1971-03-17

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, last week in response to a request from the hon. member for Edmonton West I undertook to table correspondence between myself and the co-chairmen of the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism. Under the provisions of Standing Order 41(2) I should like to fulfil that undertaking, Mr. Speaker.



PROPOSED UNITED KINGDOM AGRICULTURAL IMPORT


Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: March 17, 1971
Trade Negotiations With Britain
(b)	separate category for selected malting barley so that any levy on this product will not be set by lower priced feed barley;
(c)	separate category for denatured feed wheat so that any levy on milling grades would not be based on low prices of feed wheat;
(d)	separate category for flour for animal feeding purposes in order to avoid the possibility that any levy on baking flour would be based on low-priced feed flour.
Despite these important improvements and the assurances we have received, the Canadian government has indicated to the U.K. that the move to a levy system in a sector of trade which is so important to Canada is a matter of serious concern. This relates not only to the possible direct impact for Canadian trade but also to the implications for efforts to liberalize international trade in agricultural products and minimize adverse effects of EEC enlargement on outside suppliers of farm products. We shall, therefore, be keeping the developments of our cereals trade with Britain under close review in the light of the undertakings we have obtained.


Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: Mr. Speaker, on a first glance at the statement one must come to the conclusion that the ramifications of Britain's entry into the European Common Market will be very great. Thus it would seem logical that there should be a great deal of consultation between the governments of Canada and the United Kingdom in which all sectors of the Canadian economy must be involved. Those concerned with agricultural products, as well as those concerned with other commodities, must be given full information at all times. Certainly one would want to have the views of the opposition parties in the House. To this end I suggest that an item in the estimates might be brought before the House in order that this matter may be fully debated and members of the opposition may have an opportunity to put forward their views. This should be done so that, without any intention of hindering Britain in its efforts, Canadians may fully appreciate some of the problems facing that country and so that we may have the opportunity to present our views as to the approach we think should be taken by Canada.
I note that, according to a survey taken in Britain, approximately 70 per cent of the people there are not interested in Britain entering the European Common Market at the moment. This percentage may change as a result of negotiation. In view of the fact that we are willing to co-operate with Great Britain by relaxing some of our existing agreements in order to facilitate her negotiations, I hope Britain will be mindful of our position. Should she become a partner in the European Common Market, I hope her influence will be such that some of the existing barriers to trade will be broken down. I refer particularly to the use of subsidies by European Common Market countries, some of which are greater than the total price we receive for our products at the moment.
Without making further comment, I hope that the government will provide additional information later and
give hon. members the fullest opportunity to explore the possible ramifications of this latest move.


Mr. A. P. Gleave (Saskaloon-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, the fact that the whole trade picture for grain is still going to be kept under review, that there is a possibility of returning to the tariff system from the levy system, and that negotiations may continue simply underwrites the uncertainty that we face in this very important area of trade. This flows directly from the failure of the Kennedy Round and the GATT negotiations to reach a satisfactory agreement with the Common Market on trade in farm products, cereal grains in particular. This is the fundamental point. Britain is merely adjusting to these circumstances. We are trying to adjust our trade to what Britain is doing.
The volume of our wheat sales to England has declined steadily in recent years. We have no assurance from the minister that this trend will not continue. We have no assurance from him that as a result of these lengthy negotiations we can be sure of an open entry to the British market and of not only maintaining our present trade in grain but increasing it.
It is time that the government made a clear statement to the House as to the position we are going to occupy with regard to cereal grains and whether we can expect to maintain our present volume of exports to England and to the Common Market. I wonder whether the government has explored the possibility of an associate status for Canada or are we going to find ourselves increasingly shut out of the Common Market? Are we going to lose access to that important market on an increasing scale?
The government should clarify its policy on this matter and also clarify how we are going to maintain our markets. We want answers. The report on the negotiations which the minister has just made to the House does not answer these very important questions.


Mr. Real Caoueffe (Temiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, I also believe that more information should be given to the House when there are changes in the field of exports or imports. We are convinced, however, that agriculture remains the basis of the economic structure of any society, including ours.
We must admit that the economic situation is changing around the world. With regard to exports and imports, we have noted that, for several years now, India and other countries, who sued to purchase part of our wheat production, have become exporting countries.
We understand that circumstances change, and that we must adapt to them, but nevertheless the minister in charge of wheat or grain sales to other countries should always keep the House well informed of the situation facing our wheat and grain producers.
I urge the minister to keep us in future more promptly informed of such matters than he does at present.
In any case, we hope our trade with England and other countries increases in such a way as to permit us adequately to promote Canadian agriculture.

March 17, 1971



INDUSTRY


Mr. Georges Valade (Sainle-Marie):: Mr. Speaker, under Standing Order 43, I intend to request the unanimous consent of the House to bring forward a motion regarding an urgent matter.
The urgency of the situation is clearly established by the developments which have been reported by the spokesmen of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, that is that the situation at Canadair has never been so critical; that this company, which had on its payroll 10,000 workers in 1968, employs presently a mere 4,000; that a committee of reclassification forecasts that in December, the workers will be reduced to less than 1,900; that in spite of a slowdown in the aerospace industry in North America, the situation is more critical at Canadair than anywhere else; that this situation is the direct result of the inaction and lack of planning of this government as well as the lack of a comprehensive Canadian policy-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I must interrupt the hon. member to remind him of the provisions of Standing Order 43. The hon. member knows that under that Standing Order, he cannot raise an argument or make a statement as if his motion had been accepted and put to the House.
The spirit and letter of Standing Order 43 require that the hon. member should state as briefly as possible the reason why he wishes to put that motion and point out the urgency of the situation without indicating the substance of the argument on which he bases the motion itself.
This in my view is the only way to progress and study such motions. I am sure that the hon. member will want to consider the suggestions I am now making.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I will certainly follow your directives. I was referring to Standing Order 43 which provides that a member who takes the initiative-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I am not inviting the hon. member to rise on a point of order, but I am simply reminding him of the provisions of Standing Order 43 as well as of the practice which has developed over the years. By the way, Standing Order 43 provides that hon. members who wish to introduce a motion under its terms must do so as briefly as possible.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, I was precisely trying to explain to this House the state of emergency which exists presently at Canadair as an immediate result of the government policy in the aero-astronautical field. In fact, I was trying rather to clarify the urgency of the situation, because of the unemployment that it is causing and to expound the reasons behind the motion that I intend to introduce.
Mr. Speaker, in conclusion may I say that I want to stand by your ruling. This state of emergency is due to the fact that the government does not propose any short
Mackenzie Valley Pipeline
term solution as, for instance, the purchase of the CL-215 aircraft in order to prevent the impending layoff of 2,000 Canadair employees. The unemployment which threatens the employees of this industry is ascribable to the lack of long term government policy in the establishment of a policy-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I must once more call the hon. member to order. If the terms of his motion are not pursuant to the Standing Order, it will not even be possible to put the motion to the House. The hon. member may move a motion pursuant to Standing Order 43. Therefore, I would invite him to explain as quickly as possible the motion he intends to move.


Georges-J. Valade: Mr. Speaker, in view of the disastrous situation of the economy and, in particular, of the employment situation in Canada, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Joliette (Mr. La Salle):
That the Committee on Regional Development be required to consider without delay the economic difficulties in which Canadair of Montreal finds itself at this time, and recommend to the government immediate measures to be taken in order to palliate massive layoffs in this industry.


Mr. Speaker:: The House heard the hon. member's motion-


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: There is not unanimous consent.



THE CANADIAN ECONOMY


Mr. Paul Yewchuk (Athabasca):: Mr. Speaker, I rise under Standing Order 43 to ask unanimous consent of the House to propose a motion concerning a matter of urgent and pressing necessity. This matter concerns the desire of the Canadian people to be given the opportunity to invest in Canadian developments and the failure of the government to take cognizance of this fact while giving lip service to economic nationalism-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I have to interrupt the hon. member. I think this is a clear abuse of the Standing Order.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: I have to bring this to the attention of the House. I have previously brought to the attention of other hon. members the fact that Standing Order 43 is a very special Standing Order and, until recently, was rarely used. A change was made in our procedures relating to Standing Order 26, and following that, Standing Order 43 has been used by hon. members in place of Standing Order 26. But I point out that Standing Order 43 has a very limited application.

March 17, 1971
Mackenzie Valley Pipeline
I suggest to the hon. member for Athabasca and to the House in general that Standing Order 43 does not provide an opportunity for debate. It does not make it possible for any member of the House, for someone representing another party, to comment on the statements which are being made in support of such motion. In the circumstances I suggest that it is entirely out of order and contrary not only to the spirit but also to the letter of the Standing Order to make a lengthy statement in support of a proposed motion. All an hon. member can do is to follow the prescription of Standing Order 43 and explain why there is urgency that the motion proposed for consideration under the terms of Standing Order 43 should be received by the unanimous consent of the House.


Paul Yewchuk: I apologize to you, Sir, if I have not worded it properly but I was trying to explain as briefly as I could the reason for the motion. I hope I will have the opportunity to utter another sentence or two. If you will bear with me I will continue for a minute or two.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Paul Yewchuk: I was referring to economic nationalism-


Mr. Basford:: Who is abusing Parliament now?


Paul Yewchuk: Quiet, Curly.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Paul Yewchuk: The urgency in this matter arises out of the fact that Canadians may be deprived of one of the greatest opportunities to invest in their own country that may present itself in the immediately foreseeable future. I refer to the Mackenzie valley pipeline which is being proposed by the government and the construction of which, according to the government's statements, is to be carried out by foreign interests.
I asked the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources (Mr. Greene) as well as the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) about the establishment of a mechanism which would allow Canadians to invest in this pipeline. The answer was in the negative on both occasions. I am therefore asking the unanimous consent of the House to move, seconded by the hon. member for Moncton (Mr. Thomas):
That the question of the creation of a mechanism through which Canadians will be given an opportunity to invest in the proposed Mackenzie valley pipeline be referred to the Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development for consideration and report.


Mr. Speaker:: Hon. members have heard the motion proposed by the hon. member, which requires unanimous consent.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: There is not unanimous consent. The motion cannot be put.



TARAS SHEVCHENKO-SAINT PATRICK

Mr. Steven E. Paproski (Edmonton Centre):: Mr. Speaker, it is coincidental that the month of March is set aside for the observances of two great people, first, to honour Taras Shevchenko, Ukraine's great bard and universally acclaimed champion of freedom. Shevchenko is admired as much for his poetry as he is revered for his undaunted spirit and devotion to freedom, truth and justice. Thousands of Ukrainians, young and old in Canada will take part in special programs and concerts dedicated to the memory of the man most strongly identified with the ideals and aspirations of the Ukrainian people.
It is today, too, that we celebrate St. Patrick's Day, a great day for the Irish and for those who are not Irish but wish to be Irish. With your consent, Mr. Speaker, and with the consent of the House I would like to present a little token of kindness, to match his tie, to "O'Trudeau" from "O'Paproski" from the cockles of me heart.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Hees:: Put it on.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The presentation having been made and the hat worn I should like to suggest to hon. members that there must be some Standing Order which is being offended either by the hon. member presenting the hat or the right hon. gentleman wearing it at this time.


George Harris Hees: You are allowed to wear it. The rules of the House say you are allowed to wear it.


Steve Eugene Paproski: Mr. Speaker, I believe that under the Standing Orders there is still room for a hat in this House.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.



QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER

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

Mr. Orlikow: In view of Air Canada's desire to economize wherever possible and to run the system as efficiently as possible, did Air Canada recently decide that employees and their wives in certain management levels may now travel as free riders on a confirmed reservation basis even though the seats they occupy may be needed for fare paying passengers and, if so, for what reason?

March 17, 1971


Mr. Gerard Duquet (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, the management of Air Canada advises as follows: At the beginning of the year, the Company rearranged its pass procedures slightly, to provide more efficient arrangements for movement of company personnel travelling on business, including in certain cases, right to make a reservation in economy, subject, however, to deplanement if the space is needed for a revenue passenger. No substantial change was made in regard to the position of senior management in this respect, other than the development of a new built-in identification code to assist local agents in determining company personnel for deplanement if space is needed for revenue passengers.


SNOWMOBILE NOISE POLLUTION CONTROLS
Mr. Hales: Is the government presently considering adoption of noise pollution controls, other than those for snowmobiles mentioned on January 19, 1971, at page 2538 of Hansard and, if so, for each set of controls (a) what is the purpose of the controls (b) what department is involved in drafting the controls (c) when are the controls expected to be announced?


Gérard Duquet: The government is considering safety standards to establish maximum noise levels in vehicles such as buses and trucks, (a) The purpose of this noise standard will be to protect drivers, passengers and people in the proximity of roadways from health impairment due to noise pollution, (b) The Road and Motor Vehicle Traffic Safety Branch of the Department of Transport is drafting amendments to the Motor Vehicle Safety Regulations with the assistance of the Department of Justice, (c) Regulations in the United Kingdom and California and those of the Economic Commission for Europe are presently being reviewed. It is too early to estimate when they might be issued because of serious implications related to the power to weight ratio and safety on the road.


PUBLIC SERVICE-UNIFORMED OFFICERS
Mr. Mather: Are there any uniformed officers in the Public Service whose responsibilities encompass the enforcement and/or administration of a variety of laws or regulations similar to the responsibilities of Customs Officers but excluding Royal Canadian Mounted Police and, if so (a) who are such officers (b) what laws or regulations fall within the scope of their activities?


Mr. J. A. Jerome (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: I am informed as follows: Yes. The Department of Agriculture: (a) Officers of the Plant Protection Division are located at Port aux Basques, Newfoundland, (b) Destructive Insect and Pest Act.
Note: Officers of the Health of Animals Branch are located at the Ports of Halifax, Saint John, Montreal and Vancouver. While they are not in the full meaning of the term "uniformed officers", they customarily wear a uni-
Questions
form cap when performing their duties. Their responsibilities in enforcement and administration of the Animal Contagious Diseases Regulations, and the Meat Inspection Regulations with regard to restricted commodities entering the country bear some similarity to the responsibility of Customs Officers.
The Department of Fisheries and Forestry: (a) Fishery Officers; Fishery Wardens; Ship's Officers in the marine service of the Department, (b) Fisheries Act and Regulations; Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act; North Pacific Halibut Fishery Convention Act; North Pacific Fisheries Convention Act; Fish Inspection Act and Regulations; Coastal Fisheries Protection Act; Whaling Convention Act; Territorial Sea Fishing Zones Act; Pacific Fur Seals Convention Act; Pacific Salmon Fisheries Convention Act; Navigable Waters Protection Act.
The Department of Manpower and Immigration: (a) Immigration Officers at Ports of Entry; (b) Immigration Act and Regulations.


