bill C-192, to amend the National Housing Act, 1954.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first time and ordered to be printed.

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

Mr. Caoueite: 1.	Has the government considered, or is it considering, or will it, in the near future, consider the inauguration of a ferry service between Berthier and Sorel?
2.	Has a study to this effect been made or will such a study be made?
3.	If not, for what reasons?
4.	If so, what are the government's plans?
5.	At the present time, what means of transportation are available to these citizens to enable them to travel between Sorel and Berthier?
6.	At the present time, what is the shortest route between Sorel and Berthier?
7.	How many people from Berthier are presently working in Sorel?
8.	How many people from Sorel are presently working in Berthier?


Hon. James Richardson (Acting Minister of Housing):: The Canadian Transport Commission advises as follows: 1. A ferry service is on operation between Berthier (lie St. Ignace) and Sorel.
2.	See answer to question one.
3.	See answer to question one.
4.	See answer to question one.
5.	Ferry service operating all year long.
6.	One mile and a half via ferry.
7.	Ferry operators report that 250 to 300 people work in Sorel and Tracy.
8.	Ferry operators report approximately 15.


LAW OF THE SEA LEGISLATIVE CHANGES
Mr. Harding: 1.	What specific legislative changes did Canada make as a result of becoming a signatory to the
8158

April 30, 1969
Questions
Final Act of the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea in 1958?
2.	What steps have been taken to define Canada's territorial sea?
3.	What steps have been taken to define Canada's inland waters?


Mitchell William Sharp: 1. Canada has not taken any specific legislative action as a result of becoming a signatory to the Final Act of the 1958 United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. However, in 1964 Parliament passed the Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Act which took into account certain provisions of the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone. This statute also necessitated the passage of certain consequential amendments to the Aeronautics Act, the Canada Shipping Act, the Coastal Fisheries Protection Act, the Criminal Code, the Customs Act and the Fisheries Act. Certain provisions of the Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea are also reflected in the Oil Pollution Regulations of September,
1968.
2.	Canada's territorial sea has been defined by the Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Act and also by an initial list of geographical coordinates for the establishment of straight baselines pursuant to Order-in-Council P.C. 1967-2025 of October 26, 1967.
3.	It is presumed that the term "inland waters" refers to the internal waters of Canada. Pursuant to the 1964 Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Act these include the waters on the landward side of the baselines of the territorial sea of Canada. These waters have been defined in the same manner described in the reply to part 2 above.


MILK AND BUTTERFAT PRODUCERS
Mr. Korchinski: 1.	How many registered milk and butterfat producers were there in the last three years in each province?
2.	For the last three years, what amount of subsidy was paid to these producers in each province (a) for the production of whole milk (b) for the production of butterfat?
3.	For the last three years, what was the maximum production upon which a subsidy was paid, in each province?
4.	In each of the years that the phasing out policy has been in effect, how many producers in each province received payment and what amount was paid?
5.	In each of the last three years, including
1969,	on what date was the dairy policy announced?


Hon. H. A. Olson (Minister of Agriculture):: 1.
	1966/67 1967/68	1968/69
P.E.I.	3,868 3,490	3,031N.S.	2,503 2,212	1,759N.B.	3,214 2,836	2,322Que.	53,342 49,660	45,116Ont.	36,515 32,208	28,080Man.	16,333 14,476	12,086Sask.	23,459 20,979	16,980Alta.	24,940 22,767	19,104B.G.	887 829	612Canada	165,061 149,457	129,0902.	1966/67	Cream	Milk$	$P.E.I.	808,703.36	387,523.05N.S.	333,223.94	237,855.30N.B.	701,916.64	220,140.91Que.	4,816,263.56	26,657,361.29Ont.	4,992,027.00	22,320,115.99Man.	3,024,544.11	324,444.31Sask.	3,199,704.22	18,842.90Alta.	5,189,488.73	1,576,059.60B.C.	97,731.98	1,454,678.79Canada	23,163,603.54	53,197,022.141967/68	P.E.I.	1,026,431.71	577,664.53N.S.	437,329.31	132,177.59N.B.	854,399.99	268,112.30Que.	5,090,675.93	36,127,794.04Ont.	6,087,841.06	27,890,330.81Man.	3,756,356.16	623,012.89Sask.	3,938,387.89	74,427.25Alta.	6,585,409.79	2,142,867.16B.C.	143,337.19	964,925.87Canada	27,920,169.03	68,801,312.441968/69	P.E.I.	1,045,579.06	530,683.23N.S.	339,812.47	94,697.57N.B.	815,566.59	224,294.84Que.	4,285,748.88	39,080,470.78Ont.	5,659,471.39	27,454,880.43Man.	3,501,757.99	727,958.64Sask.	3,317,906.70	17,119.65Alta.	6,339,677.07	2,067,029.46B.C.	89,732.28	1,068,311.06Canada	25,395,252.43	71,265,445.663. No	maximums.	
April 30, 1969
4.
1968/69 No. of	Amount of
Producers	Payment

P.E.I.	763	120,784.13N.S.	1,138	106,616.09N.B.	825	120,346.22Que.	5,343	1,039,347.98Ont.	3,693	654,856.39Man.	4,996	578,551.67Sask.	10,141	924,432.85Alta.	7,624	868,956.34B.C.	267	32,009.41Canada	34,790	4,445,901.085. March	22,	1967	March	29,	1968	March	31,	1969


CO-OPERATIVES AS A HOUSING INVESTMENT BANK
Mr. Beaudoin: Are discussions being held to establish cooperatives which will become a housing investment bank as was recommended in the Hellyer Task Force Report?


James Armstrong Richardson: Discussions have been held with representatives of the National Labour-Cooperative Committee regarding the establishment of a Co-operative Housing Foundation designed to promote and provide technical assistance by local and regional housing associations serving the interests of low and moderate income groups.
While the supply of mortgage funds is being kept under review no action has been taken towards the establishment of new forms of lending institutions.


RETURN OF CENTENNIAL MEDALS
Mr. Robinson: 1.	How many Centennial Medals awarded to recipients have been returned to the government and are they to be awarded to other Canadians and, if so, who will be the recipients?
2.	Have all Centennial Medals been distributed and, if not, how many are available for distribution and what are the terms of reference for distribution?
3.	What units and/or formations did not receive any allotment of Centennial Medals and why were awards not made and is it because the units did not have any worthy (a) Officers (b) N.C.Os. (c) Men?
4.	Was the allocation of Centennial Medals to military units awarded in accordance with the "actual strength" or "paper strength"?
29180-517J
Questions
5.	Did the Officers of any militia unit in Canada receive more than three Centennial Medals and, if so, which units?
6.	Were all Centennial Medals allotted to the militia distributed and, if not, how many are still available for distribution?


Mr. Yves Forest (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council):: I am informed by the Departments of National Defence and Secretary of State as follows: 1. Eleven Centennial Medals were returned. These medals were not reallocated but are maintained as a reserve from which replacement of lost medals may be made.
2.	Distribution of the Centennial Medal is complete.
3,	4 and 5. See reply to your question 737, Hansard dated 25 November, 1968, pages 3125-6, and supplementary reply tabled 15 January, 1969-(Votes and Proceedings page 590 refers).
6.	Yes.


STARCH DIVERSION PROGRAM
Mr. MacDonald (Egmonl): 1.	What effect is the starch diversion programme announced by the Minister of Agriculture on March 21 likely to have on the potato producers of Prince Edward Island?
2.	What amount of potatoes will be purchased from the Prince Edward Island potato growers and what is the expected price the growers will receive?
3.	What other forms of assistance are being contemplated in order to assist the Prince Edward Island potato growers in this regard?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: 1, 2 and 3. Storage holdings of potatoes in the Maritime region were in excess of the five-year average, resulting in depressed producer prices. A starch diversion program was authorized under the Agricultural Stabilization Act as a means of removing potatoes from the market and stimulating producer prices in the Maritime area. The market is being carefully watched, but there are no current plans for other forms of assistance.


SEPT-ILES AIRPORT FIRE-FIGHTING EQUIPMENT
Mr. McCIeave: 1.	Was an Air Canada Viscount recently destroyed by fire at Sept-Iles and, if so, what firefighting equipment was available to the Department of Transport at the Sept-Iles Airport?
2.	Were all vehicles using Foam fully equipped with foam during the fighting of the fire and, if not, what was the amount carried and the amount that could be carried?

April 30. 1969
Questions


James Armstrong Richardson: 1. (a) Yes, Air Canada Viscount CF-THK was destroyed by fire April 7, 1969; (b) One Department of Transport Crash Rescue Truck equipped with 1,000 lbs. of dry chemical extinguishing agent. A pick-up vehicle was also available, carrying 23-5 gallon cans of foam concentrate and portable foam equipment. The City of Sept-Iles, on request, responded with one structural fire truck carrying 500 gallons of water and one 2,500 gallon Water Tank Truck.
2. (a) The Department Crash Rescue Truck is not designed for foam application, therefore, was not equipped with foam concentrate. The foam concentrate and portable foammaking equipment carried on the pick-up vehicle was used in conjunction with the City of Sept-Iles fire fighting vehicles. As these vehicles are not designed for major foam applications, they are not equipped with a foam concentrate carrying capability; (b) The Department of Transport's major foam fire fighting vehicle at Sept-Iles Airport, which carries 800 gallons of water and 90 gallons of foam concentrate, was out of service for maintenance at the time of the incident. A NOT AM (notice to airmen) advising that this vehicle was out of service was in effect at the time of the incident.


C.B.C.-PERMISSION FOR COMMERCIALS
Mr. Broadbenl: 1.	Is the C.B.C. considering eliminating its traditional ban on commercials in news, public affairs and special events programs and, if so, what are the reasons for the above review?
2.	Is the government considering making representations to the C.B.C. in order that the ban on commercials for the above areas be not lifted?


Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Secretary of State):: 1. I am informed by the C.B.C. that while C.B.C. news and public affairs programs have never been commercially sponsored, commercial messages have occasionally been carried in public affairs and special events programs. Extension of this practice has been considered, as a source of revenue to meet rising costs, but no decision has been taken.
2. No.


* DISCUSSIONS ON U.S. AIRBORNE WARNING SYSTEM
Mr. Lewis: 1.	How long have discussions been proceeding between Canada and the United States in relation to the proposed Airborne Warning and Control
System?
IMr. McCleave.]
2.	Who has represented Canada at these discussions?


Mr. D. W. Groos (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, the answer to the first part of this question is, since 1966, and to the second part, discussions and briefings on the proposed U.S. airborne warning and control system have been included in discussions regarding cooperative defence matters by the Canada-U.S. permanent joint board on defence and between planning staff members of Canada's Department of National Defence and the United States department of defence.


P.E.I.-STAMP VENDING MACHINES
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	How many postage stamp vending machines are in operation in Prince Edward Island and what is the location of each?
2.	How many are operated by use of new twenty-five cent coins?


Hon. Eric W. Kierans (Minister of Communications):: In so far as the Post Office Department is concerned:	1. (a) Twelve;
(b) Alberton, one; Charlottetown, two; Kensington, one; Montague, one; Port Borden, three; Souris East, one; Summerside, two; Slemon Park, one.
2. At present none, but a modification programme is expected to be completed by 10 May, 1969.


TRAVELLING CLAIMS OF ARMED SERVICES PERSONNEL
Mr. Sallsman: Has the Department of National Defence rejected the recommendations by the Auditor General, as referred to in his 1968 Report, page 68, paragraph 119, that the Department require travelling claims submitted by service members to be supported by a special certificate of an officer who has knowledge of the trip being undertaken?


David Walter Groos: It is
impractical administratively and economically for an officer to have personal knowledge that the claimant did in fact complete the journey in the manner claimed. It is considered that the existing audit procedures should reveal cases of fraudulent claims, and the disciplinary action which could be taken affecting careers and pension entitlements is a reasonable deterrent.
April 30, 1969


STUDY ON USE OF STAFF CARS
Mr. Bailsman: 1.	When Is it anticipated that the special study of the use of staff ears and chauffeurs by senior officers of the Department of National Defence, that began in 1966, will be completed?
2.	On completion, will the Minister table the above report?
3.	What are the reasons for the long delay in the completion of this study?


David Walter Groos: 1 and
3.	Canadian Forces administrative transport is established, purchased and accounted for as a capital resource to enable the forces to fulfil their role and commitments. The requirements are reviewed continually and the present review, which is nearing completion, is to ensure that the use and allocation of these vehicles, with particular reference to staff cars, satisfy new guidelines for economy and efficiency. This study has been lengthy in that it embraces not only the use of staff cars but has been expanded to encompass a review of existing policy regarding the employment of all administrative transport used by the Canadian Forces.
2. No.


NEGOTIATIONS IN PORT OF MONTREAL STRIKE
Mr. Forfin: 1.	Where do Judge Gold's negotiations stand regarding the dispute between shippers and stevedores in the Port of Montreal?
2.	Does the government intend to introduce special legislation regarding the problems of shippers and stevedores in the Port of Montreal and, if so, when will such legislation be introduced?
3.	What steps is the government taking to avoid having shippers abandon the Port of Montreal?


Mr. Jim McNulty (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour):: 1. Conciliation proceedings involving the Shipping Federation of Canada and the International Longshoremen's Association, were brought to a successful conclusion. A Memorandum of Agreement was signed by the parties in Montreal on 8 April, 1969.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


DEPLETION ALLOWANCE CLAIMS
Mr. Harding: 1. What is the total amount of depletion allowances claimed by (a) oil and natural gas companies (b) all other mining companies in each of the years 1960 to 1968?
Questions
2.	Are these statistics broken down according to individual company (a) by size of assets, employment, etc. (b) by nationality of ownership and, if so, what are these statistics?
3.	What is the total amount of exploration and development expenditures claimed for tax purposes by (a) oil and gas companies (b) all other mining companies for each of the years 1960 to 1968?
4.	What controls, if any, does the government have to ensure that deductions claimed for exploration and development purposes by oil and gas companies have in fact been spent for those purposes?


