1970-06-15

PRIVILEGE

[Stage Direction]
MR. HOWARD	(SKEENA) -DISCLOSURE TO

Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege relating particularly to an announcement over the CBC on the 11 o'clock news on Friday night and to other news items which were carried over the weekend dealing with the interim report of the LeDain commission on the non-medical use of drugs.
It was obvious from watching the newscast and listening to Capital Report and other news items that certain members of the press have inside information as to the contents of the report. Reference was made to the number of pages in the report-


Mr. Lambert (Edmonton West):: Seven
hundred.


Frank Howard: -and to the legal difficulties which might arise if certain aspects of the report were adopted, the awkward position in which the courts might be placed when imposing sentences dealing with infractions of the current laws, the matter of diet pills, marijuana, a cabinet committee and other things. This clearly indicates that certain individuals within the news media have received information with respect to the report in question.
It is my contention, since government is the element of Parliament which has possession of this interim report and has so far not tabled it, that the contents thereof, or part of them, have been revealed to certain persons in the news field contrary to proper practice and to the requirement that such reports be tabled in Parliament. It is an affront to the people of Canada and to Parliament for someone in government to leak certain information, as is obviously the case here, to the press while at the same time denying full information in the form of the report itself.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Frank Howard: After much prodding and questioning on Friday morning last, the Prime Minister said the report would be tabled in the House. I believe that it smacks of arrogance and manipulation for someone in his cabinet to contravene the spirit of that commitment.
If Your Honour finds that a prima facie case of privilege does exist, I intend to found upon it the following motion, seconded by my hon. friend from Winnipeg North:
This House expresses the opinion that the government should forthwith table the interim report of the commission of inquiry into the non-medical use of drugs.


Mr. Speaker:: I suggest to the hon. member for Skeena and to other hon. members that there should not be a debate on the proposed motion. A motion in similar terms was proposed late last week by the hon. member for Peace River. After much thought and consideration and after hearing argument on the subject, the Chair ruled that though there might have been a grievance no question of privilege arose. I therefore have to say that, even in the light of the circumstances to which the hon. member has alluded, this cannot be considered a proper question of privilege and I have to rule that the hon. member's proposed motion cannot be put to the House.
[DOT] (2:10 p.m.)



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Hon. Eric W. Kierans (Postmaster General and Minister of Communications):: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 41(2) I wish to table two copies in both official languages of a report on "Participation by Telecommunications Carriers in Public Data-Processing". This report has been prepared by the Department of Communications within the framework of the telecommission studies. It should not, however, be regarded as a final telecommission report.
June 15, 1970

Oil Spill into Athabasca River
As the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications may well wish to study this report I suggest, if the House agrees, that the report be referred to the committee today.


Mr. Speaker:: Is the hon. member for Winnipeg North rising on motions?


Mr. Orlikow:: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: My understanding of the proposed motion of the Postmaster General is that it referred to the tabling of a document and this, of course, is not subject to debate. I have to rule that there is no debate on the statement or on the action proposed by the Postmaster General.


David Orlikow: Mr. Speaker, I have another motion I should like to move.


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order, the Minister of Communications suggested that the subject matter of the report tabled by him today might, with unanimous consent of the House, be referred to the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications. I wonder if we might ascertain whether there would be unanimous consent to such an order?


Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Is
this under Standing Order 43?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I gather it is not under the provisions of Standing Order 43. The President of the Privy Council as Government House Leader seeks the unanimous consent of the House to proceed as suggested by the Minister of Communications. Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Apparently there is not unanimity. The motion cannot be proceeded with as suggested by the minister.



POLLUTION


Mr. G. W. Baldwin (Peace River):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to move a motion of a type with which Your Honour is now familiar. My proposal motion is made pursuant to
[Mr. Kierans.)
Standing Order 43 and I ask unanimous consent to move the motion under these circumstances.
The oil spill into the Athabasca River has now reached epic and dangerous proportions. It is now backing up into the Peace River, will be entering the Slave River and may well go into Great Slave Lake. At this time of year the flood waters in the area of the confluence of these rivers are very substantial.
In view of what has happened and the fears that have arisen, and in view of the fact that additional pipelines to be constructed in the north are now under contemplation, I think this matter should be one for immediate inquiry. I therefore move, seconded by the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka (Mr. Aiken), the following motion, to which I ask for the unanimous consent of the House:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government of Canada and the government of Alberta should immediately discuss the establishment of a commission of inquiry into the question of the oil spill in the Athabasca River; the adequacy of the means taken to deal with the damage and the establishment of proper safeguards and precautions against any repetition of this disastrous pollution.


Mr. Speaker:: Hon. members have heard the motion proposed by the hon. member for Peace River. By the terms of Standing Order 43 this motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Therefore the Chair has to inquire whether there is such unanimity.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Since there is not unanimity the motion cannot be moved at this time.



COMMUNICATIONS


[Stage Direction]
-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
David Orlikow: Mr. Speaker, I rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43 to ask the House to agree to a motion regarding Bell Canada. Bell Canada has made a request to the Canadian Transport Commission for a new increase in telephone rates of 6] per cent. This follows the increase of last fall which gave Bell increased revenues of $27.5 million.
Bell Canada has surpassed the 6.8 per cent maximum rate of return permitted by the Canadian Transport Commission and is now averaging over 7 per cent return on its investment. Bell has been working closely
June 15, 1970

8C89
with the Prices and Incomes Commission in circulating its material. This request for an increase is completely uncalled for.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, under the provisions of Standing Order 43 I ask leave to move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), that:
The Standing Committee on Transport and Communications be authorized to meet forthwith and proceed as quickly as possible to investigate the latest proposed increase of Bell Canada, and the relationship between Bell Canada and the Canadian Transport Commission.


Mr. Speaker:: Again hon. members have heard the motion proposed by the hon. member, which requires unanimous consent. Is there unanimity?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Since there is no unanimity the motion cannot be put.



DEUTERIUM OF CANADA ASSISTANCE BILL


Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Regional Economic Expansion) moved: for leave to introduce Bill C-222, to authorize the making of a grant to the province of Nova Scotia for the purpose of providing assistance to Deuterium of Canada Limited.


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

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

Mr. Broadbent: 1.	Did Dr. R. J. Uffen, Director of the Science Secretariat, at the conference of Canadian scientists and engineers held at Carleton University from July 31 to August 1, 1969 say that, "I speak to the President of the Treasury Board, Mr. Drury, regarding science policy for two hours each week."?
2.	Did Dr. R. J. Uffen, also say at that meeting that, "The Committee of the Privy Council on Scientific and Industrial Research meet one hour each week"?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Presideni of fhe Treasury Board):: 1. Dr. Robert J. Uffen, Chief Science
Questions
Adviser to the Cabinet, in his capacity as Secretary of the Privy Council Committee on Scientific and Industrial Research, regularly meets with the Hon. C. M. Drury, who is Chairman of the Committee.
2.	The Privy Council Committee on Scientific and Industrial Research has a scheduled weekly meeting.


STATEMENT ON SCIENCE POLICY
Mr. Broadbent: 1.	When will the Government of Canada issue a full statement on Canada's National Science Policy?
2.	When will the Government of Canada issue a comment on the recommendations of the Science Council of Canada?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: 1. The Government is at present receiving advice from many sources regarding science and technology in Canada. It is yet to be determined if it would be useful to endeavour to articulate a statement comprehending all science policy. There may evolve a series of policy statements covering specific areas of Canadian activity.
2. The Privy Council Committee on Scientific and Industrial Research meets weekly and does give consideration to the various recommendations of the Science Council of Canada. The Government acts upon those recommendations which it deems timely and makes announcements where appropriate.


PRIVY COUNCIL COMMITTEE ON SCIENTIFIC AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH
Mr. Broadbent: Does the Privy Council Committee on scientific and industrial research meet regularly once a week?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: See reply to Question No. 161 answered this day.


EMPLOYMENT AND CONTRACTS, AIRCRAFT DIVISION, ENAMEL AND HEATING PRODUCTS LIMITED
Mr. Coates: 1.	What is the total employment of the Aircraft Division of Enamel & Heating Products Limited?
2.	What is the total amount of contracts awarded to Enamel & Heating Products Limited, Aircraft Division, through the Department of Supply and Services and through sub-contractors involved in work with the Department of Supply and Services?


Hon. James Richardson (Minister of Supply and Services):: 1. The only authoritative source of information is the company.

June 15, 1970
Questions
2. The total amount contracts and subcon- 1969/70 were as follows: tracts awarded for fiscal years 1968/69 and
Fiscal Year	Price Contracts
1968- 1969	$363,013
1969- 1970	$320,982 (estimated)


ELIMINATION OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 1,628
Mr. Broadfceni:: Has the government given any consideration to the problem of discrimination against women in the labour market during its meetings with representatives of the provincial governments and, if so, has the federal government discussed with the representatives of the provincial governments the matter of provincial legislation which would accord with the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination against women so that Canada might ratify this Declaration?


Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Minister of Labour):: The United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women is not open to ratification. The matter of discrimination against women in employment has been the subject of federal-provincial discussions. Canada ratified International Labour Convention number 111, dealing with discrimination in employment, in 1964, following consultation with the provinces.


FEDERAL PROGRAM TO EMPLOY WOMEN AS ECONOMISTS, LIBRARIANS AND STATISTICIANS
Mr. Broadbent: 1.	How many women are currently employed in the federal public service program to employ economists, librarians and statisticians on a part-time basis?
2.	Has this program proved successful and (a) if so, is the government planning to extend this program to other job categories (b) if not, for what reason?


Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Secretary of Sfaie):: I am informed by the Public Service Commission as follows: 1. Eight.
2. The program was launched as a pilot project to determine the availability of women with skills in the fields of economics, statistics and library science to work on a parttime basis and the capability of government departments to utilize these skills on a parttime basis. Relatively few women with skills at the levels required were identified as a result of the program. The program did demonstrate that employment of part-time workers

Subcontracts	Total
$ 731,594	$1,094,607
$1,327,272	$1,648,254
in some professional fields is feasible in some government departments. The special regulation under which the program was established has not been renewed as it was found the program could be carried out under the provisions for part-time work which apply generally across the Public Service. It is therefore possible to continue to employ women with professional skills on a part-time basis.


MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION CONSULTANTS
Mr. Robinson: How many consultants have been engaged by the Department of Manpower and Immigration during each year 1950 to 1970 inclusive (a) what was the cost of the consultants (b) how were the consultants utilized (c) for what reasons were the consultants necessary?


Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (Minister of Manpower and Immigraiion):: Since its establishment in 1966 to 1970, the Department of Manpower and Immigration has engaged 125 consultants, (a) The cost was approximately $669,841; (b) The consultants were utilized to carry out analysis, planning, organization, and evaluation studies for the Department; (c) The consultants were necessary because the work was beyond the capabilities of departmental resources.


REMOVAL OF REFUSE FROM HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT
Mr. Mather: 1 Approximately how many tons of papers, leftover or waste, are removed from the Houses of Parliament each month?
2.	On what basis is this removal carried out?
3.	What revenue does the waste paper bring to the public?


James Armstrong Richardson: In so far as Crown Assets Disposal Corporation is concerned: 1. Approximately 10 tons.
2.	By contract government buildings are scheduled for a regular pickup of all left over and waste paper.
3.	$12,000 per annum.
June 15, 1970


CBC-&quot;THE NATION'S BUSINESS&quot;
Mr. Paproski: Was the film shown on Sunday, April 19, 1970, on the CBC program, Channel 4, "The Nation's Business", sponsored and paid for entirely by the Liberal Party?


Mr. Yves Forest (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: Yes.


ONTARIO-EXPENDITURES BY NATIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE
Mr. Serre: 1.	What were the expenditures in the Province of Ontario by the Department of National Health
Program
Fitness and Amateur Sport Research Grants Welfare Grants Medical Services Family Allowances Youth Allowances Family Assistance Old Age Security2 Total
'Figures still subject to adjustments.
'Includes the Guaranteed Income Supplement.


INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT-POSITIONS EXEMPTED FROM P.S.E.A.
Mr. Barnett: 1.	What are the descriptive particulars of each of the twenty-five positions in the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development which, by P.C. 1970-120, dated January 21, 1970, are excluded from the operation of section 10 of the Public Service Employment Act and to which the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development may make appointments during the period January 21, 1970 to March 31, 1971?
2.	For what reasons has the Public Service Commission decided that it is not practicable nor in the best interests of the Public Service to apply section 10 of the Public Service Employment Act, as stated in the preamble of P.C. 1970-120?


Yves Forest: I am informed by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and by the Public Service Commission as follows: 1. All 25 positions which, by P.C. 1970-120, are ex-
22478-22}
Questions
and Welfare for its various programs, Family Allowances, Old Age Security, medical services, research etc., during the fiscal year 1968-69?
2. What are the estimated expenditures for the year 1969-1970?


Hon. John C. Munro (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: 1 and 2. The table below lists the expenditures of the Department of National Health and Welfare in the Province of Ontario for the fiscal years 1968-69, 196970. It excludes the payments made to the Province of Ontario under the various shared-cost programs administered by this Department.
1968-69	1969-701 1
$	$
126,645	73,710
658,546	572,655
6,660,569	7,209,700
189,231,474	190,556,271
25,343,412	26,693,008
1,831,600	1,494,715
550,610,467	618,514,190
774,462,713	845,114,249
eluded from the operation of Section 10 of the Public Service Employment Act are training positions to which only Indians and Eskimos may be appointed. It is expected that the positions to which the 25 Indians and Eskimos are being appointed will provide an opportunity for them to learn the administrative skills required to operate effectively at middle management positions within the Department and in provincial and Band administrations. By March 31, 1971 the 25 employees selected will move into full-time positions within the Department or in Band administration. The 25 positions are being filled by competition among Indians and Eskimos and the Public Service Commission Selection Standards apply in all cases. The salary levels are within the range $6,294-$10,162 depending upon the person and his qualifications.
2. The Public Service Commission is in full sympathy with the Government's objective of providing developmental experience to enable Indians and Eskimos to assume managerial responsibilities in the Department that has primary responsibility for native peoples, and the exclusion was made to facilitate this objective.

June 15. 1370
Questions


INFLATION-ISSUANCE OF DIRECTIVES TO PROPRIETARY CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. Forlin: 1.	Has the government issued directives to proprietary Crown corporations to participate in the governmental anti-inflationary policy and, if so, what were the directives?
2.	What steps have proprietary Crown corporations taken to fight inflation?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: 1. Yes. The directives issued by Treasury Board requested proprietary Crown Corporations to comply with the government's policy as outlined by the Prime Minister in the House of Commons on February 18, 1970, at the close of the Federal-Provincial Conference on Price Stability. Compliance was requested in respect of all domestic prices other than charges determined by statute or international agreement; charges for recovery of actual costs under existing agreements; and interest rates for the lending of money. In the case of these three items, other controls exist and are being employed selectively, where possible, to achieve the government's policy.
2. In accordance with the directives mentioned in the answer to the first part of the question and with the guidelines established for private business by the Prices and Incomes Commission, proprietary Crown Corporations are now requested to submit any proposals for essential price increases to the Prices and Incomes Commission for review under the procedure established after the Federal-Provincial Conference in February 1970.


COST OF CRTC HEARING IN OTTAWA APRIL 13 TO 22
Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian RadioTelevision Commission as follows: 1.
Rental of halls and rooms
for hearing	$9,870.00
Advertising as per Broadcasting Act Simultaneous translation		9,425.00
Equipment	$4,256.00	
Interpreters	3,937.00	8,193.00
Court reporters		4,500.00

2.	The space at the old Union Station was considered for public hearings and ruled out because it was too small and because it was already committed to some other use.
3.	Travel costs and fees-part-time members	$12,615.00.	
4.	14.	
5.	Cost of telephone March 1 to April 30/70	$4,484.54
	Cost of telegraph March 1 to April 30/70	778.12
	Cost of telex March 1 to April 30/70	402.73
	Total	$5,665.39


OLD AGE PENSIONS-ADJUSTMENT TO COST OF LIVING
Mr. Robinson: Will the federal government consider increases in the Old Age Pension in accordance with the increases in the Consumer Price Index and the 1.5% rate of inflation?

Question No. 1,855-Mr. Kees:
1.	What was the direct expense to the government of the Canadian Radio Television Commission hearing in Ottawa on April 13 to 22 inclusive-hotel, transportation, etc.?
2.	For what reasons was a hotel selected instead of a government building, such as the new facilities at the old Union Station?
3.	What were the other costs to the taxpayer for the same meeting such as travel costs, per diem of the part-time members, and an estimate of the cost of keeping the full-time members and stalls there for this period of time?
4.	How many staff members were directly involved in the hearing to the extent of spending most of their time at it during the period involved?
5.	What was the CRTC telephone, telegraph and telex bill for the period March 1 to April 30, 1970?

Hen. John C. Munro (Minisier of National Health and Welfare): Yes.


EFFECT OF BUDGET CREDIT RESTRICTION PROVISIONS ON CONSUMER DEBT
Mr. Robinson: To what extent is it anticipated that the consumer debt will be reduced by the budget credit restriction
provision?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of Finance):: I announced in the House of Commons on June 1, 1970 that the government would not be proceeding with the measures proposed in the last budget to control consumer credit.
June 15, 1970


CBC COVERAGE OF OLYMPIC COMMITTEE
Mr. Matte: Did CBC cover the meeting of the Olympic Committee held recently in Amsterdam, and, if so, did the technical crew responsible for the film sequence come from Toronto or from Montreal and for what reasons?


Gérard Pelletier: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: Yes. As a matter of convenience, European-based technical crews were used by CBC French and English services. In addition to a local Dutch crew, technical crews were sent to Amsterdam from CBC offices in London and Paris.


NATIONAL DEFENCE-DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT
Mr. Robinson: 1.	Does the Department of National Defence have data processing equipment (automatic) and, if so, for how long?
2.	What was the initial cost of the equipment?
3.	What yearly costs are anticipated for data processing in the Department?


Mr. D. W. Groos (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Defence):: 1. Yes, data processing equipment has been used since 1942; in Defence Research Board since 1956.
2.	The initial equipment was rented. Defence Research Board's records for 1956 no longer exist.
3.	In the fiscal year 1970-71 the forecast cost for data processing is estimated to be $3,287 million.


NATIONAL DEFENCE-COMPUTERS USED IN OPERATIONS
Mr. Robinson: 1.	Does the Department of National Defence have the use of a computer in its operations and, if so, to what extent is it utilized?
2.	Is the computer programmed 24 hours per day and, if not, for what reason?
3.	What is the number of hours planned for utilization of the computer?
4.	What has been the annual cost of computer services for each year 1960 to 1970 inclusive?
5.	How many programmes are in preparation for the computer at the present time and how will each affect the efficiency of the Department?


David Walter Groos: 1. The Canadian Armed Forces have many computers in operations ranging from the SAGE facility at
Questions
North Bay to guidance systems in individual weapons. The Defence Research Board also has a number of computers of varying capacity in its establishments to carry out research programs.
2, 3, 4 and 5. Since the computers used by the Canadian Armed Forces are considered to be integral parts of the systems to which they belong, them use, measured in hours per day, varies with the training programs, operations, etc. involved. Those used by Defence Research Board are considered to be tools in the research activity and are selected and used to maximize the efficiency of the research program. The costs of computer services are allotted as part of the costs of the scientific program and are not maintained as separate items.


REPAYMENT OF LOAN BY GREAT BRITAIN
Mr. Matte: Has Great Britain repaid the money borrowed from Canada during the last war and, if so, how were the repayments made?


Edgar John Benson: In 1942 Canada made an interest-free loan of $700 million to the United Kingdom. The loan represented the funding of advances made to the government of the United Kingdom in 1941 and 1942, prior to the establishment of the wartime Mutual Aid arrangements. Repayment was deferred until the end of the war, though the total outstanding was reduced both during the war and after by crediting against it the Canadian dollar proceeds of Canadian securities sold, or surrendered for redemption, by U.K. residents. After this provision came to an end in 1953, the outstanding balance of $150 million was repaid in 20 equal quarterly instalments, ending on December 1, 1958.


DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS- SEMINAR &quot;ACCESS TO INFORMATION&quot;
Mr. Coates: 1.	Was the Department of Communications involved in the arrangements for a seminar called "Access to Information" held at Carleton University on May 15?
2.	What was the purpose of the seminar, how many invitations were issued and how many attended the seminar?
3.	Was the reception associated with the seminar held before or after the actual seminar or was there a reception both before and after and, if so, what was the cost of the reception and what portion of this cost was the responsibility of the Department of Communications?

June 15, 1970
Orders for Returns
4.	What was the total cost to the Department of Communications for its involvement in this seminar?


Eric William Kierans: 1. Yes.
2.	The purpose of the seminar, taking special account of regional disparities was: a) consider ways by which telecommunications technology, systems, concepts and institutions can be developed and applied so as to approach the ideal of the optimum amount of information being made available to the maximum number of individuals, groups and institutions; b) assess the costs and benefits (economic, social) of providing such information, and the costs (economic, social) of failing to do so. 90 invitations were issued. 77 people attended.
3.	A reception was held before the seminar. There was no cost to the Department of Communications for this reception.
4.	Approximately $5,600.


QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN
Mr. Burton: 1.	Has the Department of Regional Economic Expansion under the Regional Development Incentives Act authorized or provided an incentive grant or grants to Dominion Textile Limited, Magog, Quebec, and, if so, what is the amount of each grant?
2.	Who are the directors and executive officers of Dominion Textile Limited, Magog, Quebec, and what is the address of each?
3.	To what extent is this company non-resident or foreign-owned or controlled?
. What is the name and country of the known non-resident ownership in this company?
Return tabled.


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, I
should like to inquire about starred question No. 1,907 standing in my name. The question is starred because of the urgency in acquiring the information. It relates to meetings the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development may have had with certain Indian bands. Having been in touch with some Indian people I know they would like to have the information before Parliament rises presumably at the end of this month. Could this question not be answered with some expedition?