HARBOUR FACILITIES
Mr. Blouin: Since 1967, how much money has the government spent on new harbour facilities and improvements of existing wharves, including the building of sheds and related facilities in (a) Montreal (b) Quebec City (c) St. John (d) Halifax (e) Vancouver
(f)	Baie Comeau (g) Sept-iles?


James Alexander Jerome: The Department of Public Works advises as follows: (a) Montreal, nil; (b) Quebec City, nil; (c) Saint John (Ferry), $4,866,269.30 by Ministry of Transport funds; Main Channel, $159,878; (d) Halifax, Quay Wall, $439,690 by D.N.D. funds; (e) Vancouver- First Narrows, $2,575,402; (f) Baie Comeau, $289,709;
(g)	Sept-Iles, $304,848. The National Harbours Board advises as follows: (a) $9,283,619; (b) $7,475,100; (c) $2,071,368; (d) $13,764,831; (e) $13,951,221. The Department of Transport advises as follows: (f) $289,709; (g) $304,898.


COMMERCIAL VALUE OF STORED BUTTER
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 871-Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse): (Supplementary)
What was the commercial value of stored butter on (a) January 31, 1970 (b) January 31, 1971?
Mr. Bruce Howard (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: According to Dominion Bureau of Statistics' figures, creamery butter in storage on: (a) January 31, 1970 totalled 83,351,000 pounds; (b) January 31, 1971 totalled 81,745,000 pounds. The commercial value of creamery butter in both 1970 and 1971 was the support price of butter by the Canadian Dairy Commission-65 cents per pound. The commercial value of stored butter on: (a) January 31, 1970 amounted to $54,178,150; (b) January 31, 1971 amounted to $53,134,250.

March 17, 1971
Questions


DEPARTMENT OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION-DESIGNATION OF SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES
Mr. Robinson: What percentage of the supplementary estimates of the Department of Manpower and Immigration is designated for (a) winter works (b) to reduce unemployment (c) underestimating expenditures (d) combatting inflationary costs (e) new programs (f) hiring of additional employees?


Otto Emil Lang: (a) Nil; (b) (i) 19.7 per cent to augment the Canada Manpower Training Program; (ii) 79.9 per cent for accelerated payments for capital assistance in the provision of training facilities; (c) nil; (d) nil; (e) nil; (f) .4 per cent.


OPERATION LIFT-AERIAL SURVEY WORK
Mr. Thomson: 1.	What are the names and addresses of all companies or individual fliers who were engaged in aerial survey work under Operation Lift?
2.	What amounts were paid to each individual or company concerned?
3.	Was this work done under contract and, if not, on what basis?


Hon. H. A. Olson (Minister of Agriculture):: 
YUKON TERRITORY-TIMBER BERTHS
Mr. Nielsen: 1.	What persons, firms or corporations now hold timber berths in the Yukon Territory?
2.	Upon what date was each such timber berth granted to each such person, firm or corporation and in each instance, what is the total area covered by the timber berth?
3.	Was the grant of each such timber berth in writing or made the subject-matter of an agreement between the holder thereof and the government and, if so, what are the provisions, conditions and terms upon which each such timber berth is held?


Mr. Judd Buchanan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: 1. (a)
Acorn Timber Limited; (b) B.C. Yukon Forest Products Limited; (c) Watson Lake Lumber Limited; (d) Timberline Development Services Limited.
2.	(a) Acorn Timber Limited, established January 1, 1969, covering 40 square miles on the Pelly and Macmillan Rivers, (b) B.C. Yukon Forest Products Limited, established April 1, 1969, covering 10 square miles on the Liard River, (c) Watson Lake Lumber Limited, established November 1, 1968, covering 10 square miles on the Liard and Hyland Rivers, (d) Timberline Development Services Limited, established January 1, 1969, covering 20 square miles on the Nisutlin River.
3.	Each of the above timber berths was granted under the terms of a formal timber management agreement based on an estimated annual production of 10 million board feet. Each agreement is for an initial period of 10 years, with provision for renewal for a further 10 years. The agreements call for the establishment of wood processing facilities within two years of the agreement date and each company must produce an average of three million board feet per year during the first five years. Each of the agreements is still in effect. All four companies have established the mechanical capability for wood processing, as required in the agreements. In subsequent years, production must not be less than three million board feet per year. Failure to reach this minimum production may result in reduction of the timber management area. Stumpage has been set initially at $2.50 per thousand board feet, with provision for adjustment after five years. Annual occupation and fire protection fee is $15.80 per square mile. The agreements specify wood utilization standards and there is also provision requiring approval of annual operating plans. Copies of the agreements may be seen at either the District office in which the timber berth is situated, or at the headquarter's office in Whitehorse.


GRANTING OF SCHOLARSHIPS FOR DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL PARKS
Mr. Lambert (Edmonton West): 1.	What will be the selection criteria for the granting of scholarships for the planning and development of natural parks and recreation areas announced on January 25, 1971, by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development?
2.	Will consideration be given to geographical factors and to language?
3.	Who will be the members of the selection panel and what are their qualifications?
4.	Will the recipient of the scholarship have to commit himself to work for a set number of years?
5.	What have been the honours subjects of the participants in the scholarship program since its inception?
6.	Will this program give equal consideration to all Canadian universities and on what criteria will the courses offered in the various universities be judged?


J. Judd Buchanan: 1.	Canadian citizenship; successful completion of undergraduate degree; high academic standing; graduate work to be taken at Canadian university; course outline related to the planning and management of natural parks and outdoor recreation areas; written support of university professors.

March 17, 1971

2.	No, but in the past successful candidates have been widely distributed geographically and from both official language groups.
3.	Chairman, Mr. J. I. Nicol, Director of National and Historic Parks Branch; engineering background; Public Service since 1945; National and Historic Parks Branch since 1963. Mr. H. K. Eidsvik, Chief of National Parks Planning; M.Sc., Forestry; with National and Historic Parks Branch since 1959. Mr. P. DesMeules, National Resource Adviser; M.Sc., Wildlife Biology; government service with the Province of Quebec, Department of Tourism, Fish and Game and Canadian International Development Agency since 1960; with National and Historic Parks Branch since 1970. Secretary, Mr. A. C. Holden, Branch Personnel Adviser; B.A.; in personnel work since 1945; with National and Historic Parks Branch since 1967.
4.	No, the recipient of a scholarship is not required to commit himself to work in the National and Historic Parks Branch.
5.	Biology; boreal ecology; ecology; forestry; geography; marine and pleistocene geology; park planning and management; parks and outdoor recreation; research management and urban studies; research methodology; urbanism and land development.
6.	The program gives equal consideration to all Canadian universities which offer courses relating to National Parks management and outdoor recreation. Course content is reviewed only in relation to the emphasis noted above.


ABOLITION OF SALES TAX ON MARGARINE
Mr. Mather: Have representations been received urging the abolition of the sales tax on margarine and, if so, what consideration is being given to such representation?


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of Finance):: Yes. If the Government should decide to propose an amendment to the Excise Tax Act to exempt margarine from sales tax it would be announced at the appropriate time.


TENDERS FOR NEWFOUNDLAND PROJECTS
Mr. McGrath: Under existing agreements between the Government of Newfoundland and the Department of Regional Economic Expansion, on what date was approval given and authorization for the calling of tenders for (a) construction of an elementary school, Happy Valley (b) construction of a high school, Marystown (c) industrial water supply system, Stephenville (d) extension to district vocational school, Conception Bay South (e) construction of an elementary school, Grand Bank (f) extension to district vocational school, Burin (g) extension to district vocational school, Gander (h) construction of an elementary school, Cres-ton (Salt Pond) (i) construction of a junior high school, St. John's East?


Mr. Marlin P. O'Connell (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: (a) and (b)
Final design not completed, (d) and (f) February 12, 1971; (e) and (h) February 17, 1971; (c), (g) and (i) February 24, 1971.
Questions


ESTABLISHMENT OF CANADA LAND INVENTORY PROGRAM
Mr. Southam: 1.	What progress has been made in the plan to establish a Canada Land Inventory Program as set out by ARDA in 1965?
2.	Is it designed to establish a soil capability classification for all provinces?
3.	Does this program include a use capability classification for organic soils?
4.	Are plans under way to develop any further soil capability classification systems?


Abram Ernest Epp: 1. This program was completed in Prince Edward Island in 196869, and in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick in 1970-71. It will be completed in Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta in 1971-72, in Quebec in 1972-73, and in British Columbia in 1974-75.
2.	Yes.
3.	Yes, except in the case of soil capability for agriculture.
4.	No.


MARGARINE-ABOLITION OF SALES TAX AND COLOUR RESTRICTIONS
Mr. Southam: 1.	Is it the intention of the government to remove the 12 per cent sales tax on margarine?
2.	By province, what is the sales tax presently in effect?
3.	Is it the intention of the government to consult with provincial departments to eliminate colour restrictions, presently affecting margarine?


James Alexander Jerome: I am informed by the Department of Finance and the Department of Agriculture as follows: 1. This is a matter of government policy. If it should be decided to propose an amendment to the Excise Tax Act to exempt margarine from sales tax it would be announced at the appropriate time.
2.	In nine provinces, the general rate of sales tax of 12 per cent applies to margarine. Margarine for consumption in the Province of Newfoundland is exempt.
3.	No. The regulation of the control of colouring in margarine is entirely within the jurisdiction of the individual provinces.


CANADIAN ARMED FORCES DISABILITY PLAN
Mr. Forreslall: 1.	How does the Canadian Armed Forces Disability Plan compare with that of the Public Service D 1 plan as to (a) premium costs (b) benefits?
2.	Are there any plans to incorporate servicemen into D 1 plan?


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (Minister of National Defence):: 1 and 2. Apart from the benefits which might be received from the Pension Act as a result of injury or disease or aggravation thereof directly connected with military service, there is no Canadian Armed Forces Disability Plan per se. Voluntary coverage has

March 17, 1971
Questions
been made available to servicemen as part of a total package plan sponsored by the Armed Forces called the Servicemen's Income Security Insurance Plan. Deliberations have commenced to obtain recognition of the Armed Forces sponsored plan as an official plan for the servicemen in a similar way that the Public Service D 1 plan is now recognized as the official plan providing Disability Insurance for the Public Service.


CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-ENLISTMENTS
Mr. Forresiall: Has there been a recent increase in enlistments in CAF and, il so, does the government expect this trend to continue?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Attention is drawn to part 3 of reply to your Question 977, appearing in Hansard, March 8, 1971, page 4035. Monthly enrolments in the Canadian Forces during 1970-71 have met requirements for the current fiscal year. As the requirement for 1971-72 is less, it is anticipated that the quotas for the limited number of trades open to enrolment will be met. The ratio of applicants to the number of vacancies is about 4.5 to 1.


DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL REVENUE-INCOME DERIVED FROM COMPUTER SERVICES
Mr. Robinson: What income, if any, is derived from the computer services provided by the Department of National Revenue (a) from other departments (b) from sale or services to industry (c) to provincial government departments (d) to municipalities?


Hon. Herb Gray (Minister of National Revenue):: In so
far as the Department of National Revenue, Taxation, is concerned: (a) $29,824.23 for 12 month period January 1 to December 31, 1970; (b) nil, for same period; (c) $333.75 for same period; (d) nil, for same period.


ATLANTIC SEAL HUNT-LETTERS OF PROTEST
Mr. St. Pierre: 1.	How many letters of protest against seal hunting were received by the Department of Fisheries and Forestry up to December 31, 1970 (a) how many were from Canadians (b) what were the numbers from each province (c) how many were from foreign countries (d) what were the number from the various countries?
2.	What was the Department's response?


Mr. Eymard Corbin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and Forestry):: 1. 10,381. (a) 699; (b) British Columbia, 412; Alberta, 14; Saskatchewan, 8; Manitoba, 10; Ontario, 196; Quebec, 51; New Brunswick, -; Nova Scotia, 5; Prince Edward Island, -; Newfound-
Fiscal Year
(a) No. of applications received	147
(b) No. of applications approved	120
(c)	Total amount disbursed	$2,249,423(d)	Smallest loan approved	$	3,700Largest loan approved	$	48,000
land, 3; Yukon, -; Northwest Territories, -; (c) 9,682; (d) United States of America, 7,639; United Kingdom, 1,042; France, 368; West Germany, 76; Holland, 156; Belgium, 23; Switzerland, 42; Italy, 3; Other, 333.
2. A personal letter from the Minister of Fisheries and Forestry, Hon. Jack Davis, attaching an information leaflet entitled "The Atlantic Seal Hunt".


CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-EQUATION BETWEEN PAY OF SENIOR OFFICERS AND THAT OF PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYEES
Mr. Forresiall: Was an equation made between the pay of senior officers in the Armed Forces and that of the Public Service and, if so, what were the criteria?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Yes, after detailed analysis, the Joint Treasury Board-Department of National Defence Advisory Group on Military Compensation recommended that the rates of pay of general officers be equated to those received by the Senior Executive Category within the Public Service.


DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS-INCOME DERIVED FROM COMPUTER SERVICES
Mr. Robinson: What income, if any, is derived from the computer services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (a) from other departments (b) from sale or services to industry (c) to provincial government departments (d) to municipalities?


Hon. Jean-Eudes Dube (Minisler of Veterans Affairs):: None.


FARM CREDIT CORPORATION-APPLICATIONS RECEIVED FROM P.E.I.
Mr. McQuaid: 1.	During each year 1968, 1969 and 1970 (a) how many applications were received from the Province of Prince Edward Island for loans from the Farm Credit Corporation (b) how many applications were approved (c) what was the total amount disbursed each year by way of loans (d) what was the smallest loan approved and what was the largest?
2.	How many loans, made to residents of the Province of Prince Edward Island under the Canadian Farm Loan Board or the Farm Credit Corporation, are now in arrears of principal, interest or both and what is the total amount presently in arrears?
3.	Since January 1, 1968, how many foreclosures have there been under the terms of the mortgages?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: The Farm
Credit Corporation 1.	advises as follows:	
Fiscal Year	Fiscal Year	
1968-69	1969-70	1/4/70-31/1/71164	91	66112	67	57$2,311,181	$2,090,254	$1,677,535$ 4,600	$ 7,200	$ 4,100$ 79,400	$ 100,000	$ 90,000

March 17, 1971

2.	On March 1, 1971, there were 251 loan accounts in arrears for a total amount of $174,546.72.
3.	The Corporation enforces its mortgages in Prince Edward Island by exercising the power of sale contained in the mortgage. In the period January 1, 1968 to January 1, 1971, the Corporation sold three farm securities under power of sale.