Hon. Jean-Pierre Cote (Minister of National Revenue):: (a)	(b)
1. Year	$ Million	$ Million1960	20.7	76.91961	14.8	87.11962	25.2	77.01963	40.2	85.21964	40.7	115.51965	61.0	136.01966	68.0	109.01967	Not	available1968	Not	available2. These statistics are not available in *	form requested	in (a) or (b).	(a)	(b)3. Year	$ Million	$ Million1960	118.9	72.21961	174.5	46.81962	155.0	52.01963	233.2	41.11964	296.7	42.51965	306.0	64.01966	346.0	121.01967	Not	available1968	Not	available4.	Qualified Department of National Revenue assessors carry out field audits to test check the accuracy of the income tax returns filed. In order to verify the amount claimed for exploration and development purposes the checking would include an examination of documentary evidence and on occasion a physical inspection of the properties involved.


SUGAR COMBINE INQUIRY
Mrs. Maclnnis: 1.	Has an application been received in the name of Roberta Gray et al for an inquiry under Section 7 of the Combines Investigation Act into the practices of Atlantic Sugar Refineries, Canada and Dominion Co., and St. Lawrence Sugar Refineries and if so, what was the date of such application?
2.	Has an investigation been started and if so, on what date and, if not, for what reason?

April 30, 1969
Questions
3.	At what date Is it anticipated that this investigation will be completed?
4.	Will the report arising out of this investigation be made public?
Hon. Ron 3asford (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs): 1. Yes, the application is a matter of public knowledge. Section 8(a) of the Combines Investigation Act requires the Director of Investigation and Research to institute an inquiry on application under section 7 and he is carrying out his statutory duty. The general practice in regard to the matter of inquiries under the Combines Act, however, is that no information is given out as to v/hether a particular inquiry is being pursued with respect to a particular group of companies or individuals unless and until a report is published as the statute may require.
2, 3 and 4. See answer to 1.


DEFENCE COLLEGE LOCATIONS
Mr. MacLean: 1.	Are there any plans to change the location of any of the Defence colleges and, if so (a) is it the intention to combine two or more of these colleges at one location, and (b) what is the location?
2.	Are there any plans at the present time to close down any of the Defence colleges?


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


SOUTH SASKATCHEWAN DAM-LAND RESERVED FOR RECREATION
Mr. Kaplan: 1.	How many acres of land forming part of the South Saskatchewan Dam project are reserved for recreational purposes?
2.	How much did the federal government contribute toward the cost of acquisition of the recreational land and what percentage was this amount of the total cost of such land?


Mr. Russell C. Honey (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Forestry and Rural Development):: Mr. Speaker, in respect of the first part of the question, this is a provincial responsibility and any information would need to be requested from the province of Saskatchewan. In respect of the second part, the federal government did not make any contribution toward the cost.


PATHOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF CHEMICAL WARFARE
Mrs. Maclnnis: 1.	Is there any department of our government concerning itself with the pathological and ecological consequences of chemical and biological warfare, which have such profound implications for the health of the Canadian people and for the whole chain of life's processes?
2.	Will the Canadian Government keep the public informed about the results of this research?
3.	Will the government place this research under the control of agencies such as the Medical Research Council and the Department of National Health and Welfare?
4.	Could Canada co-operate with the World Health Organization in this type of research and in disseminating information about it?


David Walter Groos: 1. No.
2, 3 and 4. Not applicable.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Skoberg: 1.	For the years 1960, 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968 what were the advertising expenditures for each government department or agency?
2.	Is there a competitive tendering system for the advertising budgets of government departments or agencies?
3.	If not, what system is used in the awarding of advertising contracts?
4.	Is there any co-ordination among government departments or agencies in order to achieve efficiency in advertising expenditure allocation?
5.	If so, who are the members of this co-ordinating group and what are their specific functions and objectives?
6.	Is the government considering the establishment of a Crown corporation for public advertising expenditures?
Return tabled.


EXHIBITIONS-TORONTO AND VANCOUVER
Mr. Foriin: What expenditures or contributions have been made each year since 1965 by the various departments of the federal government in connection with exhibitions in Toronto and Vancouver?
Return tabled.


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Nanaimo- Cowichan- The Islands):: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I should like to draw the government's attention to starred questions 1964 and 1965 which were placed on the order paper on
April 30, 1969

April 15. Neither of them require any statistical data or research and I should hope that answers can be obtained at an early date.


Mr. John L. Skoberg (Moose Jaw):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to draw the government's attention to Question 933, which was put on the order paper on December 3; Question 1121 which was placed on the order paper on December 20; Question 1256, which was placed on the order paper on January 27, and Question 1323 which was placed on the order paper on February 4. I should like to know whether I can expect answers to these questions, unless there is some reason for us not wanting to know why we should not be given this information in respect of-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I could respond in respect of Questions 933. An examination of a number of departments, for example, the Department of Transport, indicates that it would require several thousand dollars to prepare this information. Under the circumstances I wonder whether the hon. member would be prepared to withdraw certain parts of the question so an answer can be prepared more easily?


John Leroy Skoberg: Mr. Speaker, I was contacted to see whether I would do this, but I believe the information should be made available?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: At any expense whatsoever?
[DOT] (2:20 p.m.)



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS

Yves Forest: Mr. Speaker, notices of motion Nos. 102 and 114 are acceptable to the government.

GIBSON FINANCING STUDY Motion No. 102-Mr. Salfsman:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the study of Canadian export credit financing by J. W. Gibson.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Motions for Papers
FORT CHURCHILL, MAN.-MARINE TERMINAL Motion No. 114-Mr. Anderson:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the Treasury Board Minute 642800, being an agreement between the Department of Public Works and Imperial Oil Limited concerning marine terminal facilities at Fort Churchill, Manitoba.
Motion agreed to.
Yves Forest: Notices of motion Nos. 105, 107 and 108 are acceptable to the government subject to the usual reservations concerning privileged papers and authorization of the government authorities concerned.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations or conditions expressed by the hon. parliamentary secretary, is it the pleasure of the house that notices of motions numbered 105, 107, 108 be deemed to have been adopted?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



REPORTS TO SENATE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE POLICY-PAGES 4380 TO 4382

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 105-Mr. Orlikow:
That an Order of the House do issue for copies of each report referred to in the submission of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to the Senate Special Committee on Science Policy on February 26, 1969, listed on pages 4380 to 4382, No. 31 of the proceedings of the Senate Committee.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 107-Mr. Orlikow:
That an Order of the House do issue for copies of each report referred to in the submission of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to the Senate Special Committee on Science Policy on February 26,	1969, listed on
page 4439, No. 31 of the proceedings of the Senate Committee.
Motion agreed to.

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 108-Mr. Orlikow:
That an Order of the House do issue for copies of each report referred to in the submission of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to the Senate Special Committee on Science Policy on February 26, 1969, listed on pages 4395 to 4396, No. 31 of the proceedings of the Senate Committee.
Motion agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
April 30. 1969
Motions for Papers
Yves Forest: Mr. Speaker, would Your Honour call notices of motion Nos. 88, 92, 93, 97, 98 and 104?
I ask, Mr. Speaker, that the remaining notices of motion be allowed to stand.

DIPLOMATIC RECOGNITION OF THE VATICAN Motion No. 88-Mr. Howard (Skeena):
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of all telegrams, correspondence and other documents received by the Prime Minister or any other member of the government since January 1, 1969 relating to the proposal that Canada extend diplomatic recognition to the Vatican.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to the house last week, it is estimated that between January 1 and March 28 of this year 10,275 letters responding to this inquiry have been received. In view of the fact that this would require the reproduction of over 20,000 copies of the document at a heavy expense to the treasury, I wonder whether the hon. member would be agreeable to withdrawing the motion?


Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Far be it
from me to put public servants to such an amount of work as a result of such a carelessly thought out proposal as the one advanced by the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker, so I will gladly withdraw it.
CANADIAN TERRITORIAL AND INLAND WATERS Motion No. 92-Mr. Harding:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of a map of Canada showing both territorial waters and inland waters claimed by Canada.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, the government intends in the near future to issue maps illustrating additional straight base lines which will be drawn along Canada's coasts. It is also intended to amend the Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Act to permit the establishment of fisheries lines in certain areas without affecting the limits of Canada's internal waters and territorial sea. It would not be in the Canadian interest for the government to issue further maps of Canada's possible maritime claims at this time. On this basis I ask the hon. member if he will agree to withdrawing his motion?


Mr. Randolph Harding (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to have permission to have the matter transferred for debate.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that it shall be
transferred for debate?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Transferred for debate.
LAW OF THE SEA-ARCTIC ISLANDS BASELINES Motion No. 93-Mr. Harding:
Than an humble Address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this House a copy of all notes exchanged between Canada and the United States concerning the drawing of baselines between the islands of the Canadian Arctic pursuant to the provisions of the Final Act of the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, any communications on this subject form part of confidential exchanges between the government of Canada and the government of the United States. Such communications are privileged. It has not been the practice to produce them. I therefore ask the hon. member to withdraw his motion.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN CANADA DEPOSIT INSURANCE AND B.C. RESPECTING COMMONWEALTH TRUST

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 97-Mr. Harding:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of all correspondence between the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Province of British Columbia, or any of its agencies, concerning the operations of the Commonwealth Trust Company since its incorporation.
Mr. H. E. Gray (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I am informed the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation considers correspondence in its files with member institutions to be of a confidential nature. I am informed this is consistent with the policy followed in this regard for the Bank of Canada, the Industrial Development Bank and other Crown corporations that report to the Minister of Finance. I therefore ask the hon. member if he would be willing to withdraw his motion.


Randolph Harding: Mr. Speaker, I should like to have permission to have this matter transferred for debate.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that it shall be transferred for debate pursuant to Standing Order 48?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Transferred for debate.
April 30, 1969	COMMONS



CORRESPONDENCE BETWEEN CANADA DEPOSIT


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 98-Mr. Harding:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of all correspondence between the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Commonwealth Trust Company concerning the operations of the Commonwealth Trust Company since its incorporation.
Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: Mr. Speaker, I ask that the remarks I made with regard to the preceding notice of motion apply to this one as well. For the reasons expressed, I again ask the hon. member if he would be willing to withdraw this notice of motion?


Randolph Harding: Mr. Speaker, I should like to have permission to have this matter transferred for debate.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed that it shall be transferred for debate pursuant to Standing Order 48?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Transferred for debate.



EFFECT OF WAGE PARITY IN AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 104-Mr. Saltsman:
That an Order of the House do Issue for a copy of the study by Economist David F. Smith of the Mechanical Transport Branch, Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, on "The Effects of Canada-United States Wage Parity Upon the Cost Structure of the Canadian Automotive Industries".
Mr. Yves Fores! (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council): Mr. Speaker, I am informed by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce that the study referred to in this motion is an internal departmental document which is privileged, and will therefore not be tabled. The minister wants to point out to the hon. member that this work is not an official departmental study but one carried out by a university student. In addition, this document contains confidential information received from the industry. On this basis, the minister hopes the hon. member will withdraw his motion.
Max Saltsman: Mr. Speaker, I regret I cannot accept the explanation given by the government. I should like to have permission to have this matter transferred for debate.
DEBATES	8165
Inquiries of the Ministry Mr. Speaker: Is it agreed that it shall be transferred for debate pursuant to Standing Order 48?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Transferred for debate.



UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION-ACTION TO PREVENT FRAUD

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 70-Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the Unemployment Insurance Commission's cost-benefit study with respect to the operation against fraud referred to in the answer to Part 4 of Question No. 1,074, as set out in Sessional Paper No. 126-D, tabled on Wednesday, February 5, 1969.
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I make a brief reference to Motion No. 70? I had a few words regarding this motion with the Minister of Labour. Subject to my right to redraft it, I ask permission to have it withdrawn.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.


Mr. Speaker:: Shall the remaining notices of motion be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[DOT] (2:30 p.m.)



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Prime Minister in his capacity as minister in charge of housing. Does the housing bill which received first reading this afternoon, and which we have not yet seen, contain a provision to remove the ceiling on interest rates charged on
N.H.A. loans?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: The bill will be in the hands of hon. members within a few minutes, Mr. Speaker.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Meantime, Mr. Speaker, we can hope for the best.



REMOVAL OF ROADBLOCKS ON URBAN RENEWAL AND PUBLIC HOUSING

Robert Lorne Stanfield: I would now like to ask a supplementary question. With regard to people
8166	COMMONS DEBATES	April 30, 1369
Inquiries of the Ministry on very low incomes will the Prime Minister say when the roadblocks on urban renewal and public housing projects will be removed so that Canadians can get ahead with the work of adequately supplying housing for these people?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I believe the minister did report that in many cases the so-called roadblocks have been removed after discussion with the authorities concerned and many projects have received approval, but there are still some under consideration.



ISSUANCE OF NEW GUIDELINES

Mr. Robert McCleave (Halifax-East Hants):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the acting minister in charge of housing if he would advise when the new guidelines for public housing will be issued?


James Armstrong Richardson: Mr. Speaker, the guidelines on public housing are being prepared by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and when these guidelines have been received and approved by the government they will be made public.



MEASURES TO BENEFIT LOW INCOME GROUPS

Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, so that there is no ambiguity this time I would like to direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. Will he say whether the government plans any measures at this session which will bring housing within the reach of a large number of Canadians to whom subsidized public housing is not available, and yet who earn less than $8,000 per year and therefore are effectively prevented from buying, building or even renting improved housing? I am speaking about measures in addition to those concerning limited dividend companies, which I understand are in the housing bill.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Surely, Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is anticipating the debate on that bill. The first reading of the bill was given a few moments ago. It will soon be in front of hon. members and this will be the answer to all these questions.



CITIES INCLUDED IN URBAN RENEWAL SCHEME

Mr. Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether to direct

my question to the Prime Minister or to the Minister without Portfolio in charge of housing. I think I will try the Minister without Portfolio. Now that some cities have had the freeze removed from their urban renewal schemes may I ask which cities are these, and have they been advised of any federal commitment?
Kon. James Richardson (Acting Minister of Housing): Mr. Speaker, with regard to urban renewal projects the position is really the same, that guidelines are being prepared and they will be made available to all municipalities as soon as the government policy is determined.