Mr. Chretien:: Soon.


Mr. Coates:: Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member for Skeena, I also have a starred question, No. 1,203, about which I am concerned. It has to do with the Prime Minister's use of the Jet Star. In view of the fact that he now uses a Boeing 707 and since it has been most difficult to obtain information regarding the Jet Star, I am afraid that if consideration is not given to answering the question soon I will never be able to catch up on his use of the 707.


Mr. Muir (Cape Breion-The Sydneys):: Mr. Speaker, may I refer to question No. 1,530 of March 18 in my name requesting the simple information as to the fees paid to people who have been hired by the present administration in the province of Nova Scotia since June 25, 1968. It would be most interesting to have the answer to this question. Certainly I cannot see any reason for the government not wanting to disclose how much money was received by people who possibly formerly have been Liberal candidates and by others.


Mr. Macquarrie:: I should like to refer to an ancient question of January 21 regarding the SS Prince Edward Island, Now that the boat has been towed away I wonder whether someone could give us the information as to the number of tenders that were received.


David Orlikow: I should like to refer to my
question No. 1,002 of January 28, asking for the names of outside consultants, etc., hired by the Prime Minister's office or the Privy Council office, what they are doing and how much they are being paid. It is almost five months since I filed my question and I would hope that an answer could come down before the House adjourns.


Mr. Speaker:: Shall the remaining questions stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: I should like to ask a question of the Acting Prime Minister in the absence of the Minister of Consumer and Corporate
June 15. 1970	COMMONS
Affairs and the Minister of Finance. What is happening to the government's guideline program of 6 per cent with regard to wage and salary increases? Has this program been abandoned or modified or is everything going according to plan?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Acting Prime Minister):: The Prices and Incomes Commission is continuing to seek co-operation in wages as well as in prices and incomes. I hope that it has the support of my hon. friend.


Gerald William Baldwin: Sir Galahad.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: I do not think the Acting Prime Minister, in his own embarrassment, should provoke me. Does the government, instead of simply passing this off as something devised by the Prices and Incomes Commission, propose to take any measures toward encouraging the acceptance of this program which I understand it has accepted as its own?


Mitchell William Sharp: The government has accepted the recommendations of the Prices and Incomes Commission. It established it, it encourages it, it gives it all the support that it can, and I hope it has the support of my hon. friend.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Is it the position of the Acting Prime Minister and of the government that this program in its present form, with the exceptions that seem to have developed, carries conviction?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I would not think that this question is in order.



INFLATION-APPLICATION OF SIX PER CENT WAGE INCREASE GUIDELINE TO POSTAL EMPLOYEES

David Orlikow: My
question is directed to the Acting Prime Minister. In view of the wage increases announced in the past few days for teachers, firemen, iron workers and towboat workers in British Columbia, all of whom have received substantially more than 6 per cent, is it the government's intention to continue to insist that the postal workers get no more than 6 per cent?


Mitchell William Sharp: The Prices and Incomes Commission this morning issued a statement in which it said
DEBATES	8095
Inquiries of the Ministry that it is undertaking a preliminary inquiry into wage settlements ratified yesterday by Toronto construction workers, that it is proceeding to gather the facts and, after it has done so but not before, it will be making appropriate comments.



PRICES AND INCOMES COMMISSION


[Stage Direction]
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The
Islands): Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Solicitor General who I understand is Acting Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. I would like to ask him a question regarding the policy of the Prices and Incomes Commission with respect to the salaries of its own staff. Is it correct that those joining the staff of the Prices and Incomes Commission are guaranteed a 15 per cent increase over the salaries they were making prior to joining that staff and are guaranteed an annual increase in excess of the 6 per cent which the commission has laid down for others?
Hon. G. J. Mcllraiih (Acting Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I would be very glad to have the hon. member's allegation looked into and have an answer brought forward by the minister on his return to the House.


Mr. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: Will the minister undertake to have a statement made on motions by the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs, the Minister of Finance or the President of the Treasury Board some time this week so that we may have all the facts with respect to the income policy applying to the staff of the Prices and Incomes Commission?


George James McIlraith: No, Mr. Speaker, because it must be readily apparent to hon. members that any answer given should be given by way of answer to the parts of the hon. member's allegation that can be considered to be a question.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Under those circumstances, will the minister undertake that an answer will be forthcoming to my question this week?


George James McIlraith: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will try to have that done.

June 15, 1970
Inquiries of the Ministry [Translation]



NATURAL RESOURCES


Mr. Real Caoueile (Temiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion.
Does the Canadian government make any contribution to prospection of new mining resources in northwestern Quebec and northeastern Ontario?


Mr. Speaker:: I feel the hon. member's question should normally be placed on the order paper, but if the House agrees the minister might perhaps reply.


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, I shall have to inquire from the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, and perhaps also from the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce as to such prospection as might be carried out, and probably the minister under whose jurisdiction the matter comes will be able to reply to the hon. member.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Has SOQUEN, the Quebec agency, already applied for government aid for specific development.


Mr. Speaker:: The supplementary question could be placed on the order paper or dealt with at the time of adjournment.
[English}



THE CANADIAN ECONOMY


Hon. George Hees (Prince Edward-Has-iings):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Acting Prime Minister. As the statement by Dr. Young during the weekend about the 6 per cent wage guideline makes it clear that the government intends to keep the cost of labour as low as possible in its fight against inflation, is it the intention of the government to take similar steps to keep another very important cost of production, the cost of working capital, as low as possible by reimposing a ceiling on the interest rates charged on commercial loans at a level considerably below the levels of today, which are permitting the chartered banks to register record profits since the 6 per cent ceiling was removed?
[Mr. McHraith.I


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member's question contains a number of statements. He knows that a question should be a question and not a statement, but to the limited extent that the hon. member's intervention is a question perhaps it might be replied to by the minister.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I think the question that was originally put to me by the hon. member was whether the government was taking steps to bring down the cost of interest on working capital. As a result of the government's success in dealing with inflation there has been a notable reduction in interest rates, and if we continue to be successful interest rates will continue to come down, but if the hon. member wants to encourage inflation on the one hand and hopes for low interest rates on the other he will be disappointed.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister knows, I have been pressing the government for a long time to keep costs down, and I would simply-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


George Harris Hees: -I would ask him-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Would the hon. member ask a question?


George Harris Hees: Yes, Mr. Speaker. Thank you. I would ask him why it is that the government feels perfectly well satisfied to impose very stringent guidelines or restrictions on the earnings of labour when it refuses to impose any restrictions whatever on the earnings of capital?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member's question is argumentative.



INFLATION-INVESTIGATION OF BANK PROFITS BY PRICES AND INCOMES COMMISSION

Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Acting Prime Minister who has been speaking about the necessity for maintaining guidelines. In view of the fact revealed in Friday's reports that the chartered banks have chalked up an increase in their profits of 27.7 per cent for the first six months of this year, following a 26.5 per cent increase last year over the previous year, is the Prices and Incomes Commission taking any steps to investigate these high profits particularly in view of the fact that the criteria the commission established do not deal with the profits of banks?
June 15. 1970


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Can the Acting Prime Minister tell us how soon we can expect the results of this investigation?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I was talking to the chairman of the Prices and Incomes Commission this morning and he is looking into the matter immediately.



INFLATION-OPINION OF PRICES AND INCOMES COMMISSION CHAIRMAN ON CERTAIN WAGE SETTLEMENTS

George Harris Hees: In his conversation with the chairman of the Prices and Incomes Commission this morning did the Acting Prime Minister ask his opinion on these very large raises that have been put through during the weekend and what does the chairman say about them?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I do not think the hon. gentleman could have been listening to my earlier answer.


George Harris Hees: Oh yes, he was. He didn't hear any answer.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Young said it would be inappropriate to comment on the settlements until the commission has had time to examine the situation, and this advice I offer to my hon. friend.



POLLUTION


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister for Indian Affairs and Northern Development in respect of a matter which I have already raised. In view of the fact that the oil spill in the Athabasca River is moving with tremendous rapidity hundreds of miles north through the Peace and Slave Rivers and threatening the water supply of Fort Smith, will the minister get in contact with the proper authorities in the province of Alberta to arrange for a commission of inquiry as to the nature of this spill, how it happened, whether proper steps were taken to control it and what can be done to prevent a repetition of this very dangerous form of pollution?
Inquiries of the Ministry [Translation]


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, the problem has been looked into by the officials of my department. As early as Saturday morning, I communicated with Mr. Ross, Minister of the Alberta Department of Lands and Forests, to seek the co-operation of his department, and we have set up a task force headed by Mr. Stephens of the Wildlife Service to study the problem. In addition, 23 officials of the Department of National Defence have been sent on the spot, not to mention officials of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. We have obtained the co-operation of the Alberta government and hope to repair the damage as soon as possible.
With regard to the possibility of preventing the recurrence of such incidents, of course the officials concerned have been asked to look fully into the cause of that pollution and to try to give the necessary instructions to prevent a recurrence.


Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister mind explaining to the House and the country why, in as much as I raised this question two weeks ago and was told by the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources that the oil spill would be investigated and that experts would be sent there to find out the cause and to do something to prevent such spills, there has been two weeks' delay and nothing has been done to this date?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I must point out to the hon. member that the pipeline was damaged in Alberta, within the territory administered by the province. As soon as the oil reached the national park and I felt I was involved, I immediately dealt with this problem.
As far as the officials of the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources are concerned, I cannot say what they did, but I shall inquire into the matter and report to the House.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Is it because the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources has got himself into so much difficulty with the cabinet that there has been no conversation between that minister and-

June 15. 1970
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please, the hon.
member for Athabasca.


Mr. Paul Yewchuk (Athabasca):: Could the minister indicate in what way the government is co-operating with the provincial government and Great Canadian Oil Sands to handle the pollution that is occuring in view of the fact that it has been going on for nearly two weeks, outside of sending officials to the area?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It seems to me that, essentially, the hon. member has reiterated the question asked by the hon. member for Peace River.



ATHABASCA RIVER-POWERS OF INQUIRY TASK FORCE

Mr. Les Benjamin (Regina-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, in light of the answer given earlier about the appointment of a task force with which the province of Alberta has agreed to co-operate, will this task force have the power to subpoena witnesses and call evidence, and if that has not been arranged will the government be requesting the government of Alberta to agree to such a procedure?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, we have been directly in touch with the company responsible for that pipeline to inform them that they would be held responsible for the incurred damage as far as legally possible.
I wish to point out to the hon. member for Calgary North that there are over there not only government employees, but additional employees who are trying to control the damage, and we have acted as soon as it happened.



ATHABASCA RIVER-REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON DAMAGE TO WILDLIFE

Paul Yewchuk: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister whether he would be prepared to make a statement on motions, after his officials have reported, with reference to the damage done to wildlife such as waterfowl, fish and furbearing animals in the area?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, it does not seem so far that any great damage has been caused to the animals

of the area. It remains possible that the damage caused to fisheries might be quite serious, but I have received no report in that respect. As soon as I have one, I will gladly submit it to the House.



ATHABASCA RIVER-SCOPE OF TASK FORCE INQUIRY-ESTABLISHMENT OF PERMANENT BODY

Mr. G. H. Aiken (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: should like to ask a supplementary question concerning the task force that has been assigned, Mr. Speaker. Is this an ad hoc task force appointed just to look into this particular problem? If so, does the government have plans for the establishment of a more permanent and satisfactory group to deal with oil pollution problems?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I know that following other similar incidents, the Department of Transport conducted extensive studies of methods used to clean up damage caused by oil.
As far as the pipeline itself is concerned, I wish to inform the hon. member that in Inuvik, some very important experiments are going on in order to make sure that in the future pipelines will be constructed so as to make such accidents impossible.


Gordon Harvey Aiken: May I ask a further supplementary to clarify the matter, Mr. Speaker. Does the government intend to set up a body which would deal with oil pollution problems both on land and on water and not just through the Department of Transport's special task force?


Gerald William Baldwin: You had better amend your legislation; you had better change your bill pretty soon. It is out of date even before it has been applied.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I think a joint study of the problem by the various departments would certainly be appropriate, and I take due note of the recommendation of my hon. friend.



HEALTH AND WELFARE


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of National Health and Wei-
June 15, 1970

fare. In view of the great concern felt by diabetic patients in Canada as a result of reports to the effect that the drug tolbutamide, under the trade name "Orinase", has dangerous properties, is the minister yet in a position to make a statement to the House about the use of this drug in Canada?


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, this
matter has been checked into by my officers in the Food and Drug Directorate. This was a conclusion of one paper submitted at a recent conference of scientists but there are other scientists who disagree with the findings. Scientific papers on investigations conducted especially in the United Kingdom and Scandinavia would indicate contrary conclusions. We are continuing to examine all the data, but in the meantime we are far from satisfied that there is anything harmful here which would require action at this particular time. We have also been in consultation with the Canadian Diabetic Association and they feel that the protective elements of this drug are very necessary for many diabetics in this country. Until we have greater clarification on what the research is, and because it is so contradictory, we feel that it is not appropriate to take action now.


Stanley Howard Knowles: May I ask the minister whether the government of Canada is doing any monitoring of patients in Canada who are using this drug in order to determine statistics for our own use?


John Carr Munro: As far as all the scientific research that is being carried on is concerned, Mr. Speaker, we are aware of what is going on in other countries. We are not conducting research ourselves, but are relying on studies carried on in other countries. This does not mean we do not regard it as important but we do not want to duplicate the work. We are carrying on extensive research in other areas. That is the situation at the present time.


Robert Muir: A supplementary question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Are we to understand from the minister's remarks that the government does not plan to restrict or control the use of Orinase in Canada until further studies take place?


John Carr Munro: That is correct, Mr. Speaker. Several studies that have been conducted indicate quite the contrary of the adverse findings mentioned, in terms of conclusions. Until we can adequately assess the contradic-
Inquiries of the Ministry tions, we do not feel that action is warranted. Many benefits are derived from the use of this particular drug.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):: My
question is for the Acting Prime Minister in his position as Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of the fact that the federal government has not lent more than $500 million to the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority and the Seaway Authority is unable even to pay the interest charges on this government loan, has the government or the minister been involved in any recent discussions with United States officials concerning any joint action that might be taken to put the seaway on a sound financial footing?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest to the hon. member that this question, although it is important and may be urgent, is the type of question that should normally be placed on the Order Paper. If there is urgency the hon. member might wish to give the Chair notice and I will see that it is given priority for consideration at the time of adjournment.


HEALTH AND WELFARE
Mr. R. R. Souiham (Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain):: My question is for the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Is the minister in a position to answer the questions I directed to him on May 4 and May 20? On June 3 the minister indicated he expected an answer shortly. I refer to the allegations by Mr. Roy Daniels with respect to the Indian people who are alleged to have died because of water pollution in the community of Rae in the Northwest Territories.


John Carr Munro: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The nature of that particular situation was due to the fact that there was no top soil. The environment was such that the pollution could not be corrected. Measures have been implemented for that particular community to be moved to another area some miles away from its present location where they will not be subject to this type of risk.

June 15. 1970
Inquiries of the Ministry ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


DEPORTATION OF DESERTERS FROM U.S. ARMED FORCES-TABLING OF REPORT ON INVESTIGATION
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford):: My question is for the Solicitor General. Has the government completed its investigation with respect to complaints made against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police concerning the alleged handing over of three United States deserters to the American authorities? If so, can the minister indicate to the House in general terms the result of that investigation?


George James McIlraith: As
the hon. member knows, Mr. Speaker, a commissioner was appointed pursuant to the Inquiries Act by the three departments directly concerned, the Department of the Solicitor General, the Department of Manpower and Immigration and the customs department. The commissioner presented a report on Friday. I hope to consult with my colleagues who participated in the appointment regarding this report. The report will be translated and copies made available to the House.


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: In view of the fact there is considerable interest in this matter, can the minister indicate when the report might be tabled? The second part of my original question was whether the minister could give the House an idea as to the result of the investigation?


George James McIlraith: Mr. Speaker, I do not think it would be fair to reveal any of the contents of the investigation until the report is tabled in the House. One of the difficulties is that each minister has only one copy of the report. Additional copies will have to be made and the report translated before it can be tabled in the House. I hope that can be done very quickly.


AVAILABILITY OF INTERIM REPORT OF LE DAIN COMMISSION TO OPPOSITION PARTIES ON CONFIDENTIAL BASIS
Frank Howard: My question is directed to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. It is prompted in part by the commitment on Friday morning by the Prime Minister to table the interim report of the LeDain Commission and also the Prime Minister's statement that he hoped the opposition parties will be in a position to make a declaration of their position on the interim report [Mr. Munro.l
as quickly as the government. In light of that, is the minister prepared, in the period until the report is tabled, to make the interim report available on a confidential basis to the opposition parties so that we will have the same amount of time to examine the report?


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, I think the government's position with respect to the LeDain Commission report is well known. As stated by the Prime Minister and earlier by myself, the decision as to when the document will be made public, if indeed it is to be made public will be made by cabinet as soon as possible.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


George Harris Hees: Trudeau said it would. You are starting to weasel already.


John Carr Munro: I am not starting to weasel. I am indicating that as of this moment the government has not made a decision to table the report. I estimate that the matter will be taken under consideration this week. With regard to the cabinet's decision I am referring more to the timing of the tabling of the report. I believe the Prime Minister indicated it would quite probably be made public.


An hon. Member:: Be made public?


John Carr Munro: I think the preoccupation of the opposition is that it be made public as soon as possible. That type of decision has not yet been officially made.


Frank Howard: A supplementary question. Is the Minister of National Health and Welfare aware of what the Prime Minister said on Friday, namely, "I can give the House the assurance that the report will be tabled?"


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Frank Howard: We are aware of everything that the minister has said and I again ask whether he is prepared to make the report available to the opposition parties on a confidential basis so that the opposition parties will have a similar amount of time to examine the report and make their positions known at the time the report is tabled?


John Carr Munro: I think it is fair to say that when the Prime Minister made that statement he hoped and expected that the opposition would take a position on the paper as quickly
June 15. 1970	COMMONS DEBATES	8101
Inquiries of the Ministry
as the government does. I judge that would would not give instructions that are, if I am be very soon indeed, judging from the atti- correct in the inference I have drawn, con-tude of the opposition.	trary to the law.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


John Carr Munro: The government certainly has had very little time indeed to study the report.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


MARIJUANA-INSTRUCTIONS TO CROWN PROSECUTORS RESPECTING CHARGES IN LIGHT OF LE DAIN COMMISSION INTERIM REPORT
Eldon Mattison Woolliams: wish to direct my supplementary question to a minister who will give an answer we can understand, namely, the Solicitor General.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: In view of the minister's knowledge of what is in the LeDain Commission report, are special instructions being given to those Crown prosecutors who look after prosecutions under the federal jurisdiction with regard to young men and women involved in marijuana charges, in light of the recommendations of the LeDain Commission and in light of the bill the Minister of Justice has introduced with regard to bail, because many of these young people will remain in jail over the holidays?


George James McIlraith: am sure the hon. member does not want me to give him indirectly the contents of the LeDain Commission report in answer to a question phrased in that manner.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I guess the Solicitor General has fallen into the same habit as the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Possibly I can make my question a little clearer. Will the Solicitor General issue special instructions to the Crown prosecutors who receive their instructions from his office on charges involving marijuana, particularly with reference to those people who cannot raise the money for bail?


George James McIlraith: I find it a little difficult to answer the hon. member's question. He is suggesting that I give instructions to Crown prosecutors in some way, by inference, contrary to the law. First, the Solicitor General does not give instructions to Crown prosecutors at any time. Second, even if I were the minister with authority to instruct them I


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: A further supplementary. Can the minister explain why some of the special Crown prosecutors in Calgary allege to defence counsel that they get that kind of instruction?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
Robert Muir: My question is for the Acting Prime Minister. In view of the statement made by the Minister of Labour on Saturday to the effect that the provincial premiers have apparently given assurances that they will take whatever steps are necessary to curb inflation, including rent control, will the Acting Prime Minister say whether assurances have been received from all provincial premiers that this will be done?


Mitchell William Sharp: The hon. member's question is based on
a very truncated version of what the Minister of Labour said. I obtained a transcript of what he said on the air and it was not as alleged by the hon. member. He said: "I presume-I wasn't there; I don't know what Dr. Young discussed but I am sure he came away satisfied." He made it quite clear that he was not there, that he was just talking from a presumption, and he did not know.


Robert Muir: May
I ask the Acting Prime Minister, who is undoubtedly in communication with Dr. Young, whether all the premiers said that they might take such steps and, if so, when might this take place?


Mitchell William Sharp: I would have to take the question as notice and ask Dr. Young or someone who was there. I was not there myself.


Robert Muir: Can
the hon. gentleman say whether it is now government policy to press for rent controls and other controls on a nationwide basis as part of its war against inflation?


Mitchell William Sharp: I am sure it is the view of all members of this House that if a prices and incomes policy is to be put into effect successfully there must be restraint in all directions.

June 15, 1970
Inquiries of the Ministry Therefore the government does support in general the idea that all forms of income and prices and so on should be restrained. To this extent we support the Prices and Incomes Commission. If the hon. member asks me directly whether the provinces have agreed to apply a certain kind of restraint in the areas over which they have control, I would have to take the question as notice.


INDIAN AFFAIRS
Mr. Thomas S. Barnett (Comox-Alberni):: have a question for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. In view of the statement the Prime Minister made to Indian leaders recently in Ottawa that the government would not force the white paper policy on the Indian people, has a decision been taken to cancel the appointment of the Indian claims commissioner appointed to inquire into certain matters affecting Indian claims?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, the policy we suggested a year ago was based on proposals. We do not intend to force anything on the Indians.
I wish to point out to the hon. member that this commissioner was appointed after the Indians had set up their own inquiry committee headed by Chief Delisle of Caughnawaga which is responsible to the Indians although it is financed by the government. On the other hand, Mr. Barber is responsible to the government. His contribution is aimed at clearing up the matter, so that the discussion will be more open when each party knows whether or not the contracts have been adhered to.