SUBSIDY QUOTAS HELD BY INDUSTRIAL MILK PRODUCERS
Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse): On February 8 (a) 1970 (b) 1971, how many industrial milk producers held a subsidy quota from the Canadian Dairy Commission?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Data on the total number of producers holding subsidy quotas is available only as at April 1 each year. On April 1, 1970 subsidy quotas were held by 88,474 industrial milk and cream shippers. The number on April 1, 1969 was 98,346.


DAIRY PRODUCTS HELD IN STORAGE
Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse): On February 8, 1971, what quantities of the following dairy products did the Canadian Dairy Commission have in storage of (a) butter (b) powdered milk (c) cheese (d) any other product?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: (a) Butter, 62,974,255 lbs.; (b) dry Skim Milk, 42,118,703 lbs.; (c) cheese, 648,084 lbs.; (d) any other product, nil.


SUBSIDY QUOTAS GRANTED TO PRODUCERS OF INDUSTRIAL MILK
Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse): As of February 8, (a) 1970 (b) 1971, what was the total subsidy quotas granted by the Canadian Dairy Commission to the producers of industrial milk in Canada?


Horace Andrew (Bud) Olson: Data on the total amount of subsidy quota is available only as at April 1 each year. On April 1, 1970 the total of subsidy quotas to industrial milk and cream shippers was 297,159,859 lbs. of butterfat. The total on April 1, 1969 was 314,207,727 lbs.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mrs. Maclnnis: 1.	For the period January 1, 1969 to September 30, 1970, what requests for financial grants have been received by the Department of National Health and Welfare and, what grants have been approved?
2.	For the same period, what requests for financial grants have been received by the Department of Secretary of State and, what grants have been approved?
3.	For the same period, what requests for financial grants have been received by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and, what grants have been approved?
Return tabled.
Motions for Papers


ALBERTA INDIAN RESERVES
Mr. Horner: 1.	How much money has the federal government spent, on all types of programs, on Alberta Indian Reserves in the past five years?
2.	What were the types of programs involved?
3.	What reserves were involved in the programs?
4.	What steps are being taken (by the government) to deal with the problems created by the Bennett Dam, specifically with regard to Alberta Indians affected by the depletion of water by the Dam?
5.	What programs have been approved, but not yet implemented, that will involve Alberta Indian Reservations (a) what is the dollar value of such programs (b) are any of the programs designed to compensate Indians who have been adversely affected by the Bennett Dam (c) are there any programs planned with regard to improving housing conditions on Alberta Indian Reserves (d) are there any programs planned with the view to improving the long-range economic and social conditions on Alberta Indian Reserves
Return tabled.


PUBLIC SERVICE PERSONNEL
Mr. Broadbenl: 1.	How many women employed, by department and/or agency, in the latest available year earned less than (a) $6,000 (b) more than $6,000 a year?
2.	How many men employed, by department and/or agency, in the latest available year earned (a) less than $6,000 (b) more than $6,000 a year?
3.	For each department and/or agency, how many women are ranked in the Senior Officer category?
4.	For each department and/or agency, how many men are ranked in the Senior Officer category?
Return tabled.



MOTIONS FOR PAPERS

James Alexander Jerome: Mr. Speaker, Notice of Motion for the Production of Papers No. 194 is acceptable to the government subject to the usual reservations concerning confidential documents and to the authorization of the government authorities concerned.


Mr. Speaker:: Subject to the reservations or conditions expressed by the parliamentary secretary, is it the pleasure of the House that this motion shall be deemed to have been adopted?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO NATIONAL PARK, SHIP HARBOUR, HALIFAX COUNTY

[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 194-Mr. Forrestall:
That an humble Address be presented to His Excellency praying that he will cause to be laid before this House copies of all proposed plans including the original proposed plans and all
March 17, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Inquiries of the Ministry
subsequent modifications or changes between the Governments of Canada and the Province of Nova Scotia with respect to the National Park in the Ship Harbour area of Halifax County.
Motion agreed to.
James Alexander Jerome: Mr. Speaker, would you be so kind as to call Notice of Motion No. 199?
COPY OF STUDIES ON TRANSIENT YOUTH Motion No. 199-Mr. Skoberg:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the studies on Transient Youth, undertaken by the Canadian Council of Social Development.


James Alexander Jerome: Mr. Speaker, the Department of National Health and Welfare advises that the study on transient youth is not a federal government document. This study was carried out by the Canadian Council on Social Development and, therefore, ownership of the study rests with the council. Under these circumstances, the hon. member from Moose Jaw may wish to withdraw his motion.


Mr. Skoberg:: I realize that I have the wrong document, Mr. Speaker. There is an internal document which I shall seek shortly.


Mr. Speaker:: The motion is dropped.
Order discharged and motion withdrawn.


Mr. Burton:: Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago I asked the parliamentary secretary if he could take action to facilitate Notice of Motion 197 in my name. In view of some of the circumstances surrounding this matter I wonder if the parliamentary secretary can report progress?


James Alexander Jerome: I cannot make any comment at this time, Mr. Speaker. I have taken special note of it and we are working on it.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Secretary of State with regard to the program entitled "Opportunities for Youth". The Secretary of State is supposed to be here today. He may very well have an excuse but if he has not I would have sought one myself rather than try to explain this program.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Robert Lorne Stanfield: In his absence I would direct the question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. The minister has given an estimate of some 600,000 students to be employed in the private sector as against some
730,000 students employed in the private sector last year. I should like to ask the minister how he proposes to make up this difference, especially since there will be substantially more students seeking employment this year than last?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition is referring to a couple of different sets of figures, and I would have to go into the whole conversation I had with the reporter to explain to him.


An hon. Member:: Don't be shy.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of Manpower and Immigration give his forecast of the number of students who in his estimation will be employed by the private sector during the coming vacation season?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, the conversation was about the mathematics applied to last year's figures as that would lead to certain mathematical conclusions this year. I will be glad to supply a scratch sheet with that information on it for the Leader of the Opposition.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: I did not ask the minister about any conversation he had outside the House, Mr. Speaker. I ask the minister again for his forecast as to the employment of students in the private sector this year. This is no joke, Mr. Speaker.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Otto Emil Lang: I was only trying to refer to the difficulty of starting a question with figures that do not themselves have any basis in fact.


An hon. Member:: You are used to that.


Otto Emil Lang: It is not possible to make any very precise calculations on matters like this which depend upon so many variables that have to be taken into consideration. Therefore there is no precise forecast. All one can do is to take the situation for one or two previous years, compare the situation this year and try to weigh the variables and reach a conclusion based on those factors.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: I might ask the minister whether he will agree with me that the prospects for students under this program are very grim indeed?


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



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-CRITERIA FOR JUDGING APPLICATIONS UNDER OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH SCHEME

Mr. David Orlikow (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Secretary of State can the Minister of Manpower and Immigration tell us whether the criteria which will be employed in judging grant applications under the opportunities for youth scheme will be made public in the near future?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, I would expect so.

March 17, 1971



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-CRITERIA FOR OVERSEAS JOBS FOR POSTSECONDARY STUDENTS

Mr. J. M. Forreslall (Dartmouih-Halifax East):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. Will the 3,200 overseas jobs that are being provided by his department for post-secondary students be made available according to need as well as language skills?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, this is a program which has resulted from negotiations with a number of countries. The procedure for final selection rests in the hands of the host countries. I am not certain that in every case need will be taken into consideration.



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-REDUCTION OF TUITION FEES, MORATORIUM ON REPAYMENT OF STUDENT LOANS

Mr. Walter C. Carter (St. John's West):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. In light of the fact that tens of thousands of students will get less than eight weeks of work this summer, is the government considering assisting the provinces in reducing tuition fees?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, as the House knows, under our assistance to the provinces for post-secondary education we are paying 50 per cent of the costs. We are not in a position, of course, to decide for the provinces whether they will have a different set of term systems than they now have.


Walter C. Carter: Is the government going to introduce amendments to the student loan legislation and declare a moratorium on the repayment of such loans?


Edgar John Benson: Mr. Speaker, may I answer this question. The provinces meet with the federal government each year to discuss the terms of the student loan program. Also, there are provisions within the student loan program to make such postponement if postponement is necessary.



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-DISCUSSIONS WITH PROVINCES

Mr. Andre Fortin (Loibiniere):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question I wish to direct to the Prime Minister.
Would he tell us whether he intends to open discussions with provincial government officials for the purpose of achieving a global solution to the summer student employment problem so that the federal and provincial governments may join forces, efforts and resources and settle this matter once and for all?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I will point out the fact that such consultations were held during the weeks which preceded the announcement by the federal government. The Secretary of State is at
Inquiries of the Ministry
present in one of the provincial capitals for the purpose of discussing the implementation of these measures.
It is obvious that we cannot do much more than consult with the provinces since, as the hon. member knows well, in this field of education we have no powers whatsoever to reorganize the academic year in such a way that students would study the whole year round instead of coming out every summer and invading the labour market for three or four months.



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-ASSISTANCE FOR MARRIED STUDENTS

Mr. Robert Muir (Cape Brelon-The Sydneys):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. With reference to the right hon. gentleman's announcement yesterday concerning the program of student employment and activities, may I ask whether the government intends to initiate programs for married students which will provide income and adequate savings so they may resume their studies in the fall?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we are not envisaging at this time making any announcements additional to the ones we made yesterday.


Robert Muir: I realize that the right hon. gentleman's experience as far as marital responsibilities are concerned is quite limited, but would he not agree that some action should be taken to assist married students who would like to return to their studies in the fall and who have the added expense of a wife?



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-INCENTIVES TO PRIVATE INDUSTRY

Mr. John Gilbert (Broadview):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. Since, in the final analysis, private industry will be the big employer of students in the summer, is the Prime Minister considering any special tax incentives to private industry to encourage the employment of such students?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Gilbert: Mr. Speaker, I do not think the Prime Minister heard my question.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Yes, he did, but he is not considering it.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I heard it, Mr. Speaker, and the answer is no.



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-SUGGESTED REPEGGING OF DOLLAR TO ASSIST FOREST INDUSTRY TO PROVIDE JOBS

Mr. Stan Schumacher (Palliser):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Finance. In order to assist the forest industry to hire more students this summer, is the government going to repeg the Canadian dollar at a level consistent with expanding the exports of that industry?

March 17, 1971
Inquiries of the Ministry



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-REFUSAL OF GRANT TO McGILL STUDENT ENTREPRENEURIAL AGENCY

Mr. John Lundrigan (Gander-Twillingaie):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. In view of the non-program announced yesterday by the government, can the
minister explain why he refused a grant of money to the McGill Student Entrepreneurial Agency Incorporated, a non-profit, self-help organization which over the past two years has provided or found jobs for over 500 students?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, basically and specifically, because the program was not eligible for grants. Of course, if any of the programs of this organization are eligible for support under the job opportunities program, it can apply in connection with those projects.


John Howard Lundrigan: May I ask why the program was not forwarded to the Secretary of State for his consideration?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the applicants can submit their own direct applications. The application which we were considering was probably not one of those that was suitable for the program. In any case, it would be parts of projects upon which they might be working which might be more eligible.



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-DEADLINE FOR APPLICATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE PROGRAM

Mr. Mark Rose (Fraser Valley West):: Mr. Speaker, may I divert a supplementary question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. I also seek clarification of a point in the minister's news release yesterday on the international student summer employment exchange program between Canada and some ten other countries. On page 2 of appendix B there is the statement that students may apply at any Canada Manpower Centre prior to March 31, 1971, which is only 13 or 14 days from now. It says that they may apply. Does it mean they must apply before that date? Is there a deadline for applications under this program?


Otto Emil Lang: Their applications are to be in by that date. The posters have been up for some days in all universities and in other places all across the country, and early applications are requested.


Mark Willson Rose: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I notice that there are five or six hon. members who wish to ask supplementaries about this matter. I suggest to hon. members that very soon we should change the subject. For the moment the hon. member for Fraser Valley West has the floor.


Mark Willson Rose: Mr. Speaker, I would ask the minister to
reconsider because two weeks is hardly sufficient time for
people to make their plans and apply for this kind of program.


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


Mr. A. D. Alkenbrack (Fronlenac-Lennox and Addington):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration arising out of the questions regarding aid for students. Will there be any provision for aid to their worthy contemporaries, the thousands of unemployed and unskilled young people who are not in school or college?



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-AVAILABILITY TO PERSONS IN REMOTE COMMUNITIES

Mr. Jack Marshall (Humber-St. George's-Sl. Barbe):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the youth programs announced by the Prime Minister will be more easily available to young persons in large cities and in the central region of Canada, will he consider the referral of the subject to a standing committee so that the ministers and staffs involved can appear to define clearly the various aspects of the program in order that all Canadians, especially those in remote and isolated communities, will be able to take advantage of those programs that have been previously denied to them and thereby enjoy equal opportunity?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I will consider if anything can be done along this line.



SUMMER STUDENT EMPLOYMENT AND ACTIVITIES PROGRAM-JOBS AVAILABLE IN PUBLIC SERVICE

Mr. Gordon Ritchie (Dauphin):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the President of the Treasury Board who reports to the House for the Public Service Commission. I should like to know approximately how many vacancies will exist in the Public Service for students this summer and what proportion of these will be in the national capital region?


Hon. C. M. Drury (President of the Treasury Board):: Mr. Speaker, I do not have those figures at hand but I will obtain them for the hon. member.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I apologize to the hon. member. There is apparently a new and last supplementary question on a certain subject, and I will soon recognize the hon. member for Temiscamingue.


