1971-06-18

NEW MEMBERS INTRODUCED

[Stage Direction]
Claude Lajoie, Esquire, member for the electoral district of Trois-Rivieres, introduced by the Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau and the Hon. Jean Chretien.
Yvon L'Heureux, Esquire, member for the electoral district of Chambly, introduced by the Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau and the Hon. Jean-Pierre Cote.
*	* Sit


Mr. Bruce Howard (Okanagan Boundary):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. Last night a number of votes were conducted in the House after ten o'clock. When I left my office at 10.15, having finished my work, I discovered that the votes were in progress. The reason I did not know prior to that was that the division bells in the area of the west block where my office is were not working. I had drawn this to the attention of the staff in the west block earlier in the day. I merely wish now to draw to the attention of Your Honour the potential seriousness of such a situation and I hope it will be corrected.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member is obviously the victim of a conspiracy of silence and this includes the fact that he did not notify the Chair of his intention to raise this matter. In any event, the situation will be looked into and I am sure it will be corrected.



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, under Standing Order 41(2) I should like to table a statement of conclusions from the constitutional conference in Victoria and the proposed Canadian constitutional charter. I regret that these documents are not available to all members of the House but they will be distributed as quickly as possible during the day.


Mr. Speaker:: I understand the hon. member for Peel-Dufferin-Simcoe has a report to table. With the consent of the House we will return to that item to allow him to table the report.


Mr. Peters:: No, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: There is not consent. The hon. member for Timiskaming will not give unanimous consent.


Mr. Lang:: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I believe the hon. member rose at the right time but failed to be recognized in time to present his report.


Mr. Horner:: Is the minister criticizing the Speaker?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I am sure the minister is not criticizing the Speaker. The Chair inadvertently overlooked the fact that the hon. member had risen. The only way we can go back to that item is by unanimous consent. The Chair must take the responsibility for not having recognized the hon. member. Perhaps some time later during the day, if the hon. member will stay around, there may be an opportunity to revert to that item.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Chretien:: You will have to stick around, Arnold.



COMMUNICATIONS


Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order 41 (2), I want to table, in both official languages, two letters, one dated May 21, 1971, and written by Mr. Dean Burch, Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission of the United States, to the Deputy Minister of Communications of Canada, Mr. Allan E. Gotlieb, and the other, the latter's answer dated June 7, 1971. The letters deal with the orbital position of the satellites that will constitute the space element of the national telecommunications network of Telesat Canada. Part of this correspondence, that is the letter from the Chairman of the FFC, has already been published in the United States. I, therefore, deem it necessary to make public Canada's answer.

June 18, 1971
Opportunities for Youth Program MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE BILLS



REFERRAL OF PETITION AND REPORT TO STANDING COMMITTEE

Mr. Victor Forget (Saint-Michel):: Mr. Speaker, I move, supported by Mr. L'Heureux:
That the petition of United Bank of Canada, tabled after the period of time specified in Standing Order 90, be referred to the Standing Committee on Miscellaneous Private Bills and Standing Orders, together with the fifth report of the clerk of petitions submitted to the House on Thursday, June 17, 1971, so that the Committee may make the recommendations that it deems appropriate.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
The motion is adopted.


Mr. Speaker:: Hon. members have heard the motion proposed by the hon. member for Saint-Michel. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, so that the House may understand the Opportunities for Youth program more fully, I would like to take a few moments to outline detailed information about the program and to place it within the context of the over-all summer employment and activities programs of the federal government for this year.
As you know, the total budget for the summer 71 program is about $67.8 million, which represents the provision of more than 70,000 jobs. This compares with last year's spending of $33.2 million, which resulted in the creation of jobs for 38,300 young people. In certain respects, however, this is a misleading comparison because this year's programs emphasize to a much greater extent activities which do not provide direct employment. I am thinking here of the tens of thousands who are engaged this summer in language training programs, athletic endeavours or travelling. An important objective of the summer employment programs is to offset regional disparities by providing more assistance to those regions that are hardest hit by student unemployment. The number of students in each region and the levels of other provincial and federal spending in each region that would create summer jobs have been taken into consideration. Opportunities for Youth moneys has been carefully allocated to assist the government in achieving this balance. For instance, the following is a breakdown of
the Opportunities for Youth allocations by region: Atlantic Region, $2.8 million; Quebec, $9 million; Ontario, $5 million; Prairies and N.W.T., $3.8 million; B.C. and Yukon, $2.4 million; National, $.5 million.
Embarking on such an endeavour, we must be prepared to face certain problems. Not all of us have the same needs, nor do we often agree on the measures which should be taken to satisfy them. Nevertheless, I am confident that we can overcome the difficulties which will develop, although there already have been problems and there will likely be more before the summer is over. Some of the problems are administrative: it has not been possible to finalize project approvals as quickly as we had hoped; nor has it been possible to release the project funds as quickly as had been planned. But all in all there were some 13,000 project applications to process and we are at the present time dealing with 2,500 approved projects involving some 30,000 people.

I know that many students who responded to the Opportunities for Youth challenge have been disappointed and some of those who have had their projects approved have felt frustrated over some of the delays. But I also know that the vast majority have shown real understanding and appreciation of what is involved in implementing this program.
At the same time, the government recognizes and has recognized from the beginning its responsibility to Parliament and to the people for the spending of public funds on a program of this nature. This responsibility weighs more heavily in respect of a program that is admittedly experimental. To those who have voiced concern towards this aspect of the program, I would like to set out the four means by which the government will discharge its responsibilities for the spending of these moneys.
First, every Opportunities for Youth project will be visited by an official of my department. He will ensure that the project is carrying out the activities and fulfilling the objectives that were agreed to. No further payments will be made to projects that are carrying on activities other than those agreed in the government's contracts with the project organizers.
Second, all projects receiving funds in excess of $25,000 will receive an audit by the Department of Supply and Services. The department will also run spot audits of all other projects. In addition, all projects are required to submit financial statements before the final payment is made.
Third, an evaluation of the program will be carried out on which the young people themselves, community officials and voluntary organizations will contribute their views. In addition, a range of outside experts in community development, youth activities and social research will be asked to assist on this evaluation.
Fourth, the government undertakes to publish a report on this evaluation at the conclusion of the program. This report will be tabled in the House and made available to

June 18, 1971

participants in the Opportunities tor Youth program and the general public tor discussion and comment.
These steps are, of course, in addition to the careful examinations of projects made by my officials based on criteria agreed to by Treasury Board and explained on Wednesday by the Minister without Portfolio responsible for citizenship (Mr. Stanbury) and on other occasions by myself and other members of the government. They should provide the basis upon which this House can place its faith in the responsibility of our young people and, at the same time, feel confident that it is carrying out its responsibilities for the spending of public funds.
When we designed the Opportunities for Youth program, we knew it was experimental. We knew there would be problems of implementation. But we had confidence in the responsibility and good sense of young people. We still have that confidence and I certainly have seen nothing in the criticism that has emerged to date to shake that confidence. I have seen innuendo. I have seen unspecific and unsubstantiated sweeping attacks.
The attacks that have come are absolutely true to the tradition we have come to expect from critics of the young. They jump on isolated incidents and use them to pillory a whole generation. They scream about youth problems and disregard the overwhelming positive and constructive activity that the young embrace so enthusiastically, time and time again. They demand that we institutionalize and bureaucratize programs involving the young to the point where all possibility of error is eliminated.


Mr. Baldwin:: I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Your Honour is aware, of course, of the terms of the Standing Order which provides that statements made on motions must be limited to facts.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Gerald William Baldwin: The minister should have been here last Wednesday when he was invited. He would have had a chance to make his speech. Under the Standing Order the minister has no right to depart from facts. He is not entitled to give opinions, and I would ask Your Honour to reprimand him.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I might say that if I reprimanded hon. members every time they express opinions when a statement is made by a minister on motions and comments are made by hon. members on behalf of the opposition parties, I would be doing much more reprimanding that than the Chair wants to do. In any event, the minister is as well aware as the hon. member for Peace River and all other hon. members that the Standing Order provides that statements are to be factual and not controversial. I suggest that this should apply both to ministers and to those who make comments on behalf of opposition parties.
Opportunities for Youth Program


Gérard Pelletier: I just have a few lines to go at any rate, Mr. Speaker.
I was saying that they want to impose on our program so many restrictions that there would be no freedom left, no room for young people to innovate, to initiate, to exercise responsibility. What it all boils down to is that they just do not trust young people.


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I assume that the statement is now concluded. The hon. member for Gander-Twillingate rises on a question of privilege.


Mr. Lundrigan:: On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, I think the Secretary of State should be requested by the Chair to withdraw the remarks he has just made which are a terrible reflection on members of the House on both sides and should not be permitted to go unchallenged by the House.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member for Egmont.


Mr. David MacDonald (Egmont):: Mr. Speaker, I do not entirely blame the minister for wanting to divert attention from many of the fundamental problems that exist within the Opportunities for Youth program. I suppose it is only natural that in his desire to avoid and deflect the obvious criticism from many sources he should try to mislead this House and the public badly. There has been evidence of that this morning.
There had been some hope that the minister, after so many weeks and months of engaging in this process, might have something worth while to contribute this morning. Indeed, it was announced well in advance that he would make a statement in the House today on the Opportunities for Youth program. He did not even have the courtesy to send a copy of his statement to the opposition parties before the sitting began. One would have thought that, rather than only a few words to those who submitted the close to 11,000 projects which have been rejected, he would have had more to say than:
But I also know that the vast majority have shown real understanding and appreciation of what is involved in implementing this program.
I am sure they know only too well, now that they have received the thousands of form letters which say next to nothing as to the reasons for which their programs have been rejected.
I think it is absolutely shocking that the minister should have the effrontery to come before the House today without being prepared to answer some of the specific questions which have been asked time and time again in this place. On Wednesday I reminded both the parliamentary secretary and the minister without portfolio in charge of winking that the minister had confirmed to me many weeks ago that there would be an active process of negotiation with regard to rejected projects with other authorities, whether they be municipal,

June 18, 1971
Opportunities for Youth Program
provincial, industrial, universities or other such groups that might be prepared to pick up projects that the government was not prepared to finance. I have yet to hear from the minister, from his parliamentary secretary or from the Minister without Portfolio any response to what is a basic question that thousands of our young people who in all sincerity submitted projects are expecting to be answered.
Why did these people receive nothing more than a form letter from the minister as of June 8, June 9 or whenever it was? Why has the minister not been prepared to tell us about the kind of consultation and negotiations that took place with regard to these programs? Why is the only response of the minister to say that they must surely understand what is involved in the implementation of the program?
We have asked as well why it is that this program was put together, as the minister himself has said, as a crash program. Why was the whole office for the Opportunities for Youth program assembled at such a late date? We are still waiting for a clear statement so that we can learn in a positive way from the unfortunate experiences of the administration of the program this year.
It is not enough for the minister to come here and to accuse indirectly members of the House, members of the press gallery or members of the general public of having no faith in our young people. I think our young people are asking how much interest this government has in them that it could put together at such a late date such a fuzzily defined program and then try to pass it off as the finet thing any government has done for Canadian youth. What utter nonsense, Mr. Speaker!
If the minister is seriously concerned about looking at the real issues that exist in the program, then let him examine the criteria. We have had a kind of tantalizing process in this regard. The minister has told us on the one hand that we have all the necessary criteria for the acceptance or rejection of projects, and then a little later somebody else comes along and adds some new information, new ideas, and these are tossed into the pot at the last moment.
We have been told that there are to be some specific auditing procedures, that there will be investigations made by representatives of the minister's department. I should like to ask in what way these investigations will be carried out. What criteria will the investigators use? What assurance have young people whose projects have already been accepted that their projects will not be terminated next week or the week after? The minister has not explained any aspects of these newly announced criteria.
With regard to administrative processes, if the minister wishes to operate with a clean hand surely he should be willing to allow a much fuller disclosure of the present procedures in regard to the Opportunities for Youth program. I suggest that it is in the minister's own best interests seriously to consider the establishment of a small all-party committee so that its members might look in detail at the administrative effectiveness of the program with a view to making recommendations regarding any program that might be operated in 1972.
I suggested earlier that in an over-all way what we needed was a special committee on youth to consider the impact of this program and other programs presently being operated by the government. There has been no response on that front either by the minister.
Once again the members of this House have been given a statement by the minister in which he has tried to deflect and diffuse accurate and honest criticisms of a program that at its inception could have had tremendous possibilities for the young people of this country. We are asking this government to please address itself to the facts and to stop fooling around as it has been to date.


Mr. David Orlikow (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Speaker, when the minister made the first announcement about this program it was just one month before university students would be finishing their courses and looking for the work they need if they are to earn the money to go back to university next fall. I pointed out at that time that the delay in working out the plans and announcing what the government intended to do till that late date was a criminal act on the part of the government which could not be defended. I predicted that a large number of young people would be disappointed and would not get work. I predicted that many of the projects which would be approved would not have the scrutiny required so that we would be assured the projects actually approved were the best ones. There are thousands of young people who hoped to get work but could not find it in the private sector of the economy and did not hear that they could not get work through these projects until the first of June. I hope the minister will tell them where they are going to earn the money so they can go back to school next fall, and not blame the opposition.
We asked the minister repeatedly what the criteria were and it was like pulling teeth to get an answer. What do we now find? One of the main criteria used by the people who are sifting through the many projects is that a project which is conceived and proposed by young people will have priority over other projects. The minister says that members of the opposition are not specific and that they are making innuendoes in the kind of complaints they put forward. I want to give the minister two examples from my own area which have come to my attention unsolicited.
The YMCA and B'Nai Brith are two organizations which have had probably a quarter of a century of experience in operating day care centres and day camps. They submitted proposals for that kind of project in Winnipeg. The projects they proposed would have employed only young people. They were planned by people who had had experience, but they were turned down.


Some hon. Members:: Shame!

June 18, 1971


David Orlikow: The same kind of projects submitted by young people who have had no experience were approved and funded. I say it is madness to turn down projects conceived and to be supervised by people with experience, which will employ young people and provide funds to young people who have conceived similar projects. I say when things are over we will find that the experience of this year will be as bad or worse than the experience we had with the Company of Young Canadians.
Let me talk about the future. The government has fumbled and bumbled and made a mess of this year's program. In 1972 young people will again be looking for jobs. I urge the minister and his department to work on plans for 1972 this fall. I urge the minister to have the plans ready and to make them public by December 31, 1971, so that next April or May we will not have a rush job with the same kind of rooting around to find projects in order to use up the money, much of which will be used in the wrong way as has been the case in 1971.


Mr. Real Caoueile (Temiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to see the Secretary of State (Mr. Pelletier) in his seat. Two days ago, I said the minister was incompetent and should hand in his resignation to the cabinet, because the Opportunities for Youth program in several areas of Canada, and specifically in the province of Quebec, has turned out to be a separatist-oriented project and because public funds are being used to promote separatist organizations. Please note, Mr. Speaker, that I say in passing that some Liberal members have told me exactly the same thing.
The minister's statement can be summarized as follows: The opposition, says he, just does not trust young people, whereas the government does. He is not prepared to see the success of such a creative program jeopardized in any way by the sinister assertions of the timid and the sceptical.
Mr. Speaker, the minister-and I say it once again today-should resign because of his incompetence in managing the Department of the Secretary of State. I have given instances of this the day before yesterday and other examples will follow on Monday, when the budget is discussed, concerning grants which have been allocated to separatist elements of Rouyn-Noranda to create trouble. We should co-operate with the students and find jobs for them. Projects submitted by the municipalities of Rouyn-Noranda and other Canadian cities have been rejected whilst others drawn up by people intent on destroying Canada have met with approval. If the minister is unaware of this fact, then I will inform him personally or in this House.
Mr. Speaker, the minister's statement is the worst example of petty politics I have ever seen in the House of Commons.


Mr. Boulanger:: Oh, oh, oh!


David Réal Caouette: It must be the hon. member for Mer-cier (Mr. Boulanger), the "whippet", who just shouted.
Inquiries of the Ministry
Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of keeping the floor any longer, even if those who spoke before me took twice as much time as I did, but I will repeat that the Secretary of State is an irresponsible man if he does not know his department is full of incompetents. I asked for a list of names two days ago giving the official five hours' notice to provide me with an answer. Somebody phoned my office yesterday afternoon while I was in Trois-Rivieres dealing with the minister of Indian Affairs (Mr. Chretien), to let me know that they had no list of names available. However, thousands of dollars are being given to nameless people. An amount of $85,000 has been sent to 139, Perreault St., Rouyn, and given to some socialists of the same type as the Secretary of State.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


David Réal Caouette: I did not say New Democrats, but "socialists". Mr. Speaker, when I refer to socialists, the members of the New Democratic Party are annoyed. They feel that they are being attacked. When I tell them that the communists in the USSR are called socialists, they are annoyed and retort: We are not communists. Mr. Speaker, the reaction you get from those people is fantastic.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I think we should come back to the minister's statement and hear about the member's reaction, rather than that of those who listen to him.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, no doubt you are pleased to hear me. I will disregard the interruptions from my friends of the New Democratic party. I am speaking of the statement made by the minister and, when I say that the minister is not a liberal, you know what I mean, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Once again, the debate is not about the minister but about the statement made by the minister, and I hope we will soon end the discussion, for time is flying.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, my conclusion is that the minister is not a liberal, that he is a socialist.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of Ihe Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, before posing my first question to the Prime Minister perhaps I might be permitted to express the hope that the deliberations of the Prime Minister and the premiers of the provinces will lead to progress with regard to patriation of our constitution and will prove to have been a substantial step forward in terms of the constitutional reform for this country.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!

June 18, 1971
Inquiries of the Ministry


Robert Lorne Stanfield: I am disappointed the Prime Minister did not make a statement on motions as was done by Mr. Pearson in February of 1968 and by the present Prime Minister in February of 1970. I should like to ask the Prime Minister whether he intends to make a statement to the House or to consult the House or the constitutional committee established by Parliament before June 28 with regard to the decision that the government of Canada will be making with relation to the charter placed before the government of Canada and the governments of the provinces by the constitutional conference?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: No, Mr. Speaker. I do not intend to make such a statement. Of course the procedure we foresee will be that both Houses of Parliament will have ample occasion to discuss all the provisions of the charter if on the 28th we realize that the provinces and the government of Canada want to proceed to that step. But between now and the 28th it is a matter of the federal cabinet and the other cabinets deciding whether they do want to proceed to the step when they will have discussions in their legislative assemblies and in Parliament.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: I am disappointed there will not be more consultation because I am sure there are a number of aspects which are puzzling the Canadian people. I do not ask this in a controversial way since I am seeking information, but perhaps the Prime Minister will explain why it is necessary for each province to accept the whole package including a number of proposals which are not linked together really except in the sense that they are contained in the charter? Why is it necessary for the provincial governments and the federal government to agree to the whole package which means in effect that if any province objects to even one slight aspect of any proposal the whole project falls to the ground?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, because these matters have been dealt with in Canada for many years now and have been brought to a head at the federal-provincial conferences of the past three years, every government present at Victoria felt it had done enough thinking about these various things and that now they wanted to look at the package as a whole and decide whether they wanted to accept it or not. The Leader of the Opposition understands that without further meetings we could not have some provinces saying that they accept this part, other provinces saying that they accept another part, and the federal government saying that it accepts another part. We certainly would not have any agreement. The talks in Victoria were based on the consensus reached in February. A lot of time has been taken in drafting texts both before and at Victoria, and now we feel we have a package we can either accept or reject.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Is it the position of the Prime Minister that if any province fails to express approval of the total package by June 28 there will be no further effort made to reach an agreement with regard to the matters contained in the package or that at least no further discussions will be held for some period? If so, can the Prime Minister indicate to the House how long a period he
envisages that constitutional discussions would be, if not in limbo, at least not proceeding if, as I say, one province should object to any part of the package?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: The question is hypothetical, Mr. Speaker.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I am asking the Prime Minister what the position of the government is in the event of this happening. I suggest with all respect that this is a matter of government policy and not a hypothetical question.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: On the point of order, Mr. Speaker, a question which begins with "if" is hypothetical.


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, can the Prime Minister assure the House that the process of constitutional reform will not be allowed to lapse simply because one province may not agree with every term of the proposed charter?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, this question is also hypothetical.



AGREEMENT OF FOUR WESTERN PROVINCES TO AMENDMENT FORMULA

Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, probably some of these things are still confidential until an agreement is reached, but can the Prime Minister tell us today whether the four western provinces agreed to the amending formula?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, they have until June 28 to say whether they do or not. Obviously I cannot speak for them.



POSSIBILITY OF GENERAL ELECTION IF PROPOSED CHARTER NOT ACCEPTED AS PACKAGE

David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question to ask the right hon. Prime Minister.
He indicated a few minutes ago that a whole package had been submitted to the provinces and that this whole package was to be studied for June 28. If it is rejected, can the Prime Minister tell us if he intends to call a general election to clarify the situation?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member for Prince Edward-Hastings on a supplementary.


Mr. Hees:: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.

June 18, 1971


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Temiscamingue on a point of order.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, do I not have the right to ask the Prime Minister whether he intends to call an election, if that whole package is not accepted by the 28-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I must say to the hon. member that the question seems rather hypothetical to me. I was not exactly of that opinion on one of the questions asked previously, but I definitely am as far as this one is concerned. I do not think that the question asked in those terms is in order. I am prepared to allow the hon. member to rephrase it if he can make it in order.

After that I will recognize the hon. member for Prince Edward-Hastings. Order, please. I have suggested to the hon. member for Temiscamingue that he should rephrase the question if he wishes to do so.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I would have accompanied the right hon. Prime Minister to Victoria, but he did not invite me.
If the provinces reject the whole package-and this is not a hypothetical question-is it, not would it be, but is it the Prime Minister's intention to call a general election?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I do not know why the hon. member says I did not invite him to Victoria, because I asked the leaders of the three opposition parties. I wonder why he says such a thing when I sent him a written invitation.
Mr. Speaker, in reply to all those hypothetical questions, I would like to explain to the House what is the position of the government. Our position is that the cabinet will examine the provisions of the charter this afternoon.
We are going to decide within the next few days whether we ought to say "yes" or "no" at the Victoria conference and then we shall see. We do not know what the other provinces are going to do, but we are hopeful and I do not see why I should have to consider now what we shall do in case of negative answers.
According to a Portuguese saying, Mr. Speaker, the worst is not always bound to happen.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a supplementary question, which could take the form of a point of order or a question of privilege. This way, you will perhaps decide that my question is in order.
The Prime Minister said that he personally invited me to go to Victoria. That is correct, but he invited me to go and face the cameras of the CBC. I was not interested and, so, I did not go there.
Inquiries of the Ministry


Mr. Speaker:: Order. I feel that if this is-and I hope this is not a conditional "if"-the hon. member's question of privilege, we should now-


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Mr. Fairweather:: All you were invited to do was to cool your heels outside.


Mr. Speaker:: Order please. I recognize the hon. member for Prince Edward-Hastings on a question. Order, please. I really do not think that is an essential matter which should be considered at this time. The hon. member for Prince Edward-Hastings.


George Harris Hees: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister, in refusing to answer a very important question posed to him by the Leader of the Opposition, gave as the reason for not answering that the question was hypothetical. Is not the real reason for refusing to answer that the government has not thought this matter through-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


George Harris Hees: -and is therefore hiding behind-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest that for the moment we will go to the next subject. The Chair will come back to supplementary questions later, but it seems to me we are getting away from the subject. For the moment the Chair will recognize the hon. member for Waterloo on another subject.



INQUIRY OF THE MINISTRY

Mr. Max Sallsman (Waterloo):: I would like to direct my question to the Secretary of State and ask him whether he will seek an early opportunity on motions to make a statement asserting his allegiance to the Liberal party so that the implication that he is a socialist will not reflect unfavourably on those of us who are?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: 

CANADIAN CONSTITUTION


Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: I should like to address my question to the right hon. Prime Minister. Having regard to the absence of any evidence which might have been presented to the conference on the

June 18, 1971
Inquiries of the Ministry
constitution by the constitutional committee composed of members of the House of Commons and the absence of at least one premier, namely, the premier of the province of Saskatchewan, are these absences or avoidances any indication that the federal government is proceeding at this time on its own initiative regardless of what the attitudes of the premiers might be?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Obviously not, Mr. Speaker. We have made an agreement with the provinces that all provinces will have until the 28th of this month to indicate their agreement or disagreement. As the hon. member said, one premier was absent from the conference. He was well represented there, but he is in the same position as every other premier and, indeed, as the Prime Minister. He has until the 28th to give his answer.


Mr. Roch La Salle (Joliette):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a supplementary question to the Prime Minister.
Considering the importance of the question before us and since the Quebec government cannot within ten days take a serious and perfectly justified decision about the answer which it must give to the federal government, will the Prime Minister allow the Quebec government to sound all classes of society regarding that important question for Quebec and for that purpose, is he ready to extend the period beyond June 28?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, premier Bourassa is perfectly capable of speaking for himself. He has taken a decision and I do not think that he needs the hon. member for Joliette to tell him what it should be.
* *



EDUCATION


David Orlikow: I would like to direct a question to the Secretary of State. In view of the fact that the agreements between the federal government and the provinces for the financing of post-secondary education expire in 1972, and in light of the very serious consequences to post-secondary education and to the provinces if the agreements are not renewed or new agreements negotiated, would the minister consider making a statement before the House rises at the end of this month about the position of the federal government with regard to the future of the financing of post-secondary education?


Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, I would quite willingly consider the proposal of the member. But I must point out to him that since January repeated and intensive negotiations have been held with
the Canadian Council of Ministers of Education, as well as bilateral negotiations with each of the provincial Ministers of Education-all very important people-since this is a field of provincial jurisdiction. We still hope to come to an agreement, which would allow a statement to be made to this House, not only on the attitude of the federal government, which is generally known, to the effect that an agreement has been renewed for two years, and that in the meantime plans will be made for a complete revision of the agreements in 1974. Obviously, however, for a general statement to be made, we should have completed our present negotiations with the provinces; unfortunately, this is not yet the case.


David Orlikow: May I ask the Secretary of State whether the reports are true that the major factor in the inability to reach an agreement is the desire of the federal government to put a limit on the amount of its contribution for post-secondary education, which has been 50 per cent under the old agreement?


Gérard Pelletier: I think that the hon. member confuses two things Mr. Speaker. As regards the 50 per cent part of the expenses, I do not think that the federal government ever asked questions about it. It stated the same question as the provinces, that is, at what rate should we allow post secondary education costs to increase? This is a matter of concern not only for the federal government, that foots 50 per cent of the bill, but for most provinces, that pay the remaining 50 per cent.



INFORMATION


Gerald William Baldwin: I would like to ask the Prime Minister whether, in light of the controversy raging in the United States about the publication of government documents, the Minister of Justice was enunciating government policy when he said at Queens University:
The right to know is fundamental to any participation in democracy.. .What is necessary, then, is a freedom of information act entitling the individual to information which the government authority has arbitrarily seen fit to withhold.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Yes, Mr. Speaker. On the first part of the question we hold that the freedom or right to know is basic to democracy. Whether or not this must be entrenched in the law is for the government to decide.


Gerald William Baldwin: In light of the fact that this statement was made over a year ago, would the Prime Minister discuss with the President of the Privy Council steps to expedite the passage and consideration of Bill C-250?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

June 18, 1971



SOCIAL SECURITY


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, in view of the statement just made by the Prime Minister I should like to ask him whether the Minister of National Health and Welfare intends to make a statement to the House before it recesses with regard to the plans of the federal government that have been proposed to or discussed with the provinces for the integration of an income support program inasmuch as such plans are obviously of great interest to the House and to the people of Canada?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I will discuss this with the Minister of National Health and Welfare, Mr. Speaker.



CONSTITUTIONAL CONFERENCE


Mr. Elmer M. MacKay (Central Nova):: I have a question I should like to direct to the right hon. Prime Minister. Was the important issue of offshore mineral rights one of the subjects discussed with the provinces at Victoria?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the subject was raised but it was not brought to any conclusion at the discussions, as indeed was the case with many other subjects raised and which did not form the basis of what we call the charter.


John Howard Lundrigan: Could I ask the right hon. Prime Minister whether there were any new proposals to the provinces regarding the sharing of revenues from offshore mineral and oil resources?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: No, Mr. Speaker. We are still waiting for answers from the provinces to the plan we put to them more than a year ago.


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


David Réal Caouette: I want to put a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: The Chair recognized the hon. member for Terrebonne and the hon. member for Temiscamingue will be able to put his question in a moment.



PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SOCIAL SECURITY PROGRAM

Mr.   J.-R. Comtois@Terrebonne: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Prime Minister.
Could he tell us if, in addition to the proposed amendments to section 94A dealing with social security, the federal government suggested to the provinces any changes to the present social security program? If so, have these changes been proposed before or during the Victoria conference?
Inquiries of the Ministry
Righl Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minisier): Mr. Speaker, the Victoria conference was to receive from the Ministers of Health, a report on a conference held about ten days before the one in Victoria.
At this conference, the federal Minister of National Health and Welfare did actually make some suggestions as to the ways the federal government could considerably improve, for instance, the family allowance program. He also submitted other proposals with respect to public assistance. But as I just told the Leader of the Opposition, I will have to discuss the matter with the minister concerned in order to determine whether he should make a statement to this effect within the next few days.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker I have a question for the Prime Minister who said a moment ago that there were no conclusions or solutions reached as to the eastern provinces' problems and no agreements on the west end of our country. Can the Prime Minister tell the House exactly where he has agreed with any province on any subject so that we can be aware of what is taking place in our country?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


George Harris Hees: A very good question.


Mr. Speaker:: It seems to me this question is rather argumentative.
* H:	*



CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY


Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. In view of the fact that pension increases announced recently by the Canadian Pacific Railway did not include any increases at all for employees who retired before 1956, and in view of other shortcomings in the plan, will the minister make the strongest representations he can to the Canadian Pacific Railway to bring its pension increases at least in line with those recently given by Canadian National Railways?


Hon. Donald C. Jamieson (Minisier of Transpori):: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I will be pleased to do that. As the hon! member knows, we have introduced improvements on behalf of Canadian Pacific with regard to their pension plan. We took steps earlier to authorize Canadian National to improve their pension plan. The objective of all this is, of course, to bring about the best possible pension arrangement for all retired employees of the railways. While I am on my feet-


Stanley Howard Knowles: A supplementary-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. We are all on our feet. I am not sure whether the Minister has completed his

June 18, 1971
Inquiries of the Ministry
reply but I gather that the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has a supplementary. Perhaps we should try to get this matter under control before we go to another one.


Stanley Howard Knowles: The reason I sought to get to my feet on a supplementary was that I anticipated the minister might be about to go to another subject. May I ask the minister-let me start over again-


An hon. Member:: While you are on your feet.


Stanley Howard Knowles: That is right. In view of the fact that the government has put the Canadian National Railways and the Canadian Pacific Railway on the same footing so far as the arrears owing to their pension funds are concerned, will the minister make an appeal to the Canadian Pacific Railway to do exactly what the Canadian National has done for its retired employees?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: The hon. member knows that I certainly can and will make that kind of representation but that this is first of all a matter for negotiation, I would assume, between the CPR and its employees. Of course, it is also a private company and in a sense the government has no leverage, if one wants to use that word, to do it.
What I was about to do when I was-I won't say rudely interrupted, Mr. Speaker-was to say that the hon. member has today moved one year closer to being pensionable himself but he sure as Hell doesn't show it.


Stanley Howard Knowles: I suppose the minister means that I looked as old when I came here as I do now.



LABOUR CONDITIONS


George Harris Hees: I have a question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. As the minister has now had 24 hours to confer with the Dominion Bureau of Statistics since the matter was brought up in the House yesterday, can he now advise as to the exact number of people unemployed in Canada during the month of May when the number of those temporarily employed on the census is added to the figure submitted to the country by the DBS yesterday?


Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: This was answered yesterday, Mr. Speaker. I said that when people were hired, most of them housewives and students, to do the census they were not asked if they were employed, unemployed or otherwise. They were just hired.


George Harris Hees: Was the only requirement that they had to be followers of the Liberal party-good ward heelers?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.



PUBLIC SERVICE


Mr. W. C. Scott (Victoria-Haliburton):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Treasury Board and deals with the practice of setting wage levels for the Trent and other canal systems on a zone rate system. Would the minister say whether the government would consider eliminating the zone system for Trent canal workers and other canal workers as other departments, such as the Post Office, have done?


Mr. Speaker:: While the hon. member's question is being considered the Chair will recognize the hon. member for Brandon-Souris.


Mr. Scoff:: On a question of privilege, as the minister does not seem to have grasped the point of my question, I should like to debate the matter at ten o'clock.



AIRPORTS


Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: My question is for the Minister of Transport, and arises from the closing of the Rivers air base and the need to provide alternate all-weather landing facilities in western Manitoba. Would the minister indicate when the instrument landing system at Brandon airport will be upgraded to meet this situation?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I am not sure that this is a question that can be asked at this time. Normally, this kind of question is placed on the order paper. However, the question having been asked perhaps the minister might reply briefly.


Donald Campbell Jamieson: will take it as notice and give the hon. member a reply on Monday or Tuesday.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: A supplementary-


William C. Scott: A question of privilege-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. We have a question of privilege and a supplementary question. It might be easier to allow the hon. member's supplementary and return to the question of privilege of the hon. member for Victoria-Haliburton in a moment. The hon. member for Brandon-Souris.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: A supplementary question. When the minister replies to this question, would he also indicate when he will be making his pilgrimage to western Manitoba to open the new terminal there?
June 18, 1971



INQUIRY AS TO AGREEMENT WITH ROUMANIA

Hon. D. S. Harkness (Calgary Centre):: I have a question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. In his talks this week with the Foreign Minister of Roumania, were any agreements or trade arrangements arrived at designed to increase the Canada-Roumania flow of trade?


Jean-Luc Pepin: Preparations were completed for a trade agreement between Canada and Roumania. This agreement should be signed in the near future. Discussions took place on a number of issues, such as joint ventures, nuclear reactors and so on, and the Roumanians were apparently satisfied enough with the progress made on a number of items of interest to them and to us.


Douglas Scott Harkness: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister indicate what particular commodities are to be covered by this agreement?


Jean-Luc Pepin: It is a general trade agreement, Mr. Speaker, and no specific commodity, so far as I remember, is included in the agreement itself.
^



PROPOSED FLOODING OF SKAGIT RIVER VALLEY-INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION REPORT-GOVERNMENT ACTION

Mr. Randolph Harding (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of the Environment. When does the government expect a report from the International Joint Commission on its recent hearings on the proposed flooding of the Skagit River Valley?


Hon. Jack Davis (Minister of the Environment):: Mr. Speaker, we expect a recommendation early this fall.


Randolph Harding: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the decision, once rendered by the IJC, constitute the final attempt by the government to stop the proposed flooding?


John (Jack) Davis: Mr. Speaker, if I understand the role of the International Joint Commission correctly, the commission makes recommendations to both the United States and Canadian governments, and they may or may not accept those recommendations.



AIR TRANSPORT


Mr.   Chas. L. Caccia@Davenport: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Can the
Inquiries of the Ministry
minister indicate when negotiations might be initiated with airlines seeking landing rights at Toronto International Airport?


Gerald William Baldwin: Do you have your music, Don?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Mr. Speaker, as I have replied on earlier occasions in the House, we have had preliminary talks with the various governments concerned, and have most recently indicated to the government and proper authorities in Germany that we will be prepared to undertake talks with them beginning, I believe, early in the fall. I will be communicating similar information to the government of Italy within a short time.



AIR CANADA


Mr. P. V. Noble (Grey-Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Will Air Canada begin its Boeing 747 service to Frankfurt, Germany, on July 7 next, as scheduled.


Donald Campbell Jamieson: hope so, Mr. Speaker. The reference I made a few moments ago was to a small misunderstanding that might have occurred internationally, but I hope that as a result of what I have indicated today that can be resolved.



HARBOURS


Mr. Thomas M. Bell (Saint John-Lancaster):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. In view of growing uneasiness in New Brunswick, will the minister say if there has been any basic change in the federal government's participation in development plans for the port of Saint John? Will he further reassure us that he will stand by the commitment he made in the glare of camera and television lights a short time ago?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Mr. Speaker, I doubt very much if the hon. member can find an instance where I have not stood by a commitment, and that is exactly the case in this instance.



PENITENTIARIES


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Speaker, I notice that the Solicitor General has left the chamber. I
June 18, 1971

Inquiries of the Ministry
do not know whether the ministers' parliamentary secretary is here, although I see the Parlliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice. Can he advise us whether any ladies in Kingston penitentiary are still in solitary confinement following the problems encountered there?


Mr. Albert Bechard (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of this situation but I will notify the minister who will answer this question next time he has the chance to do it.



KINGSTON WOMEN'S PRISON-REDUCTION OF SENTENCES

William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, in view of the discussion that has taken place over the sentences of some of these women in prison at Kingston, would the parliamentary secretary also inquire whether consideration is being given to reducing their sentences to keep them more in line with other sentences now being handed down by the courts?


Albert Béchard: I will, Mr. Speaker.



NATIONAL MUSEUM


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State, the minister responsible for the Opportunities for Youth program and for the administration and operation of the National Museum.


An hon. Member:: Did the hon. member say
"responsible"?


Alfred Dryden Hales: Why was the number of summer jobs for students in the Slavic department of the National Museum cut from 18 to two?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest to the hon. member that this question could be placed on the order paper. If there is urgency, it could well be given priority for consideration at the time of adjournment.


Alfred Dryden Hales: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, there is urgency because one young person who was employed there last summer was given the assurance that he would be hired this summer and then was told that he could not be hired because of lack of funds.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: That is shocking.



INDIAN AFFAIRS


Mr. Oza  Teirauli@Villeneuve: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. In a speech he made in Peterborough on June 11, 1971 he said:
Because of the poverty of many Indians the Canadian people were prodded into asking themselves how such a situation could have arisen and why it persists.
Does the minister know that the same applies to the whites of Canada, because two Canadians out of five lack proper food, clothing and shelter?


Mr. Speaker:: I do feel that this is an argument rather than a question.



AIRPORTS


Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Has an investigation been conducted into the aborted Air Canada landing at St. John's airport which I might say was a direct consequence of the malfunctioning of the instrument landing system there? Can the minister tell the House when the ILS will again be functioning at that airport?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for giving me notice of the question, albeit only since I entered the House. I have only had time to make a quick inquiry and will get a full answer by Monday. In the interim, I have a note from officials indicating that safety in no way has been compromised. That is all I can say at present, and I will undertake to get a full answer by Monday or Tuesday.



INQUIRIES OF THE MINISTRY

Mr. Robert McCleave (Halifax-East Hants):: Mr. Speaker, in light of events to take place later today, may I direct a somewhat irreverent question to the Prime Minister. Since a CBC broadcast this morning suggested that the Minister of Finance would forecast the future later today by the old method of studying the entrails of slaughtered animals, can we now be assured that those entrails will not come from us as lambs led to the slaughter?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: It is going to be a "gut" budget, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Robert Muir (Cape Breion-The Sydneys):: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker-
June 18, 1971


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please I doubt whether there can be a supplementary to that question.


Robert Muir: Possibly I could direct a related question to the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker. In view of the extremely close relationship between the Prime Minister and Mr. Kosygin, can he say whether the Minister of Finance, while delivering his budget speech tonight, will drink Russian vodka as he indicated to the news media?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I am sure the hon. member's spirited supplementary is not in order.



CANADIAN CONSTITUTION


Mr. Warren Allmand (Noire-Dame-de-Grace):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Since there were reports that the Victoria conference almost reached agreement on the role of the provinces and the federal government in international affairs and since this question is not part of the charter, would the Prime Minister tell the House if this important matter will be pursued further so that some agreement can be reached?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: 

INDUSTRY


Max Saltsman: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. In view of interest currently being expressed by Japanese investors in building a uranium enrichment plant in Canada, can the minister indicate whether he has developed a policy in connection with projects of this type? Has he reached a conclusion regarding the value of this kind of development as against encouraging manufacturing?


Hon. J. J. Greene (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: 

INDIAN AFFAIRS


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. For some weeks now I have not been able to get an answer from the minister with respect to the construction of an important causeway or bridge linking the Lennox Island Indian reservation with Prince Edward Island. In view of the fact that there is money allotted in this year's estimates for the construction of such a link, can the minister indicate when this important project will begin?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I cannot give a specific date for two reasons: first, the soil studies undertaken by the Department of Public Works have not yet been completed, and second, the construction of a causeway could change the nature of the education facilities provided for the Indians on that island. Discussions are not going on between my department and the Indians concerning the future of the school on the island.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Since the loss of the school and teachers' residence was a direct result of inadequate transportation to get firefighting equipment to the island, is the minister saying there must be a choice on the part of the Indians-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. This is debate and not a question.
^ ^



CONSUMER AFFAIRS


Mr. R. E. McKinley (Huron):: My question is for the
Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Has the minister investigated suggestions by farmers that there have been short weights in packages of a certain herbicide they purchased this spring to assist at seeding time? If so, what has the minister done about this?


Hon. Ron Basford (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: I have not noticed those particular complaints, Mr. Speaker. I will inquire whether my officials have received any complaints. If the hon. member can give me particulars of the complaints, I will be happy to ensure that short weight does not occur.

June 18, 1971
Pilotage Act POLLUTION



PRESENCE OF MERCURY IN INDIANS-LINK TO DOMTAR PLANT AT LEBEL-SUR-QUEVILLON

Mr. Ralph Stewart (Cochrane):: My question is for the
Minister of the Environment. Can the minister inform the House whether a definite link has been established between the high levels of mercury in the Indian population and the mercury contaminated effluent of the Domtar plant at Lebel-sur-Quevillon?


John (Jack) Davis: There has been no such link established, Mr. Speaker. The Indians who were brought to Montreal for observation were not found to have a serious sickness caused by mercury. They had been eating fish from watersheds other than those into which Domtar discharges its effluent.


Ralph Wesley Stewart: Can the minister state if the Domtar plant has now complied with federal standards in its mercury output into local waters?


John (Jack) Davis: Yes, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Orders of the day.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-246, respecting pilotage, as reported (with amendments) from the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications.
Mr. Thomas S. Barnett (Comox-Alberni) moved:: That Bill C-24S, respecting pilotage, be amended by adding to Clause 15 at page 13 immediately after subclause (7) the following:
" (8) A pilotage certificate shall be valid for use by the holder thereof only on ships of Canadian registry".
He said: Mr. Speaker, the amendment I have proposed to this bill is not likely to receive widespread attention in the press, particularly in view of the events that are scheduled to take place later today. Before I get into the substance of my amendment, I would like to suggest that in these days when we are increasingly concerned about the ecological health of our country and the world, this legislation is very important to us all.
After having undergone one of the most strenuous committee sessions that I have ever attended, I remarked that this bill does not have very much political sex appeal. None the less, the work that was done in the standing committee on this bill was a very worthwhile exercise. We were dealing with a very complex piece of legislation on a subject which does not come to the
attention of Members of Parliament very often. We worked hard trying to understand the complexities of the bill and did what we could to improve it. This is indicated by the fact that a number of amendments were written into the original draft by the committee.
Those who were most concerned about the bill, particularly the pilots who were very assiduous in their attendances at the hearings, were by and large very happy with the results of the work of the committee. They expressed themselves quite freely in that context. However, it was unfortunate that, because of a rather irrelevant clause in this bill, irrelevant in the context of the total package which has to do with legislation due to expire June 30, the committee hearings were rushed and the pressures under which we worked were rather extreme for a bill of this complexity.
My assessment of what happened in the committee with regard to the total picture of what is proposed in the bill, is that there appears to be one defect that is worthy of consideration. For that reason, I placed this amendment on the order paper for discussion. The amendment reads:
A pilotage certificate shall be valid for use by the holder thereof only on ships of Canadian registry.
To put this amendment in context, it is necessary to appreciate the main purpose of the bill. It provides for a new concept of semi-autonomous regional pilotage authorities which will be responsible for most of the administrative work of the pilotage service in their respective regions. Clause 12 clearly states that the central purpose of the bill is to have the pilotage authorities operate an efficient pilotage service in the interests of safety. This is the over-riding consideration in the whole matter of having a pilotage service. It is central to consideration of my amendment and, indeed, almost any other proposal in the bill. It is with the object of raising certain questions as to the adequacy of the bill with regard to the matter of safety that I would like to discuss certain provisions of the bill at this stage.
The bill provides, and this is most important and certainly central to my amendment, that in effect there are to be two classes of people who will be empowered to have responsibility for piloting ships in the compulsory pilotage areas in Canadian waters which will be established under the bill. There are the people who are in our present pilotage service, the people we normally refer to as pilots. There is provision for granting pilotage certificates to officers of certain ships. I do not quarrel with this basic concept. It is not because of any quarrel with this proposal that I have introduced my amendment. I am sure the minister and, more particularly, his parliamentary secretary who sat in on the committee meetings, will recognize that a great deal of discussion in the committee centered around who should be the holders of pilotage certificates and under what circumstances.
Indeed, the committee did propose a number of amendments designed to clarify the question who should receive pilotage certificates. The committee wrote a provision into clause 14 that the holders of such certifi-
[Mr. Basford.l
June 18, 1971

cates would be required, as are pilots, to undergo further training and examination from time to time. This was a step toward keeping the qualifications of those who receive certificates on a par with those of regular pilots. Another amendment agreed to in committee was that the holder of a pilotage certificate must be a Canadian citizen or a landed immigrant, a stipulation being that the landed immigrant must become a Canadian citizen within five years if he wished to continue to hold his certificate.
We introduced an amendment to another clause designed to make it clear that the holder of a pilotage certificate must be qualified in navigational skills and possess a knowledge of the area in which he operates equivalent to that possessed by holders of a regular pilot's licence. I suppose it could be argued that with these additional safeguards the bill covers all the questions which needed to be dealt with. It is fair to say that most of the pilots felt we had gone a great distance toward ensuring that holders of pilotage certificates would, in fact, be people who possess qualifications similar to those of the pilots themselves.
There is another matter which is of considerable importance and it received a good deal of attention in committee, namely, the relationship between the master of a ship and the person responsible for performing the pilotage function. The bill seeks to clarify this relationship by virtue of a couple of amendments which were introduced in committee. It is spelled out for the first time in Canadian law, I believe, that a licensed pilot who has the conduct of a ship is responsible to the captain for the safe navigation of the vessel. This is provided by amendments to clause 16 to be found on page 13 of the bill. Later in the same clause hon. members will find an additional provision making it clear that the master has the authority, should he deem it necessary, to take over the control of the ship from the pilot at any time, though if he does so he must report his reasons for so doing to the pilotage authority.
When a pilot is aboard a ship it might be considered that there is a dual authority. This arises from the fact that the pilot is not responsible to the master as far as general directions are concerned; he is responsible to the agency which, in effect, is his employer, namely, the pilotage authority. So the pilot is placed in an independent position in his relationship to the master. Though in the last analysis he is under the control of the master while he is aboard, when he steps off the ship he is completely divorced from his relationship with that officer. This is not, however, the situation which will apply to those who hold pilotage certificates, people who may be second or third mates on a vessel. One of the requirements the committee wrote into the bill is that if a person is obliged to function as a navigational officer, as the holder of a pilotage certificate, he has to be a member of the complement of the ship's crew. So we have a man who is the holder of a pilotage certificate in a continuing relationship with the master of a vessel, under his general direction at all times, in addition to the particular relationship which exists while he is engaged in performing a pilot's function.
Pilotage Act
This is a feature of the situation about which we ought to be very careful because there is a good deal of concern in the minds of many of us that in these circumstances the member of the crew performing the pilotage function may not be in a position to exercise independent judgment in relation to what he does as a pilot. This is because he would be dependent for his job, for his career, on maintaining the good will of the master of the ship and, in addition, on being willing to work at all times under his direction. He would be in a position in which the master could exercise strong and continuing pressure upon him. While the holder of a pilotage certificate may have qualifications equivalent to those of a regular pilot, while he may have equivalent knowledge of the waters of the area in which he operates, it is open to question whether the interests of safety with respect to navigation will be as fully protected as would be the case were a fully qualified licensed pilot independent of the master, responsible for the navigation of the ship. There appears to be no question in the minds of pilots with whom I have discussed this question with regard to the situation in the coastal trade. They know that in most cases, under the arrangements envisaged by this bill, there should be no problem in having as master of a ship a person with knowledge of the waters and navigational skills that make for the safe navigation of his vessel.
Indeed, those of us who have had some experience living in seacoast areas know that in fact masters in our coasting trade have established a very good reputation and record in relation to the safe navigation of their vessels in some of the most difficult waters in the world over a long period of years. While there have been occasional accidents at sea and incidents of mis judgment that have caused disasters of one kind or another, in the total picture such events have been few and far between. With the continuing kind of action envisaged by the bill, and as a result of some of the amendments we made to the Canada Shipping Act, I think the record of the past can be improved upon in the future as far as our coasting trade is concerned.
The concern that was expressed to me following the committee's consideration of the bill, a concern which to my way of thinking is a legitimate and real one, is that, as the bill now stands, the practice could develop whereby we would have foreign line ships employing as a matter of deliberate policy second or third mates who are Canadians and holders of Canadian pilotage certificates. As the bill stands, if someone who is the holder of a pilotage certificate is a ship's officer, the vessel could be exempt from taking on a pilot in the compulsory pilotage waters of Canada.
I think this is a very different situation from that which prevails with respect to our coasting trade. Here, you will have a junior officer of a ship, at all times under the direction of a master, who has no local knowledge of Canadian waters; who may not even speak either one of our official languages; who is unfamiliar with many of the local customs in respect of navigation that are thor-

June 18, 1971
Pilotage Act
oughly understood by the pilots in our pilotage service, as well as by masters of coasting vessels who are travelling through these waters on a continuing, year-round basis. I think this is a situation that we should examine, and it is something on which my amendment tends to focus attention. I think it is obvious to hon. members that the effect of my amendment would be to provide that these pilotage certificates would be valid only on ships of Canadian registry.
I am not certain that the exact terms of my amendment fully and completely meet this situation. I might be willing to concede in our discussion that there may be some situations where it might be logical to agree that a pilotage certificate is valid on a foreign line vessel. But from such knowledge as I have, which as far as it goes is principally related to the Pacific coast, I think such situations should be few and far between.
I would further argue that while a person may have met all the qualifications required for holding a pilotage certificate, if he is in fact going to be employed on a non-Canadian vessel that is travelling the high seas and which only periodically visits areas along the coast of Canada where his pilotage certificate is valid, then inevitably he will lose his familiarity with the area, apart from anything else. For example, he will have to concern himself with duties that involve him in Hong Kong, Japan, Australia, the United Kingdom and other parts of the world. He will spend only a small part of his time in giving active attention to navigating a ship in Canadian coastal waters and approaching our ports. Most of the time his mind will be concentrating on other duties in other ports of the world, duties that are not directly related to the piloting of a ship in Canadian coastal waters.
In terms of safety, I suggest this is a matter that should be carefully examined. If my amendment can be better worded or in some way qualified in respect to its rather bald terms, then I for one would be prepared to listen to any suggestions and, with the agreement of the House, arrive at some different form of wording or at what might even be considered to be compromise wording. But with my limited knowledge, this is the best effort that I have been able to make by way of amendment and is what I thought would meet the basic requirements of what I am trying to achieve.
The emphasis and thrust of this amendment is directed at the main purpose of the bill, which is the operation of a safe, efficient pilotage service in the interest of general safety. Let me say at once that my discussions with pilots would lead me to believe it is not simply a question of their worrying about whether or not their individual jobs would be safeguarded. This issue is much broader than that. From my own experience of meeting some of the people engaged in the pilotage service on the Pacific coast-and I think there are some 80 of them-these people are a very high calibre of Canadian indeed. They are men of experience and judgment, and I think it is obvious on the face of it that this is what they should be. They are men whose whole focus on life is to ensure that ships can move safely in and out of our Canadian ports
and waters. They have a great deal of pride in their work, since they recognize that they exercise a responsibility in the matter of safety that no comparable group of Canadians in any other field exercises. Like many of the rest of us, they are aware of the increasing responsibilities they have to bear with the development of larger and larger ships carrying pollutant cargoes in larger and larger quantities.
They are aware, as very few other Canadians are, of the real danger of a major disaster at sea, particularly in coastal areas. If we do, as I suppose we must, accept the fact that bulk cargoes on the sea moving from our ports to foreign ports and from the ports of other countries to our ports are going to be carried in larger and larger vessels and that there are going to be more of them, we have to recognize how crucial and important some of these questions can be. Indeed, I readily say at once that the fact this bill was introduced by the Minister of Transport (Mr. Jamieson) is an indication that the government recognizes such to be the case.
Quite frankly, one of the things I do not like about my amendment is that it might be argued it runs contrary to a principle with which I agree as enunciated by the minister's spokesman before the committee. Our concern should be primarily with the competence of the people on the bridge rather than with questions surrounding ownership or the flag of the vessel. This is essentially a sound principle, and my amendment or any other should be viewed in that context. The practical realities of the situation as I see them, and certainly this was in my mind and I think in the minds of most other members of the committee as we discussed the pros and cons of the situation, are that primarily pilotage certificates would go to ships' officers in our coasting trade, in whom we do have a pretty high degree of confidence because of the knowledge they possess and the constant and continuing experience they gain.
If the practice develops and becomes widespread of foreign lines deliberately employing Canadians as officers for the purpose of short-circuiting the kind of regulations which would force them to take independent pilots aboard, then I think there is a real fear some of the fundamental purposes of this bill will be circumvented. Hon. members of the House can realize that, up to a point at least, the owners and managers of shipping lines, who are thinking in terms of dollars and cents, are going to say why not avoid paying pilotage fees by having a qualified second or third mate on the vessel? This would make it possible for them to dispense with pilotage services. These pressures can build up.
In concluding my discussion on this amendment, perhaps I can do so best by telling the House of a situation which developed, a detail of which I only learned recently. It concerns the motor vessel Scheydyck which is now at the bottom of Nootka Sound in my constituency. At the time the Scheydyck had taken on its load of pulp from the Gold River Pulp Mills cargo dock. This was a new port and some of the navigational aids, lights and so

June 18, 1971

on, now in that Muchalat Inlet were not there and the judgment of the pilots at that time was that this was not a safe channel to navigate in the dark. One of our B.C. pilots felt so strongly that this was the case he would not take that ship, even though it would have been his normal turn to do so. However, another pilot did go with the view of trying to persuade the Master not to leave until dawn. He was overruled by the Master and the ship left port in the evening. Whether this was primarily the cause of the ship now being at the bottom, I do not know. I am not sure this can be determined because the vessel is down at the bottom of Nootka Sound and something may have gone wrong with the controls or equipment on the vessel.
The fact of the matter is that had there only been a second or third mate on that ship who was the holder of a licence certificate there could have been no argument about the ship sailing if the Master said it was to sail. This was one of the thoughts in my mind which led me to proposes my amendment to the bill. This is the kind of practical situation which can develop, because Masters responsible to their owners want to get their ships under way in order to be in another port at a certain time to finish taking on cargo, get back on the high seas and meet a loading schedule somewhere on the other side of the world. This is the attitude because it means dollars in the pockets of the owners, and the fact that a Master is making dollars for his owners is one basis upon which ship owners will naturally judge the efficiency of their Masters.
If this bill as it stands allows that kind of practice to become widespread, it seems to me in some respects we are defeating the basic purpose of the bill which is, as it says, to improve upon the existing provision of pilotage service in a more realistic way, with more local autonomy of judgment as to how detailed management should be carried out in respect of those areas where it is to be applied.