THE CANADIAN ECONOMY


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister. In view of the serious deterioration in the prairie economy due to the decline in farm income resulting from declining grain prices and reduced delivery quotas, may I ask the Prime Minister has the government completed its consideration of the various proposals submitted to it by farm organizations, and how soon will the appropriate ministers be able to announce the specific measures that the government intends to take to augment western farm income before the situation becomes more desperate?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I will discuss this with the ministers, Mr. Speaker.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Then, Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister whether any consultations have been held between his government and the governments of the prairie provinces regarding what steps should be taken to meet the very serious economic situation on the prairies?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Well, we have received many representations from various authorities, including the provincial governments, Mr. Speaker.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: As1 a further supplementary question, could the Prime Minister give the house any idea what proposals have been received from the provincial governments and what
April 30, 1969

action the federal government intends to take with respect to these proposals?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: As the hon. member must know, Mr. Speaker, they cover a variety of subjects from two-price wheat to various forms of subsidy to the grain producers. They are all being given consideration, and they have been the subject of answers in this house at various times.
Mr. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The
Islands): Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the situation is pressing, may I ask the Prime Minister when the prairie provincial governments and the western farmers can expect some statement of policy from the government as to what it proposes to do about the situation?



REDUCTIONS IN WHEAT EXPORTS- OIL QUOTAS

Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, this is a supplementary and somewhat related question. In light of the serious reductions in wheat exports and the imposition of export quotas on petroleum exports to the United States of America will the Prime Minister now agree to set forth on motions this week, his government policy in reference to these serious matters, so that the industries of western Canada can make decisions which will be good for the nation?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Not this week, Mr. Speaker.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: If he will not do it this week, when can we expect some decision on the deterioration of the economy of western Canada?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, as is indicated by the increase in demand for passports the economy is booming more and more-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.



PROMOTION OF GRAIN SALES IN ASIA

Mr. A. P. Gleave (Saskatoon-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. During his present trip to Asia is the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce putting some emphasis on grain sales and markets?


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: Mr. Speaker, I hope that I may sug-

Inquiries of the Ministry gest to the Prime Minister that he might alter that last answer of his.


Some hon. Members:: Question?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The right, hon. gentleman has to ask a question.


John George Diefenbaker: I find it difficult, sir, to understand why any minister, or the Prime Minister-


Some hon. Members:: Question?


John George Diefenbaker: -can make these gratuitous observations-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Is the right hon. gentleman rising on a point of order?


John George Diefenbaker: Yes, Mr. Speaker. With great deference to you, I find it very difficult to understand why we on this side of the house are to be denied answering gratuitous statements such as the Prime Minister and other ministers are making from time to time.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. With equal deference to the right hon. gentleman I have to tell him that unfortunately the rules do not allow the present procedure at this time. This is a question period, and the long established practice is that hon. gentlemen in the opposition may ask questions but may not make statements.


John George Diefenbaker: Again on a question of order, does that mean that ministers can do that which other members in the house cannot do? If it does, then I take the strongest possible objection to it. It is developing day by day that the ministers make their smart Aleck interruptions and statements-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Prime Minister this question. In view of the fact that the other day in an interview he spoke of the western people as being those who are forever crying about something- either too much production or too little, that the country is too dry or too wet-will he send somebody out west to look into the serious situation there, which cannot be laughed off by the government? Will he do something
8168
April 30. 1969

Inquiries of the Ministry about it instead of postponing, procrastinating and doing nothing but laugh at the situation in western Canada?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: There was no indication the government was not doing anything for the people of this country. I was just describing a condition of human nature.


John George Diefenbaker: In western Canada?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Yes, and in the House of Commons. Some people are complaining all the time. When I said what I did about the west I said it was a condition occurring in all parts of Canada. Naturally people want the government to improve conditions in all areas and the government has to answer as it can these demands.



FARM IMPROVEMENT LOANS ACT


Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. While the economy booms will the Minister of Finance and the government consider what they are going to do for the western farmer? Will the Minister of Finance consult with the banks in order to stop the banks foreclosing on farmers who cannot make their payments?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of Finance):: my friend has any specific instances, I would be very interested to have him bring them to my attention and I will certainly take them up with the Bank of Canada.



ARTS, LETTERS AND SCIENCES NATIONAL ARTS CENTRE OPERATING DEFICIT

Mr. Ed Schreyer (Selkirk):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the President of the Treasury Board. I should like to ask the minister if our economy is so booming that we can afford to subsidize by half a million dollars a two-week opening festival at the Arts Centre.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member's question is hardly a supplementary question. I do not think it should be asked at this time.



INCOME TAX


Mr. Gerard Laprise (Abitibi):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a question to the Minister of National Revenue.
Has the minister received from his Quebec counterpart a request for the refund of the social development tax from January 1, 1969, up to the date medicare will be implemented in the province of Quebec, and if so-


Hon. Jean-Pierre  Cofe@Minisier of National Revenue: No, Mr. Speaker, and I do not expect to receive such a request. There might be an exchange of letters between the federal and provincial ministers of Finance.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Mr. Colin D. Gibson (Hamilton-Wentworfh):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can the minister inform us how many passports have been issued since January 1, 1969?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.


CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Mr. Ambrose Hubert Peddle (Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador):: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Acting Minister of Transport. Will the minister investigate and report to the house the details surrounding an accident on April 25 in which a Canadian National bus, one of the fleet which is to replace the reliable and accident-free rail passenger service in Newfoundland, left the highway 12 miles west of Corner Brook while carrying 35 passengers, plunged over an embankment, coming to rest on its side, striking two large boulders which completely penetrated the side of the bus-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. We have only 40 minutes.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Ambrose Hubert Peddle: Mr. Speaker, I apologize, but since there have been so many accidents with this service, and are apt to be many more, I

April 30, 1969	COMMONS
thought I should properly identify the particular accident for the minister. I have just about finished my question, Mr. Speaker, and this is a very pertinent part of it. It did strike two large boulders which completely penetrated the side of the bus and injured nine passengers, necessitating hospital treatment, and rendered the $60,000 bus a total loss.


James Armstrong Richardson: Mr. Speaker, this accident is
being investigated and I will be pleased to report to the hon. member.


NATIONAL DEFENCE
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: Mr. Speaker, this question is for the Minister of National Defence. In light of the statements of General Lyman Lemnitzer to the effect that there is no justification for any military reduction in Europe at this time, will the Minister of National Defence say whether the government of Canada has formed an assessment of the military and political situation in Europe different from that of the NATO military command? If so, will the minister undertake to make an explanatory statement in this regard to the house at an early date?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member I understand is not asking the minister to make a statement now. The question is acceptable only to the extent that the hon. member is asking the minister to indicate whether he will make a statement, and when.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Well, in view of Your
Honour's very correct observation about the question I realize that perhaps there is a slight misunderstanding. I wonder if I might be permitted to put the question in this way: Will the minister undertake to make a statement to the house at an early date concerning the first part of the question I asked him, and can he indicate when he might be in a position to make the statement?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Minister of National Defence):: I think first of all I should investigate the interview to find out exactly what was said. After having done that I suppose I could advise whether or not it would be advisable to make a statement.


Mr. G. W. Baldwin (Peace River):: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a supplementary question? After the Minister of National Defence has investigated and obtained a copy of this
DEBATES	8169
Inquiries of the Ministry statement will he table it in the house, so that all members will have an opportunity to examine it?


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: I do not believe it was in written form. I think it was in the form of questions and answers.


Gerald William Baldwin: The questions and answers are what we want-the answers particularly.


STATEMENT BY GENERAL ALLARD IN LONDON, ONTARIO
Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Since the minister has been so kind as to give this undertaking will he now tell us if General Allard, the chief of Staff, was speaking on behalf of the government last Saturday in London, Ontario-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member cannot ask a question about statements made outside the house. He can ask the question directly, but not in relation to a statement made outside the house.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: Perhaps I could rephrase the question. Did the Minister of National Defence authorize the remarks purportedly made by the chief of staff in London, Ontario in which the chief of staff was quoted as saying:
I don't give a damn. You tell the university professors they are not going to destroy Canada.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I think the ruling applies to the second portion of the question as well as to the first.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I just wanted to know whether that is government policy.


A.B.M. SYSTEM-REQUEST FOR STATEMENT OF GOVERNMENT POLICY
Hon. George Hees (Prince Edward-Has-tings):: Mr. Speaker, as nearly six weeks have passed since the Prime Minister discussed the United States A.B.M system with the President of the United States, has the government had a chance to give full consideration to this matter and is the Prime Minister now in a position to advise the house and the country what the government's position is on this important matter?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the government has been considering it. I hope the opposition has been doing the same thing. I know the debate is going well in the United States and it would be unwise for Canada to intervene in it.
April 30, 1969

Inquiries of the Ministry


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, of course the Prime Minister did not answer my question. He has not told me whether the government is in a position to state its position. Since the government seems to find it increasingly difficult to make up its mind on matters-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member is making an argument. Would he ask the question directly.


George Harris Hees: Would the Prime Minister and his government consider taking some form of mental laxative to free up their mental processes so that they would be able to give an opinion on these important matters, so that the country will know in what direction they are trying to go.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Prince Edward-Hastings knows that when the Speaker has the floor he should resume his seat.


AIR CANADA
Mr. David Lewis (York South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct this question to the Minister of Transport and/or the Minister of Labour, whichever of them has been dealing with the matter. I should like to know whether such minister has received any protests from the non-striking unions of Air Canada, or whether he has in some other way been made aware of their dissatisfaction with the fact that all union employees who are not on strike have been laid off without pay, and that non-union employees have been put on their jobs? If so, has he discussed the matter with Air Canada, and what is being done about it?


Hon. Bryce S. Mackasey (Minisler of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, representations have been made to my department, and possibly to the Acting Minister of Transport. We have informed the particular groups involved that if they think they have a grievance within the confines of their collective agreement, they are quite capable of taking whatever action is necessary. In other words, if they think their collective agreement is being violated, having in mind the provisions of the I.R.D.I. Act, they should place the problem before arbitration.


David Lewis: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. If there are cases, as I am informed there are, where the collective agreement may not apply or have the required provisions, would the minister discuss with Air Canada the simple justice of retaining on the


job people who held the job previously, rather than replacing them with people who are not members of the bargaining units?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member's question is in the form of a submission.


HEALTH AND WELFARE
Mr. Barry Mather (Surrey):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Having in mind that tomorrow marks the start of national mental health week in Canada, would the minister consider increasing financial aid in this very important area, particularly because there has been in recent years a great increase in the rate of mental ailments in Canada, even prior to the present government's taking office?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Hon. John C. Munro (Minisler of National Health and Welfare):: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I would advise the hon. member that I would be pleased to take that matter into consideration.


CANADIAN ACTION IN MARKETING OF ANTIBIOTICS
John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, I should like to reply to a question put to me on April 16 by the hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowi-chan-The Islands (Mr. Douglas) with reference to antibiotics. A study group was set up in the United States to study particular antibiotic drugs and their efficacy on the United States market prior to 1962. It was felt that many claims were made for these drugs which experience might not bear out as being true and accurate. The manufacturers of those antibiotics have been advised that they will have an opportunity to prove the claims made before the drugs are removed from the market. I think approximately 80 antibiotics are involved. As of now these drugs are still on the United States market. Our Food and Drug Directorate are watching the situation closely and working closely with the food and drug people in the United States in order to determine whether we will have to take similar action.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that this investigation revealed that some 78 drugs containing

April 30. 1969
antibiotics exposed the patient to unnecessary risk, is the minister's department following this aspect of the investigation with a view to taking whatever action is necessary to protect the public?


John Carr Munro: Yes, we are, Mr. Speaker. As I have indicated, our information, obtained after close work with the food and drug people in the United States, would indicate that they are not alarmed to the degree indicated by the hon. member. The investigation being carried out by the food and drug people in the United States may show that the claims made in respect of these drugs are not borne out by the facts. But no serious harm is being done. For this reason they have not as of this date removed the drugs from the United States market.


NATIONAL DEFENCE
Mr. Rene Matte (Champlain):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a question to the Minister of National Defence.
According to the Canadian Teachers' Federation, the minister refuses to consult the teachers before making changes in contracts for teaching in national defence department schools overseas. Is that statement true?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member cannot ask a minister to confirm or to deny a statement. Furthermore, I point out to him that a similar question has been asked yesterday.


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, as one who admits that he is fond of the Don Messer show, I would ask the Secretary of State whether in view of the widespread requests from all parts of Canada for the continuation of this program, the C.B.C. has given consideration, either finally or interimly, to the continuance of the show.


Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, I shall inquire of the C.B.C. about its views on the matter. Every day, I know, we forward to the C.B.C. representations made to us by listeners. I also know that
Inquiries of the Ministry the C.B.C. takes them under consideration. I shall ask C.B.C. officials to what conclusions they have come and whether they intend to revise their decision or not. I will be happy then to make their answer known to the right hon. member.


John George Diefenbaker: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the rather lengthy delay on this matter, would the minister communicate with the C.B.C. today and give tomorrow on motions a report of the situation? Many people are asking that this show be continued, and they are not particularly pleased with the fact that Black Panthers and the like apparently have the inside track with the C.B.C.


Mr. Barney Danson (York North):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Secretary of State. Will the minister ask the C.B.C. to allow Don Messer to fiddle while the hon. member for Prince Albert-


George Harris Hees: "Burns" is the word.


Barnett Jerome Danson: Yes, while the hon. member for Prince Albert burns.


HEALTH AND WELFARE
Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe North):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of National Health and Welfare based on a question I asked him on April 16 regarding the availability of anti-rubella vaccine for the innoculation of expectant mothers, to prevent foetal abnormalities. Has the minister the answer to this question?


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, I would advise the hon. member for Simcoe North that my department has under review several investigational new drug submissions for antirubella vaccine. We expect that one of these vaccines will be cleared for clinical trial in Canada in the next few weeks.



ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE


Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breion-East Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Justice which might be considered an economic question. Is he contemplating any prosecutions in respect of the
April 30, 1969

Inquiries of the Ministry recovery of bonds stolen recently from a Montreal firm? These bonds, worth approximately half a million dollars to the company, are supposedly worth $10 million.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member-


Malcolm MacInnis: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I think the hon. member should have asked the supplementary question first, because my understanding of the situation is that the first question need not have been directed to the Minister of Justice.


Malcolm MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I was asking the Minister of Justice about the arrest of anybody connected with the theft of half a million dollars worth of bonds. However, I direct my supplementary question to the Minister of National Revenue and ask whether his interest has not been aroused by the fact that negotiable bonds could be held in this manner, as they were before the theft.



FISHERIES


Mr. Mark Rose (Fraser Valley West):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Fisheries. Can he inform the house of any decisions reached between the federal and provincial governments over the proposed Shuswap River diversion plan?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It is difficult for the Chair to understand whether this is a matter of some urgency. If it is an urgent matter, the minister might like to reply at this time.