ACTION TO DEAL WITH CLAIMS OF NON-TREATY INDIANS
Gerald William Baldwin: I should
like to ask the minister whether the government intends to do anything at all to deal with the legitimate and real claims of the Indian and Eskimo people in northern Quebec, in the Northwest Territories and in British Columbia with regard to resources and lands which they claim to be theirs?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. 
Speaker, as far as New Quebec is concerned, I had the opportunity to discuss this matter personally with the provincial authorities. A tripartite committee, composed of representatives of the federal government, the provincial government and the Indians, was set up to look into this problem.
As regards the Northwest Territories, those are obligations now being studied by Commissioner Barber.
With respect to the rights of non-treaty
British-Columbia Indians, they brought their troubles themselves before the Supreme Court of Canada.


POST OFFICE
Mr. Mark MacGuigan (Windsor-Walker-ville):: My question is for the Minister of Communications. In light of the fact that residents of the city of Windsor have received mail only once since the current postal negotiations began, can the minister advise the House when normal postal service will be restored in Windsor?


Eric William Kierans: I am
extremely sorry that there is not normal postal service in Windsor. At the present time the unions are attempting to dictate to the Post Office the terms under which casual employees will be engaged. We regret that we cannot accept this kind of dictation. We realize that the service is diminishing-in fact it is bleeding to death in Windsor-but until the unions accept the fact that the Post Office will itself determine who is needed to sort and carry the mail there is nothing that can be done.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: May
I ask the minister when, in his opinion, mail delivery service was normal in any part of
Canada?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Mr. Speaker:: I have the impression that the question is argumentative.




Mr.  R. Gordon L. Fairweather@Fundy-Royal: I have a question for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can he tell us
June 15, 1970

whether we can expect the white paper on foreign affairs to be tabled within the next week or so? I am advised that the gestation period of the document outstrips even that of an elephant.


Mitchell William Sharp: The period of gestation is over now and we are only waiting for delivery from the Queen's Printer.


Mr. Fairweather:: That, of course, does not answer my question. Will the delivery date be within the next few days? We want the report for light summer reading.


Mitchell William Sharp: Present plans are to provide copies for light summer reading. We expect to be able to table the review before the House rises.


REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION
Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: wish to direct a question to the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion. Has he received a proposal from the government of Newfoundland for a $1 billion long-term development program based on a white paper recently presented by that government to the Newfoundland legislature?


Jean Marchand: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Speaker. I can inquire of the department whether we have received such a request.


James Aloysius McGrath: May I ask what additional initiatives his department is taking to bring about regional economic expansion in light of the government's new policy and the new finances available?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I suggest to the hon. member that this information would normally be given by way of a general statement to the House on motions. I do not think it would be in order for the minister to give this kind of information now.


INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY
Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: My
question is for the Acting Prime Minister. Was the Prime Minister stating government policy in Vancouver yesterday when he was asked whether he would introduce more liberal abortion laws if the opposition agreed to it, and he replied that he would?


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!
Inquiries of the Ministry PENITENTIARIES


ST. VINCENT DE PAUL-INVESTIGATION OF SUICIDE OF JACQUES BOUCHER
Mr. Robert McCleave (Halifax-East Hants):: My question is for the Solicitor General. May I ask whether he has caused to be completed the inquiry into the death of a 16-year old boy by suicide at St. Vincent de Paul penitentiary as promised by him on May 27 and as reported in Hansard at page 7388, and will he report to the House thereon?


George James McIlraith: regret that the inquiry or investigation I was making into that case is not yet completed. I will see that an answer is brought forward.




Mr. Steven E. Paproski (Edmonton Centre):: My question is addressed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. In view of Canada's deteriorating position in the Caribbean, will the government give consideration to calling a full-scale conference on Caribbean policy this summer?


Mitchell William Sharp: No, Mr. Speaker, there is no intention of calling a conference this summer but we have in mind calling one at an appropriate time.


Steve Eugene Paproski: In addition to dealing with the sugar rebate issue, will the agenda of such a conference deal with tourism, development assistance and immigration?


Mitchell William Sharp: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I should think that a conference of this kind would have a very broad agenda including the items mentioned by the hon. member.


LABOUR CONDITIONS
Mr. Barry Mather (Surrey):: I have a question related to one which was asked a little earlier, Mr. Speaker, in connection with the very high profits of the chartered banks. I would direct it to either the Minister of Labour or to his Parliamentary Secretary. Considering the multi-million dollar profits being made by the banks and the fact that an estimated 8,000 bank employees have been working for less than the newly established minimum rate of $1.65 an hour, will the department concerned look into what appears to be a reprehensible situation?
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


RIGHTS RESPECTING CONTINENTAL SHELF OFF ISLAND OF ST. PIERRE
Mr. Waller C. Carter (SI. John's West):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has the government taken a decision yet to go to the International Court of Justice to determine our rights over the continental shelf off the French island of St. Pierre?


Mitchell William Sharp: No decision has yet been
taken, Mr. Speaker. The matter of the conflict between the French government and ourselves is still under discussion.


LABOUR CONDITIONS
John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. Would the minister inform the House whether or not the TAB benefits for the auto workers, due to expire at the end of this month, have been extended?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I will have to check whether an announcement has been made or not during my absence.


Mr. Speaker:: Orders of the day.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


Mr. Rene Matte (Champlain) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, in view of the government's inability to effectively combat the frightening increase in the public debt, the public sector of the Canadian economy, including the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards should be financed by direct interest-free loans from the Bank of Canada, repayable at the rate of the depreciation on the assets thus created.
He said: Mr. Speaker, it is a principle universally accepted by orthodox economists and applied by all governments that government expenditures can only be financed by charges and taxes or, still, by means of loans which fMr. Mather.]
finally turn into taxes when it comes to paying the interest on the amounts borrowed and paying back the capital.
The federal government, the provincial governments, the municipal administrations and the school boards need money to administer themselves, to pay their civil servants, to finance public works, public services, to build roads and bridges, schools, universities and hospitals. Now, since governments have no money, they must get it somewhere, in the taxpayer's pocket, by imposing sales taxes, excise duties, through the delivery of licences to individuals; they must also get money from the public by selling natural resources, by making 'a profit in Crown corporations such as the liquor boards, for instance.
The profits of public undertakings do not amount to much in terms of income for the governments, because most of them lose money instead of making profits.
The sale of natural resources is only a temporary source of revenue: it is a source of income only at the time of the sale or as long as those natural resources exist.
As for the royalties paid to the governments which concede certain rights to industries or individuals, they are nothing but deferred taxes, taxes paid to the government by the companies and the individuals which are then passed on to the buyers of the products when the transactions are made within the country.
Government loans are deferred taxes which will be paid by the taxpayers in five or ten years. They are taxes other generations will have to pay. And to pay the interest on those loans, taxes will have to be levied which, in many cases, will be greater than the value of the goods and services purchased through the loans.
To give you some idea of the amounts the taxpayers must pay in interest only on public debts, I will quote you statistics on certain elements of the public debt in Quebec.
As of March 31, 1969, the public debt in the province of Quebec amounted to $2,022,858,854. The interest on that debt was $120,507,300 or $330,157 per day.
The Quebec Hydro, as at December 31, 1967, had a debt of $2,213,263,653; the interest amounted to $120,538,440 or a daily interest of $330,242. The figures for 1968 reveal the equivalent of a daily interest payment of $700,000.
In 1969-70, the Quebec government borrowed $318 million at a 9 per cent interest
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
rate, which means an annual interest of $28,620,000, or $78,411 per day.
The 1,652 Quebec municipalities, with a $2,083 million debt, pay $232,470,000 in interest, or $636,904 per day.
According to the Union of the county councils, school boards, including the CEGEPs and regional schools, hospitals and universities have an overall debt of $4 billion. Therefore those organizations must pay an interest of $250 million, or $684,931 per day.
[DOT] (3:10 p.m.)
Thus, Mr. Speaker, the overall debt of the province of Quebec amounts to $10,637,122,507, on which the Quebec taxpayers pay an interest of $2,060,645 per day.
I do not intend to linger unduly on the debt problem in Canada. I will merely point out that since 1867, the gross debt as well as the net debt have steadily increased in Canada.
Here are a few examples of the total debt of the federal administration for a few given years. In 1867, Canada's total debt was $93,046,051. In 1900, it went up to about $346 million. In 1933, it had already reached some $3 billion; it increased to $9,228 million in 1943 to finally reach $32,924,170,000 in 1968.
But these loans, as I mentioned, are but differed taxes which some day the taxpayers will have to pay. If we succeed in decreasing the public debt, it will be because the government will go and get that money in the taxpayers' pockets. And if the government does not succeed in decreasing the public debt, the taxpayers will be called upon to pay taxes all through their lifetime just to pay the interest.
Taxes, taxes and more taxes. We have personal income tax, corporate income tax, taxes on dividends, federal taxes, provincial taxes, municipal taxes, school taxes.
Any manufactured item carries a 12 per cent federal tax. The Ontario government adds a five per cent tax while the Quebec government adds an 8 per cent tax. Thus, for a simple item which costs $1.35 at the manufacturing level, if the seller adds 30 per cent for his profit, the sales price will be $1.98 including the federal tax.
In Quebec, if you add the 8 per cent sales tax, the item will cost $2.14 to the consumer.
Every province, except Alberta, applies a direct sales tax. The hidden tax on the sale represents on the average about 7 per cent of the retail value of the products to which it applies. Since the provincial tax is added on
DEBATES	8105
Suggested Interest-free Loans to the federal sales tax, we are having tax over tax to which other surcharges are often added.
There are also many other taxes: tax on land, tax on meals, tax on cigarettes, tax on alcoholic beverages, tax on estates, taxes on entertainment, crop insurance premiums, medicare premiums, unemployment insurance contributions, taxes on airplane tickets. Taxes, Mr. Speaker, taxes everywhere.
And taxes keep rising. Here is how taxes and other revenues of the Canadian government have increased during certain years.
In 1926, with a gross national product of $5,146 million, government revenues totalled $867 million or 16.8 per cent of the GNP.
In 1950, for instance, with a GNP of $17,955 million, government revenues amounted to $4,634 million or 25.8 per cent of the GNP.
In 1968, with a GNP of $71,454 million total government revenues at all levels reached $24,727 million or 34.6 per cent of the GNP.
And that is just the beginning because, according to the white paper on tax reform, the federal government intends to draw another $630 million annually from the pockets of Canadian taxpayers, five years after the new tax system has been implemented.
Such is the situation today and such will it be tomorrow if Canadian citizens do not require from their governments to find other sources for the financing of social capital. Such a situation will last for ever unless the government should finance without interest social capital used for the development of the social projects of the federal government and the financing of the activities of provincial governments, municipal services and school boards.
People will say that taxes are necessary. Indeed, they are, as long as we yield to the financial rules which keep them necessary. However, these rules are no part of the Decalogue nor of God's commandments. They were established by men, and other men may change them, if they decide to do so.
We, from the Ralliement Creditiste, state positively that we can do without running into public debts and without taxes, without giving up developments and public services, without inflation or deflation, while providing an adequate distribution of the purchasing power among the members of the community. But to realize that, a certain condition has to be fulfilled first: a change in the operation of the financial system.
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans
What sort of change do we have in mind? A very simple one, and nobody could possibly deny its worth: let finance reflect hard facts; let finance be a servant, not a master; let finance be a flexible and useful tool, instead of a tyrannical one which can only paralyze.
That is why, Mr. Speaker, I have had the honour to move this motion which has been read at the beginning of my remarks, and which I want to read again:
That, in the opinion of this house, in view of the government's inability to effectively combat the frightening increase in the public debt, the public sector of the Canadian economy, including the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards should be financed by direct interest-free loans from the Bank of Canada, repayable at the rate of the depreciation on the assets thus created.
Mr. Speaker, before concluding my remarks, I wish to remind the House that the present inflation and rising interest rates actually make even still heavier for the taxpayers the burden of taxes and public debts, due to the higher interests the governments and public bodies have to pay.
In this respect, let me recall what Mr. Louis Rasminsky, Governor of the Bank of Canada, said in the brief he submitted to the Standing Committee on Finance, Trade and Economic Affairs on July 3 last. I shall quote from page 2749 of No. 55 of the minutes of proceedings and evidence of the said committee:
One of the casualties of a prolonged period of inflation is the market for long-term debt obligations. This is because investors become increasingly reluctant to commit their funds in such a form even at progressively higher interest rate levels. Private corporations who wish to raise long-term funds can try to combat this trend by offering equity participation, often in the form of convertible debentures, but this option is not open to government-federal, provincial or municipal- or to buyers or to publicly-owned utilities who must rely on debt financing to cover their borrowing requirements. It is social capital formation rather than private capital formation which must bear the brunt of the harm done to the long-term capital market by inflation.
In his evidence before the Committee on Banking and Credit of the United States House of Representatives on June 21, 1969, during hearings on the increase of the prime rate by the banks, the governor of Maryland, the hon. Marvin Mandell, after having listed the requirements of cities and education, the housing needs of small wage-earners, the need for health care, prisons, rehabilitation of criminals, transportation and roads, pollution control, etc. stated that the Maryland

government was forced to give up some plans needed by the people.
He referred at that time to an article published in the June 21, 1969 issue of the Washington Post pointing out that several states and cities of the United States were no longer able to sell their bonds, and that certain issues had to be cancelled. Among others he gave the example of the cities of Pittsburgh and Dallas, which had received no offer for school bond issues, while the state of Maryland had cancelled the floating of $59.8 million worth of bonds.
Mr. Speaker, this is also happening in Canada, and that is why, for instance, the Union of Mayors and Municipalities is proposing that a bank be set up to provide for municipal bonds.
It can thus be rightfully implied that it is the social capital, in short, the social projects of all governments which are being scrapped due to the shortage of credit and high interest rates.
That is why, Mr. Speaker, we think that we are justified in proposing that the sums required for the public projects of the federal and provincial governments, of school boards, be financed through interest-free loans granted by the Bank of Canada.
[DOT] (3:20 p.m.)


Mr. Max Saltsman (Waterloo):: I should like to congratulate my friends in the Social Credit Party. Although I cannot support their motion I can sympathize with their sentiments and it is for this reason I rise now to discuss the present financial system. In a way they have a very understandable grievance because anyone who has been an objective observer over the years and who has observed our financial institutions as well as our way of financing public works over the years, surely has been appalled at the stupidity of the conventional method of financing. This type of financing causes the cry against the establishment, and it is one that has a long history. The cry arises from seeing poverty in the midst of plenty, and seeing waste when there are so many things that are needed by the people. I recall that during the depression years there were many people who wanted to work and there were all sorts of needs that had to be fulfilled, yet the government was not able to match the two together. Later, when the war started it suddenly became possible for this nation to make an enormous expenditure.
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans they be for municipal financing or for low cost housing, and have the banks work in the direction of this policy. This could be done by the government imposing a profit level on the banks, restricting the spread between what they pay for money and what they charge for money. The interest rate could continue at its present level for those areas of low priority but for the things which we think are fundamental and important to an intelligent, humane civilization, the banks would have to provide funds at low interest rates. This is not as far out as it sounds and that it why, as I said, although I cannot support the Social Credit motion-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Max Saltsman: -I sympathize very much with my hon. friends' sense of injustice, with what they want to do. However, I cannot give them anything more than sympathy until they see things a little more clearly. I understand what they are trying to do, and I appreciate what they are trying to do, but they think you can have something for nothing.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Max Saltsman: What always disturbs me is that the Social Credit party postures as the great defender of the little businessman, and at the same time it wants interest-free money. But there is a mechanism involved. They cannot have both. They cannot have low interest rates for the private sector, and interest free money in the public sector.


Mr. Gauthier:: You are all mixed up.


Max Saltsman: There appears to be a difference of opinion, Mr. Speaker, and that is why I cannot support their motion. I have listened very carefully to the Social Credit party spokesmen but after all these years of listening to them I remain unconvinced. Perhaps their advocates are not as persuasive as they might be. Perhaps some day they will have an advocate who will be persuasive. I think there is an inherent flaw in their theory. They try to walk on both sides of the fence and the result is that what starts off as a laudable outlook with regard to some of the problems in our society, becomes discredited because of the lack of thought attached to it.
Let us take a look at the smart boys in government, the people who deride Social Credit theory, who cannot see the germ of truth that exists in it, and who try to dismiss it. The exception, of course, was Hon. Walter

Gordon, the former finance minister, who turned out to be a supporter of the Social Credit party when he voted with them on one occasion. Let us look at how intelligently these smart boys are approaching this problem. They start off by saying, "We have a great problem in this country. Inflation is a terrible problem. We are going to pull out all the stops and do something about inflation. The way to tackle this problem of inflation is to create unemployment." They all sat there in great, solemn convocation, and reached this earth-shattering conclusion, despite all the evidence that the causes of inflation are external to Canada. Virtually all of our inflation is inherited because of our close association with the United States and, in fact there is very little we can do about it The most draconian methods will only create a marginal effect on inflation in Canada so long as the United States pursues its insane policies in Viet Nam. Despite this evidence which is coming from virtually every major economist in the country, the great and solemn conclave over there creates unemployment.
Unemployment is not a costless thing. I would not mind them having a little fun, a little pleasure in playing games, if it did not cost the nation too much. But it is a very expensive little game that they are playing with the lives of the Canadian people and with the future of our economy, because we have over 500,000 unemployed people now. I made inquiry of the ministry as to what unemployment was costing Canada. I wish to quote from a return that was given me on March 2, 1970. I asked this question:
1.	In its economic planning, does the government attempt to assess the cost to the economy of different amounts of unemployment and of different degrees of inflation and, if so, what techniques are used in calculating these costs?
2.	Does the government compare the cost of inflation and unemployment in deciding what fiscal and monetary policies to use?
3.	What is the cost of having an additional one per cent of the labour force unemployed?
The great geniuses on the other side of the House, who are charged with the responsibility of running the government, thought about this for a considerable time, and then in the great parliamentary tradition answered my question as follows:
1.	The Department of Finance maintains a continuing analysis of the economic situation and outlook with a view to assessing likely trends in the economy, including movements in prices and unemployment. A wide variety of techniques is used, including surveys, statistical and econometric anal-
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
ysis and qualitative appraisal. The results of these various studies are brought together in formulating judgments as to likely developments.
I wonder whether the ghost of a former secretary of state for external affairs walked through the walls while that was being typed.
2.	In deciding upon fiscal and monetary policies, the government and the Bank of Canada consider many objectives such as those pertaining to economic growth, stability, regional disparities as well as employment and prices.
I must apologize, Mr. Speaker, if I am just too dense to understand what they meant by that.
3.	It is not possible to give a definitive reply to this hypothetical question without detailing the underlying economic environment, including inter alia, the level and distribution of unemployment by region and occupation, movements of prices, the distribution of the national income, the phase of the business cycle, developments in capital markets and trends in savings and investment. There are available publicly a number of studies which relate changes in the rate of unemployment to changes in GNP. These studies have been based largely upon observations of past events, especially during periods of relative price stability. They show varying results depending on the time period chosen and other assumptions.
[DOT] (3:40 p.m.)
In that last bit they used a little Latin, which is very impressive. It is easy to see why the opposition is so enlightened when it gets replies of this kind from the government. Other people have been working on this problem and they are inclined to be a little less obtuse than the bright boys in government. The studies I have seen would seem to indicate that with the present rate of unemployment we are losing over 8 per cent of our gross national product. This is not an insignificant percentage when one calculates that we are talking about $7 billion a year lost in terms of potential output in this economy. I wonder how the government balances this against their marginal joy at the slight decline in the cost of living.
What does this amount of unemployment mean in terms of revenue? It represents a 15 per cent shortfall in government revenues, and here we are talking about close to $2 billion At a time when people are concerned about rising taxation, at a time when there is such a need in our society to help old age pensioners, to do something for war veterans, to stimulate housing, it is shameful and criminal to have a government act in this way and to virtually destroy the economy.
The only thing that saves us, Mr. Speaker, is that this country is so rich, so resilient that
DEBATES	8109
Suggested Interest-free Loans even the worst attempts of the government cannot destroy an essentially buoyant nation and a buoyant people. If it were not for that, we would be suffering even more.
What have they accomplished? We have been through periods of national crisis before. We have been asked to tighten our belts and do without things. When there is some purpose in adopting these methods and they can be shown to be necessary and effective, then even these terrible figures that I have quoted would have some justification. But this cannot be shown in the present case. They have not succeeded in even denting the problem of inflation. They were told time and time again that they would not succeed, so their little game has been played out and has given fantastic hardship to the people; it has held back the economy. It has prevented us from creating the housing we need and from giving some social justice to pensioners whose condition worsens as the years go by. While the government is preoccupied with fighting inflation the pensioner's standard of living is declining.
Things do not have to be this way, Mr. Speaker. With full employment, government revenues would have been more than adequate to take care of the problems of the poor and the needy in our society. But the just society has been aborted by policies which are senseless and which cannot be justified.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I hesitate to interrupt the hon. member but I am informed his time has expired. He can continue with the agreement of the House, however. Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: There is unanimous agreement, so the hon. member can continue his interesting remarks.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Well put, Mr. Speaker.