Mr. Speaker:: It being one o'clock I do now leave the chair.
At one o'clock the House took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The House resumed at 2 p.m.
Mr. Ovide Laflamme (Montmorency):: Mr. Speaker, I listened attentively to the hon. member who moved an amendment to clause 15 and to his remarks on the need to provide for the greatest shipping safety within our territorial waters. I do not believe the requirements in this amendment would really improve the safety standards already established in the legislation for the simple reason that, within our shipping zones, there must be a pilot or a holder of a pilotage certificate.
Under an amendment to paragraph (a), subclause (2) of clause 15 of the act, it has been established that accord-
Pilotage Act
ing to the legislation requirements, the holder of a pilotage certificate must, in the opinion of the local authority, have a degree of skill equivalent or at least equal to that of a licence holder. That is why I cannot understand very well why the issuing of pilotage certificates must be limited to Canadian ships only.
While attempting to grant special protection to a certain class we are perhaps depriving a good number of Canadian pilotage certificate holders from becoming crew members of a foreign ship if they so desire.
I am speaking at this stage of the study on this important bill, which was fully discussed in committee, first to express my personal appreciation for the discretion that was granted all members and for the real exercise of democracy that prevailed during consideration of this bill.
I would like to commend the Minister of Transport (Mr. Jamieson) who, while piloting this most complicated bill, has allowed hon. members the greatest freedom. The understanding of all the civil servants who participated in the study of this bill should also be recognized.
This is important since, when the bill was studied by the committee substantial amendments were proposed and almost all of them were given unanimous approval. I also commend the hon. member for LaSalle (Mr. Les-sard), chairman of the Transport and Communications committee, who handled with much tact our proceedings on this important question.
Mr. Speaker, during several meetings which were perhaps exhausting but also most important, we were able to discuss in depth an extremely technical bill which is most important for Canadian shipping and which lays down major principles which I want to mention. Among these basic principles I would simply recall at this stage that for nine years we had been waiting for the report of the Royal Commission on Pilotage.
In its report the Commission came to the conclusion that pilotage authority just had to be decentralized. It is proposed in the bill to establish four local authorities which will be in a better position respectively to judge the problems posed by pilotage in Canadian waters.
Decentralization was requested by all interested parties and the bill includes such a proposal. I believe that unless we have absolutely no confidence in the local administration that will so be constituted, we reject the basic principle of this bill, aimed first of all at decentralization. If we do not trust the local administration, we indeed reject the basis of that bill, the essential principle on which the officials relied while drafting that legislation.
Besides decentralization, there is another essential principle that was put forward in the Bernier commission report-that exemptions from compulsory pilotage should be based in future not only on the tonnage or the seaworthiness of the ship but also on the qualifications of the person at the helm. This provides an additional and

June 18, 1971
Pilotage Act
indispensable security factor, because it is well known that traffic is growing heavier within Canadian territorial waters and one quickly must conclude that whatever the size of a ship, small, medium or large, its presence within our waters and in vital pilotage zones may spell great danger.
While studying this legislation in committee, we suggested some amendments. Notwithstanding all the amendments that were made, it is a fact that perhaps some of the people concerned still entertain apprehensions or misgivings about that bill.
In my view, the bill, in its present form, including some corrections to which I would like to draw the minister's attention, is of great importance and represents considerable progress, unless one would want to consider future authorities as incompetent. The bill is an answer to a long-standing need and it attempts to ensure, within Canadian waters, real control of the safety of pilotage.
The previous speaker praised our Canadian pilots. I wish to say that I agree with him wholeheartedly and to add that it is not merely a question of ensuring employment security for an important group of workers-I would say of professionals in the field of shipping-but rather of really understanding to what extent the role which these people have played in the past and will have to play in the future, is pressing and important since we passed Bill C-2 on pollution.
I recently read in a Quebec newspaper an article on the consequences of a ship running aground or of a maritime disaster which could happen at the level of Portneuf, or elsewhere in the St. Lawrence river, up to the Escoumains or Kimouski, because it must be understood to what extent, through tidal movements, a disaster in the river would bring about irreparable and widespread damage.
In the consideration of this legislation we insisted more on the necessity, not to keep pilots but to insure aboard ships sailing in our waters the presence of men whose competence will be controlled by local authorities or by the department, emphasizing the increasing importance of this matter. Some people might feel that clause 14 will enable local authorities to establish new compulsory pilotage areas. However, I fail to see how compulsory pilotage areas could be established in our Canadian waters, where traffic density is very great. In fact, experience has shown that only experts have the qualifications required to conduct ships in these areas.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation provides for establishment of local authorities for the purpose of decentralizing pilotage. To this end, we must choose one of two courses. We can have everything included in the act. Then, it would seem that we do not trust the authority to be set up. On the other hand, we may accept the principle of decentralisation and put our faith in the authority to be set up, with the understanding that the local authority will be closer to the actual problems of navigation and will obviously be more competent to pass judgment on the qualifications of those that are to hold pilotage certificates.
So, as proposed in the bill, I chose to trust the local authority and believe in the regulations that will be set up and published for 30 days in the Canada Gazette under clause 14.
As far as compulsory navigation zones and regulations concerning the qualifications of pilotage certificate holders are concerned, these regulations should be given a 30-day public notice and be subject to investigation.
Within such a framework, I can hardly imagine how the local authorities of the Montreal area, for instance, could intervene while the shipping traffic continues to increase and say or direct that there will be no compulsory pilotage, from Quebec City to Escoumains and that it will not be necessary that a certificate holder be on board one or another of the ships which will negociate the distance.
Under section 14(1)a), it will be possible to awake the public interest and show that it is out of the question to make shipping completely free within our waters.
It is a known fact, Mr. Speaker, that all countries require that a pilot steer the ships travelling in their territorial waters. The reaction to the Darling report is also known. That report, which the Minister of Transport (Mr. Jamieson) tabled in the House on May 21 last, has been concurred in by almost all ship owners because it made the specific recommendation that Canadian ships be responsible for coastal navigation in territorial waters.
If we are so convinced that it is essential to promote coastal shipping by Canadian vessels, I can easily understand why members of the Committee on Transport and Communications urged that pilotage certificate holders be Canadian citizens or immigrants having filed their citizenship application. The requirement was approved and when I refer to the favourable reaction to the publication of the Darling report recommending that only Canadian ships move goods between ports, I wish to make it clear that it was important to guarantee that Canadians pilot ships in important inland waters called compulsory pilotage areas.
On the whole, that legislation can give rise to some concern. Literally, that legislation could suggest that the local authority, the minister or the cabinet could enact regulations altering its meaning. As a result, we would be introducing a bill to delude the public and I cannot accept such argument. I trust-and I say so in all fairness-the Minister of Transport and his advisers, but Parliament would always be in a position to enact other regulations. However, for the moment I am convinced that the Minister of Transport is quite determined to carry out to the letter the general instructions which will have been recommended to cabinet and included in regulations made by local authorities created once the bill has been approved.
There, actually, is my idea of this law. And if the authorities are not trusted, one may, obviously, through reluctance or by playing with terms, interpret certain clauses as meaning that indeed the cabinet has the power to establish a parallel pilotage system and to get rid of the present system.

June 18, 1971

For my part, I trust the authorities; it they let me down, I can always make representations, as a member of Parliament, to the powers that be, but I feel I shall not have to do so. Not only will I not have to do so, but I am sure that the cabinet that proposed so important a measure is still the one that can best administer it.
I suspect that when the Authority has been set up, some might begin to worry.
As for me, and I say it again, quite frankly, I feel I was one of those who, in committee, presented the views shared by the association of the St. Lawrence pilots.
On the whole, however, this legislation is clear and relevant, and, unless we have no confidence in the future, or see problems where there are none, it is premature to suggest that this legislation does not represent a considerable step forward in the regulation of pilotage in Canada, and this, in the best interest of pilots, whom I shall always try to protect, because they really ensure the security of shipping. Since they are experts, I do not see how, in a system where traffic is constantly increasing, as it is in our compulsory areas, we might eventually reduce their number.
While we are talking about pollution, to allow larger and bigger ships to sail in our waters without direction and control by Canadian experts, by pilots who have been delivered licences or certificates by the Department of Transport, would give the impression that the cabinet, the government, in short, that Parliament has completely lost its mind, and that Members of Parliament do not understand the major interests of the people.
On the whole, I am not only satisfied with the bill, but also with the help provided by the Parliamentary Secretary to the minister, my colleague from Quebec East (Mr. Duquet), as well as the help of all hon. members and the co-operation of the minister who has allowed the true play of democracy. We moved helpful and constructive amendments which, I think, should dispel the fears of those who are primarily interested.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order, please. I regret to interrupt the hon. member but his time has expired.


Some hon. Members:: Continue.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order, please. The House knows that the hon. member cannot continue his remarks unless he gets unanimous consent. Does the House agree to allow the hon. member to continue?


Stanley Howard Knowles: A point of order, Mr. Speaker.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) on a point of order.


Stanley Howard Knowles: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I believe that under the rules the minister would have 40 minutes to reply and if the hon. member is replying for the minister, we ought to give it to him.
Pilotage Act


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: It is very difficult for the Chair to identify which member is replying in the name of the minister. The Chair has been glancing in the direction of the hon. parliamentary secretary who has been taking notes. He might be the one making the official reply, so if the minister or somebody could enlighten the Chair-


Robert Jardine McCleave: Let's hear him anyway.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: The House seems disposed to allow the hon. member to go beyond the time allotted to him. Is there unanimous consent to allow the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. Laflamme) to pursue his remarks?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Ovide Laflamme: Mr. Speaker, I was concluding my remarks and suggesting to the hon. minister that clause 14, despite the amendments made to it, seems to be contradictory with regard to compulsory areas.
I wanted to call the attention of the minister on clause 14(l)(b). Instead of the words-
(b) prescribing the ships or classes of ships that are subject to compulsory pilotage
-it would be much more logical to say: -
-prescribing the ships-*
-since we are dealing with compulsory zones that will not be subject to those described in paragraph (a).
I shall perhaps have a few questions to ask the hon. minister later on, but I must say that this bill, though not a perfect one, is an acceptable compromise and a basic answer to this important question concerning navigation in our inland water.


Robert Jardine McCleave: Mr. Speaker, this important measure comes to us in the awful calm before the storm, that is while we are awaiting the birthday-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order, please. The hon. member for Champlain (Mr. Matte) on a point of order.


Mr. Rene Matte (Champlain):: Mr. Speaker, would the hon. member for Montmorency care to reply to a question I wish to ask him?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: The hon. member for Montmorency has concluded his remarks. He could accept a question if he still had the floor, but the Chair has already recognized the hon. member for Halifax-East Hants. The hon. member would require the unanimous consent of the house.

June 18, 1971
Pilotage Act
Does the hon. member for Champlain has the consent of the house to direct a question to the hon. member for Montmorency?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, I would just like-


Prosper Boulanger: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker.


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


Prosper Boulanger: I do not want that the question be asked.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: The hon. member for Halifax-East Hants.


Robert Jardine McCleave: Mr. Speaker, I was noting that in a few hours we shall have a birthday present for two hon. members of this House, for the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) and for that other outstanding speaker, the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch). The minister will have missed by one day the birthdays of the hon. member for Prince Edward-Hastings (Mr. Hees) and of the hon. member for Lambton-Kent (Mr. McCuteheon). Perhaps, until we learn what is in the package, it will be as well to say that they are not receiving the contents of it as a birthday present.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Will the hon. member permit a question, Mr. Speaker. Is he aware that this day is also the anniversary of the battle of Waterloo?


Gerald William Baldwin: Where is the hon. member for Waterloo (Mr. Saltsman)?


Robert Jardine McCleave: That is a good question. I think that my hon. friend for Waterloo is locked up somewhere, as the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Barnett) would so felicitously put it. For my friends in the gallery who may wonder what the phrased "locked up" means, may I say that he is with officials who are briefing him about the budget presentation to be made this afternoon.


Gerald William Baldwin: He is probably in a state of shock now.


Robert Jardine McCleave: Mr. Speaker, I so thoroughly agree with most of the remarks made by the two speakers who preceded me, the hon. member for Comox-Alberni and the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. Laflamme) that I shall make my remarks brief. Perhaps the hon. member for Saint John-Lancaster (Mr. Bell) will wish to say something briefly on third reading; otherwise, this will be our total contribution on this measure.
Our remarks will be brief, in inverse proportion to the importance of the measure. We agree that it is an important measure. However, such was the success of discussions in the committee that one can say the different
[The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel).]
issues were well and truly thrashed out. Ample leeway was given. I cannot remember any bill with respect to which so much leeway was given in committee. What we have before us is a fair consensus of what people consider to be important in the bill.
May I first say to the hon. member for Comox-Alberni that, although I greatly respect the earnestness of his submission, I cannot unfortunately support it and my colleagues cannot support it. Nevertheless, since he was good enough to say that he was really trying an idea on for size, I do not think he will regret the decision we have made. As a maritime member, I have to think of the effects of legislation on ships of British registry engaged in our coastal trade. On balance, although he has done us a great service by presenting his idea and giving us an opportunity to speak about it, I must reject his contention.
The hon. member, and the hon. member who succeeded him in this debate, outlined the concept of the pilotage certificate. He referred to people who, in limited cases or in limited regions, will be entitled to exercise the rights of pilots, although those people will actually be officers of the ship which they are piloting. That was the main issue before the committee. It was asked, to what extent should this right be given. The responsibility that would rest on the person who is given a pilotage certificate is, in a sense, a responsibility towards Canada. For example, he could come from outside Canada. We made important amendments in this regard and I think, by and large, performed a fair service in not killing the original concept of the bill but putting it within reasonable limits. What really bothered me was that there would be people who could exercise pilots' rights without having a sense of responsibility towards Canada. I think that the curbs put on that class of person were pretty reasonable curbs.
I think the legislation should now have a chance to prove itself, and so I make this suggestion to the minister and to the parliamentary secretary. I think it might even meet the point of the hon. member for Comox-Alberni. I suggest that a reasonable report regarding the operations of this bill be drawn up-a special study, as it were- that could be presented to the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications when the estimates are considered one year from now. I do not think that is asking too much. I think if officials know that they will be expected to come forward with a detailed report upon which they will be questioned, the point raised by my friend for Comox-Alberni will probably be met. That, of course, would certainly meet any hesitation that I might have about the bill and at the same time it would give this important act an opportunity to prove itself in operation. That is the only suggestion I want to make. I put it forward as a respectful request, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Roland Godin (Porineuf):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out to the House that I am also a member of the Transport and Communications Committee and, when the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. Laflamme) gives to understand that everything went on smoothly and in a
June 18, 1971

democratic way during the study of this famous bill, one has to take it with a grain of salt.
The story of democracy is rather the story of pressure because it is known that the association of pilots had delegated one of its members to the committee and requested an hon. member to present many amendments. But after a few days of negociation, the member who had introduced the main amendment was forced to withdraw it under pressure from the authorities because it can-tradicted senior officials in the Canadian government.
Being very much aware of the excellent work done by the Royal Commission on Pilotage, I am disappointed that the Minister of Transport (Mr. Jamieson) did not see fit to accept all the recommendations of the Commission, especially that which to me is the most important, pilotage on the St. Lawrence River.
Clause 14(1) states that the authority can determine areas of compulsory pilotage.
I believe that such power is to be feared, though I realize that it could be checked through some rule or commission. I am convinced that there are areas of the St. Lawrence where no pilotage authority should be allowed to overrule compulsory pilotage provisions.
The most important places insofar as Canadian shipping is concerned are the rivers and waterways most sensitive with respect to the Canadian economy as a whole. Nobody could suggest that the St. Lawrence River is not one of them.
Besides, I could never support a decision to deprive of their jobs Canadian pilots and their families. For those reasons, I take strong exception to the clauses of this bill which could lead to the removal of the regulation requiring the presence of a Canadian pilot on-board ships in the St. Lawrence River.
In that connection, I would like to quote parts of Part I of the report of the Royal Commission on Pilotage. On page 233, under the title "Freedom of Pilotage Service", one can read the following:
Local knowledge and experience in local navigation are the ultimate and most essential requirements for safe navigation in confined waters. Since the raison d'etre of organized pilotage is to provide shipping with the services of qualified navigators who are experts in navigating local confined waters, an efficient and adequate pilotage service is the ultimate means of enhancing safety of navigation.
As a rule, compulsory pilotage should be imposed: (a) on Masters who do not possess the necessary degree of local knowledge to navigate their ship or navigation unit safely; (b) in ship channels where a maritime disaster would seriously affect the economy of the country and the interest of the public.
Because pilotage is the most effective way of achieving safety of navigation, it should come under the jurisdiction of the authorities responsible for the safety of navigation, wherever such safety is of vital importance to the country. Conversely, the involvement of these authorities is not as necessary where the safety of navigation is not an essential national concern.
Here is now the most important part of the text:
For instance, nowhere is the safety of ship channels more vital to Canadian interests than on the St. Lawrence River.
Pilotage Act
Considering the great importance of pilotage on the St. Lawrence River, I think the provisions on compulsory pilotage should be included in the legislation and that the rather broad powers referred to on page 233 of Part I of the report be given to authorities. Furthermore, the Commission suggests that the future legislation on pilotage deal mainly with safety of navigation.
Surely navigation is nowhere more important than on the St. Lawrence River.
In fact, the St. Lawrence River is treacherous, and this has been recognized by the Commission. I live in Don-nacona and I can see the Quebec City bridge from my house. This waterway is 30 miles long and three miles wide, yet when a ship runs aground everyone notices. As long as the whales stay in the water, nobody cares. But as soon as a whale emerges, the people of the village come rushing to see what is the commotion.
Along the St. Lawrence River, especially in the Port-neuf region, you do not have to go on the beach. From my window, I once saw a ship around at Saint-Nicolas; at Saint-Augustin, on the north shore of the St. Lawrence, I could see another ship, outside the channel, on the reef. Recently, the same thing happened at Cap-Sante; a ship went out of the channel and it looked for a moment as if it migh run aground on the coast. Then the strollers collected along the shore, looked on and worried.
Not too long ago, the same thing happened in Leclerc-ville. A few years back, there was a shipwreck in the Petite Riviere Saint-Frangois in which Chinese sailors perished. And, closer to Quebec City, in the channel at the bottom of the river near the lie d'Orleans, another wreck still remains a danger.
There is already too much freedom under the regulations. Pilotage duties are being charged to ships entering the river, but there is nothing to force them to retain the services of a pilot. So, you get a pretty fair idea of what happens to those regulations that are often applied according to the captain's or the shipping companies' sense of responsibility. The St. Lawrence is dangerous. A maritime disaster could greatly affect the Canadian economy and the public interest. The Channel is indeed of vital significance to the country.
So, on the national level, the St. Lawrence channel should be a seaway where compulsory pilotage is guaranteed. I would not like to see such a decision left to one administration with only the possibility to appeal to the minister. I would rather like to see compulsory pilotage on the St. Lawrence included in bill C-246 and at a later stage, I will move an amendment to this effect.
Yet, I would like to emphasize the situation of pilots; the report admits that pilotage on the St. Lawrence is of extreme importance. To me, the best way to ensure good pilotage on the river is to require Canadian pilots to be on duty on all ships sailing on the river. To my mind, no other means is adequate to comply with navigation security standards.
At the same time, it must be kept in mind that pilotage is a special profession which requires a long and difficult training, which means that pilots, although experts in this field, could not easily adjust to other types of employment. Indeed, there are not many fields in which

June 18, 1971
6878______________________________
Pilotage Act
they could put their training to use. So, in the interest of security, everything should be done to prevent these pilots from being laid off. I would not want to see this happen under a by-law; it would be completely unfair.
If the act provides for compulsory pilotage along the Pacific coast, I would like to hear the minister say, when he rises, in the name of what freedom an authority would be allowed to make decisions in the Quebec area which, after all, is the most dangerous and should actually have been the one to cause no concern. All the necessary clauses should have been included in this bill to ensure first of all, security for the Canadian public, and especially employment security for this group of pilots who have been efficient and very active until now.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member opposite who was defending his opposition to this amendment. I was surprised at his view of the amendment. I agree that things are tough in Canada and that we need to create jobs. There is no question about that. However, this bill is much too important to consider creating opportunities for people who have the potential of getting a mate's licence for Canadian waters to be employed by a foreign power.
While I did not have the opportunity of listening to the deliberations of the committee, in past years I have been very interested in the job that has been done by the Department of Transport. The job has not always been entirely satisfactory to the Department of Transport but we have developed, particularly in our inland waters, a remarkable crew of men. They have handled an immense amount of shipping from all parts of the world despite language problems, different customs and differences in the types of charts and measurements that we use. These people have been able to come into Canadian waters and use the seaway facilties to their advantage and ours. This has been possible because of the calibre of people registered as pilots under the Canada Shipping Act.
In moving this amendment, my colleague had in mind the point made by the previous speaker, namely that this would be an opportune time for creating jobs for Canadians. Anyone who had obtained either a pilot's or an apprentice pilot's licence for any waters under Canada's authority would have been able to work as first or second mate and bring a ship in to Canadian waters without the necessity of hiring a Canadian pilot. While this would create some jobs, it would not be satisfactory to the pilots who have established this reputation. It would not be acceptable to the Canadian authorities or public because Canadian pilots have developed a great deal of independence. They have had their ups and downs.
The hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mar. Barnett) referred to one case where there is a difference of opinion as to whether the master should be able to do what he wants. The pilot said, no. A second pilot was asked for his assistance and was pushed into taking the vessel out under conditions less than favourable. The fact that the ship went to the bottom interests only the insurance
company, I suppose. But there is an important lesson to be learned from this. Those who are working continuously in short portions of our waterways are in a position from day to day to drop into the pilotage centres and discuss with other pilots changing conditions which may be developing, the congestion anticipated from the presence of other sripping, changes which have been made in the placement of navigational aids, and so on.
If we allow those holding pilotage certificates to ship on vessels of foreign register and act in any capacity other than that of captain, they will be placed in a position where their wishes can be overridden at any time. Moreover, as the hon. member who spoke from the government benches noted, a great possibility for developing Canadian job opportunities on foreign ships will be eliminated.
It has been interesting to discuss pilotage matters with those directly affected. One of the difficulties has been that the Department of Transport has failed to keep abreast of changing conditions and changing needs; it has not responded to these changes nearly as fast as the shipping companies or the pilotage authorities. The pilots and the representatives of the shipping companies have on a number of occasions insisted on the updating of navigational aids which the department argued that it was not in a position to provide because of monetary considerations. A few years ago serious difficulties arose on the St. Lawrence on a number of occasions because of the department's inability to purchase up-to-date radio equipment for the use of our pilots. The equipment they were using was largely ineffective by comparison with that which could be purchased from other countries. It was only after a parliamentary committee had given great study to this question that the department could be prodded into working in conjunction with the National Research Council to develop suitable equipment.
The dialogue which has been going on between the Pilots Association and the government in conjunction with the shipping companies has produced for Canada a fairly responsible body which has done more for Canadian shipping than was anticipated. I express the hope in connection with pilotage that either we make it mandatory within certain areas to carry a pilot, or else develop a higher degree of skill in certain very concise areas. I am thinking particularly of the passage through the Seaway locks where a high degree of skill is necessary. If we put a pilot aboard in the basin at Montreal and go through the St. Lambert locks, a passage which calls for a high degree of skill, I suggest that the pilot so employed should not be used in areas where their particular skill would be largely wasted. Pilots who lack that particular expertise could well be used in such areas. This observation, of course, applies to other areas.
One of the principal areas with which I am concerned, because it is of great importance to this country over the next few years, is the area to be included in the schedule under the Great Lakes Pilotage Authority. As most people are aware, Canada is divided into four pilotage regions-Atlantic, Pacific, Laurentian and Great Lakes.

June 18, 1971

While the Great Lakes system is probably the largest inland water system in the world, that particular authority is also responsible for shipping in another very large area, the Hudson Bay and James Bay area. The reason I make the point about the advantage of specialization, particularly in the Seaway, is that I would be strongly opposed to the authority sending out pilots to operate in the Hudson Bay-James Bay area. I think it would be unfair to the pilots concerned and detrimental to the operation of the pilotage authority. We have not as yet developed any expertise in the field of Arctic shipping. It is true there are some experts, probably three or four of top calibre. But from the information available to me these are not the people who are running our icebreakers; they are not the people who are employed by the Department of Transport at the present time.
However, there are a number of people who are experts in this field and have spent a great deal of time in northern and Arctic ice. I am pleased that the government is interesting itself in this field. I was also pleased to note that one of the places that the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) visited in Russia, when he was paying some attention to problems there similar to those in Canada, was Murmansk. At this northern Arctic port they had developed a degree of expertise that had enabled them for a number of years not only to operate the port, which is ice-free and much above the normal shipping lanes, but to navigate ships in what is an iceberg area, which we are not able to do. I am sure that the Prime Minister and his officials will be giving some attention to this problem.
I suggest that the authority now being given to the Great Lakes Pilotage Authority should not extend to Hudson Bay. This is a new authority that should be centred upon the Churchill area. The Hudson Bay route is not operated by Canada today; it is really operated from London by Lloyds and other insurance companies. These are the companies which determine when the season starts and when it ends. They exercise authority similar to that which insurance companies used to exercise in the Great Lakes area.
We have extended considerably both the spring and fall shipping seasons on the Great Lakes system, having developed the expertise to close the seaway on a daily or weekly basis. Ships in the seaway are given 24 or 48 hours' notice of closure and this is found to be sufficient. The situation is not the same in the Hudson Bay area, a shipping lane that has many advantages both for western Canada and northern Europe. This is an area of great development potential as well as great need. The committee would have been well advised to seize itself of the question of the Hudson Bay shipping authority and to recommend an authority in that area to meet some of the problems of which most members of the House are aware.
I hope hon. members will give consideration to the amendment moved by the hon. member for Comox-24171-161
Pilotage Act
Alberni (Mr. Barnett). In addition, I hope that one of
these days the House will show interest not only in the establishment of a pilotage authority for Hudson Bay but also in other coastal areas of Canada. It strikes me as very odd that a representative of the government should suggest that we train people in Canada for their mate's certificate; that they apply for a pilotage certificate simply so they can get a job on a Liberian freighter. This seems to me a rather odd situation.
It also seems odd that we are making large contributions free of interest to one of the maritime shipbuilding industries to enable them to build ships for France. Why do we not build these ships for ourselves without interest and operate them under Canadian registry? On top of that, a representative of the government is suggesting that we train people to navigate ships so that the owners do not have to pay pilotage fees when passing through Canadian waters.
It strikes me that one point that has been overlooked is that we have one of the longest coastlines in the world. We do not have sufficient expertise in regard to fishing zones, fishing rights, protection of ships in inland waters and passages; indeed, it is only within the last five or six years that we have concerned ourselves with this problem. We are now suggesting we train crews to serve on the ships of other countries. We are building ships to sail under other registries. Although we are providing the wherewithal to do this, we still have made no decision to build our own merchant navy. Some might say that we are not in a position to build one. If that is the case, I would remind them that prior to the last war Canada had a very small merchant navy. After the war we ranked third or fourth in the commercial shipping interests of the world. Those ships were under Canadian registry and operated by Canadian crews. Not only did these crews handle Canadian ships but also the shipping of other countries. Therefore, I suggest it is possible to develop an interest in Canadian shipping.
However, I suggest we will not develop an interest in Canadian shipping by following the course the government seems bent upon, of supplying competent assistance to foreign ships navigating in Canadian waters. Rather, we should place greater reliance on Canadians being employed on ships which are pledged to serve Canadian interests.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, the bill now under consideration is quite important and I would like to insist on its consequences especially concerning the pilots on the St. Lawrence.
Mr. Speaker, my constituency includes several municipalities situated on the shores of the St. Lawrence and consequently pilots are taxpayers of those municipalities. I am therefore in a position to know about their problems and to state my views during consideration of that bill providing for the establishment of new authorities.

June 18, 1971
Pilotage Act
A little earlier I wanted to put a very simple question to the hon. member tor Montmorency (Mr. Laflamme). I know he has been deeply involved and has done an excellent job in taking up the cudgels on behalf of the St. Lawrence pilots, but I must admit that he did not get his way along the line, which I regret.
The hon. member for Montmorency expressed his very great confidence in the hon. minister of Transport (Mr. Jamieson) as well as in all the officials of the department. I am only too willing to see this confidence become positive so that he may do justice to all those affected by the bill.
Mr. Speaker, parliamentary, political experience has shown us that it can be dangerous to have confidence in government administration. That is why it is always better that in such legislation things are spelled out, in order that they be clear and unequivocal.
I am not imputing motives to anyone, but good intentions must be protected.
Now, Mr. Speaker, this bill shows a will to organize properly the various pilotage authorities in Canadian waters, a will to protect against pollution, a will to protect the sovereignty of Canadian territories. But I wonder to what extent we safeguard the principle of Canadian sovereignty in Canadian territorial waters when we leave clauses in the bill indicating that in some cases, pilots and foreigners might be allowed to navigate our waters freely, without the support of our competent pilots who know their trade, and on the tip of their fingers-to use the popular expression-the nooks and corners of the St. Lawrence river, and who consequently can lead in all safety the ships that navigate it.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I believe it is a basic principle that is not even questionable, that in our own waters, and especially in the St. Lawrence-which is, as everyone knows, the heart of Quebec and the greatest waterway in Canada-we should be assured that any ship which passes through it are protected by Canadian pilots.
Mr. Speaker, I readily believe in the good intentions that the hon. member for Montmorency ascribes to the minister, but I am not sure about them. This is why I would have preferred that the amendments suggested by the Federation of St. Lawrence River Pilots were more favourably considered and defended-I would not say more energetically, since I am sure that the hon. member for Montmorency acted in good faith and did his best- which would have resulted in the support of his colleagues in committee and caused all the amendments to be adopted. In my opinion, they were basic and necessary.
For instance, I should like to make only a few points to better illustrate my own approach. In clause 14(c)-
(c) prescribing the circumstances under which compulsory pilotage may be waived;
the pilots had suggested that we add the following:
*-for Canadian ships of less than 350 registered tons.
Mr. Speaker, why have these words not been added? Which influence was exerted to convince the members of the standing committee on Transport and Communications to refuse such amendments, while they guaranteed not only protection for the members of the Federation of St. Lawrence River Pilots, but, besides-since an essential principle was at stake, sovereignty, the protection of the ships and of the associations as well-respect for a profession which in the past has proved its efficiency and absolute necessity beyond any doubt?
Mr. Speaker, I wish here to deplore the situation and this is why I make my point. I wanted to put a question to the hon. member for Montmorency were it not for an interference from the hon. member for Mercier (Mr. Boulanger)-who never takes the floor and who now seems quite mad at the members of the Ralliement creditiste. I simply wanted to ask him if the Association of the St. Lawrence river pilots agreed with his statements. It is the urgent question I wanted to ask him since now in Canada, we are facing problems of all kinds and, among others, a major constitutional problem. Even though the various federal-provincial conferences, as everybody knows, do not solve anything, it has turned out to be a major problem.
In the province of Quebec, when an association almost exclusively from Quebec is thus denied a greater protection, some question must be asked, but this does not solve the major problems now facing Canada in this connection.
I suggest that the Minister of Transport should consider giving special attention to the recommendations made by this association, and I still hope that my colleagues on the government side will look fully into the matter-most especially the Quebec members-so as to safeguard, in Quebec, the scope, the strength and the purpose of such an important association in such an important field as navigation, namely the Association of the St. Laurence river pilots.
Mr. Speaker, I conclude my remarks with this wish: I would like that the confidence referred to by the member for Montmorency could turn into concrete regulations the very legislation now under study in this House.


Mr. Speaker:: The question is on the amendment of the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Barnett). All those in favour of the amendment 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.


Stanley Howard Knowles: On division.


Mr. Speaker:: I declare the motion negatived on division.
Motion (Mr. Barnett) negatived.

June 18, 1971


Donald Campbell Jamieson: that Bill C-246, respecting pilotage, as reported (with amendments) from the Standing Committee on Transport and Communications, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker:: When shall the said bill be read the third time. By leave, now?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Donald Campbell Jamieson: that the bill be read the third time and do pass.


Thomas Miller Bell: Mr. Speaker, before this bill passes I wish to indicate that I believe this is a good measure which carries out the recommendations of the pilotage commission. I have just looked at the recommendations and I believe there were 39. At quick glance, it would appear that most of them have been fulfilled in some way. Changes were made in the committee. I think that was done in a straightforward manner. The officials of the Department of Transport came forward, gave evidence and accepted many of the proposals which were made. I hope this has made it a better bill. Most of the problems centred around the St. Lawrence. Some of us were loathe to become too closely involved in this, but many members from that area had suggestions. We hope the suggestions which are now coming forward will mean new modern navigation safety, that there will be a protection for the honourable profession of pilots and that Canada itself will be in a better position in respect of world shipping.
The pilotage commission makes reference to the fact that there should be an up-to-date review from time to time in respect of the problems relative to pilotage, and I hope this recommendation is carried forward. I hope a close check is made concerning modem changes which might be implemented. The minister has made changes in his department. I am always suspicious that many of these changes which are said to involve decentralization still involve the retention of authority pretty close to the centre of the department. However, regardless of whether or not this is true, this legislation is a move which I think, after a long review of this subject, may have some good results for those of us who are concerned about where we are going in respect of shipping these days. The minister was not too involved in this legislation. He gave his officials carte blanche and most of us felt they did a good job. But I hope he considers this small piece of legislation only a challenge for the future.
I know the minister has a large department. There are many problems. Previous ministers, who shall be nameless now, left many problems in abeyance while dashing around the country worrying about things in no way connected with transport. The minister appears to have some interest in this field, and he would appear to be energetic. I hope he does not feel that the problems
Pilotage Act
concerning shipping are over now. I hope he will take the Darling Keport home with him to Newfoundland on his holidays so that when he comes back in the fall he will have a brand new marine policy. We will be able to write his name into shipping history if he does.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether the minister intends to reply at the third reading stage to the presentation of my hon. friend. If he does, I should like to repeat for him the suggestion I made at the committee stage. While it is true that this legislation provides for the appointment of any authority, there is this whole new field of Hudson Bay and the high Arctic which I believe should be considered as a separate problem. It would seem to me we have not paid much attention to this area. We are just at the beginning of shipping in that area. Because of this, we should be training people specifically for employment in that area. I believe the Canadian people are so concerned with pollution of all kinds that they will be very sceptical about the idea of allowing any foreign ships into that area without a pilot. People who have spent 30 or 40 years in the high Arctic, in the marine field, indicate there is an immense amount to be learned by anyone who would be involved in the navigation of ships in that area, taking into consideration the limitations in respect of navigational aids for the area.
This is a new field in which we will have to have new types of equipment for the detection of icebergs, shoals and so on. During the committee hearings we heard an interesting history of what has been taking place over the last five or six years. I should like to congratulate the committee for the work it has done in this respect. I should also like to congratulate the department for having arrived at this decision, after what I consider to be one hell of a slow start on the part of many departmental officials. So, we have arrived at this stage. I think Canada will have to provide leadership in a totally new field, the Arctic. I would suggest that if we go into this field in the next year we should separate the high Arctic and Hudson Bay because in my opinion within the next few years consideration will be given to a great extension, probably a doubling, of the length of the shipping season into Hudson Bay. I should like to see a Hudson Bay authority established separately so that we could take full advantage of any pressure the government may be able to apply to make it possible for shipments to move to northern Europe from the midwest without the necessity of going through the present process.


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Mr. Speaker, I had not intended to speak at length on third reading, but just so that my hon. friend may be reassured may I say I recognize completely the necessity for some sort of special attention being paid to Arctic waters. The Arctic waters have not by any means been neglected. This House unanimously passed legislation last year having to do with the whole question of pollution and indirectly the control of shipping in the north. A first set of regulations under that act has now been prepared and we will be watching very closely what are the most



PRAIRIE GRAIN ADVANCE PAYMENTS ACT


Otto Emil Lang: that Bill C-239, to amend the Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act, be read the third time and do pass.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I assure you, Mr. Speaker, and the minister that it is not my intention to speak at length on third reading of this bill. It is my hope that the bill will pass this afternoon, particularly since the end of the session is fast approaching and there is still much agricultural legislation to be passed. Therefore, I think it would be wise for the House to allow Bill C-239, dealing with cash advances, to be passed.
This legislation was originally introduced back in 1957. It is remarkable how successful it has been among the Prairie producers. When the bill was submitted to the House the minister said that 51,285 individual advances had been made to producers. There were around 185,000 producers in the three Prairie provinces in what is called the Wheat Board region.
This gives hon. members some idea of the service this legislation has provided to the farmers. A little over 25 per cent of the farmers had availed themselves of the cash advances program at the time the legislation was presented, and the number was twice as high sometimes during the winter months. Losses have been minimal. This proves beyond doubt that the legislation has merit. When one thinks back to the stormy period of its birth, one realizes that the minister of the day and those who brought this legislation forward-the right hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) was then Prime Minister-were responsible for instigating it and ensuring its passage. A number of interesting changes have been made to the legislation and after this bill passes and applications are made under it in the new crop year I am certain that members of the House from the Prairie
regions, as well as farmers throughout the Wheat Board region, will watch the changes to see whether they in fact help the agricultural industry.
The most interesting change made in committee dealt with the repayment of loans and interest rates. Until the bill is passed cash advances are interest free, but when it is passed they will continue to be interest free only if they are repaid in grain and if farmers are not in default in their payments. If they are in default, the minister can charge interest on the loan from the time it was taken out until it is repaid.
This has been an interesting bill to study in light of the committee's work. The bill was debated at length in the House on second reading and the minister complained about the lengthy debate. But because we on this side of the House and other hon. members spoke on the provisions of the bill, the minister himself moved an amendment in committee. This points out the merit of thorough discussion of a bill before it is sent to committee, because undoubtedly when the minister recommends an amendment to the committee it has a much greater chance of being accepted than if an ordinary backbencher moves one as a member of the committee.
Although I do not want to mention it, it is regrettable that when the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Olson) recommended an amendment to another piece of legislation before the agricultural committee, the members of the committee deliberately rejected it. It is regrettable that such things happen and that when the Prime Minister appoints a person to a portfolio he is not of high enough calibre to command the support of the committee handling the minister's legislation; yet this has taken place.
I would like to explain this amendment because I think it is important. If a cash advance is taken, is repaid wholly in grain and repayment is not in default, no interest is charged on the cash advance. If a cash advance is taken and paid mostly in grain, but in order to finalize the payment of the cash advance the farmer repays some of it in cash, the minister recommended to the committee that if the portion that is paid in cash is not higher than $500 no interest would be required on the cash advance. If it is greater than $500, the recipient would be charged interest from the time the loan was taken out until it was fully repaid.
The fact that the minister was prepared to recommend to the committee the $500 clause and the committee was prepared to accept it, is to the credit of the minister and the committee because in many cases when a farmer takes out a cash advance he does so on the basis of his estimate of the amount of grain in his granaries and in some cases he is too optimistic. Sometimes when a farmer harvests the grain and puts it in the granaries he thinks he has a lot of grain, but when he takes it to the elevator and has it weighed he finds there is not as much as he thought. One must take into account the amount lost through dockage and shrinkage.
This $500 cash payment, without affecting the interest rate on the cash advance allows for some computable error in the amount of grain the farmer may have in the

June 18, 1971

granary. But another factor that comes into play is that many grain farmers who are also in the livestock business-and in the livestock business one never knows how much feed will be required for the winter months-have a tendency to keep a portion of their grain as a reserve feed back for the winter months. As a result, they have less grain to sell. This could bring about variants which would require the farmer to pay the balance in cash. Therefore, to my way of thinking this is a great improvement in the bill.
There is another amendment which the committee accepted on the recommendation of the minister. I want to deal with it because it is a very important and significant change from the original legislation. The original legislation in 1957 set out the exact amount that a person could receive in the way of a cash advance, through the elevator company, from the Canadian Wheat Board for grain in storage on the farm. In the original instance a person could collect 50 cents per bushel of wheat, and when he sold the grain the elevator company was supposed to take back half its value to pay the cash advance. That concept has been changed in this legislation. We see here an undetermined cash advance and an undetermined rate of repayment.
In committee the minister proposed an amendment to this clause, which was accepted. The minister should be commended for the fact that the agricultural committee supports him and has confidence in his recommendations. He recommended that the prescribed rate be determined before the commencement of the crop year. This means that in the spring the farmer will know how much cash advance he will receive on grain in storage on his farm. The amount will change from year to year, but he will be given notice. This is an improvement and needed to be written into the bill. Farming today is geared to meet market demand and the farmer needs to know how much money will be available for the various types of grain. If there should happen to be a slow market for a particular commodity, the farmer can then adjust his production.
There is one other matter I should like to deal with, Mr. Speaker. At the moment there are three major pieces of agricultural legislation before the House, Bills C-238, C-239 and C-244. When the House adjourned last June 26 we found ourselves in the same position of having to push agricultural legislation through quickly. We are down to the wire again; as I understand the rules of the House, Monday will be the last full day available for government legislation. These three pieces of legislation appear to be at the low end of the totem pole so far as the priorities of this government are concerned. I remember making the same remarks a year ago with regard to agricultural legislation.
We cannot be asked to turn a blind eye to so many pieces of agricultural legislation. Sooner or later we must examine them. They are of great concern to the farmer and many people whose livelihood is affected. There are
Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act in my office at present 2,500 letters on the subject of Bill C-244 and the chairman of the agricultural committee stated this morning that there is a demand for six to eight groups who wish to appear before the committee on Bill C-238. So there is a great anxiety about some of this legislation. It is a pity that we have come down to the wire again with agricultural legislation apparently having the lowest priority of this government.
We dealt with Bill C-244 in committee rather quickly this morning. On October 29, 1970, the minister announced the proposals that led to the drafting of Bill C-244 and we did not hear anything more about it until last March 15. About a month ago the bill was presented to the House and it went back to committee three weeks ago. We have to hear witnesses on it and pass 37 clauses-


Otto Emil Lang: It was over a month ago.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: I am not going to argue whether it was four weeks ago or five weeks ago, but where was the bill from October 29? When I asked the minister that question this morning in committee, he replied that they had been out trying to sell it across the country, trying to convince the people that it was good legislation.
The letters we are receiving show what the farmers think of it. I said I had 2,500 letters. I have not asked my secretary whether she made an exact count today, but every member of the agricultural committee has received from 2,000 to 5,000 letters, depending on the anxiety in his constituency. The bill should have been presented to the House and to the committee much earlier. It could have been dealt with and then they could have gone out and sold it to the farmers, to agri-business, and so on. The business of leaving agricultural legislation to the last minute has to stop, because it puts an undue strain on the whole agricultural industry.
Bill C-239 proposes to bring rapeseed, flax and rye under the control of the Canadian Wheat Board. The minister knows that the whole of the Wheat Board region is very much concerned about this question, as is the rapeseed industry which is a very sensitive one.
Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I end my remarks with the hope that next June will not find us again trying to cram through agricultural legislation at the last minute. I hope that the minister, who has found far more support in the agricultural committee than has the Minister of Agriculture, can convince his colleagues in the cabinet that agriculture should rate a little higher on the list of priorities in bringing legislation before the House.