Hon. Jack Davis (Minister of Fisheries and Forestry):: Mr. Speaker, that important matter is under active consideration. The minister responsible is the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources.



FORESTRY


John (Jack) Davis: Mr. Speaker, I should like to answer a question asked yesterday by the hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands (Mr. Douglas), concerning the export of logs from British Columbia to Japan. I would tell
[Mr. Maclnnis (Cape Breton-East Richmond).)
the hon. member that exports to Japan for the first three months of this year were down about 25 per cent. Most of these logs are of substandard quality and of no interest to our sawmills. They are not a potential source of employment. Others come from the Peace River reservoir which will be subject to flooding. The last approved by our log export committee was in December, 1968. Shipments made since that date have been made in fulfilment of contractual obligations entered into last year and under permits granted prior to January 1, 1969.
As a final point of information I should like to say that exports of logs from British Columbia have never exceeded 2 per cent of the annual timber cut, and exports from the western United States are ten times our own.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that the figures released by the British Columbia forestry department indicate an increase of some 2.6 million board feet for the first three months of this year and a sevenfold increase from Vancouver Island-Crofton and Chemai-nus-from 1.5 million to 10.5 million board feet in March compared with one year ago-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Will the hon. member ask his question, please.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Would the minister undertake to have the figures checked to see whether or not there has been any violation of the voluntary ban on log exports and, if so, make it a mandatory ban?


John (Jack) Davis: The answer is yes. The statistics which I gave today have been checked today with the British Columbia forestry service. Nevertheless we will look into the subject again.


Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the minister's reply with regard to the Shuswap River water diversion, would he indicate to the house whether he has any responsibility for salmon conservation in that particular area?


John (Jack) Davis: I certainly agree that the federal government does have a direct interest and responsibility in respect of salmon conservation in the Fraser River system, and hence in the Shuswap area as well.
April 30, 1969



HOUSING


[Stage Direction]
Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the
Opposition): Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask either the Prime Minister or the Acting Minister of Transport whether it is the intention of the government to introduce any other legislation in this session respecting housing, in addition to the bill introduced by the Prime Minister this afternoon?
Donald Stovel Macdonald: There is no additional legislation beyond that which we have set out in the program previously. The hon. member is referring to the bill with regard to the National Housing Act.



HEALTH AND WELFARE

[Stage Direction]
MEDICARE-OPTING OUT BY QUEBEC Hon. D. S. Harkness (Calgary Centre): I
have a question for the Minister of Finance. Has the minister, or anyone else speaking on behalf of the government of Canada, advised the government of Quebec that they could opt out of the federal medicare system before entering it, but still get the money?
Edgar John Benson: No,
Mr. Speaker.



FINANCE


Mr. Ralph Stewart (Cochrane):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. Since the minister has announced that there will be new regulations governing the trust companies can he assure the house that there will no longer be a double standard on the part of lending institutions, which discriminates against capital investment in northern Ontario?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I am not sure whether the question is one of urgency. Perhaps the hon. member might consider the advisability of debating it at the time of adjournment.

Inquiries of the Ministry Standing Committee on Transport and Communications, would the house leader give consideration to referring to that committee by an order of the house the very important matter of automobile safety standards and highway safety in Canada?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: I might be prepared to discuss it with my colleagues. I might indicate that there is a bill amending the Canada Shipping Act which will have to be referred to the committee, in addition to the harbours study which should be considered in the committee. So it looks asi though the committee's timetable will be very full for the next two months.


Mr. McGraih:: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the house leader ensure that the committee will study this matter before the legislation is brought in?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: I am prepared to discuss this with my colleagues to see whether it fits into the timetable. I understand that the legislation referred to by the hon. member concerns automobile safety.



ARTS, LETTERS AND SCIENCES NATIONAL ARTS CENTRE OPERATING DEFICIT

Edward Richard Schreyer: Mr. Speaker, I hope you will agree that the President of the Treasury Board should be held accountable. Therefore I should like to ask the minister whether specific and prior approval was given to the group of people who decided on a course of action which will result in a deficit of $500,000 for the two-week opening festival of the arts here in Ottawa?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member suggested that the minister is accountable, and I do not disagree with this. But the hon. member is asking a question which was asked yesterday, I believe, or recently. At the time I suggested to the hon. member, a suggestion which I repeat at the present time, that his question is normally of the type that is put on the order paper or discussed at the time of adjournment.



HIGHWAY SAFETY


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the President of the Privy Council in his capacity as house leader. While the house awaits concurrence in the fifth and sixth reports of the



INCOME TAX


Mr. Roch La Salle (Joliette):: Mr. Speaker, when the Minister of National Revenue answered the question of the hon. member for Abitibi a while ago, I understood him to say
April 30, 1969

Inquiries of the Ministry that the question should have been asked of the Finance Minister.
As the Quebec Finance Minister has stated that he would ask for the transfer of the 2 per cent social development tax, I ask the minister whether he has received from Quebec an official request to that effect?


Edgar John Benson: do not know whether it can be called an official request, but the idea has been put forward several times.



AIR CANADA


Mr. Charles H. Thomas (Moncton):: Mr. Speaker, my question arises out of the statement made in the house on Monday by the Minister of Labour that the air strike did not constitute an emergency because there were alternative methods of transportation available. I direct my question to the Acting Minister of Transport. Since the railways and bus companies are not able to handle the extra traffic and are not providing a satisfactory alternative service between the mari-times and the rest of Canada, what action is the minister taking to assist other carriers to provide a suitable service?


James Armstrong Richardson: Mr. Speaker, I think we have already given that answer in the house. The President of the Canadian Transport Commission has said that the commission will grant any reasonable requests for licences. My office has been in touch with the President of C.P.A. expressing parliament's concern and the government's concern about some of the goods that are not moving, and he has agreed to give all help possible. I think the government is doing all it can in the emergency.


Charles Humbert Thomas: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is the acting minister aware that C.P.A. does not provide service in this area, and that the railways will not book sleeping car accommodation?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Robert Jardine McCleave: I have a supplementary question for the Acting Minister of Transport. Would he cause the government to re-examine its present policy, which prevents the development of a second coast to coast national air line service?



STRIKE OF MECHANICS-INQUIRY AS TO PROGRESS IN NEGOTIATIONS

Mr. Norman A. Cafik (Ontario):: I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Labour. Will he take this opportunity to report to the house on what is happening in the negotiations between Air Canada and its employees?


George Harris Hees: The minister is getting up more slowly every day.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: I plead guilty to having been in Montreal last night because I thought it would be the last occasion this spring when there would be a National Hockey League game in that city.
With regard to the hon. member's question, may I say that I feel a little better as the result of the public statements made both by the union and by Air Canada that they welcome an opportunity to resume negotiations. I hope that in the next few days, of their own volition and by their own initiative, they will seize the opportunity to resume negotiations.



FISHERIES


Mr. John Lundrigan (Gander-Twillingale):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries. Can the minister indicate whether he has received any unfavourable response to his recently announced program on Atlantic salt codfish?


John (Jack) Davis: So far the response has been one of general approval.


John Howard Lundrigan: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is it the government's aim to have the prices received by fishermen approximate the target prices set by the government regardless of the prices paid by merchants?


John (Jack) Davis: We have sought the advice of fishermen who are on the advisory committee in this program and my understanding is that the price schedules are meeting general approval.


John Howard Lundrigan: Can the minister indicate whether the government would be willing to revise the formula in the event of a depressed price being received this year?
April 30. 1969


John (Jack) Davis: The answer is no. However, the formula is this: Whatever the price, the government will make up half the difference between that price and the target price, which is a high price, as the hon. member knows.


Malcolm MacInnis: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I rise to express my appreciation to the government for providing me with an answer to a question posed on April 22, which was not asked by me in the first place. I would ask the government to give the same consideration to a question I asked one month earlier, on March 21.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, a week or so ago I asked the Secretary of State for External Affairs for information regarding the proposal made by him to the government of Nigeria. I wonder whether on his next appearance in the house he would make a statement on motions with regard to the proposal which was made?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I would be prepared to answer the question but I do not know whether it would be worthy of a statement on motions.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed, from Tuesday, April 29, consideration of Bill C-150, to amend the Criminal Code, the Parole Act, the Penitentiary Act, the Prisons and Reformatories Act and to make certain consequential amendments to the Combines Investigation Act, the Customs Tariff and the National Defence Act, as reported (with amendments) from the Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs, and motion No. 27, Mr. Laprise.
Mr. Speaker:: Order. Order.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: I thank you very much to have called the members to order, Mr. Speaker, because we must consider such an important bill as earnestly as possible. Some members may not take this bill too seriously. As far as we are concerned, we feel that this bill as well as the amendments
Criminal Code moved these past days are of the utmost importance.
That is why we study them so carefully and so seriously. We put forward every argument we can possibly find, including some opinions expressed by experts and by the public at large who may unfortunately be governed in a few months' time by so odious a bill.
Yesterday, we were discussing amendment No. 27 proposed by the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise), and pertaining to abortion in the case of a female person, pregnant, of full age or married, or of a person under age provided she gets the written consent of her parents or guardian.
The amendment provides that a female person under age who would be pregnant must obtain her father's consent for abortion.
Parental authority over minor children has always been widely recognized in all areas. When the father is deceased, the consent of the mother or the guardian is required; that goes for driver's permits and for the right to enter liquor stores.
The father must always remain the guide, the protector of his minor child, male as well as female. I base my argument on the Civil Code which clearly establishes the responsibility of the father, the mother or the tutor if the father is dead or cannot act.
At page 215 of the Civil Code, and more particularly at section 1053 dealing with offences and quasi-offences, it can be read and I quote:
Every person capable of discerning right from wrong is responsible for the damage caused by his fault to another, whether by positive act, imprudence, neglect or want of skill.
Section 1054 of the Civil Code of the province of Quebec as well as similar provisions in the Common Law clearly establish, and in a more detailed manner, the parents' responsibility towards minor children. Section 1054 reads as follows:
He is responsible not only for the damage caused by his own fault, but also for that caused by the fault of persons under his control and by things he has under his care.
The father, or, after his decease, the mother, is responsible for the damage caused by their minor children;
Mr. Speaker, there is no doubt that the parents have authority over their children and are responsible for them. What is beyond me is that the amendment of the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise) corrects the Civil Code.

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code
Under the above-mentioned clauses, the Civil Code recognizes the authority of the father, but the Criminal Code, as the result of the proposal made today, abolishes the authority of the father over his minor child.
That is why I feel the amendments on abortion are an infringement of the Criminal Code on the Civil Code. It is an infringement of the federal government on the authority of the provinces and by accepting the amendment of the hon. member for Abitibi, we would confirm the paternal authority conferred by the Civil Code.
As for abortion, the amendment if adopted would have for effect to show that the Criminal Code cannot destroy what is already recognized by the Civil Code. The Civil Code establishes the authority of the father over his minor children, but at the present time the Criminal Code does not require the father's consent to the abortion of his female children.
The Minister of Justice (Mr. Turner) should be told, once more, that if he does not accept this amendment, he will be violating the constitution which provides the provinces with the authority in civil matters. Thus, he is creating the proper environment for separatism in the provinces.
Moreover, section 186 of the Criminal Code states and I quote:
Every one is under a legal duty as a parent, foster parent, guardian or head of a family, to provide necessaries of life for a child under the age of sixteen years;
Thus, the Criminal Code holds a head of a family criminally responsible for not providing necessaries of life for his children under age. Thus, a head of a family would be held criminally responsible if one of his children under age died of hunger.
On that point, the Criminal Code is clear. If the Minister of Justice were willing to accept the amendment moved by the hon. member for Abitibi, once more we would be confirming the father's authority with regard to abortion.
Section 186 of the Criminal Code indicates that a person is fully grown up at the age of sixteen years. We have ample documentation showing when maturity begins.
On page 262 of a book entitled Adolescence, there is some definition indicating when a child can be considered mature.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)

Every parent... in regard to sex must have clear ideas of what he himself considers mature attitudes 
toward sex. He must know what he believes to be the values and goals in sex relations. He needs to be able to suggest ways in which such values and goals can be attained, what self-control and self-discipline will be necessary, and what satisfactions can be achieved

And further on it is said, and I quote: [English]
What attitudes toward sex are mature? A mature person sees sex in the total setting of life itself-

However, Mr. Speaker, a person is only mature when able to understand all the responsibilities involved in life. If under the terms of the Criminal Code, one allows a 14, 15 or 16-year-old girl to have an abortion, it is obvious that this right is given to someone who is not yet capable of judging all the implications of her act.
Here are other reasons why we ask that the father's consent be compulsory for the abortion of a pregnant girl. The father should have his say regarding children under age.
A girl under age who would not have to get her father's consent will use every possible means to conceal her love affairs from him; she will take all the necessary steps for her abortion because she wants to hide the truth from her father.
The father should have the right to consent to the abortion of a girl under age, otherwise he will be unaware of those facts, and thus the girl will be encouraged to carry on in the same foolish way and make the same mistakes. Why? Because she does not yet have all the required knowledge and is still unaware of the full implication of her responsibilities in connection with life.
I hope that the bill will not be passed without this amendment being agreed upon, for if we granted as much freedom to children under 21, it would mean giving them the green light to lead a loose life that leads to moral decay. Nobody will be able to supervise the young girls who are still unaware of all the responsibilities of life and have their own way without their father's consent.
We claim, Mr. Speaker, that this amendment is in order. If it were not adopted, then there would exist a contradiction between the Civil Code in which the fathers' responsibility towards his child under 21 is made clear and the Criminal Code which for the time being does not enable young girls to consult their father in order to be allowed to undergo abortion.
April 30, 1969

Many other reasons could be put forward to justify the fact that the father should be consulted when a girl under 21 wants to undergo abortion.
I could quote a few cases which unfortunately arose. In fact, young girls or other persons have induced young girls to undergo abortion so as to obtain a better share of the estate, to inherit greater amounts of money. I would not like this afternoon to deal with all these matters for my hon. colleagues will be able to throw much more light on the facts than I.
I would like to remind the Minister of Justice of the fact that if we adopt the bill in its present state, the provinces will have the right to state that the Criminal Code abolishes the authorithy of the father vested in him by the civil law of the provinces.


