1970-01-12

HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES


[Stage Direction]
Queen's Printer for Canada, Ottawa, 1970
[Stage Direction]
Monday, January 12, 1970

Mr. Speaker:: As hon. members are aware, television cameras have been located for some time in the foyer adjacent to the House of Commons. Propriety of this procedure has been considered by the Chair in consultation with House Leaders and with the executive of the Press Gallery. It was agreed by all concerned, in the course of these lengthy discussions covering several months, that the decision should be left with the Chair. The decision has been made that on an experimental basis, the foyer should no longer be used for this purpose. To give effect to the decision Room 110-S, located at the foot of the stairs leading to the foyer, has been made available to the Press Gallery for the purpose indicated, in addition to Room 154-D which was already available to members of the Press Gallery for radio and television interviews. Technical objections having been made to the use of this particular space, Room 238-S has also been allocated to the Press Gallery on a temporary basis for interviews following Orders of the Day.
This decision has had the effect of bringing into focus a long-standing problem, that of television and radio coverage of the House and its committee proceedings. In view of the wide interest shown in the situation, I have taken the liberty of consulting with the House Leaders and suggesting to them, as they are representative of the members of all parties in the House, that the whole issue should be considered forthwith by the Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization. I propose to have a further meeting with the House Leaders in the hope that a suitable reference will be made as soon as possible.
I think I should insist that in so far as I am particularly concerned, as the custodian of the dignity of the House of Commons and its proceedings, I feel as strongly as ever today that the foyer should not be used as it has in the past for the purpose of radio and television interviews. It is my hope that the House Leaders and the Committee on Procedure and Organization, in consultation with representatives of the Press Gallery, can find a solution which will be acceptable to all concerned.
[DOT] (2:10 p.m.)



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, hon. members will no doubt wish to know what steps the government is taking with regard to the rapidly changing situation in Nigeria. The latest information we have is that the Commander in Chief of the Biafran forces has ordered his troops to stop fighting and has asked General Gowon for an immediate cease-fire. The government welcomes General Gowon's statement of reassurance to the supporters of the Biafran cause. Bringing hostilities to an end in a territory like that of Eastern Nigeria inevitably results in confusion. The government hopes that General Gowon will spare no effort in maintaining the discipline of his forces and protecting the lives of all the peoples of Nigeria.
We have, at the moment, two senior officers of the Canadian Armed Forces in the area of operations as part of the International Military Observer Team. The government is offering to provide more observer personnel.
The need for relief is bound to increase very rapidly. The government considers it of first importance that outside relief activity should be co-ordinated on an international basis in co-operation with the government of Nigeria, preferably under the aegis of the Red Cross. With this in mind, we are in touch with the Nigerian government and other governments concerned with relief activities. There are considerable stocks of food and other supplies in Nigeria and neighbouring countries, including ports like Cotonou and Sao Tome. The immediate problem is to move these supplies rapidly and effectively into the areas where they are most urgently required.

January 12, 1970
Biafran Relief
Now that hostilities have ended we hope that it will be possible to open up land supply routes. We have also asked our High Commissioner in Lagos to reiterate to the Nigerian government our willingness to mount an air drop operation without delay if this is the only means whereby relatively large stocks of food can be delivered quickly to otherwise inaccessible areas.
As announced on Friday, the government is providing $500,000 to the Nigerian Red Cross, $500,000 to the Nigerian Rehabilitation Commission and $250,000 to the International Committee of the Red Cross to aid in the delivery of food and other relief operations. Immediate steps are being taken to make these funds available and the government is exploring ways in which additional funds might effectively be used. As and when it should be required, we are prepared to provide aircraft for an airlift. Canadian Armed Forces Hercules are standing by for these operations. These should be regarded as essential interim measures because, in the long run, supplies in the quantities needed must be delivered by surface transport.
To assist our High Commission to deal with a vastly increased work load and with the special requirements that will be placed upon it, we are sending a small group of experts in relief, transportation and other fields to Lagos.
I am sure that members on all sides of the House will agree with me that we must spare no effort in co-operation with other interested nations to ensure that the tragic war in Nigeria is not followed by disastrous famine and unnecessary suffering.


Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, this is certainly not a time for recriminations about government policy touching on this very tragic situation. Nevertheless we must say that the maladroitness and ineffectiveness of the government's policies with regard to the Nigerian-Biafran difficulty to date have created a feeling of uneasiness on the part of all those in this country who are concerned about what may happen there now. After a very bitter and bloody war there is bound to be a legacy of bitterness which one can only hope will be overcome by appropriate arrangements. There has also been a very genuine fear of genocide on the part of the Biafrans, and it is not merely confined to the Biafrans because His

Holiness the Pope and others have expressed concern about the possibility of genocide, either actively or through starvation.
The government of Canada is now offering to supply additional military observers, but the Secretary of State for External Affairs has not indicated the extent to which Canada is pressing for this; neither has he indicated acceptance of the government's proposal or where that proposal stands. It is vitally important not only that the team of observers be enlarged but that it should have freedom of movement. It should have not only the theoretical right to go to various parts of the country but the ability to get there. There has been a terrible loss of life, sir, and we must do all we can to keep any further loss of life to a minimum.
We, like the government, welcome the willingness expressed by the governments of Britain, United States, France and other countries to participate in measures to bring relief, but surely this has to be considered in its totality. The government should not simply offer to make observers available but should take the initiative to ensure that such a team is at work in the field to report on what is actually going on there. Furthermore, the relief that is needed should be in a forward position.
The Secretary of State for External Affairs stated that a lot of supplies were available nearby. Can he assure us that the supplies that are immediately required are available? For example, will additional truck transportation be required immediately to make this relief available to the various parts of the country? Is the government now using Hercules aircraft and is it doing its part to ensure that trucks are being put in a forward position to be able to respond when required?
I agree with what the Secretary of State for External Affairs has said about the importance of co-ordination. Obviously it is of vital importance; otherwise relief efforts could degenerate into chaos. The minister has said that Canada has made a proposal, but what response has the government of Canada received? Time is of the essence. It is not a matter for long discussions with the government of Nigeria and personal emissaries going to Lagos. There must not be the sort of delay there has been in the past. Time and vigour are of the essence.
We want more than just a general statement of intentions. We want to know what is going on. We need to send observers there in
January 12, 1970

adequate numbers. We need far more information than the Secretary of State for External Affairs has given us regarding the response. What is the actual state of these proposals put forward? To what extent are they being received? What action in fact is being taken? All we have heard from the Secretary of State for External Affairs are general assurances about the willingness of the government of Canada to do certain things. We want to know what is going on. We want action and not only pious declarations.
At the conclusion of the comments on the statement made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs I will seek the unanimous consent of the House to have the House give instructions to the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence with regard to the continuing surveillance of the government's program.


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, it has now become clear that the military operations in Nigeria and Biafra are coming to an end, but that does not necessarily mean that the immense tragedy that has taken place there cannot be compounded and continued unless there is urgent and immediate action within a matter of hours. I want to reinforce what the Leader of the Opposition has said, that this is a question of hours, not of days or weeks. Something must be done right away.
[DOT] (2:20 p.m.)
The present method of feeding four million people in this unhappy country by airlift has necessarily been disrupted for the time being. Many people are on a knife-edge; threatened daily and hourly by death through starvation. In these circumstances it will be necessary not only to mount a massive international effort in the long run but to use the existing facilities provided by the people who are already there, the people who are operating the feeding centres, in the short run, which means within the next day or two. I put it to the Secretary of State for External Affairs that if there was ever a need for urgent and immediate action it is now.
I wish to pay tribute on this occasion to those gallant people who fought so tenaciously for independence and survival, as they saw it, against heavy odds. I wish to pay tribute also to all those who planned, executed and carried through the magnificent, imaginative and heroic air operation which, as I said ear-
Biafran Relief
lier, has saved up to two million people from starvation despite immense hazards and difficulties. I refer to the operations under Joint Church Aid and, initially, the International Red Cross.
It seems to me the new situation imposes heavy obligations on the international community which permitted this situation to develop. There is need not only for an expanded military observer team, as the Secretary of State for External Affairs indicated, but for a substantially expanded team whose membership would not be confined to the military alone. There is an obligation on the international community to ensure that the fear of genocide does not turn into one of the tragic facts of this generation.
There is also a long term need to organize an international community which would be able to intervene even in civil wars to preserve human rights and lives. We cannot afford in this world to experience tragedies like Biafra.
In view of the large number of questions which still arise despite the statement of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, and the immense concern of the Canadian people, I shall put forward, when the occasion arises, a motion that this matter be debated further today.


Mr. Bernard Dumont (Frontenac):: Mr. Speaker, since the beginning of 1970, we have gone through very tragic hours and very dark days. The Ralliement creditiste has been calling the attention of the government to the problems of Biafra and Nigeria far the past two years.
We note, following the minister's statement, that the government can act quickly when it wants to. It is unfortunate that this action has not been taken without any political consideration, in order to prevent the starvation of Biafrans and Nigerians. The genocide of Biaf-rans is really an unfortunate event.
We cannot understand why Canada did not intervene before today. I think that love of lucre was stronger than Christian charity. Unfortunately, pressures to prevent England from selling arms to Nigeria failed. We have rendered valuable services to that country in the past and stronger pressures from us would surely have brought results.
Finally, since the tragedy is now over, I would suggest to the Secretary of State for External Affairs that we could send to Nigeria,

January 12, 1970
Biafran Relief
besides military observers, representatives of all parties of the House who could examine the problems on the scene.
If members of Parliament can attend United Nations meetings as observers, can go to Paris, to India or to any other country, why would it not be passible for representatives of each party accompanied by military observers to visit the scene of the hostilities in order to get clear and precise information about the situation and to report to the House so that the government will be in a position to take the steps necessary to eliminate misery from that part of the world.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 43 I ask unanimous consent of the House to move the following motion:
That the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence be instructed to take under consideration immediately the plans of the government to give assistance to the victims of the Nigerian-Biafran conflict; that the committee exercise continuing surveillance over the efforts of the Canadian government in this respect; and report with all possible speed to this House as to the adequacy of the measures proposed and recommend any further measures it considers appropriate.


Mr. Macdonald (Rosedale):: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, we on this side of the House would be quite prepared to have the committee study this question if it is agreeable that the question on the motion be put without debate today.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Hon. members have heard the motion proposed by the Leader of the Opposition, which can be accepted only by unanimous agreement. There may be a difficulty in that the President of the Privy Council has placed a condition on putting the motion which places the Chair in a somewhat embarrassing position. Since there can be no debate under the rules I can only ask whether there is unanimous agreement to the motion proposed by the Leader of the Opposition, though I am willing to hear any member on the point of order raised by the President of the Privy Council.


Mr. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to raise one point. The motion has been placed before the House under Standing Order 43.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: No, it has not.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: All there is for the House to decide is whether or not unanimous consent is forthcoming. I do not think that any member or any party in the House can put a proviso on their approval. As far as we are concerned we are prepared to give unanimous support.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am in agreement with the point of order raised by the hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands, who raised the same point I had in mind. I was trying to be helpful to hon. members, but according to the terms of Standing Order 43 I can ask only whether there is unanimous consent to the putting of the motion proposed by the Leader of the Opposition.

Is there unanimous consent of the House for the Chair to put the motion submitted by the Leader of the Opposition?


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: As there is not unanimous consent, the question cannot be put to the House.



QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER

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

Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg: North Centre):
How many vacancies by category of position in each department of the Public Service were filled by persons (a) from outside the Public Service and (b) from inside the Public Service, between July 1, 1969 and October 1, 1969?


Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Secretary of State):: I am informed by the Public Service Commission as follows: The total number of appointments made under the Public Service Employment Act between July 1 and October 1, 1969, in each category of positions, is as follows: (a) From outside the Public Service: Administrative and Foreign Service, 428; Administrative Support, 465; Operational, 328; Scientific and Professional, 524; Executive, 5; Technical, 286.
(b) From within the Public Service: Administrative and Foreign Service, 613; Administrative Support, 552; Operational, 52; Scientific and Professional, 98; Executive, 36; Technical, 47.
January 12, 1970

Questions
This information is not segregated by de-	2. See answer to 1. above,
partments in the Commission's records.	3. See answer to 1. above.


URBAN RENEWAL-FREEZING OF FEDERAL ASSISTANCE
Mr. Gilbert: 1.	On what date this past summer did the Minister responsible for Housing announce a freeze of federal government assistance for urban renewal projects?
2.	On what date were cities and municipalities in Canada informed of the federal government's decision in this matter?
3.	On what date were the provincial governments informed of the federal government's decision in this matter?


Hon. Robert K. Andras (Minister without Portfolio):: 1. On August 14, 1969, the Minister responsible for Housing issued a public statement which in part indicated that "Until a more well-defined and logical long-term Canadian urban renewal policy can be formulated and enunciated, municipalities with urban renewal schemes presently in preparation will have to elect either to susped further study or, alternatively, to complete their work in the knowledge that additional federal funds for implementation of the schemes may or may not be forthcoming." Discussions with the provincial governments during the summer dealt with the urban renewal program among other matters of mutual interest and the provincial and municipal officials concerned were notified officially of the government's decision immediately after the public announcement.


URBAN RENEWAL-BAN ON PLANS
Mr. Gilbert: 1.	Is there presently a ban on all urban renewal plans in Canada financed by the Government of Canada?
2.	When is it expected that the Government of Canada will formulate its policy on urban renewal projects?


Robert Knight Andras: 1. No.
2.	See the statement made by the Hon. R. K. Andras in the House of Commons December 18, 1969.


URBAN RENEWAL-PLANS AFFECTED BY SUSPENSION OF ASSISTANCE
Mr. Gilbert: Which urban renewal plans submitted to the federal government have been affected or cancelled by the suspension of all urban renewal projects funded by the Government of Canada?


Robert Knight Andras: The processing of applications for financial assistance for urban renewal studies, the preparation of urban renewal schemes and the implementation of urban renewal schemes, was suspended following the announcement of August 14, 1969. The following is a list of applications received by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation which have been affected by the suspension.
Part V, NHA Urban Renewal Studies
Hawkesbury, Ontario.
Section 23A, NHA Preparation of Urban Renewal Schemes
St. John's Nfld.
(TherBattery) Yarmouth, N.S. Dartmouth, N.S.
Halifax, N.S.
North Sdyney, N.S. Fredericton, N.B. Brockville, Ontario. Cobalt, Ontario.
St. Thomas, Ontario. Regina, Sask.
Estevan, Sask. Yellowknife, NWT Chilliwack, B.C. Vancouver, B.C.
Section 23B, NHA Implementation of Urban Renewal Schemes
Cambellton, New Brunswick Cornwall, Ontario.
Hamilton, Ontario. Kitchener, Ontario. Mountjoy, Ontario. Winnipeg, Manitoba. Calgary, Alberta. Drumheller, Alberta.
New Westminster, B.C. Vancouver, B.C.
The following is a list of applications received by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation which have been approved in part only:
Nil
Nil
London, Ontario. Niagara Falls, Ontario.

January 12, 1970
Questions


URBAN RENEWAL PROGRAM STUDIES
Mr. Gilbert: 1.	What specific studies have been undertaken regarding urban renewal programs in Canada as mentioned by the Minister responsible for Housing in his statement at the press conference in the National Press Conference Theatre, at 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, August 14, 1969?
2.	Which civil servants or outside individuals or groups are working on each of these studies and when are each of them expected to be completed?


Robert Knight Andras: 1. The comprehensive study of urban renewal policy currently underway covers the over-all social, physical and economic aspects of urban renewal.
2.	The study is being undertaken by the officers of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation responsible for urban renewal and the related professional services within the Corporation. The study will take into account the views of the provinces, municipalities, residents' associations, academics and other interested outside individuals or groups. It is anticipated that this study will be completed next year.


PUBLIC SERVICE JOB APPLICATIONS
Mr. Gleave: 1.	How many applications for jobs in the Public Service were there during each month of the year of 1968?
2.	How many applications were successful?
3.	How many applications were not successful because the RCMP would not grant security clearance?
4.	Is the RCMP obliged to explain to the department, or the individual concerned, the reasons for their decision?
Mr. Yves Fores! (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council): 1. These statistics are not available. It is the usual practice to destroy applications for candidates who are not appointed after a period of one year.
2.	Same as above. Figures are available on the number of appointments by month to the Public Service commencing with the period July 1, 1968. They are listed as follows: July, 860; August, 1,138; September, 1,157; October, 1,234; November, 941; December, 3,048.
The total number of appointments to the Public Service for all of 1968 were 20,379.
3.	It is not the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, but each department which hires an employee through the Public Service Commis-

sion that has the responsibility of ensuring that a prospective employee is not a security risk.
4.	Not applicable.


TAX CONCESSIONS, SHAHEEN NATURAL RESOURCES
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	When did Shaheen Natural Resources Inc., first apply to the Government of Canada regarding federal tax concessions for a refinery to be built on Trinity Bay, Newfoundland?
2.	What was the response of the Government of Canada to this request?
3.	What changes were made in the October 22, 1968 federal budget governing the tax-free status of Crown corporations that are under purchase option by private interests?
4.	Has the Government of Canada now agreed to federal tax concessions for Shaheen Natural Resources of New York regarding this refinery and, if so, what are they?
5.	For what reasons has the Government of Canada now allowed Shaheen Natural Resources Inc. of New York federal tax concessions for its refinery?
6.	What is the estimated loss in federal government revenue due to these tax concessions?
7.	What is the estimated period of tax-free operations of the refinery due to these federal tax concessions?
8.	Is Mr. Charles R. Granger, a former Member of Parliament, an officer of Shaheen Natural Resources Inc., and if so, what is his position?
9.	What other provincial or municipal tax concessions have been provided to Shaheen Natural Resources Inc. for its refinery?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of Finance):: 1.
Shaheen Natural Resources Inc. did not make an application to the government of Canada regarding federal tax concessions for a refinery to be built on Trinity Bay. The government of the Province of Newfoundland did make representations to Ottawa concerning the tax position of this refinery and of certain other Newfoundland corporations.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	The Budget Speech on October 22, 1968 announced that Parliament would be asked to amend Section 62(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act. This was subsequently done by Section 14(1) of Chapter 44 of the Statutes of 1968-69.
4.	No measures have been taken applicable to a specific company. The Income Tax Regulations were amended on August 15, 1969, by Order in Council P.C. 1969-1643 to allow a fast deduction of the capital cost of certain depreciable property. This was intended to ease the transition from the old to the new law provided by the amendment to Section 62(l)(c) of the Income Tax Act.
January 12, 1970

The amendment to the Regulations allows any corporation, commission or association in existence on October 22, 1968 that would have qualified for tax exemption under Section 62(1X0 of the Income Tax Act, if that section had not been amended, to claim capital cost allowance at a rate of 100% in respect of property acquired by the corporation, commission or association before October 23, 1968, or after October 22, 1968 and before 1974 where the property is acquired under an agreement in writing made before October 23, 1968 and ratified by a provincial statute that came into force before October 23, 1968. By this amendment, all of the corporations affected were enabled to use the full cash flow of their businesses to meet debt obligations and repayment schedules which they undertook at a time when they did not expect to be subject to corporation income tax.
5.	See reply to part 4.
6.	Given the nature of accelerated capital cost allowance, there may be some postponement of federal tax by some of the corporations involved, but there should not be any loss of federal government revenues.
7.	Not available. It will depend on the future profits of the refinery and its applicable capital cost allowances.
8.	It is believed that in August 1968 he was appointed a Vice-President of Shaheen Natural Resources Company Incorporated.
9.	This is not a matter within the administrative responsibility of the government.


&quot;MANHATTAN&quot; PROJECT-ASSERTION OF SOVEREIGNTY
Mr. Thomson (Ballleford-: Kindersley):
1.	Did the Government of Canada at any time in the course of the planning of the Manhattan project assert its sovereignty over the waters between the Arctic islands and, if so, in what way?
2.	Does the Canadian Government have an obligation of any kind to undertake a rescue mission should a vessel run into trouble in the waters between the Arctic islands?
3.	Does the Government of Canada have any plans to establish navigational aids in the Arctic?


Mr. Yves Forest (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: I am
informed by the Department of External Affairs and the Department of Transport as follows: 1. The government has outlined its position concerning the Manhattan exercise on a number of occasions and will in due 21611-7\
Questions
course announce further measures that will be taken with respect to the waters of the Arctic archipelago.
2.	Canadian legislation requires any Canadian ship at sea to go to the assistance of any other vessel that is in distress. No Canadian government has ever accepted direct responsibility for all rescue at sea, but the government has assumed a supporting role through the provision of an organization for the co-ordination of all marine rescue and has directed that all government ships will participate in these rescue efforts. There are no particular geographical limits to these undertakings and to the extent that they are practicable they would apply in Arctic waters in the same way as anywhere else.
3.	Aids to navigation are currently established each season as required by traffic and further aids with possibly greater sophistication will be considered as traffic develops.


CBC SPORTS TELECAST SPONSORS
Mr. Mather: 1.	Which brewery company sponsors CBC Canadian football telecasts?
2.	Which brewery company sponsors other CBC sports telecasts?
3.	In August, was there a sponsor conflict which prevented the CBC from carrying, on a later newscast film, the remaining minutes of the Hamilton Tiger-Cat and Montreal Alouettes football game which was not televised due to a technical breakdown?
4.	If so, what actions is the CBC taking to ensure that such conflicts do not reoccur?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: 1. Labatt Breweries of Canada Limited sponsor one-quarter of the CFL Football telecasts.
2.	With respect to regularly scheduled CBC sports events coverage, Molson Breweries of Canada Limited sponsor one-third of each of the Hockey Night in Canada telecasts; Canadian Breweries Limited sponsor one-quarter of each of the NFL Football telecasts and, during the baseball seasons, sponsored 15 Montreal Expos games plus one-quarter of the World Series. With respect to TV sports reports, O'Keefe Brewing Company Limited, Canadian Breweries Limited and Labatt Breweries are the sponsors of local programs on some individual stations.
3.	No. The coach's film could not be processed in time for the CBLT Sports Report on Saturday, August 9 but the two minutes

January 12, 1970
Questions
that were missed were telecast over CBLT on the late night Sports Report on Monday August 11. It was decided not to schedule the film on the Sunday Sports Report in order to preclude the possibility of impairing relations with the CFL and the sponsor of the live telecast.
4.	See answer No. 3.


&quot;GUIDE TO RELATIVE PRECEDENCE AT OTTAWA&quot;
Mr. Howard (Skeena): 1.	How many employees are engaged in all aspects of the publication "Guide to Relative Precedence at Ottawa"?
2.	For each fiscal year since, and including 196566, what has been the total cost of all aspects of the said publication?
3.	Is there any intention of discontinuing this publication and, if so, when?


Gérard Pelletier: 1.	Four.
2.	1965-66, $1,673.86; 1966-67, $1,969.55; 1967-68, $3,297.97; 1968-69, $7,025.65.
3.	Consideration has not been given to discontinuing the publication.


COST AND REVENUE, CBC TELEVISION SHOWS
Mr. Broadbent: 1.	What is the cost to CBC-TV of each of the prime-time U.S. shows it imports?
2.	What is the total cost to CBC-TV of each of the prime-time Canadian shows it presents?
3.	What is total advertising revenue for Canadian prime-time shows and U.S. prime-time shows?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: 1 and 2. It has not been customary to require the CBC to disclose specific program costs since such details would affect the corporation's competitive position. However, it usually costs more to produce Canadian programs than to import U.S. programs.
3.	No such breakdown is available.


FEDERAL FINANCIAL AID FOR URBAN MASS TRANSIT FACILITIES
Mr. Mather: 1. Does the federal government make available to provincial or municipal administrations financial aid in regard to long-term planning and development of urban mass transit facilities?

2. Is consideration being given to reviewing the present federal role in this matter?


Yves Forest: I am
informed by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion as follows: 1. The Department of Regional Economic Expansion may do so in slow growth regions.
2. No.


PRIVY COUNCIL PERSONNEL
Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How many people were employed in the Privy Council Office and/or the Prime Minister's Office as of September 1, 1963, 1965, 1967, 1969?
2.	Of these people, what were the numbers receiving salaries in each of the ranges $4,000-$7,000; $7,000-$10,000; $10,000-$15,000; $15,000 plus?


Mr. J. E. Walker (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister):: 1.
1963	1965	1967	1969>	181	125	185	232$ 4,000- 7,000	79	67	94	106$ 7,000-10,000	25	12	18	37$10,000-15,000	28	9	15	23$15,000 plus	8	12	31	53140	100	158	219
Note: Figures are for September 1 in each year.


ELEVATOR DELIVERY POINTS
Mr. Stewart (Marquette): 1.	How many elevator delivery points are there for grain in each of the Provinces, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta?
2.	Of these delivery points, by province, how many were unable to accept a 5-bushel quota at the crop year ending July 31, 1969?
3.	By provinces, of these delivery points unable to accept a 5-bushel quota at the crop year ending July 31, 1969, how many were located on the C.P.R. and how many were on the C.N.R.?
4.	As of October 28, 1969, how many of these points have been able to complete the 5-bushel quota for the last crop year?


Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister without Portfolio):: 1. Manitoba, 324; Saskatchewan, 983; Alberta including Peace River Block of British Columbia, 509; Total, 1,816.
2.	Number of stations submitting deferred delivery permits: Manitoba, 166; Saskatchewan, 683; Alberta including Peace River Block of British Columbia, 281; Total, 1,130.
3.	Manitoba, C.N.R., 57; C.P.R., 104; C.N.R. and C.P.R. 5; Total, 166. Saskatchewan, C.N.R. 296; C.P.R., 374; C.N.R. and C.P.R. 13; Total
January 12, 1970

Questions
683. Alberta including Peace River Block of that the priorities of the provinces would be British Columbia, C.N.R., 124; C.P.R. 97; carefully considered in developing the 1970 C.N.R. and C.P.R., 6; N.A.R., 49; G.S.L., 4; program.
C.N.R. and N.A.R., 1; Total, 281	A copy of this brief was referred to the
4.	Information not available as bulk of De- Prime Minister for information by the Minis-ferred Delivery Permits were not mailed until ter without Portfolio responsible for housing. October 18, 1969.


COMPLAINTS RESPECTING POSTAL SERVICE
Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg: North Centre):
1.	Would the Minister of Public Works give consideration to publishing the complete list of tenders for each project in his monthly announcement of major contract awards?
2.	Would the Minister also give consideration to publishing the cumulative amount of contract awards for each company awarded another contract?


Hon. Arthur Laing (Minister of Public Works):: 1. and 2. After careful examination it is considered that the administrative procedures involved in providing the requested information would be very onerous. Therefore it will not be possible to institute such a report on a regular basis. Lists of tenderers for any specific project will continue to be available on request.


HOUSING-ALLOCATION OF FUNDS TO PROVINCES
Mr. Lambert (Edmonton: West):
1. Has the Minister without Portfolio, responsible for housing, or any member of the government received a brief from the Government of the Province of Alberta complaining about the apparent unfair allocation of funds between provinces for housing arising out of the application of general monetary policy changes?
2 Has a reply been given and what was the nature of the reply?


Yves Forest: The
Hon. F. C. Colborne, the Minister of Municipal Affairs for the Province of Alberta presented a housing brief from the Province of Alberta to the Hon. Robert Andras on Monday, the 27th October. The brief dealt mainly with the flow of mortgage funds and in the private sector recommended that consideration be given to shielding the flow of mortgage funds from the full effect of the anti-inflation program. In the public sector, the brief gave the strongest support to the policy of the federal government of using the largest part of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation capital budget to provide housing for low income families. Mr. Colborne was assured


Mr. Coates: How many written complaints have been received by the Postmaster General and his department regarding the service presently available to the public since June 25, 1968?


Hon. Eric W. Kierans (Postmaster General and Minister of Communications):: 16,217.
Note: The Post Office handled, in total more than 7 billion pieces of mail in this 17 month period.
In addition to the figure stated, departmental managers at headquarters and the field received a limited number of complaints of the miscellaneous category. These are not recorded and determining the total number would involve search of thousands of files at headquarters and in hundreds of field components, entailing delay in replying and a very substantial amount of labour hours and cost.


CBC PROGRAMS ON PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE AND NDP MEETINGS
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	Between October 9-14, 1969, how many CBC "Viewpoint" or "Preview Commentary" programs dealt with the Niagara Falls Conference of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada?
2.	When and by whom were such broadcasts made?
3 For what other CBC programs (television or radio) was the conference the subject matter?
4.	How many actuality broadcasts originated from the Niagara Falls conference throughout its proceedings?
5.	What was the total coverage given to the Niagara Falls Conference by the CBC?
6.	How many interviews with participants at the Niagara Falls conference were carried by the CBC radio-television networks and who were the persons interviewed?
7.	What sessions of the Niagara Falls conference were broadcast "live" by the CBC radio or television and what is the total time of such coverage?
8.	How many CBC "Viewpoint" or "Preview Commentary" programs dealt with the 1969 convention of the New Democratic Party held at Winnipeg?
9.	When and by whom were such broadcasts made?
10.	For what other CBC programs (television and radio) was the convention the subject matter?

January 12, 1970
Questions
11.	How many actuality broadcasts originated from the New Democratic Party convention in Winnipeg?
12.	What was the total coverage (TV and radio) given to the New Democratic Party convention by the CBC?
13.	How many interviews with delegates to the New Democratic Party convention were carried by the CBC (television and radio) and who were the persons interviewed?
14.	On how many special affairs programs, news casts or public affairs programs did Professor Melville Watkins appear?
15.	Is it the policy of the CBC to allocate time on its networks to political conventions of opposition parties in inverse ratio to the proportion of the votes received by the respective parties in the last preceding election?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: 1. There were no "Viewpoint" programs on the subject during the period specified but there were two following the Conference. There was one "Preview Commentary" program on the subject during the Oct. 9-14 period.
2.	"Viewpoint"-Oct. 15 by W. A. Wilson (Montreal Gazette) and Oct. 21 by Dennis Smith (Trent University). "Preview Commentary"-Oct. 14 by Ron Blain.
3.	Television-News items on the national TV news Oct. 9, 10 and 13 and on evening news Oct. 10. Also French network news items Oct. 9-13 inclusive. "Weekend-Saturday Edition", Oct. 11. "Weekend-Sunday Edition", Oct. 12.
Radio-News items on "World at Six" Oct. 9, 10 and 13; World at Eight" Oct. 10 and 13; One O'clock News Oct. 10 and 13; National News Oct. 9 and 12. Also French Network news items Oct. 9-13 inclusive. "Capital Report", Oct. 12. "Five Nights a Week at This Time", Oct. 13. "Matinee", Oct. 13 and 15. Closing Address by Hon. Robert Stanfield, Oct. 13. "Canadian Roundup", Oct. 13. "Sunday Magazine", Oct. 12. "Present", Oct. 17.
4.	Closing address by Hon. Robert Stanfield plus 20 actuality clips used as items on the English network; 14 actuality clips used as items on the French network.
5.	Total CBC radio and television coverage on the English networks was just over 2 hours; total on the French networks was approximately one hour.
6.	Seven. Flora McDonald, David Surpliss, Heward Grafftey, Richard Atkey, Senator Jacques Flynn and Fernand Alie (2).
7.	Closing address of Hon. Robert Stanfield, Oct. 13, for 30 minutes.
IMr. Macquarrie.]
8.	One "Viewpoint" and One "Preview Commentary".
9.	"Viewpoint"-Oct. 31, by Ellen Simmons. "Preview Commentary"-Oct. 28, by Michael Wicks.
10.	Television-News items on the national TV news Oct. 28-31 inclusive and on the evening news Oct. 30. Also French network items Oct. 27-31 inclusive. "Weekend-Saturday Edition", Nov. 1. "Weekend-Sunday Edition", Oct. 26 and Nov. 2. Two Specials on Oct. 30. "Format 60", Oct. 31.
Radio-News items on "World at Eight" Oct. 28-31 inclusive; "World at Six" Oct. 27-31 inclusive; One O'clock News Oct. 29, 30 and 31; National news Oct. 27, 28, 30 and 31; Nine a.m. news Oct. 31; Also French network news items Oct. 27-31 inclusive. "Radio Free Friday", Oct. 24. "As It Happens", Oct. 27. "Matinee", Oct. 30. "Five Nights a Week at This Time", Oct. 31. Closing Address by T. C. Douglas, Oct. 31. "Canadian Roundup", Oct. 30. "Sunday Magazine", Nov. 2. "Present", Nov. 3. "Au Rythme du Monde", Nov. 2.
11.	Closing address by T. C. Douglas plus 22 actuality clips used as items on the English network; 19 actuality clips used as items on the French network.
12.	Total CBC radio and television coverage on the English networks was just over 3 hours; total on the French networks was 1J hours.
13.	Fifteen. T. C. Douglas (2), David Lewis
(2), Melville Watkins (2), Charles Taylor (3), Laurier Lapierre, Mr. Lassiter, Dawn Carrol, Roy Atkinson, Enid Paige, Rolland Morin.
14.	Five appearances in news programs, three in current affairs programs and two in special programs from the convention; plus one French network appearance.
15.	It is the policy of the CBC to make convention coverage decisions on the basis of program judgment following assessment of the degree and kind of broadcast coverage warranted. Special attention is paid to leadership contests where the party concerned is consulted to ensure the most effective coverage possible.