Max Saltsman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I just need a few moments to conclude. The government is now coming to the conclusion that the policy has been a failure, that the policy has not been working and probably will not work. Like the characters in the old film serial, The Perils of Pauline, they have escaped from one cliff only to be found hanging from another. They have decided to bring in a policy of wage restraint which is to apply only to the wage and salary earners of this country. As in the case of their previous
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans policy, they are now being told by everyone who is concerned about the problem, that it will not work and that it is unfair. If it is unfair it will not work in our society because it will not be accepted. The government has been told repeatedly that any policy of restraint must apply equally to all sectors of the economy. In a democracy, unless something is accepted as fair and workable, it will eventually have to be withdrawn.
I welcome the opportunity provided by the members of the Social Credit Party to put before this House some ideas for change, Mr. Speaker. I am glad to join with my friends in the Social Credit Party in denouncing what we think has been an insane financial attitude on the part of the bright boys of this country.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, the motion now before the House, introduced by my colleague the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte), clearly lays down a basic creditiste tenet, Which is to make financially possible what is physically attainable, in a country like ours.
Recently, the provincial Ministers of Finance met in Winnipeg to discuss taxation and monetary matters, but within the framework of our present financial system.
When we ask to make financially possible what is physically attainable, we are making no crazy suggestion, since, in the past, such a principle has been applied. I am referring to wartime or national emergency periods, as they were called. In wartime, when they were told about national emergency, people never asked whether the necessary credits existed.
When we had to manufacture guns and other deadly weapons, to enlist young people 18 years old or over, to withdraw from the consumer goods production sector 800,000 young workers during the Second World War, to provide them with clothing, food and adequate housing, we never wondered whether Canada could make financially possible what was physically attainable.
e (3:50 p.m.)
And as soon as it is peacetime, it usually takes 10, 15 or 20 years to reach a situation as the one we are experiencing now, when every province is near exhaustion, when municipalities are impotent, when several school boards can no longer pay their teachers, with the federal government suggesting as a solution: Tighten your belts, stop spending your

money, even though the number of unemployed may increase considerably.
Mr. Speaker, because of the present financial policy, there are a total of 545,000 unemployed in Canada. In addition, more than
600,000	students are looking for summer jobs and we cannot give them any. The federal government may very well say: We are going to use 35,000 or 40,000 of them, but what about the remaining 550,000 or 600,000?
Mr. Speaker, the Finance ministers, particularly that of Quebec-that is the new Quebec Prime Minister-got back to their respective provinces saying:	Ottawa has
granted us $100 million, $50 million of which should have been turned over only next year. But what does represent $100 million for the administration of the province of Quebec? A drop in the ocean! You could not even pay the annual interest on the provincial debt with it! And the Prime Minister was pleased to announce that he had come back to Quebec with his hands full. But the unemployed are still "filling the frame" of Quebec's economic activity.
Mr. Speaker, the financial question is of prime importance. We suggest that interest-free loans should be granted to the public sector in Canada, namely to municipalities, school boards, provincial governments as well as to the federal government which does not have the necessary funds, even if it has the necessary authority to enact the monetary reform or the mobilization of the whole monetary system for the benefit of the Canadian people, in order to liberate Canada, the provinces and the municipalities.
As soon as we say this we are accused of wanting inflation. But when we granted interest-free credit to other countries, did this create inflation in this country? When, quite recently, the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) offered Malaysia $50 million in interest-free Canadian investments for the development of a power plant, did the Malaysians complain that this would create inflation in their country? And if the same thing were done for Quebec, Ontario or any other province, this would create inflation.
When, because of the system, the former premier of Quebec had to borrow $50 million from the United States, these $50 million did not exist in the province of Quebec before the loan. They were borrowed from the United States at a 10 per cent interest rate for 25 years. In 25 years, we will have payed out $125 million in interests and we will still owe $50 million in capital, i.e. $175 million in all!
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
The hon. member for Waterloo (Mr. Salts-man) does not understand that. No one has mentioned that it caused inflation. We will have to pay $175 million for $50 million received. Neither the Prime Minister nor any other federal cabinet minister have protested against this shameful abuse, nobody mentioned that it was causing inflation in the province of Quebec. If the province, instead of borrowing from the United States, had used the services of the Bank of Canada to produce the same amount of $50 million, interest-free, would that have caused inflation? Of course not. Some members of the federal Parliament have no gray matter between their ears. We hear a lot about inflation, but is the Bank of Canada short of ink or pens? Does not Mr. Rasminsky know how to count anymore? We are afraid of creating inflation by calling upon the Bank of Canada, while the fear of inflation miraculously disappears when we borrow money from our friends, the Americans.
As private enterprise is profit-earning, it can put up with our financial structures, pay interest while making profits, which is normal. But that public institutions such as the federal, provincial and municipal governments as well as the school boards should have to pay interests when they do not operate on profit, that is a mathematical impossibility. It is illogical on the part of the central government to allow such a situation with regard to provinces, municipalities and school boards.
Quebec or Ontario, in order to build low cost houses-not at $150 a month for a worker who earns $5,000 a year or at $135 or $125 a month for people who earn from
4,000	to 5,000 a year, which they cannot afford-needs from $50 to $500 million. Houses are built and then families are told: regardless of the size of your family, take this house.
Instead of building houses according to the needs of families, an attempt is made to cut families down to the size of the house. It is quite sensible. Four-room houses are built for families with ten children. A fine sight!
My friend, the hon. member for Hull (Mr. Isabelle), smiles when I talk about that, but he knows. In Hull, we see it every day. Large families are living in small houses. That is why the federal government and the Minister of Justice (Mr. Turner) work at bringing in abortion bills so as to control the birth-rate, to prevent human beings from coming into the world and to cut down families to the size
DEBATES	8111
Suggested Interest-free Loans of houses built by the government. Those are the logical consequences of the present system.
I understand the position of the Minister of Justice. Families must be cut down because it is impossible to enlarge houses. Lumber and other materials are lacking. Contractors and workers are lacking. The minister is smiling. And he is right. That system is so stupid. They do nothing to change it, smiling all the while, as the Minister of Justice is doing. They smile, put they stand pat.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


David Réal Caouette: If the province of Quebec needs $500 million at once to build dwellings, the Bank of Canada does not issue that amount on the spot, by putting that money in circulation, but according to the work done, at the rate the work is completed. If during one month $500,000 worth of dwellings have been erected, the Bank of Canada issues a credit of $500,000 to be paid back in "x" years according to the depreciation of those dwellings. Then a man would not have to pay twice or three times for his house. As regards my small house in Hull, the Mutual Life agreed to underwrite my mortgage and in six years I have not yet managed to reduce the capital debt by $1,000. My payments amount to $1,500 a year, most of it in interests. In one year, I pay $90 or $100 on the capital, the rest goes for interests and insurance.
I am forced to pay for three houses. The Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has published official figures concerning payments on a $22,000 house with a 9 or 9J per cent mortgage over 35 or 40 years. In the end, the $22,000 house will cost $99,000.
[DOT] (4:00 p.m.)
And that is inflation. It is not just an ajust-ment, it is not the true reflection of our opportunities.
So, the provincial government-to come back to my example-would refund the loan in so many years following the fall in value of the houses which have been built and we could give accommodation to our people. We could have houses to sell, thus allowing the small wage earners to have their own homes which is simply impossible in the present circumstances, under the system now prevailing.
The government has to come to grips with this system. It expresses wishes for it is anxious to see an end to inflation. However, those who are at the roots of inflation are
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans encouraged in every way. In fact, under the present financial system we have to pay two or three times whatever we achieve, as for instance Hydro-Quebec.
In Manitoba, under the New Democratic Party, they have done the same thing. They have borrowed $50 million from the United States on behalf of a Hydro project. I remember hearing on television my good friend, the leader of the New Democratic Party in Winnipeg, and his colleague from York South (Mr. Lewis) who, with fists clenched above his head, was saying that if the Americans could be expelled from Canada we could recover the control of our economy and have Canada all to ourselves.
And he was right. The next day, however, the Minister of Finance of the New Democratic party in Manitoba was telling us on the waves of the same television station about the wonderful trip he had just made to the United States where they had rolled out the red carpet and where, thanks to the confidence of the Americans in Manitoba and its new government, he had been able to borrow the huge sum of $50 million at an interest rate of 9J per cent. This was just a little less than what in the province of Quebec had had to pay: 9J instead of 10 per cent. They were bragging about it.
Mr. Speaker, the only condition on which we can regain control of our economy, is to start with regaining control of our finance. When we can create our own credit in order to build our roads, to enable our provinces to develop normally, then we might say that we control our economy. Canada belongs to us. But as long as this financial issue has not been settled, I challenge the New Democratic party, as well as any other party, to tell me that some day we will own Canada. We will never own her as long as we are obliged to borrow from the United States.
But this is the reply given to us: Will the credit supplied by the Bank of Canada not cause our money to depreciate on the American or the international markets? They have not understood yet, Mr. Speaker, that our Canadian dollars is not in circulation in these coun tries.
I have been to Russia, Czechoslovakia, France, everywhere! And let someone show me in those countries one single dollar bearing the likeness of the queen. No one has ever seen any. No one wants to accept our dollar. Go to the United States, across from Cornwall, and try with a Canadian quarter to get a package of cigarettes from a vending

machine. It will immediately reject the coin. Some will say: How much will our money be worth in the United States? At the present time it has no value.
Do you imagine that the Americans are wondering what kind of roads we are now building to James Bay? Are they wondering what kind of schools we are building in Charlevoix and in Carleton, or anywhere else in Canada? Are they going to see what kind of wheat is stored in our grain elevators in northern Saskatchewan? What concerns the Americans at the present time is to lend money to the idiots that we are because this way they can triple their profits.
Great care is taken not to alter those interest rates. We would rather let them go up. However, bills are submitted to the provinces in which they are told: Try to control the small employees' salaries, not to increase them by more than 6 per cent a year. But for the "big shot", a 30 per cent increase is not excessive.
No minister has taken exception to that. To the small wage-earner, the mailman, the miner in Noranda or the worker in Toronto, a 6 per cent increase only is granted in order to check inflation, but a 30 per cent one is granted to the "big shot". To fight against whom? To fight against those who check inflation, this is exactly what it is.
Why would the creation of credit by the Bank of Canada have any influence in the United States? We wish to create credit in order to develop our country, and make financially possible what is physically feasible. At present, there are 200,000 unemployed in the province of Quebec; Those Canadian citizens do not want to be unemployed, they want to work. However the Quebec government, is promising them 100,000 jobs. Our friend, Mr. Samson, the leader of the Rallie-ment creditiste in Quebec said to Mr. Bou-rassa: Hurry up, because we are going to count them one by one, those 100,000 jobs, if they are not provided by the end of 1970.
Even if 100,000 jobs were created, there would still be 100,000 others to create, in addition to summer months for students, jobs for future graduates. The situation is serious.
In Quebec and elsewhere, everything is to be done. There is some talk of hydroelectric projects at James Bay, of about $2 or $3 billion. But they think of dollars instead of thinking of the waterfalls of the natural wealth they represent. Instead of adjusting the financial system to the resources to be
June 15, 1370

developed, they do the opposite: they try to adjust the resources to be developed to the financial system.
That is against common sense. This is walking on one's head instead of using one's feet. There are some who do not yet realize that.


Mr. Speaker:: Order! Will the hon. member allow me to interrupt him to remind the House that his time has expired? He can keep on with his remarks with the unanimous assent of the House.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Agreed. The hon. member for Temiscamingue.


David Réal Caouette: Suggested Interest-free Loans and the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Olson) are taken to task, and both have the same reply: No money.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to say again what I said at the opening of my remarks: If war broke out tomorrow, there would not be any shortage of money: we would find some, even to buy the wheat of the western farmers. Indeed there would be some to buy everything.
But is it not also a national urgency when you have close to 700,000 or 800,000 unemployed in Canada? Is it not urgent to find a solution when our kids are uprising against a society in which they are not able to integrate themselves?
Mr. Speaker, the young people who are uprising are blamed and the society which prevents their integration is tolerated. Instead of blaming the youngsters who are uprising, one should begin by blaming the society and by improving it, and begin by effecting improvements in the House of Commons so that it could set an example for the rest of Canada. But instead, the blame is put on the youth. It is true that there are some hotheaded among the youngsters, but if we were in their situation, would we not have our hot-headed too? After all, these young people of today are our children.
I met recently a few federal members with 18 or 19 years old kids who are blamed in their own home by young separatists, rebels or revolutionists who cannot find a job in their own country. And we are told that the middle class is responsible for this situation, when everyone wants to become part of it. Today's young people who rebel against the middle class want to become part of it tomorrow. However, the financial system does not see to it that these young people are integrated in society, because it refuses them the right to work. If all these young people were actually employed in the development of the vast riches of Canada, would not that create new riches? Would it not allow them the opportunity to contribute directly to the administration of their country?
What solution does the Government offer? None. It does what it can; it spends $27 million to create 33,000 jobs. $27 million is a large sum! However, 600,000 young people are watching us. They are not happy about what is happening. That should not worry us. As long as our leaders will give more attention to the financial system than to the Canadian nation, and in particular to the young, there will still be trouble in Canada.

Things will go from bad to worse and necessarily Canadians as a whole will pay for the consequences. That is why we should assume our responsibility. We are reasonable and in earnest, we are seeking solutions. The government finds none. The Progressive Conservatives offer no alternative solutions. They tell the government: Put us in your place and we will do the same as you do. The proof thereof is that they already were in power, and acted in the same way.
The New Democratic party has never been in power. What better results would they obtain within the same system? None at all. If we were in the government's place within the same system, we would do no better. We must get out of the system, improve it, change it. Instead of changing the people and putting them through the system, let us put the system to work for the people. Then we will be able to guarantee that each and every citizen enjoys economic security as well as personal freedom.
Canadians are entitled to their freedom and security. Freedom without security is impossible. Security without freedom is quite easy. Every socialist country in the world has brought security at the expense of freedom. If you do not believe me, try it. Suppose that ten members go to Frieman's and break all the windows of that department store. I am convinced that within 15 minutes the Minister of Justice will have his security, just like me. We would all be behind bars with three meals a day guaranteed, and clothes that might not fit. But we will be clothed and fed and if we get sick, medicare will look after us, all of this at the government's expense. There, we would all enjoy security but not freedom. That is not a system we want for our citizens.
We want a system that would allow the minister, as well as all Canadians, to be free, to enjoy security from birth to death. That is exactly the purpose of the motion introduced by my colleague for Champlain. That is also advocated by the Creditiste doctrine of Major C. H. Douglas. Instead of laughing at it, let it be seriously considered. Everybody agrees that changes are necessary if we are not to end up in chaos as so many other countries did.
A country to which we provided millions of dollars in assistance, I mean Ceylon, became communist a few hours ago. We gave help, but was it the citizens or the businessmen of Ceylon we helped? If we used Canadian credit to make a few businessmen richer
June 15, 1970
and left the poor in destitution, it is not surprising to see communism taking hold of that country.
Besides, even in India, a country on which we are lavishing assistance, what Indians are benefiting by it directly? None. There again, businessmen who make profits at the expense of human lives.
I went to India just two years ago. I have seen what is happening over there. I did not see any 25-cent Canadian coins in Bombay, where two million people sleep outside at night. None at all! We have not helped the people, we have helped some businessmen.
I believe it is time, if it is not too late, to think of helping the individual. We will then prevent the communist catastrophe, the revolution growing in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada.
In our capacity as responsible members of a sovereign Parliament, it is time we bring order in our finances, so as to free the human being. Then, as I said before, we will ensure the security and the freedom of every citizen.
[DOT] (4:20 p.m.)


Hon. J. W. Monleith (Perth):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate the last speaker who participated in this debate, because at least two-thirds of what he said was right. His speech was entertaining and forceful, but unconvincing. He suggested that if he were given some additional time he would be able to convince the members of the House, and Canadians as a whole, of the correctness of Social Credit theory, but I am afraid he left me unconvinced. I do not expect to be lengthy in my remarks. I merely wish to show that the Conservative party is at least consistent. On November 6, 1962 we opposed a motion to this effect-


Mr. Francis:: I think I remember it.


Mr. Bell:: A lot of people remember it.


Jay Waldo Monteith: Yes, a lot of people remember it. The motion called for debt free money. The Conservative party at that time opposed this particular motion and they are opposing it today. It is interesting to note that on November 6, 1962 the Liberals voted for debt-free money.


Thomas Miller Bell: Shame.


Jay Waldo Monteith: The motion itself reads:
That, in the opinion of this House, in view of the Government's inability to effectively combat the frightening increase in the public debt-
22478-23}
Suggested Interest-free Loans
So far I agree. I think it should be stressed that this situation is one of the government's own creation. The huge increase in debt in the last few years, the huge increase in taxation and the increase in inflation have been caused by government mismanagement. World-wide conditions have been difficult to combat. I admit that. Since 1965, this government has been heading into the situation in which we find ourselves now. Today, we have a situation in which the government is at least suggesting controls. There are implied guidelines. Presumably, the government is on an austerity kick, although expenditures for the year ending March 31, 1971 are some 9 per cent higher than for the last fiscal year. I call this irresponsibility on the part of the government. When this debate on debt free money came up today, I recalled the debate which took place in November, 1962. I should like to point out that the following appears in Hansard of that year at page 1331:
The tight money policy which was Introduced as part of the austerity program, and by this I mean restrictive credit and high interest rates, was bound to slow down business activity. High interest rates were bound to make it difficult for municipalities to proceed with badly needed works and services. This, in turn, could not fail to slow down construction and this is bound to mean fewer jobs this winter.
But instead of worrying about a program which would lead to the employment of more people in this coming winter, the government seemed much more anxious to placate those who had moved their money out of Canada and to beg them, in the form of high interest rates on their investments, to bring it back. The effects of the government's tight money policy are bound to fall most heavily on small businessmen and on those parts of the country such as the maritimes and the Minister of Finance's own province of Nova Scotia where capital is especially hard to come by. Why we should go on punishing our own people in this way is beyond my comprehension. But that is what we are1 doing under this emergency tight money policy.
Those are the words of the Hon. Walter Gordon. I suggest that those words apply today. I feel convinced that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Turner), who listened intently to the last speaker, will probably vote for this motion again today. Since the members of the Liberal party voted for a similar proposition in 1962 they will probably be quite ready to support it today.


Thomas Miller Bell: They have nothing to gain today.


Jay Waldo Monteith: My purpose in speaking today is to point out that I feel this is the wrong approach. I admit that an approach should have been made back around 1965, but

June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans it is not too late yet for this government, which does not know restraint, to start showing some restraint. I should like to mention in passing that the last speaker was entertaining. I recall a member of the Social Credit Party, the hon. member for Lethbridge of that day, who always participated in the debate on the estimates of the Department of Finance. In those days the estimates were considered in the House, as any hon. members who were where here will recall. This particular hon. member always spoke three times on the estimates of the Department of Finance He spoke once on the estimates themselves. Then, he spoke on Social Credit theory and, finally, on the Turkish-Mongolian conspiracy. This was always most entertaining.
The hon. member for Temiscamingue (Mr. Caouette) was as entertaining today, if not more so, but at the same time he failed to convince us that the use of debt free money is the way to cure the situation. The government, during free time for Political broadcasts on t.v. last August, came out with a big hullabaloo about what it was going to do under the austerity program. This was a lot of nonsense. The government has not done anything. A few commissionaires employed at various places may have been laid off and some other people on the lower income bracket may have been laid off, but actually the government is building up the hierarchy. A power house is being built up around the Prime Minister's (Mr. Trudeau) office. This is enough to frighten anyone. We are approaching what I would suggest very definitely is a socialistic dictatorship. I know of a country in the Middle East which suggests it has a con-stituional monarchy form of government. I call it a benevolent dictatorship. This is not even a benevolent dictatorship.
This government, for instance, a few months ago renewed the 3 per cent surcharge. In addition, this government changed the constitution under which our system of government operates. In February, 1968 they were defeated on a money bill and refused to resign, so, in effect they changed our whole system of constitutional authority.
e (4:30 p.m.)
Now, they have renewed that 3 per cent surcharge which replaced the 5 per cent on which they were defeated, and if, as, and when the white paper should become legislation-pray God it never does-this temporary tax will be melded into one tax rate which the people of Canada will have to face forever.
[Mr. Monteith.l
I suggested earlier, Mr. Speaker, that I would not go over my time so you do not have to point out to me that my time has expired. I propose to sit down now, but before doing that I want to point out, something to the hon. member for Temiscamingue (Mr. Caouette). He suggested that the Conservatives would only do the same as the Liberals, that we would be very concerned about the situation. We have proven our ability to be concerned about the situation which has existed here in Canada since 1965. I cannot support this motion no matter how well intentioned it may be.