Mr. William Skoreyko (Edmonton East):: I have a supplementary for the President of the Treasury Board. I should like to ask the minister whether students, particu-

March 17, 1971

larly those coming from western Canada, who wish to work in the Public Service of Canada in the national capital, will be at any disadvantage if they are not bilingual?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: The answer, quite unequivocally, is no.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, here is the question I want to put to the Prime Minister.
Since journalists and commentators, who know practically everything, have been telling us for close to a month that there will be a general election this autumn in Canada, can the Prime Minister confirm or deny those rumours?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I am not at this time in a position to give a specific reply. I must, however, say that the rumour, as far as I know, comes primarily from opposition members seeking in this way to justify their dilatory tactics in parliamentary debates. (Applause)



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Mr. T. C. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: My question is for the Prime Minister. It arises out of reports that the representative of India on the International Control Commission has invited the Polish and the Canadian representatives to join in a public appeal for peace in Laos and that the Polish representative has agreed but the Canadian government has rejected the invitation. Has Canada rejected an invitation to participate in this appeal and, if so, why?


Mr. Andre Ouellei (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, Canada has not rejected the proposal, simply because it has not yet been formally submitted to the Commission.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: May I ask the parliamentary secretary whether an invitation has been received and whether the Canadian government has indicated it is prepared to join in this appeal for peace in Laos? How soon may we expect some statement in view of the fact that the press reports which have gone around the world indicate that Canada is the only member of the Control Commission which has not agreed to join this appeal?


André Ouellet: Mr. Speaker, I should like to remind the hon. member that Canada has already made known its
Inquiries of the Ministry
position. Canada had made a concrete proposal. Now, the representatives of India have put forward another proposal. The Canadian government feels that it has some merits, but that it cannot replace the action which the International Control Commission may take, and which might be much more efficient than the suggestion of India.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: I am quite aware of the proposal which the Canadian government made. I am still asking why Canada has not joined with India and Poland in a public appeal for peace in Laos. The fact that the Canadian proposal has not been adopted is not the question at issue. I am asking the parliamentary secretary a direct question: why has Canada not joined with the other two members of the International Control Commission in supporting a public appeal for peace in Laos?


André Ouellet: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member should know that, quite a long time ago already, Canada has clearly stated its views in favour of peace in that part of the world.


RESEARCH
George Harris Hees: I have a question for the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker. Having regard to the statement by the chairman of the Science Council of Canada that research and development have not grown in Canada for two years and may be headed for a sharp decline in 1971, is the government planning to adopt measures in the near future to correct this situation so that production, which generates employment and depends heavily on industrial research for its forward momentum, will not continue to be adversely affected?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I believe the reference by the chairman of the Science Council was to research in industry. As the hon. member knows, the government is presently trying to reorganize itself in a way which will enable it to deal with this subject more comprehensively. As soon as the House sees fit to pass the government reorganization bill we shall consider the appointment of a minister to deal with science matters.


George Harris Hees: In view of the fact that no new laboratories have been opened in the past two years, while six have closed down, will the Prime Minister personally interest himself in this vitally important matter since it is something which can influence the production of jobs very effectively in the future?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I think the hon. member will agree that if we had a minister who could devote his whole time to this subject it would be even preferable to my showing a special interest in it. This is why I appeal to the opposi-

March 17, 1971
Inquiries of the Ministry
tion to facilitate the passage of the government reorganization bill.


Some hon. Member:: Hear, hear!


George Harris Hees: Since the Prime Minister refuses to look into this matter personally-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


George Harris Hees: -will he take his head out of the sand-


GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATION
Mr. Robert McCleave (Halifax-East Hants):: I have a question for the Prime Minister arising from the fact that we now have some indication of what the right hon. gentleman would propose. Will he undertake to tell us, when the appropriate stage of the reorganization bill is reached in committee of the whole House, what other ministries of state, in addition to science, he proposes to set up in the near future?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Indication has already been given that we would wish to have a minister of state designated for the purpose of looking at housing and urban affairs. That is one other area. We have also indicated that through this bill we would be able to appoint a minister responsible for the whole sphere of the environment. That is another area. I do not know whether the hon. member wants me to spell out in advance what ministers without portfolio or ministers of state would be assigned to various fields, but obviously I cannot foretell which areas might have to be covered by special ministers in the future. I have just mentioned two and it seems to me this clearly indicates the urgency attached to the passing of this bill by the House.


Robert Jardine McCleave: My question to the Prime Minister was concerned with the setting up of ministries which would be assigned specific responsibilities. Provision for the establishment of a ministry of the environment is already set out in the legislation.


Mr. Baldwin:: Would the Prime Minister consider appointing a minister of state for unemployment?


CITIZENSHIP
Mrs. Grace Maclnnis (Vancouver-Kingsway):: I have a question for the Minister without Portfolio in charge of citizenship. Would the minister make a full report to the House on motions in connection with the charges of falsehood, deception and inefficiency in the citizenship branch made by its employee, Mr. Alex Bandy of Vancouver?


Hon. Robert Slanbury (Minister without Portfolio):: The
hon. member will have an opportunity to discuss this matter in the committee in the course of the examination of the estimates of the citizenship branch. In the meantime, I can only say we have taken the advice of Mr. Bandy as to the worth of his services.


Mrs. Maclnnis:: Can the minister assure the House that citizenship participation in his department means more than just low-income citizenship groups being analysed-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


REQUEST FOR TABLING OF ALLEGED REPORT PREPARED BY ALEX BANDY
Robert Lorne Stanfield: should like to ask the minister whether he will table in the House the report which the parliamentary secretary stated Mr. Bandy was being retained to complete?


Robert Douglas George Stanbury: am not sure to what report the hon. gentleman is referring. It was explained in the House that he was gathering documentation on poverty groups in British Columbia. If the hon. gentleman would like to attend the committee examining the estimates I would be glad to respond to questions on that subject.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: The parliamentary secretary stated in the House that this gentleman was being kept on until he had completed his report. I am asking the minister whether he is prepared to table the report which the gentleman in question says he was never asked to write?


Robert Douglas George Stanbury: Mr. Speaker, I will have to check into exactly what form the report took, but I would be glad to consider that.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The minister said that the government had taken Mr. Bandy's estimate of his worth at its face value. Is he also prepared to take Mr. Bandy's word as to the worth of the department and the waste of public money?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


INQUIRY AS TO ELIMINATION OF OATH AND SWEARING OF ALLEGIANCE
Mr. R. N. Thompson (Red Deer):: I would ask the minister to tell us, before we deal with the estimates of his department, whether or not a directive has been issued which would basically alter the citizenship court procedure to the extent of eliminating the oath of citizenship and the swearing of allegiance to the Crown?


Robert Douglas George Stanbury: No,
Mr. Speaker.


March 17, 1971


SHORTAGE OF DOCTORS-DISCUSSIONS WITH PROVINCES ON KEEPING MEDICAL SCHOOLS OPEN ALL YEAR
Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe Norlh):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of National Health and Welfare. It is a continuing question having to do with the acute shortage of doctors, particularly general practitioners. Can the minister tell the House whether the government is discussing with the provinces the possibility of keeping the medical faculties open all year round, thus allowing for maximum use of equipment while at the same time reducing the length of time required to get a degree in medicine?


Hon. John C. Munro (Minisier of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for Simcoe North for giving me notice of his question. He is aware that this is a matter falling within provincial jurisdiction. Our department would be generally in favour of the concept, and if the hon. member would like to correspond with the provincial ministers on the matter we would welcome it.


Philip Bernard Rynard: I should like to ask the minister whether the federal government will participate by helping to finance any joint program of enrolment of medical students.


John Carr Munro: Mr. Speaker, as the hon. member is aware, under our medicare legislation and the health grants provisions, we are already assisting in this regard. If certain provinces wish to get this type of program under way we would be pleased to consider any ways in which we could help.


MANPOWER
André-Gilles Fortin: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Manpower and Immigration.
Considering that 42 per cent of the unemployed in the province of Quebec are under 25 years of age and that nothing is being done to solve this problem, would the minister tell us if special measures will be taken to find work for these young people?

Hon Otto E. Lang (Minister of Manpower and Immigration): Mr. Speaker, quite a number of the regular measures that the government has taken with regard to the total employment situation, and also the special ones announced in the last couple of days, are weighted in the direction of those parts of the country where unemployment is highest. They should, therefore, be of direct benefit to the groups the hon. member mentions.
Inquiries of the Ministry OIL


PROPOSED MACKENZIE VALLEY PIPELINE-REQUEST FOR TABLING OF RESEARCH STUDIES-SETTLEMENT OF INDIAN AND ESKIMO LAND CLAIMS
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, my question was to be directed to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development but he has left the House. Perhaps I could direct it to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, who could take it as notice if he cannot answer it and pass it on to his confrere. In view of the great concern over the ecological impact of the proposed oil pipeline down the Mackenzie River valley, would the minister table all the research studies that have been undertaken on the matter?


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I will consider that suggestion. In the very comprehensive debate last Friday, I outlined in great detail the research that had been done by various agencies, both governmental and extragovernmental, as well as in the private sector and by universities, which I thought would be helpful to the House and the country. However, I will consider the suggestion of the hon. member regarding the tabling of the specific studies.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: I have a supplementary question. Perhaps this could be taken as notice for the attention of the minister of northern affairs. Could the minister give the House an assurance that the land claims of the Indian and Eskimo population of the territories arising from this project, as well as the claims under Treaties 8 and 11, will be settled by negotiation and consultation with these first Canadians as an integral part of the whole project?


FISHERIES
Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Fisheries and Forestry. In view of the number of swordfishermen presently unemployed in Atlantic Canada because of the ban on the sale of swordfish to the United States, has the minister decided on a program to assist these fishermen and, if so, when can we expect the details of this program to be announced?


Hon. Jack Davis (Minister of Fisheries and Forestry):: Mr. Speaker, I expect to be receiving the report of a joint federal-provincial task force on this problem next week.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: Since the shortage of codfish has brought about the closing of two large saltfish processors in Nova Scotia, has the minister investigated alternative programs which may be implemented to utilize the facilities in these two large plants, thereby alleviating some of the unemployment that their closing has created?


John (Jack) Davis: No, Mr. Speaker.
4350

March 17, 1971
Inquiries of the Ministry FINANCE


GOVERNMENT ACTION TO ASSIST IN STABILIZING SILVER PRICES
Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Finance a question. In view of the request made recently by Mexico and Peru for Canada's help in stabilizing world silver prices, has Canada replied to this request and what action does the government intend to take to help achieve more reasonable prices for silver producers in Canada?


Edgar John Benson: May I please take this question as notice, Mr. Speaker.


CAPE BRETON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Donald MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Have there been any negotiations to the minister's knowledge between the authorities of the Canada Pension Plan and the crown company Devco with respect to the phase-in, phase-out retirement scheme that they have adopted?


John Carr Munro: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, but in any event the Canada Pension Plan would apply to these men if they have been making contributions. Any other private arrangements that they have would be strictly their own private concern.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I did not want the minister to try to interpret what is going on. Since the Canada Pension Plan has been promoted as a universal scheme, I ask the minister the direct question: Does he feel that and Crown company, or any company for that matter, can fool around with the Canada Pension Plan which is available to all wage earners in Canada?


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The hon. member is asking the minister to express an opinion.


FINANCE
Mr. Max Sallsman (Waterloo):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Has the minister's attention been drawn to a complaint under section 32 of the anti-combines legislation by six people who have complained that

the charges of the banks on cheques are in contravention of that section? Will the minister see that this complaint is expedited by the Restrictive Trade Practices Commission?


Stanley Ronald Basford: Mr. Speaker, I was told that six people were intending to lodge such a complaint. Whether or not it has been received, I have not yet had notice of it. However, as I pointed out in the House the other day such action by the banks is not covered, as I understand the law, by the Combines Investigation Act.


Max Saltsman: Would the minister check to see whether such a complaint has been received and what has been the decision of his advisers on the matter?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington):: I have a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Would the minister ask the chartered banks of Canada to withhold implementing the increase in charges until a decision has been reached?


Stanley Ronald Basford: Mr. Speaker, banking services and financial services are not covered, nor are any other services, by the Combines Investigation Act. The Economic Council of Canada recommended that financial services be covered by the Combines Investigation Act, and the banks have been acting in such a way recently, I think, as to probably convince the public that they should be covered.


Alfred Dryden Hales: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Hon. members will realize that there are only a few minutes left before the expiration of the question period. If there are too many supplemen-taries to each question, we will run short of time.


Alfred Dryden Hales: May I address my supplementary question to the Minister of Finance. Would the minister prevail upon the chartered banks of Canada to withhold this new charge?


Edgar John Benson: Mr. Speaker, business decisions within the banking system are a matter for the banks, not for the Minister of Finance.


Mr. Jack McIntosh (Swift Current-Maple Creek):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Would the minister inform the House when the amendments to the Combines Investigation Act, referred to in the Speech from the Throne, will be available to members for study?


Stanley Ronald Basford: Mr. Speaker, we have been working very hard on revising the Combines Investigation Act and I hope the amendments will be introduced at the earliest possible moment, as soon as they are ready for introduction.

March 17, 1971


MANPOWER
Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State might be able to answer my question which relates to the participation of local associations and organizations in the opportunities for youth programs. It is contemplated that these should be established community associations or local associations, or is it contemplated that these will be local associations of students which will take part in this program?


Mr. Hugh Faulkner (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, my understanding is that it will probably include both.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Can the parliamentary secretary indicate what will be required of the local associations by way of financial participation, and will he assure the House that guidelines and full information will be issued in respect of how associations can qualify for participation in this program, immediately and without any further delay, supplementing the very vague references in the publicity so far?


James Hugh Faulkner: Mr. Speaker, without accepting all the comments the Leader of the Opposition makes about the program, I think the point he makes is valid. It is our intention that not only full information but criteria will be provided.


PROPOSED FLOODING OF SKAGIT RIVER VALLEY-PROGRESS OF NEGOTIATIONS WITH UNITED STATES
Mr. Randolph Harding (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Fisheries and Forestry. What progress has the government made with the United States government in its efforts to stop the flooding of Canadian territory in the Skagit River Valley?


John (Jack) Davis: Mr. Speaker, we are continuing discussions. We were discussing this matter with the United States administration yesterday.


Randolph Harding: Is the government officially opposing the application by the Seattle City Light Company at the United States hearings on the Skagit taking place this week in Seattle?