GRAIN MOVEMENT MEASURES
Mr. Burton: What measures, other than the block system, are being considered to deal with the problem of grain movement?


Otto Emil Lang: The Grains Group which was recently established by the government, is examining
January 12, 1970

further measures to improve the grain handling and transportation system. Specific measures considered feasible will be outlined from time to time.


COMBINING OF SOCIAL WELFARE TAXES
Mr. Robinson: Will the federal government consider the advisability of combining the Old Age Security Tax, Canada Pension Plan Tax, Guaranteed Income Supplement Tax in order to provide one comprehensive payment for the aged, widowed and orphaned?


Hon. John C. Munro (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: The purpose of the Old
Age Security program is to provide for Canada's senior citizens a universal flat rate pension as a base on which they can build for their retirement years. This plan is financed by a special tax on personal income, corporation income and sales. These taxes are not identified with the individuals who pay them and eligibility for the pension is not based on their payment.
The Canada Pension Plan is complementary to the Old Age Security program and is intended to provide Canadians with additional financial security through the payment of retirement, disability and survivors benefits. This is a contributory plan under which the amount of the graduated benefits paid is related to the earnings of employees and selfemployed persons.
Questions
When the Canada Pension Plan was introduced it was realized that there would be some persons who would not qualify for full benefits during the ten-year period of transition while there would be others who would not have any entitlement due to non-employment. The Guaranteed Income Supplement program was brought into being as a means of augmenting the Old Age Security pension for this group of persons. Payments are made from the Old Age Security Fund.
Since these programs are based on two different principles, namely graduated benefits and a flat rate benefit, and since the Canada Pension Plan is not operative in Quebec, which has a comparable provincial plan, it would be extremely difficult to combine them as suggested. If in the future a decision is made to effect any changes, they will be announced at the appropriate time.


PAYMENTS TO NORTHLAND NAVIGATION COMPANY
Mr. Howard (Skeena): For each fiscal year since and including 1964-65, how much money has been paid to Northland Navigation Company for (a) providing service to B.C. Coastal communities (b) carrying of mail (c) other purposes?


Yves Forest: The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
The Canadian Transport Commission
(a)	1964-65	
$15,000	$387,4481965-	66	
18,000	388,0001966-	67	
19,000	315,9141967-	68	
20,000	398,6661968-	69	
25,000	523,800
The Post Office Department
(b)	1964-65	
$ 8,000	$ 87,4331965-	66	
8,000	66,7851966-	67	
8,000	69,8501967-	68	
10,000	65,4631968-	69.	
10,000	62,525
The Department of Fisheries and Forestry
(c)	1964-65	
$ 1,000	$ 3,6491965-	66	
1,500	5,6471966-	67	
1,500	3,4811967-	68	
2,500	3,5551968-	69	
2,500	2,401
January 12, 1970
Questions


PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION PLANNING DIVISION
Mr. Fortin: 1.	Is there a planning division in the Public Service Commission and, if so, what is its composition?
2.	What reports have been drawn up by this division in the last two years?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Public Service Commission as follows: 1. There is in the Staffing Branch of the Public Service Commission a Planning Service. This Service is comprised of five divisions as follows: (a) Planning and Special Projects Division; (b) Delegation and Monitoring Division; (c) Selection Standards Division; (d) Information Management Centre; (e) Selection Procedures and Testing Division.
Number of
Group	employees
Senior Executive	1
Personnel Administration	34
Administrative Services	5
Cumputer Systems Administration 20 Organization and Methods	5
Data Processing	11
Social Science Support	6
Secretarial, Stenographic, Typing	10
Clerical and Regulatory	26
Total	118
2.	The following represent the major reports issued by the Planning Service during the past two years:
(1)	Lay-off Procedures.
(2)	Definition of Appointment.
(3)	Management Reporting System.
(4)	Use of Automatic Typewriters in the Staffing Branch.
(5)	Employees Appraisal in the Appointment Process.
(6)	Long Range Objectives of Public Service Commission in the Staffing Area.
(7)	Unilingual Secretaries Career Opportunities.
(8)	Planning and Performance Indicators for the Staffing Branch.
(9)	Language Requirements in the Public Service.
(10)	Research Proposal for the Executive Development Programme-Report No. 1.
(11)	Characteristics of Successful Executives: Techniques: Rationale-Report No. 4.
(12)	The relationship of background variables to the pass-fail criterion on the Air Traffic Controller Course.

(13)	Interaction Process Analysis; A method for the study of small groups.
(14)	An analytical study of the stenographic battery in the Canadian Public Service.
(15)	A critical review of the Employee Evaluation Program in the Public Service.
(16)	Types of validity for language proficiency tests.
(17)	Research on the identification, selection and evaluation of Research Scientists: A review of the literature-Report No. 2.
(18)	Stenographic-Secretarial Group: Research Proposal.
(19)	Interviewing and the Interviewer: Characteristics and Research findings.
(20)	The summer intern looks at his job.
(21)	Summary of reports on the Language Proficiency Examinations.
(22)	Training the Trainee: An evaluation of the 1969 formal training session for Administrative Trainee.
(23)	Attitudes of Managers in the Canadian Public Service.
(24)	Interests of Managers in the Canadian Public Service.
(25)	Work of the Manager.
(26)	The Creative Manager.
(27)	Prediction of Managerial Success.
(28)	General description of the Manager.
(29)	Personality of the Manager.
(30)	Statistical treatment of criteria and predictors: Practical Approach.
(31)	Preliminaries to Test Construction and Personnel Testing.


CBC POLICY ON POLITICAL CONVENTIONS
Mr. Broadbent: What is the policy of the CBC regarding radio television coverage of conventions of the major political parties in Canada?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: It is the policy of the CBC to make convention coverage decisions on the basis of program judgment following assessment of the degree and kind of broadcast coverage warranted. Special attention is paid to leadership contests where the party concerned is consulted to ensure the most effective coverage possible.
January 12, 1970


ASSOCIATION QUEBECOISE DES TECHNIQUES DE L'EAU BRIEF
Mr. Matte: 1.	Did the federal government receive a brief from the Association quibecoise des techniques de Veau concerning the management of water resources and, if so, has the government reached an agreement which would extend to the Province of Quebec the same benefits as the other provinces?
2.	Does the federal government intend to accept the AQTE recommendation advocating the creation of a federal water board in which the federal and provincial governments, various agencies and private enterprise would participate?
3.	By what methods does the federal government intend to take maximum advantage of this natural resource?


Mr. R. J. Orange (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: 1. No brief has been received to date but recent correspondence from officers of the Association indicates such a brief may be expected in the near future. Canada is prepared at any time to negotiate with the province of Quebec toward the development of an agreement or agreements concerning the management of water resources. The proposed Canada Water Act will provide the appropriate legislative basis for such agreements.
2.	Presumably the Association quebecoise des techniques de l'eau recommendation will be contained in its Briefs, which will have to be received and studied before any comment can be offered.
3.	Enactment of the proposed Canada Water Act will provide the basic legislation which will facilitate federal-provincial co-operative activities concerning the management of water resources.


URBAN RENEWAL, QUEBEC-SUSPENSION OF CONTRIBUTIONS
Mr. Malie: 1.	Did the federal government suspend Its contributions to urban renewal programs in the Province of Quebec and, if so, does it intend to grant to the Government of Quebec equivalent fiscal points in order to permit projects already planned or under way to be completed without delay?
2.	If not, is it the government's intention to grant any other assistance to the Government of Quebec in the field of housing?


Robert Knight Andras: 1. The announcements made on August 14, and December 18, 1969, regarding the federal government's policy in relation to urban renewal schemes had application in Quebec as it had in all other provinces.
Questions
2. Pursuant to an administrative agreement made between Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Quebec Housing Corporation, CMHC is making loans to the Quebec Housing Corporation in respect of low rental housing projects, public housing projects and student housing projects under the relevant provisions of the National Housing Act, 1954. This agreement covers the period to March 31, 1970. The amount provided for such loans is $124.9 million.


LOANS TO STUDENTS IN QUEBEC AND ONTARIO
Mr. Lalulippe: 1.	In 1968-1969, how much has the federal government granted in loans to students in (a) Quebec (b) Ontario?
2.	What is the percentage granted to Quebec students in relation to Ontario.


Yves Forest: I am
informed by the Department of Finance as follows: 1. (a) No loans. Quebec does not participate in the Canada Student Loans Plan. (See 2 below) (b) 53,911 loans in the amount of $27,538,820.
2. The Province of Quebec has its own student assistance program and has chosen not to participate in the Canada Student Loans Plan. An alternative payment is made to Quebec each year and is determined by applying the ratio of the general population in the 18 to 24 year age group in Quebec to the same population in the rest of Canada at the beginning of the loan year to the total of the statutory costs incurred by the federal government during that loan year.
The alternative payments to Quebec have been as follows:
Loan year in respect
of which payment made Amount of payment 1964/65	74,262
1965/66	757,448
1966/67	1,230,572
1967/68	2,402,552
1968/69	2,915,698


INTEREST FREE LOANS TO PRAIRIE GRAIN GROWERS
Mr. Robinson: 1.	How many prairie grain farmers took advantage of the interest free federal government loans after August 1, 1969?
2.	How many took the maximum loan and how many of them actually needed the loan?

January 12, 1970
Questions
3.	Is there any definite time limit as to when the loan is to be repaid and, ii so, when and, if not, what is the maximum time the interest free loan can remain unpaid?


Otto Emil Lang: 1. As of December 12, 1969, the Canadian Wheat Board records indicate that 97,653 producers took advantage in the current crop year of the Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act.
2.	5,443 producers took the maximum advance payment of $6,000. The Canadian Wheat Board records do not indicate how many producers actually need the advance payment.
3.	Under the Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act the advance payment is to be repaid within a reasonable period of time after the quotas have been increased to the extent that the producer can deliver sufficient grain from which one-half of the gross value, when deducted, would equal the original advance payment.


VIEWER RATING, &quot;SING ALONG JUBILEE&quot;
Mr. Coales: 1.	What is the present viewer rating of the program "Sing Along Jubilee" on the CBC Television Network which replaced "Don Messer's Jubilee"?
2.	What was the rating of "Don Messer's Jubilee" at the same time last year?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: 1. On the metro network of eleven CBC-owned TV stations which carry "Singalong Jubilee", usually at 9-9:30 p.m. on Fridays, the program currently has an average weekly audience of about 1.14 million viewers. "Singalong Jubilee" is not carried by any of the CBC affiliated stations which make up the full CBC network.
2.	At this same time last year, in that same part of the country now served by these eleven stations, "Don Messer", seen normally at 8:30-9:00 p.m. on Fridays, had virtually the same size of audience, an average 1.13 million viewers weekly. On the full network of over 40 CBC and affiliated stations which carried "Don Messer" throughout the country, the program's total weekly audience, at this time last season, averaged about 2.71 million viewers.


CABLE TELEVISION, CALGARY, EDMONTON, REGINA, SASKATOON
Mr. Southam: Is it the intention of the government to make available to the cities of Calgary, Edmonton, Regina
[Mr. Robinson.)
and Saskatoon, microwave transmission for cable television purposes and, if so, how soon can this service be expected?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian RadioTelevision Commission as follows: In a fully-documented decision (CRTC No. 69-397) issued on December 3, 1969, the Canadian Radio-Television Commission stated:	"The
Commission will not licence broadcasting receiving undertakings (CATV) based on the use of microwave or other technical systems, for the wholesale importation of programs from distant U.S. stations and thereby the enlargement of the Canadian audience and market areas of U.S. networks or stations."


INDIAN-ESKIMO RADIO NETWORK
Mr. Howard (Skeena): 1.	Is the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation giving favourable consideration to the request of the Indian-Eskimo Association that a radio network be established to serve the Indians, Eskimos and Metis?
2.	What assistance is being provided by the Canadian Radio-Television Commission in assisting the native peoples in the above project?


Gérard Pelletier: 1. I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation that the Corporation has not had an opportunity to study the details of this request which was presented recently to the Canadian Radio-Television Commission. However, the CBC would be prepared to consider the request as part of its continuing review of overall CBC coverage and programming development.
2. I am informed by the Canadian RadioTelevision Commission that on November 10, 1969, the Canadian Radio-Television Commission received a delegation from the National Indian Brotherhood of Canada, The Canadian Metis Society, The Indian Eskimo Association of Canada and representatives of the Alberta Native Communications Society. A brief was presented which has been studied. Spokesmen for the Commission advised the delegation to concentrate their efforts on producing programmes for Indians, Eskimos and Metis and in securing fuller distribution through existing facilities, rather than become involved in setting up separate facilities.
The CRTC is engaged in studies with the Department of Communications and the CBC
January 12, 1970

Questions
on the extension of services in general, and [English]
in particular with the requirements of this	loan applications, P.e.i.
group.


Mr. McQuaid: 



ANSWERING OF ORDER PAPER QUESTIONS

["1. 2,554 milk and cream shippers.\n2.\t$1,696,868.84.\n3.\tDeductions from subsidy payments for the export equalization fund were made against each shipper's total deliveries, at the same rate for deliveries up to quota and over quota. 1,202 shipped more than their quota.\n4.\tThe figure of deductions on account of over quota deliveries is not available.\nQuestions"]
Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. The Minister.
2.	The President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada.
3.	(a) A Minister of the Crown must be a member of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada and a member of the House of Commons or of the Senate or must become a member of the House of Commons or of the Senate shortly after becoming a Minister; (b) in general, a Minister's function is to be answerable to Parliament both for matters of policy and administration; (c) a Minister may perform many other duties in addition to being responsible for the administration of his department; (d) this is a matter of public record; and (e) the maximum competence obtainable is required.



Mr. Matte: Have requests been made to the CBC concerning the possibility of making free time available each week to each of the political parties and, if so, when will this policy be implemented and, if not, is such action being considered?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the CBC that, to the best of the Corporation's knowledge, no such requests have been received and the CBC is not considering such a policy.
1.	How many applications were received during the past fiscal year from the Province of Prince Edward Island for (a) Farm Credit Corporation Loans (b) Farm Improvement Loans (c) Small Business Loans (d) Fisheries Improvement Loans?
2.	How many of the applications were accepted for each of the above categories and what was the total amount loaned in each case?


Yves Forest: I am informed by the Farm Credit Corporation and the Department of Finance as follows: 1. (a) 164, (b), (c) and (d). Information is not available. Under the administration of these Acts, the chartered banks report particulars only in respect of loans which have been approved. No record exists, therefore, of applications for loans which may have been declined by lenders.
2. (a) 112 loans for total amount of $2,612,200, in the fiscal year ended March 31, 1969. (b) 399 loans for $923,035 in the calendar year ended December 31, 1968. (c) 19 loans for $190,675 in the calendar year ended December 31, 1968. (d) 22 loans for $42,290 in the fiscal year ended March 31, 1969.


CESSATION OF USE OF SILVER IN COINS
Mr. Barnett: 1.	When did the Royal Canadian Mint cease to use silver in the minting of Canadian coins?
2.	For a period immediately prior to this date, did the market value of silver in Canadian coins exceed the face value of the coins, and, if so, for how long a period?
3.	What is the actual or estimated cost to the government during this period resulting from excess of market value over face value of silver used in minting of Canadian coins?


Hon. James Richardson (Minister of Supply and Services):: January 12, 1970
Questions


PURCHASE OF YACHT BY CANEX
Mr. Winch: 1.	Has CANEX, operating at CFB in Chilliwack, British Columbia, decided to purchase a $35,000.00 yacht out of its funds and, if so, who made the proposal and was it carried by a democratic vote of the members?
2.	Is this for the use of officer staff or all ranks?
3.	What opportunity will there be for non-officer ranks to use the yacht?
4.	Was the base commander in any way involved with the decision to purchase this yacht?
5.	Could this money have been spent to revive community facilities for all ranks?


Hon. Leo Cadieux (Minister of National Defence):: 1. The Canadian Forces Exchange System (CANEX) is responsible for issuing directives and guidelines to the Non-Public resale outlets in the Canadian Forces. The original proposal to purchase a 42 ft. ketch which will sleep eight was submitted by the Base Commander to the Base Fund Committee (of which he is not a member). After thorough discussion by the Committee, a vote was taken from all members of the all-ranks committee representing all units on the base, and it was agreed that the Canadian Forces Central Fund be asked to lend the Base Fund Committee, Canadian Forces Base Chilliwack, B.C., the necessary non-public money to purchase this sailing boat which would be berthed in Vancouver for the use of personnel at CFB Chilliwack when they proceeded on vacation.
2.	The aim is to provide recreational sailing facilities for all ranks.
3.	The schedule of fees is scaled so that junior ranks will be able to participate equally with senior non-commissioned officers and officers. For example, should three privates and their families decide to rent the ketch for one week, they would share the cost equally, i.e. $27. per family. At the present time, 19 men and 10 officers are undergoing winter training in sailing.
4.	Only insofar as he proposed the idea to the Base Fund Committee for study.
5.	The purchase of this sailing boat is only a small part of a comprehensive nonpublic fund program now underway to provide the military community at Canadian Forces Base, Chilliwack, with recreational facilities. The extension to the Junior Ranks Club,

swimming pool, curling rink is now under construction and is expected to be completed on target. During the past year an auto-hobby club, a bowling alley and an extension to an all ranks lounge was completed. Further community facilities for the use and enjoyment of all ranks at Canadian Forces Base, Chilliwack, B.C., are in the planning stage.


'EXPENDITURES ON &quot;VISAGES DU CANADA&quot;
Mr. Diefenbaker: 1.	What is the total expenditure to date paid or unpaid of the Caravan described as "Visages du Canada"?
2.	For how many months will it travel through African countries?
3.	On these travels, how large will be the staff, including working crews and ail other employees?
4.	What will be the total estimated costs of such travels?


Mr. Jean-Pierre Goyer (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the answer is as
follows: 1. $138,559.00.
2.	Twelve months.
3.	Six persons.
4.	In addition to the amount already spent, the costs of shipping charges, salaries and allowances for accompanying personnel and operating expenses total approximately $201,000.


IMPORTS OF DDT
Mr. Harding: 1.	How many pounds of DDT were imported in each of the years 1960 to 1968 inclusive and in that part of 1969 for which records are available?
2.	From what countries was DDT imported?
3.	What was the total value of these imports?
4.	Is DDT produced in Canada and, if so, where and in what quantities for each of the above years?


Yves Forest: I am
informed by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce as follows: 1. and 3. See table p. 2225.
2. DDT is imported only from the United States of America.
4.	There was no production of DDT in Canada during the years 1960-68, inclusive, nor is it being produced at present.
January 12, 1970

Questions
Imports of DDT for the Years 1964 to August 1969
Commodity Class 407-87
DDT Technical (Pure DDT)
Year	Quantity	Value
	(cwt.)	($)
1964	19,526	349,6421965	18,243	305,0731966	21,021	383,1411967	16,074	290,2261968	13,565	234,9951969 (Jan.-Aug.)	9,197	152,411Due to implementation of a	new classification, comparable statistics are unavailable prior to 1964.
Commodity Class 418-30 DDT Dust, Solutions & Wettable Powder
Year	Quantity	Value
	(cwt.)	($)
1964	5,277	112,9361965	3,633	66,6231966	6,262	115,4761967	5,309	93,9311968	4,708	84,3701969 (Jan.-Aug.)	4,917	90,956


NUCLEAR RADIATION TESTING PROGRAM
Mr. Robinson: 1.	Does the federal government have a program of testing the atmosphere for nuclear radiation and, if not, for what reason and, if so, how many locations are there in Canada, how often are samples taken and what is the permissible levels of fallout and has this level been reached at any time in Canada and, if so, where and what action was taken as a result?
2.	Have any studies been carried out in Canada to determine the effects of nuclear fallout on the population and, if so, what are the results and, if not, will such studies be carried out as a preventive measure for protecting Canadians from the effects of nuclear fallout?
3.	Have any studies been carried out to determine the effect of Strontium 90 entering adult bodies by food or air and, if not, for what reason and will such studies be carried out and, if so, what were the findings?


John Carr Munro: 1. The Department of National Health and Welfare has been regularly testing the atmosphere for nuclear radiation since 1958. Samples of air particulates are collected continuously at 24 stations throughout Canada and analysed daily in Ottawa. In assessing the data, the Department of National Health and Welfare is guided by the Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. These Recommendations identify various "permissible" levels for specific radioisotopes, but nuclear fallout may consist of mixtures of radioisotopes and its "permissible" level varies accordingly. The "permissible" level relates to conditions of continuous exposure and the Commission has recommended that, in practice, the annual average level should be used in health assessments. The annual average at all the Department's stations has remained well below the "permissible" level each year.
2.	No direct determination of the effect has been made. For a scientifically valid study, extensive data would be needed on the incidence of various diseases, both in population groups exposed to fallout and in population groups not so exposed. Sufficient data of this kind are not available in Canada.
3.	The Department of National Health and Welfare is carrying out a comprehensive program to determine the amounts of Strontium-90 entering adult bodies by food or air but it has not been able to determine directly the effect of Strontium-90 on the incidence of disease for the reason given in answer to question 2.


DESIGNATED REGIONS, NEWFOUNDLAND
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Newfoundland regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Newfoundland by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Newfoundland regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Newfoundland submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Mr. Marlin P. O'Connell (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,	2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


DESIGNATED REGIONS, QUEBEC
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Quebec regarding the selection of

January 12, 1970
Questions
designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Quebec by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Quebec regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Quebec submit any counter-proposals and, if so. what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,	2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


DESIGNATED REGIONS, ONTARIO
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Ontario regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Ontario by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Ontario regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Ontario submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,	2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


DESIGNATED REGIONS, MANITOBA
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Manitoba regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act, and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Manitoba by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Manitoba regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Manitoba submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,	2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


DESIGNATED REGIONS, SASKATCHEWAN
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Saskatchewan regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act, and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Saskatchewan by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Saskatchewan regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Saskatchewan submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,	2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


DESIGNATED REGIONS, ALBERTA
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Alberta regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Alberta by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Alberta regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Alberta submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions and correspondence.
1, 2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters except for correspondence tabled in reply to Notice of Motion No. 140.


DESIGNATED REGIONS, BRITISH COLUMBIA
Mr. Burion: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of British Columbia regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of British Columbia by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of British Columbia regarding the federal proposal?
January 12, 1970

4.	Did the Government of British Columbia submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


POST OFFICE-DATA INPUT UNIT INSTALLATIONS
Mr. Macquarrie: 1.	In what post offices were "data input units" (manufactured by Pylon Electronics Development Co.) installed?
2.	How many such units were installed and at what total cost?
3.	What other equipment or material was installed to make these units functional?
4.	At what cost for material and installation?
5.	For how long was the equipment in Parts (1) and (3) above used?
6.	For what reason was its use discontinued?
7.	How does the function of "time clocks" in Canadian post offices differ from that in use before the installation of "data input units"?
8.	What reasons prompted the introduction of "data input units"?


Eric William Kierans: 1. Toronto Post Office. These units were installed and maintained by Bell Canada.
2.	(a) 77; (b) $19,500 for wiring and cabling.
3.	A central scanner which is an electronic scanning device which can poll up to 100 data input lines. Magnetic tapes required for the two tape drives which were used by the central scanner as data capturing devices.
4.	Total cost for installation and material, $41,333.67 (this includes the $19,500 for 2 above).
5.	From February 1968 until November 1969. It was a Pilot experiment necessary for the development of a future integrated Management Information System.
6.	It was considered that information sufficient to establish the feasibility of using data input devices in a Post Office operation environment had been collected. Continuing the operation would have entailed unnecessary additional costs.
7.	Prior to the advent of the input devices Toronto used a standard I.B.M. t.me clock which provided a visible printed record of the time clocked in. The data input device functioned manually, except that there was no visible record of the time a man clocked in or out, as this was captured (or relayed im-
Questions
mediately) to the central scanner and kept on magnetic tape. An employee determined a successful clocking by receiving a "Remove" light signal or, on an unsuccessful clocking, a "Reinsert" light signal on the input device.
8.	The electronic data input devices were tested in the Pilot Project to examine the potential of a more immediate and accurate form of data collection (it did not have to be transposed to a machine readable electronic configuration). This data was then manipulated to prepare production control and personnel information reports.


CBOT-TV COVERAGE OF OTTAWA CIVIC AFFAIRS
Mr. Coales: 1.	What participation has CBC Television through CBOT TV taken in civic affairs in Ottawa and the Ottawa coverage area associated with the Civic Election held December 1, 1969?
2.	How many hours of free time were made available to those involved in Civic Election campaigns within the area?
3.	What was the total cost to the CBC of their participation in civic affairs?


Gérard Pelletier: 1. I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: On the program "Something Else":
September 10-Interview with Controller Fogarty, Ottawa mayoralty candidate. (6 min. 16 sec.)
October 30-Interviews with David Porter and Joseph-Louis Paradis Ottawa mayoralty candidates. (9 min. 1 sec.)
November	21-Interviews	with	Reeve
Aubrey Moodie and Councillor Andrew Hay-don, candidates for Reeve of Nepean Township. (17 min. 36 sec.)
November 26-Interviews with all seven Ottawa Board of Control candidates. (22 min. 10 sec.)
November	27-Assessment of	Ottawa
mayoralty candidates by commentator Roger Appleton, Ottawa Citizen. (2 min. 54 sec.)
November 28-A film about five Ottawa aldermanic candidates in Dalhousie ward. (12 min. 33 sec.)
December 2-A film about election night activities of Messrs. Fogarty and Paradis. (22 min. 51 sec.)
News Items:
November 17

Evening Report (3 min. 22 sec.) Night Final (1 min. 20 sec.)
November 18-Night Final (32 sec.)

January 12, 1970
Questions
November 20-Evening Report (1 min. 22 sec.)
November 24-Evening Report (24 sec.)
November 29-Night Final (2 min.)
December 1-Bulletins from 8:00 p.m. on; Full coverage 10:30-11:00 p.m.; Extended Night Final (9 min. 50 sec.)
2.	No free time was allocated to candidates. The above programming was presented as a matter of current affairs and news interest.
3.	It has not been customary to require the CBC to disclose details of its internal operations such as specific program costs.


PUBLIC SERVANTS' RIGHT TO STRIKE
Mr. Southam: Is it the intention of the government to take away the right of Public Servants to strike as was suggested on November 28, 1969 by the President of the Canadian Manufacturers Association?


Hon. C. M. Drury (President of the Treasury Board):: The suggestion made by the Canadian Manufacturers Association and by other individuals and organizations will be reviewed at the appropriate time along with many other suggestions which have been made from time to time to amend the Public Service Staff Relations Act.


SELECTION OF DESIGNATED REGIONS, NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of New Brunswick regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if ;so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of New Brunswick by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of New Brunswick regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of New Brunswick submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1, 2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


SELECTION OF DESIGNATED REGIONS, P.E.I.
Mr. Burton: 1. Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Prince Edward Island regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province

under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Prince Edward Island by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Prince Edward Island regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Prince Edward Island submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,	2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


SELECTION OF DESIGNATED REGIONS, NOVA SCOTIA
Mr. Burton: 1.	Did the Government of Canada consult the Government of Nova Scotia regarding the selection of designated regions in that Province under the Regional Development Incentives Act and, if so, when and in what manner did the consultations take place?
2.	What specific proposal or proposals were placed before the Government of Nova Scotia by the Government of Canada?
3.	What view was expressed by the Government of Nova Scotia regarding the federal proposal?
4.	Did the Government of Nova Scotia submit any counter-proposals and, if so, what proposals were made?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Yes, by discussions.
1,	2, 3 and 4. The details of such consultations are confidential matters.


PLANS FOR LEBRETON FLATS
Mr. Mather: Is the Government of Canada presently reconsidering its plans regarding LeBreton Flats and, if so, is it giving favorable consideration to turning the Flats into a National Park?


Yves Forest: I am informed by the National Capital Commission and the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development as follows: (a) The prospective use of LeBreton Flats has been under study for some time by the National Capital Commission, (b) No.


&quot;PART-TIME&quot; EMPLOYEES, INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT
Mr. Nesbitt: 1.	Has Treasury Board acknowledged that so-called "part-time" employees of the Department of
January 12, 1970

Indian Affairs and Northern Development were "lull-time" employees under the terms of Section 2 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act, and hence entitled to full benefits in terms of salary, isolation pay, cost-of-living allowances, pensions, etc.?
2.	Did the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, before the Treasury Board acknowledgement was made, spend public funds in legal action to oppose the argument that such employees were full-time employees and, if so, how much was spent?
3.	How many "part-time" employees were reclassified as "full-time" employees after complaints were lodged against the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development?
4.	(a) Have all the affected employees now been reclassified as full-time (b) how many employees were affected?
5.	Have all reclassified employees been retroactively paid the salary, allowances, pension and other benefits to which they were entitled as of the 1967 date of the passage of the Public Service Staff Relations Act and, (a) if so, what was the cost of the settlement (b) if not, how many have been so paid and how many remain to be paid?
6.	(a) Have all the former employees, who should have been reclassified during their term of employment, received retroactive payments and, if not, how many have been so paid and how many remain to be paid (b) what will be the total cost of this part of the settlement?
7.	What were the occupations of the employees involved in this reclassification?
8.	How many of these employees were Indians or Eskimos?


Mr. Russell C. Honey (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: 1. Treasury Board acknowledges that if a part-time employee of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development is an employee for purposes of Section 2 of the Public Service Staff Relations Act, that person would be entitled to the benefits flowing from the applicable collective agreement.
2.	No.
3.	One.
4.	(a) Yes; (b) one.
5.	Yes. (a) $2,674.32; (b) not applicable.
6.	(a) This Department gives full consideration to all requests from former employees as to the possibility of their warranting retroactive payments. No such claims have been identified as requiring such payment to date, (b) Not applicable.
7.	Indian Day School caretaker.
8.	The employee is Indian.


RADAR AND COMMUNICATION SCHOOL, CANADIAN FORCES BASE, KINGSTON
Mr. McKinley: What is the estimated cost of additional facilities or of renovating facilities that will be required
Questions
at Canadian Forces Base Kingston to facilitate the Radar and Communication School now at Canadian Forces Base Clinton for the Department of National Defence?