Mr. Gilbert Rondeau (Shefford):: Mr. Speaker, we listened a few minutes ago to the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) who introduced with great eloquence a motion to establish a new method of financing public capital in Canada.
We also listened to the hon. member for Temiscamingue (Mr. Caouette) who gave us examples intended to cast some light on this motion.
One would have to be blind, to be totally deprived of financial knowledge or to accept to be a accomplice of this administration not to recognize the merits of this motion. The Canadian financial system piles up on the federal government, the municipalities, the provincial governments and the school boards and all the public agencies, a pyramid of debts which mathematically speaking can never be repaid and which paralyses all these bodies.
If, because of ignorance or collusion, we refuse to recognize that banks alone, with practically nothing, in the form of credit, create more than 95 per cent of the money in circulation in Canada, we will look everywhere as the hon. member for Perth (Mr. Monteith) just attempted to do, for some justification for that pyramid of debts, the causes of which I should like now to summarize. When banks through credit created out of nothing lend to all public bodies, governments and school boards, $10 billion per year, at a 10 per cent rate of interest and then request a year later for the repayment of $11 billion in capital and interest, that represents the basis of a pyramidal system of debts that we will never manage to pay, if we keep that same indebtedness system.
How can we believe that all public bodies can repay $11 billion when they received in fact only $10 billion?
June 15, 1970

Put $5 billion next to another $5 billion, Mr. Speaker, and let them sleep together for a year, and as there is no such thing as male or female dollars, bringing together those two amounts of $5 billion for a year will never generate little ones twelve months later.
Whenever the banks lend $10 billion and request to be repaid $11 billion, they create in a year a billion dollar debt at the expense of all public bodies, a debt mathematically impossible to repay over a short or long term period.
However the banks will accept part payments and will refinance the balance under the same conditions. If you owe $11 billion on a $10 billion loan and pay back $5 billion, you still owe a balance of $6 billion. Yet, you only have in fact $5 billion of the original amount borrowed.
So you borrow again, at every government level, you borrow again to pay back part of your old debts; you borrow let us say another $14 billion for the following year. You then owe $20 billion, for the banks will refinance the first $6 billion you owe them. Total loans then amount to $20 billion, at 10 per cent, which means that in another year you will again owe $22 billion while having received only $20 billion.
Because money does not make little ones, because it has neither hair nor life, it cannot multiply itself.
Banks, by creating credit out of nothing, ask that more money be paid back to them than they have put in circulation through loans, create a system of perpetual and pyramidal debts which society cannot possibly pay. That is what crushes public bodies.
Today, more than 50 per cent of all public income is absorbed by taxes of all kinds: municipal taxes, school taxes, federal and provincial taxes, to pay the interest on unpayable debts. Indeed, fifty per cent of all our taxes are spent solely on paying the interest on the public debts.
That is why it is stupid, archaic, obsolete and criminal, not to accept the motion of the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte), so that the federal government, through its own financial institution, the Bank of Canada, would issue credit instead of the banks, and put it interest free, at the disposal of all public bodies.
With your leave, Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a chart of the public debts, including
Suggested Interest-free Loans those of the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities, and the school boards.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I must point out again that although there may be precedents for this it is a practice against which I have felt obliged to caution. It seems to me that the practice of hon. members seeking to include tables in Hansard might be open to abuse. Having said that, I am prepared to put the question to the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Thank you, Mr. Speaker, I thank the-


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: There was no unanimous consent.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Apparently there is no unanimous consent.
[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)


Gilbert F. Rondeau: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, that my colleagues seem to be afraid of hearing about the debts we are facing, because those figures were supplied to me by the Minister of Finance of each of the ten provinces of Canada.
I would like to put on record the official documents in my possession from each of the provinces. According to this chart, which gives a frightful picture of our public debts, the provinces owe $9,299,409,860. The municipalities with a population of over 5,000 people owe $6,502,696,257. The school boards owe $3,744,760,945. The total debt for the municipalities, the provinces and the school boards is $19,546,830,062.
According to the latest statistics in the budgetary papers dated March 12, 1970, the federal debt totals $38,018 million, for a grand total of $57,564,830,062 for the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards, without mentioning the debts owed by municipalities with less than 5,000 population.
A look at the budget of Quebec municipalities for 1967-1968 and at the statistics reveals that several municipalities must earmark over 65 per cent of their budget for the payment of interest on the debt.
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans
The town of Saint-Hubert, for instance, which has a municipal budget of $2,274,400, must pay $1,015,866 in interest only on its debt. The municipality of Ville d'Anjou, which has a $4,976,081 budget, must earmark
64.9	per cent of its budget for the repayment of interests only. It actually has to pay $3,229,623 in interests.
And so it goes for most municipalities in Quebec.
For instance, on a budget of $690 million, the city of Trois-Rivieres-Ouest must pay 57.4 per cent in interest alone, that is $396,385. The story is much the same for all municipalities in Canada.
I would have liked to table in the House a list of borrowings by the Quebec Hydro last year, a very important list. In a single year, the Quebec Hydro borrowed $282 million, including $50 million in the United States on July 15, 1969, $27 million in Germany on September 1, 1969, $25 million in Canada on October 15, 1969, $20 million in Europe on October 15, 1969, $50 million in the United States on December 15, 1969, $50 million on February 1, 1970 and $60 million on March 15, 1970.
A look at those figures shows that every 15 days, Quebec Hydro gets into debt to the tune of approximately $25 million.
When we consider those figures, we realize that a very large part of the budget of some municipalities goes in interests on their debts.
For example, in the city of Chateauguay only, one bank makes an annual profit of $315,000 in interests on three bank accounts. The two cities of Chateauguay owe the same bank the amount of $1 million at 9J per cent interest. The Youville Regional School Board, in the riding of Chateauguay, owes $1,700,000 at 8} per cent interest. As for the Chateauguay School Board, it has a $881,000 debt at 9$ per cent, for a total of $3,581,000 on which the bank makes $315,000 a year. It does not take a large personnel to enter three different figures in the three bank accounts.
Three hundred and fifteen thousand dollars have been earned by entering three figures in the bank books for three accounts. This contributes to get the Chateauguay taxpayers into debt.
The same conditions prevail in all cities and school boards of Quebec and other Canadian provinces.
The creation of credit money by banks is the finest legal racket in the world stifling every public body.

In India people starve and worship sacred cows instead of eating them. In Canada, we are crushed under the burden of public debts while worshipping the golden calf and
Mammon.
Even though we believe that our civilization is much more modern and superior to that of India, we are strangely like the Indians when we worship the golden calf and Mammon.
Our financial system of running into debt is a bottomless barrel which the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards are trying to fill up, but which is used to make richer all those who create money out of nothing and exploit the people. In Canada, the total public debt amounts to $57,564 million. We therefore pay on average $5 billion in interests per year, which means that each Canadian pays $250 and each family $1,000 yearly.
If we passed the motion put by the hon. member for Champlain, we would avoid all those payments and Canadians would save $5 billion per year in interest, the price of entering figures in bank books.
A few months ago the Quebec Autoroutes Authority said in its report that in the province of Quebec, after 400 years, there are only 155 miles of highways which have cost the province over $400 million, an average cost of $2.5 million per mile. This includes the Eastern Townships highway, 70 miles long, the Northern highway, the Laurentides highway as well as the highway connecting Montreal to Joliette.
Last year the Autoroutes Authority gave the following figures: tolls brought in $7 million while only $2 million in capital and $19 million in interest were paid back. The revenue totalled $7 million, which leaves a deficit of $14 million for 1969 to be added to the already existing deficit of $70 million, even after the $400 million are paid.
But, if we could take advantage of the credits of the Bank of Canada for the highways of Quebec or of any other province, we would be able to pay for them once and for all whereas presently, we have to pay for them at least five times as it is the case for our schools. Why? Because we have no public financing system and, for that reason, we freeze the private capital in the public one. But if the Bank of Canada financed our public capital, it would allow us to use our savings to build sidewalks, bridges, highways
June 15. 1970

and water systems. We could invest our savings in the private sector, in order to increase our national wealth.
The Ralliement creditiste is convinced that if the financing policy of the public capital that it has now been advocating for many years in this House is not applied, the federal government, the municipalities and the school boards will have budgets that will barely pay the interest rates and they will have practically nothing left to pay for services needed by municipalities.
All we have to do is consider the balance sheets of our municipalities and school boards to find that a financial cancer is eating our public bodies, and that only the federal government can cure it, by agreeing to the motion moved by the hon. member for Champlain.
[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)



PROCEEDINGS ON ADJOURNMENT MOTION


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Prior to recognizing the hon. member for Richmond (Mr. Beaudoin) perhaps I might alert the House as to the subjects to be raised at the time of adjournment: The hon. member for Vancouver-Kings-way (Mrs. Maclnnis)-Criminal Code-Abortion-Removal of provisions from law; the hon. member for Kootenay West (Mr. Harding) -Pollution-Monitoring of waters receiving effluent discharges from plants using mercury.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Matte:
That, in the opinion of this House, in view of the Government's inability to effectively combat the frightening increase in the public debt, the public sector of the Canadian economy, including the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards should be financed by direct interest-free loans from the Bank of Canada, repayable at the rate of the depreciation on the assets thus created.
Suggested Interest-free Loans [Translation]
Mr. Leonel Beaudoin (Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) referred earlier to the unfortunate consequences of our present financial system and showed that governments, at all levels, are new facing almost insoluble financial problems.
Besides, the hon. members for Shefford and Temiscamingue (Messrs. Rondeau and Caouette) quoted many statistics to the effect that governments, federal, provincial or municipal, and school boards could only provide the necessary services to the Canadian people only by involving all communities into debt.
Such a situation, that I would readily term disastrous, is the result of past performance. The Canadian people in 1970 are paying for blunders made in the past; yet our governments still believe in the principles that brought them about. We are in debt for things of the past. Bridges, highways, schools and hospitals built ten or 20 years ago have not yet been paid and all Canadians must pay each year a very high tribute in return for the permission granted by bankers to carry out those works.
But, Mr. Speaker, some thought should also be given to the present and of the future. At this time, governments are hard-pressed. The federal government wanted to take $630 million more in the taxpayers' pockets, according to the proposals of the white paper on tax reform.
The provincial governments have money problems. They want to build schools, universities, hospitals, roads, health facilities. They have no money or the money available is beyond their means because its cost is prohibitive.
Therefore, we must look into those problems and ask ourselves what we can do as members of Parliament to settle the present financial problems and bring about the results the people expect of us.
The Ralliement Creditiste has always maintained that the human person is the most valuable creation of society and that all existing facilities should be at his disposal. We therefore say that material things, i.e. money and credit, should be put at the service of the human person rather than the opposite, as has been and is now the case. That is the first principle of the Social Credit philosophy.
The second one is as follows: government must be at the service of man. The role of
June 15, 1370

Suggested Interest-free Loans an elected and responsible government is to run the public affairs to suit the people, as long as this is desirable and physically possible.
In addition, what is physically workable must be made financially feasible. This means that if schools are a must to house young Canadian students, and if workers and materials are available to build them, the financial world must then bring itself in line with facts. I suggest that finance must be a reflection of the state of the economy. If money is needed to build those schools, then the necessary credits must be released automatically.
I would like to tell hon. members once more that as money is a creation of man, it should serve him and not enslave him, being only an element of exchange between human beings, for which purpose it was created. It has no other justification.
Mr. Speaker, the needs of the Canadian people are constantly increasing in various fields of economic and social life.
If you examine the housing problem, you realize that in spite of the population's urgent needs the rate of construction is increasingly slower, which will certainly not help to solve the housing problem in Canada.
The Hellyer Commission, for instance, and all recent reports on housing show that Canada should devote more funds to housing. Referring to working papers submitted at the provincial conference on housing and urban development in 1967, I see that of all the major sections of the economy, housing is the one where it will be most necessary to increase productivity, at least into the seventies, and perhaps even to the end of the decade. It is a major problem for the country as a whole since it involves seeing to it that the increasing shortage of housing does not become a real national problem. It will therefore be imperative to considerably increase present available resources, including skilled manpower and capital in the field of residential construction. It will be necessary to provide a considerable and sustained volume of mortgage loans.
[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)
That is what the report suggests, Mr. Speaker. Now what do we find? We find that residential construction decreases, that mortgage loans are almost unavailable, or if they are available, their interest rates are very
tMr. Beaudoin.]
high, and thus prohibitive. Construction decreases, and the problem worsens from day to day.
Another problem is directly facing municipalities; urbanization. We now witness a concentration of population in the great urban centres, which is an almost insuperable challenge for municipal governments.
Municipalities have to meet the new requirements of the people, of traffic, transportation, water and sewage facilities, control of water and air pollution, and land use.
This implies, in a given area, an effort in respect of synthesis, co-ordination and planning at the urban, metropolitan, regional, provincial and national levels.
Because of those needs, cities have to resort increasingly to experts in all fields able to attack the complicated problems created by that urbanization. Therefore education is involved. In order to train such experts, specialists, technicians and engineers, educational systems are in need of reform. School boards also need more financial resources to build modern and well equipped schools; they must have better trained teachers and be able to pay them.
Now, all Canadian cities are faced with financial problems. For municipalities, there is an ever increasing gap between revenues and expenditures. They can no longer balance their budget and must always resort to borrowing. Their most important budget item is usually the debt service.
At this stage of my speech, I would like to quote a few statistics so that the House will know the percentage of municipal budget earmarked for interest payments. I have here the 1967-68 financial statement covering about 200 municipalities in Quebec. Checking these figures, one can easily see that the older the city the higher the percentage of its budget allocated to the payment of interests on its debt.
Thus, the municipality of Bagotville in the Saguenay-Lac Saint-Jean area, during the fiscal year 1967-68, paid $49,633 in interest charges on its debt, that is 8.9 per cent of its total budget of $557,250.
As for the relatively new municipalities, they earmark not more than 20 per cent of their total budget to the payment of the interest costs. The cities of Roberval, La Tuque, Rouyn, Aylmer, Touraine, Westmount and many others are in this situation.
Mr. Speaker, I find it rather strange to consider as fortunate the municipalities which
June 15. 1970

do not earmark more than 20 per cent of their annual budget to the payment of the interests on their debts. The noxious fumes of the present economic system are slowly poisoning us and I find it very disturbing.
However, many municipalities in Quebec earmark more than 50 per cent of their annual budget only for the repayment of interest on their debt. Thus, the municipality of Trois-Rivieres-Ouest in the St. Maurice region earmarked 57.4 per cent of its budget for the fiscal year 1967-1968 for interest payments on its debt, or about $62.98 per citizen.
The municipality of Ville d'Anjou earmarked $3,229,623 in 1968 out of a total budget of $4,976,081 for the payment of interest on its debt, or 64.9 per cent of its total budget. The Chambly municipality in the Richelieu region allocated 53.6 per cent of its budget during the fiscal year 1967-1968 to the payment of interest on its debt.
What are we to make of such figures, if not to feel that our economic system is completely obsolete and that all we can do now in order to live decently within such a system is to get our children and our children's children into debt.
The older a municipality is, the harder it is for it to balance its budget. Simple logic proves, without the shadow of a doubt, that there is something really wrong with our economy. Why persist in increasing taxes, reducing expenses, getting into debt with neighbouring countries, while in reality we are only putting bandaids on a wooden leg. Why not solve the problem at the source, and change the system?
I have only quoted a few figures concerning the municipalities, but we all know that the same goes in every field in the public sector, and that it is much more so in the private sector. Indeed, the situation is the same with regard to the budgets of school boards, community centres, the provinces as well as the Canadian government. Must we wait till the nation goes bankrupt to finally wake up? Unfortunately, I am afraid so, Mr. Speaker.
Another problem, that is ever growing, and which, unless it is solved in the near future, will cause us much trouble, is that of air and water pollution.
At the present time, our rivers, our lakes, are filled with waste to the extent where government authorities have had to forbid commercial fishing because the fish has become unfit for consumption.
I have sat for two years on the National Resources and Public Works Committee, and
Suggested Interest-free Loans I am convinced that the present situation urgently requires the attention of the central government. Last Wednesday, I attended with my colleagues of the committee the showing of a few short films on the quality of our waters in various parts of the country. Things are far from rosy, even though the films were in colour. We talk of saving the lives of our fish, but what about the lives of human beings, of Canadians!
In several municipalities, tap water is no longer drinkable. Many doctors have forbidden their patients to drink the water in some Quebec municipalities, on the other side of the Ottawa river, for instance, where cases of typhoid and paratyphoid fever have been recorded.
Meanwhile, the municipal councils are doing nothing and they cannot do anything because they do not have enough funds to purify the water, to filter it so that people may safely drink it. These are very serious problems since the health of the people is at stake as well as our industrial development.
It is time that the federal government should develop some kind of machinery for regulating financial participation in order to help the municipalities together with the administrations of the various provinces.
We should try to devise financing methods more rational and more just than those we have now if we do not want to run the risk of entirely destroying private ownership and if we do not want to jeopardize house ownership as a result of high taxes.
Municipalities as well as industrial organizations are facing financing problems when they try to fight water pollution in an efficient way. Provided it is willing to take the necessary steps, the federal government is in a position to solve these financial problems.
That is why the Ralliement creditiste has raised today this question and is asking the federal government, through the Bank of Canada, to grant interest-free loans to the provinces and to the municipalities in order to build and develop social projects which are a vital necessity if the community is to survive.


Hon. Jean-Pierre Cote (Minister of National Revenue):: Mr. Speaker, we must admit that the members of the Ralliement creditiste who spoke before me, seem convinced and sincere, but me must also admit that they are not very convincing. In fact, accord-
June 15. 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans ing to the members of other parties who also spoke in this debate, the Creditistes seem to have convinced no one.
It is not an easy task to follow the hon. member for Temiscamingue (Mr. Caouette) through a speech such as he alone can make. He told us how nice it would be to get interest free money. He complained that he is paying a 7J or 72 per cent interest on a house that he bought, but he did not tell us how much interest he draws from his savings at the bank because it is rather easy, nowadays, to invest these savings perhaps at a even higher rate.
[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)
It was also pointed out that we are paying now for the bridges, roads and schools which have been built perhaps 20, 25 or 30 years ago, or more, but I find this normal, since we are using these roads, these schools and these bridges.
The true injustice would have been to have the taxpayers, 25, 30 or 40 years ago, pay for buildings, reads or bridges which wouid be used perhaps for the next 50, 75 or 100 years. And it is only fair that the next generation pay also a portion of the cost of what we build today.
Of course taxes were mentioned and it was suggested that all the taxes which are raised, are mainly used to repay loans or our public debt. One must not exaggerate. We must admit that the taxes we collect help most of the time to pay for expenditures and that most of that money goes back to the taxpayers in the form of social benefits such as old age pensions, family allowances, medicare, hospitalization insurance. They also help to finance education and to pay for public buildings and services.
Mr. Speaker, the Creditiste motion before us is based upon the false assumption that there was a tremendous increase of the public debt. Indeed, the public debt at all levels of government increased only in a moderate way during the last 15 years or so as against the gross national product. If we merely quote figures, such amounts seem astronomical, of course, but compared to the gross national product, such an increase seems rather a moderate one.
Last February, the Committee on Taxation reported to the federal-provincial conference of prime ministers that the present debt at all government levels had increased from 95.9 per cent of the gross national product in 1952 to 101.4 per cent only in 1968.
[Mr. Cote (Longueuil) .1
During the same period, the federal government's debt decreased from 75.7 per cent of the gross national product in 1952 to 61.4 per cent in 1968. The debt of the provinces had increased from 14 per cent to 26.6 per cent of the gross national product and that of the municipalities, from 7.4 to 13.3 per cent.
On this account, I must point out that the Economic Council of Canada indicated in their last annual review that as a proportion of total government expenditures, interest on the debt had decreased from 20.8 per cent in 1939 to 6.8 per cent in 1967. The Council's figures also show that proportionately to the to the gross national product, interest on the debt at all government levels had decreased from 4.7 per cent in 1939 to 2.1 per cent in 1967.
Both groups of figures are another proof that the Creditistes motion is based uniquely on assumptions but allows them to claim that the public debt is frightening.
If we read the motion carefully, we see that it is predicated on the idea of a federal responsibility as regards the loans of other provinces or other governments. In fact, the motion reads as follows:
That, in view of the Government's inability to effectively combat the frightening increase in the public debt, the public sector of the Canadian economy, including the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards-
The motion assumes that it is the government's responsibility to limit the amounts of money borrowed by the other levels of government. It is a matter that obviously overrides its jurisdiction.
Let us deal now with the impact of the financing of these loans by the Bank of Canada. During 1969, the net total of borrowings made by all levels of government was well over $2 billion. If the Bank of Canada was making available unlimited amounts of money to all levels of government, and that, without interest, as is proposed by the creditiste motion, inflation would be greatly accelerated. This tremendous increase in the money supply would start a large increase in expenditures and would give a great impulse to price increases, which would seriously jeopardize the stability of our economy.
Governments and school boards must borrow on the money markets as to all other enterprises. In a free enterprise system, public administrations must compete to attract the money lenders. One must pay for the use of money; this is a truth as old as money itself which Social Credit should recognize.
June 15, 1970

Mr. Speaker, when hearing the speeches of the members from the Ralliement creditiste, we were wondering if that party which seems to be so far from socialism is not quite close to it sometimes.
The Ralliement creditiste often cites as an example-and the member for Temis-camingue (Mr. Caouette) mentioned it a moment ago-the loans which Canada grants to other countries on easy terms.
It is true that Canada, as other countries granting loans to under-developed countries, do so on quite easy terms. But this is not a reason to ask the same terms in some entirely different situations in Canada.
The federal government recognizes that there are joint responsibilities at the international level to devote some financial resources to the development of poorer countries. However, all countries recognize that such funds cannot always be loaned on commercial terms. The poorer countries simply cannot obtain the necessary exchange funds to pay commercial interest rates.
Therefore, Canada grants loans on easy terms, while abiding by criteria ensuring worthwhile development projects. Such loans do not apply to non-profitable enterprises. They apply to construction and development projects providing a good return.
Mr. Speaker, the Ralliement creditiste motion reflects their old theory according to which our economic system is defective since it fails to produce an adequate increase in the money supply.
The federal government believes that our present monetary system is efficient and flexible enough to meet the changing needs of the economy, including the need for expansion of the available credit. And a while ago, a striking example of the situation was provided by the hon. member of Temiscamingue when he referred to credits avaialble in wartime, e (5:20 p.m.)
True, available credit was enormous during the war, but it is equally true that there were a great many restrictions, particularly on coffee, tea, butter, sugar, and even manpower mobility. In fact, one could not change jobs without permission. There were restrictions on the purchase of luxury items. One could not even buy a car, a fact which even now would surely affect the hon. member for Temiscamingue.
There was also a control on salaries and prices. The results of that increase in credit are that the national debt more than trebled, 22478-24}
Suggested, Interest-free Loans because the credit allowed was financed from war loans. New money was not created, it was just a matter of borrowing more money in order to spend more.
In the report which he presented to the Commons last Thursday on the provincial Finance Ministers and Treasurers conference, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Benson) did mention that the basic goal of the government is to put an end to the inflationary spiral of prices, while maintaining a firm economic balance.
The budget tabled by the Minister of Finance last March considerably eased federal tax restrictions. Since then, monetary restrictions have also been eased, which was reflected in a decrease of the bank rate from 8J to 7J per cent.
In the meantime, the government has also decided not to implement the budget proposal to establish controls on consumer credit. Furthermore, the increase of $300 million in payments to provinces during the fiscal year, which was announced in the House last Monday by the Minister of Finance, is another important measure to ease the fiscal policy of the federal government.
The continuous increase in costs and prices remains a main matter of concern to the government. Since the beginning of 1970 some progress has been made with regard to checking price increases, which has made it possible to reduce somewhat fiscal and monetary restrictions.
I would emphasize that the government is quite anxious to have the Canadian economy back on a strong but steady rate of increase. We are looking forward to reducing the surplus capacity now existing in our economy so that it may develop more in harmony with its potential.
I am in a position to inform the House that the government is now intensively studying the adoption of specific measures aimed at increasing still more our economical activities.
Before taking further significant action to ease present restraints, it is essential however to ascertain that the inflationary pressures on our economy have begun to slacken.
As I have indicated, through various undertakings we have been able to slow down price increases in Canada for the first months of 1970. Until now, no corresponding progress has been noted as regards costs. Moreover, salaries have kept on increasing rapidly.
June IS, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans
The house realizes that this is the factor which has caused the Price and Incomes Commission to recommend the establishment of guidelines for salaries and wages at the federal-provincial conference of ministers of Finance and provincial treasurers which took place in Winnipeg recently.
These guidelines, which would correspond to the criteria on price controls adopted at the national conference on price stability held last february in Ottawa, were fully endorsed by the federal government. They were also approved by most of the provincial ministers present at the Winnipeg conference.
If those guidelines manage to hold costs down as they have done already with prices, the government could go ahead through a new policy aimed at a more rapid rate of growth, a higher rate of employment and a higher increase in the actual income of all Canadians.
Unemployment has been referred to. The very high rate of unemployment in Canada is a matter of concern. However, the opposition seems concerned with unemployment only when the rate reaches 5 or 6 per cent. But the government, I can say that, becomes involved right away as soon as there is one man out of work. We try by every means to give him a hand.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to say to conclude that, even though Creditistes may seem convinced, they are not quite convincing. Having heard the NBP members and the Conservatives decline to support their motion, I can say that the government will not support it either and it seems that the Creditistes are quite isolaied.
Mr. Speaker, between you and me who does not understand?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr.   C.-A. Gauthier@Roberval: Mr. Speaker, I believe we have today a special day, called the opposition's day. We, of the Rallie-ment creditiste had to propose a motion and it seems to me that the motion which has been proposed by the member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) concerns the whole population.
The Liberal, Conservative and New Democratic members say they are not concerned by the motion. In fact only three of them have spoken up to now. They are afraid or are not authorized to speak about this matter. However this matter is nowadays a very important one.