Hon. John N. Turner (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I want to speak specifically to amendment 27. This proposal would deprive a woman of the provisions of clause 18 relating to therapeutic abortions if she happened to be unmarried or under 21 and did not receive parental consent to a therapeutic abortion. The policy of clause 18 is to restrict therapeutic abortions purely to medical considerations, and such considerations ought not to be confused, as this amendment proposes, with age or consent.

As for the provincial law, I must point out to the hon. members of the Ralliement credi-tiste who are well aware of it, that the subsection 7 under section 237 of the law reads as follows:
Nothing in subsection 4 shall be construed as making unnecessary the obtaining oi any authorization or consent that is or may be required, otherwise than under this act, before any means are used for the purpose of carrying out an intention to procure a miscarriage of a female person.
There is nothing to prevent the provincial law, before such surgery is decided upon, to request the consent of the state and that of the parents.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house ready for the question?
e (3:30 p.m.)


Mr. Rene  Malle@Champlain: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. minister for telling the house that the Ralliement creditiste is of all the parties the best informed on the matter under study. We agree with his statement and that
Criminal Code
is maybe one of the main reasons for our wishing to inform the house about our opinions whether on the bill, as a whole or on particular opinions about the litigious sections it contains, especially, section 18 which concerns the amendment now under study. This amendment would require the terms of subsection (8) under section 18, to be much more specific, and I quote:
-a female person who, being pregnant, permits a qualified medical practitioner to use in an accredited or approved hospital any means described in paragraph (a) for the purpose of carrying out her intention to procure her own miscarriage.
The object of our amendment is to delete the words:
-a female person who, being pregnant,-
and to replace them by the following words:
-"a female person who is married or of the full age of twenty-one years, or a female person who is under the full age of twenty-one years, with the written consent of her parents or guardian."
The reasons for such an amendment deserve to be thoroughly examined.
That amendment is to state clearly the problems doctors will encounter in the case of a female person under the full age of twenty-one years, who is pregnant.
Some people may accuse us once more of indulging in witch-hunting and of getting lost in the meandering considerations of past centuries, but it is not by accusing usi of being mediaeval that they will clear up problems as old as the world itself.
If the daughters' of Adam and Eve had had the freedom to dispose of the foetuses nestling in their womb, where would mankind be?
On the contrary, Mr. Speaker, the fruit of their love was of such a value that never would they have thought, even for a second, to get rid of it. They may have regretted the apple but never this fertilized ovum which was intensely wanted through one of the deepest instincts the Creator has ever instilled in the soul, one which is irresistibly manifested in the body by the ineffable sensual pleasure linked to the function of reproduction.
This instinct has been transmitted in full. This explains the existence of the world. Without doubt, it happened one day that a pervert came to sully this unescapable natural law. I would tend to think that this sad individual was a descendent of Cain.
And ever since, for all sorts of reasons that are more or less pure fantasy, and exist most often only in minds floating in unreality

April 30, 1889
Criminal Code
whose lucubrations are causing this incredible loss of time we are now sustaining, others have been continuing to try and legislate against nature.
One must not let a girl under age alone reach some agreement with her doctor or the committee of the doctors of a hospital. The father and the mother of this girl must also take their responsibilities. One-sided decisions from the part of the child who is under 21, could greatly affect, in such circumstances, the health of her parents.
One talks of the health of the mother. One should also think of the health of the other close relatives. The extreme care which one brings to the protection of the pregnant mother is both very understandable and commendable. The whole problem consists in knowing which of the two following possibilities will affect more the life or the health of the mother. Is it abortion or normal pregnancy carried to its normal conclusion?
Now, if we refer to the evidence of the specialists who appeared before the committee on justice and legal affairs, we notice that the facts are sometimes very different from the inhuman theories of the supporters of abortion.
Allow me to quote, Mr. Speaker, a few words from Dr. Lavigne which are taken from the proceedings of the committee. In No. 12, page 535, one can read and I quote:
However, the effects of abortion are often detrimental to women and create guilt and hostility complexes in the mother and this is often worse than what can be obtained by abortion, or than the secondary psychiatric or psychological reactions due to an unwanted pregnancy.
We should ask ourselves whether in trying to solve one problem we do not create another problem.
To help the doctors understand more clearly the situation of a girl under age and whose problem is now under study, I would say that it is important that the doctor consulted should have the consent of the parents or guardians. That is the very reason for the amendment. The doctors would be delighted with this additional precaution.
Dr. Lavigne said, on behalf of all the Quebec doctors, and I quote:
It must be noted that this hill does not take into account the personal conviction of physicians and hospitals who fear that they might be liable to legal proceedings for not having practised that which they consider as not acceptable as far as their own professional ethics are concerned. Medical doctors are always concerned with protecting their patients against death.
Indeed, doctors want the acts they are called upon to perform to be carefully consid-

ered, strictly scientific and medical, and consistent with the most elementary laws in the world. Dr. Lavigne added, and I quote:
However, we believe that only scientific medical research will bring a true solution to this problem and favour any committee set up to study the problem. Dr. Hurteau has proven to us that abortion, in the present state of medical science, remains the murder of a living human being. Any doctor or hospital should be free to refuse to participate in this medical technique and this is not mentioned in the bill. Since this technique has to do with the life of a human being, the decision should not be left up to the sole will of the patient.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
The amendment now before us, Mr. Speaker, seeks to give a little more precision to that. I repeat the last sentence of the quotation I just gave:
Since this technique has to do with the life of a human being, the decision should not be left up to the sole will of the patient.
Is there anything more logical than to demand in the legislation the co-operation of the parents or the guardians in order to help the doctor responsible obtain a better knowledge of the health of his patient. And we should not forget, as I said a while ago, that the immediate family of this pregnant teenager could be affected in their physical or mental health just as much as the girl herself. I pointed this out a while ago and I noticed that the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres (Mr. Mongrain) seemed to smile, finding this statement funny.
I think there is here food for thought, pondering and discussion.
Many possibilities or suppositions could be involved. The father has a heart attack upon learning that his daughter has secured a miscarriage. The mother has a nervous breakdown following the abortion performed on her dear young daughter.
Some may object on the other hand that many parents would also be affected upon learning that their daughter is going to give birth to a child. I say no and I will prove the merit of my opinion by evidence given before the committee on justice and legal affairs. It is the opinion expressed by Dr. Walsh, a psychiatrist, and I quote:
There is at the present time a considerable body of psychiatric opinion which states that it is impossible to prove that either neurosis or psychosis can be prevented by abortion. This has been illustrated in several studies.
On the contrary, neurosis and psychosis can be provoked by abortion, and this has nothing to do with the individual patient's religious or moral philosophy.
April 30, 1969

Mr. Speaker, that is one of the favourite arguments of those who do not agree with us, who say we express the opinion of Catholic theologians and of members of the clergy and that our position therefore has no legal or medical value. We often come back to this argument as we would very much like it to be taken seriously.
When, everyday, at the opening of the sitting of the house, Your Honour says the prayers asking God to protect Her Majesty the Queen, her husband, Prince Charles, Princess Ann, I do not think this disgraces the house in any way. On the contrary, I think all hon. members are glad thus to state their Christian principles.
In the same way, when, by chance, the policy we are promoting agrees with the teachings of the Catholic church and of all the other Christian churches, there is no reason to feel upset. It simply proves that, from every aspect, we are right.
And I go on quoting Dr. Walsh:
Here I am talking on psychological grounds. In other words, it has been our experience that, whatever the patient's moral viewpoint, abortion is, in fact, psychologically harmful. Therefore, many psychiatrists who accept this viewpoint would be reluctant to recommend abortion.
Such is the conclusion reached by Dr. Walsh.
Mr. Speaker, in the light of this evidence, it is easy to understand how important it is for the doctors, the psychiatrists and all those who might be requested to perform therapeutic abortions, to be in possession of all the necessary information on the condition of the patient.
How could we not feel shocked when we think of the incredible number of hon. members who close their ears to such statements? Fortunately, there are still, on the opposition side, free people who are not afraid of calling upon the whole country to witness the war they are waging for the sake of principles which are so important and so essential to the honour of the country. Besides, if she becomes pregnant the very young girl, who sees everything through rose-coloured spectacles, and for when nothing is more beautiful than love, is not mature enough to feel the seriousness of the problem; she is still malleable and she often falls a prey to common prejudices. Should not parents or guardians lend a helping hand?
Mr. Speaker, all of us have met with situations of that kind. It is quite normal for parents to intervene when their children find
Criminal Code
themselves in a predicament. Of course, we eliminate-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I regret to have to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, I would like-


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member asks the house to allow him to carry on with his remarks.
s (3:50 p.m.)

Does the house agree to allow the hon. member to pursue his remarks beyond the allotted time?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: There is no unanimous
consent.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, I have nearly finished-


Mr. Speaker:: Unfortunately, the house did not agree.


Mr. Bernard Dumont (Frontenac):: Mr. Speaker, I regret that we cannot get the unanimous consent of the house so that the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) may carry on with his very serious remarks.
I would like to express my views, as a father, on this fair amendment to the omnibus bill. This proposed amendment suggests a reform which I think is quite justifiable. The members of the Ralliement Creditiste closely examine the remarks of hon. members on this amendment moved by the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise) which is before us. We agree with this amendment to the effect that the words "a female person who, being pregnant" be replaced by the words "a female person who is married or of the full age of twenty-one years, or a female person who is under the full age of twenty-one years, with the written consent of her parents or guardian."
Mr. Speaker, this amendment is logical and I commend the hon. member for Abitibi for moving it, because it forces us to think seriously of the fact that this house sometimes passes legislation, making light of parental authority.
Mr. Speaker, whoever has children is in a position to consider this problem in its true perspective. I agree with the hon. member for

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code
Abitibi who, as the father of a large family, fears that such a legislation may lead to abuses.
In fact, if a girl under the full age of twenty-one who becomes pregnant does not need to have her parents' consent to get an abortion, we can expect serious abuses.
The minister said that our amendment was provided for in the act. So why not accept this amendment right away by the vote that will take place shortly, so that it is provided in the act that a girl under the full age of twenty-one years should get the written consent of her parents or guardians to get an abortion?
Nothing, I think, must be said lightly. This is why after scrutinizing the bill, I feel that if we accepted the amendment the minister would not feel frustrated. He leads us to believe that he must bend before the dictatorship of a Prime Minister who wants him to have this omnibus bill passed without any amendment.
The amendments we are presenting are logical. We would like them to be adopted and we regret the dictatorship which exists in parliament. This is why I am convinced that the Minister of Justice himself is sincerely sorry he did not follow his first thought, which was to divide the omnibus bill into several bills, as he said himself publicly.
In view of the fact that an order has been given and that amendments are rejected, I submit that if 14, 15, 16 or 17 year olds do not understand the beauty of maternity and hope to conceal the fault they believe they have committed, even though we are living in a perverted world we must ensure that then-parents are given full authority to give their consent to abortion, because if the health of the minor girl is affected, her parents will have to bear the consequences.
I think this legislation should be made clearer, more explicit. The minister should explain to us why he does not want at least this amendment to be passed.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the house ready for the question?
Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?

All those in favour will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


Mr. Speaker:: All those opposed will please say nay.


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


Mr. Speaker:: In my opinion the nays have it. I declare the motion lost on division.
Before the next motion, no. 28, is put to the house may I draw the attention of hon. members to a printing error in the wording of the said motion as printed in the Special Notice Paper. The house will recall that on Friday last the hon. member for Abitibi was granted leave of the house to delete from his motion the words "or approved". The text, as it appears in the Special Notice Paper, unfortunately includes these words. The correct text of the hon. member's motion is; appended to this day's Order Paper.


Mr. Foriin (for Mr. Laprise) moved: motion No. 28:
That Bill C-150, An Act to amend the Criminal Code, the Parole Act, the Penitentiary Act, the Prisons and Reformatories Act and to make certain consequential amendments to the Combines Investigation Act, the Customs Tariff and the National Defence Act, be amended by deleting paragraph (a) of sub-section 6 of clause 18 on page 43 and substituting therefor:
"(a) For the purpose of this section, an accredited hospital means a hospital containing not less than four hundred (400) beds and/or forming part of a university, in order that the therapeutic abortion committee may execute its functions in an atmosphere of perfect professional ethics."
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise) has moved the amendment which you have just read and to which we might revert later on.
Mr. Speaker, one can readily see that the purpose of that amendment is to clarify the words "accredited hospital" not only under clause 18, but everywhere they appear in the bill.
I wish a definition were given of "accredited hospital". Is it meant to be a 25, 30, 100 or 200 bed hospital? Or any hospital, whatever its status, where the medical practitioners are more or less competent? One does not know. We know that in a 20 or 25-bed building with medical practitioners in attendance, abortion could be procured by qualified physicians.
The hon. member for Abitibi, by means of his motion, wants the words "accredited hospital" to be clarified. In his opinion, the words "accredited hospital" should apply to an institution providing at least 400 beds;.
Mr. Speaker, that is a minimum. We believe that a 400-bed hospital is not a small one; however, we consider that such an hospital, where several highly qualified medical
April 30, 1969