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: Prior to integration, the three services operated similar training facilities for the electronic and mechanical trades at Clinton, Kingston and Camp Borden. It is now proposed to operate one school for each of these two trade groups at Kingston and Borden. It is estimated that it will initially cost up to $500,000 to relocate the Communications and Radar School into existing accommodation at Canadian Forces Base Kingston. In the long term, certain temporary facilities will have to be replaced or expanded but detailed studies and estimates will not be available until spring of 1970. As announced on August 13, 1969, the closing of CFB Clinton will result, when completed, in estimated annual savings of $4.6 million.


CBC-TV SERVICE, KOOTENAY REGION
Mr. Harding: 1.	(a) Is CBC-TV for the Kootenay area of British Columbia being brought into that district from Calgary, Alberta instead of from Vancouver, B.C. and, if so, for what reason (b) when was this service instituted?
2.	Does CBC-TV plan on giving the Kootenay area access to all CBC programs and news through Vancouver, B.C. and, if so, when will the change be made
3.	Is it possible, with its present facilities, for CBC-TV to provide the Kootenay area with the B.C. regional news and the B.C. weather reports and, if so, why has this service not been instituted?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: 1. (a) The network service is fed from east to west via Calgary to an unmanned network relay station at Trail, B.C. from which rebroadcasting stations in the Kootenay area receive network service. Some B.C. regional programming is videotape recorded at Vancouver and sent to Calgary for use in non-network periods to partly circumvent the lack of direct programming from Vancouver. A separate west to east network to serve the Kootenay area would require the CBC to rent additional microwave circuits from Vancouver back to Trail, (b) The network service from Calgary to Trail, B.C., was instituted in 1960 when the Trail station began operating.
2.	The Corporation has recognized the desirability of programming B.C. regional serv-

January 12, 1970
Questions
ice from Vancouver but it is a large and costly project which cannot be undertaken in the near future, particularly with current financial restrictions.
3.	It is technically possible to supply B.C. regional programming eastward from Vancouver to Trail and other stations in the area at times when the national network service is not being relayed westward. However, this is not being done because it would be costly to maintain such a service on a regular basis. There are many communities elsewhere in British Columbia and in other provinces which are still awaiting the network service already available in the Kootenay area and these less fortunate communities must be given priority.


APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES
Mr. McGrath: 1.	Under what program or programs were the approvals given for the 278 development incentives recently announced by the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion?
2.	When will the new plants and expansions involved in the incentives approved come into operation?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. Area Development Incentives Act-261, Regional Development Incentives Act-17.
2.	At varying dates, some in 1969, most in 1970 and early 1971.


CONNECTION WITH GOVERNMENT OF HARRISON McCAIN
Mr. Skoreyko: 1.	Is Mr. Harrison McCain of Grand Falls, N.B. whose firm, McCain Foods Limited, was recently given a grant amounting to several millions of dollars by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion connected in any way with the present government and, if so, in what capacity?
2.	Does the Minister or his departmental officials approve grants of such amounts of public funds to applicants without question and with some system of checking the reputation and standing of the application and his firm?


Yves Forest: 1. No.
2. No.


REGISTRATION OF CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS
Mr. Howard (Skeena): 1. For the years 1967, 1968 and 1969, how many applications were received by the Department of

National Revenue regarding registration of charitable organizations in Canada?
2.	For each of the above years, how many applications were approved by the Department?
3.	For each of the above years, how many charitable organizations missed their annual deadline for filing a report of their operations with the Department?
4.	What action is required under the Income Tax Act for those charitable institutions who have not filed their annual returns?
5.	What action has been undertaken by the Department of National Revenue to enforce compliance with the law?


Hon. Jean-Pierre Cote (Minister of National Revenue):: 1. 1967, 34,630; 1968, 4,322; 1969 (to December 9), 2,055.
2.	1967, 31,373; 1968, 3,213; 1969 (to December 9), 979.
3.	1967, 13,250; 1968, 11,237.
1969 Returns are to be filed three months after the end of each fiscal period. Most organizations are on a calendar year basis and their 1969 returns are not due until March 31, 1970.
4.	Section 27(3c) of the Income Tax Act provides that a charitable organization's registration may be revoked for failure to file an information return.
5.	No action was taken for 1967 because that was the first year the requirements to register and to file an annual return were in effect. In the summer of 1969 requests to file returns, together with copies of the required forms were mailed to all registered organizations that had failed to file for 1968. Over 8,000 returns have been filed to date as a result of this action. No decision has yet been made as to what further action will be taken to obtain the balance of the returns not filed.


GARBAGE DUMPS, CAUGHNAWAGA INDIAN RESERVE
Mr. Rondeau: 1.	How many garbage dumps are in use on the Caughnawaga Indian Reserve?
2.	How many tons of refuse are discharged daily into each dump?
3.	How much are the Indians paid per ton for the use of these dumps?
4.	To whom is the Kanawaki Golf Club in Caughnawaga leased, for what period and at what annual rent?


Russell Clayton Honey: 1. Two.
2. It is not possible to estimate the tonnage of refuse discharged daily into each dump. Information supplied by the Permittees for
January 12, 1970

1968 showed an average up to 900 loads a week being deposited by vans with a capacity of 20 cubic yards.
3.	The rental is on area, rather than tonnage, basis. The rate paid is $200 per acre per annum.
4.	The corporate body of the Kanawaki Golf Club holds 8 separate leases on the Caughnawaga Reserve to September 30, 1995.
The Kanawaki Golf Club annually pays $1,000 into Band funds and a total of $5,518.44 to individual land owners.


IMMIGRANTS WITH PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Rondeau: 1.	During the past ten years, how many immigrants with professional qualifications have entered Canada?
2.	How many of them have elected to take up permanent residence in Canada?
3.	How many have returned to their countries of origin (other than the United States)?
4. How many of them have emigrated to the United States?


Yves Forest: I am
informed by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics and the Department of Manpower and Immigration as follows: 1. During the past ten years the number of immigrants with professional qualifications entering Canada is as follows: 1959, 6,947; 1960, 7,436; 1961, 6,696; 1962, 8,218; 1963, 9,640; 1964, 11,965; 1965, 16,654; 1966, 23,637; 1967, 30,853; 1968, 29,250 -Total 151,296.
2.	151,296 (an immigrant, once landed, becomes a permanent resident of Canada).
3 and 4. Permanent residents of Canada are not required to report their whereabouts or movements to the Department, hence the Department does not compile the kind of data required to reply to these questions.


INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT-APPROACH AND ACTION OF CERTAIN PERSONS
Mr. Howard (Skeena): Has any attempt been made to identify the person or persons in the employ of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development who engaged in an approach termed "insidious" by the Crockett Writers Company in its quarterly report for the period ending March 31, 1969 to the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and which approach involved "Xerox" processing and the distribution of copies of a contract marked "confidential" and, if so, what is the name and position held by each such person?
Questions


Russell Clayton Honey: 1. Yes, an investigation into Crockett Writers allegations was launched when their report was submitted and appropriate steps were taken to ensure that the firm receive the cooperation it required to perform the duties as outlined in the terms of the contract. Xerox copies of the contract were sent to all regional offices to ensure cooperation with the firm.


INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT-CO-OPERATION IN IMPROVING IMAGE
Mr. Howard (Skeena): Has any attempt been made to find the identity of the persons referred to in the Quarterly Report for the period ending March 31, 1969 by Crockett Writers Company to the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development as being "some department heads who will never co-operate with us in trying to improve the image of the Branch" and, if so, what is the name and position held by each such person?


Russell Clayton Honey: 1. Yes, as mentioned in the reply to Question No. 653 appropriate steps have been taken to ensure that the firm receives the cooperation it requires to fulfil the terms of the contract. It would not, however, be in the public interest to divulge names.


DISCONTINUANCE OF OPERATIONS BY KNITTED OUTERWEAR MANUFACTURERS
Mr. Sallsman: 1.	How many manufacturers of knitted outerwear have discontinued knitting operations in the years 1965-66, 1966-67, 1967-68 and 1968-69?
2.	How many jobs have been lost as a result of these changes?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: 1. The information required is not available from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. However, according to industry sources, the numbers of companies discontinuing operations during the years requested were as follows: 1966, 3; 1967, 5; 1968, 8; 1969, 4 to date.
2.	The numbers of jobs lost as a result of these changes were: 1966, 125; 1967, 170; 1968, 520; 1969, 155 in two companies. Information concerning the jobs lost as a result of the closing of the other two companies is not available.

January 12, 1370
Questions


DISCRIMINATION AGAINST CANADIAN MACHINERY MANUFACTURERS
Mr. Sallsman: 1.	What action is the Department of Industry. Trade and Commerce taking to combat discriminating practices facing Canadian machinery manufacturers, arising from their exclusion in the bidding on Canadian projects due to tied foreign financing?
2.	What action is the Department of Regional Economic Expansion taking regarding the exclusion of Canadian machinery in projects receiving aid from the federal government due to tied foreign financing?


Yves Forest: I am
informed by the Departments of Industry, Trade and Commerce and Regional Economic Expansion as follows: 1. The Departments of Industry, Trade and Commerce and Regional Economic Expansion are in the process of completing a study of the impact on Canadian industry of tied foreign financing involving subsidized rates of interest and other concessional financing terms. This study will
contain specific recommendations on appropriate measures to curtail this practice.
2. Section 11 of the Regulations under the Regional Development Incentives Act provides:
"It is a condition of a development incentive in respect of a facility that the applicant shall provide reasonable opportunities to Canadian manufacturers to supply the machinery and equipment included in the eligible assets of the facility, where such machinery and equipment are competitive in performance, price and delivery."


IMMIGRATION FROM CERTAIN COUNTRIES
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	What has been the number of immigrants from the following countries for each year since the implementation of the point system (a) United Kingdom (b) France (c) Italy (d) Greece (e) Hong Kong?
2.	What was the number from each of these countries for each of the three years preceding the application of the point system?


Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (Minister of Manpower and Immigration)):: 1 and 2. See following table.
Immigration to Canada from Selected Countries
Country of					To Sept.
Former Residence	1965	1966	19670)	1968	1969United Kingdom	
39,857	63,291	62,420	37,889	24,128France	
5,225	7,872	10,122	8,184	4,238Italy	
26,398	31,625	30,055	19,774	8,112Greece	
5,642	7,174	10,650	7,739	4,828Hong Kong	
4,352	4,094	6,409	8,382	6,655
Note (1): New Immigration Regulations embodying norms of assessment, and a points evaluation system, were introduced on October 1, 1967.


GRANTS BY DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE TO CERTAIN ORGANIZATIONS
Mr. Gleave: For the fiscal years 1968-69 and 1969-70, what are the estimated grants made by the Department of Agriculture to the (a) Canadian Seed Growers Association (b) Canadian Horticultural Council (c) Canadian Council on 4-H Clubs (d) Advanced Registry Board for Dairy Bulls (e) Canadian National Livestock Records (f) Canadian Hunter, Saddle and Light Horse Improvement Society (g) British Columbia Beef Cattle Growers Association (h) Canadian Council on Plowing Associations (i) Federated Women's Institutes of Canada (j) Royal Agricultural Winter Fair, Toronto?


Hon. H. A. Olson (Minisier of Agriculture):: Annual grants made by the Department of
[Mr. Pepin. 1
Agriculture for 1968-69 and 1969-70: (a) Canadian Seed Growers Association, $44,000; (b) Canadian Horticultural Council, $8,400; (c) Canadian Council on 4-H Clubs, $23,000; (d) Advanced Registry Board for Dairy Bulls, $4,500; (e) Canadian National Livestock Records, $50,000; (f) Canadian Hunter, Saddle and Light Horse Improvement Society, $5,000; (g) British Columbia Beef Cattle Growers Association, $900; (h) Canadian Council on Plowing Associations, $5,000; (i) Federated Women's Institutes of Canada, $10,000; (j) Royal Agricultural Winter Fair, Toronto, $50,000.


LICENSING OF B.C. CREDIT UNION LENDERS
Mr. Coaies: 1.	Are lenders associated with the British Columbia Credit Unions licensed under the Small Loans Act and do they make a complete annual report to the Superintendent of Insurance for Canada?
January 12, 1970

2.	Was the Superintendent of Insurance informed by the Government of the Province of British Columbia of an order-in-council which increased the interest rate on loans made by British Columbia Credit Unions and, if so, on what date was the Superintendent of Insurance so informed?


Edgar John Benson: 
SUBSIDIES TO P.E.I. MILK PRODUCERS
Mr. McQuaid: 1.	During the past fiscal year, how many milk producers in the Province of Prince Edward Island were in receipt of subsidies payable by the Canadian Dairy Commission?
2.	What was the total amount of the subsidy paid during that period to producers in Prince Edward Island?
3.	How many producers in Prince Edward Island during that period had deductions made from their subsidy payments because their production exceeded their assigned quotas?
4.	What was the total loss in dollars to producers because of these deductions?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: 1. 2,554 milk and cream shippers.
2.	$1,696,868.84.
3.	Deductions from subsidy payments for the export equalization fund were made against each shipper's total deliveries, at the same rate for deliveries up to quota and over quota. 1,202 shipped more than their quota.
4.	The figure of deductions on account of over quota deliveries is not available.
Questions



REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE GRANTS

[Stage Direction]
Question No. 692.-Mr. Rondeau:
1.	How many applications for grants have been received by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion since the coming into force of the Regional Development Incentives Act?
2.	How many applications have been granted?
3.	What was the total amount requested?
4.	What amount has the Department decided to grant?
5.	How many applications have been made to the Department for grants of (a) more than $1,000,000 (b) from $500,000 to $1,000,000 (c) from $250,000 to $500,000 (d) from $100,000 to $250,000 (e) less than $100,000?
6.	What was the percentage approved in each of the above categories?
Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: 1, 2 and 4. This information is contained in the reports on the operation of the Regional Development Incentives Act tabled monthly in Parliament.
3,	5 and 6. The applicant does not request an amount. Within the maxima provided for in the legislation, the Department makes the offer judged appropriate to the particular case.



CHARTERED BANK EARNINGS, EXPENDITURES AND PROFITS

Mr. Korchinski: 1.	What were the total earnings, expenditures and profits of each of the Chartered Banks of Canada in the past five years?
2.	In each of the past five years, what were the Bank of Canada interest rates and on what dates did these rates become effective?


Edgar John Benson: 1. Published financial statements of individual chartered banks indicate the following amounts of Earnings, Expenses and Profits for financial years 1965-1969:
Total Earnings
Bank of Montreal	
The Bank of Nova Scotia	
The Toronto-Dominion Bank	
La Banque Provincial du Canada.... Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce
The Royal Bank of Canada	
Banque Canadienne Nationale	
The Mercantile Bank of Canada	
Bank of British Columbia	
Total	
(millions of dollars)
1965	1966	1967	1968	1969265.8	300.2	342.1	431.0	577.7183.3	213.9	247.8	325.3	439.4147.5	168.3	194.9	263.4	260.731.4	34.5	39.2	49.1	62.8300.8	339.9	386.0	503.7	668.4295.8	364.0	418.6	528.0	696.151.3	62.6	72.4	93.4	118.29.1	12.5	14.7	14.4	16.5-	-	-	1.0	3.41,285.0	1,496.0	1,715.7	2,209.2	2,943.1
Total Expenses
Questions

1965	1966
January 12, 1970
1967	1968	1969
Bank of Montreal	 223.4
The Bank of Nova Scotia	 161.2
The Toronto-Dominion Bank	 126.0
La Banque Provinciale du Canada	 26.5
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce		248.1
The Royal Bank of Canada	 244.4
Banque Canadienne Nationale	 42.9
The Mercantile Bank of Canada	 9.8
Bank of British Columbia	 -
Total	 1,082.3
248.9	290.1	363.3	481.6184.5	212.8	275.9	379.3143.5	164.8	221.4	307.029.7	32.8	41.0	51.6277.2	314.4	407.5	543.2302.4	349.7	425.8	575.853.0	60.1	79.3	100.813.5	15.1	13.4	15.1-	-	.7	3.31,252.7	1,440.0	1,828.3	2,457.5
Profits
Bank of Montreal	 23.0
The Bank of Nova Scotia	 11.6
The Toronto-Dominion Bank	 11.3
La Banque Provinciale du Canada	 2.6
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce		30.0
The Royal Bank of Canada	 29.1
Banque Canadienne Nationale	 4,3
The Mercantile Bank of Canada	 - .7
Bank of British Columbia	 -
Total	 111.1
30.3	31.5	49.6	54.617.6	21.8	33.5	29.513.8	17.8	27.4	26.42.5	3.9	5.3	7.036.3	44.5	60.5	57.836.1	38.1	65.6	58.24.9	7.2	8.5	8.3- 1.0	- .4	.9	1.4-	-	.3	.1140.5	164.3	251.7	243.4
Notes:
(1)	Two banks (Royal and Nationale) had 11-month financial years in 1965. On a full year basis 1965 Earnings, Expenses and Profits would all have been somewhat larger.
(2)	A special $15 millions contribution to Pension Fund in 1969 has not been included in Expenses of Bank of Montreal.
(3)	Profits are the net of total Earnings and Expenses less all provision for income taxes.
2.	Rate
Percent	Effective
4J	 December 6/65
51	 March 14/66
5	 January 30/67
41	 April 7/67
5		 September 27/67
6		 November 20/67
7		 January 22/68
71	 March 15/68
7	 July 2/68
61	 July 29/68
6		 September 3/68
61	 December 18/68
7		 March 3/69
71	 June 11/69
8		 July 16/69



TRAVEL EXPENDITURES, SECRETARY OP STATE FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS

['January 12, 1970', 'Orders for Returns\n(c)\n(a)\n(b)\n\tWar\t\t\nName\tVeteran\tDVA Service\tWar Service\nCosman, I\t No\nHersey, C\t No\nKennedy, F. D\t No\nMorrison, R\t No\nWallace, E\t No\nHolmes, W. S\t No\nCampbell, N\t Yes\nIsnor, M. E\t Yes\nDoncaster, A. A\t Yes\nHarquail, T. D\t Yes\nOakford, E. C\t Yes\nWaddell, A. D\t Yes\nMazerolle, J. F. A\t No\nCooper, G. R\t Yes\nMacDonald, A. L. R\t No\nWilson, M. A\t No\nClark, J. L. J\t Yes\nLanteigne, N.C.D\t No\nMcNamara, P. E\t No\nHorncastle, F. H\t Yes\nAnderson, M. G\t Yes\nParlee, M. C\t No\nWood, I. M\t No\nHenry, W. A\t Yes\nJohnston, G. F\t Yes\nCollins, Elinor K\t No']
Mitchell William Sharp: Total cost during the fiscal year 1968-69 was $7,103.99.



Mr. Mather: Did Doctor A. Vennema report to the government concerning conditions as he found them in Vietnam [Mr. Benson.)
after the Tet offensive of 1968 and (a) if so, was this report confidential (b) if not, is a copy of the report available?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes. (a) Yes. (b) Not applicable.


ACCEPTANCE OF GOVERNMENT CHEQUES BY COMMERCIAL BANKS
Mr. Nesbitt: 1.	Are commercial banks required to accept cheques issued by the Government of Canada, provided that the payee is properly identified?
2.	Has the government received complaints that commercial banks are refusing to accept government cheques and, if so, what action has the government taken in this regard?


Edgar John Benson: 1. No provision of the Bank Act requires a bank to accept cheques issued by the Government of Canada or any other cheques if the person presenting such cheques does not maintain an account with the bank.
2. There have been a few complaints from persons who did not maintain an account with the bank at which the cheque was presented. Letters have been sent to those who have complained, explaining the situation set forth in (1) above.
January 12, 1970


HALIFAX-POSTAL DELIVERY TO APARTMENTS AND HOMES
Mr. McCleave: 1.	How many apartment buildings and homes in the City of Halifax are eligible for postal delivery by mailmen but cannot receive same under the austerity programme?
2.	How many extra post office employees would be required to service such?


Eric William Kierans: 1. None.
2. Not applicable.


TOM LONGBOAT MEMORIAL TROPHY
Mr. Howard (Skeena): 1.	Since January 1, 1960, what is the name of each person who has been awarded the Tom Longboat Memorial Trophy?
2.	In each case, did the recipient of the award have possession of the said Trophy and, if not, where was the Trophy located?
3.	What form does the said Trophy take and is there any monetary aspect to it?


Russell Clayton Honey: 1. 1960, Mr. Arthur Obey; 1961, Mr. Bruce Bruyere; 1962, Mr. Tom Watts; 1963, Mr. John Lewis; 1964, Miss Vivian Underwood; 1965, Mr. George H. Brown; 1966, Mr. Ron Jamieson; 1967, Mr. Wilton Li tlechild; 1968, Miss Phyllis Bom-berry; 1969, Bert Mistaken Chief.
2.	In most cases the recipient is presented with the trophy but it is customary for it to remain in his Agency Office, where everyone can see it.
3.	(a) It is silver approximately 18 inches high, and a new crest is placed on it each year with the recipient's name, (b) No money is awarded; however, each recipient receives a medal which he keeps.


CANADA SAVINGS BONDS
Mr. Harkness: 1.	As of December 10, what is the amount of 1969 Savings Bonds which have been sold?
2.	What amount of this is represented by previous years' Canada Savings Bonds having been turned in for the 1969 issue?
3.	What is the amount of new money actually secured?
4.	What has been the cost of this operation broken down into (a) advertising (b) commissions to dealers and agents (c) payments to banks (d) cost of the new bonds (e) other expenses?


Edgar John Benson: 1. Total sales of the 1969/70 Series of
Questions
Canada Savings Bonds to December 10, 1969 amounted to $4,721 million.
2.	Canada Savings Bonds were redeemed between October 1st and December 10th in the amount of $2,591 million. The purpose for which Canada Savings Bonds are redeemed is not known and it is, therefore, not possible to state what portion of the total redemption was made in order to permit purchase of the 1969/70 Series.
3.	The amount of the net increase in Canada Savings Bonds outstanding from October 1st (the date on which the 1969/70 Series went on sale) to December 10th was $1,130 million.
4.	(a) $1,576,000. (b) and (c) The total sales commission and issuing fee payable to banks, investment dealers and other sales and issuing agents on sales made to December 10th is $42.2 million. Sales commission payable to investment dealers included in this figure is approximately $5.2 million. It is not possible at this time to determine the exact division of the remaining sales commission and the issuing fee between banks and other agents, (d) $1,260,000. (e) $787,000.


HMCS &quot;KOOTENAY&quot;-USE OF ARMED FORCES TUGS
Mr. McCleave: 1.	What ocean going tugs are owned by the Canadian Armed Forces and which are in commission?
2.	Did the Department of National Defence consider using such for the return of HMCS Kootenay after her recent mishap in North Atlantic waters?
3.	For what reasons was a foreign tug used for the return of HMCS Kootenay?


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: 1. St. Charles.
2.	Yes. However this vessel was in refit at Pictou, N.S.
3.	As the Commander, Maritime Command's operational plan called for the return of HMCS Kootenay to Canada in mid-November, tenders were called from companies which it was felt would be able to provide maximum security for the vessel. L. Smit & Company was considered to offer the best possibility for the lowest price.


ASSISTANCE IN CONSTRUCTING PORT BICKERTON-COUNTRY HARBOUR ROAD
Mr. MacEwan: Has the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion received a communication from the Goldboro-Bay-view District Board of Trade, Isaac's Harbour, Nova Scotia, requesting assistance for the construction of a 10-mile proposed road from Port

January 12, 1970
Questions
Blckerton to Country Harbour, known as the "missing link" and, if so, what action does the Department intend to take?


Abram Ernest Epp: Yes, but federal assistance would be to the government of Nova Scotia, with whom the request will be reviewed.


ARMED FORCES RETIREMENTS
Mr. Diefenbaker: How many men of all ranks have retired from the Armed Forces, month-by-month, since January 1969 with service of (a) less than 6 months (b) 6-12 months (c) 12-24 months?


Léo Alphonse Joseph Cadieux: The total number of men who have been released in 1969 for misconduct, unsatisfactory service, medical, voluntary and death is as follows:
	(a)	(b)
January	77	43February	123	29March	125	45April	134	55May	195	86June	208	69July	207	68August	167	74September	145	133October	125	113


REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES ACT- APPLICATIONS AND OFFERS TO OCT. 20, 1969
Mr. Schumacher: 1.	From the period of its inception up to October 20, 1969, how many applications were received under the Regional Development Incentives Act, and from whom were such applications received?
2.	How many were rejected?
3.	What were the reasons for rejection, in each case?
4.	How many offers were made under the Regional Development Incentives Act up to October 20, 1969?
5.	To whom were such offers made?
6.	In each case, what was the location of plant, type of industry, type of project, estimated cost, estimated employment, and rate of offer?
7.	How many offers were accepted?
8.	What are the names and addresses of the companies accepting such offers?
9.	Of the accepted offers, how many have begun construction or installation and where is such construction or installation taking place?
10.	What is the estimated date of completion in each case?
11.	Of the accepted offers, how many have not begun construction or installation?
[Mr. MacEwan.j
12.	What are the reasons for delay in each case?
13.	When is it estimated work will start and be completed in each case?


Abram Ernest Epp: The first report on the operation of the Regional Development Incentives Act was tabled in Parliament October 27, 1969. As other information ceases to be confidential to the applicants, it will be included in future monthly reports.


REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES ACT-APPLICATIONS AND OFFERS, OCT. 21-NOV. 30, 1969
Mr. Schumacher: 1.	During the period October 21-November 30, 1969, how many applications were received under the Regional Development Incentives Act, and from whom were such applications received?
2.	How many were rejected?
3.	In each case, what were the reasons for rejection?
4.	How many offers were made, and to whom were such offers made during the period October 21-November 30, 1969?
5.	In each case, what was the location of plant, type of industry, type of project, estimated cost, estimated employment and rate of offer?
6.	Which companies accepted such offers made?
7.	Of the accepted offers, how many have begun construction or installation, and where is such construction or installation taking place?
8.	What is the expected date of completion in each case?
9.	Of the accepted offers, how many have not begun construction or installation?
10.	What are the reasons for delay in each case?
11.	When is the estimated date of start and completion in each case?


Abram Ernest Epp: The second report on the operation of the Regional Development Incentives Act was tabled in Parliament December 4, 1969. As other information ceases to be confidential to the applicants, it will be included in future monthly reports.


VETERANS AFFAIRS SURPLUS EMPLOYEES, N.B.
Mr. MacRae: Of the 26 employees in the Department of Veterans Affairs, New Brunswick, including Canadian Pension Commission and War Veterans Allowance Board who have been notified they are surplus to staff requirements (a) what are the names of these employees (b) which ones are War Veterans (c) what is the period of service of each?


Hon. Jean-Eudes Dube (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: January 12, 1970

Orders for Returns
(c)
(a)
(b)
	War		
Name	Veteran	DVA Service	War Service
Cosman, I	 No
Hersey, C	 No
Kennedy, F. D	 No
Morrison, R	 No
Wallace, E	 No
Holmes, W. S	 No
Campbell, N	 Yes
Isnor, M. E	 Yes
Doncaster, A. A	 Yes
Harquail, T. D	 Yes
Oakford, E. C	 Yes
Waddell, A. D	 Yes
Mazerolle, J. F. A	 No
Cooper, G. R	 Yes
MacDonald, A. L. R	 No
Wilson, M. A	 No
Clark, J. L. J	 Yes
Lanteigne, N.C.D	 No
McNamara, P. E	 No
Horncastle, F. H	 Yes
Anderson, M. G	 Yes
Parlee, M. C	 No
Wood, I. M	 No
Henry, W. A	 Yes
Johnston, G. F	 Yes
Collins, Elinor K	 No



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Broadbenl: 1.	For the fiscal years 1968-69 and 1969-70, what specific research studies have been undertaken by the Research and Development Branch of the Department of Labour?
2.	Who are the individuals involved In these studies and when is it anticipated that these studies will be completed?
Return tabled.


MOVEMENT OF DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES
Mr. Lewis: 1.	Which federal government department is responsible for the safety control of transferring or moving dangerous materials, poisons and poisonous gases within Canada?
2.	Which federal government department is responsible for the control of dangerous materials, poisons and poisonous gases moving across Canada's border?
3. What specific standards have been established for such shipments within and across Canada's borders?
4.	Did officials stop the shipment of phosgene gas from the United States to Canada during the
Years Months Days
17	9	-	-16	10	1	-8	8	13	-7	6	27	-21	3	20	-6	3	3	-19	1	19	2- 9-39 to 6- 3-4512	5	30	3- 3-43 to 16- 5-4622	2	28	3- 9-39 to 10-11-443	2	22	10- 7-40 to 6- 9-4513	1	18	3- 8-42 to 5- 3-4613	2	30	28- 4-43 to 6-10-454	7	3	-4	4	25	1-12-43 to 27- 3-4615	-	28	-4	4	17	-2	3	-	26- 6-42 to 22-10-454	3	13	-3	5	16	-24	2	26	20- 7-40 to 16-10-4523	10	-	8- 9-40 to 6- 3-464	8	6	-27	6	29	-24	4	-	11- 9-39 to 25- 9-4523	4	25	13- 9-39 to 13- 6-4516	-	-	-
first week in August, 1969 and if so, for what reason?
5.	At that time, were all shipments of poisons, poisonous gases and other dangerous materials being stopped from entry into Canada?
6 Are officials of the Department of National Revenue presently prohibiting all shipments of poison gas from the United States to Canada and, if not, for what reason?
Return tabled.


OIL LAND EXPLORATION PERMITS
Mr. Thomson (Balileford-: Kindersley):
1.	What permits for oil land exploration in Canada's Yukon and Northwest Territories have been issued by the federal government?
2.	For the above permits, what are (a) the names and addresses of individuals or corporations holding such permits (b) the names of the members of each consortium holding a permit, with the percentage interest held by each member of the consortium respectively (c) the total acreage covered by the permit or permits held by each individual or corporation and by each consortium respectively, and (d) the percentage owned or controlled by nonresidents of Canada for each individual corporation or consortium respectively?
Return tabled.

January 12, 1970
Orders for Returns


OFFSHORE OIL EXPLORATION PERMITS
Mr. Thomson (Balileford-Kindersley): 1.	What permits for offshore oil exploration have been issued by the federal government for (a) the east Canadian coast (b) the west Canadian coast (c) the Hudson Bay-Hudson Strait region, and (d) the Arctic coast?
2.	For the above permits, what are (a) the names and addresses of individuals or corporations holding such permits, (b) the names of the members of each consortium holding a permit; with the percentage interest held by each member of the consortium respectively, (c) the total acreage covered by the permit or permits held by each individual person or corporation and by each consortium respectively, and (d) the percentage owned or controlled by non-residents of Canada for each individual corporation or consortium respectively?
Return tabled.


&quot;TELECOMMISSION&quot; INQUIRY
Mr. Gilbert: 1.	Who are the members of 'Telecommission', the inquiry into all aspects of the telecommunications industry?
2.	When is it anticipated that the above inquiry will be completed?
3 Will the report on the above inquiry be made public?
4.	What specific studies are to be undertaken with regard to the above inquiry?
5.	What studies will be undertaken within the public service and which officials will be participating in each of these internal studies?
6.	What studies will be carried out by outside consultants?
7.	Have these consultants been chosen, and, if so, (a) what expenditure is involved in each study (b) was there a competitive tender for each of the outside studies?
8.	If no competitive tendering has taken place, what are are reasons?
9.	Will each of these specific studies, undertaken both internally and externally, be made public and, if not, for what reason?
Return tabled.


CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD-PRICE QUOTATIONS
Mr. Burton: What were the daily price quotations announced by the Canadian Wheat Board for each day since June 1, 1969?
Return tabled.