John (Jack) Davis: No, Mr. Speaker. I do not believe it is normal practice for the government of Canada to appear before semi-judicial bodies of that kind in another country.
Inquiries of the Ministry AGRICULTURE


FARM PRODUCTS MARKETING BILL-SUGGESTED MEETING WITH GROUP FROM WESTERN CANADA
Mr. J. H. Horner (Crowfooi):: Mr. Speaker, I direct my question to the right hon. Prime Minister. It arises from a reply he gave last Monday when he stated he would be prepared to give detailed consideration to regional requests to take the reference to hogs and cattle out of Bill C-176, provided the request did not come from myself. Is the Prime Minister prepared to meet with a small non-political group representing western Canada so they may put forward western Canada's requests in this regard?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, if there is something that cannot be decided or agreed upon between the Minister of Agriculture and this group, I will meet them, but I think it would be normal practice for them to meet with the Minister of Agriculture to see if their problem can be understood and tackled at that level.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I have a supplementary question. It relates to the fact that this bill has been in the mill for exactly a year today.


An hon. Member:: Who has been holding it up?


John (Jack) Henry Horner: Mr. Speaker, this is rather good evidence that there has been a stalemate between the Minister of Agriculture and the representatives of this region of western Canada. That is why I personally request the Prime Minister to hear the views of this non-political representative group from that region of Canada.


FINANCE
Mr. J. G. Lind (Middlesex):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to my colleague, the Minister of Finance. It relates to the increased service charges that banks have now adopted. First of all, if a merchant imposes an extra service charge and collaborates with another merchant across the street it is called retail price maintenance. I wonder whether there is any retail price maintenance involved when the banks increase their service charges in this way and affect all citizens of Canada?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Edgar John Benson: Mr. Speaker, as my colleague, the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs indicated, the Combines Investigation Act does not cover services whether it be bank or other services. Perhaps it will in the future.

March 17, 1971
Inquiries of the Ministry AIRPORTS


TORONTO-DECISION ON SITE FOR NEW FACILITY
Mr. S. Perry Ryan (Spadina):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Transport. Has he now had an opportunity to meet with the new premier of Ontario concerning the site for the new Metropolitan Toronto airport and, if so, can we expect an announcement this week?


Hon. Donald C. Jamieson (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I am looking forward with pleasure to meeting the new premier of Ontario tomorrow afternoon here in Ottawa.



TRANSPORT


Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the Minister of Transport. It relates to the announcement by General Dynamics concerning a proposed plan for nuclear-powered submarines to carry oil under the polar ice cap. Since this will require trans-shipment facilities, has the minister's department undertaken a study with a view to having trans-shipment facilities on Canada's east coast in light of this proposal for the movement of Alaska oil down to the eastern seaboard?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Yes, Mr. Speaker. In addition to General Dynamics there is one other firm at least that has designed a so-called polar submarine. We have undertaken studies on both of them and these are now in the process of being evaluated. The question of trans-shipment points and related matters form part of this study. I might say that one of the reasons for referring polar ice programs to a special committee of the House was so that members could hear witnesses from groups such as these, and it might be helpful to bring them here.



REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION


Mr. Roch La Salle (Joliette):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion.
In view of the concern of the employees of the Canadian Pittsburgh Industries Limited in Montreal, I should like to ask whether he has met the directors of this company, and whether his department is making efforts in order to urge that industry to carry on with its operations in Montreal?


Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: Mr. Speaker, unfortunately I have not met anybody. That company has decided to move into Ontario. It has been said publicly that this was because of a grant from my department. That is not so. My department has not given any grant to the company. The Ontario part of that firm did receive a grant, in 1966, I believe, and that has nothing to do with what is happening in Montreal presently.


George Harris Hees: I rise on a point of order. The hon. member for Middlesex should be allowed to ask a supplementary question.


Mr. Speaker:: I thank the hon. member for his assistance to the Chair; I shall call upon him from time to time.



MANPOWER


Stanley Stanford Schumacher: Mr. Speaker, my question is supplementary to a question asked by the hon. member for Dauphin. It relates to yesterday's announcement by the Public Service Commission concerning summer employment for students. Can the President of the Treasury Board say what percentage of the job opportunities are still open? I ask this question because I understand that a majority of the positions have already been filled, and the information in the press release may be misleading.


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I will ascertain from the Public Service Commission what the number is and report to the hon. member.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The allotted time for the question period expired a few minutes ago, but if there is unanimous consent on the part of hon. members to allow the hon. member for Middlesex to ask a supplementary question I have no objection.



FINANCE


James (Jim) Gordon Lind: Mr. Speaker, I wondering whether the Minister of Finance could prevail on the Governor of the Bank of Canada to investigate the increase in service charges by the banks and ascertain whether it is necessary in view of the huge profits they are making to the detriment of the citizens of Canada?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!

March 17, 1971


Edgar John Benson: Mr. Speaker, it is nice that hon. members opposite should urge you to recognize more members on this side of the House.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The minister has the floor for the purpose of replying to the hon. member's supplementary question.


Edgar John Benson: I was attempting to do that. If Mr. Speaker recognized more members on this side of the House we would get more intelligent questions. The answer to the question is that I do not think it is within the power of the Governor of the Bank of Canada.


Donald MacInnis: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I know it may be embarrassing to the Chair, but the Minister of Finance has just reflected on the Chair and the decorum of the House. He should not do that.


Edgar John Benson: If I have, Mr. Speaker, I apologize. I still think it was a good suggestion.


George Harris Hees: Apologize to the Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Orders of the day.


Mr. Simpson:: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. I have been endeavouring to catch Your Honour's eye since the start of the question period. In view of the minister's reply to a question yesterday, I feel that my question requires an answer today.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. That is not a question of privilege. The hon. member is not the only one who sought the recognition of the Chair. If all hon. members seek to be recognized during the question period, obviously some will not have the opportunity to do so. I bring to the attention of hon. members that when we have three, four, five or six supplementaries to a question, this is the end result. Hon. members do not have an opportunity to ask their questions. The hon. member has suggested to the Chair and the House that he has a very urgent question to ask. The Chair has no objection if the House will allow the member to ask the question.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: I regret that there does not appear to be agreement. I will undertake to recognize the hon. member immediately at the beginning of the question period tomorrow.


Robert Simpson: Further to the point of privilege, Mr. Speaker, as a result of the roster system the question will not be applicable tomorrow because the minister will not be here.


Mr. Speaker:: Orders of the day.
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed, from Monday, March 15, consideration of Bill C-180, respecting the packaging, labelling, sale, importation and advertising of prepackaged and certain other products, as reported (with amendments) from the Standing Committee on Health, Welfare and Social Affairs.
Mr. Speaker:: Is the House ready for the question on motion No. 5 (Mr. Benjamin)?


Some hon. Members:: Question.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


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


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


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


Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to Standing Order 75(2) the recorded division on the proposed motion stands deferred.


James Aloysius McGrath: I move
That Bill C-180, respecting the packaging, labelling, sale, importation and advertising of prepackaged and certain other products, be amended by deleting clause 19 thereof and substituting therefor:
"19. A copy of each regulation or amendment to a regulation that the Governor in Council proposes to make under section 11 or 18 shall be published in the Canada Gazette, and in at least one leading news publication in each province not less than once and a reasonable opportunity shall be afforded thereafter to consumers, dealers and other interested persons to make representations with respect thereto."
The purpose of this amendment, Mr. Speaker, is to ensure that the regulations which the minister will have power to set up under the terms of this bill will receive the widest possible dissemination across the country and that consumer groups, individual consumers, manufacturers and small businessmen will have an opportunity before the regulations are officially promulgated to make their views known to the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Basford) and the government.
Under clause 19 of the bill as it is now worded, all the minister has to do after the regulations have been set up

March 17, 1971
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act
is to have them published in the Canada Gazette. Clause 19 reads:
A copy of each regulation or amendment to a regulation that the Governor in Council proposes to make under section 11 or 18 shall be published in the Canada Gazette and a reasonable opportunity shall be afforded to consumers, dealers and other interested persons to make representations with respect thereto.
During the examination of this bill in committee, we heard evidence from most of the witnesses who appeared. Many of them were apprehensive about the legislation because of the wide discretionary powers that the bill gives to the minister. They were concerned that the regulations which would be made under the bill would not contain the proper safeguards to protect their rights. This is a justifiable misgiving, not only from the point of view of protecting the rights of Canadians who are manufacturing, whether they are small businessmen producing canned fruit or vegetables in Ontario or big conglomerates such as General Foods, but also because Canadian consumers will be affected by this bill. They have a right to know what these regulations will be. They have a right, either through consumers' associations or as individuals, to express their views on the proposed regulations to the minister and the government. If the minister does not accept my amendment, they will be denied that opportunity because the Canada Gazette does not have the widest possible circulation in Canada. As a matter of fact, the Canada Gazette is only read by politicians, senior civil servants and people who are directly involved in government at the federal, provincial and municipal levels.
What is wrong with the suggestion that the regulations be advertised in the leading newspaper of each province? This would give most people a chance to see what the government proposes to do with the power that Parliament will give it under this act. They will have this opportunity if the proposed regulations are advertised in the leading newspaper of each province. They will have an opportunity then to make their own recommendations known to the government, to protest to the government if that is necessary, or to indicate that the government has, in fact, not gone far enough to protect the consumer. I think it is worth noting that the total circulation of the Canada Gazette is less than 3,000. It has a very limited and exclusive readership which would not include the average consumer. Perhaps it might be worthwhile to place on the record a breakdown of the distribution of the Canada Gazette by provinces, in addition to the circulation of the leading newspapers in each of our 10 provinces.
In the province of British Columbia, the Canada Gazette enjoys a circulation of 114. Surely, the minister would want to have his regulations read by more people than the 114 in his province who read the Canada Gazette. I suggest to him that the way to do that would be to advertise the regulations in the Vancouver Sun, which has a circulation in excess of 210,000.


Stanley Ronald Basford: They would probably get it all wrong.


James Aloysius McGrath: In the province of Alberta, the Canada Gazette enjoys a circulation of 125, whereas the Edmonton Journal, the leading newspaper of that province, has a circulation of 147,000. In the province of Saskatchewan, the Canada Gazette has a circulation of 87, while the Regina Leader Post, the leading newspaper in that province, has a circulation of 60,000. In the province of Manitoba, the Canada Gazette has a circulation of 95, whereas the Winnipeg Free Press, the leading newspaper of that province, has a circulation of 130,000. In the province of Ontario, the Canada Gazette is a best seller by comparison. It enjoys a circulation of 1,362, whereas the Toronto Star, has a circulation of 400,000. In the province of Quebec, the Canada Gazette is not so popular. It has a circulation of 667, whereas the Montreal Star enjoys a circulation of 186,000, and La Presse in Montreal has a circulation of 206,000. In the province of New Brunswick, the Canada Gazette really takes a beating. It enjoys a circulation of 64, whereas the Saint John Telegraph-Journal has a circulation of 29,000. In the province of Nova Scotia, the Canada Gazette has a circulation of 69, whereas the Halifax Chronicle-Herald has a circulation of 68,000. In the province of Prince Edward Island, the Canada Gazette has a circulation of 11; that says something for Prince Edward Island. The Charlottetown Guardian enjoys a circulation of 16,500. In my own province of Newfoundland, the Canada Gazette has a circulation of 74, whereas the St. John's Evening Telegram enjoys a circulation of 46,000. When we get to Labrador, we find that the Canada Gazette has a circulation of only two.
I put these figures on the record to indicate to the House that the minister is defeating the very purpose of section 19 of the bill, which calls for the proposed regulations or amendments to a regulation to be advertised in the Canada Gazette. The reference is to regulations under section 11 of the bill which deals with undue proliferation, standardization, and so on. I ask the minister, is he serious about advertising these regulations, about having the widest dissemination of the regulations and encouraging the widest possible response to them? After all, he is not infallible, nor is the Governor in Council, and even though, hopefully, he will consult with consumer groups, with the Standards Council and with the trade groups, the proposed regulations will probably be lacking in many important aspects. There may be very serious shortcomings which would only be made known through the widest possible publication. It is obvious that they will not get this publicity unless my amendment is accepted.
Advertising in the Canada Gazette is merely a legal technicality. But surely in this particular bill, which comes close to being the minister's consumer's bill of rights and which will affect every single Canadian because we are all consumers, the minister should have departed from the standard, legalistic form of publishing the proposed regulations in the Canada Gazette. Perhaps he will be generous and accept our amendment since this is St. Patrick's Day and the minister may have a little Irish in him. There is some hope for the minister because his mother is Irish. Perhaps on St. Patrick's Day he might
March 17, 1971

be constrained to accept this amendment, knowing in his heart that it will improve this bill which is so dear to him. We all hope this measure will have the desired effect, since it is receiving the support of everyone in the House.
The principle of the bill is good, but the drafting is bad. It was necessary for the government to bring in a number of amendments. In so doing they incorporated many of the ideas that we had proposed. We had proposed eight amendments in the committee. I forget the number of amendments that were submitted by my colleagues in the NDP. Of our eight amendments, four eventually surfaced as government amendments, having been first rejected by the committee. We are pleased with that. We are pleased that we were able to improve the bill. The bill now before the House is a better bill than the one that received second reading last November. Great credit is due the minister that he saw the light and improved the bill. Now he can go one step further and accept this amendment, the purpose of which is to ensure that the people of this country will know exactly what their rights are with respect to this legislation. If there is one fault that the minister and his department have, it is that they bring in laws, amend the existing laws, and bring in new regulations, all of which are designed to protect the consumers across this country but the average consumer knows nothing about them. The minister himself admitted during discussion of his estimates the other day that he had only a very limited advertising budget.


Stanley Ronald Basford: It is $600,000.


James Aloysius McGrath: I think his budget for advertising amendments to the Bills of Exchange Act was $15,000. This amount would not even be sufficient to let the people of my own province know that they have new rights with respect to bills of exchange and with respect to the sale of sales contracts to finance companies. Nobody in Canada knows about the amendments to the Bills of Exchange Act which every member in this House supported. I submit that nobody will know about this legislation. They will not be aware of the regulations which the Governor in Council will be empowered to set up under this bill unless these proposed regulations are first of all advertised widely right across the country. There is only one way to do that, and it is by advertising in the leading newspapers of each of the provinces. I made an offer to the minister, which I repeat here. If his budget is such that he cannot afford to advertise this important legislation, if he cannot give these important proposed regulations the publicity they deserve, then perhaps Parliament can find the money. I think it is important that we do so.
I think the minister should first accept the amendment, should agree with the argument that the proposed regulations should be as widely disseminated as possible, and then he can come back to Parliament. I am sure Parliament will vote him the necessary money. We believe this amendment would strengthen the bill, just as it has
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act
already been strengthened by previous amendments, many of them ours, albeit the government took credit for them. We believe this amendment is necessary if the people of Canada are to know of the rights they will enjoy under this legislation. We believe that the widest dissemination is necessary in order that these regulations will be honoured by people who are in the business of manufacturing, processing, packaging and distributing food and food products.