Mr. Gordon Riichie (Dauphin):: In rising to speak on Bill C-239, Mr. Speaker, I would remind hon. members and the farmers that this is only one of many pieces of legislation on our plate that could be effective in markedly changing the agricultural situation. I have no great quarrel with the provisions of Bill C-239. I support the principle of the bill; it is tidying up and bringing up to date legislation that has proved valuable in the past and will be necessary in the future. This bill is somewhat more restrictive than its predecessor but in general I

June 18, 1971
Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act
support it as being reasonable and necessary, particularly in regard to the situation of the grain industry in western Canada.
I should like to comment on a few of the problems which this legislation will help solve. It is important to farmers because these are days of opportunity in world food markets and we are hardly getting our share. United States farmers are the pace-setters today; their exports rose to a record $7.2 billion in 1970. That country is looking forward to even greater farm export sales. President Nixon hailed the surging vitality of United States agriculture and pledged to help farmers realize more of its rewards. He set a goal of $10 billion for farm exports from the United States. Since some people think that nearly all United States farm produce benefits from support prices, it is interesting to note that 60 per cent of United States farm income comes from commodities that are not included in price support programs.
United States Secretary of Agriculture C. H. Hardin further emphasized the importance that the United States government places on the value of exports. He boasted that almost one cropland acre out of four in that country is contributing to exports. He pointed out that his country is exporting commodities such as wheat, feed grains and soybeans, areas in which the United States is directly competing with Canada inasmuch as we seek to sell our wheat, barley and rapeseed. He was reported as saying:
Our greatest opportunity for market growth lies in exports. We have the ability to produce with great efficiency, particularly in the major bulkshipped commodities such as wheat, feed grains, and soybeans.
He went on to say that the new agricultural act gives farmers greater flexibility. I ask, what is the situation facing farmers in Canada? In this country problems have arisen in agriculture inasmuch as provinces are worrying about their agricultural position and have brought about the chicken and egg war as well as engaging in other, similar actions. It has become evident that the more populous provinces are worried and are having a hard time keeping out the produce of less populous provinces. This is not good. Ottawa responded with Bill C-176, an inward-looking bill which is not likely to be of any significant help in this area. We shall have to see whether Bill C-176, if passed, will have the effect of bringing about a common market in this country. I was always under the impression that a common market referred to many countries working together and not to the various provinces of one country working together. That was the impression left by the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau). Manitoba, as well as other western provinces, will be affected by this legislation. Mr. Speaker, four or five years can make a great difference in this area.
The Ryerson Press, which is now under foreign control, in 1966 prepared for publication a book to help celebrate the first 100 years of Canada's history. The author wrote an article in the Winnipeg Free Press of Monday, June 14, 1971, which reads in part:
In recent years, thanks partly to massive sales to China, Russia and other countries behind the iron curtain, prairie wheat farmers have become prosperous as never before.
What a difference a few years makes. Ryerson, the oldest continuously operating publishing house in Canada, has fallen into foreign hands. The prairie wheat farmer, beset by government regulation and declining markets, hardly knows which way to turn. He feels trapped in a long, dark tunnel with no sign of light at the end.
Those remarks apply to wheat farmers and other farmers big or small. The article continues:
As one farmer expressed it, "It is getting to the place where I may as well be nothing more than the hired man on my own farm-except that as a hired man I'd be better paid. I have one of the best farms in this community, but I haven't made a cent on my farm operation in the last three years. I'm living on what should be laid aside for depreciation. My property tax bill this year was almost $3,000, $1,900 of it representing the school tax. There is no way in which I can battle forever against such odds.''
The bill before us will go some way in relieving that situation but it will not solve the problem. The article then reads:
The two rays of light in a dark situation are that, with Bill C-176 apparently headed for the discard, traditional cattle markets will stay open-and there is some hope of a greater movement of wheat. But even the latter is small comfort. More than one farmer has wheat still on hand that he harvested four years ago. Increased quotas this year may alleviate his predicament but it will not solve his long-range problem.
It seems to me that farmers in Manitoba and western Canada generally have legitimate gripes and axes to grind. Only three years ago our farmers were told to grow all the wheat they could because there was an unlimited market for it. The farmers are bitter about the Lower Inventory for Tomorrow, or Lift program of last year which cut down wheat acreage but which was less than beneficial financially to farmers. Indeed, we are passing the legislation now before the House in order to help the farmer. He is critical of what he considers lack of aggressive selling policy on the part of the Wheat Board. He distrusts what the Free Press has called the "Ottoman empire of Otto Lang" and feels plagued by government interference and regulations in the entire conduct of the wheat industry. I have spoken of some of the things which affect wheat farmers in Manitoba as well as farmers in other parts of the Prairies.
According to figures relating to the agricultural industry of Manitoba, in 1968 the farmers' cash income was $365 million. In 1969 it had declined to $351 million and in 1970 it was $336 million, a drop of $29 million over a period of three years. We get the same picture from an examination of realized net income. This stood at $114 million in 1968, at $109 million in 1969 and at $94 million in 1970. There we see that over the same period farm income dropped by about $20 million. Farmers whose income has not increased or whose income has decreased are still faced with ever-increasing costs; prices have not stood still. The same sort of thing has happened all over Canada. Taxes and equipment costs continue to rise. As a result there is extreme dissatisfaction in the rural areas of western Canada.
I will support this bill as being a small measure in the right direction but it is in no way a complete answer to our problems. Further legislation, it is hoped, will be

June 18, 1971

introduced to improve it. However, I find the legislation valuable at this time.


William Arnold Peters: May I call it four o'clock, Mr. Speaker?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. It being four o'clock, the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely, notices of motions, public bills and private bills.


Mr. Forest:: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I ask the unanimous consent of the House for notice of motion No. 43 which stands in my name on the order paper to be given preference and discussed ahead of other motions. There have been discussions among the House leaders of the parties and I understand there would be general agreement to accept the motion after a few brief remarks on my part and no further debate.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Hon. members have heard the request of the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Forest). Is it agreed that motion No. 43 be considered first at this time.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



PRIVATE MEMBERS' MOTIONS


Yves Forest: That, in the opinion of this House, the Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization should consider the expediency of amending the Standing Orders so as to provide an opportunity for debate in the House, from time to time, of the activities and reports thereon of official Canadian Parliamentary Associations.
He said: Mr. Speaker, may I first thank hon. members of the House for consenting to my motion being called first. I especially wish to thank the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond-Delta (Mr. Goode) whose motion is first on the list. I assure him that my remarks will be brief.
The purpose of this motion is to ask the Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization to consider amending our Standing Orders to provide for debate in this House on the reports and activities of official Canadian parliamentary associations and, if the committee so decides, to recommend to the House an appropriate time, either private members' hour or at some other time, in which to consider these matters. As chairman of the Canadian group of the IPU I was requested at the last general meeting by members of all parties to present this motion. I am convinced it also has the endorsement of other parliamentary associations.
Non-Medical Drug Abuse Treatment Centres [Translation]
As we know, Mr. Speaker, most of the members here are members of one or more organizations and a good number take an active part in the international conferences or joint meetings of the various organizations. I believe it would be very useful not only for hon. members but for the public in general to know more about the role, the purposes, the achievements and activities of those organizations.
I do not intend to say more at this point, because there seems to be a general consensus on this motion that the House would like to be considered by the Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization, which has many experienced members like the hon. members for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), Edmonton West (Mr. Lambert) and others. I hope they will agree with such an opinion and make the appropriate recommendation to the House.
I thank hon. members for the general support they will want to give this motion.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, we commend the hon. member for bringing in this motion. We are happy to support it. Those of us on the committee to which the motion refers will do our best to bring in a favourable report.


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, I join the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles). This is an indication of parliamentary co-operation. By the same token, I hope that the next time we are considering private members' public bills, item No. 250 in my name, which received the blessing of the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) this morning, will be given priority and accepted, so that the practice of the government in not disclosing information will be curbed.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
M!r. Deputy Speaker: It is the understanding of the
Chair-hon. members will correct me if I am wrong____
that it is the intention of the mover of the motion that this matter be referred to the Standing Committee on Procedure and Organization. It is so ordered.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.


Mr. Tom H. Goode (Burnaby-Richmond-Delia) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, the government should consider the advisability of establishing a system of regional drug treatment centres and co-ordination for a region or province and which would be capable of providing treatment for drug dependency, of co-ordinating the activities of treatment satel-

June 18, 1971
Non-Medical Drug Abuse Treatment Centres
lites or subclinics, and oi working with other social and governmental agencies to provide a non-punitive treatment approach to the drug abuse problem.
He said: Mr. Speaker, it has become a cliche to say that ours is a drug-oriented society: the fact is well known. Every day people rely on some type of drug, whether it be a sleeping pill, a cigarette, a scotch and soda, a teaspoon of cough medicine or a couple of aspirins, in order to function. The number of Canadians using drugs for non-medical purposes has reached an alarming level and there is every indication that it is on the increase.
Consider, if you will, Mr. Speaker, the following statistics beginning with the drug that continues to present the most serious problem-alcohol. Since 1951 alcoholism has increased by almost 60 per cent while per capita consumption of alcohol has increased by approximately 25 per cent. The Le Dain commission records that while in 1951 there were 117,685 convictions for offences involving alcohol, by 1966 this figure had risen to 302,278, an increase of more than 150 per cent. These convictions accounted for a total of between 8.5 per cent and 6.3 per cent of convictions for all crimes in Canada during those years.
What about narcotics? Although the opiate narcotic addict population has declined in proportion to the population as a whole, the number of young narcotic addicts rose from 1 per cent in 1968 to 4 per cent in 1970. Convictions for possession of heroin increased from 310 in 1969 to 383 in 1970, while the number of convictions for trafficking in heroin jumped from 89 in 1969 to 180 in 1970. With regard to so-called restricted drugs such as LSD, MDA and DMT, we again find that usage is up. For instance, on the basis of convictions it can be fairly accurately assumed that LSD use almost trippled in Canada between the years 1968 and 1970.
The story is much the same in the category known as controlled drugs. The increase in the abuse of amphetamines is of major concern today, and cases of barbiturate overdoses are up sharply. In 1967 there were 478 reported barbiturate poisoning cases compared to 197 in 1961. Couple these figures with the 973 minor tranquillizer poisoning cases in 1969, compared to a total of 63 cases in 1961, and the trend is brought sharply into focus.
As for marijuana, presently the most controversial drug, determining the extent of its use is complicated by the fact that some users who believe they have smoked marijuana have, in reality, smoked substances. However, it has been estimated that in 1970, 18.3 per cent of the Canadian population used marijuana compared to 6.7 per cent in 1968. Perhaps even more significant are the figures released earlier this month which indicate that convictions for possession totalled 5,399 last year compared with a low of 11 in 1962. The 1970 figure represents an increase of 3,086 from the previous year. From the foregoing statistics, Mr. Speaker, it becomes apparent that in relative terms at least it is difficult to overstate the gravity of the drug abuse problem in Canada today. It is a serious problem and has been approached as such
by this government which, quite rightly I believe, has refused to be swayed by extremists at either end of the spectrum.
We all await with interest and hope the final report of the Le Dain commission. The sense of urgency present in the recommendations of its interim report was echoed late last January by the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Munro) with the announcement of a significant new federal program to combat drug abuse. I am proposing today that the government consider an extension of that very valuable program by setting up a system of regional drug treatment centres to provide a non-punitive treatment approach, present reliable information and co-ordinate the activities of treatment satellites or subclinics. This would be a logical extension of the present program.
As I see them, these regional centres, which would not necessarily have to be administered by the government itself, would be staffed by a multidisciplinary group of medical specialists, social workers and non-professional youth workers. The regional centres would interact with and exercise general supervision over innovative services operated at the municipal level. I foresee such local services having a great deal of participation from community groups and young people themselves.
e (4:10p.m.)
The active involvement of empathetic, sensitive young persons in both the regional and local treatment centres would be extremely desirable if the younger drug users are to be helped. Far too often the younger user is reluctant to seek help from the established hospital system and thus is only given care at a very extreme stage of illness. This reluctance stems partly from his fear of being reported to the police by the hospital authorities and partly from the well known negative attitude of many hospital staff members toward drug users.
Clinics locally operated within a guiding framework laid down by the regional treatment centres would be the solution to this very real and practical problem. This innovative services approach has worked well in Montreal which is fortunate enough to be reasonably well supplied with youth clinics and street agencies. In fact, it has worked so well that the Montreal police now usually take young people suffering bad trips to one of the youth clinics rather than to the emergency department of a hospital.
It would be important to ensure that the regional treatment centres and their local clinics operate on a nonpunitive basis with no suggestion that they are acting as just another branch of a law enforcement network. However, consideration should be given to making it possible for the courts to use the centres as rehabilitation clinics, referring drug offenders to the regional centres rather than imposing fines or jail sentences which serve little useful purpose either for the individual or for society as a whole. The centres would handle each case individually, suggesting to the user the best program for rehabilitation. Only by exposing the person to the facts about drug

June 18, 1971

abuse and showing him the possibility of functioning independently of drugs can we hope for a well adjusted human being. Experience has shown that treating him as a criminal is likely to only reinforce his drug-taking habit.
I have tried in this brief presentation this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, to demonstrate that the drug abuse problem in Canada is increasing dramatically and to show how I believe the existing federal fight against drug abuse should be expanded to meet the growing threat to the mental and physical well-being of our nation. Admittedly, the program I am proposing is an ambitious one. It is as ambitious as the problem is serious. I hope the House will agree with me that the plan should receive favourable consideration.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Maurice Foster (Algoma):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to congratulate my hon. friend from Burnaby-Rich-mond-Delta (Mr. Goode) for having placed this motion on the order paper recommending that the government should consider establishing a system of regional drug treatment centres.
It seems to me my hon. friend is anticipating some of the recommendations of the Le Dain commission whose next report is expected later this year. Drug use is increasing, as the hon. member has shown us by the statistics he quoted, and this is causing concern to regulatory bodies, to federal narcotic agents, to those in our teaching institutions, in our colleges and universities and, most of all perhaps, to parents who in most cases have no idea how to cope with this situation among young people. Most important of all, it is of concern to the young people themselves.
The motion raises the question of how to proceed when attempting to define programs to combat non-medical drug use in ways other than by punitive measures. We are probably moving at this time from an era when drug use was regarded solely as a manifestation of criminal behaviour to one where we try to understand the underlying motives for such use and attempt to help the person involved. In some senses there are parallels to the way in which we ceased to regard alcoholism as deviate behaviour and began to treat it as an illness and alcoholics as sick people in need of help and treatment. There are, I am sure, many lessons we can learn from our experience with alcohol, both positive lessons of useful approaches to take and negative ones of pitfalls to avoid.
The department of health is giving considerable thought, first to the most effective ways in which it can use presently available resources to reduce the dimensions of the problems involved in non-medical drug use and, secondly, to ways in which new resources can be marshalled. Indeed, one of the terms of reference of the commission of inquiry into the non-medical use of drugs was:
To inquire into and recommend with respect to ways or means by which the federal government can act, alone or in its relations with government at other levels, in the reduction of the *dimensions of the problems involved in such use.
Non-Medical Drug Abuse Treatment Centres
So the first point I feel I must make is to caution against precipitate and hasty action before a thorough examination has been made of both treatment programs currently available here in Canada and abroad, and also of the feasibility of using compulsory treatment. In the interim report of the commission of inquiry into the non-medical use of drugs little stress was laid on treatment and other social responses to the phenomenon of non-medical drug use. Rather, the report was primarily concerned with a statement of the issues and applicable principles, with some specific recommendations in the field of research, drug analysis, information and law. In the area of treatment and supportive services the commission made certain recommendations of a general nature but said, more specifically:
In the coming year the commission intends to examine in detail both the concept of psychological dependence and the treatment programs which have evolved, both in Canada and abroad.
Later it said:
The commission recognizes that one of its major tasks in the preparation of its final report will be a thorough examination of the proposals for legislation which would result in compulsory treatment of heavy chronic drug users.
Thus, I wonder if any good purpose would be served in committing ourselves at this juncture to policies which may be invalidated by the further observations of Mr. Gerald Le Dain and the commission.
The concept of treatment means adopting the attitude that we have to concern ourselves with cures for those who have encountered problems as a result of their drug use. This is, sadly, a fact of life today because those who are dependent on drugs and would like to resume a meaningful role in society find many difficulties and little help. We must not let this distort our priorities, however. Our first priority must be to find ways of preventing the problems from arising. Legal sanctions will have an important role to play here, although we must be constantly prepared to examine the relevant acts and regulations so that we are always sure of what we are attempting to control and why.
In the final analysis, however, we have to rely on the good sense of young people to make wise decisions for themselves in their individual attitudes toward drug use. To this end the Department of National Health and Welfare established this summer a drug abuse education unit which is disseminating information both in the form of pamphlets and by speaking to groups. This information is factual in nature and it is hoped that the presentation of such facts to young people will aid them to develop responsible positions on drug use.
However, while most surveys of drug use have studied youthful drug users, we are slowly becoming aware that we cannot concentrate solely on young people. We know, for example, that some of the largest selling drugs in Canada today are minor tranquillizers and we can guess that most of these are prescribed for adults. A recently survey by Mrs. Ruth Cooperstock and Mrs. Sims of the Addiction Research Foundation of Ontario examined the

June 18, 1971
Non-Medical Drug Abuse Treatment Centres extent to which mood-modifying drugs are being prescribed in metropolitan Toronto. They found that 24 per cent of all prescriptions are for mood-modifying drugs

tranquillizers, stimulants and depressants-and that on any given day 7 per cent of the population 15 years of age and older were taking such drugs legally.
A great deal of information was produced and I hope that similar future surveys will give us deeper insights into this largely unknown area of adult drug use. How many of these people for whom such drugs are being prescribed are finding difficulties with their use? How many are building up tolerance and finding ways and means to increase the dose above that stated by their physician? How many are anxious to cut down on their use but don't know how to do it or where to turn for help? We need to get information to adults to help those who have such problems and to help others avoid them.
Adults need information too, not only to help them assess their own drug problems but to help them understand why their own children might turn to drugs in response to the many stresses of modern life. Again, teachers need information if they are to discuss drugs and drug problems with any degree of credibility with young people of some sophistication in this area. Not only the lay public needs information, however. Many medical practitioners are unaware of the dangers of overprescribing these potent drugs; many hospitals are unable to cope with emergencies arising from drug abuse. Thus, two grants of $15,000 were given to the Canadian Hospital Association to assist in planning and implementing a symposium which was held in February in Montreal. At this symposium those who have learned about drug problems the hard way, by practical experience, passed on to those who have yet to face such crises the benefit of their experience and expertise.
The drug scene is, however, not static. New groups are turning to drugs for new reasons. Research is constantly giving us new insights into the mode of action of drugs and the potential hazards of drug use. Without doubt, the number of different mood-modifying drugs will continue to grow. Information dissemination must, therefore, be the handmaiden of research and data retrieval. Thus, the Department of National Health and Welfare made another move in recent weeks with the appointment of a co-ordinator to oversee the information and research programs of the department. He will make available funds to suitable applicants for research into many of the vexing questions that have to be answered if we are to make rational judgments on drug use. He will himself suggest areas of priority for research if suitable programs are not forthcoming. The information which results from these research programs and from research elsewhere in the world will then be processed and made available in forms suitable for various client groups such as educators, parents, young people, medical and paramedical practioners.
This, briefly, is what is already being done to help check and slow down the move toward wider non-medical use of mood-modifying drugs. The problem still remains, however, that we already have casualties in our society
as a result of drug use and we can anticipate that their numbers will increase unless preventive measures begin soon to show an effect on general, over-all use. Without being pessimistic, I cannot see that we have yet found the preventive measures which will have a noticeable affect on non-medical drug use. The latest survey of student drug use in metropolitan Toronto indicates a continued and sharp increase in drug use of a number of types. I am sure that you have all read reports of this survey-virtually a tripling of the number of students using marijuana, LSD and opiates during the past two years. Obviously, we still have cause for concern; obviously, we must continue and intensify our efforts to combat the problem.
Let us, however, keep a sense of perspective. Most people who use alcohol are able to control that use and only a minority, albeit a sizeable minority, become deeply involved and find their use of alcohol to be uncontrollable. We appear to have a similar situation with drug use. We must be careful not to move from the old simplification of treating all drugs use as criminal delinquent behavior to a new one of assuming that all drug use is symptomatic of serious underlying emotional and mental disorders.
It is becoming fashionable to talk of drugs as "the symptom" and not "the problem", so fashionable that it is becoming almost a cliche. We have to learn, rather, to treat the drug user as an individual and to understand that different drugs have differing degrees of hazard. The young person who tries marijuana once is probably not in need of any treatment of the kind proposed by the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond-Delta, and it would be useless to try to force him into an institutional setting to be treated for a condition which does not exist. On the other hand, a minority of marijuana users are finding problems with the drug. They find themselves unable to cope efficiently with their studies or work, and they find themselves being increasingly dependent on the drug whenever stressful situations arise. They may want help but do not know where to find it, just as many tobacco smokers want help but do not know where to go for it. I suggest that such people need a very different kind of treatment from the treatment of a heavy, chronic heroin or speed user.
Much drug use appears to be attribuable to boredom, to peer group pressures, to frustration with our society and its institutions and, perhaps most commonly, merely to a desire for experience. We cannot, therefore, view all drug use as necessarily demanding treatment. We cannot, furthermore, view the drug problem as one problem requiring one approach merely because we have the common denominator of the drug. We must, rather, learn to see it as a human problem, defined by the motivations, personalities and behaviour of people as individuals. Dr. Helen Nowlis, author of "Drugs on the College Campus" and a long-time researcher in the field argues in this way:
There are two separate drug problems. One has to do with drugs as pharmacological substances and the other has to do with people, physiologically, psychologically, socially and philosophically defined, people who use drugs, who have attitudes opinions, and beliefs about drugs and make judgments about

June 18, 1971

drugs, drug use and drug users. Much of our difficulty has arisen because of failure to separate the two problems.
We must explore, therefore, a number of levels of approach to deal with a number of different types of people. The hon. member's motion refers to that minority of drug users who can be defined as chronic users. Such people may need the long-term, live-in type of facility which can help them not only to overcome their physical and/or psychological dependency on drugs but which can also help them to understand their own motivation for resorting to the drug whenever problems appear in this lives. Facilities of this kind already exist, mainly of course in the United States where the problem of chronic drug use has so far reached much larger proportions than it has here. Facilities such as Project Ossington in Toronto, as Daytop Village and Odyssey House in New York, and Synanon in California have had much experience and can teach us a great deal.
One lesson is, I think, that we must not be bureaucratic and limited in our approach, but must be prepared to be sufficiently flexible so that institutions can change with changing social conditions. We have to accept that many of the institutions can change with changing social conditions. We have to accept that many of the institutions we will be called upon the support will be innovative and will be hard to judge and assess by more conventional yardsticks. Often, a treatment facility will depend heavily on the personality, charm or charisma of one person. If this person is able to get results we should be prepared to support him even though he may not conform to our bureaucracy as well as more "establishment" organizations.
Another lesson is that we can only help those who want to be helped. All the successful projects are based on this premise. Often, the prospective applicant is required to call the organization several times before being allowed to enter the program. Some are tired of the life they are leading and of their slavery to drugs, others apply as a condition of probation by the courts. We must be careful, too, not to set up compulsory treatment centres merely as a ruse to remove what we perceive to be undesirable people from society.
Even then, given the motivation on the part of the drug user and the availability of suitable long-term facilities, we would still have to face the problem of the re-entry phase. Many young people who have become deeply involved with drugs have done so in their late teens at a particularly crucial time of their lives. They are just not equipped, educationally or vocationally, to get back into society. We have to look, therefore, to training or retraining as an integral part of any treatment scheme.
The questions of where drug treatment programs should be located and how they should be developed have also to be answered. Should we form highly specialized drug treatment centres which are also responsible for research and clinical evaluation, or should we, rather,
Non-Medical Drug Abuse Treatment Centres allow treatment facilities to grow up where they are needed as grassroots movements and then give financial and other support as necessary? The latter approach has, I think, much merit if we are anxious to avoid bureaucratic, inflexible organizations unable to change and innovate in response to changing social conditions and drug use patterns.
In summary, therefore, I have three points to make. First, we must be careful not to create a number of new institutions which lack effectiveness because of the inflexibility and inability to change with changing conditions. Second, we need in-depth studies of what is already available before proceeding, and since we already have a commission of inquiry working in this area it would be premature to act before their final report is tabled. Third, we must realize that treatment may only supply an answer for a small segment of the drug using population, those involved in heavy, chronic use. The great majority of young people will need factual information to help them make wise decisions and also the opportunity for meaningful positive alternatives so that they have better things to occupy them than resorting to drug use.


William Arnold Peters: Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond-Delta (Mr. Goode) for bringing forward this motion. I suggest it is very timely and I am surprised that it would not be accepted by the government without question. It is very easy for backbenchers to present forward-looking proposals in an attempt to deal with social changes, but surely the government has a responsibility in this regard. This kind of motion is indicative of practical solutions to a major problem in our changing social climate, particularly among our young people. The government should at least consider such motions and agree to refer them to a committee for further study.
The idea of establishing drug centres across Canada to co-ordinate treatment and the supply of information in various regions is one that deserves the support of all Canadians. The two hon. members who have spoken drew a parallel in respect of alcohol, smoking and drug use, but they did not refer to the social implications. I do not remember when smoking became a fad, but I do remember when the use of alcohol was considered to be a social stigma. No one could drink legally except for medicinal purposes.
In those days a doctor would make out a prescription and the individual would walk across the street and purchase a bottle of alcohol. Today a number of addicts go to the doctor, obtain a prescription and then walk across the street to the drug store to have it filled. Many people in the professions and in business are using drugs today. They are affluent individuals and can afford to purchase drugs. This is similar to the purchase of alcohol earlier and apparently it does not raise the eyebrows of people who are aware of our social climate.
It was pointed out by the Le Dain commission that even heroin is not a bad drug when used under certain condi-

June 18, 1971
Non-Medical Drug Abuse Treatment Centres tions. I consider this to be one of the worst drugs, but when a doctor prescribes its use individuals can use it over long periods of time without any serious mental or physical difficulty. I suggest there is a problem in the use of drugs similar to the problem which can be created by the use of alcohol. Many people when considering the use of drugs do not realize that young people might like to use them. These young people do not feel there is anything wrong with drug use. The use of alcohol can be just as serious.


An hon. Member:: I beg your pardon?


William Arnold Peters: The hon. member's comment proves my point. People no longer believe the use of alcohol is bad, but if you take a large concentration of alcohol into your system it will prove fatal. I think it is fatal to have a 3 per cent blood-alcohol content. The hon. member is surprised by this, but let me suggest that the people of our society have decided they like to drink. One would not think of inviting half a dozen neighbours in for the evemng and serve them tea. I suggest if you did this your neighbours would not come back a second time. It would also indicate that you had never been to their homes, because then you would know the normal pattern is to serve alcoholic beverages.
Mr. O'Leary of the United States believes you can produce an acceptable social climate by the use of LSD. I do not accept that theory. If you produce that kind of effect through the use of hallucinogenic drugs you are in trouble.
We know that most people who experiment with drugs try marijuana. I believe it would be very difficult for anyone to provide medical evidence to indicate that marijuana is any more serious than cigarettes or alcohol. It probably does not produce any bad effect unless one takes too much of it. Anyone who has studied the problems of emphysema or any other lung disease will be aware that anything put into the lungs other than clean air is bad for the lungs. I suggest, however, that marijuana probably is not much worse than any of the social drugs almost everyone uses. It certainly is not any worse than tobacco or alcohol. We regulate those products. The government inspects tobacco.
We are aware of what is happening in many areas. In my own area I have spoken to people who over a long period of time have used marijuana and, I believe, other drugs as well. They indicate they would consider themselves crazy to use the marijuana sold in that area because it is laced with half a dozen impurities. One of the impurities which has been turned up in much of the marijuana used today is strychnine. I do not think anyone would suggest that strychnine is in any form a social drug. We say in a social sense that drugs which are bad cannot be allowed, and therefore we do not do anything about the situation.
I believe 40 per cent or 50 per cent of the people in our society use drugs, although not in the sense the hon.
member for Burnaby-Richmond-Delta indicated. These people use aspirin, sleeping tablets, wake-up tablets and all sorts of drugs, some of which they know the purpose of and others they do not. There are drugs to sleep and to wake up. Some of them are not even prescribed drugs. So we have developed a social acceptance of some drugs. Fortunately, those drugs usually are controlled as to impurities. However, we allow young people of seven, eight, and nine years of age to buy marijuana simply because we say the sale of it is illegal and does not exist. Since we say it does not exist, obviously we cannot have inspectors check it for impurities.
I suggest that if we had treatment centres as envisaged in this motion they would be able to find out one simple thing. I am sure they would find that many people who go to hospital as a result of a bad trip or an overdose of drugs find that the potency of these drugs is different from time to time and they really do not know what is the proper usage of the drug they have taken.
Mr. Speaker, it seems to me society should soon make up its mind. Prohibition is no good; it does not work. Control may work. However, we have not tried control. Other countries have. In England, if a person should be addicted to cocaine, heroin or any of the so-called hard drugs he can register as an addict and obtain a supply of the drug. The price is reasonable. In conjunction with any kind of drug, here we have the criminal element because a lot of money can be made in its distribution.
If we had treatment centres, I suggest that when the medical evidence is provided by them we would find that the impurities and additives which are being passed around in the trade are so dangerous that it is absolutely necessary that they be controlled. The first thing that is necessary in order to control this situation is to have a social sense of the problem. There were some people who did not like to drink prior to prohibition days.
I for one expect many people drank during the prohibition period who had never taken a drink before and probably have never taken a drink since. They probably drank during prohibition because it was illegal and this added an additional kick to whatever kick they received from alcohol. It was stupid even to consider prohibition. One reason it was stupid is that it is not very difficult to make moonshine. It is not very difficult to make a still and develop alcohol. In respect of the hallucinogenic drugs now being used, I am told that children who take chemistry in high school can go in their own basement and with $5 worth of equipment can turn out some kind of hallucinogenic drugs, impurities and all. If this is so, the parents had better not say that their kids do not use drugs. They had better not say it is only everybody else's kids who use drugs. They should consider the possibility that their children may be using drugs. If they look at the situation fairly and squarely they should suggest that Parliament get busy and bring in controls that would at least protect their children against the deaths now being suffered in many instances not so much because of the drug but, rather the impurities in it.
I congratulate the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond-Delta on introducing this subject. I commend his

June 18, 1971

motion to his government. I suggest that probably more good ideas are emitted from the backbenches of all parties in this House than from the frontbenches. I believe it would behoove Parliament in general to have a better way of accepting a proposition such as this, to which I am sure no person would object unless they believe the health and development of our young people are not worth the expense of establishing a large number of treatment centres that would provide the population with control and the young people with the assistance they so desperately need.
Mr. Speaker, drugs are probably with us to stay. It is not good enough to say it was not so in father's day and therefore we do not have to consider the problem today. It is wise to look at it and at some of the propositions being put forward by young people. If this is done and receives the kind of publicity and support it should by organizations concerned in this field, then I am very hopeful that within a year or so we will see this kind of centre being established throughout Canada for our young people.
tTranslation]


Mr. Gaston Isabelle (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to join those of my colleagues who have congratulated the hon. member for Burnaby-Richmond-Delta (Mr. Goode) for the very good motion he presented to the House. And, like the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters), I want to tell him that good ideas sometimes come from those who do not have the opportunity to be heard as often as others in the House. He may rest assured, however, that what he has said in his motion will be borne in mind by the Department of National Health and Welfare, with regard to the non-medical use of medicines and drugs.
We have heard today a kind of parallel or confrontation-if I may use these terms-on what is or should be the use of alcoholic beverages compared to the non-medical use of drugs. It would be interesting, I believe, to have a debate some day on this important issue which, in my view, as has already been mentioned by the hon. member for Timiskaming, will be with us for a long time.
It is true, however, that according to the motion of our friend from Burnaby-Richmond-Delta, treatment is a solution to the drug problem. In my opinion, this is only partially true, as it would solve only a small part of the problem caused by drugs in Canada.
If we felt that all young people guilty of drug abuse should undergo medical treatment, we would have found a medical solution to boredom, frustration, mental illness as well as to existing physical and affective problems. However, drug abuse may, to a certain extent, be checked by treatment, and we are already working on that. We have considered the following: intervention at the time of the crisis caused by abusive use of certain drugs for non medical purposes and long term rehabilitation.
Non-Medical Drug Abuse Treatment Centres
In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, it is extremely important that we vary the treatment approach for these sick people.
The first one requires immediate medical attention for physical and emotional troubles. There are in Canada centres for the care of critical cases, though they are not in sufficient number-I do not doubt it-since they have been existing only for six years. They have generally beenn established through the initiative of young people, with very limited financial support drawn mainly from local community funds.
Ordinarily, they are free, although a vrey small fee might be asked. This is one of the main features of these centres, especially since they attend, partially at least, to young people on the move who have very little money. In these centres, the atmosphere is quite relaxed, which seems necessary for the type of work that is done there. Along with the youths who are to be found in the centres, there is always voluntary professional personnel available on call. Such personnel may include health officials, doctors, lawyers, psychiatrists, and many others.
It is important to understand that acute reactions to drugs are not the only cases treated in these centres. Other types of medical services are provided, in particular for venereal diseases, hepatitis-a common illness among those who travel extensively-torn skin from walking barefoot as well as fractures.
Some centres are helping people by distributing clothes, vitamins and contraceptives, and by giving advice, for instance, on locally available jobs and by giving legal advice and information on birth control. For example, during the summer of 1970, drug abuse cases ranked only eighth among all cases treated in a clinic in Ottawa.
People often ask why treatment centres should be established in emergency cases when there are hospitals. Unfortunately, the problems of chronic drug use cannot always be solved in general hospitals. For instance, you always have to wait a long time before being admitted into emergency rooms, but drugs effects must be treated without delay.
Moreover, hospitalization cards and some identification are required in hospitals. For one reason or another, many young people do not carry them around. One must nevertheless admit that some hospitals do change their emergency services in order to face problems such as these.
Even the atmosphere of efficiency which normally exists in a hospital becomes a problem in itself since it appears as something altogether unknown to these young people who come in to be treated for negative reactions to drugs. They may easily mistake reality for the confused images which they feel and see when they are under the influence of drugs and this is why, as I said earlier, control centers in critical cases insist on creating an atmosphere of relative relaxation which is vital.
Negative reactions to drugs may get to be dangerous and this is why an effort should be made to bring those people under the influence of drugs back to reality, or to use a familiar phrase, to bring them back to earth. This

June 18, 1971
The Budget-Mr. Benson
can be achieved, generally, by following two methods: either by administering chimiotherapy, either through the use of tranquilizers or by talking with the patient. Most people working in this field seem to prefer the latter method, which involves personal, intense, warm communication between the patient and the social worker. Usually, hospital personnel do not have time to engage in this kind of therapy in a large hospital.
A significant part of the staff in treatment centres works on a voluntary basis so that salaries are not a major cost component. This permits the hiring of large staffs which help ensure that any person applying to these centres receives immediate help. Usually, people working in these centres can deal with most bad experiences with drugs by talking with the patient, which does not seem to require very sophisticated professional training. This way, the professional staff can concentate on more difficult cases and have more time to study specific cases that should be referred to other institutions. These centres therefore offer a most useful service and their operating costs are small. The staff of most of these centres seem to take their responsibilities very seriously and it is extremely useful to the community.
However, before taking decisions, we must study what is already available in order to establish the best possible programs. Among the services which can be considered are the following: the Youth Centre in Montreal, the Insight-Drug Aid in Fredericton, the Toronto Free Youth Clinic, Digger House in Halifax, Cool Aid in Vancouver. Those are but a few examples. Many others should be studied, and we have the impression that our young people should play an important role in their development, which they will undoubtedly do.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Honey):: Order, please. The hour appointed for the consideration of private members' business has now expired.

Pursuant to the order made on Friday, May 28, 1971, this sitting is suspended until 5.10 p.m. when the bells will be rung.
At 5 p.m. the sitting was suspended.



SITTING RESUMED

[Stage Direction]
The House resumed at 5.16 p.m.


Hon. E. J. Benson (Minister of Finance) moved:: That this House approve in general the budgetary policy of the government.
He said: This is an important and historic occasion. It is the birthday of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles).


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Edgar John Benson: And it is the birthday of the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch).


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Edgar John Benson: In order to celebrate this occasion, I should like to invite them to wear a rose as I am doing. It is also an historic occasion in that nine years ago today many of us were elected to Parliament. It is also the anniversary of the battle of Waterloo-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Edgar John Benson: -and the declaration of war by the United States on Britain in 1812. It is an historic occasion as well, Mr. Speaker, because after almost a decade of study and public debate, we are now entering the final phase of the most comprehensive tax reform undertaken since the income tax system was begun in 1917. The legislation Parliament will be asked to approve this year will provide the framework for our income tax system for many years to come.
My budget presentation this evening will be somewhat longer than usual. This is because it is my intention not only to provide a broad outline of the tax reform we propose for Canada, but to discuss the economic situation and the fiscal policies appropriate in present circumstances.
The first step down the long road of tax reform was taken in 1962 by the former Conservative government. In response to a growing public demand for major revision of the tax system, the government of the day appointed the Royal Commission on Taxation, under the chairmanship of the late Kenneth Carter. In the spring of 1967, the commissioners published their report recommending sweeping changes in the system.
Shortly afterwards my predecessor as Minister of Finance, the member for Eglinton, invited submissions from the public on the commission's report. Following a widespread public discussion the government tabled the White Paper on tax reform in November, 1969.
The government has considered the hundreds of submissions from organized groups in our society and the thousands of thoughtful letters from individual taxpayers.
The work of the two parliamentary committees was extremely important to the White Paper process. The members of the Commons Committee of Finance Trade and Economic Affairs were able to assess not only the submissions from organized groups but as elected Members of Parliament were able to assess public opinion among their constituents. Both committees held lengthy hearings in Ottawa. The Commons committee also conducted hearings in provincial capitals.
The provinces, too, have put a great deal of time and effort into studying the federal proposals. For the first time they were invited to comment upon and criticize proposals for changing the tax system and alternatives were put forward. After the White Paper was published,
June 18, 1971

I met with provincial ministers many times on the subject of tax reform. It was also discussed at meetings of first ministers. Many of the provincial representations are reflected in the bill.
The White Paper process was an important step in the evolution of participatory democracy in Canada. Until now, it has been traditional for governments to implement tax policy by introducing legislation directly into this House. In this instance the government chose to adopt a different approach. This was done because the government believed that a fundamental reform of the existing tax system was necessary and that all Canadians should participate in the development of this reform. The government chose to express in a White Paper its view of what a tax system ought to be, and invited all Canadians and all levels of government to join in the discussion. As I have said many times, the White Paper reflected the government's view, but the government was not wedded to its proposals; rather, it was willing and ready to respond to suggestions for improvement, provided that the basic objectives of tax reform were maintained.
At the beginning of the debate, the government was able to participate openly in the dialogue. As the time for decision drew nearer, the traditions of budget secrecy forced us to limit more and more the public expressions of our views. However, throughout the entire process, we listened carefully to the constructive advice received from citizens, organizations and other levels of government.
The White Paper process was, Mr. Speaker, of great value. In the end, the federal government must assume its responsibility to recommend to Parliament the legislation which, in its judgment, will best serve the interest of Canadians. However, through the process of debate and discussion, it has been possible to develop a program of tax reform which not only meets the needs of Canada but also reflects the views of Canadians.
The Goals of Reform
Mr. Speaker, the legislation I am introducing this evening represents a basic reform of our income tax system. To properly evaluate these proposals it is important that we have a clear view of what a good tax system ought to be.
A tax system must be sensitive to the economic and social needs of this country. It must not stand in the way of steady and continuous growth and economic prosperity. In some cases, it must do more-it must stimulate sectors of our economy which need incentive.
A tax system must distribute the tax burden in an equitable manner, based upon ability to pay. Furthermore, it must not only be fair; it must be seen to be fair. As stated in the White Paper, fairness in taxation implies two principles. First, it means that people in similar circumstances should accept similar shares of the tax load. Secondly, it means that people with higher incomes should be expected to pay in taxes a larger share of their incomes than persons with lower incomes.
The Budget-Mr. Benson
To be acceptable to all citizens, a tax system must have as few loopholes as possible. Voluntary compliance cannot be maintained if it is apparent that special groups of taxpayers are able to avoid paying their fair share of the burden.
A good tax system must lend itself to efficient, economical and objective administration. It must be straight-forward in both purpose and method, so that taxpayers know where they stand with a minimum of administrative discretion and litigation.
Finally, in the Canadian context, it is essential that the federal tax system be capable of being harmonized with provincial tax systems. This is necessary if we are to avoid a tax jungle.
I believe that the proposals which I will introduce this evening represent a reform of our tax system which will deal with many of its shortcomings. They will also reflect a consensus about what Canada's tax system ought to be in the 1970s.
Because this is a comprehensive reform, time will not permit me to discuss in detail the many individual changes proposed. So that members of this House will be able to obtain a clear understanding of what is proposed, the notice of ways and means motion which I will table tonight contains the full content of the tax reform bill. In addition, supporting documents provide a brief but comprehensive explanation and description of the various proposals.
It is my intention this evening to discuss the main features of the reform package, to explain its general direction and purpose and to review the revenue and economic implications.
The Thrust of the Changes
Mr. Speaker, I now want to describe the general thrust of our reform proposals and the manner in which they respond to the goals of a tax system and the needs of Canada.
First and foremost, by a combination of increased exemptions, changes in the rate schedule and other measures, we propose to reduce significantly the tax burden borne by lower-income Canadians. In recent years the combined effect of the income taxes, sales taxes and property taxes, of all levels of government, has put too heavy a load on those with the least ability to pay.
We propose a major reform of the definition of income so that our tax system will be more fair and equitable between taxpayers. As the most important element in this regard, we propose to tax capital gains. In addition, we propose to bring into the definition of income several other items which have not been taxed in the past. At the same time, we propose to recognize certain expenses as new deductions from income. The result of these measures will be to produce a better and fairer balance in determining the income that is brought to tax1.
As part of this process, we will reform the tax treatment of wage earners-the vast majority of our taxpay-
June 18, 1971

The Budget-Mr. Benson
ing population. We propose a number of measures which will more accurately reflect the changing composition of our labour force and the many expenses that this group faces in earning a living.
We propose a major reform of the tax treatment of corporations and their shareholders. This will eliminate much of the double tax burden at present imposed upon persons who invest through corporations.
In addition, the corporate tax system will give due recognition to the problems and contributions of small business-a subject to which many Canadians attach a high importance.
We propose several valuable reforms of the administrative procedures. Our objective in this regard is to recognize in law the rights of taxpayers.
We propose a significant reform of the present treatment of our natural resources industries. We are fully aware of the importance of this sector of the economy. At the same time, incentives in this area will be more directly responsive to the needs of this industry and to Canada's over-all policies in this area.
We propose important reforms for Canadians who carry on business aboard and non-residents who invest in Canada.
Finally, we have developed a program which will ensure that the increases in revenue derived from the more equitable distribution of the tax burden will be returned to all taxpayers. This program fulfills the government's commitment that tax reform will not be a stepping stone to tax increases.
Mr. Speaker, before I turn to a more detailed consideration of these reform proposals, a brief word on the timetable.
The tax bill will be introduced for first reading at the end of the budget debate. It is the government's intention that debate on second reading of the bill begin when the House reconvenes early in September. This will provide time for public study and for the government to consider representations for technical changes. Meanwhile, we will discuss the legislation with provincial governments. I have asked for a meeting of finance ministers and treasurers in July. It is intended that the new system will come into effect on January 1, 1972.
Personal Income
The reforms with the greatest impact on most Canadians are, of course, those involving personal income. Low-income groups bear a disproportionate share of the tax load. Not only have the basic exemptions remained unchanged for more than 20 years, but provincial and federal sales taxes, which bear heavily on low-income groups, have increased substantially.
The legislation proposes to raise personal exemptions to $1,500 from $1,000 for single taxpayers and to $2,850 from $2,000 for married taxpayers. This substantial
increase in exemptions, which goes beyond our original proposals, is the broadest and most fundamental move to provide tax relief for individuals.
Hundreds of thousands of elderly Canadians will reveive further substantial tax relief through a combination of measures. The existing $500 extra exemption for persons 70 years and over will be increased to $650 and extended to all persons 65 years and over. The guaranteed income supplement, which goes to pensioners with little or no income other than their old age security pension, will no longer be taxable. Including the standard deduction, single taxpayers 65 years of age and over will be exempt on $2,250 of income.
Blind persons and disabled persons confined to a bed or wheelchair will be given the same benefit.
Six out of seven Canadian taxpayers are the men and women of our labour force who earn wages and salaries.
A new employment expense allowance will permit wage and salary earners to deduct three per cent of employment income up to a maximum of $150 a year. This measure will alleviate the cost of buying special clothes, or tools, or books required for a job, and put these workers on a more equitable footing with the self-employed.
There will be a deduction of up to $500 per child and up to $2,000 per family for child care expenses. This will go a long way toward removing a deterrent that many women say prevents them from taking jobs. In some cases the deduction may be claimed by the father. Our estimates are that several hundred thousand families will benefit. In many cases genuine hardship will be relieved.
There will be broad deductions for the expenses involved in moving to a new job. These include the costs of transporting families and belongings, their meals and lodgings while moving, and the cost of cancelling leases or selling their residences. The changing nature of our labour force and our economy requires that Canadians have greater mobility if they are to accept job opportunities when they arise, and this measure is proposed with this in mind.
A related proposal is to make tax free to employees the benefits they receive from employers to cover transportation, board and lodging at distant work sites. This will be important to lumber and mining workers, drilling and exploration crews and employees at isolated bases.
Unemployment insurance premiums will now be deductible, while the benefits will be made taxable.
The list of deductible medical expenses will be expanded to include payments to a school for the care and training of mentally or physically handicapped persons or disabled persons. To keep pace with the development of more modern appliances and equipment to help handicapped or disabled persons, expansion of the list of deductible medical expenses will no longer have to wait on changes made only at budget time. The government will ask Parliament for authority to add to the list by Order in Council.