practitioners have to be in attendance, should be able to avail itself of all health, therapeutic, medical and other services in order to perform abortions.
If abortions must be procured under the law, let they be done at least in a safe and sure way, with all the odds in favour of the patient, which is not necessarily the case in small hospitals.
There are many services in large hospitals or in institutions of 400 beds or more which are not to be found in smaller ones. And the most evident proof of that, Mr. Speaker, is that in Quebec particularly-it is the same in other provinces-several hospitals with less than 400 beds have today to close down at the request of the government because their services are inadequate and do not comply with the minimum standards of health.
I do not say, Mr. Speaker, that hospitals with less than 400 beds should not perform abortions because they do not have sufficient health services and so forth.
That is not the question. The greatest security possible must be ensured with regard to abortions, in accordance with the professional ethics of those who will be performing such medical operations.
Consequently, the hon. member for Abitibi has drawn the line on the right side of the 400 bed hospitals, to make sure that hospitals will be in a position to give proper medical care-which is not guaranteed at least in certain hospitals-and that the therapeutic abortion committee may comply with the professional ethics when an abortion is performed.
This amendment seems to me most acceptable to the government for the simple reason that it is legalizing abortion, in short that it is allowing it in all possible and imaginable cases where probably the life or the health of the mother would be in danger.
Mr. Speaker, while we are in favour of the legalization of abortion, I am also asking the house-on behalf of the hon. member for Abitibi and my colleagues-to have at least the decency of providing in the legislation a minimum of protection for the patients admitted into the said hospital to undergo a therapeutic abortion. It seems to me quite logical to obtain at least the assurance that patients treated in the hospitals will obtain sound and competent care worthy of the university level in a well organized hospital of at least 400 beds.
Mr. Speaker, everyone knows about the number of illegal abortions that are practised all over Canada and in many other countries.
Criminal Code
All hon. members know that abortions are procured for pregnant persons, female-to speak as the minister-by abortionists who are not professional physicians but what we might call "jobbers" who work at an hourly rate or by the job, as the case may be. It is a professional "racket". I apologize for using such English expressions in a speech in French, but I want to show the Minister of Justice he is not the only one who is bilingual.
Mr. Speaker, everybody knows that all over Canada, in a word everywhere, illegal or clandestine abortions are practised. For the majority of those abortions the fact remains- and it is well-known-that abortionists who are not doctors but who do this in part to help and at the same time to make a little money, do not use the best means. They are professional killers-because abortion is still a homicide, a murder-who take advantage of the situation because the mother or the unmarried mother are in distress. The means they use are against the most basic hygienic principles and consequently, not only is the health but also the life of the mother endangered.
Mr. Speaker, the minister is well aware that illegal abortions we hear about sometimes, have most serious consequences which more often than not, prove to be dangerous for the woman.
If we cannot help the passing of that clause, namely the legalization of abortion to which we are opposed with all our might, let us at least ensure a minimum of safety in hospitals so that patients will be able to get abortion feeling secure because they will be treated in appropriate hygienic conditions, and receive professional care that will enable them to recover, whereas, with abortionists, there is the fear of death, sooner or later, or other serious diseases. This is unavoidable since, as the government itself acknowledges, even when this bill is passed, the number of clandestine abortions will keep on increasing, and this has been proved beyond any doubt in other countries.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
Mr. Speaker, if we cannot have any control over illicit abortions, we should at least state that no therapeutic abortion committee is to be set up nor any abortion performed in any hospital containing less than 400 beds, as is provided for in the act.
The law should compel hospitals to meet minimum health standards. I could give to the Minister of Justice the names of several

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code
hospitals in the province of Quebec which must close down soon because they were giving inadequate service. Not that the staff was not well trained, but a 100-bed hospital cannot give the same quality of service as would a 400-bed unit.
Mr. Speaker, this amendment is very important. As a matter of fact, the omnibus bill defines a person who might ask the doctor for an abortion as follows: "A female person who, being pregnant".
Mr. Speaker, no one will deny that this definition must be made more explicit. As a matter of fact, when a pregnant woman asks a doctor for an abortion, it may happen that the doctor is not a responsible one, as there are incompetents in all professions, among lawyers as well as among doctors. What protection does this woman have?
If the doctor says that he will consider the matter,-and the law authorizes an abortion only when the therapeutic abortion committee of the hospital has issued a certificate,-if he submits the case to the therapeutic abortion committee, when the hospital is not authorized to procure abortions, the patient runs the risk of receiving very poor care.
The therapeutic committee may say: My dear man, we can perform an abortion, as the life or health of the patient would or "would be likely to" be endangered. The therapeutic committee will be in such a position that it will have to say yes.
Then the therapeutic abortion committee issues a certificate and the doctor performs the abortion in circumstances that leave much to be desired and could lead to serious consequences.
The patient will have confidence, but she will not know whether those people are quacks or professional killers. She will never know it either if the hospital where she applies does not have the required services.
It is the responsibility of the minister to place the hospitals and the doctors who perform an abortion under the obligation of complying with minimum standards.
Mr. Speaker, this is something essential. It is extremely important, in my opinion, and the minister will have to admit we are right in this regard.
If a person goes to see a lawyer, it is, above all, because he has a problem to solve. He chose that lawyer instead of another, because he trusts him.
If a woman consults a doctor, it is because she has a problem. She is ill, she is suffering

from a momentary or perhaps more serious disorder. Anyway she has a more or less serious reason to go and see her doctor. She has some sort of a problem. Why would she choose this doctor instead of another? There are hundreds of doctors everywhere. Very few communities are without any doctor in Canada. There will always be a shortage of doctors, but they can meet the needs. Every individual has to make his own choice. The minister can choose his doctor. I can choose my own doctor, as well as everybody else.
Why would this patient go to one doctor in particular? It is because she trusts him. Therefore, the doctor must be worthy of that confidence. As relationship based upon trust must exist.
If the doctor is not qualified, if he is not serious or if he is an alcoholic-


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The Minister of Justice is rising on a point of order.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, the remarks of the hon. member about doctors are very interesting but the amendment deals with hospitals and the number of beds available.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to play on words uselessly, but it seems to me that what I am saying concerns abortions and the conditions in which they will be performed. I am dealing with the safety, for the patient, at the hospital, such conditions should also concern those who perform the abortion. It is above all a matter of confidence and safety.
Mr. Speaker, as I was saying, the doctor must, through his competence, experience, professional qualifications, and respect for his professional ethics, deserve the confidence of his patient, just as the lawyer must deserve that of his client.
The doctor may be a member of a team of specialists or doctors, in any hospital. Now, to help him, so that he can be sure he can perform the abortion, I feel the doctor will have to perform it in a hospital where the services are adequate.
If a very competent doctor wants to do a good job for his patient, and does it seriously, but finds himself in a small hospital where the equipment is not adequate, etc, it may
April 30, 1969

happen that even it he is competent and serious, even though he is honest and trustworthy, even though he can be fully trusted, without the necessary instruments, the minimum equipment required, without nurses to take care of the patient, then he will not be protected with regard to procuring an abortion.
A very small hospital, Mr. Speaker, will be allowed to accept an abortion case, and to designate a doctor to whom the patient will have to turn to perform the abortion. The doctor will comply, as he has no choice; if a certificate is issued, but he does not want to perform the abortion, he will be subject to prosecution on criminal charges. So, he is bound to comply. What safeguards will he have if he has to perform the abortion in a hospital which is not adequately equipped?
For those who know something about the matter, I shall say the hospitals with 400 beds are well equipped. There are also, of course hospitals with 300 beds which are just as well equipped as those with 500 beds. We should think in terms of an average. According to statistics, hospitals with 400 beds are adequately equipped since they are subject to such heavy demand.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
That is why, Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise) was quite right in presenting this amendment-if only to dispel certain prejudices entertained by government members-for it does not aim at forbidding abortion but rather at making sure that it is performed under healthy and safe conditions which protect the patient, the doctor, the therapeutic committee on abortion and the government which has legalized abortion.
Mr. Speaker, if it is realized some day that 25, 30, 50 or 100 abortions have been performed in inadequately equipped hospitals, the patients would be entitled to blame the government for failing to provide for minimum security standards.
Mr. Speaker, we must take our responsibilities and see to it that abortions, if allowed, are performed in proper conditions. If doctors were consulted about the matter, we would realize that they agree, because they certainly want to be protected themselves by this legislation.
There were numerous opportunities in the course of this debate, to discuss this confusing problem. If the minister says that the amendment moved by the hon. member is not
Criminal Code
valid because there is a comma here and a line there, I think he does not adopt the proper attitude.
This is what I said to a visitor who asked me why we were moving so many amendments that were all rejected. Does it mean, he said, that all those amendments are stupid and out of order?
I think, Mr. Speaker, that we are here to legislate, that the opposition has a constructive role to play, that it must not always oppose but take part in the debates in order to improve the legislation.
If the minister says that the amendment is not in order, it means that he allows abortions to be performed in any Canadian hospital, by any doctor whether or not he is an alcoholic or whether or not he has adequate equipment. The minister no longer asks himself questions but simply says: Perform abortion on a large scale, commercialize it, do whatever you like, we could not care less.
I think the minister would prove irresponsible if he failed to recognize that there is something valid and positive in the subject-matter of the amendment, the purpose of which is not to oppose the government but to protect it against the disastrous effects of an abortion being performed in a hospital lacking proper equipment or in a hospital where abortion would be done by an alcoholic doctor.
Mr. Speaker, I am looking forward to hearing what the minister will say in this regard, not because we are anxious to know if he will deny once more our assertions, but in order to know his viewpoint. I feel he cannot do otherwise than to accept the amendment.
Mr. Speaker, before concluding my remarks, I would like to tell the minister and members of the cabinet that there is nothing wrong for the Liberal party to vote for an amendment moved by the Ralliement Creditiste. This does not mean that they are becoming Creditistes. In fact, when we are supporting an amendment or a bill introduced by a Liberal member, this does not mean either that we are becoming Liberals.
We are here to legislate and we should try to forget those stupid political discussions which have been going on since we began to consider this bill, and endeavour to produce a legislation which will ensure the protection of women, doctors, the therapeutic abortion committee and the legislator.


John Napier Turner: I regret to inform the hon. member who has just

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code
resumed his seat, that for very valid reasons, we must reject once again the amendment.
First, I must point out that when this bill has been considered by the Standing Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs, several amendments have been moved by members from all political parties and the government has accepted about 25 of them.
We are now at the stage of the committee report. This report has been prepared by the members of the four political parties involved and we have to accept or reject the report. The amendments moved by the members of the Ralliement Creditiste are not affecting this bill, but the committee report.
Well, as I said, the committee has accepted about twenty or thirty amendments-


André-Gilles Fortin: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
hon. member for Lotbiniere on a point of order.


André-Gilles Fortin: I should like to remind the house, Mr. Speaker, that I think the minister is out of order. He is not dealing at all with the amendment under consideration.


John Napier Turner: Then, these interventions concerning the debate are of another order, Mr. Speaker.
The standing committee on justice and legal Affairs met 14 times in 30 days. It really meant business. The committee made inquiries, called witnesses, almost all the officials from the Department of Justice. After six days of debate on second reading, 14 committee meetings, and 8 more days of discussion in the house at the stage of the committee report, I can say we are very much concerned with this important legislation.
I should like to read the bill, and particularly the sections and sub-sections to which the amendment moved by the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise) refers to. This is related to the definition of a hospital in which therapeutic abortions can be performed.
This definition applies to two kinds of hospital, to an "accredited hospital" or to an "approved hospital", and the words "or approved" have been added by the committee on justice and legal affairs.
This amendment had been proposed to the committee. It was quite proper since it had been accepted by the committee at that stage. A hospital-
[Mr. Turner (Ottawa-Carleton) .1


Gérard Laprise: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
hon. member for Abitibi on a point of order.


Gérard Laprise: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker, and I wish to say that Mr. Speaker asked me last Friday to delete the word "accredited" from amendment No. 28. As a matter of fact, the Speaker said, as reported on page 7963 of Hansard, and I quote:
Amendment No. 28 appears unacceptable In Its present form because, if it were adopted, it would give two different definitions to the words "accredited hospital" as used in the bill. However, as this is merely a technical error, the house would no doubt allow the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise) to change his amendment by deleting therefrom the words "or approved".
I think those words were added by the committee as the Minister of Justice has just said. But those are the very words Mr. Speaker asked me to delete from my amendment to make it acceptable.
I wish to point out to the Minister of Justice that his reply is running counter to the ruling issued by Mr. Speaker last Friday.


John Napier Turner: That is not correct. Mr. Speaker recommended that the words "or approved" be deleted because the amendment of the hon. member was related to paragraph (a) subsection 6, section 18 of Bill C-150. This paragraph refers rather to accredited hospitals, and paragraph (b) refers to approved hospitals. Thus, as the amendment of the hon. member refers rather to paragraph (a) but not to paragraph (b), Mr. Speaker suggested to the hon. member to delete the word "approved".
I am speaking about the definition given by Bill C-150, of the term "accredited hospital" at paragraph (a) and "approved hospital" at paragraph (b), subsection 6 of section 18.
Under paragraph (a), "accredited hospital" means a hospital accredited by the Canadian Council on Hospital Accreditation in which diagnostic services and medical, surgical and obstetrical treatment are provided;
Paragraph (b) reads as follows:
"approved hospital" means a hospital in a province approved for the purposes of this section by the Minister of Health of that province;
Because of this definition, only hospitals accredited by the Canadian Council on Hospital Accreditation or approved hospitals designated by the Minister of Health of a province are covered by this section.
April 30, 1969

In my opinion, this is sound and secure protection.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)

Now, what is this amendment trying to do? The amendment says that instead of allowing therapeutic abortions to be performed in an accredited hospital or an approved hospital they should only be permitted in a special type of hospital, one which must have at least 400 beds or is a hospital attached to a university. We reject this amendment because in our opinion it would impose an unwarranted restriction on the number of hospitals in which therapeutic abortions could legally be carried out.
Moreover, the amendment contains an unjustified presumption that perfect professional ethics do not exist in smaller hospitals. We believe that the tests of accreditation or of approval for which provision is made in the clause itself are entirely adequate. Our information from the Canadian Hospital Association is that the size of the hospital has no relationship to the quality of service or care which it provides. In fact I suppose some officers of the Canadian Hospital Association and of the Canadian Medical Association would admit that, for certain types of treatment, in many cases one gets better care, more regular care, more personal care, in the smaller hospitals. I do not think the size of the hospital has anything to do with the standard of care provided.
At a meeting in April, 1966, between representatives of the Canadian Bar Association, the Canadian Medical Association and the Department of Justice, the question of the accreditation of hospitals was specifically raised by the department. The reply was to the effect that where such treatment was available it could be carried out under the proposed amendment in an accredited hospital regardless of the size of that hospital. Hon. members who look up the testimony given before the Standing Committee on Health and Welfare which reviewed this matter during the last parliament will see that representatives of the Canadian Medical Association and others supported this point of view.
What the hon. member is really saying is that he has no confidence in the smaller hospitals. Yes, he is insisting-


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
Criminal Code


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member for Lotbiniere, on a point of order.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order simply because what the Minister of Justice has just said, with all due respect, is entirely false. It imputes motives to me that I do not have, and statements that I have not made.
Mr. Speaker, I want this to be clear to everyone; I repeated it and I even hit my desk with my fist when I said it: there is not necessarily a link between the quality of the services and the number of beds or the size of the building. Generally speaking, services are more adequate in large hospitals, that is those with a minimum of 400 beds; even the Hospital Association recognizes that fact.
Mr. Speaker, I would not have the minister, under the pretext of fighting for his stupid point of view, make others say stupid things, when it is he who says them.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, this is no point of order, but never mind; let us read the amendment. The amendment says that an "accredited hospital", in this text, means "a hospital containing not less than 400" beds and/or forming part of a university".
The only hospitals the hon. member trusts are those in which there are at least 400 beds and which form part of a university. To my mind, he is prejudiced against rural hospitals, against rural ridings and against the small cities of Canada or the province of Quebec.
I believe the Ralliement creditiste party does not trust rural hospitals!