Alfred Dryden Hales: Mr. Speaker, I would like to express briefly my support for the amendment. I support it on two bases. First, I think it is a very reasonable and just request that the consumers, the dealers and the processors should be advised of any regulations, or any amendments that are proposed to this new packaging bill. If it is as good as we think it is, why should we hesitate to tell the people about the bill, and about any changes or regulations that are going to be made?
My support for the amendment is also based on another part of this measure. I refer to clause 3(1) which has to do with the application of the bill. Here we have a piece of legislation drafted in such a way that we are incorporating in it one of the most dangerous principles I have ever heard in this House. I bring to the attention of hon. members this clause which reads:
-the provisions of this Act that by the terms of this Act or the regulations are applicable to any product apply notwithstanding any other Act or the Parliament of Canada.
This means that the bill and the regulations will take precedence over any other legislation that we have passed in this House. Who writes and draws up the regulations? Generally, it is public servants who draft regulations. Do you mean to tell me that we are going to allow regulations, drafted by public servants, to take precedence over any other act passed by this Parliament? This clause should not be in the bill.
I would not object if the clause read, "-by the terms of this Act are applicable to any product apply notwithstanding any other Act of the Parliament of Canada." If we allow the regulations made under the provisions of this bill to override any other act of Parliament, then we are creating a serious precedent. It is for this second reason in particular that I support the amendment. It would add weight to and strengthen the bill. If the bill is as good as we think it is, why not tell the people about the amendments and changes that will be made?


Mr. Les Benjamin (Regina-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to say briefly that we in the New Democratic Party support this amendment, but probably for somewhat different reasons from those given by our good friends to my right. First of all, I should tell the House that this amendment proposed by the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath) is something of a compromise. It is different from the amendment that he originally moved in the committee. In order to make it easier on the minister, and to lessen the costs of his proposal, he is submitting a compromise amendment which would require the advertising of the regulations in one leading

March 17, 1971
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act newspaper in each province in Canada. I believe he means each territory as well.
I quite agree with what the hon. member said when he spoke to the amendment, namely, that the Canda Gazette is hardly a best seller, and that the subscribers to it in the main will be other government officials. I submit that the subscribers to the Canada Gazette will also be organizations, particularly those of the manufacturers, packagers and the processors of products which the consumers buy. No doubt these organizations subscribe to the Canada Gazette and watch it very closely. Certainly, their legal counsel will do the same thing. In addition, the consumers' associations subscribe to it. We support the amendment because we believe it is important that as many members of the general public as possible should have a chance to see the regulations and, if they wish, make representations.
Clause 19 of the bill requires the minister to publish the regulations in the Canada Gazette, and to afford an opportunity not only to the dealers and their associations but also to consumers to make representations regarding any regulations that are published. We feel that if the minister were at least to publish the regulations in one leading newspaper in each province, a significant number of members of the Canadian public would have a chance to look at them. Then, if they wished, they would have an opportunity to make representations. The argument that this will cost too much money surely is not sufficient to override the interests of the consumer. I know the minister is anxious that the public know as much about the bill as possible. Surely, this is one way in which that can be accomplished. I hope that the amendment will prove acceptable to him, since it does not in any way harm the legislation and does not in any way restrict or prevent him from carrying out all the provisions of the legislation. In fact, it will allow him to proceed even further in informing the general public about the regulations.
If the minister accepts the amendment, I hope that when his officials are preparing the advertisements for insertion in one leading newspaper in each province they see to it that the regulations are printed in a more attractive and readable manner than when they appear in the Canada Gazette. One becomes bored after reading the first line of the Canada Gazette. The regulations should be presented in an attractive form in a daily newspaper. Even if they had to be presented in the same way as a Safeway ad, this would be much better than if they appeared in the small type and legal verbiage associated with the Canada Gazette. I think the hon. member who has submitted the amendment has gone out of his way to reword his original proposal in such a manner as to make it more acceptable to the minister, with some saving of cost. I hope the minister will accept the amendment.


Stanley Ronald Basford: Mr. Speaker, I have been urged to accept amendment No. 6 proposed by the hon. member for St.
John's East (Mr. McGrath). There is nothing I would like to do more than accept it, but I am afraid I cannot. I have been urged to accept it for two reasons, with both of which I agree. First, that today is St. Patrick's Day and the hon. member has some Irish blood as have I. My mother was born and brought up in Bandon and Cork, so on this day of the Irish I would like to agree with my friend from Newfoundland and accept this amendment but I am afraid I cannot. The second reason that I have been urged to accept is one with which I can also agree, that we should do everything possible to inform consumers of their rights. I agree with this, the hon. member for St. John's East agrees and so does the hon. member for Regina-Lake Centre (Mr. Benjamin). But this is not the most efficient or economical way of informing consumers, hence my objection to the amendment. The amendment is put forward in the best possible spirit in the world. I endorse that spirit, that desire which we all share to inform consumers of their rights.
As I explained in the Committee on Health, Welfare and Social Affairs where the bill was examined clause by clause, the cost of this proposal would be considerable. What the amendment calls for is the publication of the regulations passed under this act in the Canada Gazette and one leading newspaper in each province. Apart from the cost of publication in the Canada Gazette, the cost of publication in one newspaper would be extremely high. As an example the publication of the regulations passed under the Hazardous Products Act before Christmas relative to the safety of toys cost in excess of $15,000 for one publication. All that would be published in the legal column of a daily newspaper in one province would be some terribly complicated and legalistically worded regulation which no one would understand and we would spend $16,000 of taxpayers' money. And this would have to go on week after week as we proposed new regulations or amended and changed existing ones.
The Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs has a very limited budget. The hon. member for St. John's East referred to the budget in the committee on estimates recently when he supported the suggestion that we should have a larger budget for consumer education. I wish we had a larger budget but even so, this is not the way to spend it. What would be published would not be the regulations but only the proposed regulations. Unlike other acts of this Parliament except one, this act calls for publication of proposed regulations in the Canada Gazette. The bill states that the Governor in Council shall publish proposed regulations and allow people an opportunity to comment on them. At great cost to the taxpayers, all that would be published in the newspapers would be what we proposed to do. Various groups would then comment on them and suggest changes. We would then have to redraw the regulations and publish the final regulations. The amendment calls for publication of proposed regulations only, and this would cause great confusion. There is a better way than this to inform consumers of their rights.
This House has just completed debate on the statutory instruments' bill which arose from a special committee

March 17, 1971

which concerned itself with the whole question of delegated legislation, statutory instruments and the regulation-making power of the government and its agencies. In the published report of the special committee, a whole chapter is devoted to publication, but there is no suggestion of this type of procedure. The committee knew that there was a more efficient and economic way of informing the special interest groups and the general public of their rights, and the effect of regulations being passed, than is set out in this amendment. The special committee sat week after week and month after month studying this question of the regulation-making power of the government, and had they felt that this amendment was the right way to go about things we could take it for granted that it would have been included hi their recommendations. Because I think it would cause confusion, because the money spent would not be put to best use and because it has not been recommended by the special committee, I do not think the amendment can be accepted.
The government agrees with the spirit of the amendment of trying to inform consumers of their rights. However, we have already put into the bill a statutory requirement for the minister to publish proposed regulations. This requirement is contained in only one other act of this Parliament. In addition, there is a statutory duty on the minister to receive representations from all interested groups. That is a common statutory right which is usually taken for granted, but in this bill it is spelled out as a specific obligation.


Mr.   McGra@: Mr. Speaker, would the minister permit a question?


Stanley Ronald Basford: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


James Aloysius McGrath: Since the minister has indicated that he will not accept this amendment and since he agrees with the arguments in favour of it, could the minister inform the House how he proposes to circulate or publicize the proposed regulations? Can he tell us how he intends to solicit the response which he hopes to get from consumer groups across the country? That information would be very useful to the House because he is certainly not going to get it from the 2,800 copies of the Canada Gazette circulated in Canada.


Stanley Ronald Basford: Before starting to draw any regulation at all, we would notify the people known to be interested in whatever subject we were proposing to cover by way of regulation. For example, if we were dealing with toothpaste tubes or detergent packages or textile labelling, we would notify both the manufacturing and producer groups involved as well as the Consumers' Association of Canada. We would show them some general outline of our proposals and receive their comments, then we would draft regulations and submit them to the Department of Justice. Once they had been drawn and approved as the policy of the government, they would have to be published in the Canada Gazette as proposed regulations. However, long before publication those parties interested in the subject matter of the regulations would have been
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act
consulted and would have had an opportunity of making recommendations. Once published, of course, the statutory right to be heard arises. We would have to listen, and we would welcome comment on these regulations.
I think those who are interested in the regulations will experience no difficulty in knowing about them or in being heard. For example, the bill has arisen out of some 50 different recommendations of the Consumers Association of Canada. All of these were detailed recommendations, or detailed resolutions respecting some aspect of packaging and labelling. Most of these people are volunteers. This is not an expensive trade group, with high priced executives, directors, boards, and people who are paid to sit in the gallery of the House of Commons to ascertain what is happening. The Consumers Association is not like that. Nevertheless they, as volunteers, still are able to keep a watch on what is happening in my department, fortunately, and are able to make their input felt with respect to the making of regulations. They have done this effectively, and this bill provides the statutory right for them to do that.


Alfred Dryden Hales: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the minister a question? Since he did not either agree with or refute my argument concerning the regulations, may I ask the minister if it is the intention of those who drafted this bill to provide that the regulations made under the bill will apply notwithstanding any other act of the Parliament of Canada.


Stanley Ronald Basford: Mr. Speaker, I did not reply to the hon. member's remarks because I thought they were out of order. They referred to clause 3, with which we are not now dealing. We are dealing with the amendment relating to the publication of regulations. We debated yesterday the provisions relating to clause 3. I quoted at that time from the debate in the committee. I commented on the brief from Dr. Ziegel, the prominent lawyer in this field in Canada, which suggests that clause 3 would not have the effect that the hon. member suggests it may have. Allow me to read clause 3(1):
Subject to subsection (2) and any regulations made under section 18, the provisions of this Act that by the terms of this Act or the regulations are applicable to any product apply notwithstanding any other Act of the Parliament of Canada.
It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that the wording of clause 3(1) is clear. It provides that this act is the paramount act, and regulations made under this act are the paramount regulations. Since there are prior acts dealing with certain aspects of packaging and labelling, it is not unusual to provide in the latest act to come before Parliament, in this case the one we are considering, that that act and the regulations passed under it will govern and be paramount. That is the issue. That is what the bill provides. The substance of this bill is that this is the paramount legislation. This is to be the principal packaging and labelling legislation, and these are to be the principal regulations in this country. If you changed that, you would destroy the whole purpose of the legislation.
4358

March 17, 1971
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act


Alfred Dryden Hales: Mr. Speaker, may I say to the minister that I brought this question before the House because the amendment we are dealing with deals with advertising regulations. I was not referring to clause 3 specifically. I knew that we had discussed that earlier. I gather from the minister's answer that regulations drafted by employees of the government will apply notwithstanding any other act that this House has passed. In other words, regulations that the minister's department are to draft will override any other act that this Parliament has passed.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, that is why we wanted these regulations publicized.


Stanley Ronald Basford: Mr. Speaker, that is not quite correct. It is provided that the regulations will be made by the governor in council, which is not a group of civil servants but the cabinet of this country. The regulations passed normally under clause 3, and pursuant to the provisions of this bill, shall apply notwithstanding any other act of the Parliament of Canada. I think the wording of the legislation is clear.


Mr. W. M. Howe (Wellington-Grey-Dufferin-Walerloo):: Mr. Speaker, I think the minister's reply to the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath) cleared up something with regard to these regulations about which we were afraid. If my memory serves me right, the minister said that before regulations are made certain interested groups, such as manufacturing groups, retail merchant groups and others who would be involved with the regulations will be called in to discuss the regulations. Was this what the minister indicated when he replied a few minutes ago? If so, it clears up my misunderstanding somewhat regarding clause 18 which has to do with the publication of regulations. I felt that the minister was putting the cart before the horse, because I thought he said that the regulations were to be published in the Canada Gazette and then, after that, interested groups were to be allowed to appear.
I think the minister's reply was clear. I believe he said that, before the regulations are made by the governor in council or anybody in the minister's department, there will be consultation with the people concerned with the product being regulated. I do not think that that is spelled out in the bill, Mr. Speaker. If it is, I have yet to see it. Where does the bill say that the regulations will be published after there has been consultation with these groups? As I say, if my memory serves me right, the minister's reply a few minutes ago indicated that before the governor in council brings in these regulations, consultations will take place with interested parties. I should like to hear the minister repeat that, or tell us where in the bill there is provision for consultations before the governor in council makes these regulations.


James Aloysius McGrath: The consultations are only permissive. The bill does not say that they are mandatory.


William Marvin Howe: That is what I say. On the other hand, if what the minister has said is correct, if the governor in council is to consult with the people concerned before the
regulations Eire made, then that clears up some of our worries. We are also concerned about the matter of the regulations being advertised. The minister will listen to groups, and he may change or amend the regulations after that. However, there is no indication that the regulations will be changed or amended after the consultations. I should like the minister to clear up that matter. Also, is there any definite indication that the people concerned are to be consulted before any regulations are made?


Stanley Ronald Basford: published in the Gazette as proposed regulations upon which people have a statutory right to comment. If they have a good case, if they can show us we are wrong, we in the government, being sensible people, will change the regulations in such a way as to overcome the objection which has been raised.
I read editorials. I read that our procedure is dictatorial, authoritarian, and so on. The other day, the Financial Times, for example, wrote in connection with the packaging bill that it was proposed the minister should consult with representatives of the manufacturers, of consumer groups, and so on. Then, it added: "Mr. Basford is having none of that." Mr. Speaker, that is totally inaccurate. It is totally wrong, and I am surprised that the Financial Times is not better informed than to write editorials which say something like that. Speeches are made on the rubber chicken circuit to the effect that this department is not interested in consulting with business groups, and so on. That is quite wrong. The doors of my office, or of my department, are open to anyone who wants to talk about what we are doing or the regulations we want to draw up. Whoever says otherwise is lying, either for the purpose of discrediting the consumers' cause or because he is so misinformed, or so outside what is happening that he is not really at the centre of things. Be they members of a consumers' association or of a manufacturers' group, everyone who has something to say will find that my door is open; they are welcome to come in and express their point of view.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


James Aloysius McGrath: That is a long-winded answer to a very simple question. I think it is unfair of the minister to imply as he did that we voiced this reservation simply out of our concern for the manufacturing industry.