ACCESS TO TELEVISION NETWORKS
Mr. Dinsdale: 1. What cities in Canada have access to the two Canadian television networks, CBC and CTV and, what is the population of each of these cities?

2.	What Canadian cities of 20,000 and more population do not have access to the two Canadian networks?
3.	What plans are in process to make the two networks available to all populous areas of Canada and, when is it expected that this objective will be realized?
Return tabled.


FORT WILLIAM-PORT ARTHUR-GRANTS TO HOSPITALS
Mr. Badanai: What federal government grants have been made each year since 1957 to (a) McKellar General Hospital, Fort William, Ontario (b) St. Joseph's General Hospital, Port Arthur, Ontario (c) Port Arthur General Hospital, Port Arthur, Ontario?
Return tabled.
[DOT] (2:30 p.m.)



MOTION TO ADJOURN UNDER S.O. 26 EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NIGERIA-BIAFRA-CANADIAN ACTION FOLLOWING CEASE-FIRE

Francis Andrew Brewin: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave, seconded by the hon. member for Yorkton-Melville (Mr. Nystrom), to move the adjournment of the House under Standing Order 26 for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely, the situation arising out of the destruction of the Uli airport and the possibility of the collapse of Biafran resistance, to the end that Canada may play an effective role in organizing and participating in an expanded observer team in Biafra, so as to ensure that guarantees given by the federal authorities against reprisals upon Biafran personnel be fully observed, and that a massive international reucf operation be urgently organized, utilizing where possible existing relief distribution personnel, so as to minimize the widespread starvation which is imminent.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon.
member for Greenwood has given the Chair the required notice of the proposed motion. I have had occasion to consider the matter very seriously, and I have listened to the contributions made earlier today following the statement made on motions by the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
On reflection and after taking into account all the factors in this matter I tend to the conclusion that this is the kind of urgent
January 12, 1970	COMMONS DEBATES	2239
situation to which the House might want to direct its attention on an urgent basis. Considering all the factors and all the circumstances I would rule that the motion should be put and, if it is carried, that the debate take place at eight o'clock this evening. Therefore I will seek the opinion of the House on whether or not the hon. member has leave to move the motion for the purpose of discussing the matter stated by him under the terms of Standing Order 26.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: The debate on the proposed motion shall stand over until eight o'clock this evening.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I realize that we are going to have a debate this evening on this question but I should like to direct a related question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Will the minister say whether he has been in touch with the High Commissioner in Lagos to ascertain the whereabouts and safety of Canadians engaged in relief work in Biafra?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, before the collapse of the Biafran resistance it was our understanding that there were only three Canadians working in that area. Our information is that they were all safely evacuated.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, will the Secretary of State for External Affairs inform the House whether or not the Canadian aircraft are being moved into forward positions in order to be able to provide relief, or are these aircraft being maintained in Canada at this juncture?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I will allow the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition and certainly will allow the minister to reply. However, I think it should be in order for me at this time to caution hon. members that in view of the fact there will be a debate tonight these questions might perhaps be asked at that time. I assume the minister would then make a statement in reply to 21611-31
Inquiries of the Ministry points raised by hon. members. As I have said, the question asked by the Leader of the Opposition is quite in order and it might be replied to at this time by the minister.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, we have been looking at this question very carefully. The advice we received from the military authorities in this country is that under present circumstances, if we have our planes ready here to fly, they are probably in as good a position to fulfil the vital role of relief operations as they would be if they were at a place like London, for example. There is no question, of course, about moving them into Lagos until we have an agreement with the Nigerian authorities.


Mr. David MacDonald (Egmonl):: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I might put a supplementary question to the Government House Leader rather than to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of the motion made a few minutes ago and the apparent willingness of all hon. members to deal in some continuing way with the situation, and because of the necessity at this point of having a small body of people able to look at some of the details which undoubtedly will be presented in a general way during the debate this evening, would the Government House Leader be agreeable to meeting with other House Leaders some time during the day with a view to bringing forward a suitable motion, perhaps this evening, so the committee might be empowered to carry on this type of activity?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, there is a House Leaders meeting scheduled for 3:30 p.m.
While I am on my feet perhaps I could point out that there was agreement that the business to be called for today, Bill C-12, would be disposed of at today's sitting. Perhaps we might have an agreement that private members' hour be suspended in order that Bill C-12 be disposed of by six o'clock this afternoon.


Mr. Baldwin:: Possibly we could discuss that also at 3:30, Mr. Speaker.

January 12, 1970
Inquiries of the Ministry NIGERIA-BIAFRA


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether I might direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs in relation to his statement on motions which he can answer now or answer tonight when we are having the debate. It might give the House some information that would be useful in that discussion. The minister has mentioned the fact that the Red Cross will be used and that there may be an air drop to supply relief to the people of Nigeria. He has made no mention of utilizing the services of Canairelief which is associated with the Joint Church Aid Program. I want to ask him whether it is the government's intention to use that organization, and will the $1 million which was to be appropriated to assist them in this task be available to that organization?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, this morning when we received the news that the Biafran resistance had collapsed I was in touch with both General Wrinch of the Canadian Red Cross and Dr. Johnson of Canairelief to discuss the resulting situation. I informed General Wrinch, of course, about our desire to use the Red Cross as the acknowledged international authority as far as possible. I spoke to Dr. Johnson who told me that Canairelief had supplies on the island of Sao Tome and was ready to co-operate. He wanted me to convey this to the government in Lagos. I asked him in return, if Canairelief was not acceptable to the Nigerian authorities, whether the available supplies would be available to any other organization. He answered in the affirmative.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Have any direct representations been made to the government of Nigeria in Lagos in respect of allowing Canairelief to fly into Uli and has any favourable reply been received?


Mitchell William Sharp: Our High Commissioner has, of course, quite recently been in touch with the government in Lagos about the operation of Canairelief. Needless to say, because Canairelief operated night flights contrary to the wishes of the Nigerian government its position is not as strong in that regard as it would otherwise be. However, I do accept the statement of Dr. Johnson that they would wish to

co-operate with whatever agency is in control, and I hope the supplies can be moved quickly into position.


Mr. Andre Foriin (Loibiniere):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
Since the nations which supply the belligerents with arms as well as armament makers are among those mainly responsible for the situation in Nigeria and Biafra, does the minister intend to propose, at the next session of the United Nations, that a study be made on the position of those countries and on the military assistance they have granted to Nigeria and to Biafra, with a view to determining who is actually responsible for this war, and preventing further military disorders of this type?


Mitchell William Sharp: Well, Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the cause of the war did not lie particularly with those who, contrary to our wishes, supplied arms. It lay, of course, in the internal situation in Nigeria.



MANITOBA CENTENNIAL


Mr. George Muir (Lisgar):: Mr. Speaker, since the Biafran situation is to be debated this evening might I change the subject by asking a question of the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In view of the fact that the world hockey tournament has been cancelled and because the hockey series was an important item in connection with Manitoba's centennial celebration, what alternative is the government considering in order to compensate Winnipeg for the expense already incurred?


John Carr Munro: The CAHA and Hockey Canada, on which body the government of Canada is represented, are now working out some other suitable arrangements whereby we can have, we hope, a very interesting, hockey tournament of very high calibre in Winnipeg during the centennial. We think it
January 12, 1970	COMMONS
will have attractive features. The details of the tournament, as I say, are not yet developed but are being worked out.


Mr. A. B. Douglas (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of National Health and Welfare which is supplementary to an earlier one. Can the minister assure the House that Canada's national team will not be disbanded and will continue to be available for games throughout the nation?


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, my advice is that the national team is carrying on its operations in respect of outstanding commitments it has had in Canada for some time. How long after that the team will continue has not been decided.



RCMP MUSICAL RIDE-ASSUMPTION OF MAINTENANCE COSTS

George Robson Muir: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Solicitor General in respect of the centennial celebration. In view of the importance to the Manitoba centennial of the appearance throughout the province of the RCMP musical ride, will the government give consideration to helping Manitoba communities to finance the ride by assuming the maintenance costs of the personnel and horses dining the tour?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member is making a suggestion which is really not a question. I think he must assume the suggestion has been placed before the government for consideration and will be considered in due course.


Mr. Roch La Salle (Joliette):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to put a supplementary question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare.
Could he not make it possible for the existing parliamentary hockey team to participate in the Winnipeg festival?


Mr. Speaker:: That is also a suggestion which we can assume will be considered by the government.



DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARDS


[Stage Direction]
Mr. Jack Marshall (Humber-Si. George's-Sl. Barbel: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Secretary of State. On behalf of the war
DEBATES	2241
Inquiries of the Ministry veterans of Canada would the minister agree to take steps to have the serious question of the abolition and reclassification of military awards referred to the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs before a decision is made so that the opinions of some one million veterans in Canada can be heard?
Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, this is a proposal that we are willing to consider, but no decision has yet been made to that effect.


Hon. D. S. Harkness (Calgary Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. I should like to ask the Secretary of State why British Commonwealth gallantry awards have been suspended since, I understand, February of last year?


Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware that any announcement was made along this line. However, I know that a committee has been formed in which six federal departments are represented at the civil servants level in order to study the question of gallantry awards.
I want to point out at the same time that some press reports these last few days were somewhat absurd. Indeed, they were dealing with awards granted only in war time, which is irrelevant at present since Canada is not at war with anybody.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


Mr. David Orlikow (Winnipeg Norih):: Mr. Speaker, this question is directed to the Minister of Transport. In view of the adverse effect on railway passengers and railway employees as a result of the discontinuance of certain CNR trains from Vancouver to Winnipeg, would the minister discuss with officials of the CNR the possibility of at least continuing those trains until the application for permanent discontinuance is heard and decided by the Canadian Transport Commission?


Hon. Donald C. Jamieson (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I shall be very glad to bring these representations to the attention of officials of the CNR. I have already discussed the matter with them.

January 12, 1970
Inquiries of the Ministry
While I am standing may I apologize to certain members to whom I inadvertently gave an incorrect assessment before the recess. I said in the committee that there would be a hearing, but I was thinking in terms of a discontinuance. The CTC does not have authority to hold a hearing on this particular matter, but as I say I will discuss the matter in line with the representations made.


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question which is based on the undertaking the minister gave us on December 10. What has happened in respect of the offer he made to convene a meeting of the CN management with members of constituencies affected in order to discuss the discontinuance of trains 5 and 6.


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Nothing has happened. Perhaps it is my fault. I was under the impression that hon. members interested would get in touch with me and indicate a time. If you will let me know the time I will be glad to do it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The
offer was accepted on December 10.


Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: In connection with this discontinuance of railway service will the minister press Canadian National Railways not to act in the arbitrary and altogether cavalier manner it has? After all, Parliament votes the money for the CNR and Parliament should have some right to say whether or not such action is justified.


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I repeat that I shall be very glad to make these representations to both railways, but I have to emphasize that where it is only a reduction in service there is no legal mechanism that can be employed. Where there is a discontinuance the CTC has indicated it will hold hearings on such discontinuance.


John George Diefenbaker: I realize this is so, but what about Parliament? Parliament votes the money, and surely these railway services should not be discontinued in the manner in which the CNR is now carrying on.


David Orlikow: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that the so-called reduction is in fact a complete cancellation, if only for some months, would the minister consider the possibility of amending the legislation so that this kind of discontinuing could be considered by the CTC?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: I shall be glad to consider that, Mr. Speaker.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


Bernard Dumont: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion.
Could he tell the House what steps the government intends to take to prevent the dismissal of 325 employees at the B.V.D. plant at St. Romuald?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, I met the mayor of St. Romuald, on Saturday, in Quebec City. Today, he is in Ottawa and we are in contact with the Department of Trade and Commerce of both the federal government and the province of Quebec. We are trying to find a way to prevent the closing of this plant.


Bernard Dumont: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a supplementary question.
Has the minister considered the possibility for the government to subsidize the construction of 24 Greek ships so as to prevent the Davie Shipbuilding yards in Lauzon from closing down?


Mr. Speaker:: This is not a supplementary question.



BILINGUALISM AND BICULTURALISM


Hon. George Hees (Prince Edward-Has-tings):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister. Does the government expect to introduce at this session legislation based upon the recommendations in the third report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Bicultural-ism, which report was given to the government early in December, and may I say I feel sure that the Prime Minister and his colleagues have been studying it assiduously in the weeks that have intervened?


Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):: Well, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member has been studying it as assiduously as I have he will know that I do not see that it necessarily involves legislation at this session to implement some of its recommendations.
January 12, 1970


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has not answered the question. When does the government expect to make known its views on the recommendations in the third report-


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: That is not what you asked.


George Harris Hees: Yes, I did. I asked first of all-Mr. Speaker, I will ask my question again. Does the government expect to introduce at this session legislation based on the recommendations in the third report of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Bieulturalism-


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: That is what you asked.


George Harris Hees: -which has been in the hands of the government for several weeks and which I feel sure members of the government have studied very hard. Can we have an answer, Mr. Speaker?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


George Harris Hees: Then may I ask another
question-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon.
member has asked a question, and I understand that the hon. member for Annapolis Valley has a supplementary.


Mr. J. P. Nowlan (Annapolis Valley):: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and again it is to the Prime Minister. I hope he will come down out of the clouds and off the ski slopes to answer my question. In his statement on December 19 last the Prime Minister said that after he had reviewed the third report of the commission he would make a statement to the House on motions. Is he considering making a statement and when will it be made?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I am not certain.


George Harris Hees: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is it not true that the government has decided to shelve this whole report because it is a little too hot to handle?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.



THE CANADIAN ECONOMY


Mr. David Lewis (York South):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the right hon. Prime Minister. Arising out of a press conference which he held, according to my information, on December 22 last I would like to ask the
Inquiries of the Ministry Prime Minister whether it is now government policy to pursue monetary and fiscal policies that will result in an unemployment rate of 6 per cent across the country which, of course, would mean a much higher rate of unemployment in some parts of the country?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon.
member has asked the question in such a way that it is difficult for the Chair to accept it procedurally. He has asked merely for a statement of government policy. I would think the question as asked in this way is not in order. Perhaps it might be rephrased.


David Lewis: May I first ask the Prime Minister whether his reported statement that the government is prepared to have an unemployment rate as high as 6 per cent was a statement of government policy?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Not of policy, Mr. Speaker. It is something we hope will not happen but it is something that might happen if the private sector does not combat inflation as vigorously as the federal government has.


David Lewis: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, following upon the answer which the Prime Minister gave. Is he stating to the House that the government will not change its policies even though the unemployment rate may go up to 6 per cent?


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the Prime Minister's concern about getting the co-operation of the private sector of the economy, may I ask whether or not his government is prepared to accede to the request of the United Steelworkers of Canada that a public inquiry be held into the increase in the price of steel, which they claim is completely unwarranted and unjustified?


Hon. Ron Basford (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, if I may answer that question, it is quite clear that there will be a public inquiry when the report of the Prices and Incomes Commission is referred to the committee. The motion for the setting up of that committee is on the order paper and I hope it will be debated very soon so that the committee can be set up and can consider the report.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: As a further supplementary question, will the inquiry by the Prices and
2244	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry Incomes Commission be a public inquiry or a hole-in-the-corner inquiry which will make it impossible to question the steel companies with respect to their exorbitant profits?


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. In view of his recently expressed desire to have the private sector agree to reasonable guidelines, is he now willing to call a meeting himself of the leaders of industry and labour to try to persuade them of the necessity for coming to such an agreement?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the ministers of the government in various departments have been consulting with various sectors of industry to ensure the results that the hon. member is seeking. There is no need at this point for me to convene a general meeting of all industry.



HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES


Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has the government agreed to a proposal to defoliate a strip of the eastern section of the Canada-U.S. border with a chemical called picloram?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, for years brush and tree cutting was done by hand in this area. Since the mid-1950s the Boundary Commission has benefited from the experience of hydro companies, highway departments and other organizations maintaining brush-free rights of way and has used selective herbicides. The commission has consulted conservation authorities to ensure that the herbicides used not only permit desirable growth such as grass and ferns but are also non-toxic to animal life.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: As a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, am I to take it from this that the minister's department and the other departments involved are satisfied that there is no danger to the environment through the use of this chemical?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

DEBATES	January 12, 1970



INQUIRY AS TO REPORT OF LEDAIN COMMISSION-LEGALIZING OF MARIJUANA

Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Can he tell us whether the LeDain Commission on drugs has finished its report, and when it will be brought before the House of Commons?


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, my latest information is that the preliminary report of the LeDain Commission will be available some time during the latter part of February. As to whether it will be made available to the House of Commons I cannot answer that because no decision has been made.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: As a supplementary question, does the minister follow the Prime Minister's stand in reference to legalizing marijuana or the Solicitor General's stand? What is the policy of the government at this time prior to the presentation of the commission's report?


Mr. Marcel Prud'homme (Saint-Denis):: should like to direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Justice. Does he intend to order the suspension of proceedings against the users of marijuana and hashish until the LeDain report is published?


John Carr Munro: That matter has not yet been decided.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Speaker, may I-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please! May we have some order, please. We might go on to another question.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: But I have just started it-


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member says he has just started. That is what I am afraid of. There are a number of hon. members anxious to ask questions, starting with the right hon. member for Prince Albert.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, my question would not be exactly supplementary-
January 12. 1970	COMMONS


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I regret that I have to interrupt the right hon. member but I believe the hon. member for Saint-Denis has a question of privilege.

The hon. member for Saint-Denis on a question of privilege.


Marcel Prud'homme: Mr. Speaker, my point of order is that the Minister of Justice was preparing to answer the question when the Minister of National Health and Welfare did answer it.


Mr. Speaker:: In the circumstances, it might be in order to allow the Minister of Justice to reply to the question.


Mr. Turner (Ottawa Carleton):: The answer to the question is, Mr. Speaker, that we are not in any way prejudging the issue and as the law is the law the Department of Justice will attempt to give the appropriate advice to the courts on the basis of existing law.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I wonder if I might follow that up, Mr. Speaker. I should like to ask the Minister of Justice whether he intends to amend the law to fit the Prime Minister's philosophy or the Minister of National Health and Welfare's philosophy?


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, my question arises out of a statement made at a press conference. Would the Minister of National Health and Welfare be able to inform the House whether, when the Prime Minister at a press conference made the announcement that marijuana was going to be legalized, he was speaking for the government or just speaking ex cathedra?



LABOUR RELATIONS


Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East):: should like to direct my question to the Minister of Labour, Mr. Speaker. In view of the imperative necessity that there should not be a lock-out or strike on the waterfront in Vancouver and the three-month peace arrangement made with the Minister of Labour, which is rapidly nearing an end, could he inform the House now as to the status of negotiations?
DEBATES	2245
Inquiries of the Ministry


Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Minister of Labour):: Briefly, Mr. Speaker, I have been informed that the negotiators representing the workers on the various waterfronts in Vancouver have submitted new or revised demands to management and a meeting is going ahead as scheduled.


Harold Edward Winch: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, regarding the Harbours Board in Vancouver. Could I ask the Minister of Labour if he understands that both the employer and the union will conclude their new negotiations and report prior to the deadline of three months which he was able to arrange, after which there is the right to strike?


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Speaker, theoretically the right to strike exists at this moment. It was the unions themselves who volunteered not to strike before February 5 in an effort to arrive at a satisfactory settlement with management. I am hoping that such a satisfactory settlement will be arrived at, and I am rather encouraged by the fact that both parties are now meeting for that very purpose.



MONTREAL WATERFRONT-PUBLICATION OF REPORT

Gerald William Baldwin: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Is the minister going to make public the report dealing with conditions in the port of Montreal?


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Speaker, I can assure
the hon. member that no senior official of any department, no member of the House of Commons on either side nor anybody in private industry has suggested that the report be suppressed or not made public. What I said stands. As I said on December 17, I received the report in October, sent it out for translation and printing and it was then put before a departmental committee of the Department of Labour for analysis and study. That work was completed during the holidays and it has now been referred to the Department of Transport and the National Harbours Board for their observations. When and if the report is to be tabled will be announced in due course.



CAPE BRETON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask
January 12, 1970

Inquiries of the Ministry the Minister oi Regional Economic Expansion a question which I have asked on two previous occasions concerning the fact that the position of chairman of the Cape Breton Development Corporation, a position of great importance, is vacant. Is the minister in a position to inform the House as to who the new chairman will be? I find it difficult to believe that it is beyond the capacity of this government to fill this position with a competent person.


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, unfor u-nately, I am not in a position to announce that appointment. I hope I can do so shortly. Several people have been approached; however, some refused and others were probably not able to fill the job. As soon as we can appoint somebody, we shall be glad to proceed.



ALLEGED ILLEGAL USE OF UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION FUND

Mr. Donald Maclnnis (Cape Breton-East Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion also. I should like to ask if he has received a protest wire from Local 4527 indicating illegal use of the UIC fund by Devco and, if so, what would the nature of his answer be?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, I have not received it. I shall check with the departments to ascertain if they received the wire and who received it.


Donald MacInnis: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the minister would speak to the authorities who have been quoted on several occasions but to my knowledge have yet to come forth with any decision. Would he look into the question of the legality of the plan put forth by Devco? I think it is a matter of interest to all members of this House that legislation passed by this House has been used as a back-door method to violate existing contracts.


Mr. Roberl Muir (Cape Brelon-The Sydneys):: A short supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. May I ask the Minister of Labour if he received a wire with reference to this particular problem of unemployment insurance?
[Mr. Stanfield.)


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Speaker. It is possible that the Unemployment Insurance Commission received such a wire. Indeed, I think members will recall the fact that, contrary to the opinion expressed, the procedure is a legal one not unique to Devco; there are 100-odd such arrangements. The Unemployment Insurance Commission and the then Minister of Manpower got together to do what they thought was in the best interests of workers and miners. As a result of that action, many people who would have been prematurely out of work with no income are at least guaranteed a substantial income.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of any legal opinion because I have already asked for such an opinion from the law officers of the Crown. I ask the Minister of Labour if he does not consider that the fact a man, who is released from his position is forced to use the UIC fund to pay for his retirement, is a violation of the insurance fund?


Mr. Speaker:: I would think that the question as asked would invite an expression of opinion by the minister and, therefore, the question is not phrased properly.


Donald MacInnis: The Minister of Labour has tried to imply that a legal opinion has been given, but that is not the case because I have put the question to both law officers of the Crown, the Solicitor General and the Minister of Justice. I put it to them verbally and in writing some time last September, but as yet neither one of those law officers has expressed an opinion. Therefore the Minister of Labour is not in a position to state what the law officers of the Crown have said on this matter.



PESTICIDES


Mr. Randolph Harding (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture. In view of the important two-week December meeting in Rome of pesticide experts from the Food and Agriculture Organization and the World Health Organization on the evaluation of the hazard to man of pesticide residues in food, have the recommendations arising from the meeting on residue tolerance for use in regulating residues in food moving in commerce been received by
January 12, 1970	COMMONS
his department? If so, what action is planned on these recommendations? Is it the intention of the minister to make a statement to the House on this important matter?


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps the last part of the hon. member's lengthy question might be in order. I think it might be concentrated in these terms to inquire of the minister whether he proposes to make a statement on motions.


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Mr. Speaker, my department is constantly in touch with the activities of the FAO. Whether or not they have received the report that the hon. member speaks of, and whether or not I can make a statement on motions I am not sure, but I shall look into it.



PARLIAMENT HILL


Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Public Works. I wonder if the minister could consult with his colleague, the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion, and make a statement in the House with regard to the applicability of height restrictions on federal government buildings in the neighbourhood of Parliament Hill, with particular reference to the new National Defence building?


Arthur Laing: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I think that could be arranged.


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington):: A supplementary question for the Minister of Public Works, Mr. Speaker. Did the minister or anyone on his behalf apply to the city of Ottawa for a building permit before commencing work on this building?


Arthur Laing: Yes, Mr. Speaker, about two months ago.



FISHERIES


Mr. Lloyd Crouse (South Shore):: I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries, Mr. Speaker. In view of the serious decline in the supplies of groundflsh on the east coast, especially the supply of haddock, can the minister 21611-41
DEBATES	2247
Inquiries of the Ministry indicate whether the recommendation of ICNAF calling for a maximum annual haddock yield during the next three years beginning in January, 1970, of only 12,000 metric tons from Georges Bank and 18,000 metric tons from Browns Bank, has been ratified by all member countries of ICNAF?


Hon. Jack Davis (Minister of Fisheries and Forestry):: Mr. Speaker, we have high hopes that all member countries will take note of this recommendation and act accordingly.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for
Spadina.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear. IMMIGRATION



MEASURES TO REMEDY DECLINE IN NUMBERS FROM EUROPE

Mr. S. Perry Ryan (Spadina):: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank hon. members on this side of the House. My question is directed to the Prime Minister. Does the government intend to take measures to remedy the drastic two-year decline in immigration to Canada from Europe?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The question asked by the hon. member should normally be answered by way of a statement on motions.


Sylvester Perry Ryan: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the Prime Minister make a statement in the near future about the drastic decline in immigration from Europe to Canada?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, shortly before the House rose for the Christmas recess I made a statement on the question of immigration from Europe. I will look at that statement and if there is anything further I can add, I will be glad to do so.


Sylvester Perry Ryan: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Will the hon. member kindly resume his seat. I might recognize him in a moment. This is an opportune moment for me to remind hon. members that we are running out of time and perhaps we ought to have as few supplementary questions as possible. I recognize the hon. member on a point of order.
2248	COMMONS
Inquiries of the Ministry Mr. Ryan: Mr. Speaker, it is true that the Minister of Manpower and Immigration made a good statement; at least, it was good in part. It only went into the negative aspects of the whole situation and made excuses. It did not indicate what positive steps were being taken to encourage immigration from Europe.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Gerald William Baldwin: They were not even good excuses.



NATIONAL FILM BOARD


Mr. John Burton (Regina East):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Secretary of State. Has reconsideration now been given to the decision to lay off National Film Board employees and to introduce user charges for films? If so, will the minister indicate what decision or action has been taken?


Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is no doubt aware that, upon the request of the National Film Board Commissioner, I have asked an independent person to study this double question and that a report in this regard is to be submitted to the Commissioner himself with copies going to the interested parties, on January 15, which leaves another 72 hours for such submission.



CRIMINAL CODE


Mr. Robert McCleave (Halifax-East Hants):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Justice. It arises out of the proclamation of only part of the Criminal Code amendments dealing with the breathalyzer. When is the minister expecting those parts giving rights to accused people to be proclaimed as well?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I will not accept part of the preamble to that question because we believe the accused has sufficient rights under the legislation as it stands. In so far as that part of the question relating to providing a sample [Mr. Speaker.!
DEBATES	January 12, 1970
of breath is concerned, that matter will depend on an appropriate container being approved.



PROVISION OF SUFFICIENT BOXCARS FOR MOVEMENT

Mr. R. R. Soufham (Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Transport. In light of the heavy build-up of space for grain at our terminal elevators, what action, if any, is the minister taking to ensure that sufficient boxcars are made available to move grain into market position and thus greatly improve the serious cash position in which prairie farmers presently find themselves?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Mr. Speaker, the direct responsibility in this matter is, of course, that of the Minister without Portfolio from Saskatoon-Humboldt. However, I am working with him on a daily basis and had consultations with the railways as recently as Saturday. I am assured that they are taking all necessary or possible steps to bring about the most desirable situation.



REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION


Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion. Will he take the House into his confidence as to the outcome of the meeting that took place on Friday last in Saint John, New Brunswick, involving himself, the deputy minister, the Atlantic Advisory Council and Devco?


Jean Marchand: No, Mr. Speaker.


James Aloysius McGrath: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Did such a meeting take place? If so, can the minister tell us whether, as a result of this meeting, we shall finally obtain a development strategy, to quote the communique, for the Atlantic provinces?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, I believe it is common knowledge that the meeting did take place. This was the second meeting with a committee which is supposed to advise the
January 12, 1970
COMMONS DEBATES	2249
International Development Research Centre department and the minister. As and when the Prime Minister has no heart. What the committee wishes to submit such advice arrangements are being made for a transplant to me, it will do so and if the matter seems to and which minister will volunteer? warrant it, we will discuss it and report to
the House.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!



IMMIGRATION


Mr. Steven E. Paproski (Edmonton Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. On December 11, 1969, I asked the minister whether, in view of difficulties encountered by the Chinese people in conversing with immigration officials in Vancouver and surrounding areas, he would consider reinstituting the Chinese interpreter services which have been eliminated without any explanation. At that time he did not answer. Is he willing to answer my question now?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that all services of that character will be furnished as required in that area.



CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


Mr. John L. Skoberg (Moose Jaw):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. In view of the recent derailment of a CNR passenger train near Toronto as a result of faulty equipment, will the minister say whether adequate maintenance forces are employed to maintain track and equipment in a safe condition for the travelling public and employees?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Mr. Speaker, that is obviously such a complex question that I prefer to take it as notice.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweaiher@Fundy-Roy-al: Mr. Speaker, I have a question with alarming implications to direct to the Minister of National Health and Welfare which results from a statement made by a member of Her Majesty's Privy Council, the Hon. Judy LaMarsh, during the recess to the effect that


Mr. Speaker:: I must bring to the attention of hon. members that the question period expired a few moments ago. A number of hon. members were anxious to ask questions. I have tried to take note of them and will perhaps give them precedence tomorrow.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. On the last day before the recess, namely, Friday, December 19, 1969, as recorded at page 2184 of Hansard, a statement was made from the Chair, and appropriate action ought to be taken. In view of the statement from the Chair-and the Chair is always right-that "the Senate has now expired", I wonder if appropriate steps will now be taken to advise their Honours that they need not bother to come back on January 27.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


Mitchell William Sharp: growth corporation in North America spends approximately 6 per cent of its annual income for these purposes.
This situation is of great concern to those who are close to the heart of the international development process. The report of the Commission on International Development headed by our former Prime Minister, the Right Hon. Lester B. Pearson, highlights this concern and recommends, and I quote:
-aid suppliers should devote a significant share of their research and development resources and facilities to projects specifically related to problems of developing countries.
This Commission proposes that by 1972 such expenditures should amount to 5 per cent of all public expenditures in the industrialized countries for research and development, of which at least half should be put to work in the developing countries. The United Nations Advisory Committee on the Application of Science and Technology goes further and has proposed that donors be asked to allocate 10 per cent of their research and development resources to projects of concern to lower income countries and an additional 5 per cent to help create institutional infrastructure for science and technology in these countries.
This is an area in which Canada can play an important role and it is for this purpose that we propose to establish the International Development Research Centre of Canada. This bill results from two years of careful investigation and planning by the Canadian International Development Agency with the active assistance and participation of a number of other government departments and experts outside government, particularly the Canadian universities and a number of international institutions. A great deal of care has been taken to design an instrument that will complement and supplement the work that is being carried on by others in this field. I can assure the House that Canada's initiative in creating this body is welcomed by the entire international development community.
The centre will be basically a Canadian institution with an important international dimension. The chairman and most of the members of the centre's board of governors are to be Canadian as well as the majority of its executive committee. Both the board and the staff will include specially qualified people from various parts of the world, including the developing countries. The centre will be structured so as to provide the best possible environment for creativity and problem solving.
DEBATES	2251
International Development Research Centre
The centre will identify, initiate and encourage, support and undertake research into the problems involved in the development of economically deprived regions of the world. It will seek to develop the most effective application of the results of this research to the needs of the people of those regions. It will give high priority to programs that assist the developing countries to build their own scientific and technological capabilities so that they will not be mere welfare recipients, but contributors in their own right to the solution of their own problems.
I have said that the centre will be "problem oriented". A small expert headquarters group will identify specific development problems and develop programs designed to focus resources upon them. In the development and implementation of its programs the centre would work closely with other government departments and non-governmental institutions, particularly Canadian universities and industry. A typical project might consist of a number of programs carried out on a decentralized basis by institutions and individuals chosen for their specific capacity. The centre will also be able to provide financial support to specific research activities of other institutions that contribute directly to its own programs and objectives.
[DOT] (3:30 p.m.)
For example, a program designed to improve the protein content of cereal grains might be spearheaded by a Canadian university with special experience in that field. It would involve a number of other Canadian and non-Canadian organizations, each of which would be engaged in a specific aspect of the work as part of a co-ordinated program. Appropriate authorities in the less developed countries would be involved in the crucial work of applying and adapting the results of all the work to the environmental and social conditions of those countries.
After a project has been undertaken, the function of the headquarters group will be to oversee the programs and to audit and disseminate their results. Discussions with the OECD Development Centre, the United Nations and some of the United Nations Specialized Agencies indicate that the centre's headquarters might also provide a centralized system for assimilating, storing, retrieving and disseminating scientific and technical data relevant to international development. In this way the centre would help provide an
January 12, 1970
2252	COMMONS DEBATES
International Development Research Centre important and presently missing link in the co-ordination of world international development programs.
It is too early to be specific about the centre's programs, but emphasis will certainly be given to those problems to which Canadian capabilities seem especially applicable. Final decisions on program priorities will be reserved to the centre's board of governors. CIDA and the United Nations Advisory Committee on the Application of Science and Technology to Development have already indicated several possible areas of special interest: the development of new techniques for identifying and evaluating mineral resources, improved methods of preserving food and reducing waste; the development of genetically improved plants of high protein value; the study of some specific aspects of the world population problem; and the development of efficient, labour-intensive industrial techniques.
Most of the problems with which the centre will deal will require co-operative effort by both the physical and social sciences. The very nature of the development process requires that the special skills and perspectives of the engineer, the physicist and the chemist be harmonized with those of the economist, the sociologist and the anthropologist. The centre will be concerned with the application of science and technology to the effort to improve the quality of life, not only the processes of material production.
We should not overlook the important benefits the centre will bring to Canada. The funds provided for its support will be an addition to the funds normally available for Canadian research and development. It will create new opportunities for the use of Canadian human and institutional resources in the field of science and technology. It will help to attract to Canada highly qualified people in various fields, including Canadians who have had to leave Canada to pursue their special interests. It will also help to keep in Canada some who might otherwise leave.
In all its programs, the centre will provide important linkages between Canadian and foreign science and technology, enabling Canadian specialists to obtain international experience which could make a valuable contribution to our own development.
The funds needed to finance the centre's operations and programs will come out of Canada's international development assistance allocations. Within these allocations the

amount of funds made available to the centre will depend upon the specific programs and activities which are developed by the centre's board and management after it is established. The government intends to give priority to this aspect of our international development program and I foresee the allocation of as much as 5 per cent of our total development aid funds to the centre. The government is prepared to allocate a minimum of $30 million for the administration and programs of the centre over the first five years. About one-third of this would be for the headquarters operations and the remainder for programs to be carried out outside headquarters.
Successful operation of the centre will call for the full co-operation of the Canadian scientific and technological communities and an especially close relationship with Canadian universities. The science secretariat, other departments of the federal government directly concerned with science and technology and the university community, have contributed to the studies leading to the proposal for the establishment of the centre; they will be equally involved in its direction and operation. The proposed legislation provides for this.
I am sure hon. members will agree with me that the passage of the bill to establish the International Development Research Centre of Canada will provide Canada with a unique opportunity to make an exciting and worthwhile contribution to the cause of international development while enlarging the horizons and enriching the experience of Canadian science.


Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweaiher@Fundy-Roy-al: First, it is reassuring to know that the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp) is reporting on this legislation, in spite of the fact that Bill C-12 leaves parliament in some doubt as to which minister will be assuming responsibility for the new research centre. We in the Official Opposition are happy that the responsibility is to lie with the hon. gentleman. If a more imaginative proposal were to be forthcoming, it might be that authority should rest with a new minister for international development, and perhaps we shall see the establishment of such a post in this country before long.
The original hopes for rapid economic progress in the developing countries have been only partially and spottily achieved. We know this to be a fact, regardless of which party we support. There will, of course, be other opportunities to discuss the uncertain record in this
January 12, 1970

field as well as Canada's external aid program. Today we are dealing with one method which the government has proposed, namely, the establishment of an international research and development centre in Canada.
The Official Opposition welcomes this bill. We shall deal with it, hopefully, in a constructive as well as in a critical manner. We intend to offer a series of amendments which we hope will commend themselves as being sensible and worthy of adoption.
It used to be part of the doctrine connected with the development of emerging nations that economic growth was just a matter of time-that the process was an inevitable one. The harsh fact is that since the end of the second world war no new country has joined the ranks of the wealthy and advanced nations of the world. This is despite a good deal of energy,, a massive injection of capital and, I would say, a considerable amount of goodwill. There are three crucial questions which must be asked about the proposed research centre; they were posed for us at a meeting of a sub-committee of the Committee on External Affairs and National Defence, the sub-Committee on International Development, by Professor Irving Brecher of McGill. They are:
1.	Is there a basic need for the agency?
2.	Has Canada the capacity to carry through the projects envisaged for the centre?
3.	What kind of results can Canadians expect?
To answer the last question first, and in a general way, I would say that Canadians cannot expect any quick results. This is, of course, one of the problems of our epoch, it seems to me-the epoch of instant coffee, instant answers, instant results. I suspect it will not be in the next five years or even in the next decade that the results of the research projects shared with the world through this research centre will make themselves felt in the poorer countries. We do not need to be reminded of the veritable maze of organizations already dealing with development problems around the globe. There is a jungle of alphabets in the international development field. I do not think we need worry about this as long as there are well defined trails through it.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
It seems to me we have learned a good deal in the past few years about development aid. We have learned that we cannot superimpose on others, as we used to think we could, our
DEBATES	2253
International Development Research Centre culture, our ethics and institutions as the price for aid. In fact, this used to be the rationalization for aid in the early years before the introduction of that great project, the Colombo plan. We have learned that ways of doing things, which may be perfectly acceptable to Canada, are not necessarily wise or valid in other countries that are at a different stage of development and which have divergent histories and a variety of cultures. We have also learned-and this seems to me the core of wisdom-that we need to know a great deal more, that we require a vast amount of research in the field. We have, as the minister said, no real focus yet upon the provision of external aid.
Another thing we have learned is that a good many organizations, including those that are adjuncts to the United Nations itself, are hidebound by outmoded procedures. The Secretary of State for External Affairs reminded us of this when he spoke to the United Nations during the 24th General Assembly.
Just as an aside, may I say that the jargon in the field of external aid has evolved during the years. It seems to me that we have now a rather more hopeful set of words which are clearer than most others-"external aid".
In the 20 years since the inception of the external aid program, the underlying motives have shifted considerably. With the research centre in operation, and with the studies that have been commissioned during the past couple of years by the welter of agencies now involved in this field throughout the world, we can surely expect to be in a better position to give aid and to understand the consequences to be expected from the giving of aid.
As we abandon the old certainties-not a unique happening these days since we are abandoning certainties everywhere, much to the benefit of mankind, I think-we come to see that it is not a question of promoting this or that political philosophy; that it is not a matter of expecting, in a sort of selfish way, some long range economic reward because we have been good fellows and extended aid; that it is not even that we can expect these results to flow within a measurable time, by which I mean five or ten years. Rather it is that the goals are much clearer now, and they are clearer because the premise on which those goals were based has been simplified. I suggest we are arriving at the point where we recognize that external aid has but one focal point-the development in the world of the poor countries.
2254	COMMONS
International Development Research Centre
One of the most imaginative pieces of paper issued by the United States Information Agency is the magazine Dialogue. In the 1969 fourth edition there is an interesting article on economic development, productivity and talent by Peter Drucker, wherein he discusses some of the implications of aid and economic expansion in the poor countries. I should like to share with the House one or two sentences taken from this interesting article. Mr. Drucker says:
In the 19th century, industrializing countries financed their development out of farm exports, even though population growth in Europe, North America and Japan was almost as rapid then as it is in developing countries today. Instead of putting pressure on the food base of the economy, this growth created markets in the more industrialized nations of Western Europe for the expanding agriculture of Germany, Hungary, Russia, The Ukraine-
Then, he continues.
It is no longer possible, however, to finance development out of agriculture. Today most of the developed countries have become food-surplus producers. And most of the underdeveloped countries need all the food they can produce to feed their own people, in any event.
There are, of course, exceptions which will be obvious to those who have studied this whole problem.
Capital investment from abroad is no longer the answer to development.
The Pearson report on partners in development made it tragically clear that a good deal of the inflow of money to so many poor countries was being used for foreign exchange and to repay hard loans. Drucker comments on this in these words:
But the bulk of development investment today is of a different kind. It aims at creating capacity to produce for the domestic markets of the country in which the investment is made. It does not, in other words, generate the exports with which to repay the investment.
Then, Mr. Drucker talks about the hazards of aid:
Investment of capital in the developing countries, therefore, tends to create a foreign-exchange liability.
I am not going to bore the House by citing a long list of examples, but if one area of the world needed to be singled out, it would be Latin America where there has been, I think it is right to say, a very substantial amount of capital investment. Yet there the crisis looms as a result of the serious difficulties in which the various countries on that continent find themselves in repaying capital investment.
[Mr. Fairweather.l
DEBATES	January 12, 1970
I have said that during the 20 years since the inception of external aid program the motives have shifted. I like this because I think that the motives today are a good deal more honourable than they were. However, I think it is a little self-righteous to stand here today, armed with hindsight and the experience of the last two decades, and say: "Well, it might have been better to have made the nationalization for aid a good deal plainer when the programs were first introduced following the second world war".
This point was made, as a matter of fact, by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Indeed, somebody might do a doctoral thesis on the evolution of the language of Canadian statesmen in this whole field, which seems to get cooler as the years go by. It used to be that we would use the Dullesian phrase "rolling back Communism". It was said we had to buy our way out of the Communist menace. No such-I had better be careful here; I was going to say-


John Napier Turner: Jargon?


Mr. Fairweather:: Certainly, there is much jargon attaching to aid, and there are a good many interesting articles on the subject. I prefer to say that there are poor countries and there are rich countries; that Canada is a rich country which should help the poor countries. Others can find more complicated philosophies and ways of expressing this concept.
The reason for the present program was stated by the Secretary of State for External Affairs in what I think was language that was a little negative. He asked: "In what kind of a world do we want our children and grandchildren to work? In what kind of a world do we want to retire?" The answer to that double-barrelled question should be a determinant as we assess our motivations for foreign aid.
[DOT] (3:50 p.m.)
The Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) then referred to the threat of poverty in the world as greater than foreign investment, foreign ideologies or foreign nuclear weapons. Appealing to fear and increasing paranoia about the world is a politically ill-advised posture I suggest. It may result in an attitude of retrenchment rather than generosity.
Our committee on external affairs heard some interesting evidence from Dr. Theo
January 12, 1970

Sommer, a lecturer on international relations at the University of Hamburg. He said:
The North-South confrontation is a myth, as far as we can look ahead. They cannot get at us, to put it in very crude terms. There will be no political catastrophe resulting from the difference in living standards and development. There will be a moral capacity, of course, if there are many Biafrans or if 50 million Indians die in famine.
This, then, surely is the crucial issue. If development growth does not overtake copulation growth the rich nations face the prospect of an intolerable moral crisis by the year 2000. This is a crisis furthermore which cannot be solved by the use of palliatives like food aid.
I realize that the house leaders are trying to work out a timetable, but there are one or two points I should like to highlight. These are points in respect of which the official opposition will be making amendments when this bill gets second reading and goes to the committee. Perhaps some of the points are obvious but nonetheless are worth repeating.
First of all, the centre is not the first organization to do research for international development. Other groups like OECD, FAO, UNESCO, the U.N. development program, the International Rice Institution, the United Nations Advisory Committee on the application of science and technology to develop third world plans, plus non-government organizations such as the Rockefeller and Ford foundations are even now doing very important research in this whole field.
I assume that one of the obligations, and this is one about which the new board and executive officers will be undoubtedly enthusiastic, is how to co-ordinate the plans of the research centre with existing research being done in the world today. I stress that perhaps the centre will have to keep the very closest liaison with all the various organizations in the field so that our efforts will be co-ordinated and so that the work will not be duplicated.
I think the minister made this point, but if he did not perhaps I can make it for him. Obviously, we will want to do research in respect of things that Canada can do well. We can do a good many things well and I presume that in the list from which the directors and managers will have to choose projects the easier choices-there will be some hard ones-will be made in respect of those fields where there are Canadian experts available.
DEBATES	2255
International Development Research Centre
I am still a bit uncertain after the minister's statement about the relationship of the new research centre and CIDA. The funds for the centre it seems to me should not just be taken from CIDA's budget. The financing of the centre should be added to the money we are giving each year to CIDA. This may be government policy now.
After the centre has completed a project, it seems to me we must make sure that it will be picked up and something constructive done with it. I do not mean that we should impose the results of our research on the world. Presumably countries will make application to the centre for projects in connection with every aspect of aid, as was made clear in Mr. Pearson's report from the commission on international development. We really should have the machinery for assessing the way in which various projects are to be carried out. I know there is a very fine line that has to be drawn. We cannot be the guardians of poor countries, checking on them all the time as to how the dollars are spent, but in most instances we have embassies or high commissions, part of the responsibility of which will be to see that the value is received for Canadian dollars spent.
I wish I had made this point earlier, but perhaps it is manifestly clear. I certainly hope that no research will be done or is contemplated in any military field. Perhaps this goes without saying. I will have an amendment to propose to make this certain. Perhaps the minister or somebody else will want to checkmate me by proposing an amendment to make clear that there are no military implications whatsoever in the proposed research centre. The developing countries should be involved in the research that will be promoted by the centre, whether through Canadian universities or universities in those countries to get the benefits of this research. One aim of the policy should be that the countries getting the benefit of the research will eventually be able to take over. This is a hopeful thing, but I hope that the research centre's ultimate future is to be phased out. Nobody present in the House will live to see tha'% but the hope does not become pious for having been made.
This is perhaps a simple thing, but the Bill uses the phrase "underdeveloped" countries. I mentioned earlier in my remarks that there is a jargon in this external aid field, but is not the current jargon the word "developing"? In order to avoid being in any fix about whether a country does or does not like to be
January 12, 1970'
2256	COMMONS DEBATES
International Development Research Centre called underdeveloped, perhaps we could use the word "developing". I presume everybody is developing, and in this way we could get over a bit of a bind.
Let me make another suggestion very seriously. In view of the present hopeful movement in the world, I suggest that a couple of directors should be from eastern Europe, particularly if we are really serious about setting up an international research centre. There is some very excellent work being done and I think particularly of Yugoslavia. I do not wish to tie the minister down to this or that country. But if we are to have an international research and development centre, we should not shy away from an obligation to invite members from countries in eastern Europe and the U.S.S.R. to serve on this board.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
There is one other point. The bill needs re-drafting in so far as the provision for budgetary control is concerned. Perhaps the minister will note this point and it will be covered when the committee discusses the bill. I hope the centre will report to Parliament through the Secretary of State for External Affairs. I would even hope the government would see fit to appoint a member of Parliament. Perhaps the government is not yet daring enough to appoint any member of Parliament, but at least it could appoint one of its own members to serve on the board of governors. I believe this would be a very hopeful initiative on the part of the government because it could be a technique for bringing to the attention of Parliament the work done in this research centre.
The minister said that over the next five years some $30 million will be spent on research projects, about one-third of which will be spent in respect of the headquarters, presumably in order to get the thing into operation. In respect of this centre which has been so long aborning and which has been the subject matter of a good many studies over the last couple of years, I hope the government will see fit to ensure that it has no military purpose, that there is some better technique for reporting to this Parliament, that the possibility will be considered of having a member of Parliament on the board of governors, and that at least five representatives of the board come from developing countries. This numbers game is dangerous, but I would think one or two members of the board at least should be from eastern Europe and that we should consider very carefully
fMr. Fairweather.]
the tie-in this centre should have with the universities and colleges of Canada.
I hope the minister does not slough off this centre as some type of new toy in the international aid field to be used as an excuse for not coming to grips with the very serious implications of extending foreign aid budgets. I do not think this is the time to be negative about the centre. I do not believe it is a panacea in the development field by any means, but I hope that with some of the suggestions I have made, and some which undoubtedly will come from other parts of the House, the International Development Research Centre of Canada can make a contribution in a field of world concern which presses upon us urgently.


David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, I begin my remarks on second reading of Bill C-12 by agreeing with the minister and with the hon. member for Fundy-Royal (Mr. Fairweather) that the proposal in the bill is a useful and imaginative one and that the research centre could be, and I hope will be, of immense value in the development of the most useful methods of giving aid to the developing countries of the world and the most useful methods for those countries to make use of the aid made available.
I wish to express some concern I have about the philosophical approach to the problem of international development and international aid. In doing so, I want to make clear that I am not carping critically in respect of the proposal but am trying to get the minister and his colleagues, and indeed myself and my colleagues, to look at the problem of international development in what I think might per-haos be the more appropriate context in 1970.
Paul Hoffman is reported to have said at some point that it is wrong to speak of giving international aid. One does not give international aid. The proper way to express the situation is to talk about the developing countries receiving aid and not the developed countries just handing it out to them. This is the first problem I have in respect of the suggestions in this bill and the speech introducing it made by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp). It seemed to me that all the time he was speaking in the usual terms used by statesmen of developed countries concerning international development; that is-and I hope I am not doing him an injustice-we, a developed western nation having all the scientific and technical knowhow, are going to provide a research centre
January 12, 1970

in our capital that will involve Canadians in certain elements and areas of research and that we will provide the facilities for the developing countries to use if we can arrange with them for such use. In other words-and again I say I am not carping about this but am worried about it-we appear to be saying that we a rich, developed and knowhow nation will hand out to you, the poor ignorant developing nations which do not have it, all the wisdom we have and all the great things we have accepted in our kind of society.
My study of the subject, Mr. Speaker, which naturally has been as limited as that of any other member, has convinced me that when we speak in the field of international development we are wrong if we speak merely of scientific and technological matters, if we speak merely in terms of providing the developing nations with technical knowhow and the application in their countries of methods which may or may not be suitable for them, and if we speak of introducing into their societies a culture which they may or may not want introduced into their societies.


Mitchell William Sharp: That is why I said we had to consider the social and anthropological factors involved.


David Lewis: The minister says that we must consider the social and anthropological factors involved. Precisely, but how can this be done with a board when, as I believe he said himself if I heard him correctly, the headquarters group would decide the priorities or the areas, whatever the term he used was, in respect of the research to be undertaken. Who is to be included in this headquarters group? We see in the bill that the board of directors must be composed of a majority of Canadians, 11 out of the 19 or 21, whichever the figure is. We find that the executive committee must consist of a majority of Canadians. There are other proposals of that sort.
I appreciate it is difficult to sell to people the idea that there is a need for international aid when it would cost the people money. This involves taking out of the production in Canada a certain amount in order to assist people elsewhere and it is necessary to persuade the Canadian constituency that this is a worth-while thing to do. My own personal experience with my fellow Canadians has persuaded me for many years that Canadians are ready to make this kind of offer to people who need assistance and are ready to make the kind of sacrifice involved if they are informed about what is being done and are
International Development Research Centre informed about the purposes to be served by international aid.
[DOT] (4:10 p.m.)
I have personally, therefore, no worry about persuading the Canadian people to support an appropriate and imaginative program of assistance to developing countries to develop themselves. Therefore, I ask why the emphasis on having a majority of Canadians? What worries me, Mr. Speaker, is this: if you have a board of directors a majority of whose members must be Canadian then you will have some others, and in that case who are the others going to be?
If I remember correctly there is a total of 21 members. There is a chairman, a president, and not more than 19 others, and of this total of 21 a minimum of 11 must be Canadian. Who are the other 10 likely to be? I bet that of the other 10 there will be someone from the United States, someone from the United Kingdom, someone from the Netherlands and someone from France. In other words, in addition to the 11 Canadians there will be a number of other representatives or citizens of developed countries.
The hon. member for Fundy Royal says that he wants at least five members of the board to be from the developing countries. Why only five, Mr. Speaker? I want to emphasize that I am not playing the numbers game. I am saying to members of this House and through you, Sir, to everyone concerned, that in my estimation, after some considerable study and thought, the developing countries ought to have a full say in the kind of research that takes place which is supposed to serve their needs.
This is not only a matter of science and technology. It is a matter of the infrastructure that must be built in these developing countries-the educational facilities, the health facilites,, the roads and all the other things that support a modern society. It is a matter of fitting into the culture of developing nations, their system of government, the desire they have and the objectives which they have for the future of themselves and their peoples. Who is going to determine that? A group of Canadians and citizens of other developed countries will have a majority say in this centre, and they will decide the priorities and the areas of research that are to be undertaken.
I am concerned about that. I am worried about it. I do not see the need for insisting that there be a majority of Canadians, and I
January 12, 1970
2258	COMMONS DEBATES
International Development Research Centre suggest to the minister that he ought to leave himself free to appoint anybody in the world who can make a contribution to the choice of the priorities, a choice that has to be made in order to carry on the most worth-while and relevant research in various aspects of international development-economic, scientific, social, educational and all the other aspects which must be considered. I am convinced that this cannot be done in the proper atmosphere and in the proper context if it is handed to the developing nations as a decision of a group of men representing mainly the developed countries of the world, which is what the bill now proposes.
Perhaps when the bill is before our committee some explanation will be given as to why we must have a majority of Canadians at every stage. At the moment I do not see it. In fact I see very great disadvantage, as I have indicated, in making the board and the centre mainly representative of the developed countries, once again telling the developing nations what they ought to have, instead of the developing nations having a full voice in what is to be done on their behalf and for their needs by this centre.
This is the first worry I have because if the plan is not implemented in an imaginative way, this research centre will simply be a duplication of research done in the United States, in Europe, and elsewhere throughout the world.
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, without belittling the effort which the minister has placed before us today, I would like to indicate that I have some doubts as to whether this is the best way in which to set up research for the developing countries, and whether the better way is not to set it up inside those countries, or inside regions of those countries, rather than in Canada. I say this tentatively, Mr. Speaker. I can be persuaded that I am wrong about this, but I notice in the "Partners in Development" report of the Pearson Commission there is great emphasis laid throughout the book, and particularly at page 207, on the need for goal-oriented research in regional and national areas of the developing nations, that there ought to be regional or national laboratories and research institutes to study techniques of natural resource utilization and to make other improvements in the developing nations, and that there ought to be nationally based corporations for the purpose of developing products and processes in the developing areas.

It seems to me there is an obvious advantage in having this done in Asia, in Africa and in South America rather than in Canada. It seems to me there is an obvious advantage in having the research institute located in the area that is going to make use of the results of the research, so that the nations in the area, the representatives of the peoples of the area, can have a say in the field of research, the areas of research, the subjects of research, and the objectives of the research that will be undertaken.
You can do the same kind of thing, or at least you can assist that sort of development by a research institute located in Canada if the developing nations are given adequate representation on the board and on the executive which is to make the choice of research subjects and research areas. But when they are given only token representation the situation will be a different one.
I am worried about that because I notice that even the Pearson Commission, if I remember correctly, had only one or at most two members from developing countries. One was W. Arthur Lewis from the Caribbean countries. There may have been one Latin American person. I cannot remember where Campos was from, but most of the others were very fine people, extremely intelligent and competent in their areas but, as I say, most of them were from developed nations. I do not know why that was needed-


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, if I may interject to reply to this question, may I point out that one of the purposes of the Pearson Commission was to encourage the developed countries to give greater aid, and one of the ways to do this was to have a number of distinguished representatives of developed countries on the commission, who would try to encourage the citizens of their own countries to give greater aid.


David Lewis: I thank the minister. I was going to make that suggestion myself, as to why the commission had this overweight of developed nations. In my opinion, the other reason was that it was an organization set up by the World Bank, and in my humble opinion the World Bank's approach to international development has been a disastrous one, concerned primarily with the superiority of the developed countries, concerned mainly with supporting development in developing countries which seemed to the bankers to be desirable and necessary, but which may not at all have been what the local governments
January 12, 1970	COMMONS DEBATES	2259
and the local people considered necessary and desirable. This World Bank approach was partly responsible for the choice of the commissioners, although I hasten to say that the report they produced was one of very great value.
I have emphasized this concern, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps I have belaboured it. At the moment, although I am subject to persuasion by the minister and his assistants, I am personally very unhappy about the composition of the membership and leadership of the centre, the board and executive of the centre, which inevitably will mean mere token representation from the developing countries, so that again we will have an international undertaking by the developed nations-in this case Canada and its associates-to tell the developed countries what in our view they ought to have. More and more in the last number of years, Mr. Speaker, I suggest there has been evidence that the developing countries resent this approach and personally I sympathize with their resentment. When one visits the United Nations and listens to delegates of developing countries speak officially, and when one chats with them unofficially, more and more is there evidence that they resent the notion that the developed countries are going to have control of the methods and processes and goals of their development, which is what has happened to date.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)
I say to the minister that there is not very much difference between what he has proposed in his bill and in his speech this afternoon and the whole, in my opinion, ill-advised concept of tied aid which we have had up to now. This is another form of tied aid and the entire developing world has protested against this notion that when a government gives assistance to a developing country, then X per cent of that assistance must come in the form of goods produced in the donor country. In its report the Pearson Commission uses a great deal of space criticizing the tied aid idea and pleading with the donor countries to drop it.
In a sense, this research centre is a tied aid notion. It was significant that the minister emphasized the fact that the centre was going to give Canadians an opportunity to have certain experience, was going to promote research in Canada. In other words, they were going to use Canadian products and Canadian goods in the sense in which international assistance is tied in the normal way. That is not the objective that the minister and his
International Development Research Centre advisers ought to have for the international research centre.
As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I am concerned that this centre should be merely a source of funds for research projects for universities, and which would have been carried on anyway if the centre were not available, except that there will now be another source of funds to which the universities will be able to go to promote research projects that members of their staff or post graduate students have set for themselves. That is not the purpose of the centre. If assistance for research in our universities is to be given, let it come from the Secretary of State (Mr. Pelletier) and not from the Secretary of State for External Affairs; let it come from the Home Office; let it come from the Canada Council; let it come from whatever other source we may have for assisting research in our universities and for the development of our research and our universities. That surely is not the purpose of this international research centre, I am sure the minister would be the first to agree.
I am not therefore concerned, and I ask the minister that he not be concerned, with promoting research in our universities, with the development of Canadian research. Certainly, we will have a by-product, as will have every other country in the world, from any research carried on in this increasingly important field, but that is not the purpose. It worries me that the minister should have emphasized that because again we will have an emphasis on the things we want to do that we may think of value in promoting Canadian research, rather than an emphasis on what developing countries may require or think they require.
I agree fully with the hon. member for Fundy-Royal who spoke ahead of me. I want to support him without any reservation on the need to make absolutely clear that this research centre will have nothing to do with any military research, defensive or offensive. I am a little fed up anyway with this distinction made between defensive and offensive research. We should have nothing to do with any kind of research related to military activity in developing or developed nations,, and we must make that clear. We must make it clear by the necessary provision in the bill, later to become an act, where the powers of the board or the centre are set out. We must underline that no research in military matters will be undertaken directly by the centre or indirectly by financing any such research in the universities or elsewhere.
January 12, 1970
2260	COMMONS
International Development Research Centre
I hope, Mr. Speaker, that the minister will reconsider the personnel of the leadership of this centre and open it up to people of developing countries to a larger extent than can now be possible. There are many people, and the minister probably knows them personally, in the fields of planning and development in countries like Ceylon, India, some of the African countries, Latin America or the Caribbean countries who could make a tremendous contribution to the research centre. They should be on the board and have something to say about the choice of research subjects.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I have said on many occasions and so have other members, that any law and any institution can be reduced in value-and I am picking words carefully-if the people chosen to administer that law or run that institution are not the right people. In my study of history I learned that more good laws have been perverted by bad administration than by the Parliaments that passed them. Therefore the personnel chosen for the positions of President, Chairman, Vice-Chairman and other leaders of the centre are of immense importance.
There have been occasions, Mr. Speaker,- and I cannot help saying this though I hope I have a benign smile on my face as I do- when people have been chosen for positions of importance because they were defeated in a prior election. There have been such occasions.


Some hon. Members:: Shame, shame.


David Lewis: There have been occasions when people have been appointed to important positions because of poiilical affiliation or because they have friends in high places.


An hon. Member:: Saskatchewan and
Manitoba.