June 18, 1971

Medical expenses for which an individual has been reimbursed will not be tax-deductible. However, premiums paid to a non-government medical or hospital plan will be deductible.
The limit on charitable donations is increased to 20 per cent of the taxpayer's income from the existing limit of 10 per cent. Donations to registered national athletic associations which promote amateur athletics in Canada on a national basis will be eligible as charitable donations. Further, the government proposes a re-examination of this area to determine; whether the traditional definition of charitable organizations is broad enough to reflect real need in the 1970s.
As part of the goal of defining income more fairly the bill proposes to make certain items taxable. These include:
-capital gains, which I will discuss later;
-manpower training allowances;
-unemployment insurance benefits; and
-the value of medicare premiums paid for an employee by his employer.
They also include scholarships, fellowships and grants, but as suggested by the Commons committee there will be a special $500 exemption.
Averaging Provisions
The bill introduces two types of income averaging which are significantly more generous than the averaging provisions of the White Paper, and replace most of the special provisions under the present law.
The first is general income averaging which will be applied automatically by the Department of National Revenue when income in a year significantly increases over income in previous years.
The second type involves a system of forward averaging. This applies to capital gains, incomes of artists, musicians, actors and professional athletes and to lump sum withdrawals from various kinds of retirement and profit-sharing plans. An individual who receives this kind of receipt in a particular year will be able to cushion the tax effect by purchasing an annuity to spread the income over a period of years.
Many people in our society are engaged in work that brings in a large income in some years and small incomes in other years. Without an averaging system, the progressive rate schedule deals unfairly with them.
At present farmers and fishermen are allowed to average their incomes every five years. This system is continued, but special provisions ensure there is no overlap with the new averaging provisions.
To avoid a retroactive change in the law, individuals making lump sum withdrawals out of pension plans and profit-sharing plans may choose to use the existing formula for the portion of the withdrawal that relates to amounts accumulated up to the end of this year.
The Budget-Mr. Benson Retirement Plans
Mr. Speaker, one of the important changes will increase substantially the deductions for contributions to retirement plans. The limit for pension plans and deferred profit-sharing plans is increased to $2,500 from $1,500. In the case of a pension plan this means that a combined employee and employer contribution of up to $5,000 may be deducted, compared with the present limit of $3,000. In addition, the limit for deductible contributions to registered retirement savings plans is increased to $4,000 from $2,500.
These changes will enable taxpayers to put aside considerably more money for their retirement and will also significantly increase the level of personal savings available to finance growing capital investment in Canada.
Another measure important to Canadian development provides that the foreign investments of pension plans, deferred profit-sharing plans and registered retirement savings plans may not exceed 10 per cent of their assets if they are to qualify for tax-free treatment. I am confident that these changes will have a significant effect in channelling the investments of retirement funds into Canadian development, which otherwise might well have been placed abroad.
At present there are few limitations on the investments that may be made by registered retirement savings plans. The bill introduces restrictions that are similar to those applicable to deferred profit-sharing plans.
Both of these new investment restrictions are effective this evening. They will not be applied retroactively. Investments now held may be retained even though they do not qualify under the new rules. However new investments must meet the restrictions.
Mr. Speaker, as a result of all the changes in taxation of personal income that I am describing tonight, 1,000,000 taxpayers who would otherwise pay tax next year will be removed from the tax rolls. We estimate the taxes will be reduced for 4,700,000 taxpayers, and will be changed by less than 1 per cent for another 2,000,000 taxpayers.
All taxpayers who claim married status and whose income is from wages and salaries will pay less tax in 1972 than they do at the present time. Taxpayers filing as single whose income is from employment will pay less tax than at present on incomes of $8,000 or less.
As I emphasized earlier, the $650 deduction for taxpayers 65 years of age and over, together with the exemption for guaranteed income supplement payments, will also result in significant tax reductions.
Mr. Speaker, before concluding my remarks on personal income tax reforms, I would like to say a word about tax rates as the new system develops through the period 1972 to 1976. I have indicated that for the first year of the new system a high proportion of Canadian taxpayers will pay less tax than at present. I am pleased to inform the House that under the tax reform we shall be able to

June 18, 1971
The Budget-Mr. Benson
make progressive reductions in tax rates applying to all individual taxpayers during the years through to 1976.
In my opening remarks, I recalled the undertaking given to the Commons committee, and confirmed many times since, that revenues produced under tax reform as such will not exceed the total that would be produced if the present system were to remain in effect. Through the maturing of capital gains taxation, the closing of loopholes and the higher elasticity of revenues under the new system, substantial additional revenues would be generated as compared with the present tax system. Tax reform envisages that these additional revenues shall be returned to taxpayers.
If any changes are needed to meet new economic and social conditions, government will be required to justify them in seeking legislative authority from Parliament.
I am thus proposing a rate schedule in the tax reform legislation providing for progressive reductions in basic personal tax rates. This will be of increasing benefit to all Canadians, particularly those in the lower income brackets. Specifically, the federal rate of 17 per cent on the first $500 of taxable income will be reduced in each of the years 1973 through 1976 to reach a 6 per cent rate at the end of that period.
Capital Gains
The most important reform to broaden the income tax base is the proposal to tax capital gains. At present Canadians in a position to earn significant amounts of their income through capital gains pay far less tax than other Canadians who receive their income from salary or wages. The debate on tax reform has demonstrated wide support for a capital gains tax.
The general rule will provide that one-half of capital gains will be included in income and taxed at ordinary rates. This, in effect, makes capital gains part of the progressive tax system, taxing gains according to ability to pay. One-half of capital losses will be deductible from taxable capital gains. Individuals may also deduct up to $1,000 of deductible capital losses from their other income. Our system will be similar to that of the United States, which also includes half of capital gains in income.
The White Paper contained proposals designed to exclude most homes from taxation; but many taxpayers feared that their homes might still be subject to taxation. To eliminate this concern, there will be no gains tax on a taxpayer's principal residence.
While this proposal will adequately take care of personal residences, I have been concerned that it might impose hardship on farmers, particularly those with large acreage. Therefore, they will be able to choose either the exemption for residences I have just mentioned, or the exemption formula proposed in the White Paper.
For personal property, such as paintings or antiques, any item or set of items must have a value of at least $1,000 before it could possibly be subject to a gains tax. This amount of $1,000 is twice as high as that in our earlier proposals.
I cannot emphasize too strongly that to be subject to a capital gains tax an item of personal property first has to be worth more than $1,000, second, must be the kind of item that increases rather than decreases in value over time, and third, apart from people who leave the country, a change of ownership must occur.
The introduction of a capital gains tax requires a starting point, so that only gains after that date will be subject to the new tax. Some time before January 1, 1972, a valuation day will be announced. Generally, capital gains or losses will be measured against the value of an asset on valuation day. This will ensure that gains accrued up to valuation day are not subject to tax.
In some cases, assets may be worth less on valuation day than their original cost. If capital gains were to be measured only from valuation day value, part of the amounts that would be subject to tax might merely be a recovery of cost. The bill will provide that in computing a capital gain, a taxpayer may use either the original cost, or the value of the asset on valuation day, whichever is higher. This will ensure that gains which are simply a recovery of cost are not taxed.
In computing a capital loss, a taxpayer will measure the loss against the lower of original cost or the value of the asset on valuation day.
Alternatively, taxpayers may simply elect to use valuation day value for all their assets.
The most important assets of Canadians will be completely free from capital gains tax. There will be no tax on personal homes or on personal property with a value of less than $1,000.
There is no requirement to send any information to the government on valuation day. Toward the end of this year, the Department of National Revenue will publish an information booklet listing those items which might be subject to tax upon sale, and the type of records taxpayers would find useful to keep.
When a taxpayer leaves Canada, he will be considered to have disposed of all of his assets except those on which we will tax non-residents. The first $5,000 of capital gains will be exempt.
Alternatively, a taxpayer may elect to defer any capital gains that are deemed to arise at the time of his departure, by agreeing to pay tax in Canada in the year in which he sells any of his taxable assets.
The bill will provide that the new capital gains tax system will apply to non-residents on the disposition of certain Canadian assets.
The rule relating to non-residents is, of course, subject to any existing treaties that Canada may have with other countries.
The bill will provide that in a number of situations a capital gain may be deferred. An important exemption from capital gains tax is the transfer of property between a husband and wife by gift or at death. They will not be
[Mr. Benson.j
June 18, 1971

taxed. The wife or husband will simply take over the property at cost and any subsequent gain or loss will be measured from that cost. Other situations include expropriations, certain business or corporate reorganizations, the incorporation of a proprietorship, the transfer of assets to a controlled corporation and amalgamations.
The White Paper proposed that shares in widely held Canadian companies be revalued every five years. This proposal has been dropped. In its place, the government has adopted the recommendation of the Commons committee, several of the provinces and many taxpayers, to tax accrued gains when a taxpayer dies. The Commons committee also recommended that if this alternative was adopted, there should be a substantial reduction of death duties so that estates would not face the burden of two substantial taxes at the same time. When considering this issue, the government took into account that it receives only 25 per cent of the revenue from estate tax. We felt that an appropriate reduction would have to be of that order of magnitude to compensate for the new capital gains tax.
Accordingly, the government has decided to discontinue federal estate and gift taxes as of January 1, 1972.
Corporate Income
I come now to the provisions of the bill relating to the taxation of corporations and their shareholders.
The most important proposal concerns the basic corporation income tax rates. I referred earlier in my remarks to the fact that the tax reform system as it matures over the next five years will yield additional revenues compared with the present system. The basic corporation tax of 50 per cent at the outset of the new system in 1972 will therefore be progressively reduced in each of the years 1973 to 1976 by one percentage point, so that in 1976 the general rate will be 46 per cent.
This progressive reduction will bring the general corporate tax rate in Canada to a level below that in the United States, our most important trading partner and business competitor. Despite the many changes in our social and economic structure we must continue to look to the private sector and to business corporations to provide the jobs for our rapidly growing labour force and to produce the income required to finance our growing appetite for goods and services. I am confident that this major move to reduce substantially the general corporate tax rate will contribute in an important way to making Canada a most attractive place in which to invest, grow and prosper.
I turn now to some of the other important changes affecting corporations and their shareholders.
Small Business
This government supports the view that entrepreneurial initiative should be encouraged through the tax system. The Canadian economy depends upon the creative business activity of small, growing businesses.
The Budget-Mr. Benson
The present low rate of corporate tax on part of the income of corporations is an inefficient method of encouraging the growth of small business. It is available to all corporations, regardless of their size. It is available regardless of the type of income they receive. It is available whether they are foreign-controlled or Canadian-controlled. It is available whether they are owned by large public corporations or by private individuals. And it is available whether they are expanding or static enterprises.
However, with these deficiencies eliminated, a low rate can be an effective way of encouraging initiative by helping small corporations to accumulate capital for business expansion.
The corporate tax on the first $50,000 of business income of Canadian-controlled private corporations will be 25 per cent. This low rate will apply until a corporation has accumulated $400,000 of taxable income under the new system. It will not be available to public corporations or to foreign-owned corporations or their subsidiaries.
If a corporation does not wish to expand its business in the year in which he small business incentive is earned, it can invest in short-term debt securities, or pay dividends to its shareholders. The dividends will, of course, be taxable in the shareholders' hands and, as a result, the income of the corporation will be taxed at the marginal rate of the recipients.
If a corporation employs the tax savings that result from the low rate for non-business purposes, such as portfolio investments, a special refundable tax will be imposed to recover the low-rate benefit.
We intend that the small business incentive be available only to Canadians and that it encourage Canadian ownership of our expanding businesses. Accordingly, if control is acquired by non-residents, the corporation must repay, over a five-year period, the tax saving it has received.
It had been my hope that a system might be developed to aid unincorporated as well as incorporated businesses. A great deal of time and effort has been spent toward achieving this goal both inside and outside government. Unfortunately, all the proposals were found to be unworkable. Accordingly, we reluctantly decided to restrict the small business incentive to incorporated business.
Double Taxation
Mr. Speaker, one of the problems of the present tax system is the double taxation of corporate income. One tax is imposed when the income is earned by the corporation, and a second when that income is distributed to the shareholders.
The White Paper proposed a comprehensive new system to deal with double taxation and to give Canadians an incentive to buy shares of Canadian corporations.

June 18, 1971
The Budget-Mr. Benson
Shareholders would have received credit against their personal taxes on dividends for the corporation tax paid.
This proposal became the subject of widespread controversy. Whatever its merits, the business community and a number of the provinces, including the two largest, found it unacceptable.
It is for this reason that the government has decided to modify the existing system rather than to adopt the integrated system outlined in the White Paper. The modified system will retain and improve the present incentive to ordinary Canadians to invest in Canadian corporations.
This will be accomplished by increasing the rate of the dividend tax credit to 33J per cent of the dividend and requiring that the credit be included in income. This will remove the bias against lower income shareholders by reducing the tax payable for those whose marginal rate is less than 40 per cent. The reformed dividend tax credit will offset in the hands of shareholders 25 points of corporate tax paid by Canadian corporations.
Since the low rate of corporation tax is restricted to business income, the investment income of private corporations will be subject to the normal rate of corporate tax. As a further measure to eliminate double taxation on these corporations, one-half of the tax on investment income will be refunded when dividends are paid to shareholders.
Private corporations will also be able to distribute half of their capital gains tax-free.
The combined effect of these measures will substantially eliminate double taxation of the income of small private corporations.
As a result of these provisions, the taxation of investment income will be the same whether it is received directly or through a private corporation. In other words we are advocating an incorporation package.
Accordingly, it will no longer be necessary to have special provisions for personal corporations.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to mention briefly a few of the other important features of the new system.
-Dividends received by a private corporation from a subsidiary corporation will normally be tax-exempt, but dividends received on portfolio investments will be subject to a special refundable tax.
-Dividends received by public corporations from Canadian corporations will be exempt unless paid out of designated surplus.
-Corporations may distribute their earnings accumulated to the end of 1971 tax-free to their shareholders, upon payment of a 15 per cent tax.
Business and Property Income I
I wish now, Mr. Speaker, to deal with a number of important rules concerning business and property income.
At present Canadian corporations cannot deduct interest on money borrowed to buy shares in other corporations. This has undoubtedly put Canadian corporations at a disadvantage when competing in takeover bids with foreign corporations, which can deduct such interest in their home country. This feature of our tax system has been the subject of much criticism in recent years. The bill will permit Canadian corporations to deduct such interest. Assuming the full rate of corporate tax, this deduction means that the cost of borrowing money for this purpose will be cut in half.
Under the present tax system individuals can deduct interest on money borrowed to buy shares and this deduction continues in the new bill.
Currently, a number of business expenditures, such as the cost of purchasing goodwill, are neigher deductible as a business expense nor depreciable as a business asset. The bill will provide that one-half the cost of these items will be deductible over a period of time.
In a similar way, one-half of the proceeds from the sale of such assets will be included in income, with special rules to cover those owned at the start of the system.
During the debate of the White Paper the subject of entertainment and similar expenses was fully discussed. The consensus was that the present rules of the income tax system should be maintained and that there should be no sweeping changes in this area. The new bill continues the present deduction for entertainment and related expenses, subject to several important changes to prevent deductions for expenses which are clearly personal.
No deduction will be permitted for membership fees oi dues for clubs that exist primarily for the purpose ol providing dining or recreation for members. Expenses related to a yacht, camp, lodge or golf course will no longer be deductible. Taxpayers may continue to deduct the costs of attending two conventions a year, but the conventions must be held within the area in which the association carries on its ordinary activities.
The new bill will continue the present system of capital cost allowance. However, there are three changes to remove some inequities in the present system.
First, losses created by capital cost allowances on rental property will not be deductible from non-rental income.
Secondly, each rental building costing $50,000 or more that is acquired after 1971 will be placed in a separate capital cost allowance class.
Thirdly, when a taxpayer dies, he will be deemed to have disposed of depreciable property at an amount midway between its fair market value and its written-down value. This will provide treatment similar to the taxation of capital gains at death.
I would now like to turn to the provisions in the bill
dealing with certain classes of taxpayers.
Farmers and fishermen will continue to compute their income on a cash basis and to average their income over five-year periods. Their special depreciation provisions and the basic herd provision for farmers will be phased out. Farmers will be given an opportunity to establish a

June 18, 1971

basic herd and receive capital gains tax-free on their inventory at December 31, 1971.
The three-year tax-free period for co-operatives will be eliminated. They will continue to deduct patronage dividends. But this deduction may not reduce their income below 5 per cent of capital employed instead of 3 per cent as at present.
Caisses populaires and credit unions, which now are exempt from tax, will be taxed in a similar way.
The bill will provide that persons carrying on the practice of a profession must include amounts in income as fees are billed rather than as cash is received. This provision will bring the taxation of professionals more in line with the taxation of most other businessmen.
In general, the income of trusts will continue to be taxed as it is now. Income distributed to a beneficiary will be taxed in the beneficiary's hands. Income retained by the trust will be taxed in the hands of the trust.
When an estate is taxed on income that is retained, the personal rate schedule will be used. Most other personal trusts in existence tonight will also use the personal rate schedule for investment income.
In general, personal trusts created after tonight will be taxed at the higher of 50 per cent or the personal rate schedule.
The taxation of partnership income will not differ significantly from the present tax treatment. Partners will continue to be taxed on their share of the partnership income as if they had received it directly, although the computation of income will be made at the partnership level. As a result of this method of computing income, capital cost allowance will be taken by the partnership rather than by the partners.
Mining and Petroleum * [DOT]
In devising a tax system for the mining and petroleum industries that will best serve the national interest, it is essential to reach a balanced judgment on their role in the development of slow growth regions, the present and prospective worldwide demand and supply, the risk involved in these industries, the international competition for capital, and the levels of incentives available in other countries.
It is the government's intention to continue tax incentives at a reasonable level for these industries. At the same time, we want profitable projects to bear a fair share of taxation.
The bill will introduce a system that is basically the same as the White Paper system, modified by my announcements of last August.
The three-year exemption for new mines will be withdrawn at the end of 1973. In place of this incentive, assets related to a new mine will be eligible for accelerated depreciation. The cost of these assets may be
The Budget-Mr. Benson
written off against income from a new mine as quickly as the income will permit. Social capital related to a new mine, such as houses, townsite facilities, schools and hospitals, will all be eligible for this fast write-off.
The next major change for mining and petroleum income is that the present automatic depletion deduction will end in 1976. After that, depletion will be earned. Every $3 of eligible expenditure will earn $1 of depletion. Eligible expenditure will be exploration and development costs, the cost of most new mine assets which qualify for fast write-off and certain new processing facilities and expenditures connected with major expansions of a mine. Eligible expenditures made between November 7, 1969, and December 31, 1976, will earn depletion for 1977 and subsequent years.
The five-year delay in introducing the earned depletion system should give mining and petroleum corporations a reasonable time period to adjust to the new system. The present automatic 25 per cent depletion deduction allowed to non-operators will be continued until 1976. In 1977 it will increase to 331 per cent, but it will have to be earned.
After 1971 the depletion allowance given to shareholders of mining and petroleum corporations will be withdrawn.
The bill will also implement the proposal made in August to provide a federal abatement of 15 percentage points for provincial mining taxes, beginning in 1977.
International Income
Mr. Speaker, I turn now to the taxation of international income.
Most of the proposed changes in this area will not take effect until 1976. This will allow a reasonable period of time to renegotiate existing treaties and to negotiate new tax treaties, especially with developing countries. In their treaties, many foreign countries give significant tax concessions to corporations of other countries. If Canadians and Canadian corporations are to be competitive internationally, we must win for them these same concessions.
In all treaties we will be prepared to exempt dividends received by Canadian corporations out of profits earned in the foreign country by a corporation in which the Canadian has a substantial interest. In exchange, we will expect the foreign government to extend to Canadians the same tax concessions they grant to other foreigners.
After 1975 dividends received by Canadians from affiliated corporations in non-treaty countries will be wholly or partly exempt in Canada, depending on the level of foreign taxes paid.
In order not to discourage investment by Canadians while treaties are being negotiated, special provisions will cushion Canadian against this tax effect.
A number of foreign countries impose taxes substantially lower than those in Canada, and investment income has been diverted to these countries to avoid Canadian

June 18, 1971
The Budget-Mr. Benson
tax. Rules starting in 1973 will tax the investment income of foreign affiliates to the same extent as if it had been received in Canada.
Unless it is reduced by tax treaty, the general rate of Canadian withholding tax on investment income paid to non-residents will be increased to 25 per cent in 1976.
New foreign tax credit provisions improve the position of Canadians now facing double taxation on their foreign income.
Pension and similar payments after 1971 to non-residents will be subject to withholding tax. However, no withholding tax will apply to the old age security pension of $960 and to $1,290 of the Canada or Quebec Pension Plan payments. This exemption of $2,250 is equal to the amount exempted for single Canadians 65 years of age and over. In the new cases where the withholding tax is more than the tax that pensioners would pay in Canada, they may file Canadian returns and obtain refunds.
Appeals, Administration and Civil Rights
Mr. Speaker, I would now like to refer to changes which the government is proposing in the appeal, administration and enforcement provisions of the Income Tax Act. I am confident that these proposals will be welcomed by all members of this House.
It is important that the review and appeal procedures under the act permit disputes to be resolved quickly, efficiently and at minimum cost.
In recent years, administrative review procedures have been substantially revised to accomplish this end. We now propose to improve the judicial appeal procedures to permit faster and easier access to the courts.
If National Revenue denies or revokes registration of a charitable organization, amateur athletic association, retirement savings plan or profit-sharing plan, a taxpayer may henceforth appeal to the courts.
At present the minister may issue a reassessment of an income tax return more than four years after filing where there has been misrepresentation or fraud. If the reassessment is issued, it may extend to matters not related to the fraud. The bill provides that this reassessment may not extend beyond the original matter in question.
Changes will also be proposed in the procedures followed in inquiries held under the authority of the act. The Tax Review Board will appoint a hearing officer who will preside over such inquiries and exercise many of the powers provided in the Inquiries Act. The right of witnesses to be accompanied by counsel and of persons whose affairs are being investigated to be present or represented throughout the proceedings will also be specifically provided.
Many of the changes I have just outlined result from suggestions put forward by the Canadian Bar Association and the Canadians Institute of Chartered Accountants. I
would like to thank these organizations for their assistance.
Mr. Speaker, I feel that these and other changes will help to simplify many of the administration and appeal procedures of the Income Tax Act and will further confirm and protect the civil rights of taxpayers under the act.
Provincial Taxes
The federal government is prepared to continue to collect provincial income taxes without cost to the provinces. This system has proven its worth to the provinces and to taxpayers, and we would hope that most provinces will wish these arrangements to be maintained. The unified collection system involves agreement by the provinces to define their personal income tax as a percentage of the federal tax and, therefore, to adhere to the same rules for determining taxable income and the level of exemptions. The provincial rate is determined by provincial legislatures specifying the percentage to apply to the federal tax. In the case of the corporate tax, provinces levy their rate upon taxable corporate income as determined by the federal act.
The present federal personal tax, upon which agreeing provinces specify their rates, contains a general abatement of 28 per cent applicable to all provinces. The general abatement system will be discontinued beginning next year, as proposed in the White Paper. At the same time, the old age security tax, the social development tax and the 1966 tax reduction have been integrated with the general rate structure, and the temporary surtax has been eliminated. The net result of these changes is to reduce the size of the federal tax which is the base to which provincial rates are applied. This will require provinces to express their nominal tax rates on a slightly higher basis to derive the same dollar revenue. These higher rates will not, of course, mean higher taxes for provincial taxpayers. They arise only as a consequence of expressing tax rates on a smaller base. The precise provincial rates that will yield the same tax revenues for provinces as they now get, will be discussed with the provinces shortly at my meeting in July.
The White Paper made an important revenue commitment to provincial governments. That guarantee stated that provinces which continued to have their taxes collected by the federal government under rules in harmony with ours would be protected against unforseen reductions in the combined yield of their personal and corporate income taxes for several years. The federal government will fulfil this pledge by payments to provincial governments, if required, for the years 1972 to 1974. The guarantee will take into account the requirement to increase the nominal provincial rates as I have just explained.
Economic Effects of Tax Reform I
I should like now, Mr. Speaker, to discuss the implications of these tax proposals for foreign ownership of Canadian industry, for savings, investment and growth in the Canadian economy and for the balance of payments.

June 18, 1971

Several features of the proposals will increase the attractions to Canadians relative to non-residents to acquire equity in Canadian enterprise. First, Canadian corporations will be permitted to deduct as an expense, interest on funds borrowed to finance the purchase of shares in other corporations. This measure will eliminate a disadvantage which Canadian corporations have had in competing with foreign corporations in takeover bids. Second, the 10 per cent limitation on foreign assets of pension funds and retirement savings plans will have an important influence in channelling the funds of these large intermediaries to Canadian businesses. Third, the lower tax rate for small business will be available only to Canadian-owned companies and tax savings afforded by this incentive will be recoverable should the ownership of companies which have benefited from them pass to non-residents. Finally, the form of the dividend tax credit makes the incentive to invest in shares of Canadian corporations even more attractive than it has been for most Canadians.
In assessing the other economic effects of the reform measures, it is extremely important to bear in mind that the amount of revenue generated by the new system will not exceed that of the present system less the personal and corporate surtaxes. There will be no adverse effects of the kind that would occur if there were an increase in the over-all tax burden. The effect, instead, is that the existing burden will be redistributed in such a way as to improve the equity of the system and to make it more neutral in its treatment of different types of income. These are important improvements and I would emphasize that it has not been necessary to purchase them at the expense of economic growth. Let me develop this point.
Under the new tax system most Canadians who derive their income primarily from wages and salaries will pay lower taxes than they now pay. This improvement in personal disposable income will raise the demand for goods as well as personal saving. The measures which benefit working mothers will have the effect of making it easier for them to join or remain in the labour force if they wish. The progressively declining corporate rate will contribute to higher corporate savings and investment. The new tax system will continue to provide reasonable incentives to the mining and petroleum industries and I see every reason therefore to anticipate their continued rapid growth.
The taxation of capital gains will of itself reduce somewhat the capacity, particularly of higher income Canadians, to save and will affect adversely also the savings of corporations having taxable capital gains. There may be some adverse effects on the saving of mining and petroleum companies. We have, however, provided substantial offsets to those adverse effects. This has been done by removing the federal estate and gift taxes, by granting more generous treatment of contributions to pension and retirement savings plans, by reducing the taxes of many persons, by removing more than 20 per-24171-17
The Budget-Mr. Benson
centage points from the highest personal tax rate, by lowering the general corporate rate progressively to 46 per cent and by offering improved provisions for averaging of income for tax purposes. I am confident that the combined effect of these measures will cause the net impact of the new tax system upon savings to be minimal.
On the balance of payments, the net effects of the new measures will also be negligible. Several of the individual measures will have effects on particular items, but they will not all be in the same direction and I do not expect any significant over-all effect.
I should like to conclude these remarks on the economic effects of the reform measures by restating my conviction that in achieving greater equity it has not been necessary to sacrifice growth. Our potential and prospects for economic expansion are undiminished.
Economic and Financial Position
Mr. Speaker, I turn now from the tax reform measures to review our economic and financial position and to propose certain measures which will further contribute to our economic expansion. I realize that hon. members have already listened to the equivalent of a full-length budget speech and so I shall be as brief as possible. A Minister of Finance, someone has told me, must speak of taxes, but in doing so I do not wish to tax the indulgence of the House. Members will have available the Budget Papers that I tabled Wednesday.
In my budget speech of last December I said:
We are looking to growing increases in the value of gross national product next year, which by the second half may be running at a rate about 81 per cent above the second half of this year. With continued good price performance these figures imply an increase in real output that will be sufficient to more than offset the increase in the labour force and expected growth of productivity and so reduce unemployment progressively during the year.
Tonight, some six months later, this is still my general view of 1971. In fact, my view of the advance of the economy in the second half of this year is even stronger than it was last December. I expect that the gross national product for the balance of this year will be 9 per cent or more above the same period last year.
The Canadian economy last autumn marked a turning point from declining to expanding rates of growth in demand, output and employment. I am confident that as we move through the second half of 1971 and into 1972 the performance of the economy will be strong and gaining momentum.
This is my assessment of the economic situation. I would like to go into more detail, however, and in doing so to indicate not only features that inspire and reinforce my confidence, but also some that are cause for concern.
The results for the fourth quarter of last year and the first quarter of this year have been distorted by the consequences of major strikes. Therefore, to gain perspective let us compare results for the fall and winter combined with those for the previous spring and summer.

June 18, 1971
The Budget-Mr. Benson
After this view in perspective we may look at the first quarter of this year in more detail and at developments since then.
In the spring and summer of 1970 the value of the GNP, apart from price changes, was growing at an annual rate of only 2.2 per cent, but in the subsequent fall and winter real output grew almost twice as rapidly. This is one way of revealing the turnaround in activity of which I have been speaking. Important strengths and weaknesses in the situation may be seen by comparing the developments of the main categories of total demand. Last spring and summer, consumer expenditure grew at only 0.9 per cent; in the fall and winter it was growing at 5.7 per cent. Investment in housing, which was declining rather precipitously last spring and summer, grew at an annual rate of just over 30 per cent in the fall and winter under the stimulus of federal government financing. Government expenditure in both periods increased at rates very much in excess of the rate of growth of real GNP and was an important factor in sustaining and stimulating the economy. The balance of our international transactions in goods and services moved sharply into surplus last spring and summer. Despite this remarkable gain in our trading position, the gain in the subsequent six months more than doubled that performance. The weaker parts of the economy were in private capital investment in commercial and industrial buildings, machinery, equipment and inventories.
Employment, which grew by 140,000 jobs last spring and summer, grew by 180,000 in the fall and winter. This increase was not sufficient to bring the unemployment rate down far enough.
Looking at price developments in the same way, consumer prices seasonally adjusted were rising at a rate of 2.6 per cent during the spring and summer last year. By last fall and winter this rate of increase had been cut almost in half.


George Harris Hees: Tell us about today, Ben.


Edgar John Benson: This, then, is the view of our economic developments in perspective. It is a view of an economy embarked on expansion with moderating price increases. But it is an economy in which unemployment remains too high and business investment has not yet begun to respond and contribute to the advance.
The First Quarter 1971 * [DOT]
Let us now look at the data for the first three months of this year, although as always it is harder to bring recent information into focus. The first quarter national accounts gave an unclear and inconclusive picture. The Bureau of Statistics announced when it released these figures that it would be making upward revisions in them. I will deal with the figures as they stand.
What the figures show is that total domestic demand, apart from price changes, increased in the first quarter at

the very high annual rate of almost 8 per cent, of which housing was a strong component. As the recent very high levels of housing starts turn into high levels of completions later this year not only will investment in housing remain high, but spending for home furnishings will also rise. Indeed, consumer spending for durable goods is already up sharply this year. Auto sales following the auto strike, of course, contributed to this increase.
Expenditures by all levels of government were high in the first quarter and judging from the budgets presented to provincial legislatures this spring will remain high throughout this year.
Business spending on buildings and on machinery continues to be the weakest element in our economy. There is no surprise in this, although some gains are expected in the second half of this current year. Business profits have been very badly hit by the stiff jumps in costs that have continued greatly to outstrip productivity growth. No doubt also an atmosphere of unusual uncertainty deriving from continually rising costs, from last year's sluggish demand and from concern about tax reform has had a constraining effect upon business investment. I have dispelled some of that uncertainty tonight. Moreover, profits have now turned upward. Counting in the increases stemming from resumed car production, they are reckoned in the national accounts to have increased by 10 per cent in the first quarter. Finally, as I have said, total demand is now advancing strongly.
So the stage is being set by reviving profits, growing demand and greater certainty for improved business confidence and increased capital investment this year and next.
Consumer buying of all goods and services other than durables has been relatively slow so far this year. But here, too, the stage is being set for advance. Personal savings continue to be high and consumer credit is readily available. As consumers, financed with high savings and credit, spend more, productive capacity will be more fully utilized, capital investment will grow, more jobs will be created and more income earned to support yet higher levels of spending.
The figures of exports and imports in the first quarter are very greatly affected by the swings in automobile exports and imports occasioned by the strike. The same is true of the business inventory figures. It is simply too early to be certain how to read these figures in relation to strike effects.
In summary, the national accounts for the first quarter showed a very strong surge in domestic demand in spite of continued weakness of business capital investment. As for employment, the first quarter data show a strong increase of 1.2 per cent in the number of jobs. This was the highest quarterly rate of increase for two years. Clearly, then, the economy continued to move forward in the first quarter.
The information that has come in since the end of the first quarter confirms that the economy is gathering
June 18, 1971

strength. The least satisfactory figures were for industrial production and unemployment in April. The retail sales figures for April, published this week, show their strongest monthly advance of the year. This is true of the sales of motor vehicle dealers, but it is also true of all other retail sales. Manufacturers' new orders and shipments which showed some hesitation in March were moving forward vigorously again in April. An unbroken rise in unfilled orders foretells sustained and rising manufacturing output in the future. The value of building permits issued for non-residential construction for the first four months of this year is more than 5J per cent above that of the same period of a year ago. Housing starts continue to be high. Exports in May were up, seasonally adjusted, almost 5 per cent over April, and some 4.7 per cent over the very high figures of a year ago.
The employment figures now confirm the strength we had predicted in the economy. The May rise in employment of 347,000 not only offset the below average rise of employment in April but it was the biggest rise in May in the history of the labour force survey. The decline in unemployment in May of 116,000 was the largest for this month since 1963. The unemployment rate adjusted fell in all regions of the country save the prairie region where it is already the lowest in the country. While this is good news the rate of unemployment is clearly still too high. I want there to be no doubt about my feeling on that score. Unemployment is now well below its peak of last fall and this trend will continue downward. Our government's economic policies will be reinforced as necessary to ensure that result.
Prices and Costs
Canada had a good record of price performance in 1970-a record better than that of any other industrial country. The consumer price index increased by 1J per cent over the year from December, 1969, to December, 1970, and over the last half of the year there was virtually no change in the index at all. During the summer and fall of last year a very substantial decline in food prices contributed to our good record. So far this year there has been a renewed advance of food prices which has not yet offset last year's decline, but the increase in the group of items other than food continues to moderate.
While we may take satisfaction from the relief that the slower advance in prices has afforded, the continued rise of costs does not permit us to be sanguine about future price developments. There has recently been some modest abatement of cost increases. But in spite of this modest abatement there continues to be an upward push on unit costs of production. This has been tempered somewhat by the rise in productivity we have been experiencing. Such productivity increases are normal in the early stages of an economic expansion. We may welcome the effects of higher productivity on costs and prices and in guarding the competitiveness of our industry, but we must recognize that a reluctance to expand 24171-17,5
The Budget-Mr. Benson
employment is the counterpart of industry's quest for greater productivity in this early phase of the new expansion.
The U.S. Economy
The performance of the Canadian economy has been rather different from that of our American neighbours. Of course there are, as always, broad similarities. But over the past year or so the major changes in the economic tempo have been rather less extreme here in Canada. The percentage rate of inflation reached a higher peak in the United States than in Canada. The falling off in the rate of growth of output was distinctly sharper in the United States. Indeed, the real value of output declined in the United States last year, while in Canada it rose by some 3.3 per cent. Average unemployment rose more sharply in the United States in 1970 than in Canada. A basically declining trend in unemployment began here in the third quarter of last year, but a comparable turnaround has not yet appeared in the United States. All of these data suggest that while we cannot insulate ourselves from the pervasive impact of economic influences from the United States, we have it in our hands to achieve a somewhat better performance if we have the wisdom and the will to do so.
Balance of Payments [DOT]
The declining trend in the U.S. economy last year had a marked effect on the destination of our exports. Our exports to the United States increased only moderately and the share of our exports to that country declined to 65 per cent from 70 per cent the year before. Very considerable increases occurred in the volume and shares of our exports going to Europe and to Japan. While our exports and merchandise showed great strength last year, imports fell over much of the year and consequently our merchandise account moved to the unprecedented surplus figure of $3 billion. This strong merchandise trade position has continued into the first quarter of this year in spite of the rise in imports which occurred in the first three months.
The services or non-merchandise part of our international accounts which is typically in deficit, provided some offset to the growing trade surplus. Nonetheless, the combined figure for all current account transactions was a surplus of some $1.3 billion, a swing of over $2 billion from the more typical deficit of the previous year. This strong over-all current account position has continued into the first quarter of this year.
The changes in the capital account of the balance of payments have been equally striking in recent quarters. Net inflows of long-term capital fell off very sharply. Many factors contributed, such as the narrowing differential between long-term interest rates in Canada and abroad and my own request to borrowers to explore fully the possibilities of obtaining financing in Canada before offering securities abroad. My purpose in making this

June 18, 1971
The Budget-Mr. Benson
request was to assist the adjustment of the capital account to the vastly changed current account situation and so relieve the upward pressure on the value of the Canadian dollar. I want to record my appreciation of the excellent co-operation we have been receiving from most quarters in this regard, and to suggest again that their continued co-operation along these lines can do much to reinforce the attack upon unemployment in the period ahead.
As I mentioned before, a combination of factors reduced the level of long-term capital inflow. The outflow of short-term capital was also lower in 1970. The net result of all capital movements was an inflow of just short of a quarter of a billion dollars. This capital inflow combined with the extraordinary current account surplus of $1.3 billion to produce an increase of reserves of more than $1.5 billion.
Most of this increase in reserves was accumulated, or committed through forward contracts, before the decision in May, 1970, to allow the value of the dollar to float. After that decision the pressure in the market appreciated the value of the Canadian dollar by about 6 per cent up to the end of the year. Since then the value of the Canadian dollar has declined somewhat. I welcome this development.
I have said on many occasions that the government did not wish to see the Canadian dollar appreciate. A higher dollar works with increasing effect against our exporters and against domestic producers who must try to meet foreign competition. Since the appreciation affects the economy in this way, it works against our policy of trying to expand employment opportunities in Canada. The government is very conscious of the impact of the higher value of the Canadian dollar on Canadian producers.
Recent Developments in Economic Policy
The monetary policy pursued by the Bank of Canada has continued to give support to the broad economic objectives of the government. For over a year it has been expansionary in character. The consequence of this policy has been to increase the liquidity of the economy considerably and to reduce interest rates. These reductions have been most notable in securities of shorter maturity, but mortage rates and long-term bond rates have also declined. This setting of monetary policy has been desirable, not only to provide a suitable financial climate for stimulating the economic expansion but also for assisting in the adjustment of our international capital flows in order to avoid undue appreciation of the Canadian dollar.
It is not only the monetary policy which has been providing stimulus to the economy. The government set in train a series of expansionary expenditure moves with the budget of March, 1970. These were followed with additional expenditure measures in June, in August, in October and in the December budget. These measures, taken together, added upward of $900 million in fiscal stimulus to the economy.
In making decisions on expenditures we have had to choose carefully from among all the many competing demands for increased public spending, but during the past and current fiscal years expenditures increases have been mainly directed to three broad and important areas: first, to help the provinces; second, to finance major initiatives in the field of social security; and third, to provide further measures for strengthening the structure of the national economy. All of these efforts have been designed to assist the growth, stability and welfare of our country. As such they are integral parts of a co-ordinated economic and social policy.
As regards the provinces, it is interesting to observe the basic support now being provided to provincial budgets by federal equalization grants. This year they will total over $1 billion, up from $370 million five years ago when the present fiscal arrangements were made. Apart from their rapid growth, these grants have also helped greatly in stabilizing provincial revenues during the recent period of slower growth. In addition, the special steps to accelerate payments of tax collection receipts and capital grants for technical schools provided over $300 million for increased provincial spending. The special development loan program of $160 million has also been well received. All but two of the provinces have claimed the full amount of their allocations for financing accelerated capital development projects to be undertaken by the end of the present fiscal year. Saskatchewan has notified us that it does not intend to avail itself of its share; Ontario has indicated its wish to make use of this fund, but has not yet taken up its allocation.
More broadly, I might note the increasing interaction of federal and provincial public finance. This year, over $4 billion of federal budgetary resources-more than 31 per cent of the total-will flow to support provincial-municipal services. Only five years ago the comparable percentage was not quite 23 per cent. In July I will be meeting with provincial finance ministers to examine tax reform oce aeain and to discuss the renewal of Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements. As on previous occasions, we will be grappling with complex issues and conflicting pressures. I am sure, however, that our common aim will be to try to work toward a system of fiscal federalism that best serves our contemporary needs.
In the area of social security, the increase in the guaranteed income supplement for the needy aged went into effect April 1. That increase adds almost $200 million in improved benefits for this group this year. At the other end of the age ladder, the proposals on restructured family allowances will have a further redistributive effect. The major transformation in unemployment insurance approved by this House-widening coverage and extending and increasing benefits-builds a firmer foundation of income support for virtually all Canadian wage and salary earners. As of this year, medicare is now operative in all ten provinces. Regardless of its birth pangs, that system involving $550 million in federal grants to the provinces now assures every Canadian, regardless of his income, the right to basic medical services.

June 18, 1971

All of these measures-each a major step in itself- contribute in a real and selective way to the same goals of equity and justice which we have sought to achieve in tax reform. They build in, as well, stronger safeguards against periodic slowdowns in the growth of the total volume of demand, and thus add new dimensions to the automatic stabilization of the Canadian economy.
In the area of measures for strengthening the structure of the national economy, we have been concerned to integrate the short-term stimulus in spending with longer term structural needs. A major point of emphasis has been to increase the attractions to industry to make investments in slow-growth regions. This has been centred mainly, but by no means exclusively, in the industrial development programs of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion. A large part of these outlays are incentive grants to increase the productive capacity of the private sector. This development thrust has recently been bolstered by the designation of a major new region eligible for incentive grants and the new loan guarantee provisions added to the Regional Development Incentives Act. The special program to assist the shipbuilding industry announced only last December has also been quickly and remarkably effective. The new orders from France announced last week by my colleague, the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce, already have pushed the total value of work to be undertaken by Canadian shipyards under the program to some $250 million.
For the prairie region, we have provided-this year and last-a total of $185 million in direct aid to assist its basic agricultural industry. At the same time we are trying to provide for a new, long-term approach to stabilizing the incomes of prairie farmers. In the north, a stepped-up program of investment in the development of both human and natural resources, and in the protection of its fragile ecology, is well under way.
New initiatives and new investments are well advanced on important fronts-in transportation services, including new airports and the experimental program for short take-off and landing air services, in defining an appropriate federal role and contribution to the orderly development of major cities, and in bringing adequate federal resources to bear upon the problems of pollution and of the environment. All of these programs are of special relevance to our rapidly expanding metropolitan region where sustained and stable growth is of such importance to us all.
These measures taken together with the monetary policy are imparting a major stimulus to the economy. The full impact of this stimulus has yet to be felt, for the effects of policy action take time to build up. We can, accordingly, count on continuing impetus from the policies already in place. In addition, as I explained earlier, the income tax system that I have proposed tonight, to come into effect at the first of January, 1972, will take some $320 million less out of the economy than the present tax system. Corporations and millions of taxpayers will pay lower taxes than they are now paying. Not
The Budget-Mr. Benson
only that, but it will be a fairer system and one which will protect and enhance incentives to invest and to work. We may, therefore, count on the tax reform measures to add to the fiscal stimulus of the economy.
Budget Measures
As Minister of Finance, I have explained many times the view of this government that fiscal policy is not a once-a-year affair. Our record is that of a government that adjusts its fiscal stance to the requirements of a changing economy and not according to a rigid calendar. In keeping with this record, Mr. Speaker, I have further measures to recommend to the House now that will supplement those already adopted and whose effects are still being realized. The government is determined to do what governments can do to ensure that the expansion in real income and employment now under way shall be vigorous and broadly based. The building up of such an expansion depends ultimately on the decisions of the millions of persons and the thousands of businesses that make up the private sector of the Canadian economy.


George Harris Hees: There's a brand new statement.


Edgar John Benson: George, you read all this this afternoon.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


George Harris Hees: This is one of Don Fleming's old speeches.


Edgar John Benson: To achieve the results we seek, these decisions of investors and consumers cannot be defensive and protective; they must be bold and confident decisions. The principal measures I have to propose are designed to encourage this kind of confident spending in the private sector of the economy.
Income Taxes I
I propose first, Mr. Speaker, that effective July 1 the 3 per cent surcharge on personal incomes be removed. This measure alone will add $90 million to the buying power available to Canadian families and individuals between July 1 and the end of this year. The tax reform reduction that I outlined earlier tonight will continue this particular increase in consumer buying power into 1972 at an annual rate of $210 million.
Beyond this, I propose to change the lowest rates of federal tax to eliminate taxes after July 1 on persons with taxable income of less than $500. This immediate measure anticipates introduction of the new system with its benefits for taxpayers of lowest incomes. For example, a married taxpayer with two children will pay no further tax this year on employment income up to $3,200. The rate changes will also provide some tax relief between July and January for all taxpayers with taxable income under $3,000.
I also propose to assist pensioners with the lowest incomes. It is unfortunately true under our present rules that some of our most needy pensioners pay tax on part of the guaranteed income supplement they receive. I

June 18, 1971
The Budget

Mr. Benson
propose to exempt the supplement from tax, retroactitf to January 1, 1971.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


George Harris Hees: Long overdue.


Edgar John Benson: You are kidding me too much. In this I am again bringing forward a feature of the tax reform. The consequent tax saving will be very welcome to the needy pensioners who will benefit.
These last two changes mean an end of income taxes for more than three-quarters of a million Canadian taxpayers as of July 1.
I estimate that in the current fiscal year the cost in revenue of all these measures respecting the personal income tax will be in the order of $135 million.
Mr. Speaker, I want now to refer to corporation taxes and to propose and immediate change affecting all taxpaying corporations. The 3 per cent federal surtax on corporation income tax will be withdrawn effective July 1. This measure will leave about $40 million in corporate hands this year. There will be no surtax under tax reform legislation; thus, this particular advantage will also be a continuing one.
Sales and Excise Taxes
I have three important commodity tax reductions to propose tonight.
A sales tax on an important item of food has remained in our tax system too long. I refer to the 12 per cent sales tax on margarine. I am pleased to announce its immediate withdrawal. This exemption will also cover other similar spreads sold under brand names. This tax is between two cents and four cents per pound, depending on the product, and its removal will reduce revenues for a full year by about $7 million. The industry has promised to pass on the tax savings, and therefore the grocery bill of Canadians should be reduced by at least this amount.
To further encourage the acquisition of anti-pollution equipment, I wish to announce the immediate withdrawal of the sales tax on such equipment used in production. This new exemption will apply to all machinery and apparatus which manufacturers or producers acquire to detect, prevent, remove or reduce pollutants of water, soil or air. The exemption will reduce revenues by about $8 million a year.
The 15 per cent excise tax on home entertainment equipment such as hi-fi's, radios and television sets and certain other electronic items is particularly onerous for an important secondary manufacturing industry which is at a disadvantage relative to foreign competition in respect of this tax. I propose to repeal this tax. This action will reduce significantly the prices of these items. For example, on a major item such as a $500 television set, the retail price should come dow by at least $75. The reduction in revenues in a full year will be about $40 million.
Impact of Tax Measures
This group of measures, added to those we have implemented over the last year will, I am confident, provide any extra insurance that may be needed against the emergence of a pause in the expansion that got under way last fall. They are directed specifically to the encouragement of the spending and investment in the private sector at large which is so necessary to sustain an expansion of employment and income. The reduction of personal income taxes will make a quick and material contribution to the growth of consumer spending. The reduction of corporate taxes will give that sector added encouragement to make new investment and thus to gear for and contribute to the growth of demand. The reduction in commodity taxes will also have an important stimulating effect. All of these changes taken together with reductions in income taxes provided for in the tax reform, will give us an adjusted tax system that will provide a sure and firm foundation for confident decisions in the private sector of the economy.
Customs Tariff I
I should like to propose now a number of amendments to the Customs Tariff designed primarily to improve the competitive position of important Canadian industries. Like tariff changes in previous budgets, they are to come into effect tomorrow. Several of the important changes stem from two Tariff Board reports relating to the Canadian petrochemical industry. One is concerned with the duty on petroleum fractions used as feedstocks in making certain chemicals. The cost of feedstocks represents a significant element in the cost of making petrochemicals in Canada. The board recommended that the present rates of f cent per gallon under the British preferential tariff and 1 cent per gallon under the mostfavoured-nation tariff be reduced to J cent per gallon and this is the rate which I propose be implemented.
The second report involves the duty on polyethylene. Hon. members will recall that in my budget of October 22, 1968, I introduced a new schedule of tariff items for chemicals and plastics; the schedule was based on a Tariff Board study covering this important sector of the tariff. For synthetic resins the board proposed a duty of 10 per cent on most of the resins made in Canada. However, for polyethylene resins the board decided that the rate of per cent should remain unchanged. I asked the board to further review the duty on this product. In light of more recent information, the board recommended a 2J percentage point increase in the duty on polyethylene resin with corresponding increases in duty on further processed forms of polyethylene, bringing these rates into line with those on other Canadian-made plastics. These new rates do not require any renegotiations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade because they are the rates agreed to in the Kennedy Round. I am sure that the Canadian chemical industry will view the action taken on these two reports as a sign of the government's continuing interest in its healthy development.

June 18, 1971

As a result of the Kennedy Round a new tariff system was introduced for production machinery. A key feature of this machinery program was the provision for free entry for such machinery when it is in the public interest and when the machinery is not available in Canada. This program has been most successful in that it has ensured moderate protection to the Canadian machinery industry and at the same time assisted Canadian firms to reduce the costs of acquiring such capital equipment as must be imported. We have been reviewing the scope of this program and I am now proposing to extend it to machinery used in sawmills and logging, as a measure of assistance to the forest industry.
I have received representations from various interests-particularly from the pulp and paper producers and from utility organizations in the Atlantic provinces- expressing concern about the supply and price of heavy fuel oils. I am therefore proposing that the J cent per gallon duty on such oils be set aside for a two-year period. This will relieve the pulp and paper industry alone of over $3.5 million in costs.
These important changes in the Customs Tariff which I have outlined are intended to make clear that this government is prepared to take what steps are practical within our present tariff structure to reduce costs to Canadian users, to enable them to become more competitive, while keeping moderate protection where warranted.
There are, of course, a number of other tariff changes proposed of a relatively minor character. Some of them will reduce costs for certain industries, others are simply of a technical character intended to keep our tariff structure and language up to date. Details of all these changes are set out in the ways and means motion which I will be tabling.
I should like to refer to one further change in the tax legislation. This is a change to ensure that the withholding tax of 15 per cent is, in fact, applied on income received by non-residents on their investments in certain forms of commercial paper issued by Canadian debtors. This measure will help in effecting the adjustment of the capital flows in our balance of payments, a problem to which I referred earlier.
Let me now acquaint the House with our latest estimates of the revenues, expenditures and cash requirements of the government for the current fiscal year. I should refer briefly to the fiscal year 1970-71 first. The budgetary deficit for that year was just short of $420 million, which represents a swing of $810 million from the surplus of approximately $390 million in the previous year. On the non-budgetary side, the increase in cash requirements was rather more than $550 million, making a total increase in requirements last fiscal year compared with the previous year of more than $1,360 million. This is apart from funds required to finance exchange transactions. Whether certain payments will fall into one fiscal year or the next is always subject to some uncertainty as the calendar is rigid, but the progress of payments in
The Budget-Mr. Benson
relation to ongoing and expanding programs is less rigid. The increase in our total cash requirements was some $500 million less than I indicated in my budget of last December because of such factors. In respect of some categories of spending, these differences were fairly large, but there were offsetting changes in respect of others. The impact of the economic programs of the government upon the economy was not, however, materially affected by these rather technical matters of timing.
Some of these factors affect the forecast figures for the current fiscal year. In particular, they have served to make the non-budgetary cash requirements for the current fiscal year larger than I indicated last December. Taking account of the tax changes I have proposed tonight, I now anticipate that budgetary revenues in 1971-72 will be approximately $13,660 million and that budgetary expenditures will be approximately $14,410 million. This implies a budgetary deficit of $750 million. The net non-budgetary requirements apart from exchange fund transactions are expected to total $1,680 million. The total cash requirements would thus be $2,430 million, almost $1,250 million higher than last fiscal year.
With the permission of the House, Mr. Speaker, I should like now for the information of members to include as an appendix to Hansard tables in the form normally provided with budget speeches. These include a summary statement of our cash requirements for 1970-71 and our current forecast for 1971-72, the yields for the same two years of our main categories of budgetary and old age security revenues and again for the same two years, tables and explanatory notes giving the budget figures in terms of the national economic accounts in the form published by the Bureau of Statistics together with a reconciliation with the budgetary accounts.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's note: For tables referred to above see Appendix A]


Edgar John Benson: Pursuant to Standing Order 60(1) I should also like to table the notices of the ways and means motions related to the tax reform and budgetary proposals I have outlined.
[Editor's note: Text of Schedule "A" to Notice of Ways and Means motion respecting an act to amend the Income Tax Act and other acts printed separately.
For text of Schedules "B" and "C" see Votes and Proceedings.
For text of Ways and Means motion respecting Excise Tax Act and Old Age Security Act see Votes and Proceedings.
For text of Ways and Means motion respecting Customs Tariff, see Votes and Proceedings.
For text of Ways and Means motion respecting Old Age Security Act see Votes and Proceedings.]