Stanley Ronald Basford: I did not say that.


James Aloysius McGrath: The minister said that. The purpose of my amendment is to ensure that the proposed regulations are read by as many Canadians as possible, by the average consumer. I submit that it is not possible to reach the average Canadian by means of announcement in the Canada Gazette with its relatively small circulation. The consumer has a tremendous stake in this business. We realize that the minister will consult with the manufacturers, with the consumers' associations and with some of the main packagers. We are concerned about consultation with the average consumer.


Mr. Boulanger:: You will get it, don't worry.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Hon. members have heard the motion of the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath). All those in favour of the said motion will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


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


Some hon. Members:: Nay.
Division


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


Mr. Depuiy Speaker:: The recorded division on this motion will be deferred pursuant to Standing Order 75(2).
The House will now revert to deferred divisions on motions Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Call in the members.
And the members having been called in:


Mr. Depuiy Speaker:: Order please. The House will now revert to deferred divisions on motions Nos. 2, 3 3and 4, 5 and 6, proposing amendments to Bill C-180, respecting the packaging, labelling sale, importation and advertising of prepackaged and certain other products. The first question is on motion No. 2 (Mrs. Maclnnis). Is the House ready for the question?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I declare the motion lost. The
question now is on motion No. 3 (Mrs. Maclnnis). Is the	
House ready for the question?	
The House divided on	motion No. 3 (Mrs. Maclnnis)
which was negatived on	the following division:
	YEAS
	Messrs:
Alkenbrack	Code
Baldwin	Crouse
Barnett	Danforth
Beaudoin	Dinsdale
Benjamin	Dionne
Bigg	Douglas
Burton	Downey
Cadieu	Fairweather
Carter	Flemming
Messrs:
Forrestall	Marshall
Fortin	Mather
Gauthier	Mazankowski
Gilbert	Moore
Gleave	Nowlan
Godin	Orlikow
Hales	Peddle
Harding	Peters
Harkness	Ricard
Hees	Ritchie
Horner	Rodrigue
Howard (Skeena)	Rondeau
Howe	Rose
Knowles (Winnipeg	Ryan
North Centre)	Rynard
Knowles (Norfolk-	Saltsman
Haldimand)	Schumacher
Korchinski	Scott
Lambert	Simpson
(Bellechasse)	Skoberg
Lambert	Skoreyko
(Edmonton West)	Southam
La Salle	Stanfield
Lundrigan	Stewart (Marquette)
Maclnnis (Cape	Tetrault
Breton-East Richmond)	Thomas (Moncton)
Maclnnis (Mrs.)	Thompson (Red Deer)
MacLean	Thomson
McCleave	(Battleford-Kindersley)
McGrath	Valade
McIntosh	Winch
McKinley	Yewchuk-76.
 NAYS Messrs:
Andras	Greene
Badanai	Guay (St. Boniface)
Barrett	Guilbault
Basford	Haidasz
Bechard	Hellyer
Benson	Hopkins
Blair	Howard
Blouin	(Okanagan Boundary)
Borrie	Hymmen
Boulanger	Isabelle
Breau	Jamieson
Buchanan	Jerome
Caccia	Kaplan
Cafik	Kierans
Chappell	Lachance
Clermont	Laing
Cobbe	(Vancouver South)
Comtois	Lang (Saskatoon-
Corbin	Humboldt)
C6te (Richelieu)	Langlois
Cflte (Longueuil)	Laniel
Crossman	Leblanc (Laurier)
Cullen	LeBlanc (Rimouski)
Danson	Lefebvre
Davis	Legault
Deachman	Lessard (LaSalle)
Deakon	Lessard
Drury	(Lac-Saint-Jean)
Dube	Lind
Dupras	Loiselle
Duquet	MacEachen
Emard	McBride
Faulkner	Mcllraith
Forest	Marchand
Forget	(Langelier)
Francis	Marchand
Gendron	(Kamloops-Cariboo)
Gervais	Morison
Gillespie	Murphy

March 17, 1971		COMMONS DEBATES		
				Division
		Messrs:		Messrs:
Noel	Smith (Saint-Jean)	Fairweather	McKinleyO'Connell	Stafford	Faulkner	MarchandOtto	St. Pierre	Flemming	(Langelier)Ouellet	Thomas	Forest	MarchandPenner	(Maisonneuve-	Forget	(Kamloops-Cariboo)Perrault	Rosemont)	Forrestall	MarshallPortelance	Tolmie	Francis	MazankowskiPringle	Trudeau	Gendron	MooreRichard	Trudel	Gervais	MorisonRichardson	Turner (Ottawa-Carleton)	Gillespie	MurphyRoberts	Walker	Greene	NoelRobinson	Watson	Guay (Saint-Boniface)	NowlanRock	Weatherhead	Guilbault	O'ConnellRoy (Timmins)	Whelan	Haidasz	OttoSerre	Whicher	Hales	OuelletSmith	Whiting-102.	Harkness	Peddle(Northumberland-	Hees	PennerMiramichi)	Hellyer	PerraultHopkins	PortelanceHorner	PringleHoward	Ricard


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I declare the motion lost.	(Okanagan Boundary) Howe	Richard RichardsonBefore I put the	next	question, I might mention that	Hymmen	Ritchielast Monday it was tion No. 3 would	agreed that a negative vote on mo-also dispose of motion No. 4. The	Isabelle Jamieson Jerome	Roberts RobinsonHouse will, therefore, now proceed to motion No. 5.	Kaplan	Roy (Laval)The House divided on motion No. 5 (Mr. Benjamin)	Kierans Knowles (Norfolk-	Ryan Rynardwhich was negatived on the following division:	Haldimand)	SchumacherKorchinski	ScottYEAS	Lachance	SerreMessrs:	Laing	Simpson(Vancouver South)	SkoreykoBarnett	Lambert	Lambert	SmithBeaudoin	(Bellechasse)	(Edmonton West)	(Northumberland-Benjamin	Maclnnis (Mrs.)	Lang (Saskatoon-	Miramichi)Burton	Mather	Humboldt)	Smith (Saint-Jean)Dionne	Orlikow	Langlois	SouthamDouglas	Peters	Laniel	StaffordFortin	Rodrigue	La Salle	StanfieldGauthier	Rondeau	Leblanc (Laurier)	Stewart (Marquette)Gilbert	Rose	LeBlanc (Rimouskl)	St. PierreGleave	Saltsman	Lefebvre	ThomasGodin	Skoberg	Legault	(Maisonneuve-Harding	Tetrault	Lessard (LaSalle)	Rosemont)Howard (Skeena)	Thomson	Lessard	Thomas (Moncton)Knowles (Winnipeg	(Battlef ord-Kindersley)	(Lac-Saint-Jean)	Thompson (Red Deer)North Centre)	Winch-27.	Lind	Tolmie
++NAYS
Messrs:
Alkenbrack
Andras
Badanai
Baldwin
Barrett
Basford
Bechard
Benson
Bigg
Blair
Blouin
Borrie
Boulanger
Breau
Buchanan
Caccia
Cadieu
Cafik
Carter
Chappell
Clermont
Cobbe
Code
Comtois
Corbin
Cote (Richelieu)
Cote (Longueuil)
Crossman
Crouse
Cullen
Danforth
Danson
Davis
Deachman
Deakon
Dinsdale
Downey
Drury
Dube
Dupras
Duquet
Emard
Loiselle Lundrigan MacEachen Maclnnis (Cape Breton-East Richmond) MacLean McBride McCleave McGrath Mcllraith McIntosh
Trudeau Trudel
Turner (Ottawa-Carleton)
Valade
Walker
Watson
Weatherhead
Whelan
Whicher
Whiting
Yewchuk-151.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I declare the motion lost.
The next question is on motion No. 6 (Mr. McGrath). Is the House ready for the question?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I declare the amendment lost.


Stanley Ronald Basford: that Bill C-180, respecting the packaging, labelling, sale, importation and advertising of prepackaged and certain other products, as reported (with amendments) from the Standing Committee on Health, Welfare and Social Affairs be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:: When shall the said bill be read a third time?


Some hon. Members:: By leave, now.


Stanley Ronald Basford: that the bill be read the third time and do pass.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, it is not our intention to delay this bill, since it has been around for almost four months. It was first introduced in the House on November 2 last year and received first reading, but did not come up for second reading until December 16. Since that time, Sir, it has received very exhaustive and intensive examination in committee. The Standing Committee on Health, Welfare and Social Affairs spent a total of 13 days examining this very important bill clause by clause, and heard 15 witnesses and as many briefs. That, coupled with the two days that the House has spent on report stage and third reading, means that the bill has received a total of 15 days debate and examination. And well it should, Sir, because it is an important bill. It is the most important consumer bill to come before this House. It certainly is the most important piece of consumer legislation to be introduced by this government.
The opposition has a responsibility in respect of government bills, and if the opposition supports the principle of a bill presented by the government it is then incumbent upon the opposition to examine that bill clause by clause, to submit amendments if necesssary, with the

March 17, 1971

intention of trying to improve the bill. Now, we have supported the principle of the bill. We have made this very clear throughout. When the bill first came up for second reading our intentions in this regard were made known, and our intentions were made known during the days when the bill was receiving clause by clause examination in the committee. Since we supported the principle of the bill, we felt that the bill needed improvements.
I think that the minister will be the first to admit that the bill which is now before the House is a vastly different piece of legislation from the one he originally introduced away back on November 2, 1970. It is a better bill. It is a better bill because members of the committee representing all parties examined it very closely clause by clause. It is a better bill because many of the amendments that we moved in committee, although rejected out of hand by the government by the use of its majority on the committee, eventually resurfaced as amendments proposed by government supporters at the instigation of the minister. So, we can take some credit for the fact that the bill now before the House is a vastly improved one. It is a better bill than the one that was originally introduced. Mr. Speaker, we believe that this was our responsibility and we have tried throughout to discharge that responsibility to the best of our ability.
The minister may try to convey the impression, sometimes supported by his colleagues from the NDP, that he is custodian of the rights of the consumer. He cannot say that to this party, Mr. Speaker. Every member of this House had very special responsibilities with regard to consumer rights and no party in this House has been as diligent and aggressive in discharging this responsibility as the official opposition.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


James Aloysius McGrath: In that respect, Mr. Speaker, we take a back seat to no one, not the minister or his colleagues in the government or our well meaning and well inten-tioned friends in the NDP. In their more serious moments, I think hon. members in this House will concede this fact. However, we had very strong reservations and doubts about the way the bill was originally drafted. Indeed, we have doubts about some of the clauses of the bill in its present form.
One thing that causes us concern, Mr. Speaker, relates to the regulations which the minister will have the authority to draw under Clause 3. Reservations were expressed by the hon. member for Wellington (Mr. Hales). It is not that we have reason to doubt the minister's good intentions with respect to carrying out the intent of the bill; it is just that we do not believe the minister is the fountain of all knowledge and we do not believe that the Governor in Council is incapable of making mistakes. In view of the wide powers the minister will have under section 3 to draft regulations, which in some instances will supersede existing acts of Parliament, we believe the minister should give these proposed regulations the widest possible publicity. I submit to you, Sir, that it is not possible to do that under the
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act
present provisions of the bill. It is not possible to do that by publishing the proposed regulations in the Canada Gazette which has a very limited distribution, with a circulation of less than 3,000.
We believe that these regulations, which will be conceived by the Governor in Council after consultation with the consumers of Canada, with the Grocery Products Manufacturers' Association and other interested groups with the responsibility for manufacturing, packaging, distribution, will be presented in the Canada Gazette as proposed regulations. But we say because of the wide-ranging powers that the minister will or conceivably can have under these regulations, and because these regulations can supersede existing acts of this Parliament, they should receive the widest possible distribution so that consumer groups, co-operative groups and the average individual in this country who is concerned enough to express an opinion, can do just that. These interested parties should be able to criticize the regulations for their sins of omission or commission but I submit, Mr. Speaker, that they will be denied that opportunity because of the fact publication will be limited to the Canada Gazette.
There are 15 separate statutes presently in existence covering the packaging, labelling and, distribution of food and food products. They range all the way from the Weights and Measures Act, the Fish Inspection Act, the Meat and Canned Foods Act, to the Trademark and the Truth in Labelling Acts. The regulations which the minister has authority to draw up under clause 3 will supersede many of these 15 statutes. That is the concern of the opposition. It is our responsibility to be on guard against what would appear to be the excessive use of power by means of this use of statutory instruments. In other words, Parliament will have no say in the drafting of regulations. We say the people of Canada should have a chance to examine them before they are agreed upon and promulgated in final form. That was our main criticism of the bill
We support the bill in principle, Mr. Speaker. We have had our innings; we have submitted our amendments in committee and many of them were accepted by the government through the back door as government amendments. We submitted two of these amendments to the House because we felt that they focussed attention on our main concern, the drafting of the bill, notwithstanding what the minister said during debate and without detracting from the bill itself. The bill is ready for third reading and I want to make it clear that we are glad it has been improved by the amendments adopted in committee. It is a better bill because of them.
In supporting the bill, this party wants to reiterate and re-emphasize its position in support of some other protection in the area of packaging and labelling. There is no question that a case can be made for many of the powers which the minister would be receiving under the terms of this bill. There is undue proliferation in sizes and there is misleading labelling on many of the food items which appear on supermarket shelves. The case has been documented and I will not repeat it here. The minister was

March 17, 1971
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act co-chairman of a Special Joint Committee of the House and Senate on Consumer Credit which went into this problem in detail, and many of its recommendations are incorporated in this bill. The case has also been documented by the Royal Commission on Consumer Problems in the three Prairie provinces, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, under the chairmanship of Judge Mary Batten. The report of this commission is known as the Batten report.
We support the need for some protection. We want to emphasize and reiterate that support by supporting the bill on third reading.


Leslie Gordon Benjamin: Mr. Speaker, we, too, approve this legislation as far as it goes, and I suppose the minister expected us to take that position.


Stanley Ronald Basford: Some day the hon. member may see the light.