David Lewis: And elsewhere in Canada, Mr. Speaker. I made no distinctions and pointed no fingers. The minister's reaction is merely a measure of the guilt he feels.
Seriously, I want to emphasize that the people at the head of this research centre ought to be people who have had direct personal experience in the field of international development and have worked in this area, not merely academic people or public servants or whatever. There are such people in Canada and outside and I am sure the minister knows them as well as I do.
I merely throw out some names-I am not proposing any of them-to remind ourselves


that there are Canadians who have given a great deal of time to this particular area. There is Dr. Hugh Keenleyside who was attached to the United Nations Technical Assistance Program very early in its life. There is King Gordon and Louis Sabourin here in Ottawa who have had a great deal of experience. There is Ben Higgins, an economist now with the University of Montreal, and who used to be with McGill University, who has had experience of this sort in the field. Of course there are people outside Canada like Gunnar Myrdal, and Arthur Lewis of Jamaican University and many others of that calibre.
[DOT] (4:30 p.m.)
What I am emphasizing and pleading for is that when the heads of this institute are appointed, the minister makes certain that they are people who themselves have had personal experience in the field of international aid and development. This ought not to be an academic exercise, but an exercise in practical, realistic, international co-operation and development. And if that is to come about you must have people who have lived with the peoples in the developing areas, who have a sense of their attitudes and desires and some understanding of how they think, act and react. What is done must be of the greatest use to the developing peoples of the world in order that the developing countries may have full confidence in the research institute and not consider it as just another bit of North American largesse which they distrust. It is because Canada can do this without awakening distrust that I greet the bill and the imaginative ideas contained in it. If this kind of institute is to be set up by a developed nation on its own soil, then I submit Canada is one of the few countries that can do so without arousing the fears and distrust of the developing countries.
A great deal has been written about the motivation behind international aid. Many kinds of motivation have been suggested. Some people are motivated on purely political grounds; they think international aid will help the world go in the direction in which they want it to go. I think they are blind and deaf, and quite possibly dumb. No international aid will affect the historical development of the various continents of the world unless and except that international aid helps the developing countries to develop in the direction they have decided to go. There are other people who say that international aid is necessary if we are to assure peace in the
January 12, 1970
COMMONS DEBATES	2261
world. This, surely, is obvious. It is surely obvious that hunger, disease and ignorance across many parts of the world are a great threat to the peace and order of the world.
There are some who say that international development is good because it will assure the developed countries of future economic growth. That is also true, Mr. Speaker, and one need not be ashamed of emphasizing the fact, because it is a fact, that the future prosperity of the people in the developed countries depends on developing prosperity in the presently undeveloped areas of the world. If at the end of 25, 30 or 40 years from now the poverty of two-thirds of the world remains as deep as now, the welfare and standard of living of the developed parts of the world will undoubtedly suffer.
Finally, there is the sheer motivation on grounds of humanity, the motivation of people wanting to help other people in need. I am not ashamed to accept that as a perfectly proper motive for the giving of imaginative and effective assistance to the needy peoples of the world. We ought not to apologize for feeling that morally we are brother's keeper, whether he is in Africa, Asia, Latin America, or here, on Canadian soil. We shouldn't feel embarrassed to admit that we are anxious to deal in a humane way with great international human problems and it should not be necessary for the minister or anyone else to emphasize Canada's advantage in this undertaking rather than the sheer, decent, civilized humanity which must impel us to help people who now suffer unnecessary want to overcome their degrading and depressing condition. These are good reasons for Canada's playing a much bigger role in international development than it has played until now. All these are perfectly good reasons why this measure should be supported by all sections of the House. I hope that when the bill comes before the committee the minister and his advisers will be prepared to accept suggestions for change which may improve the bill and improve the centre when it starts operations.
tTranslation]


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, the House is now discussing the bill to establish the International Development Research Centre of Canada.
After reading this bill, I have come to the conclusion that it is intended to establish some sort of corporation under the direction of a board of governors.
International Development Research Centre
Secondly, under this bill, we would make available to the Centre the sum of $1 million to help them begin their research activities.
Mr. Speaker, this bill is of the greatest interest, and I wish to congratulate the minister on presenting the bill, because, as the previous speaker said, it shows great imagination as well as a desire to improve Canadian aid to developing countries.
It seems that the minister and his officials interested in Canadian aid to developing countries are trying to find new methods.
On the other hand, one should not be overenthusiastic as Canada is still in search of a policy. The actual aid given by Canada to developing countries since it joined the Colombo plan has often been inefficient.
Although Canada is an extremely wealthy and highly industrialized country, Canadians have voiced well founded criticisms of the government aid to developing countries. Canadians are perhaps right in asking their government for increased and gratuitous aid.
Mr. Speaker, the Canadian policy concerns not only the members of this House but also our fellow-citizens, who do not only contribute to Canada's production and expansion, but also express their opinions unhesitatingly. And to support my views, I have here a letter from Father Fernand Noel, from Victoriaville, which I would like to quote:
I would ask you earnestly to intervene in the House so that Canada's efforts in favour of the developing countries may be intensified. It is not necessary for me to make a statement to suport my request. I rely on you.
Mr. Speaker, that Canadian feels there is no need for him to give his opinion, as he considers that Canadian aid is necessary anyway although it is definitely inadequate.
I have here a letter signed by Mrs. Germain St-Pierre, 180 Notre-Dame Street West, Victoriaville, who says, and I quote:
I have read in a newspaper your wishes for this New Year.
And particularly your wishes for peace among men and between alien countries and for the development of underdeveloped countries as well.
-I dare hope that you will use your influence with the government to promote a more equitable distribution of the funds allotted to developing countries as compared with the appropriations assigned to arms.
I rely on your support.
I could also read a letter written by Mr. Fernand Turcotte-Dostie, 24 Onil St., Victoriaville, in which he expresses his views on world peace and on the problems of developing countries, and points out that affluent
January 12, 1970
2262	COMMONS DEBATES
International Development Research Centre countries are asking themselves questions on the assistance they must extend to them while two-thirds of the world is dying from hunger.
Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of boring the House by reading other letters of this nature. I did read a few because I wanted to show that Canadians living in urban or rural areas take great interest in these problems and ask that the government take measures designed to solve them immediately. In that respect, Bill C-12-I am glad to say-seems to drive the first stake in the search for an answer to requests by Canadians.
This bill provides for the establishment of a centre for research aimed at determining the value and effectiveness of our assistance to developing countries. I must say, repeat or suggest that this research centre must be more than the faithful echo of the government's voice, but rather-and that is our hope-its conscience as regards external aid policy.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)
We want the Centre to make suggestions without taking the government policy into account. We want it to be, so to speak, free from instructions emanating from the Minister of External Affairs (Mr. Sharp) or any other Cabinet member, and to engage in serious, intensive research, using facilities available in each of the countries involved. The Centre should, in fact, serve as the conscience *of our present policy and a source of information for the government.
Now and always, Canadian policy in this held has been a believe-or-else policy, in short a policy of coercion.
And although Canadians wonder about it, nobody demonstrates to the government its lack of efficiency.
We hope that this centre will help to demonstrate the lack of efficiency of the government policy in connection with the developing countries so as to oblige us to improve it all the time and render it more efficient and see that it really reaches its goal.
Since Canada is one of the best industrialized countries in the world and although a certain amount of poverty exists here, we must be keenly interested in the poor countries. Canada must also devote its efforts to research. That is why we welcome the introduction of this bill.
Finally, in this same context of aid to developing countries, Canada must increase its

financial, human and technical aid to these countries.
The Canadian policy must be restated, and we hope that this centre will give the government an opportunity to do so.
Canada should try to eliminate the exploitation factors in the developing countries. I shall give here an example which is a real scandal and I should like to suggest to the Secretary of State for External Affairs that he take note of it, so as to become aware of the contradiction contained in his own policy.
Mr. Speaker, on the one hand, primary responsibility for the tragic situation in Biafra and Nigeria lies with the countries that supply arms to the belligerents and that manufacture weapons. With regard to this, Canada has done nothing. As a matter of fact, this afternoon, during the question period, I asked the minister whether he intended at least to ask that there be an investigation into this by the United Nations. He answered that no problem existed and that those responsible for the hardship and poverty of certain countries were not those thought to be so.
Mr. Speaker, that is nonsense. One knows very well that those who supply arms have an interest in keeping those countries in poverty and hardship in order to be able to exploit them better.
The Canadian policy is inconsistent in this respect and only throws dust in the eyes. On the one hand, we would like to increase our aid up to 1 per cent of our estimates, which is insufficient, and on the other, we become the accomplices of those who take unfair advantage of the poor countries until there is bloodshed.
Mr. Speaker, it seems that we should be logical and reconsider our external aid policy, so that it would not be inconsistent.
In the United Nations, Canada has not taken any valid stand against the countries which provide arms to the belligerents and keep alive the ferments of war for the sole purpose of making a profit even if harmless victims must die.
I was talking about Biafra and Nigeria. The latter is precisely a developing country. I could also talk about Viet Nam which is another developing country. We know that many arms suppliers and financiers make money through the sale of arms and other destructive devices to those countries. Canada, the United States, England and other rich and industrialized nations promote destruction and the spreading of poverty.
January 12, 1970

Such a situation seems absurd to me and it shows the inconsistency of our external affairs policy.
I would not want to delay uselessly the business of the House. The previous speakers have sized up the present situation rather well. However, I want to emphasize that the minister should see to it that this Centre is independent from political parties, in order to really be the conscience of Canada in its foreign aid policy. Through the creation of this Centre, it is proposed to the government and to the Members of Parliament to make a review of our policy, namely, to continually assess our investments. Canada should not impose its aid on any country. It goes without saying that we must make this recommendation, because if Canada imposes its views, various conflicts will result. In this connection, let us remember the failure of the American policy.
The present aid of Canada is ridiculous. We shall never repeat it enough. It is high time that Canada, in addition to founding new research centres, should increase its financial, human and technical investments. When reading the reports of development agencies, it does not take long to realize that Canada is a country which cannot boast of the aid granted to developing countries.
It is already scandalous to note that two thirds of mankind are starving. Poverty, starvation, illness and ignorance prevail. It is unfortunate to note that owing to our nonparticipation policy regarding conflicts such as those in Nigeria, in Viet Nam, etc., we help widen the gap between the affluent countries and the poor countries that we want to assist.
Such a contradiction, I feel, should be recognized by the Secretary of State for External Affairs and his officials. The establishment of this new Research Centre should have priority. The Centre will suggest a global policy to the government, enabling it to dissipate the present scandal. So, Canada might really reach a top place among countries providing foreign aid.
At the present time, we can draw great lessons from the achievements of several other countries. I have here before me the September 1968 issue of the publication entitled International Development. Canadians will not find in it any reason to be proud of themselves. That publication shows the shameful shallowness of the Canadian policy. Indeed, it is again the consequence of its inconsistency. I therefore want to insist strongly on that point. Besides, it is the only
Business of the House
one I want to rise now because I do not care to delay the debate needlessly. And once more I urge the minister to revise our external aid policy, in the light of his external affairs policy, so that we do not build on the one hand and destroy on the other but rather see to it that our country leads the way without expecting any return in order to eliminate poverty and hardships in two thirds of the world. We have in Canada, according to the minister, surpluses of wheat, of milk and of many other products still to be sold because the government is incapable of selling them. Those goods keep accumulating, while there is growing poverty in Canada, and two thirds of the world's population is starving to death.
Mr. Speaker, this should weigh heavily on the consciences of Canadians. That explains the intervention of my fellow-citizens of Vic-toriaville, in the riding of Lotbiniere, who have asked me to urge the minister to revise that policy. Indeed, Canadians would be proud to increase their help to co-operate with the minister, and to tighten their belts, as the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) has asked, provided it really helped to check poverty and hardship. Otherwise, this is nothing but a farce, and a lack of responsibility.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Donald Stovel Macdonald: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might indicate to hon. members the substance of what I believe has been agreed between representatives of the parties with regard to this debate and to the proceedings this evening. I understand that there are others who wish to speak on this bill. It has therefore been agreed that Private Members' hour should be suspended for today's sitting and that if second reading of the bill now under debate should not have been completed by then, at six o'clock the question on second reading would then be put. If, however, the debate concludes before six o'clock and the question has been put, the House would at that point rise until eight o'clock and commence with the debate under Standing Order 26.
It has also been agreed that debate under Standing Order 26 shall be concluded by 10.30 this evening; it would be terminated at that

January 12, 1970
Business of the House
time and the motion proposed by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stanfield) under Standing Order 43 earlier today would then be put to the House without debate.
If I have given a correct understanding of the results of our discussions, and if the House is agreeable, perhaps this could be made an order for today's proceedings.


Gerald William Baldwin: I think that is quite correct, Mr. Speaker. I myself would be inclined to put it in a somewhat different way-that the House would deem the debate on second reading to be concluded at six o'clock, and the motion for second reading be then put.
Also, I would assume that the order which the hon. gentleman is proposing assumes that unanimous consent has been given pursuant to Standing Order 43 for the motion of my hon. friend the Leader of the Opposition to be put at 10.30.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Yes, Mr. Speaker, the order would assume that the notice requirement would be waived in order that the motion might be put.
With regard to the debate under Standing Order 26, perhaps I might be allowed to make what amounts to an exhortation rather than a procedural point, namely, that the 20-minute limit be strictly observed in order that as many members as possible might have an opportunity to contribute to the debate.


Gerald William Baldwin: The House always listens to exhortations.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The points which have been made, especially the last exhortation, represent what we have agreed to.


André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, the Ralliement creditiste supports the proposals of the government house leader of parliament. It will be pleased to co-operate with a view to speeding up the business of the house.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: The
House has heard the proposal by the President of the Privy Council. Is it so agreed?


An hon. Member:: Ordered.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed consideration of the motion (Mr. Sharp) that Bill C-12, to establish the International Development Research Centre of Canada be read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence.
Mr. Leonard Hopkins (Renfrew North):: should like to say a few words on this bill to establish an International Development Research Centre in Canada.
First of all, Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate the minister for bringing forward this imaginative and constructive piece of legislation, the forerunner of its kind in this field of international affairs. I think the minister would support me if I were to extend my compliments also to Mr. Maurice Strong and to his righthand man, Dr. Peters, both of whom have done outstanding work behind the scenes in connection with this legislation. They are two men who are very well qualified indeed for the positions they hold.
This bill establishes a more efficient means of expending money under what used to be known as our foreign aid plan. Many countries, including Canada, have in the past allocated a great deal of money to assisting under-developed and developing countries without really placing a great deal of emphasis upon the efficiency with which the money was being used. This is understandable; it is difficult to tell other people how to spend money once they have it in their hands, especially at the international level. The bill now before us establishes a system which enables a research centre in Canada to find the best means of solving problems experienced by the countries to which we are providing assistance. It is necessary, of course, that this research organization should not become too centralized. If it is to provide information covering many different types of industry in developing countries having widely different needs, it is self-evident that the necessary research cannot be carried on in any one centre in this country.
The central proposal in this bill is that we should set up an international development research centre which is to be problem-oriented, and much of the work to be done will
January 12, 1970

find its way to other research institutions and other areas of Canada. This is as it should be. Personally, I should not want to see the establishment of an organization which is too strongly orientated toward the universities. In the past we have depended to a large degree upon university staffs for research, ignoring the fact that we have a wealth of scientific knowledge and experience at our disposal in industry and in many of the Crown corporations of Canada-a wealth of scientific staff who are not directly concerned with education in universities.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)
In this regard I can think of several, including Atomic Energy of Canada. We also have federal forest research stations across Canada.
I am sure much can be done, for example in tree genetics, to assist some of the developing countries.
Last September when a group of us visited South America to participate in the Interparliamentary Conference at Lima, Peru, we were told that in various parts of Peru scientists had discovered several species of wood hitherto unknown. I agree with an earlier speaker in this debate who said that South America is certainly one place where a great deal of emphasis should be placed on assistance. It is only by helping people to help themselves that we are going to cure the social ills of other countries. Countries like the United States and other industrialized nations, regardless of financial wealth, cannot hope to provide all of the information and educational facilities required to assist the underdeveloped nations; the only way we can assist them is to help them to help themselves. This we can do through research programs of this type.
The humanitarian aspects of this bill have been mentioned and they are indeed very important. I think anyone who has visited South America and other countries of the world, where there is poverty, will realize that through research we can better their conditions. We must give these countries a plan and the trained personnel to solve their problems, and it is for this purpose that we require financial resources. In proceeding in this way and reaching solutions of this kind, we will be spending our money wisely.
In the Middle Ages scientists in the world did not gather together very often. Only recently have the best scientists of Europe and North America gathered together at the international level. In the old days scientists
DEBATES	2265
International Development Research Centre jealously guarded their knowledge; today the results of research in one country is almost straight-away passed on to scientists of other nations. This is one of the main purposes of this bill, and it would not be possible to put a bill like this into operation were this not the case.
This bill also breaks new ground in the field of international affairs by making provision for people from other developing countries of the world to sit on the board of governors. I think this is an excellent road on which to start out. While the majority of the board of governors will be Canadians, which I think is only right since Canada is providing the program, it is interesting to note that finally we are permitting people from other countries, who know their own problems firsthand, to sit on the board of governors of the International Development Research Centre of Canada. This is a step that will make the research program more effective. We will know the problems we have to face, the solutions we must work toward, and we will know the local conditions within which they must be applied.
I was pleased to hear the minister state in his speech that $30 million would be directed toward this plan over the first five years of operation. Although much of this $30 million is going to be spent in Canada, the nations we are assisting directly, with the balance of this money, will still benefit from this expenditure in Canada. This is a joint agreement. It is a plan whereby we will be solving our own problems both industrially and economically as well as solving similar problems in other coun tries.
I was astounded to learn that in the past only $1 out of every $200-I believe that is the correct figure one-half of one per cent- that was spent on foreign aid, has been directed toward foreign research aid programs. I think we have now come to realize that we could not continue to spend so little on research because we do not know whether our foreign aid program is being properly directed, and is actually solving problems in recipient countries. In fact, there have been times when past governments of Canada have not looked very seriously at this question of finding out how much good has been done by money spent in developing countries.
This bill starts us off on a new and very enlightened approach. Not only will we obtain first hand knowledge of problems existing in developing countries as a result of close relations with the representatives of other nations
January 12, 1970
2266	COMMONS DEBATES
International Development Research Centre on the board of governors, but we are also going to work together in research programs in order to find a plan to meet those problems and thereby help those nations to develop their economies. I think this in turn cannot help but build a better scientific and technological core, and hence a wider middle class society in developing countries.
As some of the members of this House have seen for themselves, one of the big problems in developing countries in the world today is that there are the two extremes: you have the very rich and the extremely poor. Developing a middle class society in such countries will give greater stability, and hence a better standard of living will result.
It is estimated that by the year 2000, 80 per cent of the world's population will live in those countries that today are classified as developing nations. One thing that we as a nation must strive toward is a plan to prepare the people of developing countries to look after themselves relatively well by the year 2000. I say this because if 80 per cent of the people of the world are still living in countries where they do not have enough to eat, proper clothing and the comforts of life, then we cannot help but have international problems that stem directly from such economic and social conditions.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
I hope other countries in the world will follow this example and set up new agencies with a board of governors of an international character. I hope these agencies will go to work in this field of research as problem solving agencies. We in this Parliament must not only attack the problems of today. We must always attack those problems, but when we face a serious situation such as the suggestion that 80 per cent of the world's population faces possible poverty by the year 2000, we must look beyond today's horizon and do something constructive.
In this respect, I should like to give my full support and the support of a very interested group in my constituency. They support and congratulate the minister and his staff on the passage and implementation of this legislation. I am very pleased by the great interest of the Science Association of Deep River. The several hundred professional scientists and technological people in that association are interested in doing all they can to assist the government to implement this plan.

We also have a forest research station at Chalk River. This staff is extremely interested in providing assistance where it is needed in the field of forest genetics and other scientific projects. I know I speak for them when I say to the minister that he can count on the wholehearted support of this large body of scientific and technological people. I wish the minister and his staff every success in the implementation of this measure.
If there are things about this measure that must be revised in years to come, we should not hesitate to make changes which will make the plan more workable. No one group could bring in legislation of this far-reaching type that is 100 per cent efficient. This measure is certainly off to a flying start and I am sure that members on all sides of this House will agree that if in years to come changes are necessary, the government will meet with the same co-operative attitude which exists at this time.
In closing, let me once again compliment the minister and his staff on this far-reaching legislation. I compliment the government in general for the international character of the board of governors. This is a new plan that we hope will provide for more efficient spending of the money provided to assist the developing countries of this world. By the year 2000 we will be in a position to say that at least Canadians have done something useful to create peace in the world. We have taken the humanitarian and economic steps necessary to provide the people of developing countries with the mental tools to look after themselves.


Alfred Dryden Hales: Mr. Speaker, I should like to use a few minutes of the time of the house to say a word or two about this bill before it is referred to the committee. I am sure all members of this house would endorse any policy or program this or any other government might introduce that is of benefit to developing countries. I have always been one of those who feels it is far better to teach a man how to grow a bushel of com than it is to give him the money to purchase that corn. I hope this is the philosophy of the bill now before us. Anything we can do to encourage and support research in an international sphere such as this should be done.
Let me caution the minister and the government about the possibility of overlapping or duplication in the field of science. There is
January 12, 1970

not a university in Canada which is not conducting a great amount of research useful to developing countries. There are a number of agricultural experimental stations doing research across this nation. The Canada Council is supporting a great deal in this regard, as well as the Department of External Affairs. Many foundations such as the Ford Foundation are contributing large sums of money to research. We must make sure that we do not introduce another body or corporation that will duplicate this research. I hope this will be a more efficient way of conducting research for the developing countries.
This research must be channelled and brought together in one central organization, I hope this is what the minister has in mind. The bill sets out that this board shall meet at least twice in each year with at least one such meeting at the head office, which I understand is to be in Ottawa. It shall meet at other times and places as the chairman may deem necessary. Let me remind the minister and hon. members of the outstanding facilities which are available at the University of Guelph in the riding I have the honour to represent, particularly in relation to agriculture. This university is known throughout the world as being outstanding in the field of research, in soil science, crop science, animal science and veterinary science. It is also engaged in research and teaching household science and provides a home economics course, as well as facilities at the arts college. If this board is to meet from time to time in other places, I can think of no better place than the campus of the University of Guelph. The subjects taught there are those subjects of interest to developing countries. I am sure there would be a great wealth of knowledge available to such a meeting on this particular campus.
In concluding, let me repeat my hope that some of the duplication and overlapping in the various sciences will be overcome as the result of the establishment of this International Development Research Centre. It is my hope that this will provide a more efficient way of assisting those countries which so badly need our assistance. There is hardly a university in Canada that does not have a large number of students from foreign lands. They are learning the technical ways to improve the lot of their countrymen. I fully support this bill, providing it is not just another means to duplicate research at a great cost to the Canadian taxpayer.

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra
[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)
There is no mention of the operating costs. There will be a grant of $1 million but there is no mention of the cost involved in respect of the operation of this centre. I believe, when we approve these things we should have some idea of the cost involved and the number of persons to be employed. Let us know where we are headed. So, I repeat what I said in the beginning. I endorse this bill provided it is not another example of duplication in the field of research.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Bechard):: Pursuant to special order made this day I do now leave the chair until eight o'clock.
At 5.22 p.m. the House took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The House resumed at 8 p.m.

Mr. Speaker:: Order. Leave has been granted to the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin) to move the adjournment of the House pursuant to Standing Order 26 for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely:
-the situation arising out of the destruction of the Uli Airport and the possibility of the collapse of Biafran resistance, to the end that Canada may play an effective role in organizing and participating in an expanded observer team in Biafra, so as to ensure that guarantees given by the federal authorities against reprisals upon Biafran personnel be fully observed, and that a massive international relief operation be urgently organized, utilizing where possible existing relief distribution personnel, so as to minimize the widespread starvation which is imminent.

Therefore, the motion is as follows:
That the House do now adjourn.


Francis Andrew Brewin: Mr. Speaker, the subject matter which requires the urgent consideration of this House is the
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra situation arising out of the recent damage to the Uli airport in Biafra and the collapse of Biafran resistance. I do not propose to rehash the past or attribute praise or blame for the past. History may have something to say about that. I do want to talk about the extreme urgency of the present. I want to stress that there are two things that are urgently required by the present emergency. The first is the necessity of organizing an expanded observer team. The second is the need for massive international relief efforts.
It is quite impossible for me to exaggerate the stark urgency of the situation, the immensity of the tragedy that lies just days ahead. The statement made to this House today by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp) speaks of the need to co-ordinate outside relief activity on an international basis in co-operation with the government of Nigeria.
We in this party are in agreement as to the necessity of international action. We are agreed as to the necessity of co-operation from the government of Nigeria. But the fact of the matter, as was stated by Mr. James McCracken, director of the Church World Services of the United States of America, today is that there are 4 million people in the hospitals and feeding camps who have been receiving one meal a day and are facing imminent starvation. Mr. McCracken estimates that if supplies remain cut off-as they are now by the cutting off of Uli airport and the relief operations there-1 million people will die within 48 hours.
A statement issued today by Canairelief-I remind the House that Canairelief is the agency which, on behalf of Canadians, has been working in this field and knows what it is talking about-points out that virtually no food has been sent in during the past two days. Some 5 million people, according to its estimate, face immediate death by starvation or disease unless emergency steps are taken to increase the flow of relief supplies.
The statement by Canairelief goes on in these words:
Thus the appalling death rate already standing at 2,000 to 3,000 a day could mount astronomically. This is a situation in which hours count.
I do not have the precise text, but I wish to read from what I understand was a telegram sent to the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) by Canairelief today. It says:
Some 5 million have virtually no food and relief supplies have stopped. Death rates will reach catastrophic proportions if relief supplies are delayed.
[Mr. Brewin.l
Hundreds of thousands of people could face death within 48 hours. Action is needed not in days not in weeks, but in hours.
Second: Canairelief and various agencies of the Joint Church Aid Organization could supply 500 to 1,000 tons tomorrow if permission is secured for use of the Uli airstrip. Our Sao Tome based groups have supplies for immediate delivery in the neighbourhood of 5,000 tons.
Third: we urgently request your government to secure permission from Nigeria for the free daily use of the Uli airstrip so as to deal with this interval until larger government programs can be set up.
I wish to add to this, Mr. Speaker, that if too much time is spent co-ordinating and discussing what is the appropriate action, the problem will have disappeared because the people whose need for action is so urgent will no longer be there. There has been much debate on the issue of genocide or destruction of a race. I do not propose to resume that debate here. I do assert that in the absence of effective, international action in the very near future the result will be precisely the same as if genocide had been deliberately planned. History, I suggest, will be the judge of this generation if the appalling result of the destruction of a gifted race by starvation stems from deliberate genocide or from inaction in this emergency.
The present method of supporting and distributing the food has been carried on by Joint Church Aid, the consortium of churches in which Canairelief has played a substantial part. In order to get on with the job, this organization has in the past acted heroically, imaginatively and effectively without the support of the Nigerian government. If it had waited for Nigerian approval it could not have saved the millions of lives it has already saved.
[DOT] (8:10 p.m.)
It must now be realized that the Nigerian government may wish to exclude this agency from the management of the emergency interim relief measures so urgently required. It is, however, a fact that the supplies immediately available for distribution in the next week or so are at Sao Tome, under the control of Joint Church Aid. It is also true that the means of flying in these supplies immediately available for distribution in the next week or so, before land transportation or water route can be organized, is in the aircraft at present owned and controlled by Joint Church Aid at Sao Tome.
It is also true that although some of the personnel have left, the people in charge of
January 12, 1970	COMMONS DEBATES	2289
the relief distribution centres are the only people capable of carrying on the job in an orderly way in the next short while. They are the personnel who have worked for Joint Church Aid and the International Red Cross, and they are still in Biafra.
If the existing stocks are not used, if the aircraft facilities available at Sao Tome are not used, if the present distribution system is not used in the interim until some other assistance can be organized, there will probably be few people left in the country to be saved by the time other routes of supply by land, water or otherwise can be organized. It is for this reason that the executive working group of Joint Church Aid, meeting today in Stuttgart, Germany, said:
According to reports from medical staff the physical resistance of the civilian population in the afflicted areas is at such a low ebb that if supplies are cut back for even a week, a high percentage of the population may not survive.
Joint Church Aid officials are fully confident that the Nigerian federal government will make possible the immediate continuance, and even an increase of the relief flights until such time as massive relief supplies are brought forward by normal surface routes. It is for this reason that Joint Church Aid in the United States has offered its facilities to the Nigerian Red Cross. It is for this reason that Canairelief, the Canadian agency, said that its personnel, its supplies and its aircraft will be handed over to whatever agency will do the job.
This is the reason why I urge upon this government that the highest priority be given to co-operation with other friendly governments-I am thinking of the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, France and many other countries-to urge the Nigerian government forthwith to approve the Nigerian Red Cross accepting the offer made by Joint Church Aid on an interim basis, and continuing to use the present channels until plans for the rehabilitation of a more permanent system can be worked out on an international basis. The relief of starvation could start tomorrow if this method were used. The food is there, the aircraft are there and the method of distribution is there. All that is needed is that the button be pressed, and the only people who can press the button are the federal government of Nigeria. I suspect that the only people who can persuade them to press it and agree with this method are the governments of the countries I have mentioned and the government of Canada.
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra
With the stocks of food and drugs at present in Sao-Tome, with the co-operation of the Nigerian government to enable daylight flights, and if necessary night flights, it is anticipated that from Sao Tome alone 14 or 15 aircraft using the warehouse facilities now available at Sao Tome could transport upwards of 500 tons a day to Uli airport. Joint Church Aid had in its warehouses at Sao Tome at the end of December a stock of approximately 5,000 tons, with 1,600 tons en route. If these supplies could be flown into Uli at the rate of 500 tons a night, they could tide over the dangerous interim period while the land and water corridors are organized and a new set-up created.
It may be that the Nigerian government feels it has a grievance because of what it regards as the unauthorized activities of Joint Church Aid in the past, but no such grievance should be allowed to stand in the way of saving the lives of virtually a whole people. The Nigerians must be magnanimous in victory or it will be a hollow victory, a victory which has turned an important part of their country into a graveyard.
Mr. Speaker, 1 do not tonight propose to discuss details. The urgent needs are food, drugs and medical supplies. The Canadian government should consider once again making its Hercules Aircraft available for all necessary transportation. If land routes are to be organized, trucks will have to be flown in. Portable medical field hospitals are essential. During this period some degree of security must be afforded those working in the distribution centres. The Nigerian government should be ready to give such guarantees of security as long as personnel work under the direction of the Nigerian Red Cross.
I should now like to say a word or two about the observers. The statement of the Secretary of State for External Affairs today indicated that the government was prepared to provide more observer personnel. There are two Canadian officers there at the present time. I urge that here, too, there is necessity for immediate and vigorous action.
This war arose out of fear of genocide. It started in an atmosphere of coups, countercoups and pogroms. It has been attended by massacres, the bombing of civilians and massive starvation. The international committee has entered into a solemn agreement which imposes upon it a moral obligation to see that genocide does not occur. The Nigerian government has intimated its willingness to accept expanded observer teams, but we are
2270
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra in an area of great confusion with the population running into several millions.
To be useful the observer teams must be large enough in number to undertake a reasonable surveillance of all areas. It is important, in my judgment, that observers include not only military personnel but others qualified to consider and report the facts. Indeed, it is my suggestion that included in the observer teams should be experienced jurists who could be suggested by the International Commission of Jurists, and experienced representatives of the press whose function is not only to observe but to record facts. If the code of conduct described by the Nigerian government is to be carried out, if the issue of genocide is to be laid to rest, it is necessary that there be adequate and impartial observers and it is essential that they be on the spot now, when the strain is greatest.
I hope that during the course of this debate the Secretary of State for External Affairs will tell us, in more precise terms than those of his earlier statement, his plan in both these areas; I hope he will tell us what representations are being made as to relief, who he is in touch with, what instruments are proposed to be used in dealing with the immediate emergency I have described? In the observer field, how many observers are planned? Where they are to come from? Has contact been made with the Nigerian government for the acceptance of an expanded observer team? If the government is serious, and I believe it must be, about the events of the Biafran tragedy which has aroused the conscience of the people of Canada and of mankind, it must be prepared to act now, to act urgently and to give in the debate tonight precise answers to these questions.
In the past, Mr. Speaker, Canada has been proud to lead the world in humanitarian concern and in the field of peacekeeping. The time is now, tonight, to demonstrate that Canadians can and will give effective, vigorous and urgently needed leadership in this tragic situation. Humanity, respect for human life and the future of the world community alike demand that we do not fail.


Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairwealher@Fundy-Roy-al: Mr. Speaker, it is only the extraordinary nature of this debate that would make me impose myself on this Parliament twice in the same day, but you will have to put up with me and I make no apology for the necessity for the debate itself.
Canada and the world know where Biafra is now as countries scramble to provide food


and medicine, freed from any political or diplomatic hang-ups. However, in a word or two I should like to recall the particularly brave people from various countries of the world who saw the need and responded, untroubled by diplomatic nuance, heedless of arguments about whether hundreds of thousands of deaths are an internal matter.
[DOT] (8:20 p.m.)
There is a great deal of cynicism about the relevancy of churches in today's order of things, but I suggest that without the churches the death toll would have been even more ghastly. Without the action of Joint Church Aid and Canairelief during the awful months from June until a day or two ago no food and medicine would have got into Biafra. It seems to me that on the occasions I have taken part in discussion on this issue I have been unable to get across what I think is the fundamental issue, that of man being willing to stand by. God knows, we have stood by enough in our generation, and that is what I cannot get out of my head.
I wish to read from what I think is one of the most splendid pieces of writing about this whole matter. The article was written by Renata Adler and appeared in New Yorker magazine last October. It summarizes the context that I have always felt applies to this matter. Why should I presume to suggest that others do not feel the same way? This is the context, surely, in which this tragedy should grip mankind. I read from this article as follows:
The absurdist element keeps coming up in Biafra.
Of course, now "keeps" will have to be changed to "kept". I continue:
The sense here is of a people about to die in isolation and pretending not to know it-convinced in any case by their recent history that they have no choice. Victims are seldom pure, or even entirely attractive, and a case can certainly be made against any victim of murder before some higher court of absolute irrelevance. But Biafrans (fighting a war, in a sense, for a position argued in Hannah Arendt's 'Eichmann in Jerusalem') are determined to avoid at least the accusation of passive complicity in their own destruction and resist, trusting their own interpretation of what the risks of capitulation and the costs of survival might be. Once the foremost advocates of Nigerian unity, they have been persuaded by a series, both before and since the war, of broken accords, systematic exclusions, and outright massacres, both total and selective (including the killing of all males over ten years old in a captured Biafran town whose civilians did not leave), that Nigeria intends to eliminate the peoples
January 12. 1970	COMMONS
of the region that is now Biafra, and that the intention of genocide is not one that you test, passively, until the last returns are in. In the massacres of summer, 1966 (nearly a full year before Biafra's secession from Nigeria), thirty thousand natives of the Biafran region were murdered. "I have just been reading 'Exodus'", Professor Nwosu told a group of friends, some time after his night of waiting at State House. "Before the war, a novel to me was a trivial thing. But I should have known the west would not be impressed by thirty thousand. Some of you literary people should have told me."
I suggest that there are some assurances- the hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin) mentioned some of them-that the government of Canada is entitled to obtain from the Government of Nigeria. They relate to these points: First, that no purges will take place and that prisoners will be fairly and humanely treated. The committee which studied this matter read a little booklet put out by the Nigerian government about the humane treatment of prisoners. I presume the contents of this booklet will be noted by the authorities. The second point is that the observer force be strengthened in scope and number and will be given carte blanche permission to travel throughout the entire country.
Third, experience and memory have made the Ibo people believe that mass slaughter will be their fate. The British government, which has a major responsibility for this war, now has an obligation to the peoples of Biafra, Nigeria and the world to ensure that the Biafran surrender is accepted honourably. Fourth, General Gowon will have to account to the United Nations, to the Organization of African Unity and to the Commonwealth, to say nothing of the ordinary peoples of the world who have watched the terrible war unfold. General Gowon has a heavy responsibility, and I sincerely hope that he will be persuaded to act mercifully by those governments which have seen fit to send him arms. Fifth, the United Nations and the ICRC must somehow evolve a formula which will allow the provision of humanitarian aid so that countries will no longer have an excuse to stand on the sidelines, waiting for permission to feed the people and administer medicine.
Recriminations have a hollow ring, particularly tonight. What might have been is conjecture. Surely we agree that self-righteousness is unacceptable when men have watched their brothers die. General Gowon has asked other countries to avoid or stay out of what he classifies an internal Nigerian matter. I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp) does this interdiction still hold?
DEBATES	2271
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra Does Canada know about this? If the interdiction still holds, what have we done to force the government of Nigeria to change its mind?
Everybody is being bold now. The United Kingdom is flying in an aircraft and the Netherlands are flying 16 aircraft to Nigeria. President Nixon has telephoned the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. Have we telephoned anybody? If so, for what purpose?
Some people have questioned the amount of time our Parliament has taken on this issue. Some doubt the wisdom and efficacy of any involvement in what people classify as other men's troubles. Some are content to mask their sterility of policy with excuses. I suggest that those of us with public responsibility should heed the warning that I suspect is being given to us by a majority of thoughtful people who have been profoundly frustrated by the insensitivity of the United Nations to this issue.
Many people of good will consider it unacceptable for men to do nothing in these circumstances. These people have reason to be disillusioned because of the long months of inaction and indecision over the basically simple matter of feeding people who are starving. I think it would not hurt if we reminded ourselves that we are being overwhelmed by a surfeit of boasting about our technological achievements while at the same time we cannot carry a loaf of bread across a highway.
Since the dawn of history men have been able to feed other men. We have spent a year congratulating ourselves on our advances in the field of human rights and what we like to call fundamental freedoms. But hospitals, marketplaces and feeding stations are still strafed in the name of "one country". Man has landed on the moon and has transferred human hearts, but cannot land on a neutral airstrip and transfer food and medicine. Men say, knowingly, that war is ugly. This is their excuse. If we know that,, and God knows we have reason enough to know it in this century, why cannot we evolve a formula to stop war?
[DOT] (8:30 p.m.)
Is a slogan worth a life? Is a concept of sovereignty worth a village? Is a boundary drawn by man worth redrawing with man's blood? The governments of the world are hurrying to help in a veritable tumble of concern, but many nights were filled by the sound of aircraft flying dangerously low, paid
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra for by modest people, inspired by the strangest collection of religious leaders ever gathered together to share a task. If we seek heroes, here they are. We should remember them as we pick up the pieces and wrest a formula for stopping this madness in which men engage.


Bernard Dumont: Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra
On October 10, 1968, as can be read on page 1020 of Hansard, I asked the following question:
In a statement on the troubles In Biafra, the Secretary of State for External Affairs reaffirmed that Canada would support Nigeria against the secessionist rebels.
The Prime Minister was then asked if the Canadian government policy consisted in giving Nigeria aid which permitted it to murder Biafrans.
To another question, the Secretary of State for External Affairs answered he believed one of the essential reasons for not wanting to deal with such a problem was that we did not want to get mixed up in the internal affairs of a country. But all that time, countries such as England and Russia kept on selling arms.
On June 19, I asked the Prime Minister if the International Red Cross, that had put into service a maritime route to Nigeria's capital, could be permitted to provide for the transportation of food on such a route in order to assist Biafrans. And as one may read at page 10405 of Hansard, the Prime Minister replied and I quote:
I will have to rely upon the Secretary of State for External Affairs to answer that question, which I will pass on to him.
On February 10, 1969, the Pope himself made the following appeal to bring that civil war to a stop:
Before God and our conscience, we feel that we failed to resort to the action in our power in order to find a solution that would have reduced arms to silence.
The Christian conscience cannot bring itself to yield to discouragement and resign itself to mutual destruction.
In the meantime, our country refused to interfere in spite of our repeated requests and those of all the opposition.
One can see all the crimes a government is likely to commit when it stands for out and out federalism. The most sensible statement I have read is that made by the President of Tanzania. According to the Tuesday, October 28, 1969, issue of the newspaper Le Devoir he said:
"As President of Tanzania, it is my duty to protect the integrity of the United Republic. However, if the whole of the Zanzibar people, without any foreign aid and for reasons of their own, were to decide that the Union is prejudicial to their existence, I could not recommend that bombs be dropped on them until they surrender."
"No foreign aid! Were the Biafrans in the same situation? The President of the UAO did
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra not think so and I will quote again from the same newspaper. He contended that:
-the sole explanation for the Nigeria-Biafra conflict was the greed of the colonialists and the imperialists and their determination to weaker the will power of Africa, to scatter its forces and to dissolve its great unity in order to stifle it before getting hold of it once more."
Since the people of Biafra, to whom Irish Catholics preached the gospel, tried to hold their heads up again, it was decided they were to be crushed. These people wanted to get an education. In 1961, out of 41,000 federal public servants, only 400 came from the North. Out of 437 graduates, 10 only came from the North and today, 5 million Ibos Biafrans, are waiting for death. These people, who in the old days, provided 20,000 slaves for America, in the 17th century, deserve a better fate, in my opinion, and America as a whole should have opposed this mass slaughter.
That is why in order to prevent the murder of our brothers, I urge the Secretary of State for External Affairs, as I did this afternoon, to delegate representatives of the four political parties and send them immediately as observers to the battle front in order to request first of all an immediate end to the slaughter and to the arms shipments which should be replaced right away by shipments of food, for Canadian neutralism has hitherto reeked far too much of oil. Such protection of economic interests has silenced the consciences and smothered all human feelings. No ideology whatsoever can justify this scandal. Indeed, the present crisis is that of the conscience of humanity as a whole.
To conclude, Mr. Speaker, I will add just one more word: War! Never more.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I am sure all members of this House, and indeed all Canadians, share with me a profound feeling of relief that the long and agonizing conflict in Nigeria seems finally to have come to an end. I have just received a bulletin which indicates that the last remaining town is now in the hands of the Nigerian forces. I have also received information that General Gowon has announced an amnesty to all those who were led into futile attempts to disintegrate the country, adding: "We have arrived at one of the greatest moments in the history ,of our nation." This seems to indicate that the war has, indeed, finally reached a conclusion.

The task which faces the world community today is to give to the government and the people of Nigeria every possible assistance as they face the task of reconciling their differences and rehabilitating the areas where the fighting has been taking place.
I need hardly tell hon. members who have been following these events almost as closely as I have that the situation is this: Open warfare has now come to an end and the major obstacles to the supplying of relief and the rehabilitation of the country, which lay in the fact that there were fighting lines and the resources of the country were being used in a terrible war, are now being removed. Both General Gowon and General Effiong, who is now the active leader of the Biafrans, have made statements of a conciliatory nature expressing the hope that outstanding differences will be settled amicably and quickly. I was impressed when reading the statement made by General Effiong today, in which he said:
I am convinced, now, that a stop must be put to the bloodshed which is going on as a result of the war. I am also convinced that the suffering of our people must be brought to an Immediate end. Our people are now disillusioned and those elements of the old government regime who have made negotiation and reconciliation impossible have voluntarily removed themselves from our midst. I have therefore instructed an early disengagement of troops.
It is quite clear, when we look back on this terrible period, that there were difficulties on both sides. Very often an attempt had been made to paint one side or the other as trying to impose their will. In fact, I think the situation was of such a nature that the differences had to be composed either peacefully or by violence within the country, and that efforts at intervention from outside very often only had the result of prolonging the conflict.
[DOT] (8:50 p.m.)


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Especially when countries supplied arms.


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, especially when they provided arms. I am very glad that this country never participated in that kind of intervention.
The hon. member for Fundy-Royal (Mr. Fairweather) asked whether there was evidence that General Gowon still maintained his position on outside intervention, and the answer to that is in the affirmative. I should like to quote an excerpt, not from General Gowon's actual speech, a copy of which I
January 12, 1970	COMMONS
have seen, but his words in the form in which I have them here:
The federal military government has warned foreign countries, organizations and individuals not to interfere in the internal affairs of the country in order not to prolong the sufferings of those trapped in the rebel held areas.


An hon. Member:: When did he say that?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yesterday.
The government has also given the assurance that efforts as to rehabilitation and reconciliation among all Nigerians would continue. This is contained in the head of state's message of congratulations he sent to the federal troops for their capture of the rebel administrative headquarters, Owerri, and other successes in the war. The Commander in Chief renewed his call on the soldiers to adhere strictly to the code of conduct issued to them at the beginning of the military operations.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Would the minister indicate why newsmen have been excluded from the front during this period of engagement?


Mitchell William Sharp: I am sorry, I do not know the reason for that. I will go on to say something about the experience of our observers, who have not been excluded.


David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the
minister a question about the statement concerning non-intervention from outside?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes.


David Lewis: Does the minister read that statement as referring to relief as well as to intervention in the political settlement that has to take place?


Mitchell William Sharp: No, I do not think so. I am very hopeful that the Nigerian government will be prepared to co-operate with all countries of the world in accepting relief and in facilitating its distribution. I do not think that that is the kind of intervention that General Gowon had in mind. I am quite confident that what he had in mind was the kind of intervention where countries sometimes acted without full agreement by both sides to the conflict, particularly without the agreement of the Nigerian government which is now apparently fully in control of affairs in that country.


David Lewis: Has the minister had any assurance that General Gowon will agree to relief from outside?


Mitchell William Sharp: Not as yet. Reports have been coming from representatives of the Nigerian
DEBATES	2275
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra government which seem to point to that conclusion. My own conclusion is that the Nigerian government will certainly be ready to accept co-operation. The war was over only this morning, but I should think that without undue delay arrangements can be made.
Joint Church Aid and Canair food flights appear to have come to an end, for the time being at least. There are stocks of food available in Nigeria and in neighbouring countries sufficient to meet the immediate needs of the Nigerian population for the next few weeks, if not for the next few months, and these stocks will be replenished as required.
The immediate problem is to distribute this food in the areas where it is needed, without delay. In the first instance-and I say this to all hon. members-we must rely on the Nigerian Red Cross and the Nigerian Rehabilitation Commission, both of which have already been in operation in this field. The reports we have received from our observers in Nigeria during recent months have referred to the way in which the Nigerian Red Cross has been following the troops and looking after the refugees as they have streamed across the lines. The Nigerian Rehabilitation Commission, on the other hand, has been concerned with the problem of rehabilitation rather than immediate relief. It is upon these agencies that essentially we must rely. This is one of the reasons that last week, before the war had come to an end and when we were expecting it might go on for some time, we had decided we should support those operations which were concerned with the welfare of those who were formerly in Biafra as well as those who had been in the federally-controlled areas of Nigeria all the time.
As I have said, Mr. Speaker, we have contributed $1 million to those two organizations within the last few days. We have also made a contribution to the International Red Cross which, as the House knows, the government has been supporting throughout the whole of this unhappy war.
We have felt-and I am sure the House will agree with us-that since the Red Cross is the one internationally recognized agency available to meet disaster of various kinds around the world, it is most important that that institution should always have the support of the Canadian government. As it turned out, it became relatively ineffective because it was not able to operate at night, the Nigerian government failing to agree to night flights. It was unable to operate by day because Biafra
2276	COMMONS DEBATES	January 12, 1970
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra refused to accept daylight flights. But as an institution the International Red Cross had to be supported. It continued to work behind the lines on both sides, and we shall continue to give it our support. I hope the International Red Cross will be the focal point of international efforts, because I think its workers have the greatest experience and can bring about the best co-ordination of international relief.
The government will provide additional funds and supplies as they are required and in co-operation with other interested nations. According to reports from our High Commissioner in Lagos and from our observers on the International Observer Team, these institutions have been operating effectively among refugees in the war area as the Nigerian armies have advanced.
The government is prepared to provide Canadian Armed Forces' aircraft to supplement the work of the organizations presently in Nigeria by way of airdrops to inaccessible areas or by making airlifts when landing facilities are available. We have three Hercules aircraft standing by and are prepared to activate others if they are needed.
In the end, however, the effective distribution of food to the population of eastern Nigeria requires the use of land routes. We today have a report from our High Commissioner in Lagos assuring us that the roads are in better condition than might have been expected in view of the fighting that has taken place in that area. Indeed, I read a report yesterday from our High Commissioner which spoke about a Red Cross team that had run quite freely up and down the roads. Therefore, we are not in the position of not having land routes; some are available and can be put to use immediately.
What is required over the next few weeks and months is a carefully planned, co-operative relief operation. It is our view that this can best be carried out under the aegis of an international organization, preferably the Red Cross, and with the co-operation of the government of Nigeria, which is after all in control of events there. We cannot do anything except in co-operation with them. We in this House should offer our sincere and hearty co-operation to the government of Nigeria, and I am sure we all do so.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Would the minister permit a question on the point about the Hercules aircraft and the necessity of having them in a forward position? I am wondering whether the government has conveyed to the

officials in Lagos the possibility of moving aircraft like the Hercules and other transport equipment into a forward position, in order that we can assist the people in eastern Nigeria as soon as possible?


Mitchell William Sharp: We have been looking carefully at what we can do in this respect most effectively. One of the things we have already done is to make available to the Nigerian Red Cross and the Rehabilitation Commission money with which to purchase trucks which are as close as possible to the areas affected.
[DOT] (9:00 p.m.)
The best place from which to get trucks is neighbouring countries. Taking them across the Atlantic is not the quickest way of getting them there. It may be possible to airlift trucks from some part of Europe down to Lagos, but to transport them across the Atlantic is a very doubtful proposition. Therefore, our judgment of the best way of helping was to make money available so trucks could be purchased there as close as possible to the area. That we did, and we told the Rehabilitation Commission and Nigerian Red Cross what the offer was.
For a year or more Canada has had a senior officer of the Canadian Armed Forces in the area as part of the International Observer team. The senior observers with the team have all had combat experience. They have assured us that they have been given every opportunity to carry out their responsibilities and that they have so far found no evidence of genocide. Some people have said to me, "These observers are not given freedom of action." This is not so. We have had no complaints whatsoever from our observers charging that the Nigerian government has prevented them from going where they wanted to go. Indeed, they have reported that the Nigerian forces have helped the Red Cross and the Nigerian Rehabilitation Commission in caring for refugees and restoring, to the extent possible, normal conditions as they have advanced.
I should like to point out to hon. members that it is both an unusual and a fortunate circumstance that we have in the field, and operating, an observer team, and that the Nigerian government long ago consented to have these observers there. This has certainly helped to remove any fears up until now that genocide is taking place. I agree with hon. members that if possible there should be an increase in the number of observers. This is a
January 12, 1970

decision, of course, that has to be made by the Nigerian government.
Our High Commissioner in Lagos has been instructed to offer the Nigerian government further observers, and a number of other countries have done likewise. I spoke to the French ambassador tonight. He told me that he hoped he would have the support of the Canadian government to a French initiative which is in favour of a greater number of observers, even though the French government is not represented on this team. I assure the House that we are in favour of that. We are prepared to offer them, but we cannot force them upon anyone. That responsibility must rest with the Nigerian government.
I think it is an indication of the essentially humanitarian approach of the Nigerian government in this field, at least until now, that they have permitted observers to observe the actions of their troops. I do not think there has ever been a civil war in history in which this has happened.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Would the minister permit a question? Has he or anyone on behalf of the government of Canada engaged in conversation with countries such as Britain and the United States about a common approach to Nigeria regarding enlarging the team of observers?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, we have informed our friends in Britain, the United States and France of our proposal to the Nigerian government. They are likewise making representations, and I hope that our joint efforts will be successful.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, can we be assured that the observers presently located in Nigeria are moving at the front lines and not, as was the case very often in the past, following at some later time the military engagements that take place?


Mitchell William Sharp: We expect a report within the next day or two on the situation in Nigeria today. The observers are due to make a report, I think on January 13, so we should be getting a report within the next day or two, which I hope I will be able to publish, which will give some indication of their observations of the recent past. The reports may not be up to date, of course, because there have been very dramatic developments within the last few days.
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Were they
instructed to be at the front during this extremely critical period?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, those are their general instructions. The International Observer Team has instructions to observe the conduct of the Nigerian troops and to report any evidences of genocide. So far they have found none. Indeed, they have reported, as I have said, that the Red Cross and the Nigerian Rehabilitation Commission have been following the troops and that refugees have on the whole been very well looked after, or as well as they can be.


Francis Andrew Brewin: Mr. Speaker, before the minister concludes his remarks, will he deal specifically with the suggestion I made regarding the emergency in the next few days, namely, that the stocks of supplies in Sao Tome, the aircraft, the crew and the distribution machinery which is in existence be handed over perhaps to the Nigerian Red Cross for use, before millions die in the country?


Mitchell William Sharp: That was the next point of my remarks. I have today had conversation with Dr. Ted Johnson of Canairelief on the future of that organization. Canairelief has, as hon. members know, for many months been engaged in carrying out night flights in Biafra without the consent of the Nigerian government. Therefore, there must be some doubt whether they will be allowed to continue this activity. At least, this is the information we received from Lagos. I am passing on the views that have been expressed to me. Dr. Johnson told me that if they cannot continue their flights, they are willing to put their foodstocks at the disposal of the Red Cross. It is unclear what role Canairelief may be able to play. I have advised them that the most likely way for them to help is by co-operating fully with the Red Cross.
Dr. Johnson and Dr. McKay jointly sent me a message in which they urged me to make representations in Lagos to the effect that Canairelief be allowed to carry on its operations. I think we have to consider what is the best way of getting these supplies used. This does not really involve a question as to whether Canairelief continues, but rather a question regarding the quickest way of getting these supplies from Sao Tome into the area. I have told Dr. Johnson that on that point we are fully agreed. We will have to decide what is the most efficacious way. If the Nigerian government says it cannot trust
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra Canairelief because they acted in contravention of their orders, we will have to find some other way of dealing with the problem. I certainly share the views of hon. members of the House that these food supplies should get in there, because they form part of the immediate reserves available. As the hon. member says, there are some 5,000 tons of most valuable foodstuffs and we should make every effort to see that they are moved into the area.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, the minister has indicated-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. Before the hon. member for Egmont (Mr. MacDonald) seeks to ask another question, I should draw the attention of the House to the fact that the ministers' time has expired, unless it is the disposition of the House that he continue. Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, the minister has indicated that Canairelief officials have consented to the movement of their foodstocks by any other transfer agency. My question, which has not yet been dealt with in the minister's remarks, has to do with the transportation of these materials. Since the equipment, the crews and the system is there ready to operate, has any discussion taken place regarding another method that might be adopted, using the transportation facilities that are ready for use immediately?


Mitchell William Sharp: The answer to that question is that we have had some discussions but no decisions have yet been reached. As I said a little earlier, the war ended only this morning and within the last few hours the situation has been transformed out of all recognition. I think it is unreasonable to expect that at this particular moment all these problems should be settled. I assure hon. members that we are as anxious as they to see that this food is made available in these areas. This is one of the reasons we are making transportation available. Perhaps Canadian government planes could be used for this purpose. Perhaps the Red Cross could use the planes, if Canairelief is unacceptable as the agent. I hope it is not, to be quite frank, but this is something that is not entirely within our control.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I think the House wants to know whether the minister will give

his assurance that he will make immediate representations to the government of Nigeria asking that the stocks of food, planes and personnel of Canairelief be allowed to operate either under Canairelief, the Nigerian Red Cross or the International Red Cross-I do not think it is important which one-and whether these personnel will be allowed to operate immediately to meet the situation which is so pressing and so distressing at this time. We want some assurance from the minister that such representation will be made immediately.
[DOT] (9:10 p.m.)


Mitchell William Sharp: I can assure the hon. member and the House that we are very anxious that those food supplies be moved into the area immediately. I did say earlier that the means is quite important. If we were to insist that Canairelief do it, that might hold up the operation.


An hon. Member:: No one is asking that.


Mitchell William Sharp: I suggest we are trying to find a means to move the food whether it is done by Canairelief or otherwise makes no difference to us. This is one of the problems with which we are engaged and upon which we are trying to get decisions.
Perhaps I should say a further word about my talk with Dr. Johnson. When he was speaking to me on the telephone this morning, and in a later message, he spoke about the particular difficulty being encountered by Canairelief because they were not sure whether in fact their equipment, and so on, was going to be useful. He urged upon the government some assistance to Canairelief to meet the immediate costs. I said to Dr. Johnson that no decision to spend money in that way had been reached, and that we had made a decision to spend money in transporting food to the airstrip at Uli. Of course, he could make representations to us for assistance in this immediate problem.
This is another reason I agree with the hon. member who asked about the urgency of the matter. It is urgent from every point of view. The difficulty is that the equipment and planes standing there are costing Canairelief money while they are inactive. It is essential, from the point of view of Canairelief itself, that there be action as soon as possible.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: What possible objection could there be to the Canadian government guaranteeing
January 12, 1970

the cost of maintaining those planes for 48 hours or 72 hours until a decision is reached?


Mitchell William Sharp: We have not yet had an opportunity to discuss this question. I thought the House would be interested in hearing the position of Canairelief at the moment. This representation is now under consideration.
In conclusion, I agree with hon. members that this is a time for action rather than talk. It is also a time, of course, for effective action and not simply for propaganda. We have to be, and I think have been throughout this whole bloody and despicable war, careful to avoid participation in propaganda exercises.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mitchell William Sharp: Our purpose is to help. That is the only purpose we have. Our motives are as pure as those of any government.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Mitchell William Sharp: They are related entirely to humanitarian considerations. Certainly we do not want to engage in propaganda and we do not want to lay blame on one side or the other. Our only purpose is to help. I think if we act in co-operation with the Nigerian government we will achieve the most effective results.


Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure everyone in this House, the people of Canada and the people of the world who have had their attention so vividly drawn to the tragedy of Nigeria during the last year or two rejoice today in the news that actual military activities have stopped. While this poses a tremendous challenge in so far as the immediate need in the next weeks and the longer range need so far as rehabilitation is concerned, we can rejoice that we can now look toward something positive.
I have spent most of today meeting with a church-oriented group in the city of Toronto in an effort to work out an emergency program for the most urgent need at the moment. I refer to the need for doctors, nurses and social workers who can take over or assist with the tremendous problem of distributing food and relief supplies that are presently stockpiled either on the Nigerian side or in some of the countries adjacent to Nigeria.
I believe I am right in saying there were between 500 and 1,000 workers in the area which we know as Biafra. Many of those workers have been evacuated in recent days.
21611-6J
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra I believe it is also correct to say that many of them will not readily be able to go back and pick up what they have left. In other words, there is a need for replacements as well as an additional task force of people to handle the food and medical needs that are so urgently necessary for the survival of millions of people.
I do not think that most of my colleagues in the House are familiar with the fact that I spent a number of days in the early part of December, just a month ago, in Africa in relation to the situation in Nigeria. I was particularly concerned about speaking to the representatives of the member nations of the Organization of African unity who make up the special committee which had been set up by the OAU to deal with the Biafran situation. Emperor Haile Selassie is the chairman of that committee. At that time there was a major offensive to bring Nigeria and Biafra together to negotiate a final end to hostilities in order to prevent the heavy military action which took place during the last week.
To the credit of the Biafran administration at that time, which I believe was clearly able to see the writing on the wall, a delegation came from Biafra and arrangements were set up for negotiation away from the public eye where not only could they negotiate but also sign an agreement which would allow a settlement to be made by negotiation. Unfortunately, some of the interference that has come from European countries during the whole course of this tragic experience in Nigeria took place again, and the Nigerians were probably advised that it was in their own interest to continue the military activity which at that time they were prepared to begin.
There are several observations I should like to pass on which came out of the discussions I had with the various African leaders who are members of the OAU and are directly concerned with the Biafran situation. I do not intend to go back and try to review the situation which led up to the Secessionist action of General Ojukwu. However, perhaps I should go back briefly to the massacres in 1966 and the obvious hostile attitude of many of the Nigerian people and elements of the government at that time which led to the massacres of thousands of Ibo people.
One would also have to go over the history of the two coups. The first was the elimination of the original government of free Nigeria, which as we are told was basically instigated by Ibo officers in the army and which
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra gave governmental leadership to General Ironsi. Then there was the second coup, reportedly led by General Gowon which eliminated General Ironsi and the subsequent establishment of Lt. Colonel Ojukwu as governor of the eastern area where the Ibo people have their traditional home and where several hundred thousand fled following the massacres of a year or two earlier.
[DOT] (9:20 p.m.)
One would also have to recapitulate the trek home of the Ibo people. Certainly this is one of the tragic chapters in the history of independent Africa. However, I think we must at this time be pragmatic. It is not good enough now to try and lay the blame at the doorstep of this one or that. The people of Canada and the government of Canada have a tremendous responsibility to pick up the pieces wherever we are able, to attempt to prevent the deaths of tens of thousands of people, deaths that will take place in the next week or two unless efficient and prompt action is taken. The situation is far more tragic there today than we here can understand.
I wish to make a few observations as a result of my discussions with representatives of member countries of the OAU committee which was set up to deal with the Biafran situation. I was told there was no doubt that more than 2 million civilians had lost their lives during the course of this conflict over the last two years. I was also told that unless the war stopped within three months, it was conservatively estimated that there would be another 3 million deaths because the masses of people in the little enclave which was Biafran territory at that time were living on the threshold of death by starvation, malnutrition or disease.
One thing which was made very clear to me was that the political differences between Nigeria and secessionist Biafra would have to be settled by Nigerians with the aid of Africans who were members of the Organization of African Unity, and that there had already been far too much interference by European nations. Much has been said about the actions of the United Kingdom, Russia and France in this war. The inference was that their actions were not only concerned with the supplying of arms but were also political in nature.
I am convinced that those who criticized the Canadian government and said it should have gone in and stopped the war did not know what they were talking about. The

question which immediately posed itself to me was: How could this have been done?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Robert Norman Thompson: It was legitimate to try to convince Great Britain that her policies were wrong and to make appeals to Russia, France and the United Nations, but how could Canada have involved itself in the internal affairs of Nigeria? Could it have been done by moving in an army? Of course, this could not have been done. Could we have tried to club Great Britain over the head until she saw some reason in the situation? This we could not do, either. We had a responsibility to use our influence, and I hope this has been done in the most effective way possible. If it has not been done, Mr. Speaker, then part of the responsibility for what has happened in Biafra will also be ours.
Again I say that the point of my remarks is not to try to accuse somebody but to try and outline the facts as they were explained to me by Africans. I discussed the matter of genocide with African leaders and expressed to them our concern. I explained to them how the emotions of the Canadian people had been roused in a very unique and commendable way through fear of what was happening in Nigeria.
I was reminded by these Africans, who wanted a settlement just as much as we did, and even more, that the International Observer Team which had gone to Nigeria could not substantiate with evidence the charge that there had been an intentional attempt by the government of Nigeria to eliminate or destroy the Ibo people. In fact General Gowon is not a Hausa, or even a Mohammedan; he is a Christian and belongs to one of the small tribes of central Nigeria. This is also the case with many of his leaders. Many Ibo people retained senior positions in the Nigerian government throughout the war years. In fact, General Gowon's own wife is an Ibo girl.
One of the things General Gowon has said to people who know him personally is that he did not want to have to accept the blame for military action killing millions of people, or at least tens of thousands of people more than had already been killed by direct military action and thus held back indirect military action. So, Mr. Speaker, there is another side to the story.
Without trying to minimize the situation in Nigeria that led to the secessionist action of General Ojukwu, it is important that we evaluate the situation from the standpoint that
January 12, 1970	COMMONS
it is General Ojukwu himself who really must carry the brunt of the blame for the war and for the death of so many of his people, especially during the last few months when surely he could have seen the handwriting on the wall and realized that it was impossible for him to win the war.
I urge hon. members of this House to consider the matter carefully. We must accept our responsibilities. There are those who say that Canada should have done more to stop the war. I remind them of what we thought of General de Gaulle when he came to Quebec and uttered just a few words extolling the independence of the province of Quebec. Certainly his cry of "Vive le Quebec libre" was not accepted by Canadians. In the same light, it was impossible for a foreign country such as Canada to go in and settle the war in Nigeria.
In relation to the situation in Africa, I would also point out that if the Biafran secessionist movement had succeeded and a country of Biafra had been established, there are a dozen potential Biafran situations in African countries. The tribal situation in many of the new countries in Africa is such that if some tribes thought there was the possibility of gaining their own ends, they would follow the lead provided by Biafra. I can give no better example than the crisis through which Kenya has passed in recent months.
Without belabouring this situation any further, may I commend to the House an article which appears in tonight's Telegram. It was written by Peter Worthington, a reporter who has spent several months on both sides. The article has much merit and is worthy of our consideration.
Before closing, Mr. Speaker, I wish to point out that during the last few weeks food shipments could have been made to Biafra if a land corridor had been used. But the Biafran leaders made it clear that they could not accept the use of a land corridor because they feared the food would be poisoned by the Nigerian authorities, even though assurance was given of international supervision. I also suggest that if the Biafran officials had allowed daylight flights it would not have been necessary for the International Red Cross or the World Relief Commission to stop its food flights, which occurred only a few weeks ago.
I wish also to refer to the statement issued today by General Philip Effiong, which I think is worthy of note. As I read it, 1 think
DEBATES	2281
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra he meant it to be interpreted as saying clearly that those officials who have been responsible for enforcing the continuance of the fighting in recent weeks have now been removed from the scene, meaning General Ojukwu and his senior officials, and he hopes to achieve as honourable a settlement as can possibly be worked out. I think this is commendable.
I am also concerned about the present attitude of many humanitarian agencies and many people who have been interested in relief efforts in Canada in recent months and years. I am concerned about why in some areas their reaction has been negative to the news that the war has stopped. It seems to me that we ought to be lifting our hearts in thanksgiving to the Almighty that this has been the case, and then ready ourselves for the responsibility which is the challenge of this debate.
[DOT] (9:30 p.m.)
I say to the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp) that the government has a responsibility to the tens of thousands of Canadian people who in the last year or two have been so concerned and have shown it in active participation by their contributions. The government must receive direct assurance from the Nigerian government that they will allow full and free distribution of food and relief supplies. If the Nigerian government intends to fulfil its stated policy, there is no reason, why they should not give this assurance.
Second, I think it is imperative that we ready the aircraft which the minister has said is available at the present time to move in and transport the supplies which are stockpiled. There are ample supplies for at least the weeks ahead. These should be moved into the area where fighting has ceased. Without four, five or six million people in that small area the confusion and breakdown of communications and the administration of law and order, except such as the military forces of Nigeria are able to provide, demands immediate action. This is of first importance.
Third, from reports which I have received today through a church oriented relief organization in which I am personally involved, it appears that the immediate need, in addition to the transportation of food supplies, medicine and relief supplies, is personnel. I am very pleased to say that one Canadian organization is moving to send a team of a dozen or twenty doctors, nurses and social workers. 1 believe there will be much response from the
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra private sector in Canada in this regard through non-governmental organizations, but the government must take the lead to make sure that relief supplies are moved in by-supplying aircraft where necessary and helping to fill the general needs of the people as they relate to the distribution of essential supplies and services.
Fourth, I hope that we can interpret the remarks of the minister as meaning that the observer team will be strengthened. I believe that the government could very well assure the Organization of African Unity, as well as the Nigerian government, that it is ready to do all that is necessary in so far as international supervision is concerned. The government should request additional members for the observer team to ensure that the possibility of reprisals is minimized.