June 18, 1971
The Budget-Mr. Benson


Edgar John Benson: Mr. Speaker, this brings me to the end of the budget speech-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Edgar John Benson: -or should I say two budget speeches. I have had to talk very slowly because the hon. gentleman opposite, although he has read it all afternoon, probably still does not fully understand it. Before I sit down I want to state, as simply as I can, where we are and where I think we are going.
I believe that the tax reform will give us a balanced and workable income tax system.
Starting from the premise that our society is undergoing profound change, the tax reform is a sensitive response to changing needs. It will enable us to raise in a much fairer way the taxes we need to make Canada function. It will be more equitable not only between the various sectors of our society but also within these groups. The load will be distributed more evenly and surely so that every person and every institution able to contribute will do so according to capacity.
The tax reform recognizes that we live in a private enterprise system in which effort and initiative must be rewarded if our society is to work effectively and efficiently. I believe that we have succeeded in striking a viable balance between equity and enterprise. This will enable us to get the savings and investment required for strong growth while ensuring that the less fortunate get a fair deal.
The tax reform recognizes that we live in a federal state and that the provinces must also obtain revenues from personal and corporation incomes. It has therefore been designed to permit and encourage the provinces to base their system upon it.
I believe that the tax reform will help create a mood and a setting in Canada in which we may with greater certainty and confidence proceed to solve our national problems through the decade of the seventies and beyond. I am hopeful, also, that it will make an early and telling contribution to the pressing problems of this year and next.
As to the problems of right now it is evident that unemployment is too high. There is too much slack in the economy. At the same time, costs are still rising at a rate that causes concern about future price developments. It is evident, also, that these problems are interrelated. They must be treated and solved together.
I am sure that we turned the corner late last year, and despite some apparent hesitancy are now clearly on the way up. I believe that the economy will gather strength and momentum as we move through the balance of this year. The tax reductions I have announced today will reinforce this upward trend and help speed us on this course.
I have no doubt that we will encounter squalls on the way and experience moments of uncertainty. We will
adjust as we have been adjusting and as the facts warrant. But we will not be driven into irresponsible and ill-considered action.
Mr. Speaker, I believe we are on course. We shall most certainly succeed.


Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure that all of us join in the generous applause that was given to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Benson) for his, shall we say, feat of sheer physical endurance and also in commiseration for our having to endure all of this. But I must say that we are glad to see that the minister has finally come to the end of his document, and it was high time he did. Because although I do not know who wrote it, on the last page there were references to "turning the corner", that we were "on the way up", that we will "encounter squalls", but that "we are on course". I do not know how many similes you want, but there it is.
It is not my intention to delay hon. members from their dinner hour for very long on this occasion.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear.


Mr. Lamberl (Edmonion West):: One way to become popular in this House, Mr. Speaker, is to be brief in your speeches. However, I am warning hon. members that if I cut my speech short today it is going to be that much longer on Tuesday, so they may as well all go fishing.
We had such a mass of documents presented to us at the briefing this afternoon that I was wondering what was coming. I did take a look over at the hon. member for Waterloo (Mr. Saltsman), and I would like you to look at him, Mr. Speaker, if you will excuse the personal reference, as I am sure the hon. member will. During the course of the year he had adopted a more modish hair style, yet at the beginning of the week he returned as he is now, plucked and shorn as any taxpayer expects to be when a Minister of Finance presents a budget. So, he has shown his expectations and he will tell us on Tuesday what he thinks about it.
I think the timetable for discussions with the provinces disclosed by the minister is quite right. There is no doubt about it that discussions will have to be had with the provinces. Although the tax documents do not speak, as the white paper did almost timorously, about co-operation with the provinces, the minister and the government now know that unless there is the active co-operation of the provinces all that has been written in the white paper and in this other document means nothing. The majority of the provinces in this country have already indicated that what was in the white paper was not acceptable to them, and that there was no way that this government was going to impose its will in this regard upon the provinces.
We heard a lot of applause this afternoon-


An hon. Member:: We are not hearing much now.

June 18, 1971


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Mr. Speaker, I know that the hon. member lost in the corner has to make some noise to indicate that he is in the House. This document was produced in a fiery Liberal reign. This was the document that was defended by the government in debate for nearly three weeks. For nearly three weeks, hon. members opposite participated as much as opposition members in the debate on the resolution to send this document, the tax reform proposals to the finance committee. I recall the Minister of Finance (Mr. Benson) and others running up and down the country trying to sell this document to the people, in spite of the controversial points raised this afternoon. He has been trying to present this proposal as though it were a new-found Jerusalem today. He has been trying to suggest that this document means a new discovery. We can notice the difference in the colour. The cover on this document is the same colour as tired blood. This summary of tax reform for the Canadian public has been toned down. Someone has suggested that the colour of the cover is representative of that blood cancer called leukemia, where the white corpuscules outnumber the red corpuscles, as though the Canadian nation had almost reached that point.
There are two aspects of the budget which have to be considered, and I will treat them with what I consider to be even priorities. One deals with the economic situation in this country and the measures this government proposes to provide to meet unemployment, and the other deals with proposed action to get the economy going as it should be. The minister has made much of a number of principles, and we have heard a great deal of cliches in that part of his speech following page 24 where he deals with the economy. He has been factual and correct in many instances when talking about tax changes, but it is rather interesting to see that in this field the government has accepted the recommendations of the Committee on Taxation. Members of the committee including myself and others-


Some hon. Members:: Oh oh.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: -including members of the government made these proposals and stood by them-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Hon. members should go back and read the speeches of December, 1969 and January, 1970. Read those speeches of hon. members at the first committee meetings. I am talking about the regular members of that committee rather than those who came in from time to time. I have reference to those people who sat regularly as members of this committee and made contributions. I know what they said and what the had in mind when they prepared the committee report.
The Budget-M. Lambert
After all, the Canadian public had indicated that the government's white paper was for the birds. How many times did the minister and his colleagues say that all these other measures in the budget would be good and provide a great stimulus, and would represent priorities in tax reforms, providing equity as between taxpayers? This was to be a complete reformation of taxation policy, but the Canadian public would not buy it. The Canadian public said it wanted equity between the taxpayer and the government.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, come on.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: The hon. member for Hamilton-Wentworth (Mr. Gibson) is happy sitting down making innuendoes from that position. I hope in due course he will get up on his feet and make a contribution to this debate.
In any event, the Canadian public said it was not interested in these government platitudes toward equity. We observe that this whole budget is based on the principle that a "Big Daddy", a "Grand Uncle" if you want, or the government knows best. We are going to see an increase in government revenue. Where will this increase take place? Without taking into account old age security, there will be an increase in revenue of $891 million this year over last year. This amount will be siphoned from the public and redistributed by this "Bid Daddy". This is the philosophy on which this administration moves. In 1963, total government revenue amounted to $6.4 billion. At this time we are moving toward revenues in the neighbourhood of $13,660 million, and this does not take into account the old age security plan or the Canada Pension Plan.
The government of Canada intends to take this amount of money from the economy and it is in this respect I say we differ. I will refer again in greater detail to this subject. We also have changes to the Income Tax Act. The minister spent a good deal of time, and used a lot of room to manoeuvre, because there were a lot of changes in the white paper he mentioned earlier.


Prosper Boulanger: And good ones, too.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: I am glad the hon. member has finally discovered this. The Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stanfield) was suggesting these same things in January and February of 1970. This is not a case of "I told you so", this is the way things are.


An hon. Member:: Do you support it? How are you going to vote?


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: We are going to look at these things in relation to the white paper. Everybody thought it was great when it came out earlier in November. We then heard the minister say everything was moving in the best possible way. He indicated his new budget would outline the best possible taxation system in the world. We heard the minister promise that the tax system was not designed to bring in more revenue. He
6910

June 18, 1971
The Budget-M. Lambert
told us in 1970 that his 1971-72 taxation policies would adhere to this principle. The minister's parliamentary secretary has told us that tax payments would not bring in new revenue and were not going to be related to a budgetary deficit. It has been our understanding that the government did not entertain the idea of increasing taxes on those who were-


An hon. Member:: We are going to miss you.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: I can assure hon. members that I have notes and could talk until 8.30. I can last as long as the minister.


An hon. Member:: Don't push him; he might do it.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I wonder if hon. members would allow the hon. member for Edmonton West (Mr. Lambert) to make his speech.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: I am not worried, Mr. Speaker. Because I realize you have had so much inflicted on you, and we want to preserve your good humour, instead of going along with hon. members opposite I will move the adjournment of this debate.
On motion of Mr. Lambert (Edmonton West), the debate was adjourned.
On motion of Mr. MacEachen, the House was adjourned at 7.32 p.m.
June 18, 1971



APPENDIX &quot;A&quot;


[Stage Direction]
Budgetary and Old Age Security Revenues (Millions of Dollars)
Public Accounts and National Accounts Reconciliation (Millions of Dollars)
	1970-71	1971-72
	Prelim- inary	Forecast after Tax Changes
Budgetary Revenues Personal Income Tax	
Corporation Income Tax	
Non-Resident Tax	
Estate Tax	
Custom Duties	
Sales Tax	
Other Duties and Taxes	5,263 2,217 258 120 814 1,708 964	5,960 2,000 280 100 840 1,870 1,020Total Taxes	
Non-Tax Revenues	11,344 1,425	12,070 1,590Total Budgetary Revenues	12,769	13,660Old Age Security Revenues Personal Income Tax	
Corporation Income Tax	
Sales Tax	1,132 208 563	1,270 170 630Total Old Age Security Revenues..	1,903	2,070
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE ON A NATIONAL ACCOUNTS BASIS (Millions of Dollars)
1970-71	1971-72
Forecast Prelim-	after Tax
inary	Changes
A-Revenue
Direct Taxes, Persons	
7,535	8,485Direct Taxes, Corporations	
2,115	2,235Direct Taxes, Non-Residents	
260	280Indirect Taxes	
4,075	4,400Other Current Transfers from Persons_	5	5Investment Income	
1,250	1,375Capital Consumption Allowances	
235	270Total Revenue	
15,475	17,050
B-Expenditure
Current Goods and Services	
4,540	5,030(Non-Defence)	
(2,675)	(3,160)(Defence)	
(1,865)	(1,870)Transfer Payments to Persons	
4,200	4,710Subsidies	
565	550Capital Assistance	
120	175Current Transfers to Non-Residents...	250	220Interest on the Public Debt	
1,880	2,030Transfers to Provinces	
3,675	4,225Transfers to Local Governments	
85	105Gross Capital Formation	
535	655Total Expenditure	
15,850	17,700C-Surplus (+) or Deficit (-)	
-357	-6501970-71	1971-72Forecast Prelim-	after Taxinary	Changes1.	Budgetary Revenue	
12,769	13,660
Deduct
2.	Budgetary Return on Investment....	-	989	-1,0453.	Post Office Revenue	
-	330	- 4104.	Other Non-Tax Budgetary Revenues	-	106	- 135(-1,425)	(-1,590)5.	Corporate Income Tax, Excess ofAccruals (+) over Collections (-)	- 310	65
Add
6.	Government Pensions and Social
Security Receipts	 2,883	3,145
Government Investment Income
7.	Interest on Loans, Advances and Investments	 521	590
8.	Interest Receipts on Social Insurance
and Government Pension Funds_____	419	415
9.	Profits before Taxes (net of losses) of
Government business enterprises...	310	370
(1,250)	(1,375)
10.	Capital Consumption Allowances....	237	27011.	Miscellaneous^* 1)	
71	12512.	Total Revenue, National AccountsBasis	
15,475	17,050
WThese miscellaneous adjustments represent insurance companies' tax revenues, miscellaneous indirect taxes, miscellaneous transfers from persons and adjustment for the supplementary period. In the national accounts, revenue in the supplementary period is shifted into the following fiscal year.

[Stage Direction]
Public Accounts and National Accounts Reconciliation (Millions of Dollars)
1970-71	1971-72
Preliminary	Forecast
1.	Budgetary Expenditure	 13,187	14,410
Deduct
2.	Budgetary Transfers to Funds and
Agencies^)	
-600	-5413. Post Office Expenditure	
-370	-4184.	Deficit of Government Business Enterprises	
-	84	-	875. Reserves and Write-offs	
-109	- 936.	Purchase of Existing Capital Assets. .	-	7	-	77.	Budgetary Revenue Items Offsetagainst Budgetary Expenditure^2)..	-	63	-	64(-1,233)	(-1,210)
24171-18£
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Add
8.	Government Pensions and Social
Security Benefits	
9.	Expenditure of Government Funds
and Agencies h>
10.	Capital Consumption Allowances....
11.	Miscellaneous^3*	
12.	Total Expenditure, National Accounts
Basis	
13.	Surplus (+) or Deficit (-), National
Accounts Basis	
14.	Surplus (+) or Deficit (-), Budgetary
Basis	
2,875	3,315
666	627
237	270
118	288
15,850	17,700
-375	-650
-418	-750
Net Ndri-Budgetary Transactions(1*	_
Excluding foreign exchange transactions...	-764
Total Government of Canada Financial Requirements	_
Excluding foreign exchange transactions..	- 1,182
Amount Required to Date to Finance Foreign
Exchange Transactions	 -1,255
Total Government of Canada Financial Requirements
Excluding future foreign exchange transactions	 -2,437
Win the National Accounts, budgetary appropriations to various 
[Stage Direction]
funds and agencies are replaced by the expenditure actually made by (1)xhia item includes the changes in the non-marketable these funds and agencies.	by the Unemploylnent Insurance Commission.
MThis item mainly consists of revenue from sales of goods and	(2)As of May 31, 1971.
services by the government. These sales appear as final expenditure of the private sector and are deducted to avoid double counting.
WThis item includes the supplementary period adjustment. In the National Accounts, expenditures on goods and services in the supplementary period are divided between adjacent fiscal years; most other expenditures are shifted entirely to the next fiscal year.
GOVERNMENT OF CANADA FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS (Millions of Dollars)
1970-71	1971-72
Forecast Prelim-	after Tax
inary	Changes
Budgetary Transactions
Revenues	
12,769	13,660Expenditures	
-13,187	-14,410
-1,680
-2,430
-	13 <2>
-2,443 bonds held
Surplus (+) or Deficit (-)
-750
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
presented by
the Honourable Edgar J. Benson, M.P. Minister of Finance
for the information of Parliament in connection with the Budget for 1971-72
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
The purpose of these Papers is twofold:
1.	to present a general economic review of 1970 and the first quarter of 1971, bringing together in one place and in convenient form some of the more comprehensive indicators of economic conditions prepared by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, the Bank of Canada and other government agencies, together with some comments;
2.	to present a preliminary review of the Government Accounts for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1971.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Table of Contents
List of Charts	
The Highlights of the Year 1970 and First Quarter 1971
The External Environment	
Employment, Output, Productivity and Costs	
Prices	
Private Sector Spending and Financing	
Personal sector	
Housing sector	
Business sector	
Non-Resident Sector	
Government Sector Spending and Financing	
Perspective on the government sector	
Current developments in revenues and expenditures
Federal government	
Provincial-local governments	
Government of Canada financial requirements....
Budgetary revenues	
Budgetary expenditures	
Non-budgetary transactions	
Foreign exchange transactions	
Financial Markets	
Monetary conditions	
The banking system	
Other financial institutions	
Securities markets	
Economic Prospects for 1971	
Index to Reference Tables	
Page
6921 6926 6928 6932
6934
6936
6947
6952
6955
6956 6956 6958
6959
6960 6960 6963
6966
6971
The tables, charts and figures quoted in this paper are based upon data provided by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, the Bank of Canada and other government agencies for the period ending March 31, 1971.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
List of Charts
Chart	Page
1	Canada-U.S. Economic Performance	
69222	International Comparison of Consumer Prices	
69263	Labour Market-Canada	
69294	Unemployment Rates by Region	
69305	Productivity, Labour Costs and Prices	
69326	Consumer Price Index	
69337	Residential Construction	
69368	New Private and Public Investment Expenditures	
69389	New Private and Public Investment Expenditures, excluding Housing, byRegion	
693910	Current Account Balances	
694211	Canadian Balance of International Payments	
694412	International Reserves and the Exchange Rate	
694613	Distribution of Government Expenditures	
694914	Government Sector Revenue and Expenditure, Total Public Sector	695115	Government Sector Revenue and Expenditure by Level of Government..	695316	Selected Interest Rates, Canada	
696117	International Interest Rate Comparisons	
696218	Chartered Bank Interest Rates	
6964
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
In 1970 and the early months of 1971 the Canadian economy turned from a period of relatively slow growth in demand and production to one of recovery and expansion. While it is difficult to be precise about turning points, it now appears that the transition took effect during the second half of last year, probably about the end of the third quarter. Since then, the state of the economy has been improving.
Both fiscal and monetary policy had been restrictive through 1969 and in the early months of 1970, for the purpose of slowing growth in demand for goods and services by government and by the private sector, in order to combat serious inflationary pressures. As the excess demand in the system came to be eliminated, the policy became more expansive. Throughout the period, the underlying purpose has been to move the economy on to a track of balanced and orderly growth, with high employment and an acceptable long-range performance of prices and costs.
The intended effects of the earlier strategy started to become evident during the first half of 1970, with prices increasing at a more moderate rate than in
1969.	Evidence of progress toward bringing increases in incomes more in line with the lise in productivity only started to appear much later in the year and in the early part of 1971.
In the course of the adjustment toward a more stable growth path, unemployment emerged as a problem of paramount importance. A sharp and sustained rise in unemployment through the first nine months of 1970 carried the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate from 4.7 per cent in January to 6.8 per cent in September. While the softening of demand pressure was clearly a factor, the speed and the extent of the rise were aggravated by an extraordinary swing in labour force participation rates, particularly among persons in the 14 to 24 year age group, and by the effects of time lost due to strikes and lockouts.
The growth in gross national expenditure in real terms, that is, after adjustment to eliminate the effects of price change, was 3.3 per cent for 1970 as a whole.
The last quarter of 1970 and first quarter of 1971 saw an average increase at almost a 4§ per cent annual rate.
The progress of events in 1970, like that of the preceding year, was seriously distorted by industrial disputes. Strikes in metal mining in the latter part of
1969	were followed by a new high level of activity in the mining and iron and steel sectors in the first quarter of 1970, with exports rising sharply. This activity was not sustained after inventories were replenished and the economic slowdown in the United States became more apparent. In the second quarter of 1970 a strike of towboat operators on the west coast caused much of the forest industry of that region to close down. The second quarter, and also the third, saw prolonged strikes and lockouts in the construction industry. Forest products in the east were affected by strikes in the third quarter, and in the fourth quarter a strike against General Motors in both the United States and Canada had far-reaching effects.
Employment gains in 1970 reflected the slowdown in the demand for goods and services; the increase in the number of new jobs, at 1.3 per cent, was below the long-run average. Employment in the first quarter of 1971 was running 2.2 per cent above its year-ago level. Varying rates of increase in the labour force in the past year or so have introduced an element of considerable instability into the labour market. On a year-ago quarterly comparison, the growth of the labour force has varied from 1.5 per cent in the first quarter of 1970 to 3 per cent in the third quarter of
1970	and to 3.9 per cent in the first quarter of 1971. As a result of these changes, and also as a result of the side effects of work stoppage due to the industrial disputes, the unemployment rate in recent quarters has shown variations not always consistent with the underlying strengths and weaknesses of the economy.
Price performance in 1970 and through the first quarter of 1971 improved noticeably from the inflationary conditions of 1969. While the falling price of food was an important contributor to the more satis-
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
percent change from same quarter year-ago
Per Cent
Per Cent
4
+
2

[Stage Direction]
percent change from same quarter year-ago

[Stage Direction]
seasonally adjusted quarterly average
Last data plotted: 1st quarter 1971.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
factory record of consumer prices, growing moderation in the advance of other prices also became apparent. Consumer prices excluding food were rising at close to a 5 per cent annual rate through most of 1969 and at about a 3| per cent annual rate through most of
1970.	Generally declining food prices over an eight-month period caused the overall consumer price index to show gains of less than 1| per cent at annual rates through most of 1970. A rebound of food prices in the first three months of 1971 caused the all-items consumer price index to increase at a 4| per cent seasonally adjusted annual rate. Removal of the volatile food component shows the advance in other consumer prices, on a seasonally adjusted basis, having further decelerated to about a 3 per cent annual rate.
Cost performance in the Canadian economy, particularly labour costs, continues to be less than satisfactory. While the trend in wage increases in new labour contracts has been marginally downward since early 1970, many settlements, in the construction industry in particular, are still for amounts far above any productivity gain foreseeable over the life of the contract. Thus, while the recent record on prices generally has been one of improvement, it is still not yet possible to assume that the danger of renewed inflation has been overcome.
The Prices and Incomes Commission reached agreement with business and professional leaders in early 1970 that whenever price increases were unavoidable, they should be clearly less than changes in costs. During the year the Commission investigated and reviewed a number of price and income increases, and made periodic reports. In the majority of cases they found price changes not incompatible with the agreed guidelines.
The performance of the Canadian economy compared to that of the United States, illustrated in Chart 1, has been relatively good. The total real advance of 3.3 per cent in Canada for 1970 contrasts sharply with a decline of 0.4 per cent recorded in the United States. Considerably more progress against inflation was made in Canada, with rates of increase in consumer prices by the first quarter of 1971 getting down to less than 2 per cent on a year-ago quarter comparison. The
seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for Canada was on a basically declining trend over the fourth and first quarters, while no comparable pattern has yet developed in the United States.
The fiscal and monetary stance of the authorities in Canada contributed to the maintenance of the forward momentum of the economy last year and in the early months of 1971. Monetary expansion, begun during early 1970, continued through the first quarter of 1971. The March 1970 Budget moved in the direction of economic stimulus. Projected cash requirements were significantly greater than those for 196970, and the substantial federal surplus for 1969, on a national income accounts basis, was expected to be largely reduced. As the year progressed, fiscal policy was adapted in a flexible manner to the changing economic situation. A reliance was placed on selective expenditure policies, to focus relief and stimulus where it was most required. The housing sector responded particularly well to the provision of extra funds to the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for special housing programs.
Dramatic shifts occurred in Canada's balance of payments in 1970. Canadian exports, especially to countries other than the United States, rose substantially while Canadian imports declined slightly. The trade surplus amounted to $3 billion and the current account surplus to $1J billion. These developments served to sustain economic activity in Canada. However, in combination with a reduction in the outflow of short-term capital, they brought about a rapid accumulation of reserves in the first five months of the year, which in turn led to the temporary floating of the Canadian dollar at the end of May. The Canadian dollar has remained strong since that time, having appreciated by about 6 per cent. While this contributed to the slowing down in the rate of price inflation, it has had adverse effects on the competitive position and the profitability of those Canadian industries which depend upon exports or compete with imports. Since the end of March 1970, a very substantial reduction in long-term inflows of capital into Canada has taken place. This has been as a result of the expansionary financial policies which have enabled Canadian borrowers to raise a substantially larger
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
proportion of the funds they require in Canada, and of the requests made by the Government to Canadian borrowers to minimize their use of foreign capital markets.
In the financial markets, the situation prevailing through 1969 changed markedly through 1970 and the first quarter of 1971. The historic high bond yields of 1969, in both Canada and the United States, started to come down in the first quarter of 1970 in what proved to be the most pronounced bond rally in recent history. While short-term bond and Treasury bill yields fell throughout the year, long-term yields did not decline substantially until the fourth quarter. The momentum of these developments continued into the early months of 1971, supported by relative monetary ease in both the United States and Canada and by a high degree of liquidity in the banking system, as reflected in prime lending rate reductions and continued investor interest in new issues. In the first quarter of 1971 the money supply (currency outside banks and all privately-held chartered bank deposits) was 13 per cent higher than it was in the first quarter of 1970.
During the period in which this White Paper was being prepared, preliminary estimates of the first quarter national income and expenditure accounts were released. The rate of growth in real output, as measured by constant-dollar gross national expenditure (GNE), was shown to be about 2)- per cent at seasonally adjusted annual rates, compared to over a 6 per cent annual rate in the fourth quarter of 1970. This raises the question as to whether or not the upturn was in fact being sustained.
Due to various factors, among them particularly the strike in the automobile industry in the fourth quarter, the aggregative GNE statistic may not be telling the whole story. Because of disruptions to production, the foreign trade balance and the "residual error"-the difference between total national income and total national expenditure-have particularly tended to affect the aggregative profile. As a consequence it is instructive to look closely at the components of GNE to try to get a clearer fix on underlying developments. Table 1 summarizes the changes in the main components.
Focussing on total domestic demand (which is all of GNE except the residual error and the foreign balance) it may be seen that economic activity did
pick up in the middle part of last year; that the economy did continue to advance in the fourth quarter, in spite of the strike in the automobile industry, albeit at a slightly slower rate; and that there was a continued forward expansion during the first quarter. After increasing at a 4 per cent annual rate through the middle part of 1970, total domestic demand in real terms advanced at less than a 3 per cent annual rate in the fourth quarter. This slowdown reflected a sharp running-down of inventories as the strength of final sales was maintained. In the first quarter of 1971, the growth of total domestic demand jumped to almost 8 per cent at a seasonally adjusted annual rate(1). This gain reflected both continued revival of general economic conditions and the rebound from the fourth quarter automobile industry strike. An element of uncertainty in interpreting the figures is the role of merchandise imports in relation to the increase in demand. The swing in the balance of external transactions appears to be largely accounted for by the position on automobile account with the United States (due to the strike itself and the strike recovery) rather than by a basic deterioration in trade performance. Only as more data become available will it be known whether imports are meeting a growing portion of rising demand at the expense of Canadian producers.
With regard to the components of total domestic demand, as indicated by the preliminary estimates for the first quarter, a number of points may be noted. Housing expenditures showed a very strong gain, up almost 20 per cent at a seasonally adjusted annual rate. Consumer spending on durable goods such as automobiles, appliances and home furnishings showed one of the largest increases in recent years. However, at least part of the auto sales recovery was due to the strike rebound. Retail inventories accumulated at a strong pace. In the manufacturing sector, with shipments outpacing the advance of production, stocks declined. For all sectors taken together there was a slight increase in total business inventories during the quarter. On the negative side, business fixed invest-
(1)These quarterly changes may be compared with the average rate of growth for the postwar period in total domestic demand (corrected for price change), which was 4.9 per cent per year.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Seasonally Adjusted at Annual Rates
Consumer	
Housing	
Government	
Business fixed investment.
Final domestic demand...
Inventory investment....
Non-farm business.... Other	
Total domestic demand...
Foreign balance	
Residual error	
Gross national expenditure.
Consumer	
Housing	
Government	
Business fixed investment.
Final domestic demand___
Total domestic demand...
Gross national expenditure.
		1970		1971
I	II	III	IV	I
		(Millions of dollars)		
37,984	38,280	38,776	39,400	39,8082,628	2,352	2,416	2,676	2,79611,952	12,128	12,144	12,420	12,6768,664	8,728	9,160	9,076	9,01661,228	61,488	62,496	63,572	64,296132	472	92	-528	-56372	604	524	-460	16-240	-132	-432	- 68	-7261,360	61,960	62,588	63,044	64,240452	580	112	1,364	276628	368	564	-180	8862,440	62,908	63,264	64,228	64,604
(Per cent change from preceding quarter at compounded annual rate)
-7.5 -20.5 23.9 -5.4	3.2 -49.1 6.0 3.0	5.3 11.3 0.5 21.3	6.6 50.5 9.4 -3.7	4.2 19.2 8.5 -2.7-2.4	1.7	6.7	7.1	4.6-6.7	4.0	3.9	2.9	7.80.4	3.0	2.3	6.2	2.4
ment was weak, showing small rates of decline in both the last quarter of 1970 and the first quarter of 1971, and consumer spending on non-durable goods and services apparently was also somewhat sluggish in the first quarter. On balance, the strengths considerably outweighed the weaknesses, and total domestic demand moved forward at a good pace.
The flow of information into the national accounts is never fully complete, so that it has always been necessary to revise the figures as more knowledge is gained. It was noted at the time of the release of the preliminary national accounts figures that a somewhat higher estimate of gross national expenditure
might be indicated for the first quarter in light of impending upward revisions in the balance of external transactions. There has been a tendency in many countries, including Canada, for the national accounts to understate the strength of the economy in the early stages of a recovery and, correspondingly, to understate weakness in the early phases of a downturn.
In the sections that follow, data for the year 1970 and first quarter 1971 are examined for all key sectors of the Canadian economy. Since this analysis may usefully be developed against the background of the international environment, we turn first to a brief account of recent international developments.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Inflation continued to be a problem of global proportions during 1970, and the resultant policy responses and pressures on capacity in the industrial countries gave rise to a marked deceleration of real economic growth during the year. Nevertheless, the world trade picture remained strong and interest rates generally declined substantially.
Price movements in the industrial countries during 1970 appeared more uneven than in 1969. Consumer prices during 1969 had generally increased at annual rates of some 4| to 6 per cent, while the 1970 increases showed a somewhat greater range. Although in some industrial countries progress was made towards reducing the rate of growth of consumer prices, in several others (including Germany, Italy, Japan and the United Kingdom) the rate of growth further accelerated. Chart 2 illustrates recent price trends in major industrial countries.
Whereas in 1969 real output had grown at rates ranging between 2 per cent in the case of the United Kingdom and 12 per cent in the case of Japan, the range in 1970 was between a fall of 0.4 per cent in the United States and a decelerating but still relatively high 11 per cent increase in Japan. Generally speaking, although the economic slowdown was most marked in North America, the rate of growth of real output in the industrial countries in 1970, at 2.6 per cent, was markedly below both the 4.9 per cent rate of growth realized in 1969 and the 4.8 per cent ten-year average.
The value of world trade increased rapidly, at a rate quite similar to that recorded during 1969, but as the price component was somewhat larger, the real rate of growth of world trade during 1970 was rather less than it had been during 1969. Despite a slowdown in the U.S. economy, U.S. import demand held up surprisingly well, and this, combined with the strong

[Stage Direction]
Per Cent 8
40 1960 - 40 1965 40 1965 - 40 1969 1969 - 1970*
Per Cent 8
FRANCE	JAPAN	UNITED


[Stage Direction]
Based on the latest available data.

June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
import demand in other countries because of strained domestic economic conditions, helps to explain much of the strength of the 1970 world trade picture.
In the United States there was a cessation of economic growth in 1970, and industrial production declined through most of the year. This slowdown was, however, accompanied by only a relatively slight deceleration of consumer prices. There was a shift in U.S. monetary and fiscal policy early in 1970 away from restraint and towards stimulation, the effect of which was obscured, first in the second quarter by a crisis in the U.S. financial system, and later by a prolonged General Motors strike. A result of the policy stimulus was that interest rates declined rapidly during the second half of the year and into early 1971. In the absence of a strong loan demand, reflecting the continuation of general economic weakness and the funding by corporations of short-term liabilities incurred in previous years, the U.S. banks' liquid position improved sharply. This permitted a massive liquidation of the banks' very large and rather expensive Eurodollar indebtedness which had been accumulated during 1968 and 1969, when U.S. domestic credit conditions had been extremely difficult.
Outside North America, despite evidence of rising inflationary expectations and the attainment of capacity production during 1969, authorities had been much slower to adopt restrictive policies. Hence during 1970 inflationary pressures in many industrial countries outside North America accelerated and wage settlements typically were in excess of 10 per cent per annum. Such settlements only served to strengthen already existing inflationary expectations, and to undermine the effectiveness of official policy.
Massive repayments by U.S. banks of their shortterm Eurodollar liabilities severely depressed Eurodollar rates. The resultant easing of the Eurodollar market spilled over into national capital markets and induced a substantial global decline in interest rates. These repayments also more than offset an encouraging improvement of the U.S. current account, and were instrumental in causing a massive deterioration of the U.S. balance of payments on the official settlements basis. The greater liquidity of the Eurodollar market complicated the work of monetary authorities in the industrialized countries outside
North America. In these countries during 1970 monetary policies typically were tightened for domestic anti-inflationary reasons and borrowers turned to the Eurodollar market to meet their domestic financing requirements, causing a vast accumulation of U.S. dollars in official hands outside the United States.
On January 1, 1970 a major event occurred with the allocation of 3.4 billion units of SDRs to IMF member countries participating in the Special Drawing Account. This represented the initial distribution of SDRs under a plan, agreed to earlier, which provided for the creation of a total of 9.5 billion units of this new fiduciary reserve asset during a three-year period ending December 31, 1972. Use of the new facility during 1970 was smoothly implemented and the new reserve asset was used by a broad range of countries in transactions with other monetary authorities and with the General Account of the International Monetary Fund. Late in 1970 there was an increase in members' IMF quotas, augmenting IMF resources by about one-third to enable the IMF to meet the increasing demands arising from the continued growth of the world economy. The Canadian quota was increased by about 50 per cent, from U.S. $740 million to U.S. $1.1 billion.
Discussions prior to 1970 about SDRs had been based on an assumption that annual increments in international liquidity equivalent to U.S. $5 billion would be appropriate, and this was reflected in the agreed-upon level of SDR creation for the initial three-year period. In fact, the total increase in international liquidity in 1970 was U.S. $14 billion, and continuation of this trend into 1971 gave rise to a major outburst of speculation in May of this year involving several European currencies. These recent events may have delayed the implementation of the decision, made last February by the EEC member countries, to harmonize national economic policies. These countries have delayed action on the decision to reduce internal exchange rate flexibility as the first phase of a move toward monetary union. Further advances in European integration, however, together with developments arising from United Kingdom membership in the EEC, if this should eventuate, may be expected to have a substantial impact on Canada and on the system of world trade and payments generally.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Employment and unemployment
The slower rate of growth in the economy in 1970 was reflected in a reduced growth in the demand for labour. The 1.3 per cent increase in employment for the year was far from sufficient to absorb the increase in labour supply. The combination of an extraordinary rise in the participation rate of the labour force population during the first half of 1970, together with the reduced demand for labour, caused a sharp rise in unemployment during the first nine months; the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate increased from 4.7 per cent in January to 6.8 per cent in September.
A decrease in the unemployment rate to 6.5 per cent in the fourth quarter and to 6.2 per cent in the first quarter of 1971 was one indication that the economy was starting to expand at a more rapid rate. A decline in the participation rate during the third quarter, and its subsequent levelling off in the fourth quarter, was a notable feature of the national labour market during the closing months of 1970. Thus, the swing in the overall participation rate during the year aggravated the unemployment situation in the first half of the year but contributed to its improvement in the second half. As shown in Chart 3, the participation rate has continued to move erratically in the early months of 1971. The erratic behaviour of participation rates during 1969 and 1970 has caused the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate by itself to become a less reliable indicator of underlying economic conditions than it has been in the past. The month-to-month movement of employment may be regarded as a better guide to the strength or weakness of the economy.
As noted above, average employment in 1970 was up by only 1.3 per cent over 1969, as compared to a 3.2 per cent gain in 1969 and an average annual increase of 3.3 per cent during the 1960s as a whole. While this employment performance for the year as a whole compares unfavourably with the last decade of rapid job creation, trends within the latter part of the year and in the first quarter of 1971 were much more encouraging. Between September 1970 and March 1971 employment grew at more than a 3 per cent seasonally adjusted annual rate.
During 1970, the biggest employment gains were in the service industries, where a gain of 107,000 or 5.6 per cent was observed. However, employment in
manufacturing, construction and transportation, communications and other utilities declined in 1970, in contrast to the substantial increases of previous years. Manufacturing employment fell by 29,000 as compared to an average increase of 34,000 per year between 1965 and 1969, while employment in the trade, finance, service and public administration sectors continued to climb in 1970 although at reduced rates of increase.
The average size of the labour force during 1970 was up by 211,000, or 2.6 per cent, over the average for
1969.	This compares with an average labour force gain over the 1961-1969 period of 2.9 per cent per year. The increase in the supply of labour was entirely the result of the growth in the working age population since the upward swing in the participation rate during the first two quarters and its subsequent fall during the remaining months offset each other and yielded an average labour force participation rate for 1970 unchanged from 1969, at 55.8 per cent. In the first quarter of 1971 labour force growth, at an annual rate of 3.3 per cent, was above the ten-year trend rate.
Unemployment averaged 495,000 persons during
1970,	or 5.9 per cent of the labour force. This compares with an average rate of 5 per cent over the decade of the 1960s. The increase of 113,000 in unemployment over the 1969 level was mainly the result of the lower-than-average number of employment opportunities created, since the growth in the labour force was slightly lower than the average annual increase during the 1960s.
Changing labour market conditions in 1970 also resulted in significant changes in the composition of the labour force. On the demand side, about 60 per cent of the increase of 99,000 in total employment was accounted for by women. In contrast, women accounted for only about 40 per cent of the increase in labour supply. The impact of the lower growth in employment was particularly felt by young men 14 to 24 years of age. The unemployment total of this group averaged 154,000 in 1970, or 12.3 per cent of its labour force. Employment among men aged 14 to 24 years of age increased by only 10,000, while the labour force in this age-sex group showed a gain of 51,000. As an indication of the extent to which higher unemployment was concentrated among the
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Monthly, Seasonally Adjusted)
Thousands	Thousands
PerCent	PerCent
Percentages are compounded annual rates of change between periods indicated. They are presented to provide a suitable perspective for assessing most recent developments.
Last data plotted: March 1971.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
fringe groups of the labour market in 1970, it may be noted by contrast that the average number of unemployed married men was 182,000, up by 35,000 from 1969. This represents an unemployment rate of 4.3 per cent in this age-sex group as compared to 3.6 per cent in 1969. Thus, the unemployment rate among married men showed an increase of only 0.7 points compared with an increase in the total rate of 1.2 points.
Output, productivity and costs
The relationship between aggregate demand and productivity is one which tends to follow a characteristic cyclical pattern. During a slowdown of the economy, firms cut back on production and subsequently on employment, or slow their rate of growth. In the aggregate, there will be lower levels of real output and eventually of employment, or slower growth in these indicators, during the period of the slowdown. Productivity, broadly measured as real output per worker, will tend to decline as workers put in fewer hours, and plant and equipment are employed at less than optimum capacity. Rising or accelerating demand will bring about an increase in real output, but this increase may, for a while, be produced by those having jobs, as a result of longer hours and more efficient use of existing capital. Eventually, rising demand will lead to the need to expand output further and employers will then increase their worker requirements. In this manner employment increases tend to follow with a lag the upsweep of general economic conditions.
Total output as measured by the index of Real Domestic Product (RDP) rose by 2.9 per cent in 1970, compared to the previous ten-year average annual rate of growth of 5.4 per cent. Most of the 1970 weakness was concentrated in the second and third quarters and was centred in the goods-producing industries. In this sector output dropped by approximately 0.7 per cent in each of these two quarters. In terms of yearly growth rates this decline in goods production over the mid-year represented a fall of nearly 3 per cent, in contrast to the ten-year average
annual rate of gain of 5.5 per cent. The mid-year fall in output appears to have been in large part a consequence of record levels of work stoppage due to industrial dispute, particularly in the goods-producing industries. However, it was also a reflection of lower demand in the housing sector and for consumer durables.
Productivity in the total economy, expressed in terms of real output per worker employed, rose by
1.5	per cent in 1970. The role of productivity is very important in a period of recovery and renewed growth. If the general price level is rising at less than the rate of increase in wage and salary costs, corporate profits per unit of output will likely fall or a significant increase in labour productivity must take place to allow producers to cover costs. As it turned out, the rise in productivity in 1970 was insufficient to offset the rise in wage and salary costs, and corporate profits per unit of output fell by over 9 per cent. The relation among productivity, unit labour costs, and the GNE implicit deflator is shown in Chart 5, overleaf.
Developments in the fourth quarter of 1970 and the first quarter of 1971 suggest that the turning-point in unit wage costs and unit profits may have been reached. Profits per unit of output fell by 13.1 per cent in the fourth quarter, but rose by 9.6 per cent in the first three months of 1971. Wage costs per unit of output, which had risen by 1.0 per cent in the third and fourth quarters, showed some further gain in early 1971. However, evidence is now mounting that wage pressure is diminishing, although the extent of the improvement is as yet only modest. The average annual increase in the base rate negotiated in new labour contracts, expressed as a compound rate over the life of the contract, fell from 9.0 per cent in the first quarter of 1970 to 7.9 per cent in the fourth. Contracts agreed upon in the first quarter of 1971 yielded a compound rate of 7.6 per cent. These wage gains are still well above any foreseeable increase in productivity, and thus open up the possibility that further price advances will emerge as economic growth is re-established.
[Stage Direction]


June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Per Cent

[Stage Direction]
Per Cent
[Stage Direction]
Price trends in Canada throughout 1970 indicated a substantially reduced degree of inflation. This was true of all the major price measures, although it was most apparent in the consumer price index, which advanced, on the average, by 3.3 per cent compared to a rise of 4.5 per cent in the previous year.
Falling food prices contributed most heavily to the reduction in the rate of growth of the consumer price index in 1970. The food index reached its peak in April 1970, after which, except for seasonal movements in July and August, it fell relatively rapidly throughout the rest of the year. A number of factors contributed to this decline. Farm prices were lower in both the United States and Canada, and, in Canada, the appreciation of the Canadian dollar after the end of May undoubtedly had an impact on the prices of food imports. Towards the end of the year a price war among supermarket chains in many provinces caused food prices to fall still further. After the end of the year food prices began to rebound, partly due to the usual seasonal rise in many components. As a result there was a rather sharp upward movement in the food index, and hence in the total index, during the first quarter. The jump in food prices more than offset the moderate increases recorded for consumer services and shelter in the early months of 1971.
Consumer prices excluding food also showed slower rates of advance in 1970. The index for all items, excluding food, advanced by 3.8 per cent in the year compared to a rise of 4.6 per cent the year before. The transportation index rose by 4 per cent, compared to 4.6 per cent in 1969. Clothing prices halved their rate of advance. Shelter costs, however, continued to increase rapidly, although the rise in the cost of other services was moderated perceptibly. The moderating trend has become more apparent in
1971.	Seasonally adjusted, the total index excluding food rose at an annual rate of less than 3 per cent in the first quarter, and the cost of services excluding shelter recorded an annual rate of gain of less than 2 per cent. Shelter costs, although still pushed upward by the
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Monthly, Seasonally Adjusted)
1961	1962	1963	1964	1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971
Percentages are compounded annual rates of change between periods	Last data plotted: March 1971.
indicated. They are presented to provide a suitable perspective for assessing most recent developments.
6934
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
rising price of new houses (reflecting sharply higher construction labour costs), and by the lagged effect of recent high mortgage interest rates, have also shown a more moderate growth trend than in recent years. Chart 6 shows trends in various components of the consumer price index since 1961.
Implicit price indexes in the national accounts told the same story of moderating price advances in 1970. The total GNE implicit price deflator (which is constructed using current weights, rather than the weights of the base period as in the CPI) advanced strongly in the first quarter of 1970, recording a gain of 2 per cent; in the fourth quarter, however, the gain was a modest 0.2 per cent. For 1970 as a whole the GNE deflator rose by 4 per cent, down from the 1969 advance of 4.7 per cent. The deflator for business capital formation recorded a 3 per cent advance for the year, with negligible changes in the second and third quarters, and machinery and equipment prices remained flat in the entire second half, likely as a consequence of the exchange rate appreciation. Construction prices showed mixed trends, with the non-residential category revealing small and variable movements in the quarterly gains throughout the year, while the price of residential construction
accelerated sharply in the fourth quarter after three quarters of steady gains. The prices of goods and services purchased by governments followed an erratic pattern in the year but on an annual basis advanced by 5.4 per cent, well below the 1969 rise of 9 per cent. This price series is in any case subject to particular difficulties of measurement, and quite substantial quarterly fluctuations are not uncommon. Export and import prices recorded annual advances of approximately 3 per cent and 2 per cent respectively; however, practically all the 1970 increases occurred in the first quarter.
The Industry Selling Price Indexes (ISPI) indicate the movement of manufactured goods prices, net of sales tax and handling charges. The most volatile component of the total ISPI over the last two years has been the wood prices component, which fell by over 10 per cent in 1970 compared to an advance of 7.4 per cent in 1969. The important group of primary metals prices rose by 6.1 per cent in 1970, slightly less than the 7 per cent advance in 1969. However the third and fourth quarters of 1970 showed much more moderate trends and prices actually fell by nearly 2 per cent in the last quarter.

[Stage Direction]
The personal sector
Personal income in 1970 grew less rapidly than in 1969, principally because of a reduced rate of employment gain, but also in reflection of less farm output. The advance of 7.7 per cent was offset to a considerable extent by rising personal tax payments and an advance in consumer prices; personal disposable income in real terms was only 2.7 per cent higher in 1970 than in 1969. The comparable advance in 1969 had been 4.6 per cent. In the first quarter of 1971, the gain over the same quarter a year previous was 4.7 per cent, which reflects both an advance in incomes and the relatively improved price performance.
Wages, salaries and supplementary labour income in 1970 rose by 8.9 per cent, significantly less than the 12.2 per cent gain of the preceding year. Preliminary figures for the first quarter of 1971 indicate an advance at an annual rate of only 7.5 per cent. The number of paid workers in 1970 rose by only half as much as in 1969. Some deceleration of income per worker was also evident. This may have been partly
a consequence of widespread work stoppage due to industrial disputes in construction and manufacturing, where average earnings per worker are relatively high, but it may also have reflected a tendency toward some moderation in the rate of increase in wage and salary rates toward year-end.
Net farm income fell by 29 per cent in 1970. Because the prairie grain crop is included in income in the year in which it is grown (whether or not it is sold), the sharp reduction in wheat acreage which occurred during the year in response to the federal government LIFT program (Lower Inventories for Tomorrow) caused a sharp fall in the accrued value of farm production. On a cash basis, farm cash income fell by 0.6 per cent in the year, with gains in income from livestock, crops other than grains, and LIFT payments virtually offsetting a 1127 million drop in income from the sale of grains. Payments made to prairie farmers under the LIFT program are not included in accrued farm income in the national
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
accounts, but rather under governmental transfers to persons. These payments amounted to $52 million in the year.
Personal income after taxes in 1970 rose by 6 per cent, while total personal expenditure on goods and services rose by 5.3 per cent. Only purchases of nondurable goods (such as food, beverages, medical supplies and the like) maintained a rate of advance comparable to that of recent years, recording a gain of over 8 per cent in the year. Purchases of durable goods, particularly automobiles, fell very sharply in the first quarter and showed little growth thereafter through 1970. Total durable purchases for the year were 5.5 per cent below those for 1969, which was itself a year of only modest growth. In the wake of the recovery from the fourth quarter automobile strike, consumer spending on durable goods in the first quarter showed one of the largest increases in recent years. Not all of the gain reflected new car sales, as spending on other durable goods, particularly home furnishings and household appliances, also rose quite strongly.
Personal savings, as measured in the national accounts, represented 7.4 per cent of personal disposable income in 1970, somewhat higher than the 6.8 per cent of the preceding year, despite the impact of the reduction in accrued net income from wheat farming. (Farm inventories and grain in commercial channels fell by $178 million during the year, after a rise of $356 million in 1969). At year end the savings ratio was just above the average level for the year as a whole. It increased still further in the first quarter of 1971 as a consequence of some apparent softness in consumer spending on non-durable goods and services.
The use of consumer credit in 1970 increased much less rapidly than in most recent years. Total consumer credit outstanding rose by only about 5 per cent compared to a rise of 13 per cent in 1969 and over 14 per cent the year before. Repayments exceeded new borrowing in the fourth quarter in the case of consumer loans from sales finance companies and consumer loan companies. Department stores and other retail dealers carried progressively lower outstanding balances on their customers' accounts until close to year end, while furniture and appliance dealers carried declining balances until the end of the third quarter, after which time their balances again began to grow. Chartered bank personal unsecured loans grew by 7.7 per cent on average during the year, down considerably from over 22 per cent in 1969. Life
insurance policy loans rose sharply in 1970. These can be a relatively cheap source of credit at a time of high market cost of borrowing. In total, such loans represented only about 6 per cent of total credit outstanding.
The liquidity of the personal sector thus improved through most of 1970, as credit outstanding in relation to income declined. There was a substantial gain in personal sector liquid assets as savings deposits at the chartered banks rose by over 10 per cent in the course of the year, and holdings of Canada Savings Bonds at year end were more than 11 per cent higher than a year previous.
Personal loans from chartered banks did not begin to pick up until early in 1971. The advance was slow in January, but loans outstanding rose at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 25 per cent in February and almost 20 per cent in March.
In summary, consumers' spending in recent quarters has been relatively weak. In the face of rising personal incomes and sluggish spending, savings rates have been running at high levels. Taken together with the fact that consumer credit outstanding in relation to personal income has declined, there is the potential for a significant advance of consumer spending in the near-term future.
The housing sector
A sharp turnaround in housebuilding activity occurred over the past five quarters. A decline in new housing starts, which had begun in the second quarter of 1969, reached a low point of 139,000 units, seasonally adjusted annual rate, in the second quarter of 1970. Subsequent quarters saw a substantial recovery, first of starts, then later of residential expenditures. The decline and subsequent recovery of housing starts is clearly illustrated in Chart 7.
Several factors contributed to the sharp drop in housing starts through 1969 and the first half of 1970. The flow of private institutional funds into the mortgage market had progressively declined in the face of a policy of monetary restraint. It was not until the second quarter of 1970 that lending commitments began to pick up, and these funds were not translated into housing starts until considerably later. During this period, interest rates rose to historically high levels, and it is likely that interest costs became a major consideration in decisions regarding construction activity. The second quarter of 1970 was also-
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Quarterly)*
Thousands	TOTAL	ThousandsThousands	SINGLE	Thousands
Seasonally Adjusted by the Dept, of Finance.
HOUSING EXPENDITURE Per Cent
Thousands	MULTIPLE	Thousands
Last data plotted: 1st quarter 1971.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
characterized by construction strikes and lock-outs, particularly in British Columbia and to a lesser extent in Quebec. These disputes had a substantial impact on housing activity in both provinces.
A marked pick-up in housing starts occurred during the third quarter and even more dramatically in the fourth. Privately-financed multiple unit starts were part of the increase in activity, following a pick-up in institutional lending, along with an acceleration in starts of units financed by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. The prime impact of CMHC lending activity, however, was felt in the fourth quarter, with such starts in particular pushing the total seasonally adjusted rate up to 256,000 units.
As noted further on in the discussion of federal government non-budgetary expenditures, substantial additions to the CMHC capital budget in the course of 1970 were an important channel for increasing the amount of stimulus in the system.
At year end a total of 190,500 new units had been started, 9.5 per cent less than the record 210,400 units started in 1969. Nevertheless, 1970 activity still represented the third highest level of starts on record.
The declining profile for new housing starts through to the second quarter of 1970 so reduced the amount of construction in progress that residential expenditures in 1970 ended up 8 per cent below what they were in 1969. With increases in labour costs and building material prices accounting for some of the value of work put in place during the year, the volume of new housing as measured by constant-dollar expenditures was down by 11 per cent. The third and fourth quarter upsweep in starts began to show up in the expenditure figures toward year end. Housing outlays in the first quarter of 1971 rose to a $4.1 billion seasonally adjusted annual rate, $800 million higher than the rate of spending registered in the second quarter of 1970. The strength of housing starts in the early months of this year has ensured the maintenance of high rates of housing expenditures in the months ahead.
The business sector
Despite the dampening effects of sluggish consumer demand and generally declining profits, the 1970 increase in total business outlays on nonresidential construction and new machinery and equipment was almost as great as that of 1969. Business fixed investment, on a national accounts basis, rose by 8 per cent to $11.2 billion in 1970
from $10.3 billion in 1969. The construction portion rose by just over 10 per cent, or double the rise of the preceding year. In contrast, the advance in spending on new machinery and equipment, at 6.2 per cent, was little more than half the advance recorded in 1969. After removing the effects of price and cost changes the contrast is even more striking; constant dollar construction outlays rose for the first time after two years of decline while machinery purchases showed an even greater slowdown from the previous year than indicated by the current dollar data.
Quarterly data for the year 1970 show most of the strength in fixed investment spending through the middle part of the year. The softness evident in fourth quarter expenditures which, on a seasonally adjusted basis, were unchanged from the third quarter, continued into the new year. Preliminary estimates for the first quarter of 1971 show less than a one per cent quarterly rise. On a year-ago-quarter comparison, business fixed investment in the first quarter was up by 7 per cent or just slightly above the 6^ per cent gain for 1971 as a whole indicated by the 1970 year-end survey of investment intentions. Investment spending over the past decade and the intentions for 1971 are illustrated in Chart 8.
All the major industrial groupings except forestry shared in the 1970 investment growth. (Industrial detail is not available for the early months of 1971). The greatest increase in both dollar and percentage terms occurred in the manufacturing sector where fixed investment outlays advanced by over 23 per cent. Expenditure by utilities recorded a gain of over 9 per cent, an increase which was almost matched in the trade sector. Other industry groups recorded relatively small changes.
Chart 9 shows the allocation of total investment by region for the record and for 1971 intentions. Expenditure gains during 1970 were particularly concentrated in Ontario and the Atlantic region while the intentions figures for 1971 show more strength in investment in British Columbia and Quebec in addition to further increases in Ontario.
Inventory investment by the non-farm business sector amounted to only about $300 million in 1970 as compared to well over $500 million in 1969. This relatively small advance was the result of rising net additions in each of the first three quarteis, and a sharp reduction in the rate of accumulation in the fourth quarter as motor vehicle stocks dwindled. Only a small accumulation was recorded in preliminary estimates for the first quarter of 1971.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Annual)
$ Billions	* Bim°ns
DBS: Private and Public Investment in Canada, Outlook 197!.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Annual)
$ Billions	$ Billions
*DBS; Private and Public Investment in Canada, Outlook 1971.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Outlays for non-financial capital acquisition by non-financial private corporations remained virtually unchanged in 1970 from their 1969 level. However, it was a year in which these corporations made reduced demands on other sectors for net new funds. Gross domestic saving rose slightly; the decline in net profits was reflected in reduced retained earnings, but the capital consumption allowance and miscellaneous valuation adjustments item continued to advance. Net borrowing declined by close to 25 per cent. At the same time, these corporations readjusted the structure of their financial assets and liabilities, more particularly on the liabilities side. As described in a later section of this White Paper, a large volume of the short-term debt acquired in 1969 was funded into long-term forms in 1970. As shown in table 2, of the total net new borrowing in 1970, which amounted to just under $3 billion, about $2.5 billion
was in long-term forms, while the net increase in short-term liabilities was less than $500 million. In 1969, when total net borrowing had amounted to $4.1 billion, nearly $1.9 billion had been in shortterm forms. Non-financial corporate liquidity was also increased by a rise in short-term lending and a large decline in long-term lending compared to the 1969 pattern.
Further detail on the sources of funds for nonfinancial corporations is set out in table 3. This table shows the changes in use of selected sources of finance, and here again the great increase in bond financing in 1970 is clear. This financial pattern has persisted into early 1971, with a substantial volume of net new corporate bonds being issued in the first quarter. Use of other sources of funds has continued at reduced levels.