I was pleased when the hon. Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Cote) rose a while ago, because I thought: at last, here is someone who might try to disregard the high finance. However I did not recognize his usual style and at times I wondered whether his speeches are not written by the financiers themselves.
He has claimed that others have said that we would not convince them. Our aim is not to convince members. Indeed, I have always believed this saying: Tell me who pays you and I will tell you who you are. In my opinion, the three parties are well paid by big finance and it is strictly forbidden to speak against it these days. People suffer so much because their true representatives are not in the House.
We do criticize the government at times, but we do more than that, we make suggestions. For years we have been suggesting monetary reform, asking the government to try to find new credit through the Bank of Canada and to stop having private interests create public credit. That is the flaw in the system. We take over public property and put it back on the market through individuals, that is, chartered banks.
[DOT] (5:30 p.m.)
And I was not surprised to hear the Minister of National Revenue say that he was satisfied with our indebtedness. As far as he is concerned it is normal to get into debt. The more the people work, the more they have to get into debt. This is normal. But I say that it is abnormal. And if some argue differently, they are also abnormal.
I have never seen a man who works in earnest and receives an income, getting deeper into debt year after year if he has a sound accounting system. However, this is what we tolerate from the government. If at the end of the year the government has not received a sufficient income to pay its expenditures, it goes into debt.
Of course, in underdeveloped countries this is logical. But in a country such as Canada which shows surpluses every year-if we compare the gross national income to the national output-this is unconceivable. However, we note that Canada is not a poor country but a country which is robbed by high finance which we want to denounce.
After listening to some of the speeches made by members from other parties, I am more convinced than ever that it is impossible, even with a ton of water, to get a duck wet. According to an old saying, there is none so deaf as those who will not hear.
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
We are trying to see our way clear through this maze of ideas from other parties trying to convince the people that they are right. But I am convinced that they know for sure that they are wrong. Here is the proof of it: Last week I was attending a meeting of the Committee on Finance, Trade and Economic Affairs, where I heard the president of Imperial Oil, who appeared as a witness, tell us that today no one could explain the system. He challenged everyone, economists as well as other people. However, I think that he is an intelligent man. And today they would have us believe that they can explain the present system. No, that is impossible. At least if they said: We shall try to think of something else, because after all, the monetary system is supposed to reflect what our economy is worth, but it does not at present. If only they took the trouble of looking into the question. But no. They persist in their opinion, or they promised, in order to win their election, never to raise that issue.
Our words are intended for the public and that is why I speak today. Everyone must read in Hansard what was said in the House so as to know at least about this tremendous indebtedness which is only beginning under the present system.
Previous speakers emphasized the bad effects of the present policy, due to the bank financing of the various governments' social projects, which leads to public indebtedness and, through tax increases, relentlessly erodes the low income of factory workers, farmers, white collars, civil servants, in short all classes of society.
Other spokesmen for the Ralliement cre-ditiste have suggested a financing formula, a sound, logical one which could only be beneficial to all taxpayers through the application of the principles embodied in the motion introduced by the hon. member for Champlain.
First of all, the social needs of all Canadians could be met if the brains are available, the hands are ready to work and the materials are plentiful. Education, public health, urban development, public services and social security would benefit from it.
Since education comes under provincial jurisdiction, educational systems should be financed and administered by the provinces. They are the ones who, with the co-operation of the school boards, should administer the colleges and the universities.
The provinces are the ones which, by way of consultations with the parents, the teach-
DEBATES	8125
Suggested Interest-free Loans ers and the Church, should be made responsible for developing programs while making allowance for the objectives and the needs of the community. Those educational needs, whether it be school facilities, teacher training, the physical comfort of the students, cost money. We feel that a formula such as the one we advocate would enable us, not to solve everything, but to remove the worst stumbling block that now paralyzes all the goodwill, and practically kills the best initiatives.
The same applies in the field of health. To cure the sick, to prevent disease, to maintain good health, we must first of all have enough institutions. There must be enough hospital beds to accommodate those in need of hospital treatment. We need enough doctors, and specialists to meet the needs of the sick and physically disabled.
[DOT] (5:40 p.m.)
At the present time, in all Canadian provinces, there are medical insurance plans and soon, these will be replaced everywhere by medicare. Without discussing the merits of those programs or the methods for implementing them, the fact remains that they are all experiencing the same financial difficulty.
The difficulties are such that the federal government has practically called upon the provinces to limit the ever increasing cost of those insurances. We must not forget however that the provinces must meet the cost of hospital construction, of training a competent personnel, and that they must bargain wages and working conditions with unions.
The provinces are the ones who bear the brunt of the expense of those medicare programs and strive to find the necessary funds to improve health services, considering the high interest rates on loans on the open market.
We believe that the financing formula in the public sector, through the Bank of Canada, would help to solve health problems in Canada.
Social security measures could be improved through the setting up of a realistic financial system which would not discourage goodwill or effort, but would provide all Canadians with the bare minimum, thanks to the wealth and production of Canada.
But is Canada rich enough to meet the essential needs of all Canadians? If so, why are all those needs not met? It is simply be-
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans cause the present financial system paralyses everything, monopolizes all the wealth and makes all efforts fruitless.
A financing process which would allow to bring about whatever is physically workable and desirable would result in putting an end to the misery and distress of millions of Canadians who are living below the poverty line.
I would like to say a few words on the consequences of such a financial system on savings, investments, employment, and finally on the consumers in general.
Billions of dollars are invested at present in the public sector, billions coming from the savings of Canadians and which are created at the stroke of a pen, by bonds issued by the federal and provincial governments, municipalities and school boards. Those projects are unproductive by their very nature, because they serve only to pay the interest on war debts.
The billions invested in the construction of roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, are unproductive. This is why the financing formula for the public sector we are suggesting will have the effect of freeing these nonproductive billions which could then be invested in the private sector. We think that it is legitimate to make a profit and that invested savings should bring an income, a reward and that they would find there a great opportunity to serve the common good by contributing to the country's progress.
At the present time, construction of houses, formerly financed on a large scale by savings invested in insurance companies, is paralyzed because government policies have discouraged investors and have led them towards other more profitable sectors. Savings freed from the public sector could be invested in the construction of houses, which would offer an opportunity for profitable investment and which would serve highly social purposes.
Savings diverted from the public sector towards the private one would also provide industry with a plentiful source of capital. Canadian firms would be less and less obliged to call upon foreign investors, foreign banks, to sell bonds and shares in order to insure their financing. Thus, Canadians might finance themselves the economic development of their country.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired, unless he should get the consent of the House to carry on his remarks.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Agreed. The hon. member for Roberval.


Charles-Arthur Gauthier: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I was saying that greater availability of capital, more and larger investments in Canadian industry would also result in creating many jobs for the thousands of unemployed who now have no opportunity of demonstrating their skills and their willingness to serve the Canadian community, enabling them to ensure the welfare and security of their families.
More investments, new factories, thousands of new jobs would flood the Canadian market with products in quantities to meet all requirements, either through sale on the local market, or by exchanging this increased production for foreign goods which we will always have to import.
An abundance of goods would result in lower prices which would benefit all Canadians who could buy those goods more cheaply-
Public capital financing by the Bank of Canada would ensure interest-free loans which would bring about lower taxes. This would result in a nominal increase in the purchasing power of all Canadians as well as in lower prices, which include all kinds of indirect taxes that make prices go up and deprive Canadians.
Mr. Speaker this is my final word. If the formula proposed by the hon. member for Champlain were implemented, the Canadian economy would really benefit the consumers. Since we believe that the consumer is the true purpose of the economy and that the satisfaction of the consumer's needs is the object of industrial activities, those purposes would be achieved. That is what we are asking for.



PRIVILEGE


[Stage Direction]
[DOT]'TIME" MAGAZINE OF INFORMATION IN

Mr. Speaker:: Approximately 55 minutes ago the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) gave the Chair notice of a question of privilege under Standing Order 17(2). In view of the fact that the hour required for the notice will expire in about two minutes, I
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
assume there would be consent of the House to allow the hon. member to state his question at the present time. This would obviate interrupting the hon. member who is about to start his speech. He will have an opportunity to make his contribution, without being interrupted, after we have disposed of the question of privilege.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[DOT] (5:50 p.m.)


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, my question of privilege is based upon an article in Time magazine which apparently reached the newsstands this afternoon after Orders of the Day had been completed. Thus, this is the first opportunity I have had to raise the matter. If it had not been for the requirement of giving one hour's notice we would have been able to raise it earlier than now.
The article in Time magazine, which ranges over six pages, complete with pictures and the like, contains a number of what are purported to be-and I do not doubt their truthfulness-direct quotations from the interim report of the LeDain Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical use of Drugs in Canada. Even though that report has been kept as an inner cabinet, confidential document up until now, there have been rumours and expressions in the news field about the contents of the report-but none so extensive as those which appear in Time magazine.
Those rumours and the discussions which have revolved around what the LeDain Commission interim report might have contained have been in themselves sufficient to hamper Parliament in the proper and full prosecution of its concern for the question which the commission studied. However, I submit that the question of privilege is primarily that Time magazine, in its article which ranges, as I have said, over six pages, gives extensive quotations from the report itself, paraphrases other parts of the report and makes references to minority reports in it and the like, in itself totally interferes with the work of Parliament and makes it at this stage virtually impossible for Parliament, thoroughly and properly, to take any action it would like to take with respect to that report.
If, for the sake of argument, the government wants even at this stage to maintain the confidentiality of the report, if questions are asked about it the government is in the position of not being able to answer, of not being
DEBATES	8127
Interim Report on Non-Medical Use of Drugs able to make comments about items that appear in the press, and the like. I submit that this is interference. If I could briefly put on the record a few direct quotations from the article in Time magazine, it may assist the Chau- in coming to a conclusion about the matter of privilege. The article starts off, right in its first paragraph, with a quotation as follows:
We believe that the emphasis must shift...from a reliance on suppression to a reliance on the wise exercise of freedom of choice.
The next paragraph says:
So states the interim report of Ottawa's Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical use of Drugs in Canada.
It goes on, in this first page, to say about the commission:
It recommends that possessing or trafficking in either drug remain on the books as a crime, but that the offence be removed from the Narcotic Control Act under which a younster who offers a friend a joint of pot can, theoretically, face up to life imprisonment-
The commission further recommends that criminal records for drug offences be destroyed after two years.
Here is another direct quotation:
-"one of the major problems involved in the non-medical use of drugs." Says the report-
Then there is another quotation, and so on. I do not wish to give more extensive quotations than these from the first page, nor to go on into the article itself. Based upon those quotations I would offer a motion to the House, if it is found that there is a question of privilege and that the publication Time magazine, with the extracts in it from the LeDain Commission report and other factors inherent in the article, interferes with the proper functioning of Parliament. My motion seeks to attach no blame to the government or to anyone else, but simply to have an inquiry or investigation into how Time magazine came to acquire this particular report.
We know that in the news field, Mr. Speaker, it is not uncommon for organizations, magazines, newspapers, television stations and the like to try to obtain what in the trade are called scoops and exclusive articles or items, and to obtain them by way of offering money, which often gives them prior and exclusive access to a particular document. Four or five months ago I heard rumours- that is all they were at that time-that Time magazine, among others, made offers of pretty substantial amounts of money to acquire the exclusive rights to the interim report. I just
8128	COMMONS
Interim Report on Non-Medical Use of Drugs wonder, with the publication of this article today, if Time was the successful bidder in that endeavour. But it is a fact that Time magazine does have a commission report that has so far been denied the people of Canada, and I submit that interferes with the operation of Parliament in its consideration of this matter.
This is a highly moral question, a matter of great concern to the health and psychological well-being of our nation, because the question of drug abuse is slipping through our society at all levels. One does not even need any great connection with those activities at any level of society to know that this is happening, because there are common and regular references in the newspapers to the fact that marijuana is a common companion at some parties held in our middle and upper classes. We know that we have weekend heroin users in our schools, and that LSD and other drugs are readily available at all levels, by all age groups and in all sections of our society.
We can only seek to deal properly and effectively with this question if everything is above board and if the LeDain Commission, for which we had great hopes, provides the basis of an answer that Parliament might give to the people of Canada, not in a partisan way but in an individual and moral way-in the way that Parliament should operate-on a non-partisan basis. That should be our objective-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest to the hon. member that he is now going beyond the terms of the question of privilege which he has raised. He is debating the essence of the matter, and I do not think his intervention should be allowed to continue along these lines. I fully appreciate the interest in what he is saying at the present time, but perhaps we should try to limit this debate to the strictly procedural question.
I wonder, since it is just about six o'clock, whether it would be the desire of the House that we conclude this matter now. I have some doubt whether it would be entirely fair to pursue it much beyond six o'clock, in view of the fact that we are on a supply day. I would therefore suggest to hon. members that we try to dispose of the matter before we rise.


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, I was simply making my concluding remarks to indicate the necessity of taking some action. One action I hope to propose by way of this
[Mr. Howard (Skeena).1
DEBATES	June 15, 1970
motion, and another is calling for the tabling later this evening, or tomorrow at the latest, of the report itself with or without a policy statement by the government. My motion, based on what I believe to be a proper question of privilege, is as follows:
That this House is of the opinion that the government should conduct an immediate investigation to ascertain how the interim report of the Commission of Inquiry into the Non-Medical Use of Drugs came into the possession of Time magazine and to report its findings, either interim or final, to the House not later than June 26, 1370.


Mr. Speaker:: If there is no further debate on the point, I am prepared to give a ruling now.
[DOT] (6:00 p.m.)


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, I would like to add a word or two to what has been said by my colleague from Skeena. I will confine myself strictly to the question of whether Your Honour should find that there is a prima facie case of privilege. It does seem to me, Mr. Speaker, without trying to attach blame to any particular group-whether it is the government, some other agency, or what have you-that the fact that this kind of thing happens does interfere with our capacity to do our work as Members of Parliament.
Without quoting all the authorities on privilege, hon. members will realize that this is what privilege is all about, namely, anything that interferes with our right to do our work as Members of Parliament. When this kind of thing happens, I suggest our rights are being interfered with. Therefore it seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) has made a proper suggestion, namely, that how this situation arose in this particular case should be investigated; the House should know how it came about. I hope Your Honour will agree that there is a prima facie case of privilege in the sense that the functions of Parliament have been interfered with by what has happened.


Mr. Speaker:: I thank the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) for his contribution to this very interesting point. As was indicated by the Chair earlier, the necessary notice was given just about an hour ago and this gave the Chair time to reflect on the question and study the precedents. It also gave the Chair time to come to a conclusion on the very interesting arguments brought forth by the hon. member for Skeena (Mr. Howard), supported by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre.
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
Hon. members realize that this point has already been proposed twice by way of a question of privilege. Last week, on either Thursday or Friday, a like motion was proposed by the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Baldwin) and a similar motion was proposed earlier today. When the first motion was advanced for the consideration of the Chair, the suggestion was that the fact that the report was not being published by the government was in itself a breach of the privileges of the House, and that the matter should be investigated by a committee.
After hearing argument, the Chair reached the conclusion that it was not a question of privilege; that, basically, if a document which has been commissioned by the government is not made public and the opposition wants the document to be made public, it can present a motion for the production of papers in the normal way. This was perhaps a harsh suggestion, and I realize it has serious practical difficulties; but the rule is there. I suggested to hon. members that on this basis there was no question of privilege.
The subsequent question arose as to whether some of the information contained in the report might-as the hon. member for Skeena puts it in a very positive way-have been made public either by the government or some other source, and that that in itself is a question of privilege which ought to be investigated. There again, I have very serious doubts. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre and the hon. member for Skeena suggest that in this way the operation of Parliament has been hampered; that hon. members have been hampered in the discharge of their responsibilities as Members of Parliament in that information not yet given to the House has in some way found its way to the press or the public.
Does that constitute a question of privilege? The worst case that might be made by the hon. member would be that there has been deliberate misinformation by the minister. If this were so, then I suggest to hon. members we might have a question of privilege if there were a substantive motion directed against the individual or directed against the minister as a member of the House. If there were a specific charge, the matter might be referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections. That is not the subject matter of the motion proposed now. The motion is simply that an inquiry should be launched to investigate how
DEBATES	8129
Interim Report on Non-Medical Use of Drugs this information leaked out, if it is a fact that information has actually been conveyed to members of the press.
I fail to see how this can be a question of privilege. There are a number of precedents indicating to hon. members that this type of situation cannot be treated as a question of privilege. Hon. members may remember that last year the hon. member for Calgary North (Mr. Woolliams) raised a question of privilege on the alleged advance publication of information relating to Dorval airport. It was suggested by the hon. member for Calgary North, who was supported by a number of hon. members, that this constituted a question of privilege and that the matter should be referred to the Committee on Privileges and Elections for investigation. This is precisely what the hon. member wanted to do; he wanted the committee to ask questions, to interview witnesses and ascertain how this information had got into the hands of the public. This is what the hon. member for Skeena would like done in connection with this particular alleged leak of information.
If hon. members will consult Journals of the House of Commons for Monday, March 31, 1969, they will see that the Chair at that time had painstakingly gone through many precedents, had studied the precedents in the British House and had come to the conclusion that this could not be the subject of a question of privilege. I refer hon. members to two cases which are particularly relevant. One is the Thomas case, where a motion was made for an investigation under the Tribunals of Inquiry (Evidence) Act. After debate on that motion, it was resolved on the main question "that the report be accepted," etc. The relevant point is that the matter was not considered at any time by way of a question of privilege.
Then in the Dalton case there was a suggestion that information had been leaked out. The President of the Privy Council (Mr. Macdonald) smiles, but he may not be thinking of the same Dalton.


An hon. Member:: They are all in the same Camp.


Mr. Speaker:: I am referring to the British Chancellor of the Exchequer of that time. The decision was the same, that the matter was not considered as a question of privilege. The conclusion was reached that the motion for study of the circumstances surrounding the leak of information could not be considered
June 15. 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans as a question of privilege but was, rather, a substantive motion and should be considered by way of substantive motion.
I suggest to the hon. member for Skeena and to all hon. members that what is being proposed now is a substantive motion. This kind of investigation cannot be carried out, by way of a question of privilege, by the Committee on Privileges and Elections or any other committee. I hope the hon. member for Skeena will accept the ruling I am making at this time. I am not suggesting that the matter is not an important one. I realize that it is, but I suggest that the duty of the Chair is to find whether there is a prima facie case of privilege and whether an investigation should be carried out by way of privilege. My ruling must be that there is not a prima facie case and that the hon. member's motion cannot be put at this time.
It being six o'clock, I do now leave the chair.
At 6.10 p.m. the House took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The House resumed at 8 p.m.