Mr, Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired.


Some hon. Members:: Carry on.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is there unanimous agreement for the hon. member to continue?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Robert Norman Thompson: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have only a few more comments to make. I am very pleased to say that from conversations today with church leaders and members of various organizations who have been able to carry on relief work on both sides of the issue that there is going to be a further response by the Canadian people. I would emphasize, though, that the rehabilitation and reconstruction task in Nigeria will be tremendous. This is not just a problem for the next month or two until law and order is established and relief distribution centres are set up; there will be a continuing need over the next few years.
The Canadian government must show leadership here as well. It is one thing to rationalize; it is another thing to use our position to make demands of the Nigerian government whilst at the same time giving assurances of co-operation to the OAU, the Nigerian government, the International Red Cross and any other organization that might be able to participate directly. Someone will have to be responsible for the over-all supervision of the international relief effort, and this should probably be the International Red Cross. I hope the Canadian government will take steps to ensure that a single body supervises

all international assistance and provides administrative co-ordination and leadership.
Mr. Speaker, I conclude by saying that the events of the last day or two have been some of the most momentous that have taken place in this House as we approach the decade of the 1970s. There is no question that this decade will probably be the most critical in the history of the world or even the history of civilization. We should be able to take some encouragement and hope from the fact that so early in this decade at least one international crisis seems to be subsiding, and I hope it will come to an end before too many more days have passed.


Mr. Lome Nystrom (Yorkion-Melville):: Mr. Speaker, in rising to participate in this debate one cannot help but over-emphasize the importance of this issue which must be of the highest priority. All members of the House should take this matter very seriously because it is one of the greatest tragedies affecting the modern world.
Just today one of my friends in the press gallery pointed out a very ironic incident that occurred at the question time. He noted that we were discussing the tragedy of the Biafra-Nigeria situation and then started asking questions about hockey and the troubles in the international hockey world. Many members seemed to view this as a more important question and feel more pain about it than they do about the matter now before us. There were then questions about the RCMP musical ride, veterans affairs and the British Commonwealth gallantry awards.
The question before us now concerns a matter of life and death. However, I was very disappointed in the speech and the statement given by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp) in the House today because they demonstrated that the government did not feel any real sense of urgency in the issue. Also, when the Secretary of State for External Affairs was speaking just a few minutes ago he seemed to have a great deal of information from Lagos. I wonder why communications are so fast now, when a few weeks or a few days ago there seemed to be difficulty in communicating with Lagos when trying to arrange relief for people dying of starvation in Biafra. It used to take weeks and sometimes months to get an answer from the Lagos government, but that does not seem to be the case today.
Some members on this side of the House, and probably some on the other side as well,
January 12, 1970

were frustrated by the lack of urgency in the speech of the Secretary of State for External Affairs. It was basically a manifesto of formalities, niceties and he gave many excuses for the lack of government action in the past. His speech was filled with procrastination and showed that Canada was refusing to accept the role of a leader in the international community, which would get some relief into the war zone immediately.
[DOT] (9:40 p.m.)
On reading the statement the Secretary of State for External Affairs made to the House this afternoon one can see that he has displayed hesitancy and nebulousness. These are attitudes the government has displayed in the Eiafran tragedy. He said in his statement that the government hopes that General Gowon will spare no effort in maintaining the disci-p.ine of his forces and protecting the lives of all the peoples of Nigeria. He does not demand; he is asking.
He is not saying that we shall send over observers immediately to make sure no atrocities or massacres are committed as Nigerian so.diers overrun the unconquered parts of Biafra. The statement goes on to say that the government considers it of first importance that outside relief activity should be coordinated on an international basis. That point is of first importance to this government. It does not consider that bringing relief supplies immediately to the war zone is of first importance; it considers that precedence must be given to co-ordinating actions with other governments.
If we do all this and waste time, there may not be in the war zone many Biafrans left alive to be helped by our relief and church organizations. The whole statement was ambiguous and hesitant in tone and displayed an attitude that has plagued Parliament and this country too long when the Biafran tragedy has been discussed.
When the minister speaks later in the debate, I hope he will tell us why there was so much delay in giving the money requested for relief purposes. Was the government of Canada aware that Nigerian federal forces planned to mount a full-scale attack on Biafran positions before the announcement respecting financial aid was made? You will recall, Mr. Speaker, that Canairelief had asked for assistance and the Prime Minister <Mr. Trudeau) had promised to reply before Christmas. No reply was given. Then the Prime Minister promised to reply after
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra Christmas. Once again there was a delay. Then, suddenly, the government announced it would give Canairelief assistance to the tune of $1 million, and the next day we discovered that Nigeria had mounted an offensive to capture the remaining Biafran-held territory.
I ask the minister to clarify what happened, because many Canadians do not think it a coincidence that Canairelief should be offered money one day before the offensive that was to wipe out Biafra was mounted. I demand an answer to this question, and the people of Canada also demand an answer.


Mr. Pringle:: Will the hon. member permit a question?


Lorne Edmund Nystrom: If the hon. member does not mind, I should like to finish my remarks, at the end of which I shall try to oblige him. All along the government has been delaying. It was aware that arms were going to Nigeria not only from Russia but from Britain. Yet the Secretary of State for External Affairs has come to us tonight with excuses. He still talks about protocol and technicalities that must be overcome before relief can be flown to the war-torn zone. He may still be worrying about daylight flights. By the time he has made all the appropriate and correct arrangements, many of the people we are concerned about, who are dying of starvation, will not be alive and the relief will do them no good.
The hon. member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin) told us earlier this evening that a director of a church-operated service in the United States stated today his organization estimates that unless relief is flown to the war zone immediately, within 48 hours as many as 1 million people will die. The relief must be provided immediately; it is crucial. For that reason we should not just sit down and talk about the problems and technicalities involved in giving relief. Canada must take the lead in this matter and must not be reluctant to act.
According to press reports a number of countries appear to be taking hypocritical action in this connection, but other countries are doing something. Although Britain was one of the main culprits in the Nigerian-Biafran tragedy, at least that country is trying to provide assistance. They have sent a cabinet minister to the area and have organized supplies which are ready to be flown in. Canada seems too hesitant and reluctant to act.
There was a time in our history when we led the world as peacemakers. In 1956, when
January 12. 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra a man who was to become our Prime Minister won the Nobel Peace Prize, many Canadians felt they had participated with him in winning this prize. But in the last year and a half we seem to have been hung-up with nineteenth century theories and attitudes. Instead of tackling the realities facing us in the world today, our Prime Minister seems to hide behind a very cold, academic approach. That is true of this issue and many others.
The Secretary of State for External Affairs has fallen into the same trap and is showing the type of attitude displayed by the Prime Minister. If something looks good on paper, if it is good in theory and if there are precedents for it, the government will accept it. Yet we seem to be hung-up with our concepts of federalism and with a constitution that seems sacred. We have hidden behind our concepts of sovereignty and territorial integrity, and just look at what has happened! This is not good enough. In this matter Canada must act immediately: It must delay no more, because the lives of millions of people are involved. They may die of starvation and disease unless we take action immediately.
We cannot any longer tolerate past attitudes. Is it not ironic that countries making up the United Nations would not intervene in this struggle or even bring relief because this was a so-called civil war, and now that the war is over they are all anxious to provide help? That is one of the biggest contradictions in this matter. That is why governments must find alternative solutions to problems like these which confront peoples in this modern world. In our modern world of technology and electronics new solutions must be found. If we and others had taken different attitudes to this question, the tragedy in Biafran might have been averted. What has happened today is history. The immediate problem is how we are to act now. Hours count, not days; we must act within hours, and not within days or weeks. We must bring relief to these unfortunate people within a matter ot hours.
I think we all know the history of the Nigerian-Biafran conflict, and most of us know that about 2 million people have died in it. But does anyone realize the seriousness of the situation today in Nigeria and Biafra? One has only to look at newspaper reports to know what is happening. May I read from an article that appeared in this evening's Ottawa Citizen. It was written by Richard Hall, who was the last foreign correspondent to leave the war zone on Saturday night. The headline

at the top of the newspaper in bold red letters is, " 'They run like rabbits' in hail of fire". The correspondent gives us this story:
Biafra is dying bloodily and terror-stricken.
The triumphant Nigerian army is advancing into the chaotic heart of Ojukwu's breakaway country.
The demoralized Biafran army has been stunned by the blitzkrieg onslaught mounted by the federal forces and is now offering little resistance and fleeing.
Five million civilians are running rabbit-like from the remaining crowded areas.
Several Nigerian MiG fighters add to the confusion by rocketing and machine-gunning lines of refugees.
Amid the crowds are wounded and shell-shocked Biafran soldiers.
[DOT] (9:50 p.m.)
Further on he says:
During the inevitable overrun of Biafra, their lives lie in the balance.
As I left, Owerri was being shelled and rocketted. It is now a ghost town, yet last Thursday night it contained some quarter of a million people.
As I went north, I saw appalling sights of Biafra's death throes.
They are burned in my memory: men, women and children carrying pathetic belongings, some collapsing weeping at the roadside.
I could read more of the article. It describes the situation there at the present time. There is in today's issue of the Ottawa Citizen another article written by the same foreign correspondent. He talks about the soldiers at the war front and the situation many of them are facing, and says:
Soldiers at the front ate on an average once every three days. They had only ground cassava with soup.
A doctor told me: "Abdominal wounds are hard to operate on-the men are so thin."
Against them the Biafrans faced well-fed and better armed troops.
The Nigerians knew they had their enemies at their mercy. When the final push came, the line buckled.
This, Mr. Speaker, once again paints a very vivid picture of the real situation in Biafra and Nigeria tonight. This is why the Canadian government must act now. The member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin) and the member for Fundy-Royal (Mr. Fairweather) mentioned a number of plans or alternative activities this government could adopt.
In the motion before us today there are two suggestions that should immediately be adopted by the government. I do not want to repeat the details at this time. Basically, we are calling for observers to go to the front lines
January 12, 1970

and into the villages that have been overtaken, to ensure that no massacre of Biafran civilians will occur. Activity of this sort will often take place in a situation like this, even though at times it is quite unintentional. There must be immediate action to prevent any such activity taking place.
I am not referring to military observers. It has been stated that military men should not be sent to observe military men. Civilian men are required as well and, as has already been suggested, we could include some jurists. We could send other people as well. Members of the press could be sent to expose the situation. This must be done immediately. A delay of even a few hours could be vital to the lives of many people on the west coast of Africa.
The second point we are making is that relief must be sent immediately. We cannot afford to delay even a few hours. Relief planes have been grounded for about two days and supplies in Biafra are virtually nil. When relief supplies were flown in at night, they were distributed the next morning. There is no stockpile of food or medicine in Biafra. In a few days many hundreds of thousands of these people could die like flies. This should be obvious to anyone who has knowledge of the situation.
I appeal to the government to immediately send observers into these areas that have been recently taken over. As I have said, these need not be military men. Relief must be given immediately. Canairelief and Joint Church Aid have issued statements that they have food supplies available and they will turn them over to anyone who will fly them in, such as the Nigerian Red Cross or the International Red Cross. This food must be delivered before it is too late. I ask the Secretary of State for External Affairs to act on this suggestion tonight. I ask him to contact as many governments and relief agencies as possible. Then by tomorrow morning Canada could be well on the way to doing something in Nigeria which would ensure that the minimum amount of death and starvation will occur from the tragic situation which already exists in that area.


Mr. Ray Perraull (Burnaby-Seymour):: Mr. Speaker, at four o'clock this afternoon the Biafran army surrendered to Nigerian federal forces and the final desperate chapter of the Nigerian civil war was acted out. Hopefully, an end will soon come to the misery and bloodshed which has affected both sides of the battle-line. There is no disagreement in
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra the House that when that end comes, Canada must and will be among the very first to make food and medical aid available.
This was indicated today in the statement by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp). All parties should have been encouraged by that excellent statement. Valuable suggestions were made in the debate today. Some of them related to the role of Canairelief. It seems logical that the demonstrated resources and abilities of Canairelief should be enlisted as quickly as possible. If food is ready to be delivered, staff is on hand and distribution facilities exist, let us act to bring these Canairelief resources to the area in need as soon as this can be negotiated with the Nigerian government.
We have 24 Hercules aircraft in Canada. Each one has a trained crew and is able to carry over ten tons of relief materials. They could fly non-stop from here to Lagos. Loading procedures on these aircraft should begin tonight, each with ten tons of needed foodstuffs. The crews are available and ready. They should leave in waves of at least three a day so that within a week all these Canadian mercy ships of the air would be there. If we err on any side in this dispute-it is now no longer a dispute but a situation in which we hope a settlement will occur-then let us err on the side of generosity.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Raymond J. Perrault: Let us do too much rather than too little. Let us show the world that Canada is interested and concerned. Let us get the planes to where they are needed, and when they are there let us use them to ferry supplies from all over Europe and Africa to Nigeria. Some people will say they may have difficulty landing, but Hercules aircraft can land on a grassy meadow. Where they land and where they are used are questions which could be countered by, who will stop them from landing? Landing strips are available. We should bestow on the situation as much Canadian generosity as possible. After that we can send them a copy of today's Hansard.
Some estimate that 2 million people have died in the war. In the United Nations meetings in New York in the early part of December 1, as one of the group of Canadian delegates, was told by officials of the Organization of African Unity that the figure is closer to 5 million.
Harsh words have been uttered in this House by the opponents of the government in
January 12, 1970

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra this and in past debates, words which suggest that Canada has been unduly legalistic in its approach to the civil war, that we have failed to act promptly to alleviate suffering, that we have failed to exercise sufficient influence within the Commonwealth to persuade Britain and others to refrain from arms shipments and, above all, that we have failed to play an effective role by refusing to inscribe the subject of Biafra and Nigeria on the agenda of the United Nations.


Some hon. Members:: True.


Raymond J. Perrault: Some hon. members say "True". The great tragedy is that in this entire controversy many people have spoken out very eloquently without having full possession of the facts. That in itself is a tragedy. The same words have been uttered outside the House.
[DOT] (10:00 p.m.)
Some profess they cannot comprehend why Canada has not made unilateral efforts to end the civil war and bring aid to starving people. I think it is proper to consider the Canadian position in its true light and determine what Canadians can best do to help. Hon. members are aware that Canadians observers have been on the scene in Nigeria for the past 15 months and we have been assured that other observers may be sent; that Canadian supplies and aircraft are available.
The Canadian effort will continue to be a humanitarian one, as it should be. It is an unspeakable tragedy that the suffering should have endured until this time. This point was touched upon by a member of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Thompson) who knows considerably more about Africa than do some of his hon. friends. Relief supplies could be in the area now but for the intransigence of Ojukwu who has stubbornly resisted the efforts of the International Red Cross to schedule daylight flights. This is the view which is held almost unanimously by representatives at the United Nations, including those of the socialist countries. Well, he has fled Biafra, reportedly aboard a Fokker Friendship aircraft together with tons of luggage, his family and his Mercedes-Benz. He is no longer a factor in the civil war.
In a debate in this House in late November it was stated that massive daylight relief flights under the IRC formula represented the best hope of relieving starvation in Biafra. Despite Nigerian assent and guarantees from
[Mr. Perrault.l
the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada, Ojukwu refused to provide for his people the one kind of relief which would have saved lives.
In early December after the debate in the House I had an opportunity to meet again in New York with the Nigerians and the Bia-frans, separately, in the presence of a representative of Canairelief. At the Biafran meeting, objections to the Red Cross dayught lift proposal were again voiced. What were those objections? They were that Nigerian planes might bomb Uli during or immediately following Red Cross flights, despite assurances that this would not happen.
The Biafran representatives in New York and Washington were questioned with respect to other types of aid. These are the questions they were asked, "Would you accept an air drop?" The answer was, "We wouid not. We are afraid the parcels would damage our huts; we have lost so many huts in this war." The exchange continued, "But, surely, that is a remarkable reply. Would it not be possible to designate a drop area and fly food and medical supplies into that area?" The answer was, "No, we are afraid our people would be killed or injured by the falling food cannis-ters." Only after the incredible nature of these replies had been questioned was it suggested to us that perhaps-just perhaps-aid by helicopter might be accepted.
A few days later, on December 15, in order to meet Biafran objections to daylight aid, the Nigerian government removed all possible doubt about military action interfering with International Red Cross shipments under the ICRC agreement. Nevertheless, there was still no affirmative answer from Ojukwu and no suggestion that the Red Cross plan might proceed on a test basis. Yet Ojukwu is lauded by some as a saviour of his people, a great emancipator.
As the hon. member for Red Deer suggested, perhaps it is time to question some of his motives. Indeed, that time may be more than overdue. Many who are deeply sympathetic to the Ibo people have reached the conclusion that several months ago General Ojukwu and certain of his advisers made a cold-blooded decision to reject daylight flights in favour of the night-time cover provided by the gallant people of Canairelief. He must have known full well, when making this decision, that in order to obtain greater shipments of arms many lives would have to be sacrificed. He, at
January 12, 1970

least, was prepared to make that sacrifice. But his family was safe. When we talk about this tragedy resting on the conscience of the Canadian people, I suggest to the House that most of it must lie on his conscience. He must assume responsibility for the deaths of thousands of women and children.
The starving faces of Ibo youngsters haunt all Canadians. We have to ask ourselves whether we have done enough for the Ibos and will do enough for them during the next two weeks. Are the Biafrans all Ibos? Nigeria was a nation made up of over 250 ethnic and language groups. There was only one tribe that was Ibo. When Ojukwu unilaterally declared Biafra independent, he did so on behalf of hundreds of thousands of non-Ibos in eastern Nigeria who were offered no plebiscite or vote in regard to that decision.
The faces of little children that haunt the conscience of the world, the faces of little children which were paraded on the lecture platforms across Canada during recent weeks and days, include as well the tragic faces of thousands from other tribes and language groups who were never asked whether they wanted to be liberated by Ojukwu. Yet he declared liberation in their name.
Ironically, Mr. Speaker as Ojukwu filed in recent hours he left Biafra to a non-Ibo, Major Philip Effiong of the Efik tribe, a man who surrendered at four o'clock this afternoon and stated, as the minister told us earlier, that now that those opposed to a peaceful resolution of the dispute had left, perhaps a peaceful solution could be arranged.
All of us are concerned about the possibility of genocide. There are some in Canada who have said that the Nigerian federal government and its troops cannot be trusted. All of us must hope that genocide will not occur. Significantly, although the Ibo massacres of 1966 undeniably took place, since then the Ibo people in federal Nigeria have existed peacefully. Before the surrender yesterday, 2 million Ibos lived within the enclave. There were 7 million outside the enclave, in federal Nigeria. Our observers have reported no bloodshed in the Ibo areas, and let us hope that this situation continues.
In a civil war, where there are perhaps more shades of grey than black and white, there is also bitterness-as our friend from Red Deer has suggested-about alleged Ibo complicity in murders associated with the overthrow of the federal government before

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra 1966. Let those who claim that they want to bring fair minds to bear on this dispute, even those who have been lecturing Canadians in recent weeks about their responsibiiities, some of whom are perhaps in the gallery tonight, take this factor into consideration. When we are attempting to develop a feeling of trust and confidence on both sides, let us not distort the facts.
The idea of an expanded observer team is a good one. Every Canadian initiative must be undertaken to urge restraint and moderation so that rehabilitation can proceed. I understand that news dispatches have been broadcast to the world to the effect that the federal government of Nigeria is welcoming additional observers from other nations. The government has been criticized for failing to raise the question of the Nigerian civil war at the United Nations. I served there for three months and it was an interesting experience. These criticisms ignore the fact that months ago Canada discussed this very possibility with the Secretary General of the United Nations. This is to the credit of our Secretary of State for External Affairs and is another fact that has been glossed over by the eloquent critics of this government, who should have spent more time getting the facts and less time on the lecture platforms.
The Secretary General reflected the general United Nations view that such action would do more harm than good. Many of the 126 nations at the United Nations are deeply committed to humanitarian causes. Yet significantly not one of them moved to inscribe the Nigerian civil war on the agenda. Not even one of the four black nations that recognized Biafra undertook the initiative called for by Biafra to ask the United Nations to take action. Why was this? It was because any attempted initiative would come crashing down to defeat and frustration.
[DOT] (10:10 p.m.)
Some have said, quite incorrectly, that because of its inability to inscribe the Nigerian civil war on the UN agenda this government is racist. That charge is nonsense whether it comes from Nova Scotia, British Columbia or any other province of this country. You might as well charge the other 125 members of the United Nations, including every black country in the UN, with racism. I resent that kind of statement made in the context of Canada.
2288	COMMONS DEBATES	January 12, 1970
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra
It is said that Canadians unilaterally should have convened a meeting, a conference or a peace session to arrange a settlement. This is part of the popular mythology about Biafra-Nigeria. Canadians have been urged to bring about some sort of peace conference or understanding between the factions. People who say this really exist in dismal ignorance. If before their eloquent speeches they had consulted with the black nations of Africa, they would have found out how anxious they are to have white intervention.
The hon. member for Yorkton-Melville (Mr. Nystrom), who is a sincere, dedicated young man, says we are entering a new world. That is exactly what they told us at the United Nations. But the world of 1970 is different from the paternalistic pre-war days. Nonwhites in other parts of the world have come to resent white interference whether or not it is well motivated or even well-justified. A new generation of capable African leaders say to us. "Keep out. This is an African dispute and Africans will resolve African problems." They say they need no do-gooding, white paternalists. This may be hard news but it is the news of new Africa. They welcome Canadian initiatives to feed the hungry but they say they will not tolerate outside interference in their political problems from any quarter.
I ask hon. members how much outside interference they would be prepared to tolerate in the internal problems of Canada. These may be hard words for those motivated by a sincere desire to impose on others then-white humanitarianism, but it is a fact which Canadians in the realm of international relations have come to know all too well. Anyone serving abroad knows that these are the facts of the changing world referred to by the hon. member for Yorkton-Melville.
It is in the face of these tough realities that Canada has acted in the Nigerian civil war. Now that it has concluded, our efforts must again proceed in the face of these realities. Our efforts should come through recognized and established channels. This may not be very dramatic or as dramatic as Canadian planes flying through Nigerian and Biafran flak, unilaterally dropping aid to these people, but those who fought on either side of this struggle have to be helped and we must find channels which can and will bring aid to all of them. We must find non-political initiatives which will not give rise to hostility and resentment, which in turn might serve to
[Mr. Perrault.l
retard our humanitarian efforts. We want efforts which will result in the maximum amount of aid being provided.
Many things could be said in a situation of this kind which would get headlines in the newspapers and make a great story, but which might effectively cut off aid to the people who need it most. Happily, at this time when aid must be brought to the starving of the Biafran region, Canada enjoys good working relations with the International Committee of the Red Cross and with other nations which have worked with us toward a common goal, such as the Scandinavian countries and the Nigerian federal government. This is an important consideration at this time.
I conclude with this thought: Co-operation is the key; Canadian co-operation with effective international agencies, co-operation with the government of Nigeria and co-operation to assure that the people who have suffered so much will be the recipients of the aid that Canadians in all parties are so anxious to bestow.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, in rising to speak again about the terrible tragedy that has been occurring for many months in the territory known as Nigeria-Biafra I find myself following the hon. member for Burnaby-Seymour (Mr. Perrault). When he began his remarks he seemed to be making eminently more sense than often in the past with regard to this subject, but he reverted to type and added a primarily irrelevant comment.
When the suggestion was made earlier today that we might have an emergency debate, I was somewhat reluctant about the idea in the belief that the situation was so confused that little by way of worth-while debate on the subject could be achieved. As events have transpired this afternoon and this evening in the House, I think it has become abundantly apparent that this debate of all the many discussions we have had in this House may indeed be the most important in terms of the possibility of what Canada can do.
The minister suggested to us that we should not be too surprised that we have not completed plans and have not yet made arrangements for transport facilities, and that there are still a number of questions to be resolved before relief can be resumed. If members on this side of the House express concern-and I
January 12, 1970

think the concern, fear or even scepticism which exists is not only on one side of the House-it is because we have spent far too many months waiting for the government to take action. If we are concerned this evening and talk about action being taken not in a matter of months, weeks or even days but in a matter of hours, this is not terribly surprising if one recognizes some of what I consider to be the universally accepted facts of the case.
Each war, each human conflict has its own particular marks or characteristics. Without doubt, throughout the piece and surely for over 15 months the most pronounced characteristic of the conflict in Nigeria has been the fact that millions of civilians have literally been starving or have starved to death. Are our people simply to wait in the hope that somehow the situation will either go away or by itself be resolved? Anyone who has taken any time either to visit the area or study the facts of the matter realizes this is not likely to happen. When grim predictions are made that within the course of a few days literally millions more could starve to death, it is not hysterical or inaccurate to make that comment.
We know people have literally been living the most threadbare kind of existence, sustained one might almost imagine by hope itself. If the kind of confused chaos which is recounted by those recently on the scene is at all accurate, one can think, apart altogether from the physiological aspect of the situation, about the psychological uncertainty which must be almost productive of death itself.
The minister has asked for time. There are too many millions in east Africa today who do not have that time. Unless this government is prepared to act, not tomorrow morning but tonight, then whether we like it or not we will be suffering the kind of recriminations that far too often people have experienced in this century because of the failure to act and respond to the urgent need that has been laid before them. The hon. member for Burnaby-Seymour expressed that kind of urgency when he talked about the movement of the Hercules aircraft. However, I think he should have said that all of them should have been moved on the first day.


Raymond J. Perrault: As many as could be.

Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra
[DOT] (10:20 p.m.)


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: We know there are 15 aircraft available now. They have crews. There is food. Within the space of a few hours they could be activated and directed to a suitable landing point. I know that the officials of Canairelief have sent a telegram to the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) suggesting that tomorrow, if given permission, the consortium of planes now available at Sao Tome, with the food stocks available, could land some 500 tons, enough to sustain life during this interim period until more satisfactory and permanent arrangements can be made.
It seems to me not only eminently sensible but necessary that the government act now. If the Secretary of State for External Affairs is concerned about our undue haste, I say that we hasten because of the situation and we can do no other. All of us are alarmed because it has taken such an interminably long period of time for the government to respond to each and every request on each and every opportunity.
Whether or not, as some members have suggested, it was more than circumstantial that agreement was reached last Friday to finance relief agencies supplying the Biafran people just at the moment when hostilities were coming to a conclusion, may never be known. The fact of the matter is that long before this government was installed in office and ever since it has been in office, members on this side of the House, indeed on all sides, have urged the government to take action. There is little, if any, evidence of the action it took. .
What action can we point to that the government has taken? It is not a happy picture. We can talk about the foodstuffs deposited in Fernando Po, Dahomey and Lagos, but when we talk about the food supplies delivered to the starving millions we talk about ten or eleven flights, some 200 tons at most. But when we talk about the efforts made by the Canadian people through volunteer organizations, through Canairelief, we are talking about 11,000 tons and over 660 flights. This may not have been much in terms of those who did suffer and die unnecessarily, but it was hundreds and hundreds of times better than the government was able to do while it hid so often behind the failure to get accurate communication.
2290	COMMONS
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra
I am not at all buoyed up by the indication which the Secretary of State for External Affairs has given us this evening, that he has had word from the officials in Lagos. It does not make me feel particularly proud to wonder how effective these communications have been. The government must have realized how ineffective communications have been when it continually sent special representatives to Lagos to try to devise an effective means of communication. It is not only futile but stupid for us this evening to discuss past events, discuss who was responsible for what fault, or where we should lay blame. Surely our concern at this point is to make sure that the relief supplies are effectively delivered.
As I said at the beginning of my remarks, Mr. Speaker, this debate can be the most important one we have had. In fact, it can make all the questions raised in this House, all the special debates we have had and all the inquiries of the parliamentary committee valid if the government realizes this evening that on this matter there is no time to wait, and that action must be taken now.
In discussing with Canairelief officials this afternoon the situation in the area known as Biafra, in terms of the relief supplies available there, one of them scratched his head and said there were a few bags of salt left-and this, Mr. Speaker, for a physically deprived people of whom 2 million have already starved to death and of whom another 2 million or 3 million could starve to death perhaps within a week.
Are we prepared to see that final accounting of this tragedy? Are we prepared to see a figure, not only of the 2 million deaths that have already taken place but of an additional 2 or 3 million deaths that could take place soon? I do not believe that any member of this House, including the Secretary of State for External Affairs, wants to see that occur. I believe the minister has indicated this by the fact that he has been present throughout the debate this evening and by his willingness to make sure that all available channels are used. But I say to the minister that we must do more than we have done in the past. We have not the luxury that the government seemingly thought it could enjoy throughout this tragedy that of waiting until all the "i's" were dotted and all the "t's" crossed, because if we wait any longer we will only see very many more graves.

DEBATES	January 12, 1970


Jean-Pierre Goyer: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member allow me a question?
Does he claim that the Canadian government did not do as much as Canairelief, etc. for it is confirmed that the situation of Canairelief is such today that it will probably no longer be able to serve humanitarian ends, that is transport food and medical supplies to Nigeria?
Would the hon. member want the Canadian government to find itself in a similar situation when the war is over, and be unable to help the Nigerian people?


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, I am very grateful for that question because I think it points up the sterility of our situation in regard to the whole issue. The United States government has done that, and they actually sold planes at scrap value so that the whole operation could work. Had we had the courage of that government over the past year we could now view with pride our actions to alleviate unnecessary suffering.
We are now pressing for the most reasonable kind of request possible. The food is there; the facilities are there. We know there are some diplomatic niceties to be observed, some political lobbying and other time-consuming activities that will do nothing but threaten the hopes and lives of people living this threadbare existence in Nigeria.
I would urge, as do all members here tonight, that the government not wait until tomorrow to take the kind of action requested of the Prime Minister by Canairelief, in consultation with other governments such as the United States and Great Britain. If necessary, transportation facilities could be placed under a management group acceptable to the officials in Lagos. Surely to God we do not have to sit and watch another period go by involving all kinds of legalisms that result only in a sterility of action and unnecessary death for millions.


Mr. Speaker:: As it is now 10.30 p.m., and pursuant to the special order adopted earlier today, it is my duty to interrupt the proceedings.
January 12, 1970


MOTION UNDER S.O. 43 EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
[Stage Direction]
NIGERIA-BIAFRA-REFERENCE! OF GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE PLANS TO COMMITTEE
Mr, Speaker:: Pursuant to the special order adopted earlier this day, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stanfield) moves:
Canadian Action on Nigeria-Biafra That the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence be instructed to take under consideration immediately the plans of the government to give assistance to the victims of the Nigerian Biafran conflict; that the committee exercise continuing surveillance over the efforts of the Canadian government in this respect; and report with all possible speed to this House as to the adequacy of the measures proposed and recommend any further measures it considers appropriate.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
At 10.32 p.m. the House adjourned, without question put, pursuant to special order.
[Stage Direction]
Tuesday, January 13, 1970