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order.
The hon. member for Abitibi, on another point of order.


Gérard Laprise: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.
I simply reject all the charges just laid by the hon. Minister of Justice. I wonder if he still deserves that name after making such a statement.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand why the hon. member is so sensitive. Indeed, does not his amendment say:
A hospital containing not less than four hundred (400) beds and/or forming part of a university, in order that the therapeutic abortion committee may execute its functions in an atmosphere of perfect professional ethics.
According to this, there would be no "professional ethics" in the smaller hospitals.

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code
That is what he contends and it really amazes me.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member for Lotbiniere is rising on a point of order.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Chairman, I feel the hon. minister is indeed unfair when he makes such statements.
The amendment is drafted in the following terms and I quote:
. (a) For the purpose of this section, an accredited hospital means-
-I repeat, an "accredited hospital"-


John Napier Turner: This is not a point of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Chairman, I shall go on reading the amendment:
-means a hospital containing not less than four hundred (400) beds-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member has already taken part in the debate and I can see no point of order right now.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, one must then conclude that under this amendment, the Ralliement creditiste does not trust small hospitals, does not believe that "an atmosphere of perfect professional ethics" can be found in small and/or rural hospitals.
I humbly suggest to the Chair that this amendment reflects a bias against all rural, all small hospitals in the province of Quebec. The women who live in small towns in the province of Quebec-


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, does the hon. minister allow me a question?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member for Lotbiniere has a question.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, could the hon. minister tell me what he means by "rural hospitals"-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member knows that the member who is asked a question does not have to answer.


John Napier Turner: Not now.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
hon. Minister of Justice has the floor.


John Napier Turner: The submission of this amendment leaves us under the impression that the Ralliement creditiste is not ready to grant the women who live in small towns in the province of Quebec, in villages and rural communities of that province, the same rights as to the women in the larger cities of that province.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Is the
hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Fortin) rising again to a point of order?


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
hon. member for Lotbiniere wants to speak on a question of privilege.


André-Gilles Fortin: I thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I should like to tell the house that what the minister just said does not tally with the facts. Actually, in Arthabaska, in the constituency of Lotbiniere, which is considered as a rural one, even on the electoral maps, there is a hospital with more than 400 beds. Therefore I believe the minister has no right to make such an assertion and we could give him many reasons for that. The Minister of Justice is a liar of the worst kind.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The Minister of Justice has the floor.


John Napier Turner: I cannot understand why the members of the Ralliement creditiste are so upset. Nor can I understand why people who are supposed to represent rural areas of the province of Quebec should choose to cause a serious wrong to all the women who live in the rural communities of the province of Quebec. Indeed, the government is not of the opinion that a woman living in a rural area or in a small town of Canada or of the province of Quebec deserves less service than the other women of the country. Therefore, we reject this amendment unreservedly.


Gérard Laprise: Mr. Speaker, I am quite willing to speak on this amendment and I thank very sincerely my colleague, the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Fortin) for having moved it on my behalf since I had to leave for a few minutes.
I was surprised at the insulting remarks, I would say, of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Turner) who imputed to us motives, that we have not. We have never said that we do not
April 30. 1969

trust our rural hospitals nor that we want to deny any woman, from any area, the right to the care she needs.
The minister told us that we felt a little nervous, but I think that it is rather he who gets more and more nervous as this debate is progressing.
Mr. Speaker, the amendment I introduced reads as follows:
"(a) For the purpose of this section, an accredited or approved hospital means a hospital containing not less than four hundred (400) beds and/or forming part of a university, in order that the therapeutic abortion committee-
If there is one, because that is not yet sure.
-may execute its functions in an atmosphere of perfect professional ethics."
Mr. Speaker, when it is a matter of deciding whether one must kill a being which is supposed to live, it will have to be done in a normal way and as carefully as possible.
Today a killer gets every opportunity to defend himself.
The present Liberal party went as far as to abolish the death penalty for he who, in a deliberate way, takes the life of another person.
Mr. Speaker, in that struggle against abortion, we fight to protect the life of a helpless being. And if those beings have a right to be protected, it is the role of the state to ensure that protection, for themselves are deprived of any means1 of defence.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)
That is why we use every available means to see that the law should be quite clear, in order to ensure that the minimum number of mistakes will be made. We know that the government intends to establish committees of doctors responsible for deciding whether it will be possible to put an end to a life.
Mr. Speaker, it is not at my request that the amendment was moved but at the request of doctors who told us: We want those therapeutic abortions to be practised only in big centres and not in small centres in which everybody knows everybody else, so that people cannot point the finger at a well-known and respected doctor, saying that he has become a professional abortionist.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Gérard Laprise: That is one of the reasons which led us to move this amendment. Doctors do not want to be considered as murderers, nor to be seen in such a light, when
Criminal Code
they are obliged, at the government's request, to destroy a life.
This amendment is also designed to preserve the identity of pregnant persons who will resort to abortion.
We know, Mr. Speaker, and the Minister of Justice also knows that in small communities, everybody knows everybody else, and if a girl or a married woman requests an abortion, the finger of scorn is pointed at her.
We have often been aware in our rural areas of so-called accidents-because many girls thought they could play around without getting into trouble-and to avoid scandal, a girl used to go to big cities like Montreal and Quebec to get a job, coming back seven or eight months later. Her employment was over and scandal was avoided. Very few people knew what had happened, and the baby was alive.
Mr. Speaker, if all small hospitals are allowed to do it-I do not question their competence nor that of their medical staff, because they certainly can perform that kind of operation as well as doctors in large cities-all the desirable security is not given. In the hospitals of LaSarre, Amos, Val-d'Or and Rouyn, the doctors are as expert in this field-when they have made the necessary studies-as in any other Montreal hospital-*


John Napier Turner: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The Minister of Justice on a point of order.


John Napier Turner: I wish to call the attention of the house to the wording of the amendment:
-execute its functions in an atmosphere of perfect professional ethics."
How does the hon. member explain the lack of "professional ethics" in small hospitals, since these are the words he used in his own amendment?


Gérard Laprise: Mr. Speaker, the minister is really a blockhead. He did not understand anything, he will not understand anything.


Some hon. Members:: He has received
orders


Gérard Laprise: Yes, he must have had orders to have this legislation passed at any cost. But at least my colleagues and myself will have done our duty and cleared up as best we

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code
could this legislation, and we shall have nothing to reproach ourselves with when the effects of it will be felt.
Mr. Speaker, I moved this amendment for an entirely different reason than the one the Minister of Justice has attributed to me. We want to prevent young girls from being embarrassed when they go to a little hospital.
Another point is to avoid that hospitals, even if they are accreditated-and I believe there are still	some-be	insufficiently
equipped to perform this type of operation. I know one, in particular, that can ensure very normal deliveries, but in a village where there is only one doctor.
How do they want to organize a therapeutic abortion committee under these conditions? The Minister of Justice should, in my view, reconsider the whole question. And I would be happy to hear other hon. members say so. Other members of the Liberal party may also express their opinions and I would be happy to hear them on that.


An hon. Member:: They are not able to do it. They are afraid.


Mr.   J.-A. Mongrain@Trois-Rivieres: Mr. Speaker, I feel the hon. member for Abitibi (Mr. Laprise) might not be happy to hear my comments, even if he asked for them, because I have been listening for the last two weeks to the most rambling speeches I have ever heard during my whole career.
Those people who pass themselves off as guardians of virtue, come here to speak to us of what is the least noble in human nature.
They are in such a state of confusion that they say certain things even if they have to contradict themselves a few minutes later.
For instance, the hon. member for Abitibi spoke about a girl who had a mishap and wants an abortion. The bill makes no mention of such a thing. There is no question of allowing ny woman, who wants an abortion for all kinds of reasons, to have one.
However, the question is to authorize a woman to procure an abortion under the control of a medical board, when her physical or mental health or her life is endangered. And those people who claim to be more virtuous than the others-their electors whom they managed to deceive, are as virtuous as they are-do not trust their own physician.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
hon. member for Lotbiniere rises on a question of privilege.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to take up the assertion of the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres, when he said that the members of the Ralliement creditiste deceived their electors.
Mr. Speaker, you will agree with me that such a statements affects our privileges.
We have not been elected through theft, electoral funds or patronage. We have been honestly elected and we have the courage of our convictions-
The Acling Speaker (Mr. Bechard): Order, please. The hon. member for Trois-Rivieres.


Mr. Mongrain:: Mr. Speaker, again, I say that they have deceived the population and that they have been deceiving their electors for two weeks by their false statements, when they say for instance, that Liberal members have been instructed to vote in favour of that bill. It is absolutely untrue.
And if decency and the rules allowed me to do so, I would call them liars, because they do not tell the truth. This has never been so. Only when he calls the members of-


Mr. Corbin:: Mr. Speaker, I raise a point of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
honourable member for Madawaska-Victoria on a point of order.


Eymard G. Corbin: Mr. Speaker, I ask for your indulgence. There is so much noise in that part of the house that it is impossible for us to hear the enlightening comments of the member for Trois-Rivieres. I therefore ask you to call them to order.
The Aciing Speaker (Mr. Bechard): Indeed, an elementary Standing Order stipulates that when a member has the floor he should not be interrupted.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: Mr. Speaker, they even went so far as to call us murderers a while ago. I wonder what their position will be in the face of mothers they will condemn to death, when doctors have decided they must choose between the life of the mother and that of the child. I wonder who will be the more committed murderer according to his conscience, if the members of the Ralliement creditiste succeed in having this bill rejected, a bill
April 30, 1969

which was conceived and drafted by people as serious as they are and I am charitable when I say "as serious as they are".
Mr. Speaker, their amendment stipulates that abortion must absolutely be performed in a well-equipped hospital. But all those who have ever been to the hospital know that there are perfectly well-equipped hospitals with 100, 150, 200 beds, staffed with doctors who are as conscientious as those in any big hospital. And I say it is rather amusing to see the way the members of Ralliement Creditiste are caught red-handed for they do not even trust their own hospitals nor their own constituents who will want to procure themselves a miscarriage.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: They will force the mothers, whose life is endangered, to travel hundreds of miles, to the other end of the constituency of Abitibi, for instance, to get to a 400 bed-hospital with the expenses and dangers involved.
Mr. Speaker, such is the logic of those people who for two weeks, have indulged in petty politics with regard to this bill which is not perfect of course-in party politics, which will enable them to go back to their constituency around election time and say: We are the guardians of virtue. Yet they are the ones who today call others liars, traitors, murderers. Those are the guardians of virtue, Mr. Speaker, the ones who feed on things as shocking as those we have been hearing for two weeks. I have never seen such experts on immorality or bestiality as those I have just seen among the members of the Ralliement Creditiste.
Mr. Speaker, they talk of an atmosphere of professional ethics as if such a thing could be found only in large hospitals.
As for me, I would like to talk about an atmosphere lacking in professional ethics in this house on account of the demagogy those people have indulged in for two weeks, while bills that could enable the government to give bread to the unemployed, to stimulate the economy, are pending because some members paralyze the work of the house, for purposes of party politics, which will enable them to say to the simple-minded, around election time: We have haved the virtue of the Canadians. Yes, Mr. Speaker, but it was by dint of lies and misrepresentations, by dint of statements which have a double meaning, by dint 29180-519
Criminal Code
of mental reservations and of concealment before the electorate.
Mr. Speaker, we are studying another of these silly amendments which cannot be explained, but which enable all the members of the Ralliement Creditiste to raise, one after the other, and with a kind of masochism and parliamentary "auto-eroticism" to wallow in these dirty things which are hidden in good families.


André-Gilles Fortin: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member for Lotbiniere on a point of order.


André-Gilles Fortin: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is merely that I think I must now make a remark. The fact is that since the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres has been speaking, one wonders what he is talking about. I can read the amendment to him, but where is it? He came for it a while ago but he did not bring it back.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. I thank the hon. member for Lotbiniere and I also take the opportunity to ask the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres who is wondering a little to kindly restrict himself exclusively to the amendment.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: I would like to point out to you, Mr. Speaker, that you are very indulgent to the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order.


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Lotbiniere said that it was hard for him to understand; this does not surprise me, because they are rather hard of understanding in that area. This does not surprise us.
I repeat that for two weeks they have been stirring those things with a vengeance and prevented us from passing legislation which could improve a situation for all Canadians.
I appeal to them, if they have a little common sense left, so stop this unending twaddle and so that we can go on to some other serious business. They know themselves that this does not make sense. They have just shown us their weakness, their inconsistency and now is the time to put an end to this.
Mr. Speaker, I shall stop for a moment because I would not want to do as my friends over there-

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member for Shefford is rising on a point of order.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, may I point out that, a moment ago, you called the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres to order. And now he is again out of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. I was under the impression that the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres was also rising on a point of order.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)


Barry Mather: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order to ask whether anything can be done to protect the house from these phony points of order.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear, fTranslation]


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. Is the house ready for the question? Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I would really like to change the atmosphere of the house and bring it back to a more serious mood for I feel, that for the past fifteen days, we have had very earnest discussions, not just with arguments coming right out of our heads but coming from very competent people, whose briefs we had the opportunity to study, from medical books and reports of studies made on the subject.
All this was, indeed, done in earnest, more especially as the amendments we moved were accepted by the Chair and put into Hansard.
I am afraid some members are not in a position to discuss our amendments and to call them irresponsible, as they tried to insinuate.
The amendment under consideration is in no way questioning the quality of smaller hospitals. We are quite aware that a patient admitted to a 100 or 200 bed hospital, is attended by very capable doctors. After submitting his patient to all required examinations, in most cases, the doctor will have him transferred to a specialized hospital, not that he does not trust his own hospital but in order to provide his patient with the best possible care.