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Matte:
That, in the opinion of this House, in view of the Government's inability to effectively combat the frightening increase in the public debt, the public sector of the Canadian economy, including the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards should be financed by direct interest-free loans from the Bank of Canada, repayable at the rate of the depreciation on the assets thus created.
Mr. Roland Godin (Porlneuf):: Mr. Speaker, I was in the House at the beginning of this sitting when the member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) introduced a motion censuring for its failure to fight efficiently, and I quote:
-the frightening increase in the public debt-
-and requesting that-
-the public sector of the Canadian economy, including the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the school boards should be 
financed by direct interest-free loans from the Bank of Canada, repayable at the rate of the depreciation on the assets.
Finally, the motion aims at restarting through proper financing all that is presently paralyzed or on the verge of paralysis in the economy. In my opinion, we are living the years 1929 to 1939 all over again.
While the central government is asking Canadians to "tighten their belts", the provinces, the municipalities, the cities are cancelling projects. Thus, workers take to the roads. Being unemployed, Canadians travel from one province to the other. Unemployed from Manitoba and Saskatchewan thumb rides to Alberta and British Columbia while those from the Maritimes and Quebec head for Ontario.
They are qualified workers: electricians, welders, machinists, designers and others from all kinds of trades and they are men of good will. They wander without gaining much since there is stagnation in all provinces.
[DOT] (8:10 p.m.)
We attend federal-provincial conferences where tax sharing is discussed. Yet, no effective measure is proposed to solve the problem once and for all. As I said earlier, we are going through the 1929-39 recession over again. Those who are 45 or more remember those ten years of economic paralysis. No government felt able to end it. But suddenly a war was declared and financial permits were issued to produce, to recruit, to destroy and to kill. Ten parliamentary sessions, each lasting several months, each in Ottawa had not succeeded in prompting the government to find a way to end the unnatural crisis which was starving and depriving whole families, while goods remained unsold and many more could still be offered. A so-called emergency session of only six days, namely from September 7 to 13, 1939, was enough to involve the country completely in a war that was to cost billions of dollars. That decision was speedy and unanimous.
A minister in the Mackenzie King cabinet, the hon. J. H. Harris, resorted to all his eloquence when he stated: "the eyes of all Canadians are on this House. If such is the case, does it not rest with us to act and think as one man? The reason is obvious, since Christianity, democracy and individual freedom are at stake."
Christianity and individual freedom did not seem at stake to him nor to the party to which he belonged during all those years
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
when Canadian parents found it impossible to feed their children, when young people took refuge in concentration camps, the said labour camps to get a meagre ration in return for their complete slavery, when able-bodied men were unemployed, wandering in the bush, roving from one town to another, while others were taking shelter in huts which they built with pieces of sheet iron, scrap wood and tar-paper found on the dumping grounds of the city of Montreal.
The authorities had nothing to offer to families or individuals. Of course, the provinces, the cities, the municipalities had to try to balance their budget. For them, as well as for the companies, trying to balance their budget was only normal. But when the budget is prepared by a sovereign government, there should be no need of balancing it. This would be nonsense. Clearly, an individual cannot indulge into expenditures that exceed his income without getting into debt, but the situation is entirely different for a sovereign government.
The sovereign government is the nation itself. If the nation does not increase its total production, the balance will come naturally as a result of the method suggested. Credits in circulation will be balanced by money withdrawals since no monetary expansion will be justified.
However if, as is normal, total production increases, more money will be needed. Issues must exceed withdrawals or else there would not be any money increase.
And if it is not the country itself, through its government, which makes that increase necessary, some other institution will have to take over. In fact, to-day it is the issuing banks which are handling it, but they realize this expansion by creating debts. This is why any development to-day entails a debt.
A sovereign government which strives to balance its budgets gives up its sovereignty. It lowers itself to the rank of a mere individual. It hands over its sovereignty to others, to those who undertake to look after development and credit compensation. That is why, normally, world banks insist so much on every government balancing its own budget. They even bring about the fall of those which pay no heed. They are jealous of their sovereignty and fear that governments should shake themselves free from their bondage.
With what would the government pay public services if it does not obtain money through taxes?
DEBATES	8131
Suggested Interest-free Loans
Once again, I repeat, the government has a mandate from the community. If the community, through its Parliament, has decided to avail itself of the nation's productive capacity, it is simply issuing to those entrusted with the undertaking drawing rights on that productive capacity. It generates its own credits and its own modes of payment. The government and the citizens are drawing on the same productive capacity, but the citizens contribute their money and the government the decision of the community's representatives.
Of course, the productive capacity has to be able to meet the demand. It would be futile for the community to call for a production it cannot supply. The following tax-free public works example assumes the existence of a social credit system including issuance and cancellation of credit-money according to circumstances, with periodic distribution of dividends to each and every citizen, including compensated adjustment of prices. One must keep in mind a complete Creditiste economy to understand the operation of public financing without taxes.
Public works without taxes, the building of a bridge without taxes, it is not under the existing financial system that we can find that. Under this system, finance orders, conditions, limits and restricts the realities.
But under a Social Credit system, finance is nothing more than the accounting representation of realities. We produce and we express in credit the value of the product. We destroy and we express in debit the value of what is being destroyed.
The question: "Are we able to pay"? or "How shall we pay"? no longer applies.
Does a community want a bridge? The only question to be considered is: "Are we able to build a bridge?" To be able, means to have the materials, the technicians, the labour needed to achieve this project.
If it is a provincial undertaking, the Minister of Public Works will submit the project to the provincial government that will approve or reject it, or delays it until later in the name of the community as a whole. To take this decision, the legislature enters into no financial considerations. It only determines whether the project meets the population's requirements and whether the physical possibilities of the province permits it.
Certainly the bridge can be evaluated on the basis of the estimate, of the materials and of the labour required. The construction of
June 15, 1970

[DOT] (8:20 p.m.)
Suggested Interest-free Loans the bridge may be entrusted to the lowest bidder if he is competent. Considering finance as a reflect of reality, a lower cost means less consumption, less materials, time and energy. The more finished goods a country gets with a minimum amount of raw material, the richer it becomes.
Let us suppose the member for Chambly (Mr. Pilon) retires as a member of Parliament to start a business and gets the contract for the building of the proposed bridge. He wants $500,000 to carry out the project. Where will the government get this amount to pay the contractor? It should not worry about it. Finance is not a matter of administration, it is a matter of book-keeping. The working of a Creditiste financial system presupposes the setting up of a book-keeping agency. Let us call it the provincial Credit Office since provincial finance is concerned. The head office is in Quebec, but the Office has a net work of branches according to the needs, more or less like the banks with their head office and then-branches.
The branches deal with the local producers and tradesmen and they send their reports to the head office as the banks do. Who will appoint the accounts in charge of the management of the system? The government, since it is a government agency. The appointment cannot be made elsewhere, but once the commissioners have been chosen the government should not interfere with their operations.
In the name of the community the government sets the goals which are determined by the act creating the Office. But it is up to the accountants to carry out the necessary operations in order to achieve these goals according to production and consumption, to the wealth that comes and goes.
It is more or less like the judicial system. The government enacts laws and appoints judges, but it does not interfere with the convictions. Judges are bound by a legislation which they did not make and by actions which they did not make either. Judges could even hand down judgments against the government which appointed them.
This is what the credit board would do. It would not dictate what to produce or what to consume, but would simply record the results. Then, the accountants would draw conclusions on a mathematical basis, according to the objective drawn up in the legislation creating the Board.

1.	The Bureau should create and cancel credit money in relation with the production and the disappearance of wealth;
2.	Periodically credit each citizen a dividend guaranteeing him a share of the assets of his country;
3.	Periodically adjust the retail prices paid by buyers, according to the relation of the global consumption to the global production from time to time.
To come back to the bridge: the Bureau would therefore not decide whether or not a bridge is to be built, nor for what amount. But the Bureau, and not the government, would be responsible for financing the bridge as it is built, since in the system under study, finance is but accounting. The contractor for the bridge, the former member for Chambly, could dispose of the required funds to pay the bills and salaries throughout the undertaking. In this case, he would receive his total payment, $500,000, upon handling over the completed bridge. But he could also need advances to pay for material and labour. In that case, very simple: he goes to the Credit Bureau.
Let us suppose the contractor takes delivery of cement, wood, steel, for an amount of $25,000; all he does is present his bills to the Credit Bureau. The bills prove the existence of wealth, since it has even been delivered. The Bureau does not have to make an estimate of the value of the material. They see the bills and create corresponding credit on the basis of that wealth; $25,000. They give that much credit to the contractor who uses it to pay the producers of wealth.
In fact, a loan on demand is granted the contractor, a loan without any other guarantee than the wealth produced and without interest. Why should interest be charged? Why should a fine be imposed on those who produce wealth? While the bridge is being built the contractor can get the necessary credit up to $500,000. Let us assume that the contractor could get advances amounting to $225,000. When and how is he going to pay that back?
When the bridge is built, the contractor has it approved by the Department of Public Works. Once the inspection is over and the bridge has been approved, the minister gives to the contractor a certificate showing that he has delivered a $500,000 bridge to the province. Then the contractor presents this certificate to the credit office which, on behalf of the community which received the bridge, gives the contractor a receipt for the advance
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
in the amount of $225,000 and a credit-money for $275,000 to complete the price of the bridge. The Credit Office records on the assets side of the province the amount of $500,000 which represents the new bridge. The contractor had made a profit; he has paid a salary to his employees, and he has paid the materials suppliers with the $500,000 which represent a debt on the production of the community. This is liabilities versus assets. If no one had used that money, the province would have simply acquired extra wealth and nothing else would have changed. Of course this money, at least a good part of it, is used to buy food, clothing, shoes, to pay the rent, transportation, medicine, and so on. All these purchases represent consumption, and they also contribute to greater production.
As long as they have not reached their maximum, agriculture and industry can increase their production. No need to embark upon lengthy investigations to find out that nowadays a great part of the production is unused or wasted.
Should the increase caused by the credits issued for the bridge be sufficient in itself to meet the increased demand, the bridge will be paid through that production increase.
In fact, the bridge will have been paid through the work of its builders. And those builders will really have been paid by the community's increased production. The community will have paid the cost of its bridge in the form of work, products, services, without having to deprive itself or to lower its standard of living.
In the opposite case, where consumption financed through the $500,000 would increase without any increase in production, consumption would become greater than production. The result would be an increase in the readjusted price. The buyers would get less for their money. It would amount, in the end, to a tax on the citizen's standard of living. The result would probably be between those two extremes.
But, in any case, the consumers, on account of the price readjustment, get the whole production corresponding to their needs. In every case also, each citizen is sure to get a part of the available production on account of his dividend.
The system has to be considered as a whole to see that not only does it preserve the rights of the individual but also the aspirations of the community while truly reflecting how wealth is produced and destroyed whether it be public or private.
DEBATES	8133
Suggested Interest-free Loans
If we feel that capitalism is better than socialism or communism, let us preserve capitalism. But if we feel that capitalism does not benefit everybody, let us try to study it, analyze it in order to straighten it out, while preserving its strength and its merits. This is elementary logics: not to destroy what is good, but simply to straighten out what is warped.
It is not by creating new debts through borrowing that we shall be able to repay our debts. I believe that the state should recover its financial control. The state must recover control over issuing and regulating money and credit. It will do so through an independent board empowered with all the necessary authority to achieve this purpose, that of financing public services and ownership.


Mr. Rod Thomson (Baiileford-Kindersley):: Mr. Speaker, it would be nice if we could arrange to have all this money referred to in the motion provided interest free. I have no doubt that many municipalities would rush to build some project or other if that were possible. Perhaps some would commence building madly in all directions. However, I feel that the motion would have been more reasonable had the party sponsoring it suggested some limit to it or put forward some priorities in the way of projects to be built with this money. I think all of us, including the members of the Creditiste party to my left, would accept the fact that there must be a limit to what can be built in any given period. If you allowed too much money to enter the economy in a short space of time, the economy would be burned up.
I realize that my friends to my left would not agree with me, but I suggest that it would be a good idea in times of prosperity to build up project banks, if you will, these banks to be comprised of, for example, hospitals, schools, bridges, senior citizens' homes and government building of all kinds. Then I suggest that different communities list their priorities, say in order of age, need and cost, depending on the community. As I say, these banks would be built up when times were relatively good. When a recession hit a particular area, or the country as a whole faced a depression, we could then start to build some of these projects in an effort to compensate for lack of business activity in a community, or to offset unemployment.
Too often in the past when we have felt flush, when business has been good, when
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans farm incomes have been up and everything going along as it should, we have decided to build a new hospital, a bridge or a school. I am suggesting that this is not really what we should do. I am suggesting we build such projects and use them as economic weapons to offset fluctuations in the economy. In effect, let us manufacture business or employment, as the case may be. I think an approach like this is a fairly reasonable one. I am sure if this idea had been explored in the thirties or at other periods of depression, things would have been much different in certain sections of the economy. However, in those days we did not believe in interfering with this sort of thing.
I will go so far as to say that I do not think even today we are doing all we can to solve such problems. I understand that the Manitoba government has set aside capital grants in their budget for projects of this nature. I think it would be wise to take a serious look at the approach they have taken. A short time ago the federal government attempted to dampen down the fires of inflation and one of the weapons they used was to eliminate depreciation allowances on buildings in cities like Toronto and Edmonton where inflation was at a high level. However, things did not work out as well as they might have. I am suggesting we take the other approach and actually put some money, effort and thought into building up business and employment through the use of project banks.
[DOT] (8:30 p.m.)
I have in mind something along this line: If there should be a problem in Toronto, Biggar or Saskatoon, the federal government or the provincial government might suggest to the municipality that if it started within, say, a six months' period to build a hospital or whatever it might be, a larger than usual grant would be allowed for this purpose. This would be an encouragement to the municipality to build such a facility? I believe it would be a reasonable incentive to build during a period when there is slack in the economy. Not only would such a program help the particular community, but it might enable the municipality to get a better deal from the builder if it were carried out when the builder did not have things geared up too tightly.
I suggest that in some areas, for instance in my area, while one might say there is a recession the people in the area might say there is a depression. Too often one looks at an economic situation and says it is a recession, but

when it relates to him personally it is a depression. There is a need for a hospital in my home town of Biggar. The municipality might see fit to build such a facility if there were some extra encouragement. In using my community as an illustration I do not mean to suggest that it is any better or worse economically than any other community. I suggest that interest-free money by itself will not stimulate the economy in some areas. I suggest that we take a serious look at the project bank concept which I have mentioned.


Mr. Charles-Eugene Dionne (Kamouraska):: For several reasons, Mr. Speaker, I derive a great deal of satisfaction from taking part in the debate on the motion now before the House.
First, I would like to show that the present system of indebtedness tends to discourage people. To realize this, one has only to look at the pyramid of unpaid and unpayable debts under today's upside down financial system which leads legislators to dream up every conceivable way of finding new taxes. So much so that legislators and civil servants sometimes contradict each other. Here is an example: It is generally agreed that an annual income of about $5,000 is required for a family of four or five to live decently. On the other hand, legislators under the influence of today's financial dictatorship tax the income over $1,000 of a man with a family. If we stop and think about such legislation, we realize that the lackeys of the system are in total disagreement with reality.
In reply to a question put on the order paper, in 1964, in which I asked how much was paid in interests on the public debt since Confederation, the Minister of Finance said: Gross cost of interest on the national debt to the government of Canada from July 1, 1867, to March 31,	1964, was $15,287 million
(including an estimated amount of $952 million for the fiscal year 1963-64).
Economists and politicians would easily find an explanation to the rising cost of living, if they carried out their inquiries on the constant increase of interest charges on public debts. Why continue to look for solutions that are nowhere to be found in a topsy-turvy system?
Social Credit is turned into ridicule by associating it with a "dollar machine". Now the opposite is exactly true. There is no dollar machine more efficient and diabolic than the
June 15. 1970

present bank system. Diabolic, because it always deprives the people in favour of money lenders.
The people are crushed under the taxes used to pay constantly and gradually increasing interest charges on the national debt, heavy and unfair taxes, because out of proportion to the services rendered by a centralist state.
"The greatest delusion of the mind is to believe that things are as we want them to be rather than what in fact they are." I am quoting Bossuet.
In such a situation, are we not justified in asking ourselves some questions? What occult power compels our governments to maintain such a dictatorship? The real question is to determine who is running the country. The politicians elected by and for the people, or the big financiers?
There are three ways in which a government can obtain funds required to meet its obligations. First of all, it can tax the citizens and the institutions and thereby get hold of their money. Second, it can borrow from the people and the institutions and pay some interest on the amounts borrowed. Third, it can simply create money and use the funds so created to make its purchases.
Opposition to the creation of money in the past used to be based apparently on the belief that demand for goods always had to be equal to the supply, as long as the government did not interfere with the economy. John Maynard Keynes destroyed that belief when he showed that nobody could be sure that the demand was always equal to the supply in rich countries.
Mr. Robert Theobald, an American economist of high repute, wrote the following not so long ago, and I quote:
There are many methods to make up the difference between supply and demand. It could be possible to decrease the extent of the supply without greatly affecting the demand by reducing working hours for the same salary.
[DOT] (8:40 p.m.)
It would be possible to increase demand by telling the people that more goods are needed to live comfortably and enjoy a higher standard of living.
The government could simply make up the difference between actual and potential production by building new schools, clearing slums and controlling pollution, because there would be unused resources in the economy.
The government would not have to raise money through taxes or loans. Money could be simply created. Additional funds would not cause inflation because, by definition, goods are not scarce.
Suggested Interest-free Loans
This, Mr. Speaker, is the testimony of an American economist who thinks it possible to democratize money and to use new interest-free credit for the development and social organization of a country.
While the Minister of Finance (Mr. Benson) and this government allow rises in the interest rate and increase the burden of the Canadian taxpayer, everywhere in the world loans are granted under extremely easy conditions, $25, $30, $50 and even $100 million interest-free loans for periods of time from 50 to 60 years and often with a 10 years' grace period.
Those who are against Social Credit generally claim that the application of Creditiste theories would lead to inflation. The Liberal members said it, the Conservative members agree and, unfortunately, a number of economists who base their studies upon the data of the present system, think so too.
However, it is to be noticed that in Canada as well as in the United States, both countries, like most countries in the world, are facing this kind of malaise that they call "inflation" and which was brought about by the unbalanced financial system of today. Is it the fault of the social credit, a doctrine which is not applied anywhere, or is it the fault of the actual financial system?
Today, there is no shortage of credit. The problem is that the credit is not social enough. In these days, it is not necessary to be an expert to find the great number of credit facilities available to the people.
Federal and provincial governments give us a great many examples of the way credit is used in all departments. Such a procedure has become normal. We find that at times, during the session of the various legislatures, federal or provincial, discussions become animated when estimates have to be approved or rejected.
The minister concerned sometimes becomes nervous and anxious. He feels the need to call upon the best advisers in his department to help him justify the use of the estimates submitted for approval. This occasional tension is due to misuse of certain credits voted to cover expenses that sometimes greatly exceed the experts' estimations, because they failed to take probable waste into consideration.
The Glassco report demonstrated how bureaucrats can disrupt the experts' forecasts when carelessness prevails constantly in economic fields where efficiency should be the rule.
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans
In addition to the kind of credit we have been discussing, there are many others: international, national, provincial, municipal, import, export, credit for purchasing, credit for sales. Indeed our country has advanced so much in the field of credit under our present financial system that we grant credit to foreign countries for the purchase of our products.
Here in Canada, many Canadians are bom, live and die on credit. People are continually in tow of the publicity heard on television or radio. A lot of them are feeding themselves with instant products, three minutes meals, and are relying on automatic machines bought on credit. All those rogues have helped many families get head over ears in debt.
But, we need not loose heart, our credit is still good with the finance companies which will provide us with the credit we need to balance our budget for the time being. It is even possible to purchase on credit a secondhand car at the cheapest possible price, in spite of all the hazards this implies in terms of highway safety.
However, the whole process by which these various terms and conditions of credit are established is directed, controlled, managed and monopolized by the system which issues bank credit.
Things controlled by man are subject to the human laws of production, exchange and purchasing power. This power is expressed in a practical way by monetary values. Money is to the exchange of goods what words are to the exchange of ideas. Production and consumption are thus related to the purchasing power or to the exchange power.
If we consider the world as a whole, we realize there is a blockage, an obstruction. For instance, the farming people in Canada are seriously threatened by overproduction due to deviation of consumption. The accumulated surpluses of Canadian wheat are equivalent to eight years of consumption. The dairy products of Canada are anxiously waiting for consumers. In 1969, overproduction of milk in Canada reached one billion pounds of milk or 100 million gallons. Lawyers have now come to the point where they are inverting the order of creation by saying to the farm producers:	"Stop sowing; kill your
cows."
A premium of $200 is about to be granted to the milk producers in six countries of the Common Market for every milk cow slaughtered.

Too poor to buy their own products, Canadians eat imported foods and chemical products sold at bargain prices. While underfed people are lacking milk and wheat, Canadian citizens, surrounded by mountains of wheat and heaps of milk cans, are suffering from hunger and from thirst.
Capitalis, the object of which is to regularize means of exchange is therefore in a bad conditoin. It should be corrected but not destroyed.
Instead of laying our economic system upon logical principles, upon the natural pattern, we remain tied to a system which does not provide the necessary means of distributing the existing abundance. Thus thousands of Canadian citizens must live in slums while there are enormous quantities of building materials available for the building of decent homes.
Thousands of Canadian citizens have to resort to social relief so as not to suffer too much from hunger, in a country offering through all possible advertising means such a great variety of products. Macaulay wrote in "The History of England":
The stability of the modem world is based upon the stability of its money, but it is obvious that the value of currency is unstable.
Whether all hardships inflicted upon the British people by bad kings, bad Parliaments, bad ministers and bad judges are not equal to the hardships due to the poor currency is doubtful-
A sound currency, namely a currency that keeps its stability through the repayment of debts and its purchasing power and which protects the purchasing power of salaries, savings and pensions, is the key to economic freedom, to progress and to development.
The end and objective of a monetary policy are therefore to maintain the dollar stability and to be the instrument of a maximum production. Indeed, next to the maintenance of law and order in a country, that should be the greatest responsibility of the state.
Everybody admits that the value of currency is based on goods and services. A steady balance should however be provided between the money issued and the production of goods.
It is unbelievable that governments, one after another, should have allowed private banks to create and issue millions of dollars in new currency without any obligation on their part of maintaining the stability of the purchasing power.
[DOT] (8:50 p.m.)
We do not want to disrupt everything or to set up a printing-shop, as some simple-mind-
June 15, 1970

ed persons have suggested. We already have the institutions required. It is only a matter of adjusting the values, a matter of accounting, so that the financial machinery may reflect the actual wealth, taking into account human self-respect and the value of things that can be produced in large enough quantities to feed, house and clothe the whole population.
It is quite astonishing to realize that all those researchers, more especially in the economic field, have not managed to come up with some means of distributing the abundant production that only has to be oriented to meet the needs of those waiting for it. There is certainly no shortage of means of transportation, since we have reached the point of going to the moon, spending millions of dollars just to satisfy our curiosity to "peer" on another planet, when thousands of human beings suffer from hunger, lack of shelter, clothing and care.
It is high time that our politicians, now at the helm, find a solution other then the plans submitted until now and which have only favoured even more the rich at the expense of the poor.
We do not pretend that the Social Credit theory we are advocating will be a panacea but it is logical to forecast that it will eliminate many reasons for concern.