[Stage Direction]
Sources of Funds	
Gross domestic saving (internally generated funds) Discrepancy* *1)	
Net increase in liabilities (borrowing)	
Short-term borrowing*2)	
Long-term borrowing*3)	
Uses of Funds	
Non-financial capital acquisition	
Discrepancy(1)	
Net increase in financial assets (lending)	
Short-term lending*2)	
Long-term lending*3)	
Lending (+) or Borrowing (-)	
Short-term	
Long-term	
Discrepancy*1)	
1969	1970
(Millions of dollars)	
10,706	10,118
6,269	6,664
329	484
4, 108	2,970
1,858	474
2,250	2,496
10,706	10,118
8,760	8,734
-328	-483
2,274	1,867
777	998
1,497	869
-2,491	-2,070
-1,081	+524
-753	-1,627
-657	-967
U)Reflects discrepancy between real and financial accounts as well as errors and omissions in both sets of accounts. **)Loans, short-term paper, payables, receivables, currency and deposits.
*3)Mortgages, bonds, claims, stocks, foreign investments, other assets and liabilities.
Source: DBS Financial Flow Accounts, Quarterly, Cat. 13-002, 4th Quarter 1970.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1968	1969	1970
	(Millions of dollars)		
Increase in chartered bank loans^			
Business 	
648	1,307	439Farm and grain dealers	368	-315Increase in IDB loans	54	68Business financing by sales finance companies(3)	
245	180	-167"Bankers' acceptances	53	235Net new issues of commercial paper<4>	
129	245	-38Net new issues of:	Corporate bonds	727	1,273Stocks	
525	796	257Direct investment from abroad	
590	655	760Total	
3,172	4,385	2,512
e=estimated by the Bank of Canada.
(I>
Excludes foreign currency loans to Canadian residents, and provincially-guaranteed loans to utilities. (2>Includes financial corporations.
(^Increases in balances outstanding on wholesale finance and retail sales of commercial and industrial goods. (4>Excluding finance and loan company paper.
Soorce: Bank of Canada Statistical Summary, also Bank of Canada Annual Report for 1970.

[Stage Direction]
The current account
Canada's current account balance, that is, the difference between receipts and expenditures in current transactions with other countries, was in surplus by $1,297 million in 1970. This represented an improvement in Canada's current account of over $2 billion over the current account deficit of $751 million recorded in 1969. This record current account surplus was the first surplus recorded since 1952, when it was $187 million. The sharp improvement in the current account balance was entirely due to an unprecedented merchandise trade surplus for 1970 of over $3 billion. The balance on nonmerchandise transactions continued to deteriorate in 1970, the deficit increasing from $1,611 million in 1969 to $1,705 million.
The strong current account situation continued into the first quarter of this year. According to preliminary estimates, the surplus on the current account was relatively unchanged from what it was a year ago. The main factor contributing to this strength
was a $2.9 billion surplus for merchandise trade, a gain of $100 million over the surplus recorded during the same period a year ago.
During the past year, merchandise trade between Canada and the rest of the world reflected the relatively subdued pace of economic activity in Canada and the United States and buoyant conditions in other principal markets such as some Western European countries and Japan. This situation brought about an increase of 13 per cent in Canada's exports, while imports declined slightly.
Much of the buoyancy in Canada's export trade was due to a greater Canadian penetration of overseas markets; the share of exports going to these market areas rose from 29 per cent in 1969 to 35 per cent in 1970. Notable increases were observed in shipments to Britain and continental Europe, each registering a 34 per cent increase over 1969. The Japanese economy increased its demand for Canadian products by 27 per cent, and exports to other overseas countries rose by 38 per cent, with more than one-third of the increase being in wheat exports.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
BALANCE OF PAYMENTS BASIS (Quarterly, Seasonally Adjusted)
$ Millions	J Millions

[Stage Direction]
Last data plotted: 4,h quarter 1970.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
The United States' share of Canadian exports fell from 70 per cent in 1969 to 65 per cent in 1970. In spite of the recessionary conditions in the U.S. economy during 1970, Canadian exports to that market rose by 4 per cent with non-automotive exports increasing by 6 per cent. As imports declined by over 3 per cent, the merchandise surplus with the United States rose from $371 million in 1969 to $1,085 million in 1970.
A number of factors were responsible for the strong growth in exports from 1969 to 1970. In the early months of 1970, the shipments of iron ore, steel, nickel and copper benefitted from a pent-up demand for these products, which had developed in the second half of 1969 as a result of work stoppage due to industrial disputes in the metals and minerals industries. Later in the year, industrial disputes curtailed exports of forest products, aluminum and automotive products. In addition, exports of forest products were adversely affected by the low level of residential construction activity in the United States. Automotive exports remained virtually unchanged from 1969, partly as a result of the General Motors strike in the fourth quarter and partly due to the depressed state of the car market in North America. A substantial increase was recorded in exports of manufactured goods other than automotive products. Shipments of wheat and wheat flour, which had dropped by over $200 million in 1969, regained their 1968 level of $747 million. Vigorous disposal policies of the Canadian government together with severe drought conditions in some other exporting countries resulted in major sales to Russia and China. Substantial increases in shipments of barley and rapeseed also contributed to the strong recovery of farm exports.
In contrast to the export picture, the trend for imports was weak throughout the year. In the fourth quarter imports, seasonally adjusted, plunged to their lowest level since the third quarter of 1968. This sharp deterioration was entirely linked to the substantial decline in strike-affected automotive imports during that quarter. Together with the relative weakness of automotive imports over the first three quarters, when they remained at about their 1969 levels, automotive imports declined by 10 per cent in 1970 as a whole. Imports of other commodities rose by roughly 2 per cent during the year, mostly reflecting gains in imports of consumer goods,
24171-20J
while imports of machinery and industrial materials were only slightly higher than in 1969.
There were gains recorded in both export and import trade in the first quarter of 1971. Exports were 3.5 per cent higher than a year earlier, while imports showed an increase of 3 per cent. The gains in both exports and imports over their depressed level of the previous quarter were however much more substantial. The year-to-year strength in exports during the first quarter of this year was attributable for the most part to the gain in exports to the United States. The increase in imports occurred in trade with market areas other than the United States, the most significant being with overseas countries other than the United Kingdom.
The deficit on non-merchandise trade during 1970, at $1,705 million, was up by $94 million over the previous year. Sharply-increased payments of interest and dividends, together with higher foreign contributions, were partly offset by increased earnings on the larger average level of official international reserves and increased freight and shipping receipts. The deficit on the travel account rose slightly, as expenditures by Canadians travelling overseas was only partly offset by increased travel spending by U.S. citizens in Canada.
Non-merchandise transactions resulted in an estimated deficit of $1,796 million for the first quarter of 1971, up by 5 per cent over the same period a year ago. Higher payments, principally on account of business services, interest and dividends, and personal and institutional remittances offset a marginal increase in interest and dividend receipts and freight and shipping earnings. The travel balance remained virtually unchanged compared to a year ago.
The capital account
Net long-term capital inflows fell in 1970 as Canadian borrowers turned increasingly to the domestic market for their financing needs. At $814 million, net long-term capital inflows were sharply down from the $2,257 million recorded in 1969. Sales of new Canadian bonds to non-residents in 1970 amounted to $1,269 million. While still the most important source of long-term capital inflows, they were substantially lower than the very high levels of $1.9 and $2.1 billion reached in 1968 and 1969. This reflected the gradual narrowing, beginning in the second quarter, of the differential between Canadian and foreign long-term interest rates. Later in the year, this trend to lower foreign borrowing was further encouraged by
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Quarterly)
$ Millions	CURRENT ACCOUNT BALANCE	$ Millions

[Stage Direction]
1961	1962	1963	1964	1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971
Last data plotted: 4th quarter 1970.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
the official request made to Canadian borrowers in October to investigate the possibility of carrying out their necessary financing in the Canadian market before having recourse to markets abroad. Undoubtedly, the sharpest decline in sale of new Canadian issues was in offerings to the United States, although deliveries to Europe, which had been substantial in 1969, also showed a sharp decline in 1070 as Eurobond rates rose in the second quarter. Net capital inflows during 1970 were further reduced by a higher level of retirements of Canadian securities. These trends on capital account appear to have continued in the first quarter of 1971, according to the preliminary information now available.
Foreign direct investment in Canada rose by $105 million, while Canadian investment abroad declined by $40 million. The United States continued to be the major contributor of direct investment capital to Canada, with net flows representing 70 per cent of the total. The sales of Canadian equities were reduced, however, as Canadian firms relied less heavily on new issues of corporate stocks to raise capital, and proceeds from such sales to the United States fell from roughly $173 million in 1969 to $23 million in 1970. In contrast to 1969, when Canadians made net sales of outstanding Canadian stocks to foreigners, they were net buyers of such securities in 1970. The attractiveness of U.S. equities for Canadian investors had waned during 1969, and in the first half of 1970, but net purchases were resumed during the second half of the year. The decline in the long-term capital inflow also reflected an increase in the outflow of capital associated with the increase in intergovernmental loans extended by Canada together with higher extension of export credits.
Capital movements in short-term forms (apart from changes in net official monetary assets) led to a net capital outflow for the year of $581 million, some $860 million less than in 1969. In 1969, the very high interest rates offered on U.S. dollar deposits had attracted a large volume of short-term capital from Canada; this was reflected in Canadian holdings of foreign currency bank balances and other short-term funds, which increased by $1,604 million in 1969 compared with $401 million in 1968. With appreciably lower interest rates in 1970, these holdings rose by only $376 million. During the first half of the year, especially when the Canadian dollar was under some speculative pressure, Canadian residents reduced their holdings of foreign currency
bank balances, but outflows resumed in the second half of the year.
There was a net inflow of $195 million of nonresident short-term funds in 1970, compared with $392 million in 1969. In the first half of the year, yields on hedged short-term finance company and commercial paper issued by Canadian borrowers were attractive, and non-residents added further to their holdings of Canadian paper. As the covered yield differential narrowed appreciably during the second half of the year, proceeds from the sales of Canadian short-term instruments were sharply reduced. The balancing item, representing the difference between direct measurements of the current account and the capital account, which is included with shortterm capital outflows, amounted to a net payment balance of about $400 million in the year.
In 1970, markedly-reduced net long-term capital inflows together with substantially reduced shortterm capital outflows led to a total net capital inflow of $233 million compared to over $800 million in 1969. With the dramatic shift in the current account balance, Canada's official international reserves increased by $1,663 million over the year. This includes an allocation on January 1, 1970 of $124 million in SDRs.
In the early months of 1970, the combined strength of the current and capital account put upward pressure on the Canadian dollar and additions to Canada's exchange reserves accelerated. At the end of May, reserves were U.S. $863.4 million higher than they had been at the beginning of the year, excluding the initial allocation of SDRs. In addition, $360 million had been acquired for future delivery through forward and swap operations.
With the floating of the Canadian dollar at the beginning of June 1970, the exchange rate rose sharply; by the end of the month, the Canadian dollar had appreciated by more than 3| per cent, and by the end of December it had appreciated by 6 per cent to 98.89 U.S. cents. During this period, the net foreign exchange reserves registered an additional U.S. $596 million increase. This included the maturing of U.S. $360 million in forward transactions purchased earlier in the year and which fell due in the remaining months of the year.
In the first quarter of 1971 Canada's reserves rose by U.S. $167 million, due primarily to the 1971 allocation of SDRs.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Monthly)
.006
.004
.002
+
.002
.004
.006
(1)	Inverse of quotations for U.S. dollar in Canada.	Last data plotted: March 1971.
(2)	Limits at which the Exchange Fund Account undertook to sell or buy U.S. funds without limitation in the wholesale market.
(3)	Absolute parity limits.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Perspective on the government sector
The share of the nation's resources used by government has not changed significantly in the decade of the 1960s. There has nonetheless been a substantial increase in the absolute level of government expenditures. It is useful, in gaining an understanding of the impact of government upon the economy, to examine the sources of this growth in expenditures.
In large measure, the growth of spending by all levels of government from $10.8 billion in fiscal year 1960-61 to $29.8 billion in 1970-71 occurred in response to the wish of Canadians for improved and extended governmental services, especially in the areas of social security, health and education. The decade therefore witnessed the introduction or expansion of the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans, the Old Age Security system, hospital and medical insurance plans, and unemployment insurance programs. In addition to these, there were burgeoning requirements for post-secondary education, manpower training, regional economic expansion, urban development, and other programs at all levels of government. The resulting expansion in expenditures was most pronounced in the latter half of the decade, the expenditure increases for social welfare, health and education in the period 1965-66 to 1970-71 being
89.5	per cent, 139.8 per cent and 121.2 per cent respectively. These various changes are summarized in table 4.

[Stage Direction]
CONSOLIDATED NET GENERAL EXPENDITURES Federal, Provincial and Local Governments
	1960-61	1964-65	1965-66	1966-67	1967-68 1968-69	1969-70	1970-71(1>
(Millions of dollars)				
Health	
982	1,623	1,821	2,127	2,565 2,906	3,469	4,365Welfare	
1,629	2,188	2,402	2,640	3,127 3,663	4,033	4,550Education	
1,598	2,439	2,903	3,546	4,399 5,054	5,725	6,420Defence and Mutual Aid	
1,534	1,562	1,572	1,664	1,784 1,797	1,822	1,795Veterans pensions and benefits	
296	356	372	392	401 428	421	420Internationa] assistance	
82	108	126	212	167 149	255	270Other	
4,639	6,204	7,171	8,198	8,852 9,689	10,571	11,990Total	
10,761	14,481	16,367	18,778	21,296 23,685	26,297	29,8101961-65	1965-66	1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71(Annual percentage change)	Health	
13.4	12.2	16.8	20.6	13.3	19.4	25.8Welfare	
7.6	9.8	9.9	18.4	17.1	10.1	12.8Education	
11.1	19.0	22.1	24.1	14.9	13.3	12.1Defence and Mutual Aid	
0.5	0.6	5.9	7.2	0.7	1.4	-1.5Veterans pensions and benefits	
4.7	4.5	5.4	2.3	6.7	-1.6	-0.2International assistance	
7.1	16.7	68.3	-21.2	-10.8	71.1	5.9Other	
7.5	15.6	14.3	8.0	9.4	9.1	13.4Total	
7.7	13.0	14.7	13.4	11.2	11.0	13.4
Department of Finance estimate.
Source: Department of Finance, based on DBS Financial Management series of publications.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
These rapid rates of increase in government expenditures reflect the real changes which have occurred in the level and quality of public services. They also reflect, however, the vulnerability of the government sector to inflationary processes. The labour intensity of the government sector, the practice of measuring the value of government output by the cost of the inputs necessary to produce it, and the very rapid increases in wages and salaries all combined to generate a rapid expansion of government expenditures as measured in current dollars. Of considerable importance in this context was the introduction of collective bargaining in the public sector and, in particular, its application to many workers of below-average income who had recently been brought into that sector. Some indication of the significance of these factors on the growth of government expenditures is shown by the rise from 1965 to 1970 in the national accounts implicit price deflator for government purchases of goods and services, on the base 1961 = 100, from a level of 116.6 to one of 163.6, an increase of 40 per cent. In contrast, the implicit price deflator for total national expenditure rose over
the same period from a level of 109.5 to one of 133.6, an increase of 22 per cent.
The pressures for increased expenditures were experienced by all levels of government. This is evident in the fact that of the increase in total expenditures over the decade, the federal government accounted for 38.7 per cent, while the combined provincial and local governments accounted for 61.3 per cent. Rising outlays for health and education were the most significant factors raising provincial expenditures, while increased spending for education accounted for over 45 per cent of the increase in local government expenditures.
Associated with the high and disparate rates of growth in health, education and social welfare programs at the different levels of government was a rapid expansion in intergovernmental transfers. For example, total transfers from the federal government to other levels of government more than tripled over the decade, while the combined transfers from the provincial governments to local governments and hospitals quadrupled from approximately $1.3 billion in 1960 to an estimated $5.4 billion in 1970.

[Stage Direction]
TRANSFERS TO OTHER LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT National Income Accounts Basis
Federal	Provincial	LocalYear	To	To	To To	To	To	TotalProvinces Local Total	Local Hospitals Total Provinces Hospitals Total
(Millions of dollars)
1960	
962	32	994	7141	6501	1,364	171	15l	32	2.39011965	
1,365	69	1,434	1,462	1,090	2,552	22	15	37	4,0231966	
1,557	105	1,662	1,787	1,247	3,034	38	17	55	4,7511967	
1,900	92	1,992	2,127	1,466	3,593	38	18	56	5,6411968	
2,360	92	2,452	2,404	1,715	4,119	45	21	66	6,6371969	
2,630	98	2,728	2,606	1,961	4,567	44	23	67	7,3621970	
3,315	82	3,397	3,164	2,280	5,444	45	24	69	8,910
^Estimated by Department of Finance.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Account*
The increases in governmental expenditures were largely financed by the growth in revenues. This resulted from the automatic response of tax bases to the overall growth of the economy, the progressive nature of the rate schedules of some taxes, and discretionary changes in tax bases and rates. All three factors were operative in the case of the personal
income taxes, while expansion of the bases and discretionary rate increases caused substantial increases in sales tax revenues. Together, these two taxes accounted for over 54 per cent of the increase in total tax revenues between 1960-61 and 1970-71. In the case of the personal income taxes, revenues increased from $2.0 billion to $9.0 billion over this
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
DISTRIBUTION OF GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES* BY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT
Per Cent	Per Cent
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
period, while sales tax revenues rose from $1.2 billion to $4.4 billion, thereby becoming the second most important source of revenue. The growth rates of other revenue sources over the decade were more modest, and were largely tied to the expansion in their respective bases.
The automatic stabilizing force of the revenue system is evident in the very large year-to-year increases in revenues during the boom period of 1965 to 1969 and by the distinct deceleration in revenue increases in 1970. To some extent, the increases in 1968 and 1969 were due to the imposition of surcharges and the social development tax by the federal government and to various rate increases by provincial and local governments; however, after allowing for these changes, there remained large increases in revenues due to the very rapid increases in personal income and other tax bases. Corporate tax revenue also grew rapidly in 1968, but fell off in 1970. This was the result of the speed-up of collections in 1968 and 1969 and the fall-off in corporate profits.
It was indicated above that despite the rapid growth in revenues and expenditures over the decade, the relative size of the government sector has changed little. This conclusion is borne out by the standard measures used to relate the size of the government sector of the economy to that of the private sector. These measures include the ratio of direct government outlays for goods and services to gross national product, the ratio of government expenditures on goods and services to consumer expenditures and the ratio of total government expenditures (excluding intergovernmental transfers) to gross national product.
The first of these measures, the ratio of direct government outlays for goods and services to GNP,
increased from 18 per cent in 1960 to 22.5 per cent in 1970. This increase was largely attributable to nondefence outlays, the annual rate of increase of which was 10.9 per cent during a decade in which current-dollar GNP rose at an average rate of 8.4 per cent. The already noted vulnerability of governmental expenditures to inflationary pressures accounts for much of this difference in growth rates; in constant-dollar terms, the quantity of goods and services allocated to public consumption, as a per cent of GNP, was unchanged during the decade. On this basis, government outlays for goods and services increased at the same rate as gross national product, that is, by 5f per cent per year.
The ratio of government expenditures on goods and services to consumer expenditures on goods and services increased from 27.5 per cent in 1960 to 39 per cent in 1970. In large measure, this increase is attributable to the transfer of medical services from the private to the public sector within the national accounts. Without this transfer, the ratio would have been relatively stable.
Possibly the most common measure of the relative size of the government sector is provided by the ratio of net government expenditures (excluding intergovernmental transfers) to GNP. Despite its popularity, this ratio-which now stands at approximately 36 per cent-presents a biased or distorted view of the relative importance of government. This distortion results from the fact that even where intergovernmental transfers are excluded, government expenditures still include transfers to persons and interest on the public debt, neither of which is included in GNP and both of which increased in the course of the 1960s.

[Stage Direction]
CONSOLIDATED GOVERNMENT REVENUES Federal, Provincial and Local Governments
	1960-61	1964-65	1965-66	1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71<*
				(Millions of dollars)				
Personal income tax	.... 2,001	3,043	3,472	4,188	5,111	6,098	7,728	9,030Corporate income tax	.... 1,649	2,124	2,282	2,279	2,417	2,876	3,679	3,430Estate tax and succession duties	.... 132	181	216	219	211	237	241	265Sales	.... 1,227	2,350	2,780	3,151	3,528	3,665	4,177	4,365Other revenues net of transfers	.... 4,713	6,232	6,961	7,521	8,376	9,316	10,463	11,375Total Revenues	.... 9,722	13,930	15,711	17,358	19,643	22,192	26,288	28,465
Department of Finance estimate.
Source: Department of Finance, based on DBS Financial Management series of publications.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
$ Bi
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
9.0
8.0
2.0
1.0
+
1.0

[Stage Direction]
1957	58	59	60	61	62	63	64	65	66	67	68	69	70	71
(1) Includes Hospitals beginning in 1961. Excludes all inter-governmental transfers. Excludes C.P.P. and Q.P.P. la Includes C.P.P. and Q.P.P.
,3>
Excludes C.P.P. and Q.P.P.
Last data plotted: 1SI quarter 1971.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Current developments in revenues and expenditures
In 1970, as a result of the slowdown in economic activity and the absence of major tax rate increases, the rate of growth of total government revenues declined sharply to 9.3 per cent from the 15.8 per cent rate of the preceding year and the average rate of increase of 11.3 per cent since 1960. Conversely, the implementation of stimulative policies combined with the automatic stabilization features of many statutory programs led to an increase of 13.4 per cent in expenditures. This may be compared to the increase of 11.4 per cent of the previous year and the trend rate of growth of 10.2 per cent for the last decade. Consequently, on a national income accounts basis, there was a shift of almost $1 billion towards deficit in the net position of the total government sector.
The net position for 1970 ($1,278 million) includes a surplus of $1,144 million in the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans. Excluding this surplus, which is substantially used to finance capital investments by government enterprises, the total government sector's position was a surplus of $134 million. Within the year, the surplus position (excluding the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans) was reduced, quarter by quarter; a deficit of $508 million at seasonally adjusted annual rates was achieved in the fourth quarter. In the first quarter of 1971, the overall deficit was $1,044 million, also at seasonally adjusted annual rates.
Current expenditures on goods and services were particularly strong in the total government sector. The 1970 increase of 15.5 per cent, the largest annual increase since 1966, was one of the principal sources
of strength in the economy. This high rate of growth is largely explained by the rapid increase in medicare outlays by provincial governments. Provincial expenditures on goods and services increased by 37 per cent in 1970 as provinces entered into the arrangement and medicare outlays were transferred from the consumer sector to the government sector of the national accounts. The pace of advance of government sector expenditures on goods and services was maintained in the first quarter of 1971 with a rise of 15.3 per cent at a seasonally adjusted annual rate.
Federal government
A large part of the move towards deficit in the net position of the total government sector can be accounted for by a major swing in the position of the federal government. After moving approximately $800 million in the direction of surplus in 1969, the federal position moved towards deficit in 1970 by approximately the same amount. Quarterly data shows that the federal government surplus of $276 million in the third quarter was converted to a fourth-quarter deficit of $60 million at seasonally adjusted annual rates. This trend continued in the first quarter, which witnessed a deficit of $1.1 billion at seasonally adjusted annual rates, as the stimulatory measures adopted by the government were implemented.
The move in the federal position in 1970 towards deficit and stimulus was a reflection of changes both in revenues and expenditures. Federal revenues in 1970 grew at the modest rate of 6.9 per cent. In contrast, they had increased by 17.6 per cent in 1969, while the trend rate of growth is 9.5 per cent.

[Stage Direction]
TOTAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE, EXPENDITURE AND POSITION'11 National Income Accounts Basis
Percent	Percent Deficit (-) Change in
Year	Revenue Change Expenditure Change or Surplus Position
$m	$m	$m	$m1966	
19,600	17.0	19,090	16.0	510	2041967	
21,827	11.4	21,492	12.6	335	-1751968	
24,689	13.1	23,695	10.3	994	6591969	
28,593	15.8	26,385	11.4	2,208	1,2141970	
31,245	9.3	29,967	13.6	1,278	- 930
O)Excludes all intergovernmental transfers.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
June 18, 1971


[Stage Direction]
(Quarterly, Seasonally Adjusted at Annual Rates)
$ Billions
$ Billions
20.0
-	15.0
- 8.0
Excludes Canada Pension Plan and Quebec Pension Plan 121 Includes transfers to other levels.
$ Billions

[Stage Direction]
$ Billions
20.0
-	15.0
10.0
8.0
6.0
1.0
{1) Includes Hospitals
,2) Excludes all inter governmental transfers except Federal to Provincial and Municipal
Last data plotted: 1st quarter 1971.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REVENUE, EXPENDITURE AND POSITION «>
National Income Accounts Basis
Per cent	Per cent Deficit (-) Change in
Year	Revenue Change Expenditure Change or Surplus Position
$m	$m	$m	$m1966	
10,055	10.5	9,761	14.2	294	-2571967	
10,931	8.7	11,016	12.9	- 85	- 3791968	
12,157	11.2	12,190	10.7	- 33	521969	
14,300	17.6	13,527	11.0	773	8061970	
15,284	6.9	15,296	13.1	-12	- 785
W Includes transfers to other levels of government. Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
Direct personal tax revenues were the only revenue source to increase appreciably in 1970 and accounted for over 90 per cent of the total increase in revenues. Despite this, the rate of growth in direct personal tax revenues decelerated sharply from 27.3 per cent in 1969 to 13.8 per cent in 1970. This decline was largely the result of a slower growth in labour income.
Corporate tax liabilities declined in 1970 to a level of $2,142 million as a result of a 6.2 per cent decline in the level of corporate profits before taxes. In contrast, the growth in tax liabilities in 1969 had reflected a 5.5 per cent increase in corporate profits and the introduction of the tax on excess reserves of financial institutions.
Other sources of federal revenues increased only marginally in 1970. The absence of growth in sales and excise taxes and a 2.8 per cent decline in custom import duties caused indirect taxes to increase only slightly in 1970, to a level of $4,033 million. Federal investment income increased by 16.9 per cent in 1970, a rate above the trend rate of growth of 13.7 per cent but substantially below the 32.8 per cent increase experienced in 1969. Other revenue, mainly capital consumption allowances, increased by 12.4 per cent, or roughly at the trend rate experienced since 1960.
Expenditures, on the other hand, grew more rapidly in 1970 than in 1969, the year-over-year increases being respectively 13.1 and 11 per cent. Transfer payments to the provinces, interest on the public debt, and transfer payments to persons showed the most rapid rates of increase in 1970.
Current expenditures on goods and services increased by 5.1 per cent in 1970, as compared to a growth of 13.2 per cent in 1969. The reduction in the growth of expenditures on current goods and services
was entirely concentrated in non-defence goods and services. It should be noted, however, that this figure, which fails to match the 7.5 per cent increase in GNP, does not reflect the fiscal stimulus which was provided, for example, by such non-budgetary transactions as the increase in funds made available through the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and by the loans to the provinces.
Increased unemployment insurance benefits were the major factor in the growth of transfers to persons in 1970, the benefits paid in 1970 exceeding those of 1969 by $196 million. Interest on the public debt increased by 17.1 per cent in 1970, reflecting in part the previously mentioned changes in the financing of government pension funds and the continued rise in the level of interest rates and of Government of Canada debt outstanding.
After a year-over-year increase of 11.3 per cent in 1969, 1970 saw a re-acceleration of federal transfer payments to provinces and municipalities, the 1970 transfers of $3.4 billion exceeding those of the preceding year by 24.5 per cent. It is noteworthy that these transfers have been growing at an average annual rate of approximately 20 per cent since 1966. The major sources of this growth are found in the equalization payments made under the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act, Post-Secondary Education Cash Adjustment Payments, the Canada Assistance Plan, and Medicare.
Gross capital expenditures increased by 11 per cent in 1970, as compared to a decline of 3.4 per cent in 1969. Non-defence construction grew by 18 per cent
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
as departmental fixed capital expenditures and those of government agencies expanded very significantly under the program of fiscal stimulus.
Provincial-local governments
The change in the net position of provincial and local governments, while much smaller than that of the federal government, was nevertheless in the same direction. There was a swing towards deficit in 1970 of $205 million. On a national accounts basis, the net position of provincial and local governments changed from an approximate balance in 1968 to a surplus of $351 million in 1969 and to a somewhat smaller surplus of $146 million in 1970.
In 1970, combined provincial, local and hospital expenditures increased by 15.6 per cent. Outlays for goods and services increased rapidly, largely as a result of the sharp rise in outlays for medicare mentioned earlier. The rate of growth of provincial expenditures increased from 11.6 per cent in 1969 to
20.1	per cent in 1970, while local government expenditures grew by 12.2 per cent, or in line with their trend rate of growth since 1964.
There were significant shifts in spending priorities last year. On the Financial Management basis utilized by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, provincial-local expenditures increased by $2.6 billion in fiscal year 1970-71. Of that increase, 24.5 per cent was expended for health, and, consequently, health expenditures continued to increase as a percentage of total expenditures, rising from 19 per cent in 1965-66 to
23.1	per cent in 1970-71. Conversely, expenditures for education which, as a percentage of total expenditures, had risen from 30 per cent in 1965-66 to 35 per cent in 1969-70, turned down to 33.5 per cent in 197071. Reflecting the effects of the slowdown in economic
activity, the rate of growth of expenditures for welfare doubled in the last fiscal year. Welfare's share of total expenditures, however, continued to decline. The pronounced easing in fiscal and credit conditions since early 1970 led local governments towards the end of the year to activate capital projects previously postponed. The seasonally adjusted annual rate of growth of local government capital expenditures increased to 7.1 per cent in the fourth quarter of 1970 compared to 0.6 per cent the previous quarter.
Following the trend of the last several years, revenues, including federal transfers, increased by 14 per cent in 1970. This was largely the result of the rapid increase of 24.5 per cent in transfers from the federal government. This large increase in federal transfers along with buoyant revenues from personal direct taxes and employer-employee health care premiums and other contributions to social insurance and government pension funds more than offset slower growth in major natural resource revenues and the decline in corporate tax revenues. The rate of growth of own-source revenues (i.e., excluding intergovernmental transfers), however, diminished from 14.2 per cent in 1969 to 11.8 per cent in 1970. This rate is slightly below the rates of growth experienced since 1965.
Provincial tax rate and base changes were much less significant in fiscal 1970-71 than in the inflationary period of the late sixties. Nonetheless, the introduction of special levies to finance increasing provincial participation in medicare, the acceleration of payments under the Federal-Provincial Tax Collections Agreements and the increase in municipal real property effective tax rates were special factors

[Stage Direction]
PROVINCIAL-LOCAL-HOSPITAL REVENUE, EXPENDITURE AND POSITION «>
National Income Accounts Basis
Year	Revenue	Per cent Change	Expenditure	Per cent Change	Deficit (-) or Surplus	Change in Position$m	$m	$m	$m1966	
10,488	15.3	10,991	17.7	-503	-2581967	
12,002	14.4	12,468	13.4	-466	371968	16.4	13,942	11.8	37	5031969	
15,886	13.6	15,535	11.4	351	3141970	14.0	17,964	15.6	146	-205
O) Excluding Canada and Quebec Pension Plans. Includes transfers from federal government. Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
contributing to revenue growth. Remaining cash requirements were largely satisfied by sale of debt instruments in Canada. The sale of bonds to the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans was the most important source of funds for these governments and their entreprises. Recourse to foreign capital markets in 1970 was significantly lower than in recent years thus avoiding unnecessary pressure on the Canadian dollar.
Government of Canada financial requirements
The national income accounts budget provides a measure of the claims of the government sector on the economy's output of goods and services and of the economic impact of the government sector on the other sectors of the national economy. It fails, however, to reflect the total impact of government activities. Not only does the government have an impact on the private sector of the economy through its allocative or redistributable functions, but also, and to an increasing extent, by its role as a financial intermediary. An analysis of all government transactions as they are reflected in a statement of financial sources and requirements provides a more complete description of the impact of government activity.
Financial requirements of government arise from budgetary, non-budgetary and foreign exchange transactions.® Together, these generated Government of Canada financial requirements of $2,437 million in fiscal year 1970-71. In contrast, the total requirements of the preceding year were $162 million.
The budgetary position of the federal government moved from a surplus of $393 million in 1969-70 to a deficit of $418 million in 1970-71. The net requirement on non-budgetary transactions, excluding net foreign exchange requirements, increased from a level of $208 million in 1969-70 to $764 million in 1970-71. Total net financial transactions, excluding foreign exchange requirements, therefore increased by $1,367 million, from a net source of $185 million in 1969-70 to a net requirement of $1,182 million in 1970-71.
(^Financial requirements in this presentation differ from the overall cash requirements as defined in the Public Accounts. The change in the net position of special government bonds held by the Unemployment Insurance Commission is treated as a non-budgetary transaction and not a debt transaction as defined in the Public Accounts. The changes in debt outstanding in other than Canadian currency is treated as foreign exchange transactions and not a debt transaction as defined in the Public Accounts.
The advances to the Exchange Fund to permit the transfer of profits is recorded in "non-budgetary transactions-excluding foreign exchange transactions". The transfer of profits is recorded as a budgetary revenue item under Return on Investments.
Furthermore, the substantial increases in Canada's official international reserves in the course of the year resulted in financial requirements totalling $1,255 million. The main features of these requirements and their financing are presented in table 10. A more detailed presentation of Government of Canada financial requirements for the last ten fiscal years is presented in reference table 58.
The substantial increase in these net financial requirements reflects the move towards a more stimulative fiscal policy during 1970-71. In March, 1970, the government's net financial requirements, excluding foreign exchange, were projected at $560 million, approximately $400 million greater than in 1969-70, reflecting the anticipated impact of the built-in stabilizers, planned discretionary increases in government expenditures, and planned increases in lending progams. As the year progressed, policies were adapted to the changing economic situation: the consumer credit proposals were dropped while tax-transfers to provinces and capital grants for technical and vocational schools were accelerated. The automatic stabilization features of the fiscal system resulted in increases in equalization payments and in expenditures under shared-cost programs. The capital budget of the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation was increased and a regionally-oriented spending program of economic stimulation was adopted. In December, additional regionally-selective measures were adopted which will influence financial requirements primarily at the beginning of the current fiscal year.
In addition to its role as a financial intermediary, the Government of Canada also influences activity in the private sector by guaranteeing and insuring loans under government-sponsored programs such as National Housing Act insured loans, Regional Economic Expansion, Canadian Wheat Board, Farm Improvement and Export Credit Insurance. These guarantees have resulted in recent years in a rapid increase in Government of Canada contingent liabilities which, since 1961, have increased from $6.4 billion to their current level in excess of $10.5 billion.
Budgetary revenues
Total budgetary revenue increased by 3.6 per cent in fiscal year 1970-71, as compared to a growth of 20.9 per cent in the previous fiscal year. The reduction in the growth of federal revenue in fiscal year 1970-71 resulted mainly from the automatic response
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS AND SOURCES OF FINANCING Selected Fiscal Years
	1961-62	1965-66	1969-70	1970-71(0)
		(Millions of dollars)		
Financial Requirements				
Budgetary revenues	
5,730	7,696	12,324	12,769Budgetary expenditures	
-6,521	-7,735	-11,931	-13,187Surplus (+) or deficit (-)	
-791	-39	393	-418Non-budgetary transactions (requirements-)(1)	
-93	88	-208	-764(excluding foreign exchange transactions)	Sub-Total (requirements -)	
-884	49	185	-1,182Foreign exchange transactions (requirements -)	
223	-113	-347	-1,255Overall Financial Requirements^*	
-661	-64	-162	-2,437Sources of Financing (+)	Net marketable bonds	
611	-55	-15	741Treasury bills	
-50	10	55	840Canada Savings Bonds	
500	181	410	1,226Others^)	
17	-19	-56	53Total	
1,078	17	394	2,860Changes in Receiver General	Bank Balances	
417	-47	232	423
p=preliminary.
<*This item includes funds used to pay off CNR maturing bonds, Unemployment Insurance non-marketable bonds and advances required for the transfer of Exchange Fund Profits.
<*>Includes Canada Pension Plan bonds, Securities Investment Account and securities held for retirement of unmatured debt.
Source: Public Accounts of Canada.
of tax revenues to the slowdown in economic activity and to the absence of major discretionary tax increases. Personal income tax revenues nonetheless increased by 15 per cent in 1970-71. This increase, however, was substantially below that experienced in the previous year as the growth of personal income declined from a rate of 11.2 per cent in 1969 to a rate of 7.7 per cent in 1970. The increase in personal income tax revenues was largely offset by a sharp reduction in corporate income tax collections as the result of the substantial decline in corporate taxable income and the completion of the acceleration of corporate income tax payments. Sales and excise tax collections and customs and import duties were generally unchanged from fiscal year 1969-70. The postal service and automotive industry strikes, which together are estimated to have reduced budgetary
revenue by over $200 million, were other factors of special significance contributing to the slower growth of revenues.
Non-budgetary sources of revenues have become increasingly important in recent years. Tax collections on behalf of provinces have increased sharply since 1962-63, the first year the provincial abatements were gradually expanded. Another major expansion of non-budgetary revenues came in 1966 when the Canada Pension Plan was introduced. These revenues have increased by almost 40 per cent since 1966-67. There were also some increases in tax rates, in particular those of the Old Age Security (OAS) taxes. In 1964, the OAS rate on personal taxable income was increased from 3 per cent to 4 per cent and the maximum tax was raised to $120. In 1967, the maxi-
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
mum tax was raised to $240. The OAS tax base was broadened in 1965 to include construction and machinery and equipment, but in 1968 the rate was reduced on machinery and equipment and eliminated entirely in 1969.
Budgetary expenditures
Budgetary expenditures for fiscal year 1970-71 totalled $13,187 million, an increase of 10.5 per cent over the previous fiscal year. Virtually all the major expenditure categories shared in this increase. Expenditures on economic development and support increased rapidly, reflecting the greater emphasis on programs designed to lessen regional economic disparities. Expenditures for educational assistance programs and fiscal transfers to provinces increased by
41.5	per cent and 31.9 per cent respectively. Expenditures for health and welfare increased by 16.7 per cent and now represent just under 25 per cent of total budget expenditure. Defence spending showed only a modest decrease of under 1 per cent, which resulted in a decline of its share of the total. It now accounts for 13.5 per cent of budgetary expenditure compared to 15 per cent in the previous year. Public debt charges increased at a rate of 11.9 per cent as compared to 16 per cent in the previous fiscal year. It now accounts for 14.6 per cent of budgetary expenditures compared to 14.4 per cent in 1969-70.
A large proportion of federal expenditures is authorized by statute and not subject to a great degree of administrative variation. The Canada Assistance Plan belongs to this category, with spending increasing as economic growth declines and unemployment rises, and decreasing as the economy operates closer to its potential. Many of the shared-cost programs have the same effect. Equalization payments under the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act provide some degree of stabilization in a regional context. A decline in economic activity in a particular province will cause a decline in tax revenue bases. According to the formula for equalization, such a province would receive payments to bring its revenue sources in line with the national average. These injections of funds into a province tend to partly stabilize its revenues. During the past two fiscal years there has been considerable evidence of these stabilizers at work. Expenditures under the Canada Assistance Plan increased by only $36.3 million in fiscal year 1969-70 whereas in fiscal year 1970-71 the increase was of $96.6 million. Fiscal subsidies and other payments to provinces in 1970-71 totalled $1,229 million, $297 million more than in the previous year.
In addition to the automatic spending adjustments, discretionary measures have been employed to give the economy the required stimulus. In June, 1970, accelerated payments under the Technical and Vocational Training Act and other spending measures were announced resulting in approximately $100 million of additional expenditures. An additional $60 million increase for economic stimulation programs was announced in October. In the December, 1970 Budget speech further stimulative measures were introduced. These included a 10 per cent increase in unemployment insurance benefits which is expected to raise budgetary expenditures by some $54 million. Assistance to the shipbuilding industry, capital works projects and other spending added another $37 million in economic stimulation.
The government announced several proposals for policy revision during 1970-71 which would provide for stabilizing budgetary expenditures in future years. The proposed unemployment insurance reforms would provide for higher benefits, universal coverage, and government financing of benefits with respect to unemployment in excess of 4 per cent of the labour force. A proposal for a Grain Income Stabilization Plan promises the maintenance of farm income levels. The White Paper on Income Security, tabled in 1970, provides for increased benefits under family allowances and guaranteed income supplements, albeit on a more selective basis.
Non-budgetary transactions (excluding exchange transactions)
Total government spending is divided between budgetary expenditure, which was discussed previously, and non-budgetary transactions which consist of investment of public funds in various assets. The amount of non-budgetary transactions in a given year depends on the fiscal stance of the government as well as the demand by the public for facilities and services which government institutions provide. For the five-year period ending in fiscal 1965-66, nonbudgetary transactions provided an average annual surplus of $19 million. The surplus position resulted from large repayments of loans and invested funds which exceeded the amount of new investment. This position was reversed over the next four fiscal years when non-budgetary transactions resulted in an average annual net requirement of $359 million. Economic stimulation as well as social demands of the public produced a record non-budgetary requirement of $764 million in 1970-71.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Selected Fiscal Years
1961-62	1965-66	1969-70	1970-71®)Financing of lending institutions	
-260	(Millions of dollars) -623 -658	-745Loans to other Crown Corporations	
-115	-109	-392	-392Loans and advances to departments	
-11	-12	-174	-293Major receipts	
345	603	889	956Other non-budgetary transactions	
-52	229	127	-290Total Net Non-Budgetary Transactions	
-93	88	-208	-764
p=preliminary.
U>Excluding foreign exchange transactions apart from advances required for the transfers of Exchange Fund profits. Source: Public Accounts oj Canada.
The most important non-budgetary transactions, in terms of dollar amounts, are the loans and advances to Crown corporations and agencies. Included in these loans are working capital advances which are used by the institutions for purchases of supplies and other expenditures of a current nature. Loans of much larger amounts are made for investment in long-term assets. Agencies and corporations which specialize in lending activity use these funds to make loans to the public under their various credit programs. Other government institutions receive loans for the acquisition of fixed assets. Requirements for fixed-asset investment and working capital have grown from $126 million in 1961-62 to $685 million in 1970-71. In addition, through its lending agencies, the government has advanced more than $5.5 billion in the past ten years. In 1970-71 alone, $745 million was advanced to these lending agencies.
Among the more important elements of government non-budgetary transactions are loans for regional development, nuclear energy development, transportation and international assistance. On a regional basis the government has made funds available to provincial and local authorities through the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), the Department of Regional Economic Expansion, the Municipal Development and Loan Fund, special stabilization loans and accelerated tax payments to the provinces.
As indicated earlier, a major portion of nonbudgetary transactions are accounted for by the financing of government lending institutions; this financing has grown steadily over the past ten years.
The expenditures and investments of CMHC are one of the major vehicles of the government in the implementation of its economic and social policy. While the government's investment has been increasing, the corporation's use of these funds has also been undergoing major changes. In the early sixties, CMHC's main activity was that of making direct mortgage loans to the public under Section 40 (home ownership) of the National Housing Act. In calendar 1961, this activity accounted for 83.2 per cent of CMHC's gross expenditure. Over the years, the corporation has been directing more of its activities to the provision of housing facilities for individuals and to regions where adequate housing has not been available through normal means. Loans for student housing and municipal sewage treatment plants were begun in 1961. In 1965, CMHC began making long-term loans to provinces and municipalities for the construction or acquisition of public housing. This operation has undergone very rapid growth, to the point where it represented 26.2 per cent of gross expenditure in 1970-71. Loans for urban renewal were begun in 1967, and while the expenditures involved are still relatively small, they are increasing rapidly. As a consequence of the expansion in these socially-oriented programs, loans for direct home ownership now constitute a much smaller percentage of total expenditure.
Foreign exchange transactions
Net foreign exchange requirements totalled $1,255 million in 1970-71, or more than half of the government's total net financial requirements, as Canada's
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
balance of international payments became considerably stronger. During fiscal year 1970-71 advances to the Exchange Fund for the purchase of foreign exchange amounted to approximately $1,180 million. In order to purchase foreign currency, the government makes advances to the Exchange Fund Account out
of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. A reduction in Canadian official U.S. dollar holdings conversely results in repayments of advances by the Exchange Fund Account to the Consolidated Revenue Fund. Other foreign exchange transactions represented a net requirement of approximately $75 million in 1970-71.