We have back home a 400-bed hospital which has an excellent reputation. Similar hospitals can be found throughout Quebec and Canada.
There are also hospitals with fewer than 400 beds, the personnel of which are extremely competent, but where it is felt preferable to call upon specialists if need be.
This is why, every week, we see people from Granby, for instance who having consulted our own doctors, are transferred to specialized hospitals in Montreal.
Now, the amendment before us this afternoon is not intended to cast a slur on small rural hospitals, but to give more weight to the provisions of the law on abortion, should they be adopted, unhappily.
It would not be normal, in a hospital of 150 to 200 beds, for a committee of doctors who have never performed abortions or who need the help of a psychiatrist, a general practitioner or a gynaecologist, and who do not have access to the services of those specialists, not to be able to send their abortion cases to those hospitals that have them.
Ordinary doctors would not be expected to give a final judgment before the committee to authorize abortion.
Now, I have here the testimony of a Liberal member, who is a doctor and who appeared before the committee on health and welfare in 1967. On page 46 of the proceedings, he himself expresses doubts about the efficiency and competence of the medical boards. Now I quote what the member for Hull (Mr. Isabelle) had to say:
-Those boards have been tried in the United States for four or five years. I will quote from the RN review of June 1966:
Some years ago therapeutic abortion boards-* usually made up of specialists-were organized in many hospitals to screen abortion requests. The boards have generally proved unsatisfactory for these reasons:
We are not questioning the skill of those hospital doctors, far from it, because it was found in the United States that some doctor committees have after a certain time fallen into routine and when an abortion case came up-and this was substantiated by inquiries that have been made-the foetus was killed and the papers were signed after by the committee of doctors.
This means that if we permit all the small country hospitals to make abortions, if they have qualified doctors to do so, there will be abortion committees throughout the country in every little village, and it will become
April 30, 1969

routine. The abortion legislation will then be known as a farce and a butchery for the Canadian people.
Those ideas are not ours, they come from experts. It may seem strange, but I rely much more on medical specialists than in the nonsense of the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres, and we wonder on what side of morality he is. I am not afraid, Mr. Speaker, to express my moral principles in this house because I did so in my constituency. I will continue to do so and it will take more than the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres to stop me.


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.
The hon. member seems to be questioning my morality but somebody who once said: "My Lord, I thank Thee that I am not as other men. All the others are-


Gilbert F. Rondeau: More nonsense! Mr. Speaker, this is not a matter for a question of privilege, this is one more stupid remark to add the hon. member's record.
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Abitibi has dealt with serious points on which I want to make a few comments. First, I want to deal with the variety of specialists needed to decide whether an abortion should be done or not. It cannot be decided upon only by three ordinary doctors, but by a gynecologist, a pediatrician and a general practitioner.
[DOT] <5:10 p.m.)
But all hospitals have not such specialists. Why? Because a gynecologist cannot make a living in a 100 or 200-bed hospital, so he will go and settle in a big city where there is a 400-bed hospital. Why? Because he will find there a greater number of patients. That accounts for the concentration of specialists in the big cities.
We should give those specialists the opportunity to study those problems thoroughly. Before any abortion could be performed specialists should be invited to examine every aspect of the problem. According to the Hon. Jack Winters, the hospitals in which the greatest number of abortions are practised are those whose committees are the most lenient.
Now then, if any physician who is neither a gynecologist, nor a pediatrist, nor again a psychiatrist may settle the future of the foetuses of the nation, I say that the Canadian people-


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: I rise on the question of privilege, Mr. Speaker.
Criminal Code


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member for Trois-Rivieres rises on the question of privilege.


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: The hon. member is discussing amendment No. 29. We are studying amendment No. 28, which refers to 400-bed hospitals. Amendment No. 29 refers to gynaecologists and psychiatrists. Therefore, the hon. member is out of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. I do not think the hon. member for Shefford is out of order.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry I am allowed only 20 minutes, because otherwise I could squelch those dumb cluck who keep on clucking from time to time.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. I know it is Wednesday; people may get excited and during the debate, rather unparliamentary language may be heard.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Nurses' Newsletters for March-April 1968, on page 69, deals with the definitions of hospitals and their competence. It reads as follows:
As you can see, the three definitions rather push aside the denominational aspect and clearly indicate that the legislator intends to place the medical profession in a state of bondage.
We are told that physicians should be protected, but this legislation is an insult to physicians; medical science is questioned, and doctors are told that the only way to solve pregnancy problems is abortion which is, the most idiotic, the most atrocious and the most stupid way of all.
And this paper has not been submitted by members of the Ralliement creditiste. I am sure that the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres received it, but he has never read it. I will continue to quote excerpts:
Can it be hoped that the Canadian Council on Hospital Accreditation-


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The hon. member for Trois-Rivieres on a question of privilege.


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: I wonder how my hon. friend can say that I never read that document? I do not tell him what I read. I have read it, but I am trying to interpret it-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order.


Joseph-Alfred Mongrain: -intelligently and not to-

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order please. It is precisely to avoid these frequent calls to order that I pointed out a while ago to the hon. members, and especially to the hon. member for Shefford that people get excited and that certain unparliamentary terms are being used during the debate.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
As the old saw goes: The tree is known by its fruit. Therefore, I have judged the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres by his achievements.
The committee goes on further to say in the same magazine, and I quote:
Ts there any hope that the Canadian Hospital Certification Council will have any regard for the status of religious hospitals?
Is there any hope that a hospital board-considered in this definition and even in everyday life much more as an administrative than a medical unit-will be able to resist the pressures exerted against the religious freedom of its members?
Then, nurses question the efficiency of those medical committees and, what is worse, an attempt is being made to spread those abortion committees by setting up one in every small hospital in every town of the province of Quebec.
I continue:
Finally, by what kind of acrobatics will the Canadian government manage to put in a Catholic hospital a therapeutic abortion committee?
Mr. Speaker, many other testimonies would be worth putting on record.
The Humanist Association of Canada has already done a great deal to promote medicine and health in Canada.
It is said regarding "Accredited Hospitals", and I quote:

The stipulation that only accredited hospitals will be able to hear cases and that only such hospitals will be allowed to perform legal abortions limits severely the availability of avenues for help to those women seeking it.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, I feel duty bound once again to take part in the debate on this amendment, especially after the interventions of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Turner) and the hon. member for
April 30, 1969



Trois-Rivieres (Mr. Mongrain). They help us focus our attention on the subject-matter of this debate, since they acquaint us to some extent, with their points of view. I do say to some extent, Mr. Speaker, for we have not yet heard arguments based on principles accepted by most people.
We feel this debate is dragging on, but we have no need for any particulars on the subject from the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres.
We appreciate that we are discussing a matter that should not have been introduced in the house. Such is the position we have taken right from the beginning.
For the information of the hon. members, I may say that we would agree to adjourn this debate on abortion and, as suggested by the hon. member for Trois-Rivieres, to proceed to the consideration of matters much more urgent, and of more consequence for the future of this country.
The government thought it was an astute policy to introduce this bill immediately after the Easter recess claiming that an immediate debate was necessary, and leading us to believe that we had to rush the passage of that bill in order to proceed to more urgent measures. We shall certainly not be fooled by such a childish game. Indeed, we are not deprived of intelligence to such an etxent. We were opposed to this debate and we have been proving, for the past two weeks, that it was useless.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. Now that he has been talking for three minutes, I would like the hon. member to tell us what he thinks of the amendment now under study.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, the many points of orders and questions of privilege which have been raised in the course of this debate have probably led me to make this digression and I do apologize for it. In any case, I promise I will do my best to be as brief as possible and to limit myself to 20 minutes.
Mr. Speaker, the amendment raises the question of accrediting the hospitals.
Should, this bill be adopted as a whole, we want to reduce as much as possible the harmful effects of abortion. We think that by reducing the number of hospitals where it would be possible to perform abortion and by setting the conditions under which these hospitals might be accredited for that purpose, we would have successfully dealt with one of
Criminal Code
the many means of alleviating its evil consequences.
Mr. Speaker, if we look at the amendment from this point of view, we can understand it much better. Why should we curtail the number of hospitals and increase the number of beds in the "accredited" hospitals?
The experience in other countries where abortion was legalized justifies our attitude towards this amendment.
Recently, a paper published an article entitled: English concerned about abortion law.
Mr. Speaker, this article deals with the results of legalizing abortion in that country, I quote:
The current application of the act authorizing abortion under certain conditions causes "serious concern, even to the advocates of the act", stated Richard Crossman, British Minister for Social Services, Monday afternoon in the House of Commons.
The act, adopted by parliament in October 1967 and which became effective in April 1968, authorizes termination of a pregnancy when it threatens or harms the physical or the mental health of the mother, that of the child to be born or that of the other children.
Mr. Crossman said that he was particularly displeased with the way in which the act was interpreted and applied in the private sector. Since June 1968, 22,000 abortions have been performed, of which more than a third in private clinics. The others were performed in state hospitals and paid for by social welfare.
Mr. Speaker, the last paragraph of the article which I have just quoted gives one of the main reasons which prompts us to propose the amendment now under study.
One of the main reasons there have been as many as 22,000 abortions since June 1968, is the increased number of hospitals where abortion may be procured. It is one of the reasons why we want to decrease the number of "accredited" hospitals. For this purpose, we are using the nefarious experience of other countries, so that we will not have to blame ourselves for the same mistakes.
And it says further, and I quote:
-in which the act is interpreted and applied in the private sector.
We understand, Mr. Speaker, that those hospitals must be accredited or approved. The number of applications that will come in just to accredit or approve such hospitals will be great.
Then we will surely get to the unfortunate consequences which we denounce. We urge in all seriousness every hon. member to consider

April 30, 1969
Criminal Code
all consequences, because there is an infinity of them. And to prove my point I will quote part of the submission of the Family Planning Centre of Montreal where we will realize once more-


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: May I raise a point of order, Mr. Speaker?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
hon. member for Calgary North on a point of order.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Speaker, we had some discussions concerning the taking of a vote on those matters that we have convered up to this time. All parties agreed. I do not know whether my friend has completed his argument, but in any event I wonder whether we are prepared to vote on the other motions now. Our agreement was1 to vote on the amendments on which the vote was deferred.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)


Mr. Rene  Malle@Champlain: Mr. Speaker, I know that some hon. members would like to proceeded with the vote immediately.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. The Minister of Justice on a point of order.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Perhaps the hon. member for Calgary North would repeat his intervention, because some hon. members did not hear it.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: There was a definite agreement among the parties that we would take a vote on those matters which have been stood. This does not affect the hon. member who was speaking, unless he is winding up his remarks and wants the amendment voted on. But if this is not the case, it is my understanding that we should now vote on those matters which were stood.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I may join in the point of order. I have had a few words with my Creditiste friends, and I think they are willing that we interrupt the debate at this point 
and take recorded votes on amendments Nos. 24 and 26. I understand, however, that they do not wish to end the debate on amendment No. 28 at this time. I think this is in keeping with the agreement that was arrived at among the parties. I would suggest, therefore, that the hon. member for Champlain might be given the privilege of adjourning the debate on this amendment at this point, so that he may come back to it on Friday, and that we have the bellsi rung so we may take the votes on amendments Nos. 24 and 26, as the hon. member for Calgary North suggested.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. Is the hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. Fortin) raising a point of order?


André-Gilles Fortin: Yes, Mr. Speaker. We heard the representations of the members of other parties when they said that a recorded vote should be taken on the amendments the study of which is already completed. We support that request for we want to participate in a positive way in the debate, even if some members on the other side do not agree.
However, I would like to point out that the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) has still a lot of things to say and that we would not like his time be cut for that. We would like him to resume his speech, after the adjournment.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: It has
been suggested that the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) should adjourn the debate so that he may be the first to have the floor when the sitting is resumed.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, I propose the adjournment and I am very pleased to contribute in that way to bringing together the political parties in the house.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order. We require the unanimous consent of the house to proceed in the manner suggested a short while ago. Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, I had allowed the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) to make our stand known. I would also like to point out that there is nothing folkloric about this
April 30, 1969

debate, in spite of what the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) said yesterday.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Order.
By unanimous consent, consideration of amendment No. 28 is adjourned. The house will now revert to amendment No. 24 for the purpose of recording the division thereon. The question is on motion No. 24, (Mr. Wool-liams for Mr. Valade) which reads:
That Bill C-150, an act to amend the Criminal Code, the Parole Act, the Penitentiary Act, the Prisons and Reformatories Act and to make certain consequential amendments to the Combines Investigation Act, the Customs Tariff and the National Defence Act, be amended by deleting in clause 18 the word "and" on line 5 on page 43 and the "period" after the word "practitioner" on line 8 on page 43 and inserting the following words: "and, (e) that those means are employed before the period of implantation."
Is the pleasure of the house to adopt the said motion?


Some hon. Members:: Yes.


Some hon. Members:: No.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: those in favour will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: those opposed will please say nay.


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: In my
opinion the nays have it.
And more than five members having risen:


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Call in the members.


Mr. Speaker:: The question is now on motion No. 26 (Mr. Clermont) which reads:
That Bill C-150, an act to amend the Criminal Code, the Parole Act, the Penitentiary Act, the Prisons and Reformatories Act and to make certain consequential amendments to the Combines Investigation Act, the Customs Tariff and the National Defence Act, be amended by deleting in clause 18 the words "or would be likely to" on line 4 on page 43.


Mr. Speaker:: All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


Mr. Speaker:: All those opposed to the motion will please say nay.


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


Mr. Speaker:: In my opinion the nays have it.
And more than five members having risen:


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the wish of the House to proceed with the vote without the ringing of the bells?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I rise briefly on a question of privilege. In this afternoon's Ottawa Citizen there is a headline that reads:	"Speaker Cuts
Short 'Tenacious' N.D.P. Attack On Abortion Reforms". Obviously this is a mistake; it is not a correct reference to this party at all. If it is a reference at all, it is to another
DEBATES	8197
Criminal Code
party. I think it is also unfair to Your Honour.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: It being after six o'clock this house stands adjourned until two o'clock tomorrow afternoon.


[Stage Direction]
It being eleven minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
8199
[Stage Direction]
Thursday, May 1, 1969


[Stage Direction]
Eighteenth report of Standing Committee on Finance, Trade and Economic Affairs-Mr. Gaston Clermont (Gatineau).
[Editor's Note: The text of the foregoing report appears in today's Votes and Proceedings.]