Mr. F. J. Bigg (Pembina):: Mr. Speaker, as most members of the House know, I represent the constituency of Pembina in the Social Credit province of Alberta. It is passing strange to hear this eloquent plea for interest-free money after all these years of provincial Social Credit rule when little, if anything, was done to help the taxpayers of that rich and oil-filled province. You cannot put all the blame on the federal government because, after all, the only source of income for the federal government is the taxpayers, who must reside in a province.
For a long time it has been the practice of federal governments to try to equalize the wealth of the have-not provinces with the wealth of the haves. It is no secret that Alberta is one of the have provinces. One would expect that if Social Credit interest-free money policy could be worked anywhere with any hope of success, AJberta would be a fair testing ground. But what do we find? For at least 25 years the people of Alberta have been living in hope of receiving a dividend of $25 a month. Dining some of those 25 years Alberta was in a financial condition to make
Suggested Interest-free Loans at least a gesture in that regard. As a matter of fact, one year people who had been resident in Alberta for 20 years received $20 from the provincial government. For 25 years they had been hoping to receive $25 a month, but the pay-off was only $20.
The federal government, with socialism in full command and full sweep, is short of money. Even if it wanted to give us a dividend right now, it would be the first to admit it is broke, bankrupt, and it has made the country pretty well bankrupt from coast to coast. So this is no time to ask for a handout; it is no time to ask for a dividend. But, Mr. Speaker, it is time to ask the Canadian people to go back to work, and back to work we must go if we are to compete with western Europe which has now recovered after 25 years of handouts and interest-free money from the United States. Remember the Marshall Plan. The United States put Europe back on its feet, with disastrous results. Now the great United States finds itself alone, without friends. That is a great example of social credit: you find yourself abandoned, without friends. That is where the taxpayers of Alberta find themselves, abandoned and without friends.
Social Credit is supposed to be a free enterprise party. It is supposed to support the taxpayers, the people who do the work. But have those who do the work in Alberta benefited? I will speak for myself. In a small town of 3,500 people, which has no university, my taxes are $700 per year on a three-bedroom house. From the provincial government I get $50 rebate, so my full taxes are $650. If the Social Crediters are sincere, why do they not put oil revenues at the disposal of the municipalities? With considerable riches, hundreds of millions of dollars a year coming in, why do they not put some of this money at the disposal of the people who need it most, the bankrupt municipalities?
Mr. Speaker, if you examine the record you will find that the municipalities in the rich province of Alberta are the worst off in Canada. I can only come to one conclusion, that the Social Crediters do not mean or practice what they preach. They have the money in Alberta. They do not have to go to New York for it. It is there in Alberta, but the municipalities cannot get it because the Social Crediters want the same old power that most governments want, the power to control the purse strings and never mind the poor little worker, the poor little taxpayer. How long do you think you can go on killing the goose that lays the golden egg? Not much longer.
8138	COMMONS
Suggested Interest-free Loans
We in the Conservative party have been consistent throughout the years. Taking over in 1957, we found the country bankrupt as it is today. We found the people of Canada starving in the midst of plenty. We found them with too much grain, too many cattle, too many hogs, too many chickens and nobody to buy these things. So we adopted the only answer-not a quick answer, and not a sharpened pencil. We adopted a rolled-up sleeves, back to work, back to trading policy and we balanced the country's budgets. We got the economy rolling. The only sorrow of Canadians is that they allowed the same old gang to take over again and put us back where we were 13 sad years ago.
We must go back to work in order to compete in the markets of the world. We have efficiency in the working people of Canada. This is no class war that I am waging. In this context I mean the people who are producing, the small businessman, the manufacturer, the efficient builder of houses and the entrepreneur. They are the real source of wealth in this country and no government has a right to tax them, no government has a right to lay red herrings across the trail-Socialist red herrings or Social Credit red herrings- because only through hard work, with reasonable prices and solid world markets, can we regain our feet.
Solid world markets made success possible for us, after we were forced to devalue the dollar, not because of any fault of ours but because Canada was bankrupt. We took the only way out. We got back into the export markets of the world. We recovered our share of the export markets and we sold every bushel of grain until the boast of the Minister of Agriculture of that day was, "You grow it; we will sell it." It is a long time since anybody has dared to say that about agriculture or any other sector of the economy, except perhaps nickel, uranium and some of the other hardware of war.
[DOT] (9:00 p.m.)
No government has ever been proud that the only way Canada could keep afloat was to supply the world with war materials. You are getting this from a self-declared hawk, Mr. Speaker. I am a hawk to the extent that I believe in the full defence of Canada. I do not believe in a "respectable" budget for defence which is designed to fool the Americans and bamboozle the Canadian taxpayers. It does not fool the Americans, Mr. Speaker. We have not saved a cent in the defence budget.

DEBATES	June 15, 1970
We have no defence in Canada, and taxes remain the same. How long can this bamboozling go on?
For 25 years we have had Social Credit rule in Alberta, and the people of that province snort in disdain when debt-free money is mentioned. Grow up! This is the twentieth century. Nobody accepts this kind of promise now, although it put the Social Credit government in power. Nobody believed the old shin-plaster about $25 a month when it was promised. Nobody has believed it since, and nobody believes it now. Nobody will believe this resurrection of a concept that never was born. It is an old story.
I find it passing strange, Mr. Speaker, that anybody would dare pretend that an experiment like this would work, for 25 years when they have had the finest opportunity, in the richest province in Canada, to put it into effect and nothing has been done but to give a $20 bill. That is all the people of Alberta ever got. This scheme is a dead loss; it would not even pay the interest on $25 a month for one year. For the last 20 years I have been hearing this empty nonsense, and I am tired of it. If the Social Crediters of Canada would only take a good look at the facts, they would realize that the only effective action in this situation is for all of us to get together with good, old-fashioned common sense, old-fashioned hard work and old-fashioned effort to retrieve the export markets of the world and compete with western Europe, the United States and Asia. We can show that the people of Canada have been, are now and always will be efficient.


An hon. Member:: The same old speech that we have heard before.


Frederick Johnstone (Jack) Bigg: You will hear it a good many times from me. I can be consistent. I have never changed my view and neither has the party that I have the honour to represent. We have worked for balanced budgets, which is the best form of debt-free money you can get. You cannot pile up a national debt if you pay as you go, and that is the only honest way of going about it. Everybody within sound of my voice-and I imagine that is everybody in this chamber-knows that there is no such thing as debt-free money; there is no such thing as something for nothing. You will never get something for nothing. We believe in paying as we go. We believe in paying our debts and giving people a fair return for the money they have saved. I would not ask people to give us money debt free. That is to steal-
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans


An hon. Member:: The CPR got some. [DOT] (9:10 p m.)


Frederick Johnstone (Jack) Bigg: If the CPR got debt-free money, that was taking something they did not have coming to them. There is never something for nothing. Those who try to get it are free riders. The new doctrine of something for nothing, by right, is a lie. The people of Canada may want to give something out of the goodness of their hearts-they have done it to the extent of hundreds of millions of dollars-but there is nothing that says anybody has a right to it. No government has the right to take my charitable feelings and put them into print.
If we want to produce in this country an atmosphere in which a man can work, instead of taking away more and more of the profits of his labour we should be striving to give him more and more in his pay cheque for the work he performs. If you did this you would have fewer and fewer people needing relief. We need policies to send young people back to school. We need aggressive trade policies to sell goods in the markets of the world. We need to encourage businessmen. Forget the white paper and give the businessmen of Canada encouragement to compete in the markets of the world. They have to compete with manufactured goods in the way we have competed with agricultural products.
There is no more efficient farmer in the world than the Canadian farmer, but never has he been so hard up. The policy of lending interest-free money, money at 5 per cent, or subsidizing loans to farmers of western Canada will not do much good unless markets are found for their products. You are only hanging a debt around the farmer's neck. Why let him have $75,000 without a well-thought out policy on how he will pay it back? There is no such thing as debt-free money, and I would never vote for it.
My friends opposite voted for debt-free money. I do not know why they have had this sensible change of heart, except that they know it was Conservative policy which put Canada back on her feet between 1957 and 1962. To the extent that this administration has followed the guidelines we gave them, we have prospered. When they have gone off into the wild blue yonder on a wild goose chase, we have come to disaster. It is the people of Canada who have paid and who will pay until we return to the common sense of hard work, thrift and obtaining foreign markets.


Mr. Adrien Lambert (Bellechasse):: Mr. Speaker, as I listened to the hon. member who spoke before me deal with the motion, I was under the impression that I was sitting in the Edmonton legislature in view of the efforts made to criticize the policy of the provincial government of Alberta. However, the motion is clear and it does say:
That, in view of the government's inability to effectively combat the frightening increase in the public debt in the opinion of this house, the public sector of the Canadian economy, including the federal government, the provinces, the municipalities and the schoolboards should be financed by interest free loans-
This is where there is a lack of objectivity and efforts are made to impute motives to the Ralliement creditiste and its supporters when they defend this policy.
In my estimation, a man who earns $100 and who agrees to lend it to a friend or a partner is really entitled to receive an interest because in some way he rents out the fruit of his labour. We recognize this and we accept it right away and I consider dishonest those who would like to make the people believe that we object to all this lending system of the fruit of one's work to an industry or to a chum. What we want especially is to lighten the burden of the individuals and the community by strongly urging the government so that all new credit based on the work, of all the Canadian people, be loaned to the federal government, the municipalities, the provinces, under an accounting system but free of interest which crushes everyone at the same time.
Last year, during a debate on pieces of legislation introduced by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Olson) with regard to the Farm Credit Corporation,-to unfreeze this interest system which was frozen at 5 per cent,-our friends in the official opposition categorically objected to it arguing that it would tend to impose an extra burden on the farmers and place them in an unfavourable position.
Now, Mr. Speaker, if excessively high interest rates can create problems for private enterprise, for individuals, why should it be different in the case of the interests that crush the federal and provincial governments, all our public bodies, and those who administer them, who of necessity have to levy high enough taxes to meet their payments?
June 15, 1970

Suggested Interest-free Loans They do not grow on trees. There was a time when I believed that they actually came from the land.
I tilled 90 acres of virgin soil, but I never found one bloody buck behind the plough. So, it must come from somewhere.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: Money comes from whoever has the control over the printing of dollars. Why is it so scarce while there should be plenty of it. Because it is not controlled democratically, but in a wrong way. We, of the Ralliement creditiste, demand that the credit of the nation, made up by the nation, be put at the disposal of the nation. That is all we ask for, and nothing else. This is pure horse sense. The tap feeding the public Treasury should be controlled by the Minister of Finance who is at our service, at the service of the people, at the service of the government, which is not the case of those who have now the privilege of controlling money and credit.
[DOT] (9:30 p.m.)
That is all we are asking for. It seems to me plain common sense. And then we find people who say: "As long as you do not bring us together with some influent person able to help us understand what Social Credit, we cannot believe in it.
Mr. Speaker, in turn, I ask the government and those who are advocating the present system to bring us together with some influent person able to help us understand the present financial system and its effectiveness when-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I regret I have to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired unless the House will give unanimous consent to allow him to carry on his remarks. Is it the pleasure of the House?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Agreed. The hon. member for Bellechasse.


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank my colleagues. I am convinced of one thing and it is that all of us here are working in all goodwill. We want our discussions to bring about improvements.
That is why the hon. member for Bellechasse was allowed to proceed with his remarks and he will not take advantage of the confidence and the right to speak granted to him.

I shall conclude my remarks and make my point by referring to a conference on pollution which I recently attended in France. I hope I may be allowed this reference for I believe that when parliament pays the expenses of members like the hon. member for Lapointe (Mr. Marceau) or any other, for that matter, in order to make a trip, it is with a useful purpose in view.
We have studied there the problem of air and water pollution now facing mankind. The problem of providing us with fresh air is indeed important. I made a personal experience with a little bird. I tried to put it in a cage which I gradually made smaller, which means that the volume of oxygen was shrinking gradually, and I reduced its size to the extent where at one point, the bird flapped its wings, and dropped dead. Why? It had run out of air; there was an abundance of it around, but I controlled it.
We have also studied the important problem of water pollution. The problem is vital for the nations.
But there is another problem, that of the pollution of our financial system and of our democracy. We are polluted and do not realize it. We realize there is uneasiness, that some people are unhappy. We seek the cause, but we really avoid looking for it where it really lies. What is lacking? What is wrong? Those who oppose the reforms advocated by the Creditistes, embroil matters purposely. It is easy to do so, to ascribe all kinds of intentions to us.
But God knows that our intentions are as good as anyone else's. In Parliament and elsewhere, we want our work to be of benefit not only to ourselves but to others.
A while ago, I heard the hon. member from Pembina (Mr. Bigg) say that there are surpluses, and perhaps if we were to relax credit, this would create a surplus of money, which could become dangerous.
Allow me one small remark, no harm meant.
There are milk and wheat surpluses. But there are hungry people, deprived of the bare necessaries to whom we must bring relief and comfort.
Some people claim that all the Creditistes want is the recognition of rights but that they refuse to accept the obligations of community life. Nothing is further from the truth. We recognize that each individual has rights and obligations and that we cannot live within a
June 15, 1970

community if our rights and obligations are not respected. That is the reason why we keep saying that we must not only ensure the recognition of the rights of the individuals but also enable them to fulfil their moral, economic and social obligations. Why is it that so many people nowadays refuse to fulfil their obligations, within society? Because they are deprived of the right to participate through their work in the development of the community. I am shocked, as a head of family, to see that the Canadian government is spending in Sainte-Anne-Des-Plaines $32,450 per inmate. An institution was built to accommodate 450 inmates, while families, are systematically refused the right to obtain the credit required to build a home for their children.
In my opinion, the government is not living with the times when it does not make use of all possible means to ensure to these families a right to live in a dwelling of their choice large enough so that they might perpetuate the human race.
In France we were told that the French people do not wish to emigrate to Canada because they like to stay in their country. As for us who enjoy a huge country, we can increase our population in a natural way without being obliged to resort to integration as of birth into a given area, which would systematically allow the normal growth of the population because of the famous dollar which, coming from a system proposed by the Creditistes, will be inflationary, painful and bad because there will be too much money in circulation. However, if the money comes from those who control the credit of the nation without any active and industrious participation, it is not inflationary, or dangerous for the economy. This system is sacred, it must not be changed.
Therefore, let us continue to see things unrealistically.
Very few members know the tragic events which I and certain others lived through during the 1930-39 depression. We were not even allowed to have a 3-cent stamp to mail a letter to our mothers, and that really hurt. It is difficult to wait for daybreak at the edge of the wood to begin working without fear of injury. Some are laughing at that. Let them. He laughs longest who laughs last.
I have lived through such incidents and through those difficult years and today I consider it my duty, because I have been trained to fulfil my own responsibilities, to stand as
Suggested Interest-free Loans the protector of my fellow citizens. In fact, they also have the right to live in their own country with a minimum of security while enjoying the freedom we cherish.


Mr. Henry Latulippe (Compton):: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to have this opportunity to speak for the motion introduced by one of our colleagues. The motion is logical and might be acceptable, but if the House is unable to understand, how can we expect to convince a whole country?
Parliament is supposed to group the best brains of a country, honest citizens who are supposed to work only for the nation and to develop the full physical, moral, intellectual and financial possibilities of a country. But any talk of reviewing our system, of correcting its inherent abuses is called nonsense.
Just while ago, the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Cote) stated that Liberals, Conservatives and NDP members disagreed with those who advocate an inflationary policy, a social, normal and intelligent policy which was only second-rate and extolled by a few members in a certain corner on the house who do not know what they are talking about. Those are approximately the words used by the minister.
[DOT] (9:40 p.m.)
When we have ministers who do not even know the difference between public and private capital, how can the administration of a country be normal, consistent and beneficial to the people?
We are convinced that the public debt is a nonsense, that it is the worst monster which we ever had to face, a dreadful monster, with all the necessary power and tentacles to pick up all that is consistent, powerful and weighty: finance. And it is that monster which is protected by those who govern us in Canada since confederation.
It is the Liberals and the Conservatives who governed us. They are those who increased the public debt to please, to enrich, to give more strength to that monster which now crushes and chokes the whole population. And they too are being choked and crushed by that monster but, alas, they do not feel it!
It is a bit of luck for the House to have Ralliement creditiste members, who see things clearly, who have studied the situation and tell it like it is. Truly, the House should realize its luck in having us here.
June 15, 1970


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. It being ten o'clock, it is my duty to inform the House that pursuant to section 11 of Standing Order 58 the proceedings on the motion are now considered to have expired.


[Stage Direction]
A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 40 deemed to have been moved.
Mrs. Grace Maclnnis (Vancouver-Kings-way):: Mr. Speaker, a few days ago I asked the Minister of Justice (Mr. Turner) if he would reconsider his decision and take abortion out of the Criminal Code, thus freeing qualified doctors to act in consultation with
8146	COMMONS
Proceedings on Adjournment Motion pregnant women. He replied that both he and the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) has already stated the government position, and added, "that is it for the moment".
Last night in Vancouver the Prime Minister held what the Canadian Press terms "a reasonably orderly discussion" on the subject with about 60 members of the Women's Liberation Group. According to the press dispatch, the Prime Minister said that current laws allow doctors to perform abortions if they wish, but added that the liberalization proposed by the group would force them to do so, possibly against their will. No one knows better than the Prime Minister what the present abortion laws permit. He knows that they do not permit doctors to perform abortions, no matter how much they wish to do so, except under conditions so rigid that it is estimated that about one woman in every 500 who require an abortion can get one.
[DOT] (10:00 p.m.)
As to the Prime Minister's charge that the changes proposed by the Women's Liberation Group would force doctors to perform abortions, possibly against their will, if the Prime Minister had taken the trouble to meet the group when they came to Ottawa on May 9, or even to read their brief, he would have seen that their demand in regard to abortion was simply this:
That in this session of Parliament the government sponsor a bill removing all mention of abortion from the Criminal Code.
There is no mention there, or anywhere else in the brief, of forcing doctors to perform abortions. Indeed, what the doctors need is freedom to follow their consciences, without the legal shackles of hospital boards and whole desert areas where there are not any hospitals that will permit abortions or where hospital facilities of any kind simply do not exist.
The truth is that our present abortion laws are forcing women to bear children regardless of their wishes, regardless of their state of health, regardless of whether or not they can afford to care for and educate them properly, regardless of what additional children do to the health and chances in life of the others. A few doctors, unable to watch the helpless misery of such women trapped by unwanted pregnancy, have been performing abortions on their own. With what result? They are arrested and tried as criminals. Last week

DEBATES	June 15, 1970
this happened to a respected doctor in Montreal, Dr. Henry Morgentaler, president of the Humanist Association of Canada. At a press conference in Ottawa he told of one woman, the mother of three children, brought into a Montreal hospital following a botched operation by a non-doctor. Infection developed and an emergency hysterectomy was performed, but several days after that press conference the woman died horribly of gas gangrene. No, Mr. Prime Minister, the current law does not permit doctors to perform abortions if they wish.
The Prime Minister is to be commended for trying to broaden the abortion laws last year in the face of strong opposition. But it is now evident that further changes are urgent to combat the menace of dangerous abortions performed by quacks and butchers and to wipe out the discrimination that permits a woman with means to have a safe abortion while a woman without money faces the risk of infection and death. The Prime Minister claims the public is not ready for changes in the abortion laws. A Gallup poll was taken in March of this year on the question, "Would you vote for a law that would permit a woman to terminate pregnancy at any time during the first three months?" Forty-three per cent said yes, 48 per cent said no, and 9 per cent were undecided.
A year ago it was the persistence and drive of the Prime Minister that put through the present abortion law. He did this in the face of opposition that would have discouraged most men in his position. I am quite convinced that if he now decides to make the change that experience has shown is necessary, that is, to take abortion out of the Criminal Code and leave the decision to the doctor and his patient, he will be able to switch that undecided 9 per cent into the "yes" column, thus making a safe majority of public opinion in favour of the change. Mr. Speaker, I hope the Prime Minister will take this risk as he took the risk to his career last year.


Mr. Marlin P. O'Connell (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: Mr. Speaker, in the unavoidable absence of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Turner) I should be pleased to reply to the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway (Mrs. Maclnnis). However, I do not think I could add anything to what the Minister of Justice
June 15, 1970	COMMONS
said in this House a few days ago. The Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau), have indicated to the House that because the law relating to therapeutic abortion was amended less than a year ago, it would not be appropriate to reopen the issue until sufficient time has elapsed to evaluate how the amended law is working.
DEBATES	8147
Proceedings on Adjournment Motion The Minister of Justice has indicated he will study the statistics which result under the new law's reporting procedures and, when a proper assessment can be made, he will take whatever steps may be required.
Motion agreed to and the House adjourned at 10.07 p.m.
8X49

Tuesday, June 16, 1970