[Stage Direction]
Monetary conditions
Monetary policy was expansionary over most of 1970 compared with the tight anti-inflationary stance of 1969. The money supply, defined to include currency outside the banks and all chartered bank deposits, rose by 10 per cent in 1970 compared to 5.6 per cent in 1969, while currency and chartered bank demand deposits rose by 5.4 per cent in 1970 compared to 3.9 per cent in 1969. The shift from a tight monetary policy occurred during the first quarter of 1970, and ease as reflected in credit conditions was maintained throughout most of the year and into 1971. During the latter part of 1970 a substantial easing in credit conditions and a sharp and sudden fall in longterm interest rates occurred both in Canada and the United States. The money supply continued to expand rapidly in the first months of 1971, the increase in the first quarter amounting to 18.3 per cent at annual rates.
The degree and timing of the shift of monetary policy toward ease were influenced by several factors. Changing domestic economic conditions led the monetary authorities to adopt a more expansionary policy stance. The shift was also influenced by the emergence of a balance of payments current account surplus. Falling interest rates in the United States and in the Eurodollar markets from the beginning of 1970, and the nature and timing of the 1970 foreign exchange inflows, further influenced the shift to monetary ease. A favourable development has been the reduced borrowing by Canadians abroad in 1970 due both to increased availability of credit in Canada, and lesser incentives in terms of cost to borrow abroad. The Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Bank of Canada have both encouraged this expanded use of domestic markets.
Shorter term rates fell sharply from early 1970, but longer-term rates, including both bond and mortgage rates, recorded only mild declines until
about mid-November, when they fell considerably. Government of Canada, provincial and municipal bond yields fell somewhat more than corporate bond yields. The response of the banking system to these changes in financial conditions is discussed below.
During the second quarter of 1970, foreign capital inflows and a strong current account put substantial upward pressure on the Canadian dollar. The use of Government of Canada cash balances to purchase foreign exchange and so moderate upward pressure on the dollar caused a rapid expansion of the privately-held money supply. In mid-May, Government balances were replenished through issuance of special Treasury bills in an amount of $250 million. The Bank of Canada offset the impact of this issue on the banks' "excess" liquidity by raising the secondary reserve ratio from 8 per cent to 9 per cent effective July. The Bank, on May 12, reduced the Bank rate to 7\ per cent from 8 per cent to bring it more in line with market rates. At the end of May, the Canadian dollar was allowed to float temporarily and the Bank rate was further reduced to 7 per cent.
Following the rapid money supply expansion during the second quarter of 1970, the Bank of Canada moderated the growth of bank assets somewhat during July but eased its policy again in August when the Bank rate was lowered to 6| per cent. Money supply expansion resumed and the Bank rate was reduced to 6 per cent in November. During the closing months of 1970, a further easing of credit conditions in Canada and the United States took place and interest rates fell sharply. To moderate this change, the Bank of Canada pursued a policy of restraint on the amount of cash reserves available to the banks from mid-November through January, 1971. Rapid monetary expansion, however, continued and the Bank rate was reduced in two stages during February to 5| per cent, which represents the lowest Bank rate since November 1967.
June 18, 1971


[Stage Direction]
(Monthly)

[Stage Direction]
PerCent	PerCent
(1)	McLeod, Young, Weir and Co. Ltd., 10 provincial bonds yield average.
(2)	Average stock yield on 114 stocks as compiled by Moss, Lawson and Co., Ltd.
Last data plotted: March 1971.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Monthly)
Per Cent
Per Cent
11) Salomon Brothers and Hutzler three month Eurodollar rate. (2) Canadian Treasury Bill yield less the U.S. Treasury Bill yield corrected for the cost of forward cover.
A plus indicates that the covered differential is favourable to capital inflows into Canada.
H)McLeod. Young, Weir and Co. Ltd., 10 provincial bonds yield average.
(2)|viorgan Guaranty Trust index of U.S. companies long-term international bonds denominated in U.S. dollar.
([DOT]^Solomon Brothers and Hutzler New Aa utility bonds.
(4) Average yield on Canadian provincial minus average yield on U.S. public utility long-term bonds.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
During the year the banking system made somewhat more use of Bank of Canada credit than had been the case in 1969. More use was also made by dealers in 1970 and in early 1971 of purchase and resale agreements with the Bank of Canada. Since November 1970, the minimum rate at which the Bank of Canada enters such agreements has been set at the Bank rate less f of 1 per cent. In view of falling interest rates at home and abroad, the Bank of Canada withdrew earlier requests to the banks to limit their swapped deposits and the rates they pay on large Canadian dollar deposits. The latter withdrawal reflected the return to more normal competition between the banks and the larger deposittaking non-bank institutions.
The banking system
The banking system responded, and contributed to, the developments in monetary policy and financial conditions that have been discussed above. Growth in chartered bank liabilities was paralleled, of course, by a similar expansion in bank assets. Changes in the composition of bank liabilities and assets also occurred. The total of demand deposits and currency in the hands of the public rose by 5.4 per cent during 1970. Most of this growth occurred after the end of the first quarter. Personal savings deposits, following a usual pattern, showed relatively steady growth. Within this component, there was a smaller shift (compared with 1969) to non-chequable deposits. Non-personal term and notice deposits rose rapidly during the year, by over 26 per cent, and in early 1971 were sharply above the level at the end of 1969. There was a substantial 46 per cent annual rate of increase in the first quarter of this year. This growth reflected reduced shifts of cash to swapped deposits and other short-term instruments and the removal of limits on rates paid on large Canadian dollar term deposits. Such shifts had occurred on a large scale in 1969. Swapped deposits which had risen by over 88 per cent during 1969 increased by only 11 per cent in 1970, and decreased substantially in the first quarter of 1971.
Significant shifts also occurred among the banks' assets. A generally weak loan demand accompanied the sharp rise in the banks' liabilities. Hence, the banks invested an increasing portion of their resources in various types of liquid assets, an important factor that brought downward pressures on interest rates. A useful measure of such "liquidity" is the ratio of Canadian liquid assets to the banks' total major assets.® Liquidity of the banking system, as measured by this ratio, fell to a low point in February
1970. Rising liabilities and reduced loan demand, however, subsequently raised liquidity sharply and, but for a temporary fall about mid-year, the increase continued into the early months of 1971. The total increase from the February 1970 low was about 5 per cent. Net foreign assets held by the banking system also increased as the year progressed. However, Government of Canada securities made up the bulk of the additions to the banking system's liquidity in 1970. While government marketable securities issued in Canada and held outside government accounts and the Bank of Canada rose by $1.1 billion, the banks absorbed a greater amount than this, about $1.5 billion. A portion of Treasury bill purchases by the banks has been immobilized, as noted earlier, by the 1 per cent increase in the banks' secondary liquidity ratio. The chartered banks have continued to be large purchasers of Government of Canada securities in 1971, buying marketable securities from the general public.
Increases in the liquidity of the banking system reflect the growing ability of the banks to make loans. As would be expected with a weak loan demand, which was the situation prevailing up to about February of this year, many bank loan rates were reduced, and these reductions were accompanied by falling deposit rates. Swapped deposit rates have also fallen, reflecting external rates. Chart 18 indicates the parallel declines in both bank loan rates and deposit rates. Accompanying the fall in loan rates has been a fall over most of 1970 in the proportion of borrowing at the prime rate.
Total Canadian dollar loans of the banking system increased by only 1.6 per cent during 1970 compared to an increase of 14.4 per cent in 1969. The business loans component increased in 1970 by only 2.8 per cent, with all of this occurring after mid year following the collapse of Penn Central in the United States, as some money market borrowers increased their dependence on bank loans. After a flat first half, personal loans also rose in the latter part of 1970.
The increase in the banks' lending capacity was not only made apparent by reduced lending rates; banks began advertising vigorously for consumer loans, and bank lines of credit were raised. A further
<3JThe Bank of Canada in previous issues of Weeklr Financial Statistics measured the banking system's liquidity i>y expressing "more liquid" bank assets, including net foreign assets, as a percentage of total major assets. The ratio here referred to is a new ratio published by the Bank of Canada which has net foreign assets removed from the numerator of the ratio. The Bank of Canada also published an excess liquidity ratio. This is similar to the one used in the text, but required cash and secondary liquid assets are subtracted from the numerator. Details may be obtained from the Bank of Canada's Weekly Financial Statistics.
[Stage Direction]

June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Weekly)
Per Cent
Last data plotted: March 1971.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
indication was the falling ratio of banks' business loans to the related lines of credit. Some bank credit lines, however, while not fully utilized through bank loans, may well have been used to support borrowing elsewhere. Bank loan trends, it should be noted, do not fully parallel trends in overall credit. For example, the lack of buoyancy in bank business loans through most of 1970 was partly due to some shifting of corporations and others to the bond and other markets, to the greater use of bankers' acceptances, and to some repayment of bank loans in a move to longer-term debt structures. Some consumer loans of the banks also reflect refinancing at the banks of loans obtained at other financial intermediaries when bank credit was tighter. In the early months of 1971, there has been a substantial pickup in the extension of credit by the chartered banks. General loans advanced at seasonally adjusted annual rates of 10 per cent, 16 per cent, and 25 per cent in January, February and March, respectively. Strength was evident in both the business and personal loan categories.
Other financial institutions
After two years of strong expansion, sales finance and consumer loan companies showed only a marginal growth in financial assets in the first three quarters of 1970. This was mainly due to changes in monetary
policy and lower consumer expenditure on durable goods such as cars, home furnishings, and appliances. In 1969 the credit squeeze had forced the banks to ration consumer credit; total consumer credit outstanding by banks, which had risen by $517 million in the first half of that year, fell by $32 million in the second half. Sales finance and consumer loan companies moved into the vacuum with their credit outstanding advancing $229 million in the second half of 1969. In 1970 the situation was reversed. In the last three quarters chartered banks, reacting to changes in monetary conditions, loaned a net $537 million to consumers while sales finance and consumer loan companies reduced their total credit outstanding by $23 million.
Monetary policy also affected the relative growth of deposits of non-bank financial institutions. As table 12 indicates, during the twelve months ending March 31, 1970 these institutions attracted over 80 per cent of the total increase in domestic deposits whereas the chartered banks attracted less than 20 per cent. However, following the easing of monetary conditions in March 1970, the relative positions were reversed: in the last nine months of 1970 the chartered banks attracted almost 75 per cent of deposits compared to just over 25 per cent for the non-bank financial institutions.

[Stage Direction]
2Q 1969 to IQ 1970	2Q 1970 to 4Q 1970
Per cent	Per cent
Smill. of total	Smill. of total
Chartered banks	
349	18,7	3,094	73.5Trust and loan companies	
1,080	58.0	749	17.8Credit Unions and Quebec Savings Banks	
434	23.3	369	8.8Total near-banks	
1,514	81.3	1,118	26.5Total deposits	
1,863	100.0	4,212	100.0
Source: DBS Financial Flow Accounts.
Over 1970 as a whole, deposits in trust and loan companies increased by $1,114 million compared to $936 million in 1969. Mortgage loans continued to be the major outlet for their funds. In 1970 mortgage loans increased by $880 million, compared to an increase of $827 million in 1969. Rates on conventional loans rose from 10.50 per cent at the end of 1969 to a
high of 10.60 per cent in April, 1970 and then declined to 10.16 per cent at year-end and to 9.20 per cent in March 1971. Rates on trust company deposits reached their peak of 8.62 per cent in March, 1970 and then declined to 8.21 per cent by the end of 1970 and 7.46 per cent in March, 1971.
6966
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
The financial assets of life insurance companies increased moderately in 1970. Major changes occurred in the mortgage sector, where net increases in mortgages totalled only $155 million in 1970 compared to $291 million in 1969. Investments in stocks declined to $97 million from $138 million while net purchases of corporate bonds increased to $178 million from $40 million. Policy loans appear to have peaked in the second quarter, when they reached $35 million. Since then, in response to easier credit at the chartered banks, policy loans declined to $21 million in the third and $15 million in the fourth quarter. Investment in real estate (non-financial capital acquisition) totalled $77 million in 1970, down $7 million from the 1969 total but still substantially above the levels of previous years.
The operations of mutual funds in 1970 were very much affected by the performance of equity prices, especially in the second and fourth quarters, when for the first time on record they suffered net redemptions in mutual fund shares of $39 million and $12 million respectively. During 1970 as a whole, net redemptions totalled $31 million, compared to net sales of $289 million in 1969. Until the end of the second quarter of 1970 mutual funds reduced their foreign investments, a trend started in early 1969. However, the relatively better performance of the U.S. stock market compared to the Canadian market after mid-year prompted mutual funds to increase foreign investments by $143 million in the second half, compared to an increase of only $38 million in investment in domestic stocks.
Fire and casualty insurance companies invested a total of $207 million in bonds in 1970, compared with $91 million in 1969. Credit unions and caisses populates experienced a 49 per cent increase in deposit liabilities in 1970 over 1969. Investments in bonds totalled $121 million compared to $71 million in 1969, while the net increase in consumer credit totalled only $93 million compared to $153 million in 1969. Net investments in mortgages increased by $123 million.
Securities markets
In the securities markets, 1970 proved to be the antithesis of 1969: whereas in 1969 bond yields in both Canada and the United States reached historic highs, 1970 witnessed the most pronounced bond rally in recent history. Reductions in short-term bond and Treasury bill yields began in the first quarter and persisted throughout the year. Long-term yields tended to be sticky throughout most of 1970 and did not decline substantially until the fourth quarter.
Interest rate reductions on Government of Canada instruments amounting to 3.37 per cent on 91-day Treasury bills and 1.34 per cent on long-term bonds led the way. Reductions on outstanding provincial and corporate bonds only amounted to just under one per cent and one-half of one per cent respectively. Whereas in 1969 the long-term bond market was virtually non-existent for these borrowers, unless retractible features were offered, 1970 witnessed a renewal of the market for straight long-term debt which strengthened during the course of the year despite record high levels of borrowing.
The underlying strength in the bond markets in both the United States and Canada likely resulted from a change in investor psychology attributable to some success in slowing the inflationary rise of prices, easier monetary policies, and the build up of liquidity by the commercial banks and other financial institutions. In Canada, the softness of chartered bank loan demand during 1970 led the banks to acquire over $900 million of Government of Canada bonds and almost $600 million of Treasury bills. Since this represents an amount greater than the total issue of domestic marketable federal securities, and the Bank of Canada and government accounts acquired $216 million of these securities, the chartered banks absorbed some $400 million of maiketable federal bonds released from the public and from dealers' inventory. Aggressive bidding on the part of the banks for these securities contributed significantly to firmer bond prices.
Reflecting the vastly improved bond market, the net amount of security issues by Canadian borrowers in 1970 surpassed the very high level attained in 1968. The increase in the level of total debt outstanding was accounted for by new issues by the Government of Canada. In 1970, the federal government raised $1.3 billion new money in Canada through the issue of marketable securities, a substantial reversal of the situation in 1969 when a small net retirement of marketable securities was recorded. A further $714 million was raised in 1970 through the issue of Canada Savings Bonds. Provincial and municipal government new issues retained the levels of about the previous two years. However, this level was maintained by increased borrowing in Canada of more than 125 per cent over the amount of new domestic issues in 1969 while foreign borrowing was limited to only 37 per cent of the amount issued in 1969. These developments were encouraged by the much improved bond market conditions in Canada in 1970, and by the request of the Minister of Finance and the Bank of Canada to Canadian borrowers to attempt to meet their require-
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
ments in Canada. Total new issues of all kinds of securities by corporations and others was at a level below that of the previous two years, as a result of the sharp decline in the level of commercial paper outstanding as well as the reduction in new stock issues. However, corporate sector borrowing through the issue
of bonds in the Canadian market was at a record high level, more than double that of the previous two years. This reflected greatly increased investor interest in debt instruments, an interest which gathered momentum towards the end of the year, permitting half the total amount to be raised in the fourth quarter of 1970.

[Stage Direction]
1966	1967	1968	1969	1970Issued or guaranteed by Government of Canada: Treasury bills	(Millions of dollars) 285 370 70	730Canada Savings Bonds	.. 223	230	40	324	714Bonds payable in Canadian dollars -marketable	515	807	-186	571-n on-marketable	75	62	117	-61Bonds payable in foreign currencies	.. -5	-205	266	14	-110Total	.. 430	900	1,545	339	1,844Provincial and Municipal Governments	Bonds sold to CPP	.. 462	669	704	805	863Other bonds, payable in Canadian dollars	.. 1,028	1,045	614	410	938Bonds payable in foreign currencies	.. 424	800	905	1,021	381Total	.. 1,914	2,514	2,223	2,236	2,182Corporations and others	Commercial Paper	.. 142	100	459	474	-73Bonds payable in Canadian dollars	.. 538	800	565	578	1,222Bonds payable in foreign currencies	.. 529	160	370	417	306Stocks	.. 595	454	554	992	301Total	.. 1,804	1,514	1,948	2,461	1,756Total net new issues	.. 4,148	4,928	5,716	5,036	5,782(Of which bonds payable in foreign currencies)	... 048)	(755)	(1,541)	(1,452)	(577)
Debt transactions of the federal government in 1970 reflected the significant changes in the postwar period that have occurred in the demand for federal government obligations. These changes have affected the structure of the debt and have had
important implications for the structure and liquidity of the capital markets in Canada. The past decade exemplifies these changes in the pattern of holdings of government securities outside government accounts and these are shown in table 14.
24171-21J
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
End-1960	End-1970	Change
	(Millions of dollars)		
1. Treasury bills			
Banking system	
1,381	3,366	+1,985General public	
549	218	-331Total	
1,930	3,584	+1,6542. Market issues	Banking system	
4,421	7,569	+3,148General public	
6,937	6,184	-753Total	
11,358	13,753	+2,3953. Canada Savings Bonds	
3,594	7,402	+3,8084. Total Government of Canada Debt	Banking system	
5,802	10,935	+5,133General public	
11.0S0	13,804	+2,724Total	
16,882	24,739	+7,857
During the past decade, of the $7.9 billion raised by the issue of Government of Canada securities, the banking system, that is the Bank of Canada and the chartered banks, absorbed all the marketable bonds and Treasury bills issued as well as a reduction of over $1 billion in holdings of all others. Provincial and municipal governments, including their special funds, their working capital funds and their social insurance pension plans, life insurance companies, Quebec Savings Banks, trusteed pension plans and "all other residents" all reduced in absolute terms their holdings of Government of Canada marketable securities despite very substantial increases in their total assets and their total bond holdings. Outside the banking system, only general insurance companies and
trust and mortgage loan companies increased their holdings of marketable Canada securities, but this increase was only marginal. This move away from marketable Government of Canada securities reflected a number of factors, some of which were the increasingly heavier demands on the market by other borrowers, diminishing concern about risk as the economy grew strongly, and the impact of inflation which encouraged investors to seek out higher-yielding bonds and equities.
This general trend has strongly influenced the structure of the government's outstanding debt. Table 15 shows the composition of the publicly held direct and guaranteed federal debt in 1954, 1960 and 1970.