Leslie Gordon Benjamin: There are approximately 7,000 different prepackaged items at present on shop shelves in Canada. It is estimated that in the next four years there will be between 15,000 and 20,000 prepackaged items on the shop shelves of Canada. In other words, there will be a shoppers' jungle and it will be more difficult for shoppers to make intelligent decisions on the basis of quantity, quality and the value of the articles they purchase. Although I say this is a good bill as far as it goes, may I point out that we, of the New Democratic Party, took the minister at his word when he said in committee that we should worry less about the bill going too far and more about those areas in which the bill might not go far enough. In other words, he invited all hon. members to make certain that there are not areas in the bill that the minister and his officials missed or overlooked, to make sure that there are not loopholes which might be used to deceive or mislead, either intentionally or accidentally.
We took him at his word. We proposed a number of amendments in committee, none of which the minister would accept and all of which would have done even more than the minister proposed. In essence, he argued against the amendments, some of which he felt had merit, but he thought they were unconstitutional. In using that argument the minister is on extremely soft ground, because I submit, as we did earlier in this House and in committee, that if proposals we made to amend, strengthen and enlarge this bill were unconstitutional, then many other areas that the minister has included in this bill are also unconstitutional. For example, we think it is entirely illogical of the minister to require legislation that prevents deception in the area of sizes, shapes of packages or containers and contents on labels, while at the same time relying on the better nature and good ethical practices of those who manufacture, package, process and sell products to determine the matter of pricing. In dealing with the first three areas and ignoring the fourth, we think the minister is being illogical. However, we have half a loaf, and for a starving man that is better than none.
Because the minister has refused to accept amendments that would improve and enlarge the bill, we feel that within one or two years of its coming into operation he will find that some will utilize pricing practices to mislead or deceive, and that they will do this deliberately. Others will do this purely accidentally, but there will be no regulations under this legislation to correct that situation. We shall hear a further outcry from consumers once they become aware of those practices. We predict that after one or two years of experience with this legislation, the minister will regret having refused to accept our amendments regarding the storage and dating of perishable products. Such problems as we presently experience will not be corrected under this legislation.
As my hon. friend, the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath) pointed out, the committee heard witnesses from pretty well all organizations involved in the manufacture, packaging, labelling and processing of products. We also heard witnesses from the paper industry, most of whom opposed this legislation. There were a dozen or 15 of such associations appearing before the committee. On the other side of the coin, the Canadian Association of Consumers appeared before the committee in support of the legislation. I would hardly call that an even fight. Thank goodness, to the credit of the minister, as became evident in subsequent questioning, he lined himself up, in the main, on the side of the Canadian Association of Consumers and of consumers generally.
The Grocery Products Manufacturers Association, the Canadian Manufacturers Association, the Toilet Goods Manufacturers Association and the Paper and Packaging Manufacturing Association appeared before the committee and, I feel, deliberately exaggerated the intent and purpose of this legislation. In almost every instance, they read a great deal more into the legislation than is contained in it and said that the minister could do more than he can. They tried to mount a scare campaign. They were arrogant. They knew-they did not think-they knew that they knew better than anyone else what the needs, wishes and desires of consumers were. The president of the Canadian Manufacturers Association had the unmitigated gall to say in committee that they, the manufacturers, knew better than anybody else what the needs and desires of the consumers were. What conceit. What arrogance! I should like to think that the minister, as well as members of the committee, got the message loud and clear, because this kind of talk to a committee made up of representatives of the people of Canada should not be accepted.
We have seen more than one example of this kind of arrogance and conceit. The March issue of "Executive" carries a lengthy interview, if one can call it that so with Mr. John C. Lockwood, president of Lever Brothers Ltd. I never saw so many loaded questions in one interview in my life. The more one reads this interview the more one becomes incensed about it and the more becomes disappointed that the minister did not accept some of the amendments we proposed. I predict, in light of the attitude of this gentleman and others like him, that the minister will have a lot of fun, not to say difficulty, in
[Mr. McGrath.)
March 17, 1971

enforcing his law. He will find himself in court at almost every step of the way. There will be a fight over almost every regulation made.
In the article Mr. Lockwood is reported as saying:
The minister and his people think they know better than we do what the consumer wants, and that's an astonishing situation. After all we have spent years and hundreds of thousands of dollars in market research and have had tremendous exposure of our products to the marketplace.
That is perfectly true. Outfits like Lever Brothers have spent hundreds of thousands on market research and on exposing and selling their products. What is the reputation and history of companies which manufacture and peddle detergents and soaps? They introduce gimmickry, contests and prizes. Packages are partly filled. Packages contain a reduced amount of soap and in them is a tea towel worth less than one tenth of the value of the soap it displaces. Outfits like that have had to face courts because of the type of advertising they have carried on and because of the way they have presented their product to the public. This statement applies whether you are considering tooth paste, soap or what have you. These are the kinds of outfits that act in the manner characterized by Mr. Lockwood. He was asked this question in the interview:
Do you question whether this group of people know what they're doing; or do you question their motivation for doing it?
The group Mr. Lockwood refers to are, "The minister and his people-pseudo-intellectual characters," all of whom show a form of arrogance that has to be fought. Mr. Lockwood not only questions this group of people, not only questions what they are doing, but also questions their motivation for doing it. I hope that the minister will have an opportunity at some time to have a good discussion with Mr. Lockwood privately. I will even send over a pair of boxing gloves for him to use. Mr. Lockwood does not think they have the necessary data to work on because none of them have much experience with the consumer market and they tend to be influenced by a few letters addressed to Box 99 or a few intellectual friends.
As the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath) said, we spent dozens hours listening to gentlemen like Mr. Lockwood. People like him got a hearing in greater length and depth, I imagine, than they have ever received before. I shall not take the time of the House to go further into this article, but when we read it we realize what the minister and his department will be up against. If the minister thinks for one moment that he will receive co-operation, advice and help from this outfit he is labouring under a delusion. He can expect a lot more difficulty than he has envisaged so far and he will wish that more of the tools we were proposing for him in our amendments were available before another year is up. This gentleman, Mr. Lockwood, who represents the other side, uses phrases like "galloping Basfordism".


James Aloysius McGrath: Watch your language.
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act


Leslie Gordon Benjamin: I think he gives the minister too much credit. Even the minister, good though his motives are, cannot claim credit for originating the ideas in this legislation. It seems to me expressions of this kind from outfits like Lever Brothers are symptomatic of their real attitude toward the public of Canada. Their attitude is-the public is ignorant, dumb, and a bunch of suckers. To quote the head of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association, the manufacturers know infinitely more. Such expressions are also symptomatic of their attitude toward Members of Parliament, including members of the other place who, in a joint committee which started this work in 1966, spent months listening to the outcries of consumers across the country; everyone in public life has for 15 years been subject to the complaints and distress of consumers by the tens of thousands. Mr. Lockwood would have us believe that he knows what the consumers want; that he and people like him have been pure in the marketplace; that they have never misled consumers; that their packages are designed to give the consumer a right to choose. But he never tells us what choice the consumer is given. I submit that too often it is a choice between which package or label he would be misled by.
I am glad to hear that the spokesman for the official opposition welcomes this legislation. One is tempted to be unkind, but I will resist that temptation for fear that third reading might not be forthcoming today.


James Aloysius McGrath: Also it is St. Patrick's day, and I am Irish.


Leslie Gordon Benjamin: This has been a long road for the consumer and I will resist any temptation to say things about my friends in the official opposition. If I were to do so, I would have to go back a few years and quote prominent members of the Liberal party who did not think too much fuss need be made about consumer problems. They called people in the NDP and people in the Canadian Association of Consumers economic idiots, who were raising a tempest in a teapot. They concluded that these matters should be left to free enterprise, to the free market. But even they have become converted over the years.
To the minister's credit, his arrival and the arrival of some of his hon. friends in 1965 and later, speeded up this conversion. I hope that after a year or so of experience with this legislation the minister will come to this House with amendments when he finds-I did not say "if", but "when"-there are inadequacies which prevent him doing the job he wants to do. I hope he will not hesitate to persuade his colleagues that further enlargement of this legislation is necessary on the basis of his experience.
We are happy to see this legislation going through Parliament. We wish it went further in its provisions than it does, but we shall be glad to support it on third reading.


Stanley Ronald Basford: If I might say a word before the debate on third reading is concluded, I should like to acknowledge

March 17, 1971
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act two speeches which have been made by the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath) on behalf of the Conservative party and by the hon. member for Regina-Lake Centre (Mr. Benjamin). In acknowledging those speeches, I should like to thank the hon. members of the Standing Committee on Health, Welfare and Social Affairs who spent many days listening to a great range of witnesses from manufacturers associations, consumer organizations and the department in the course of examining the provisions of this bill. Some 23 sittings of the committee were held and the committee heard representations from 13 organizations in addition to hearing from myself and my officials. In addition, of course, the committee had to take account of numerous briefs and submissions from organizations which were not personally represented.
As the hon. member mentioned, a number of amendments were made in committee, including some important amendments. I acknowledge freely the germination of the ideas behind them; some of the points arose from ideas put forward by members of the opposition. I think the bill is a better bill today than it was when it went into committee, because of the suggestions by the government and the opposition, including the hon. member for St. John's East. I think that is not a criticism of me of the bill, or the government and the bill it introduced. Rather, it is to the credit of the parliamentary system and is an indication that Parliament is working. It also gives credit to the government and puts the lie to the allegation that the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Baldwin) is always making that we are an arrogant government and do not care about the parliamentary process. As a matter of fact, I am delighted that the hon. member for St. John's East acknowledged that a number of amendments suggested by the official opposition had been accepted by me on behalf of the government. I think it is true that every bill I have introduced has been amended in committee. As I say, that is not a criticism of me or of my bills, but rather a credit to the parliamentary system and the operation of the democratic processes in this country.
I have mentioned this because we have now reached third reading stage and it has been indicated that the bill will have the unanimous support of every member of the House. I think this is significant in view of the remarks made by the hon. member for Regina-Lake Centre in, I think, amusing the House in describing the interview- which I must admit I have not seen-given by the president of Lever Bros., Mr. Lockwood, who was critical of what was going on in the consumer movement.
It seems to me that Mr. Lockwood and his colleagues should take note of the fact that the members of the House of Commons of Canada, duly elected from all parts of Canada, have considered this bill very carefully, have considered it in numerous hearings before its committee, have listened to briefs from manufacturing groups, producer groups and consumer groups, and as a result of all such deliberations have come to the conclusion that the bill is needed and should be supported
unanimously by Social Crediters, members of the New Democratic Party, members of the Conservative party and members of the government. If I were John Lockwood, the president of Lever Bros., or Colgate, I would consider this fact a pretty reliable consumer survey of what should be the law of this country. There are those in industry who support and are sympathetic to what the consumer movement is trying to do. I think those who do not fall into this category should take note of what is happening in this House this afternoon.
I also hope that those gentlemen in the other place who form the other part of this Parliament, and who sometimes have not been sympathetic to legislation introduced by the consumer affairs department will take note, not of editorials in the Financial Post or in the Financial Times, but of the fact that this bill is passing the House of Commons this afternoon, and passing unanimously. As a result, I trust they will treat this bill sympathetically when it arrives in the other place.
May I mention with your permission, Mr. Speaker, one other matter. In order to correct a misapprehension that has arisen, I would draw the attention of the House to the fact that in my statement on second reading, in raising the question of bilingual labelling, an error appears at page 2128 of Hansard for December 16, the third line from the bottom of the first column. I inadvertently omitted one line of my statement, and as a result some confusion has been caused with regard to bilingual labelling of imported products. At that time I was announcing that it was government policy to require, as a general practice, that consumer products that are subject to federal legislation be labelled in both official languages. Under the present practice some laws specify either one language or the other; some make no mention of language. Only the Hazardous Products Act and the Food and Drug Act specify labels in both languages.
As I was announcing in December, over the next few years all consumer products subject to federal legislation will progressively have to meet the bilingual labelling requirement, so that as quickly as practical and practicable bilingual labelling shall be mandatory at the point of manufacture. It is recognized that imports may require special attention to ensure that foreign suppliers are aware of the bilingual requirements. So, I want to emphasize that every effort will be made to encourage the earliest implementation of these new rules for imported products in order that they may conform, along with domestic products,-and that was the part left out of my earlier statement-to the five year target date that I announced in December. As I indicated, an interdepartmental committee will establish guidelines to ensure an orderly and efficient transition to this new policy.
I do not want to prolong the debate. I do once again want to thank hon. members for the attention and care they gave the bill during the course of debate both in the House and during the committee hearings. I am particularly grateful for the amendment made by the hon. member for St. John's East in the committee, as well as for those moved by the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway (Mrs. Maclnnis) and Regina-Lake Centre.

March 17, 1971

I want to close by saying that some of the amendment suggested, particularly by New Democratic Party members, have been turned down by the House on my recommendation. The reason was I thought they jeopardized the constitutionality of the legislation. Although the members of the New Democratic Party said that that did not matter and that we should try them anyway, the very reason we should not draw legislation that may be attacked in the courts was emphasized today by the hon. member for Regina-Lake Centre, who at two points in his discussion of the amendment mentioned he hoped that the minister would enforce the legislation; that he expected the minister would be in court a great deal with this legislation-I think they are his precise words. He also mentioned he hoped that the minister and the department knew what they would be up against when dealing with the private sector.
It is for the very reason that we do know what we will be up against in some instances, because we know that on occasion we will be in court, as the hon. member for Regina-Lake Centre said, because we do know there are people we will have to take to court in enforcing this legislation, that we have to draw legislation on the advice of the law officers of the Crown which is constitutional and will stand up in court. This is why we cannot accept some of the amendments that we would have accepted had we not received advice from the law officers of the Crown. As I say, there is no sense in drawing legislation
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act
which at the first opportunity will be challenged in court and thrown out.
I conclude with those remarks. It merely remains for me to say that I hope the private sector will take note of the fact that the House of Commons of Canada has unanimously seen the need for the legislation and supported it. I also hope hon. gentlemen in the other place will take note of that fact.
Motion agreed to and bill read the third time and passed.


Mr, McGrath:: Six o'clock.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Richard):: Is it agreed that I call it six o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Richard):: It being six o'clock this House stands adjourned until two p.m.
I am sure the evening recess will allow hon. members to join their Irish colleagues in the traditional observance of the anniversary of their patron saint in a most happy and friendly association. May the good Saint Patrick watch over you.
At six o'clock the House adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.

Thursday, March 18, 1971