[Stage Direction]
End of	Treasury	Marketable	CSBsYear	bills	bonds1954	
4.8	77.8	17.4I960	
10.8	63.8	25.41970	
14.5	49.3	36.2
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
As can be seen, the government has responded to changing market demands by increasing its use of Treasury bills, of which the banks are the major purchasers, and of Canada Savings Bonds, in order to maintain a significant non-bank market for federal securities. This trend was accentuated in 1970 when Treasury bills and Canada Savings Bonds accounted for about three-quarters of net new issues.
Interest rate developments in Canada were similar to those in the United States during 1970 and in the early months of 1971. Sharp reductions in Treasury bill rates in Canada paralleled those in the United States. Short-term Eurodollar rates also decreased substantially, influenced by the repayment to that market of funds borrowed in 1969 by U.S. commercial banks. Long-term bond prices, while stabilizing in the first half of 1970 in Canada, peaked in the United States in the first half of the year. The turning point for long-term rates did not really become apparent to the financial markets until almost mid-year, and substantial reductions in these rates did not materialize until the final quarter of the year. During this period the strength of the Canadian dollar and concern about the liquidity of the private sector following the collapse of Penn Central made it clear that the authorities would be committed to an easier credit stance, at least for the near future. In the United States, the Federal Reserve amended Regulation Q to remove restrictions on maximum rates payable on certificates of deposit with maturities of 30 to 89 days, to ensure that commercial banks had the lending capacity to absorb the demand that was expected from the attrition in outstanding commercial paper after the bankruptcy of Penn Central. Federal Reserve open market operations also helped to ensure the adequate liquidity of the system. U.S. Treasury bill rates remained higher than their Canadian counterparts throughout 1970, with the exceptions of February and March. In early August, reflecting the disruption in the U.S. financial
markets, the Government of Canada was able to float a new issue more than a quarter point in yield below a new U.S. federal issue. Further ease was evident in that month in the U.S. system, as reserves against large time deposits of Federal Reserve member banks were lowered to 5 per cent from 6 per cent. The extent of the improvement in the bond markets became evident in the final quarter. Against a background of prime and deposit rate and bank rate reductions, successive waves of new corporate bond issues were well received in both countries. In the United States a record high $3.4 billion new bonds was marketed with relative ease in the month of November.
Similar developments were recorded in the money markets. Prime commercial paper rates on three-month paper declined from 9.00 per cent in Canada and 8.50 per cent in the United States to 5.50 per cent in both countries during the course of the past year. Substantial inflows of short-term funds into Canada in the second quarter, generally from the United States and induced by the forward discount on the U.S. dollar, served to strengthen these markets, especially during the first half of the year. The Penn Central bankruptcy, although resulting in somewhat higher rates, did not have as great an impact on rates in Canada as in the United States. The major impact, other than the generation of considerable concern, was to close the market to some non-prime borrowers.
The momentum of interest rate developments which built up towards the end of 1970 continued into early
1971.	By mid-March short-term rates were dramatically lower, while provincial and corporate yields had declined by almost double the one-quarter per cent reduction in federal long-term bond yields. This momentum was supported by relative monetary ease in both the United States and Canada, a high degree of liquidity in the banking system as reflected by further prime rate reductions, and continued investor interest in new issues.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
It appears now that a transition from slow growth in demand and production to recovery and expansion took effect during the second half of 1970. Unemployment, after adjustment for seasonal factors, was on a basically declining trend following the September, 1970 peak but still remained at a high level and consequently continued to be, and is still, the priority problem of economic policy. The performance of prices generally continued on a more moderate course through the first quarter, apart from a rebound of food prices. The growth of incomes was still outpacing the advance of productivity but to a somewhat lesser extent than a year ago. Consumers' spending on major postponable items showed signs of recovery; new housing construction was moving ahead well; government sector spending was being maintained; and exports were up. On the negative side, consumer spending on non-durable goods and services was sluggish, business fixed investment was weak and imports were growing. Production was not particularly strong and in the manufacturing sector was not keeping pace with shipments. However, manufacturers' new orders were strong and the first quarter ended with an increased backlog of unfilled orders.
Looking ahead, it is expected that the pace of advance will gather momentum as the recovery becomes more broadly established. By the end of the year personal expenditures and possibly also business investment can be expected to contribute more to the expansion which was initiated by government expenditures and exports in 1970.
A tapering-off in consumer debt relative to incomes combined with above-average rates of personal saving over the past two years has placed consumers in a position to expand purchases considerably. Increased liquidity coupled with lower interest rates and greater availability of credit should generate substantial outlays for new homes, furnishings, appliances and automobiles.
Government expenditures at all levels are expected to be buoyant throughout the year. However, the
outlook for private investment expenditures is much less certain. Outlays for machinery and equipment and for structures have been running at a low rate. This reflects sagging corporate profits over the past two years as wage and salary costs have generally been outstripping productivity gains. Continued growth in consumer spending will, however, heighten the need to expand productive capacity while simultaneously improving investor confidence. The liquidity of the banking system and the strength of the capital markets will facilitate greater investment spending.
It would be unrealistic to expect a repetition of last year's record increases in exports, especially to overseas countries. As noted earlier in the discussion of the balance of payments current account, Canadian exports benefitted from a number of special factors of a non-sustainable character in 1970. Exports to the United States may benefit from more rapid growth in the U.S. economy. On the other hand, effects of the appreciation of the Canadian dollar may be increasingly felt in 1971. Imports will likely continue to grow relative to last year's volume, as economic expansion in Canada gathers momentum. They have already increased markedly in the first quarter of 1971, largely as a consequence of the settlement of the General Motors strike. A further impetus to the growth of imports may well occur during the year as investment in machinery and equipment picks up strength. This category of expenditure has a very high import content. On balance, the foreign sector is not likely to provide further stimulus to the current expansion.
Taken together, these developments indicate a significant growth in new employment opportunities and a likely downward trend in unemployment through the remainder of the year. The rate at which prices are rising may well continue to be moderate, although many uncertainties exist about cost changes in relation to productivity and about price developments among our trading partners.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Reference
Table
Number	Page
1	Demographic Developments	
69732	Gross National Expenditure	
69743	Changes in Gross National Expenditure	
69754	Gross National Expenditure in Constant (1961) Dollars	
69765	Changes in Gross National Expenditure in Constant (1961) Dollars..	69776	Structural Changes in Demand (per cent distribution of Gross NationalExpenditure by components)	
69787	Structural Changes in Demand (per cent distribution of Gross NationalExpenditure in Constant (1961) Dollars by components)	
69798	National Income and Gross National Product	
69809	Changes in National Income and Gross National Product	
698110	Structural Changes in Income (per cent distribution of Gross NationalProduct by components)	
698211	Personal Income and Expenditure	
698312	Personal Income, Canada and by Province	
698413	Personal Income per Capita, Canada and by Province	
698614	Value of Retail Trade, Canada and by Region	
698815	Private and Public Investment in Canada	
698916	Private and Public Investment by Region	
699117	Changes in Private and Public Investment, Canada and by Region....	699218	Dwelling Starts, Completions and Under Construction	
699319	Dwelling Starts and Completions, by type	
699420	Manufacturers' Inventories, Shipments and Orders	
699521	Manufacturers'Shipments, Canada and by Region	
699622	Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Industry	
699723	Changes in the Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Industry	
699924	Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Major Industrial Grouping	700125	Changes in the Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Major IndustrialGrouping	
700226	Main Components of the Labour Market	
700327	Changes in the Main Components of the Labour Market	
700528	Participation Rates by Sex and Age Groups	
700629	Unemployment Rates by Sex and Age Groups	
700730	Participation Rates, Canada and by Region	
700831	Labour Force, Canada and by Region	
700932	Employment, Canada and by Region	
701033	Unemployment, Canada and by Region	
701134	Estimates of Employees by Province and Industry	
701235	Productivity and	Costs,	Total All Industries	
701536	Productivity and	Costs,	Commercial Non-Agricultural Industries	
701637	Productivity and Costs, Commercial Non-Agricultural Goods-ProducingIndustries	
701738	Productivity and	Costs,	Commercial Service-Producing	Industries...	701839	Productivity and	Costs,	Manufacturing Industries	
701940	Gross National Expenditure Implicit Price Indexes	
70206972	COMMONS DEBATES	June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Reference
Table
Number	Page
41	Changes in Gross National Expenditure Implicit Price Indexes	
702142	Consumer Price Indexes: Standard Classifications	
702243	Changes in the Consumer Price Indexes: Standard Classifications	
702344	Consumer Price Indexes: Supplementary Classifications	
702445	Changes in the Consumer Price Indexes: Supplementary Classifications..	702546	Contributions to Changes in the Consumer Price Index	
702647	Other Price Indexes	
702748	Changes in Other Price Indexes	
702849	Total Government Revenues	
702950	Total Government Expenditures	
703051	Federal Government Revenues	
703152	Federal Government Expenditures	
703253	Provincial Government Revenues	
703354	Provincial Government Expenditures	
703455	Local Government Revenues	
703556	Local Government Expenditures	
703657	Hospital Revenues and Expenditures	
703758	Government of Canada Financial Requirements	
703859	International Payments: Current Account	
704060	Net Balances on Selected Non-Merchandise Accounts	
704261	Summary of Balance of Payments	
704362	International Payments: Capital Movements	
704463	Net Proceeds from New Issues of Canadian Bonds and Debentures toNon-Residents	
704664	Canadian Chartered Banks' Head Offices and Branches in Canada, NetChange in Foreign Currency Position	
704865	Financing of Canada's Bilateral Account with the United States	
704966	Canada's Reserve Position with the International Monetary Fund	705067	Canada's Official International Reserves	
705168	Details of New Issues and Retirements of Government of Canada Direct
and Guaranteed Marketable Bonds from January 1, 1970 to June 1,
1971	    7052
69	Changes in Market Bonds and Canada Savings Bonds Outstanding	705370	Mortgage Loan Approvals	
705471	Mortgage Loan Approvals by Private Lending Institutions	
705572	Summary of Sources of Net New Financing in Canada	
705673	Financial Flows: Chartered Banks	
705774	Financial Flows: Trust Companies	
705875	Financial Flows: Mortgage Loan Companies	
705976	Financial Flows: Mutual Funds	
706077	Financial Flows: Closed-End Funds	
706178	Financial Flows: Life Insurance Companies	
706279	Financial Flows: Sales Finance and Consumer Loan Companies	
706380	Financial Flows: Fire and Casualty Insurance Companies	
706481	Financial Flows: Credit Unions and Caisses Populaires	
7065
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Population as of June*1)	xt + i d * t [DOT] Annual Growth Birth Hate Death Rate Natural Rate Immigration Rate of of Increase Rate Population	Number of Families	Net Family Formation(Thousands	(Per thousand of population)	(Per cent)	(Thousands)	of persons)	1947	28.9	9.4	19.5	5.0	2.1	n.a.	n.a.1948	27.3	9.3	18.0	9.5	2.2	n.a.	n.a.1949	27.3	9.3	18.0	7.1	2.1	n.a.	n.a.1950	27.1	9.1	18.0	5.4	2.0	n.a.	1951	27.2	9.0	18.2	13.8	2.2	3,282.4	n.a.1952	27 .9	8.7	19.2	11.3	3.2	3,360.0	77.61953	28.1	8.6	19.5	11.4	2.7	3,423.0	63.01954	28.5	8.2	20.3	10.1	3.0	3,537.0	114.01955	28.2	8.2	20.0	7.0	2.7	3,625.0	88.01956	28.0	8.2	19.8	10.3	2.4	3,705.6	80.61957	28.2	8.2	20.0	17.0	3.3	3,796.0	90.41958	27.5	7.9	19.6	7.3	2.8	3,898.0	102.01959	27.4	8.0	19.4	6.1	2.4	3,982.0	84.01960	26.8	7.8	19.0	5.8	2.2	4,081.0	99.01961	26.1	7.7	18.4	3.9	2.1	4,140.4	59.41962	25.3	7.7	17.6	4.0	1.9	4,189.0	48.61963	24.6	7.8	16.8	4.9	1.9	4.258.0	69.01964	23.5	7.6	15.9	5.9	1.9	4,341.0	83.01965	21.3	7.6	13.7	7.5	1.8	4,432.0	91.01966	19.4	7.5	11.9	9.7	1.9	4,518.3	86.31967	18.2	7.4	10.8	10.9	1.9	4,608.0	89.71968	17.6	7.4	10.2	8.9	1.7	4,696.0	88.01969	17.6	7.3	10.3	7.7	1.5	4,807.0	110.01970	17.3	7.3	10.0	6.9	1.5	n.a.	n.a.(Expressed at annual rates)	1969 I	18.7	8.1	10.6	6.1	1.6	n.a.	n.a.II	19.2	7.3	11.9	7.7	1.3	HI....	18.0	7.1	10.9	9.2	1.6	n.a.	IV....	16.7	7.3	9.4	7.9	1.7	n.a.	n.a.1970 I	16.6	7.9	8.7	5.8	1.5	n.a.	n.a.II	17.9	7.1	10.8	7.5	1.2	n.a.	n.a.III....	
21.406	17.8	7.1	10.7	7.9	1.5	n.a.	IV....	17.2	7.2	10.0	6.4	1.5	n.a.	n.a.1971 I	
21,561	17.3	7.7	9.6	n.a.	1.3	n.a.	n.a.
n.a. =not available.
^Quarterly figures are the estimates for the months of January, April, July and October. Source: DBS Vital Statistics, Annual, Cat. 84-201, Monthly, Cat. 84-001.
DBS Estimates of Families in Canada, Annual, Cat. 91-204.
6974
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 2 GROSS NATIONAL EXPENDITURE 1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services	Government Current	Gross Fixed Capital Formation	Value of Physical	Exports of Goods and Services	Imports of Goods and Services	Residual Error of Estimate	Gross National Expenditure at Market PricesExpend* lui e on Goods and Services	Total	Government	Business	Change in Inventories d)	(Millions of dollars)	1947	.... 9,054	1,343	2,350	304	2,046	343	3,661	-3,601	19	13,1691948	.... 10,051	1,454	3,057	424	2,633	97	4,055	-3,630	43	15,1271949	.... 10,892	1,722	3,439	456	2,983	78	4,004	-3,853	18	16,3001950	.... 11,991	1,928	3,862	521	3,341	549	4,158	-4,492	-41	17,9551951	.... 13,399	2,811	4,424	640	3,784	871	5,052	-5,580	83	21,0601952	.... 14,818	3,620	5,096	779	4,317	511	5,568	-5,369	-202	24,0421953	.... 15,717	3,824	5,733	782	4,951	697	5,380	-5,806	-218	25,3271954	.... 16,561	3,825	5,714	873	4,841	-395	5,137	-5,543	-66	25,2331955	.... 17,902	4,036	6,422	948	5,474	275	5,749	-6,390	-99	27,8951956	.... 19,466	4,426	8,000	1,144	6,856	986	6,350	-7,664	-190	31,3741957	.... 20,886	4,573	8,689	1,327	7,362	170	6,379	-7,767	-23	32,9071958	.... 22,211	4,854	8,535	1,397	7,138	-296	6,329	-7,321	-218	34,0941959	4,976	8,647	1,508	7,139	414	6,674	-8,028	-37	36,2661960	.... 24,705	5,281	8,473	1,560	6,913	409	7,004	-8,092	-5	37,7751961	.... 25,120	6,350	8,317	1,671	6,646	119	7,651	-8,480	3	39,0801962	.... 26,636	6,770	8,823	1,901	6,922	568	8,265	-9,045	336	42,3531963	.... 28,364	7,149	9,522	1,983	7,539	592	9,102	-9,562	298	45,4651964	.... 30,647	7,684	11,173	2,022	9,151	469	10,540	-10,915	185	49,7831965	.... 33,134	8,307	13,251	2,443	10,808	1,172	11,223	-12,343	153	54,8971966	.... 36,057	9,820	15,405	2,845	12,560	1,230	13,088	-14,260	81	61,4211967	.... 38,998	10,934	15,684	2,969	12,715	408	14,713	-15,235	220	65,7221968	.... 42,360	12,158	15,809	2,995	12,814	741	16,719	-17,010	611	71,3881969	.... 46,531	13,680	17,242	3,052	14,190	1,043	18,468	-19,435	1,031	78,5601970	.... 48,995	15,802	17,961	3,252	14,709	122	20,969	-19,833	452	84,468(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	.... 45,256	12,996	16,804	3,012	13,792	1,180	18,312	-19,144	1,040	76,444II	.... 46,032	13,368	17,092	3,012	14,080	848	18,048	-19,120	1,184	77,452Ill	.... 46,648	14,068	17,368	3,068	14,300	1,348	18,104	-19,396	1,200	79,340IV	.... 48,188	14,288	17,704	3,116	14,588	796	19,408	-20,080	700	81,0041970 I	.... 48,008	15,024	17,592	3,172	14,420	432	21,132	-20,320	816	82,684II	.... 48,580	15,708	17,404	3,204	14,200	692	21,096	-20,140	484	83,824Ill	.... 49,312	15,968	18,168	3,276	14,892	216	20,780	-20,200	744	84,988IV	.... 50,080	16,508	18,680	3,356	15,324	-852	20,868	-18,672	-236	86,3761971 I	.... 50,840	17,108	19,076	3,464	15,612	-152	21,636	-20,740	120	87,888
U)The book value of inventories is deflated to remove the effect of price changes, and the derived "physical" change is then valued at average prices of the current period to obtain the value of physical change. The difference between this value of physical change and the change in book value is called the inventory valuation adjustment.
Soubch: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts, 1926-1968.
DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts, Quarterly, Cat. 13-001.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
CHANGES IN GROSS NATIONAL EXPENDITURE 1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services	Government Current Expenditure on Goods and Services	Gross Fixed Capital Formation	Value of Physical	Exports of Goods and Services	Imports of Goods and Services	Gross National Expenditure at Market PricesTotal	Government	Business	Changes in Inventories*1)**)	(Per cent change from previous period)	1947	.. 13.0	-18.9	39.7	28.3	41.6	148	11.6	25.9	10.81948	.. 11.0	8.3	30.1	39.5	28.7	-246	10.8	0.8	14.91949	18.4	12.5	7.5	13.3	-19	-1.3	6.1	7.81950	.. 10.1	12.0	12.3	14.3	12.0	471	3.8	16.6	10.21951	.. 11.7	45.8	14.6	22.8	13.3	322	21.5	24.2	17.31952	.. 10.6	28.8	15.2	21.7	14.1	-360	10.2	-3.8	14.21953	.. 6.1	5.6	12.5	0.4	14.7	186	-3.4	8.1	5.31954	.. 5.4	-	-0.3	11.6	-2.2	-1092	-4.6	-4.6	-0.41955	.. 8.1	5.5	12.4	8.6	13.1	670	11.9	15.3	10.51956	.. 8.7	9.7	24.6	20.7	25.2	711	10.5	19.9	12.51957	.. 7.3	3.3	8.6	16.0	7.4	-816	0.5	1.3	4.91958	.. 6.3	6.1	-1.8	5.3	-3.0	-466	-0.8	-5.7	3.61959	.. 6.3	2.5	1.3	7.9	-	710	5.5	9.7	6.41960	.. 4.6	6.1	-2.0	3.4	-3.2	-6	4.9	0.8	4.21961	.. 1.7	20.2	-1.8	7.1	-3.9	-290	9.2	4.8	3.51962	.. 6.0	6.6	6.1	13.8	4.2	449	8.0	6.7	8.41963	.. 6.5	5.6	7.9	4.3	8.9	24	10.1	5.7	7.31964	.. 8.0	7.5	17.3	2.0	21.4	-123	15.8	14.1	9.51965	.. 8.1	8.1	18.6	20.8	18.1	703	6.5	13.1	10.31966	.. 8.8	18.2	16.3	16.5	16.2	58	16.6	15.5	11.91967	.. 8.2	11.3	1.8	4.4	1.2	-822	12.4	6.8	7.01968	.. 8.6	11.2	0.8	0.9	0.8	333	13.6	11.7	8.61969	.. 9.8	12.5	9.1	1.9	10.7	302	10.5	14.3	10.01970	15.5	4.2	6.6	3.7	-921	13.5	2.0	7.5(Seasonally Adjusted)	1869 I	.. 3.0	0.7	3.7	0.7	4.4	396	4.9	6.0	3.1II	.. 1.7	2.9	1.7	-	2.1	-332	-1.4	-0.1	1.3Ill	.. 1.3	5.2	1.6	1.9	1.6	500	0.3	1.4	2.4IV	.. 3.3	1.6	1.9	1.6	2.0	-552	7.2	3.5	2.11970 I	.. -0.4	5.2	-0.6	1.8	-1.2	-364	8.9	1.2	2.1n	.. 1.2	4.6	-1.1	1.0	-1.5	260	-0.2	-0.9	1.4m	.. 1.5	1.7	4.4	2.2	4.9	-476	-1.5	0.3	1.4IV	3.4	2.8	2.4	2.9	-1068	0.4	-7.6	1.61971 I	3.6	2.1	3.2	1.9	700	3.7	11.1	1.8
OSee footnote 0) on reference table 2.
<*>Expressed in terms of absolute differences (millions of dollars) from the previous period. Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Account*.
24171-22J
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services	Government Current Expenditure [DOT] on Goods and Services	Gross Fixed Capital Formation <*>	Value of Physical Change in Inventories	Exports of Goods and Services	Imports of Goods and Services	Residual Error of Estimate	Gross National Expenditure in Constant (1961) DollarsTotal	Government	Business	(Millions of dollars)	1947	.... 13,721	2,814	3,796	442	3,390	326	8,018	-5,149	28	20,8611948	.... 13,438	2,682	4,358	549	3,845	51	5,185	-4,643	58	21,3741949	2,986	4,680	568	4,153	69	4,878	-4,770	23	22,1191950	.... 15,038	3,218	5,029	622	4,449	555	4,844	-5,196	-52	23.8091951	4,175	5,047	645	4.442	744	5,297	-5,845	93	25,0041952	.... 16,514	5,125	5,635	767	4,907	468	5,905	-6,045	-219	27,3981953	.... 17,538	5,273	6,327	818	5,559	612	5,843	-6,547	-235	28,8621954	.... 18,296	5,070	6,326	912	5,451	-364	5,626	-6,233	-71	28,2831955	.... 19,757	5,174	6,911	921	6,040	339	6,053	-7,067	-105	31,0791956	.... 21,172	5,334	8,174	1,003	7,240	775	6,508	-8,204	-194	33.7801957	.... 22,044	5,240	8,756	1,233	7,581	141	6,568	-8,108	-23	34,7101958	.... 22,846	6,398	8,659	1,367	7,332	-207	6,545	-7,539	-215	35,4621959	.... 24,000	5,354	8,705	1,472	7,263	301	6,799	-8,319	-36	36,9291960	.... 24,866	5,467	8,419	1,508	6,931	344	7,090	-8,310	-5	37.9941961	.... 25,120	6,350	8,317	1,671	6,646	119	7,651	-8,480	3	39.0801962	.... 26,277	6,598	8,692	1,867	6,825	534	8,010	-8,665	332	41,7781963	.... 27,551	6,726	9,144	1.873	7,271	576	8,712	-9,001	288	43,9961964	.... 29,372	6,980	10,437	1,862	8,575	393	9,856	-10,163	175	47,0501965	.... 31,113	7,126	11,797	2,108	9,689	1,095	10,348	-11,470	140	50,1491966	.... 32,771	7,900	13,082	2,326	10,756	1,146	11,714	-13,034	71	53,6501967	.... 34,309	8,225	13,191	2,436	10,755	312	12,941	-13,652	191	55.5171968	.... 35,853	8,539	13,177	2,458	10,719	611	14,507	-14,931	498	58.2541969	.... 37,847	8,816	13,768	2,417	11,351	910	15,672	-16,608	804	61,2091970	9,661	13,925	2,500	11,425	42	17,226	-16,599	343	63,208(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	8,804	13,592	2,380	11,212	1,028	15.7Q4	-16,656	824	60.680II	.... 37,552	8,656	13,716	2,440	11,276	548	15,296	-16,444	924	60.248Ill	.... 37,720	8,904	13,796	2,420	11,376	1,284	15,340	-16,440	928	61.532IV	8,900	13,968	2,428	11,540	780	16,348	-16,892	540	62,3761970 I	.... 37,984	9,508	13,736	2,444	11,292	132	17,428	-16,976	620	62,432II	.... 38,280	9,648	13,560	2,480	11,080	472	17,324	-16,744	364	62.904Ill	.... 38,776	9,628	14,092	2,516	11,576	92	17,044	-16,932	560	63,260IV	9,860	14,312	2,560	11,752	-528	17,108	-15,744	-168	64,2401971 I	10,092	14,396	2,584	11,812	-56	17,704	-17,428	88	64,604
UJPrior to 1960 gross fixed capital formation included an adjusting entry, thus the sum of business and government does not add to total gross fixed capital formation. Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years
and
Quarters
Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services
Government Current Expenditure on Goods and Services
Gross Fixed Capital Formation* **)
Total Government Business
Value of Physical Change in Inventories*2)
Exports of Goods and Services
1947	-24.5	26.41948	
-2.1	-4.7	14.81949	
4.8	11.3	7.4
(Per cent change from previous period)
16.9	28.0	185	-0.624.2	13.4	-275	3.33.5	8.0	18	-5.9
Gross
National
Imports of	Expenditure
Goods and	in Constant
Services	(1961)
Dollars
12.3	1.8
-9.8	2.6
2.7	3.6
1950	
6.8	7.8	7.5	9.51951	29.7	0.4	3.71952	
8.5	22.8	11.7	18.91953	2.9	12.3	6.61954	
4.3	-3.8	-	11.51955	
8.0	2.0	9.2	1.01956	3.1	18.3	8.91957	
4.1	-1.8	7.1	22.91958	3.0	-1.1	10.91959	-0.8	0.5	7.77.1	486	-0.7	8.9	7.6-0.2	189	9.4	12.5	5.010.5	-276	11.5	3.4	9.613.3	144	-1.0	8.3	5.3-1.9	-976	-3.7	-4.8	-2.010.8	703	7.6	13.4	9.919.9	436	7.5	16.1	8.74.7	-634	0.9	-1.2	2.8-3.3	-348	-0.4	-7.0	2.2-0.9	508	3.9	10.3	4.11960	
3.6	2.1	-3.3	2.41961	
1.0	16.2	-1.2	10.81962	
4.6	3.9	4.5	11.71963	1.9	6.2	0.31964	3.8	14.1	-0.6-4.6	43	4.3	-0.1	2.9-4.1	-225	7.9	2.0	2.92.7	415	4.7	2.2	6.96.5	42	8.8	3.9	5.317.9	-183	13.1	12.9	6.91965	
5.9	2.1	13.0	13.21966	
5.3	10.9	10.9	10.31967	
4.7	4.1	0.8	4.71968	
4.5	3.8	-0.1	0.91969	3.2	4.5	-1.713.0	702	5.0	12.9	6.611.0	51	13.2	13.6	7.0-	-834	10.5	4.7	3.5-0.3	299	12.1	9.4	4.95.9	299	8.0	11.2	5.11970	9.6	1.1	3.4	0.7	-868	9.9	-0.1	3.3(Seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	... 1.9	1.2	1.6	-3.1	2.6	240	3.5	5.8	1.6II.	... 0.4	-1.7	0.9	2.5	0.6	-480	-2.6	-1.3	-0.7Ill	2.9	0.6	-0.8	0.9	736	0.3	2.1IV	... 2.7	-	1.2	0.3	1.4	-504	6.6	2.7	1.41970 I	... -1.9	6.8	-1.7	0.7	-2.1	-648	6.6	0.5	0.1n	... 0.8	1.5	-1.3	1.5	-1.9	340	-0.6	-1.4	0 8hi	... 1.3	-0.2	3.9	1.5	4.5	-380	-1.6	1.1	0.6IV	... 1.6	2.4	1.6	1.7	1.5	-620	0.4	-7.0	1.51971 I	... 1.0	2.4	0.6	0.9	0.5	472	3.5	10.7	0.6
*D See footnote *D on reference table 4.
**) See footnote **) on reference table 3.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 6 STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN DEMAND (Per cent distribution of Gross National Expenditure by Components) 1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services	Government Current	Gross Fixed Capital Formation	Value of Physical	Exports of Goods and Services	Imports of Goods and Services	Residual Error of Estimate	Gross National Expenditure at Market Priceson Goods and Services	Total	Government	Business	Change in Inventories*1)	1947	.... 68.8	10.2	17.8	2.3	15.5	2.6	27.8	-27.3	0.1	100.01948	.... 66.5	9.6	20.2	2.8	17.4	0.6	26.8	-24.0	0.3	100.01949	.... 66.8	10.5	21.1	2.8	18.3	0.5	24.6	-23.6	0.1	100.01950	.... 66.8	10.7	21.5	2.9	18.6	3.0	23.2	-25.0	-0.2	100.01951	.... 63.6	13.4	21.0	3.0	18.0	4.1	24.0	-26.5	-0.4	100.01952	15.0	21.2	3.2	18.0	2.1	23.2	-22.3	-0.8	100.01953	.... 62.1	15.1	22.6	3.1	19.5	2.8	21.2	-22.9	-0.9	100.01954	.... 65.6	15.2	22.6	3.4	19.2	-1.5	20.4	-22.0	-0.3	100.01955	.... 64.2	14.5	23.0	3.4	19.6	1.0	20.6	-22.9	-0.4	100.01956	.... 62.0	14.1	25.5	3.6	21.9	3.2	20.2	-24.4	-0.6	100.01957	.... 63.5	13.9	26.4	4.0	22.4	0.5	19.4	-23.6	-0.1	100.01958	.... 65.1	14.2	25.0	4.1	20.9	-0.8	18.6	-21.5	-0.6	100.01959	.... 65.1	13.7	23.9	4.2	19.7	1.1	18.4	-22.1	-0.1	100.01960	.... 65.4	14.0	22.4	4.1	18.3	1.1	18.5	-21.4	-	100.01961	.... 64.3	16.2	21.3	4.3	17.0	0.3	19.6	-21.7	-	100.01962	.... 62.9	16.0	20.8	4.5	16.3	1.4	19.5	-21.4	0.8	100.01963	.... 62.4	15.7	20.9	4.3	16.6	1.3	20.0	-21.0	0.7	100.01964	.... 61.6	15.4	22.4	4.1	18.4	0.9	21.2	-21.9	0.4	100.01965	.... 60.4	15.1	24.1	4.4	19.7	2.1	20.5	-22.5	0.3	100.01966	16.0	25.1	4.6	20.5	2.0	21.3	-23.2	0.1	100.01967	16.7	23.9	4.5	19.4	0.6	22.4	-23.2	0.3	100.01968	
59.3	17.0	22.1	4.2	17.9	1.0	23.4	-23.8	0.9	100.01969	.... 59.2	17.4	21.9	3.8	18.1	1.3	24.0	-25.0	1.4	100.01970	.... 58.0	18.7	21.3	3.8	17.4	0.1	24.8	-23.5	0.5	100.0(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	
59.2	17.0	22.0	3.9	18.0	1.5	24.0	-24.9	1.2	100.0II	
59.4	17.3	22.1	3.9	18.2	1.1	23.3	-24.7	1.5	100.0Ill	17.7	21.9	3.9	18.0	1.7	22.8	-24.4	1.5	100.0IV	
59.5	17.6	21.9	3.8	18.0	1.0	24.0	-24.8	0.9	100.01970 I	
58.1	18.2	21.3	3.8	17.4	0.5	25.6	-24.6	1.0	100.0II	
58.0	18.7	20.8	3.8	16.9	0.8	25.2	-24.0	0.6	100.0Ill	
58.0	18.8	21.4	3.9	17.5	0.3	24.5	-23.8	0.9	100.0IV	
58.0	19.1	21.6	3.9	17.7	-1.0	24.2	-21.6	-0.3	100.01971 I	19.5	21.7	3.9	17.8	-0.2	24.6	-23.6	0.1	100.0
0) See footnote on reference table 2.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(Per cent distribution of Gross National Expenditure in Constant (1961) Dollars by Components)
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services	Government Current	Gross Fixed Capital Formation G>	Value of Physical	Exports of Goods and Services	Imports of Goods and Services	Residual Error of Estimate	Gross National Expenditure in Constant (1961) Dollarson Goods and Services	Total	Government	Business	Change in Inventories	1947	.... 65.8	13.5	18.2	2.1	16.2	1.6	24.1	-24.7	0.1	100.01948	.... 62.9	12.5	20.4	2.6	18.0	0.2	24.3	-21.7	0.3	100.01949	.... 63.7	13.5	21.2	2.6	18.8	0.3	22.1	-21.6	0.1	100.01950	.... 63.2	13.5	21.1	2.6	18.7	2.3	20.3	-21.8	-0.2	100.01951	.... 60.9	16.7	20.2	2.6	17.8	3.0	21.2	-23.4	0.4	100.01952	.... 60.3	18.7	20.6	2.8	17.9	1.7	21.6	-22.1	-0.8	100.01953	.... 60.8	18.3	21.9	2.8	19.3	2.1	20.2	-22.7	-0.8	100.01954	.... 64.7	17.9	22.4	3.2	19.3	-1.3	19.9	-22.0	-0.3	100.01955	.... 63.4	16.6	22.2	3.0	19.4	1.1	19.5	-22.7	-0.3	100.01956	.... 62.7	15.8	24.2	3.0	21.4	2.3	19.3	-24.3	-0.6	100 01957	.... 63.5	15.1	25.2	3.6	21.8	0.4	18.9	-23.4	-0.1	100.01958	.... 64.4	15.2	24,4	3.9	20.7	-0.6	18.5	-21.3	-0.6	100.01959	.... 65.0	14.5	23.6	4.0	19.7	0.8	18.4	-22.5	-0.1	100.01960	.... 65.4	14.4	22.2	4.0	18.2	0.9	18.7	-21.9	100.01961	.... 64.3	16.2	21.3	4.3	17.0	0.3	19.6	-21.7	-	100.01962	.... 62.9	15.8	20.8	4.5	16.3	1.3	19.2	-20.8	0.8	100.01963	.... 62.6	15.3	20.8	4.3	16.5	1.3	19.8	-20.5	0.7	100.01964	.... 62.4	14.8	22.2	4.0	18.2	0.8	21.0	-21.6	0.4	100.01965	.... 62.1	14.2	23.5	4.2	19.3	2.2	20.6	-22.9	0.3	100.01966	.... 61.1	14.7	24.4	4.3	20.1	2.2	21.8	-24.3	0.1	100.01967	.... 61.8	14.8	23.8	4.4	19.4	0.6	23.3	-24.6	0.3	100.01968	.... 61.5	14.7	22.6	4.2	18.4	1.0	24.9	-25.6	0.9	100.01969	.... 61.8	14.4	22.5	3.9	18.5	1.5	25.6	-27.1	1.3	100.01970	.... 61.1	15.3	22.0	4.0	18.1	0.1	27.3	-26.3	0.5	100.0(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	.... 61.6	14.5	22.4	3.9	18.5	1.7	25.9	-27.4	1.3	100.0IT	.... 62.3	14.4	22.8	4.0	18.7	0.9	25.4	-27.3	1.5	100.0Ill	.... 61.3	14.5	22.4	3.9	18.5	2.1	24.9	-26.7	1.5	100.0IV	.... 62.1	14.3	22.4	3.9	18.5	1.2	26.2	-27.1	0.9	100.01970 I	.... 60.9	15.2	22.0	3.9	18.1	0.2	27.9	-27.2	1.0	100.0II	.... 60.9	15.3	21.5	3.9	17.6	0.8	27.5	-26.6	0.6	100.0Ill	.... 61.3	15.2	22.3	4.0	18.3	0.1	27.0	-26.8	0.9	100.0IV	.... 61.3	15.4	22.3	4.0	18.3	-0.8	26.6	-24.5	-0.3	100.01971 I	.... 61.6	15.6	22.3	4.0	18.3	-0.1	27.4	-27.0	0.2	100.0
See footnote >
on reference table 4.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
NATIONAL INCOME AND GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT 1947 to 1971
Capital
Years and Quarters	Wages, Salaries and Supple- mentary Labour Income11*	Corporation Profits _ Divi-Corpora- dends Paid to Non- ®efore Resi-Taxes dents®		Interest and Miscel- laneous Invest- ment Income	Accrued Net Income of Farm Operators from Farm Production (*)	Net Income of NonFarm Unincorporated Business Including Rents ®)	Inven- tory Valua- tion Adjust- ment®)	Net National Income at Factor Cost	Indirect Taxes less Subsidies	Consump- tion Allow- ances and Miscel- laneous Valuation Adjust- ments	Residual Error of Estimate	Gross National Product at Market Prices
						(Millions of dollars)						
1947	.... 6,482	1,814	-248	197	1,105	1,427	-571	10,206	1,678	1,303	-19	13,1691948	.... 7,496	1,964	-249	239	1,366	1,524	-506	11,834	1,832	1,504	-43	15,1271949	.... 8,115	1,879	-317	276	1,216	1,651	-111	12,708	1,878	1,731	-18	16,3001950	2,522	-404	372	1,307	1,699	-374	13,888	2.065	1,960	41	17,9551951	.... 10,340	2,874	-379	428	1,868	1,806	-643	16,294	2,548	2,300	-83	21,0601952	.... 11,633	2,791	-343	493	1,878	1,933	119	18.504	2,799	2.537	202	24,0421953	.... 12,671	2,746	-325	554	1,461	2,161	2	19,270	2,994	2,844	218	25,3271954	.... 13,009	2,447	-336	603	918	2,250	88	18,979	3,042	3,146	66	25,2331955	.... 13,967	3,220	-394	744	1,120	2,475	-184	20,948	3,321	3,527	99	27,8951956	.... 15,815	3,690	-448	843	1,283	2,496	-247	23,432	3,731	4,020	190	31,3741957	.... 17,191	3,424	-494	938	908	2,614	-59	24,522	3,975	4,387	23	32,9071958	.... 17.660	3,498	-490	1,008	1,116	2,707	-41	25.458	4,036	4,381	218	34,0941959	.... 18,862	4,046	-526	1,004	1,008	2,819	-108	27,105	4,401	4,723	37	36,2661960	.... 19,862	3,912	-493	1,074	1,021	2,797	-26	28,147	4,587	5,036	5	37,7751961	.... 20,746	4,075	-618	1,261	839	2,800	-41	29,062	4,838	5,182	-3	39,0801962	.... 22,249	4,607	-619	1,396	1,343	2,791	-118	31.649	5,446	5,594	-336	42,3531963	.... 23,727	5.078	-648	1,534	1,538	3,073	-202	34,100	5,714	5,948	-298	45,4651964	.... 25,886	6,043	-788	1,697	1,284	3,215	-139	37,198	6,441	6,328	-185	49,7831965	.... 28,858	6,574	-815	1,846	1,397	3,424	-315	40.969	7,280	6,800	-153	54,8971966	.... 32,658	6,913	-835	2,015	1,958	3,650	-327	46,032	8,056	7,414	-81	61,4211967	.... 36,114	6,774	-854	2,335	1,306	3,926	-323	49,278	8,786	7,877	-219	65,7221968	.... 39,353	7,442	-827	2,571	1,471	4,218	-317	53,911	9,677	8,411	-611	71,3881969	.... 44,101	7,852	-818	3,187	1,695	4,410	-549	59,878	10,647	9,066	-1,031	78,5601970	.... 47,949	7,364	-906	3,614	1,369	4,551	-171	63,770	11,251	9,898	-451	84,468(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	.... 42,512	8,160	-808	3,076	1,540	4,292	-536	58.236	10,456	8,796	-1,044	76,444II	.... 43,532	8,084	-832	3,132	1,552	4,388	-616	59.240	10.524	8,872	-1,184	77,452in	.... 44,608	7,576	-772	3,252	1,964	4,480	-460	60.648	10,692	9.200	-1,200	79,340IV	.... 45,752	7,588	-860	3,288	1,724	4,480	-584	61,388	10,916	9,396	-696	81,0041970 I	.... 47,052	7,740	-1,076	3,416	1,380	4,488	-380	62,620	11,152	9,732	-820	82,684II	.... 47,352	7,412	-868	3,560	1,536	4,484	-188	63.288	11,096	9,924	-484	83,824Ill	.... 48,096	7,596	-896	3,836	1,116	4,564	-84	64.228	11,420	10,080	-740	84.988IV	.... 49,296	6,708	-784	3,644	1,444	4,668	-32	64,944	11,336	9,856	240	86,3761971 I	.... 50,144	7,392	1,004	3,704	1,104	4,752	-448	65,644	11,944	10,416	-116	87,888
^Includes military pay and allowances.
<2>Includes the withholding tax applicable to this item.
®>Includes an arbitrary smoothing of crop production and standard seasonal adjustments for withdrawals of grain from farm stocks and the change in livestock items. Because of the arbitrary elements, too precise an interpretation should not be given the seasonally adjusted figures of accrued net income of farm operators.
<4>Includes net income of independent professional practitioners.
<6,In the seasonally adjusted series, the value of grain production in each quarter is taken as one-fourth of the estimated value of crop production for the year as a whole. All other items in the farm inventories series are seasonally adjusted by standard techniques.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Wages, Salaries and Supplementary Labour Income d)	Corporation Profits		Interest and Miscellaneous Investment Income	Accrued Net Income of Farm Operators from Farm Production <*>
Net Income of Nonfarm Unincorporated Business Including Rents14)	Net National Income at Factor Cost	Indirect Taxes less Subsidies	Capital Consumption Allowances and Miscellaneous Valuation Adjustments	Gross National Product at Market Prices
		Corpo- ration Profits Before Taxes	Dividends Paid to NonResidents w)							
				(Percent change from previous period)						
1947	
11.2	23.1	21.0	15.9	7.2	8.1	9.0	22.4	21.7	10.81948	.... 15.6	8.3	0.4	21.3	23.6	6.8	16.0	9.2	15.4	14.91949	.... 8.3	-4.3	27.3	15.5	-11.0	8.3	7.4	2.5	15.1	7.81950	.... 8.0	34.2	27.4	34.8	7.5	2.9	9.3	10.0	13.2	10.21951	
18.0	14.0	-6.2	15.1	42.9	6.3	17.3	23.4	17.3	17.31952	.... 12.5	-2.9	-9.5	15.2	0.5	7.0	13.6	9.9	10.3	14 .21953	.... 8.9	-1.6	-5.2	12.4	-22.2	11.8	4.1	7.0	12.1	5.31954	.... 2.7	-10.9	3.4	8.8	-37.2	4.1	-1.5	1.6	10.6	-0.41955	.... 7.4	31.6	17.3	23.4	22.0	10.0	10.4	9.2	12.1	10.51956	.... 13.2	14.6	13.7	13.3	14.6	0.8	11.9	12.3	14.0	12.51957	.... 8.7	-7.2	10.3	11.3	-29.2	4.7	4.7	6.5	9.1	4.91958	
2.7	2.2	-0.8	7.5	22.9	3.6	3.8	1.5	-0.1	3.61959	
6.8	15.7	7.3	-0.4	-9.7	4.1	6.5	9.0	7.8	6.41960	
5.3	-3.3	-6.3	7.0	1.3	-0.8	3.8	4.2	6.6	4.21961	
4.5	4.2	25.4	17.4	-17.8	0.1	3.3	5.5	2.9	3.51962	
7.2	13.1	0.2	10.7	60.1	-0.3	8.9	12.6	8.0	8.41963	
6.6	10.2	4.7	9.9	14.5	10.1	7.7	4.9	6.3	7.31964	
9.1	19.0	21.6	10.6	-16.5	4.6	9.1	12.7	6.4	9.51965	
11.5	8.8	3.4	8.8	8.8	6.5	10.1	13.0	7.5	10.31966	
13.2	5.2	2.5	9.2	40.2	6.6	12.4	10.7	9.0	11.91967	
10.6	-2.0	2.3	15.9	-33.3	7.6	7.1	9.1	6.2	7.01968	
9.0	9.9	-3.2	10.1	12.6	7.4	9.4	10.1	6.8	8.61969	
12.1	5.5	-1.1	24.0	15.2	4.6	11.1	10.0	7.8	10.01970	
13.7	-6.2	10.8	13.4	-19.2	3.2	6.5	5.7	9.2	7.5(Seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	
3.6	3.0	9.2	12.6	-2.3	-0.6	3.1	4.8	2.6	3.1II	
2.4	-0.9	3.0	1.8	0.8	2.2	1.7	0.7	0.9	1.3Ill	
2.5	-6.3	-7.2	3.8	26.5	2.1	2.4	1.6	3.7	2.4IV	
2.6	0.2	11.4	1.1	-12.2	-	1.2	2.1	2.1	2.11970 I	
2.8	2.0	25.1	3.9	-20.0	0.2	2.0	2.2	3.6	2.1II	-4.2	-19.3	4.2	11.3	-0.1	1.1	-0.5	2.0	1.4hi	
1.6	2.5	3.2	7.8	-27.3	1.8	1.5	2.9	1.6	1.4IV	
2.5	-11.7	-12.5	-5.0	29.4	2.3	1.1	-0.7	-2.2	1.61971 I	
1.7	10.2	28.1	1.6	-23.5	1.8	1.1	5.4	5.7	1.8
a), (2), ([DOT]), (4). See footnotes <*>[DOT] <*>* <[DOT]>* <4>
on reference table 8. Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 10 STRUCTURAL CHANGES IN INCOME (Per cent distribution of Gross National Product by Components) 1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Wages, Salaries and Supplementary Labour Income W	Corporation Profits		Interest and Miscel- laneous Invest- ment Income	Accrued Net Income of Farm Operators from Farm Production (*>
Net Income of NonFarm Unincorporated Business Including Rents	Inven- tory Valua- tion Adjust- ment	Net National Income at Factor Cost	Indirect Taxes less Subsi- dies	Capital Consump- tion Allow- ances and Miscel- laneous Valua- tion Adjust- ments	Residual Error of Estimate	Gross National Product at Market Prices
		Corpo- ration Profits Before Taxes	Dividends Paid to Non-Residents									
1947	.. 49.2	13.8	-1.9	1.5	8.4	10.8	-4.3	77.5	12.7	9.9	-0.1	100.01948	.. 49.6	13.0	-1.6	1.6	9.0	10.1	-3.5	78.2	12.1	9.9	-0.2	100.01949	.. 49.8	11.5	-1.9	1.7	7.5	10.1	-0.7	78.0	11.5	10.6	-0.1	100.01960	.. 48.8	14.0	-2.2	2.1	7.3	9.5	-2.2	77.3	11.5	10.9	0.3	100.01951	.. 49.1	13.6	-1.8	2.0	8.9	8.6	-3.0	77.4	12.1	10.9	-0.4	100.01952	.. 48.4	11.6	-1.4	2.1	7.8	8.0	0.5	77.0	11.6	10.6	0.8	100.01953	.. 50.0	10.8	-1.3	2.2	5.8	8.5	0.1	76.1	11.8	11.2	0.9	100.01954	.. 51.6	9.7	-1.3	2.4	3.6	8.9	0.3	75.2	12.0	12.5	0.3	100.01955	.. 50.1	11.5	-1.4	2.7	4.0	8.6	-0.7	75.1	11.9	12.6	0.4	100.01956	.. 50.4	11.8	-1.4	2.7	4.1	8.0	-0.9	74.7	11.9	12.8	0.6	100.01957	.. 52.2	10.4	-1.5	2.9	2.8	7.9	-0.2	74.5	12.1	13.3	0.1	100.01958	.. 51.8	10.3	-1.4	3.0	3.3	7.y	-0.2	74.7	11.8	12.9	0.6	100.01959	.. 52.0	11.2	-1.5	2.8	2.8	7.8	-0.3	74.8	12.1	13.0	0.1	100.01960	.. 52.6	10.4	-1.3	2.8	2.7	7.4	-0.1	74.5	12.2	13.3	_	100.01961	.. 53.1	10.4	-1.6	3.2	2.2	7.2	-0.1	74.4	12.4	13.2	-	100.01962	.. 52.5	10.9	-1.5	3.3	3.2	6.6	-0.3	74.7	12.9	13.2	-0.8	100.01963	.. 52.2	11.2	-1.4	3.4	3.4	6.8	-0.6	75.0	12.6	13.1	-0.7	100.01964	.. 52.0	12.1	-1.6	3.4	2.6	6.5	-0.3	74.7	13.0	12.7	-0.4	100.01965	.. 52.6	12.0	-1.5	3.4	2.5	6.2	-0.6	74.6	13.3	12.4	-0.3	100.01966	11.3	-1.4	3.3	3.2	5.9	-0.6	74.9	13.1	12.1	-0.1	100.01987	.. 54.9	10.3	-1.3	3.6	2.0	6.0	-0.5	75.0	13.3	12.0	-0.3	100.01968	.. 55.1	10.4	-1.2	3.6	2.1	5.9	-0.4	75.5	13.6	11.8	-0.9	100.01969	.. 56.1	10.0	-1.1	4.1	2.2	5.6	-0.7	76.2	13.6	11.5	-1.3	100.01970	.. 59.4	8.7	-1.1	4.3	1.6	5.4	-0.2	75.5	13.3	11.7	-0.5	100.0(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	.. 65.6	10.7	-1.1	4.0	2.1	5.6	-0.7	76.2	13.7	11.5	-1.4	100.0it	.. 66.2	10.4	-1.1	4.0	2.0	5.7	-0.8	76.4	13.6	11.5	-1.5	100.0m	.. 56.3	9.5	-1.0	4.1	2.5	5.6	-0.6	76.4	13.5	11.6	-1.5	100.0IV	.. 56.5	9.4	-1.1	4.1	2.1	5.5	-0.7	75.8	13.5	11.6	-0.9	100.01970 I	9.4	-1.3	4.1	1.7	5.4	-0.5	75.7	13.5	11.8	-1.0	100.0ii	.. 56.5	8.8	-1.0	4.2	1.8	5.4	-0.2	75.5	13.3	11.8	-0.6	100.0hi	.. 66.6	8.9	-1.1	4.5	1.4	5.4	-0.1	75.6	13.4	11.9	-0.9	100.0IV	.. 57.0	7.8	-0.9	4.2	1.7	5.4	-	75.2	13.1	11.4	0.3	100.01971 I	.. 57.0	8.4	-1.1	4.2	1.3	5.4	-0.5	74.7	13.6	11.8	-0.1	100.0(i), (j), (i), («), (6) gee footnotes	<[DOT]>>
<4>- <6) on reference table 8.
Source, DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 11 PERSONAL INCOME AND EXPENDITURE 1947 to 1971
Years
and
Quarters
1947.
ly48.
1949.
1950.
1951.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1969	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1970	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1971	I...
Ratio of
Personal Income	Personal Disposable Income	Personal Expenditure	Personal Saving	Personal Savings to Personal Disposable Income	Personal Disposable Income Per Capita	Personal Expenditure Per Capita
	(Millions of dollars)				(Dollars)	
10,583	9,621	9,054	509	5.3	747	70312,161	11,128	10,051	982	8.8	845	76312,902	11,889	10,892	960	8.1	884	81013,681	12,704	11,991	647	5.1	926	87416,159	14,803	13,399	1,325	9.0	1,057	95617,900	16,230	14,818	1,319	8.1	1,122	1,02518,932	17,100	15,717	1,271	7.4	1,152	1,05919,006	17,157	16,561	465	2.7	1,122	1,08320,573	18,639	17,802	590	3.2	1,187	1,14022,817	20,593	19,466	954	4.6	1,281	1,21124,500	22,044	20,886	950	4.3	1,327	1,25725,893	23,555	22,211	1,124	4.8	1,379	1,30027,425	24,757	23,620	882	3.6	1,416	1,35128,921	25,893	24,705	909	3.5	1,449	1,38229,411	26,211	25,120	792	3.0	1.437	1,37731,966	28,518	26,636	1,565	5.5	1,535	1,43334,109	30,448	28,364	1,749	5.7	1,608	1,49836,618	32,385	30,647	1,379	4.3	1,679	1,58940,591	35,787	33,134	2,249	6.3	1,822	1,68745,702	39,499	36,057	2,999	7.6	1,973	1,80250,208	42,792	38,998	3,296	7.7	2,097	1,91155,213	46,427	42,360	3,558	7.7	2,238	2,04261,398	50,557	46,531	3,434	6.8	2,401	2,20966,100	63,595	48,995	3,975	7.4	2,507	2,292(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	58,772	48,884	45,256	3,056	6.3	2,334	2,16160,628	49,876	46,032	3,264	6.5	2,374	2,19162,568	51,480	46,648	4,224	8.2	2,441	2,21263,624	51,988	48,188	3,192	6.1	2,455	2,27564,688	53,008	48,008	4,392	8.3	2,493	2,25865,428	52,816	48,580	3,612	6.8	2,477	2,27866,344	53,656	4^,312	3,720	6.9	2,507	2,30467,940	54,900	50,080	4,176	7.6	2,555	2,33069,356	56,104	50,840	4,552	8.1	2,602	2,358
Soukce: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
PERSONAL INCOME, CANADA AND BY PROVINCE 1949 to 1969
Years	Nfld.	P.E.I.	N.S.	N.B.	Que.	Ont.	Man.	Sask.	Alta.	B.C.	Y.T. <fc N.W.T.	Canada
						(Millions of dollars)						
1949	51	458	339	3,123	4,990	743	797	914	1,317	-	12,9021950	53	485	360	3,355	5,380	773	715	930	1,437	-	13.6611951	62	517	402	3,922	6,228	907	1,053	1,220	1,602	26	16,1591952	78	585	426	4,384	6,897	972	1,195	1,307	1,782	30	17.9001953	
249	64	622	435	4,708	7,405	980	1,119	1,384	1.907	32	18,9321954	69	645	454	4,854	7,617	965	798	1,306	1,971	37	19,0001955	65	667	477	5,130	8,218	1,036	1,034	1,438	2,160	41	20,5731950	
315	83	714	520	5,671	9,000	1,168	1,181	1,683	2,400	54	22.8171957	
338	77	768	545	6,200	9,910	1,193	1,019	1,707	2,652	55	24,5001958	82	801	570	6,474	10,496	1,319	1,133	1,905	2,700	55	25,8931959	95	858	614	6,836	11,113	1,388	1,181	1,991	2,864	56	27,4251960	97	903	650	7,257	11,635	1,461	1,337	2,085	2,973	57	28,9211961	
427	99	926	657	7,654	11,896	1,425	1,060	2,141	3,003	55	29,4111962	
445	112	975	694	8,226	12,745	1,602	1,492	2,343	3,194	56	31,9661963	114	1,029	741	8,702	13,679	1,639	1,668	2,479	3,436	64	34.1091964	
617	127	1,096	801	9,547	14,736	1,777	1,522	2,602	3,743	64	36,6181965	
563	136	1,181	871	10,555	16,353	1,700	1,785	2,888	4,195	66	40.5911966	
628	149	1,295	690	11,820	18,433	2,073	2.057	3,337	4,763	72	45.7021967	
699	105	1,442	1,078	13,140	20,315	2,318	2,001	3,604	5,244	96	50,2081908	
755	186	1,579	1,192	14,276	22,385	2,581	2,300	4,050	5,689	106	55.2131969	201	1,761	1,304	15,733	25,124	2,787	2,415	4,555	6,457	122	61,398(Per cent change from previous year)	1950	3.9	5.9	6.2	7.4	7.9	4.0	-10.3	1.8	9.1	-	6.01951	17.0	6.6	11.7	16.9	15.0	17.3	47.3	31.2	11.5	-	18.11952	
8.9	25.8	13.2	6.0	11.8	10.7	7.2	13.5	7.1	11.2	15.4	10.81953	
13.2	-17.9	6.3	2.1	7.4	7.4	0.8	-6.4	5.9	7.0	6.7	5.81954	7.8	3.7	4.4	3.1	2.9	-1.5	-28.7	-5.6	3.4	15.0	0.41955	-5.8	3.4	5.1	5.7	7.9	7.4	29.0	10.1	9.0	10.8	8.21956	
11.7	27.7	7.0	9.0	10.5	9.5	12.7	14.2	17.0	11.1	31.7	10.91957	
7.3	-7.2	7.6	4.8	9.3	10,1	2.1	-13.7	1.4	10.5	1.9	7.41958	6.5	4.3	4.6	4.4	5.9	10.6	11.2	11.6	1.8	-	5.71959	15.9	7.1	7.7	5.6	5.9	5.2	4.2	4.5	6.1	1.8	5.91960	2.1	5.2	6.9	6.2	4.7	5.3	13.2	4.7	3.8	1.8	5.51961	
6.5	2.1	2.5	1.1	5.5	2.2	-2.5	-20.7	2.7	1.0	-3.5	1.71962	
4.2	13.1	5.3	5.0	7.5	7.1	12.4	40.8	9.4	6.4	1.8	8.71963	
6.7	1.8	5.5	6.8	5.8	7.3	2.3	11.8	5.8	7.8	14.3	0.71904	
8.8	11.4	0.5	8.1	9.7	7.7	8.4	-8.8	5.0	8.9	-	7.41905	
8.9	7.1	7.8	8.7	10.6	11.0	-4.3	17.3	11.0	12.1	3.1	10.81900	
11.5	9.6	9.7	-20.1	12.0	12.7	21.9	15.2	15.5	13.5	9.1	12.61967	10.7	11.4	54.9	11.2	10.2	11.8	-2.7	8.0	10.1	33.3	9.91968	12.7	9.5	10.6	8.6	10.2	11.3	14.9	12.5	8.5	10.4	10.01969	8.1	11.5	9.4	10.2	12.2	8.0	5.0	12.3	13.5	15.1	11.2
June 18, 1971___ COMMONS DEBATES	6985
REFERENCE TABLE 12 (continued) PERSONAL INCOME, CANADA AND BY PROVINCE 1949 to 1969												
Years	Nfld.	P.E.I.	N.S.	N.B.	Que.	Ont.	Man.	Sask.	Alta.	B.C.	Y.T. & N.W.T.	Canada
				(Percentage distribution of total among provinces) U)								
1949	
1.3	0.4	3.5	2.0	24.2	38.7	6.8	6.2	7.1	10.2	-	100.01950	
1.3	0.4	3.5	2.6	24.5	39.4	5.7	5.2	6.8	10.5	100.01951	
1.3	0.4	3.2	2.5	24.3	38.5	5.6	6.5	7.5	9.9	0.2	100.01952	
1.2	0.4	3.3	2.4	24.5	38.5	5.4	6.7	7.3	10.0	0.2	100.01953	
1.3	0.3	3.3	2.3	24.9	39.1	5.2	5.9	7.3	10.1	0.2	100.01954	
1.4	0.4	3.4	2.4	25.5	40.1	5.1	4.2	6.9	10.4	0.2	100.01955	
1.4	0.3	3.2	2.3	24.9	39.9	5.0	5.0	7.0	10.5	0.2	100.01956	
1.4	0.4	3.1	2.3	24.9	39.4	5.1	5.2	7.4	10.5	0.2	100.01957	
1.4	0.3	3.1	2.2	25.3	40.4	4.9	4.2	7.0	10.8	0.2	100.01958	
1.3	0.3	3.1	2.2	25.0	40.5	5.1	4.4	7.4	10.4	0.2	100.01959	
1.4	0.3	3.1	2.2	24.9	40.5	5.1	4.3	7.3	10.4	0.2	100.01960	
1.4	0.3	3.1	2.2	25.1	40.2	5.1	4.6	7.2	10.3	0.2	100.01961	
1.5	0.3	3.1	2.2	26.0	40.4	4.8	3.6	7.3	10.2	0.2	100.01962	
1.4	0.4	3.1	2.2	25.7	39.9	5.0	4.7	7.3	10.0	0.2	100.01963	0.3	3.0	2.2	25.5	40.1	4.8	4.9	7.3	10.1	0.2	100.01964	
1.4	0.3	3.0	2.2	26.1	40.2	4.9	4.2	7.1	10.2	0.2	100.01965	
1.4	0.3	2.9	2.1	26.0	40.3	4.2	4.4	7.1	10.3	0.2	100.01966	0.3	2.8	1.5	25.9	40.3	4.5	4.5	7.3	10.4	0.2	100.01967	
1.4	0.3	2.9	2.1	26.2	40.5	4.6	4.0	7.2	10.4	0.2	100.01968	
1.4	0.3	2.9	2.2	25.9	40.5	4.7	4.2	7.3	10.3	0.2	100.01969	
1.4	0.3	2.9	2.1	25.6	40.9	4.5	3.9	7.4	10.5	0.2	100.0
Note: The Canada figure includes personal income of Canadians temporarily abroad (including pay and allowances of Canadian Armed Forces abroad). Figures do not cross-add: See Note.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
PERSONAL INCOME PER CAPITA, CANADA AND^BY PROVINCE
1949 to 1969
Years	Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Que. Out. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. n.wIt. Canada
(Dollars)
1949	543	728	667	804	1,140	1,982	953	1,033	1,183	-	9671950	552	760	703	845	1,205	1,007	858	1,019	1,264	-	9981951	633	804	779	967	1,355	1,169	1,266	1,299	1,375	1,040	1,1531952	780	896	810	1,050	1,440	1,218	1,418	1,343	1,479	1,200	1,2381953	634	938	816	1,103	1,499	1,211	1,300	1,368	1,528	1,280	1,2751954	683	958	841	1,106	1,489	1,173	914	1,236	1,522	1,370	1.2431955	650	977	872	1,136	1,561	1,235	1,178	1,318	1,610	1,414	1,3111956	838	1,027	937	1,225	1,665	1,374	1,341	1,499	1,718	1,742	1,4191957	
797	778	1,096	970	1,300	1,758	1,384	1,158	1,466	1,789	1,774	1,4751958	820	1,130	998	1,320	1,798	1,507	1,272	1,580	1,756	1,667	1,5161959	941	1,193	1,055	1,361	1,862	1,558	1,302	1,595	1,828	1,647	1,5691960	942	1,242	1,104	1,411	1,904	1,613	1,461	1,615	1,856	1,583	1,6181961	943	1,256	1,099	1,455	1,908	1,546	1,146	1,607	1,843	1,486	1,6131962	1,047	1,307	1,147	1,532	2,007	1,712	1,604	1,711	1,924	1,400	1,7211963	1,056	1,370	1,217	1,588	2,111	1,727	1,788	1,767	2,022	1,561	1,8021964	1,165	1,452	1,311	1,710	2,222	1,853	1,616	1,821	2,145	1,524	1,8981965	1,248	1,562	1,416	1,857	2,409	1,969	1,879	1,992	2,334	1,610	2,0661966	1,367	1,713	1,571	2,045	2,648	2,153	2,154	2,281	2,542	1,674	2,2831967	
1,398	1,514	1,905	1,739	2,239	2,842	2,407	2,089	2,419	2,693	2,182	2,4611968	
1,489	1,691	2,078	1,910	2,409	3,064	2,658	2,396	2,658	2,835	2,304	2,6621969	
1,615	1,827	2,308	2,086	2,629 3,371 2,847 2,518 (Per cent change from previous year)	2,918	3,124	2,596	2,9151.7	4.4	5.4	5.1	5.7	-49.2	-10.4	-1.4	6.8	-	3.2 11911	
7.9	14.7	5.8	10.8	14.4	12.4	16.1	47.6	27.5	8.8	-	15.5 B1952	
5.0	23.2	11.4	4.0	8.6	6.3	4.2	12.0	3.4	7.6	15.4	7.4 B1953	
10.5	-18.7	4.7	0.7	5.0	4.1	-0.6	-8.3	1.9	3.3	6.7	3.0 B1954	
2.5	7.7	2.1	3.1	0.3	-0.7	-3.1	-29.7	-9.6	-0.4	7.0	-2.5 11955	-4.8	2.0	3.7	2.7	4.8	5.3	28.9	6.6	5.8	3.2	5.5 11956	28.9	5.1	7.5	7.8	6.7	11.3	13.8	13.7	6.6	23.2	8.2 1 3.9 I1957	-7.2	6.7	3.5	6.1	5.6	0.7	-13.6	-2.2	4.3	1.8	1958	
0.5	5.4	3.1	2.9	1.5	2.3	8.9	9.8	7.8	-1.8	-6.0	2.8 |1959	14.8	5.6	5.7	3.1	3.6	3.4	2.4	0.9	4.1	-1.2	3.5 *I960	
6.4	0.1	4.1	4.6	3.7	2.3	3.5	12.2	1.3	1.5	-3.9	3.1 11961	0.1	1.1	-0.5	3.1	0.2	-4.2	-21.6	-0.5	-0.7	-6.1	-0.3 H1962	11.0	4.1	4.4	5.3	5.2	10.7	40.0	6.5	4.4	-5.8	6.7 |1963	
4.9	0.9	4.8	6.1	3.7	5.2	0.9	11.5	3.3	5.1	11.5	4.7 |1964	
7.2	10.3	6.0	7.7	7.7	5.3	7.3	-9.6	3.1	6.1	-2.4	5.3 *1965	
7.9	7.1	7.6	8.0	8.6	8.4	6.3	16.3	9.4	8.8	5.6	8.9 B1966	9.5	9.7	10.9	10.1	9.9	9.3	14.6	14.5	8.9	4.0	10.5 B1967	10.7	11.2	10.7	9.5	7.3	11.8	-3.0	6.0	6.0	30.3	7.8 *1968	
6.5	11.7	9.1	9.9	7.6	7.8	10.4	14.7	9.9	5.2	5.6	8.2 *1969	
8.4	8.1	11.1	9.2	9.2	10.0	7.1	5.1	9.8	10.2	12.6	9.5 B 	
fl
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 13 (continued)

[Stage Direction]
1949 to 1969
Years	Nfld.	P.E.L	N.S.	N.B.	Que.	Ont.	Man.	Saak.	Alta.	B.C.	Y.T. * N.W.T.	Canada
		(Personal income per capita, by province,				as a percentage of personal income per capita at the national level)						
1949	
49.1	56.2	75.3	69.0	83.1	117.9	205.0	99.1	106.8	122.3	-	100.01950	
52.0	55.3	76.2	70.4	84.7	120.7	100.9	86.0	102.1	126.7	100.01951	
48.6	54.9	69.7	67.6	83.9	117.5	101.4	109.8	112.7	119.3	90.2	100.01952	
47.5	63.0	72.4	65.4	84.8	116.3	98.4	114.5	108.5	119.5	96.9	100.01953	
51.0	49.7	73.6	64.0	86.5	117.6	95.0	102.0	107.3	119.8	100.4	100.01954	
53.6	54.9	77.1	67.7	89.0	119.8	94.4	73.5	99.4	122.4	110.2	100.01955	
53.0	49.6	74.5	66.5	86.7	119.1	94.2	89.9	100.5	122.8	107.9	100.01956	
53.5	59.1	72.4	66.0	86.3	117.3	96.8	94.5	105.6	120.9	122.8	100.01957	
54.0	52.7	74.3	65.8	88.1	119.2	93.8	78.5	99.4	121.3	120.3	100.01958	
52.8	54.1	74.5	65.8	87.1	118.6	99.4	83.9	104.2	115.8	110.0	100.01959	
53.6	60.0	76.0	67.2	86.7	118.7	99.3	83.0	101.7	116.5	105.0	100.01960	
55.3	58.2	76.8	68.2	87.2	117.7	99.7	90.3	99.8	114.7	97.8	100.01961	
57.8	58.5	77.9	68.1	90.2	118.3	95.8	71.0	99.6	114.3	92.1	100.01962	
55.3	60.8	75.9	66.6	89.0	116.6	99.5	93.2	99.4	111.8	81.3	100.01963	
55.4	58.6	76.0	67.5	88.1	117.1	95.8	99.2	98.1	112.2	86.6	100.01964	
56.4	61.4	76.5	69.1	90.1	117.1	97.6	85.1	95.9	113.0	80.3	100.01965	
55.9	60.4	75.6	68.5	89.9	116.6	95.3	90.9	96.4	113.0	77.9	100.01966	
55.8	59.9	75.0	68.8	89.6	116.0	94.3	94.3	99.9	111.3	73.3	100.01967	
56.8	61.5	77.4	70.7	91.0	115.5	97.8	84.9	98.3	109.5	88.7	100.01968	
55.9	63.5	78.1	71.8	90.5	115.1	99.9	90.0	99.9	106.5	86.6	100.01969	
55.4	62.7	79.2	71.6	90.2	115.6	97.7	86.4	100.1	107.2	89.0	100.0
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
VALUE OF RETAIL TRADE, CANADA AND BY REGION 1947 to 1971
Years
and	Canada
Months
1947	 6,963.4(0
1948	 7,835.0(0
1949		 8,532.0
1950		 9,617.2
1951		 10,693.1
1952		 11.567.2
1953		 12,189.4
1954		 12,317.2
1955		 13,472.8
1956		 14,773.7
1957		 15,423.3
1958		 16,139.1
1959		 17,087.1
1060	 17,390.5
1961	 17,752.3
1961	<«)	 16,073.0
1962		 17,137.2
1963		 18,207.1
1964		 19,492.9
1965		 21,154.6
1966		 22.686.4
1967		 24,154.8
1968		 25,710.8
1969		 27,324.7
1970		 27,793.2
Atlantic Region	Quebec	Ontario	Prairie Region	British Columbia
	(Millions of dollars)			
563.6«>	1,621.1	2,721.1	1,320.8	736.9607.3(D	1,792.0	3,067.2	1,550.7	817.8734.2	1,872.0	3,293.6	1,758.1	874.1822.2	2,183.0	3,715.4	1,914.4	982.1898.5	2,442.6	4,129.8	2,122.3	1,099.8970.7	2,657.8	4,409.2	2,339.9	1,189.61,004.4	2,793.1	4,665.6	2,485.3	1,241.01,023.6	2,867.7	4,761.7	2,390.6	1,273.61,124.7	3,109.3	5,295.7	2,496.1	1,447.01,208.6	3,463.0	5,734.3	2,727.8	1,640.01,233.0	3,709.6	5,943.1	2,854.5	1,683.21,286.7	3,854.4	6,271.1	3,021.3	1,705.51,356.5	4,114.2	6,614.9	3,208.1	1,793.41,421.0	4,213.1	6,750.7	3,250.3	1,755.31,455.6	4,490.1	6,808.0	3,238.1	1,760.51,380.5	4,108.0	6,206.7	2,773.6	1,604.21,436.1	4,455.6	6,526.3	2,944.9	1,751.11,511.0	4,770.3	6,947.8	3,097.6	1,880.31,616.2	5,119.7	7,366.1	3,304.5	2,086.51,761.9	5,533.9	8,034.4	3,509.2	2,306.91,861.0	5,882.1	8,625.4	3,811.2	2,506.61,979.1	6,379.2	9,091.0	4,057.6	2,648.02,135.4	6,564.9	9,884.7	4,266.5	2,859.32,193.7	6,937.8	10,639.2	4,448.6	3,105.32,292.3	7,090.8	10,841.6	4,425.4	3,143.11970	J..

[Stage Direction]
o.
[Stage Direction]
1971	J.. F. M. * ([DOT])
(Seasonally adjusted)
2,319.9	187.5	588.32,287.9	186.6	582.82,280.1	184.3	585.92,311.5	189.6	583.92,305.0	190.4	587.52,297.7	191.5	590.92,352.8	193.4	596.92,304.2	190.5	585.52,340.0	194.4	596.62,318.8	194.2	589.52,322.2	192.5	587.62,364.3	196.8	618.92,318.4	188.0	592.32,401.4	202.0	598.12,408.0	192.5	588.5894.3	379.3	268.4881.8	364.5	262.2897.7	358.2	263.0911.7	361.1	261.8910.8	359.4	260.8901.7	357.4	259.7920.3	385.1	259.5907.0	367.2	250.7912.4	372.4	263.6895.6	372.8	261.9903.3	372.9	266.1909.9	380.6	270.1899.7	373.0	263.4941.4	383.2	267.0946.5	381.5	269.5
Note: Figures may not cross-add due to rounding, tt) Excludes Newfoundland.
([DOT]) Figures from 1961 are based on 1966 intercensal estimates. Source: DBS Retail Trade, Monthly, Cat. 63-005.

June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
PRIVATE AND PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN CANADA 1947 to 1971 (Millions of dollars)
Years	Capital Expenditures	Total	Capital Expenditures	Repair Expenditures	TotalConstruction	Machinery and Equipment	Sub-Total	Repair Expenditures	Construction	Machinery and Equipment	Sub-Total	Primary and Construction Industries	Manufacturing	1947	... 87	317	404	195	599	185	343	628	273	8011948	... 127	382	509	218	727	181	392	673	329	9021949	... 159	461	620	263	883	157	379	536	339	8751950	528	701	292	993	135	367	502	347	8491951	601	813	311	1,124	268	525	793	422	1,2151952	631	879	360	1,239	344	629	973	459	1,4321953	648	935	375	1,310	325	644	969	480	1,4491954	512	821	368	1,189	288	534	822	489	1,3111955	612	999	411	1,410	345	602	947	513	1.4601956	772	1,306	475	1,781	488	906	1,394	578	1,9721957	702	1,246	461	1,707	520	959	1,479	613	2,0921958	... 378	619	997	468	1,465	398	697	1,095	572	1,6671959	678	1,074	517	1,591	374	770	1,144	662	1,806I960	683	1,134	522	1,658	335	843	1,178	671	1,8491961	639	1,211	512	1,723	279	806	1,085	682	1,7671962	738	1,306	536	1,842	353	916	1,269	750	2,0191963	879	1,478	586	2,064	355	1,003	1,358	801	2,1591964	... 702	1,051	1,753	660	2,413	443	1,388	1,831	896	2,7271965	... 869	1,151	2,020	724	2,744	604	1,736	2,340	974	3,3141966	... 1,066	1,348	2,414	796	3,210	788	2,U&	2,914	1,096	4,0101967	... 1,069	1,42<	2,496	854	3,350	677	1,857	2,534	1,156	3,6901968	... 1,086	1,341	2,427	914	3,341	657	1,542	2,199	1,232	3,4311969	1,323	2,526	985	3,511	772	1,828	2,600	1,306	3,9061970	1,250	2,447	1,052	3,499	989	2,173	3,162	1,348	4,6101971	... 1,457	1,392	2,849	1,082	3,931	888	2,096	2,984	1,408	4,392Utilities	Trade, Finance and Commercial Services	1947	... 174	236	410	373	783	112	90	202	96	2981948	... 282	284	566	438	1,004	159	122	281	101	3821949	... 376	313	689	465	1,154	142	161	293	120	4131950	... 437	322	759	483	1,242	207	192	399	128	5271951	... 497	442	939	545	1,484	201	210	411	160	5711952	... 701	493	1,194	598	1,792	160	183	343	125	4681953	... 692	562	1,254	635	1,889	283	243	526	135	6611954	... 610	554	1,164	606	1,770	319	263	582	133	7161955	... 649	487	1,136	600	1,736	296	265	561	130	6911956	... 1.086	676	1,762	640	2,402	327	284	611	138	7491957	... 1,475	833	2,308	677	2,985	383	307	690	146	8361958	748	2,153	650	2,803	396	309	705	146	8511959	724	1,842	703	2,545	462	371	833	168	1,001I960	... 1,074	698	1,772	713	2,485	466	409	875	168	1,0431961	... 1.088	610	1,698	723	2,421	451	396	847	162	1,0091962	... 982	619	1,601	734	2,335	438	422	860	164	1,0241963	... 1,111	660	1,771	774	2,545	468	450	918	183	1,1011964	... 1,332	727	2,059	822	2,881	548	494	1,042	195	1,2371965	980	2,423	867	3,290	705	664	1,269	220	1,4891966	1,260	2,926	945	3,871	860	667	1,527	248	1,7751967	... 1,748	1,397	3,145	1,019	4,164	764	770	1,534	272	1,8061968	... 1,774	1,446	3,220	1,070	4,290	710	762	1,472	300	1,7721969	... 1,719	1,586	3,305	1,113	4,418	704	952	1,656	299	1,9551970	1,626	3,588	1,152	4,740	754	959	1,713	299	2,0121971	1,686	4,032	1,255	5,287	748	998	1,746	294	2,040
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 15 (continued) PRIVATE AND PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN CANADA 1947 to 1971 (Millions of dollars)
Years	Capital Expenditures	Repair Expenditures	Total	Capital Expenditures	Repair Expenditures	TotalConstruction	Machinery and Equipment	Sub-Total	Construction	Machinery and Equipment	Sub-Total	Institutions	Housing	1947	
78	13	91	23	114	526	_	526	155	6811948	
126	22	148	37	185	635	-	635	189	8241949	
172	23	195	35	230	822	-	822	206	1,0281950	
187	26	213	34	247	923	-	923	226	1,1491951	
2U	30	242	40	282	947	-	947	270	1,2171952	
252	33	285	40	325	P71	-	S71	287	1,2581953	
270	33	303	42	345	1,189	-	1,189	304	1,4931954	41	338	42	380	1,238	-	1,238	316	1,5541955	
367	41	408	49	457	1,397	-	1,397	338	1,7351956	
359	43	402	52	454	1,547	-	1,547	355	1,9021957	
407	47	454	56	510	1,430	-	1,430	383	1,8131958	
457	57	514	57	671	1,782	-	1,782	407	2,1891959	
479	57	536	59	595	1,752	-	1,752	431	2,1831960	73	573	71	644	1,456	-	1,456	457	1,9131961	
536	81	617	78	695	1,467	-	1,467	484	1,9511962	
729	105	834	76	910	1,587	-	1,587	513	2,1001963	116	873	75	948	1,713	-	1,713	544	2,2571964	123	771	79	850	2,028	-	2,028	577	2,6051965	
867	145	1,012	82	1,094	2,133	-	2,133	618	2,7511966	
1,020	184	1,204	y3	1,297	2,181	-	2,181	661	2,8421967	
1,107	208	1,315	113	1,428	2,352	-	2,352	713	3,0651968	
1,197	225	1,422	118	1,540	2,806	-	2,806	780	3,5861969	
1,134	209	1,343	133	1,476	3,384	-	3,384	844	4,2281970	
1,146	222	1,368	140	1,508	3,077	-	3,077	858	3,9351971	
1,116	227	1,343	154	1,497	3.806	-	3,806	884	4,690Government Departments	Grand Total	1947	44	279	145	424	1,397	1,043	2,440	1,260	3,7701948	
314	61	375	158	533	1,824	1,263	3,087	1,470	4,5571949	
338	46	384	146	530	2,166	1,373	3,539	1,574	5,1131950	
391	48	439	185	624	2,453	1,483	3,936	1,695	5,6311951	
534	60	594	220	814	2,871	1,868	4,739	1,968	6,7071952	
758	88	846	216	1,062	3,434	2,057	5,491	2,085	7,5761953	
710	90	800	235	1,035	3,756	2,220	5,976	2,206	8,1821954	
676	80	756	268	1,024	3, ^37	1,984	5,721	2,222	7,9431955	
728	68	796	268	1,064	4,169	2,075	6,244	2.309	8.5531956	
932	80	1,012	282	1,294	5,273	2,761	8,034	2,520	10,5541957	85	1,110	288	l,3y8	5,784	2,933	8,717	2,624	11,3411958	
1,014	104	1,118	314	1,432	5,830	2,534	8,364	2,614	10,9781959	
1,128	108	1,236	341	1,577	5,709	2,708	8,417	2,881	11,298I960	
1,171	103	1,274	383	1,657	5,453	2,809	8,262	2,985	11,2471961	
1,125	122	1,247	380	1,627	5,518	2,654	8,172	3,021	11,1931962	
1,130	128	1,258	388	1,646	5,787	2,928	8.715	3,161	11,8761963	
1,154	128	1,282	393	1,675	6,157	3,236	9,3i3	3,356	12,7491984	
1,303	157	1,460	402	1,862	7,004	3,940	10,944	3,631	14,5751965	
1,494	174	1,668	442	2,110	8,115	4,750	12,865	3,927	16,7921966	
1,702	222	1,924	526	2,450	9,283	5,807	15,090	4,365	19,4551967	
1,731	215	1,946	573	2,519	9,448	5,874	15,322	4,700	20,0221968	
1,679	230	1,909	604	2,513	9,909	5.546	15,455	5,018	20,4731969	205	2,113	583	2,696	10,824	6,103	16,927	5,263	22,1901970	
2,086	199	2,285	612	2,897	11,211	6.429	17,640	5,461	23,1011971	
2,317	244	2,561	660	3,221	12,678	6,643	19,321	5,737	25,058
Note: 1969 figures are actual, 1970 figures are preliminary actual, and 1971 figures are intentions.
Soubce: DBS and Department of Trade and Commerce, Private and Public Investment in Canada, Occasional, Cat. 61-504
DBS and Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, Private and Public Investment in Canada, Annual, Cat. 61-205.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
		REFERENCE TABLE 16					
		PRIVATE AND PUBLIC INVESTMENT BY REGION					
			1952 to 1971				
	Years	Newfoundland	Prince Edward Island	Nova Scotia	New Brunswick	Atlantic Region	Quebec
				(Millions of dollars)			
1952	
86	17	133	104	340	1,2831953	
80	18	157	108	363	1,374U-54	19	156	119	367	1,3621955	
89	21	164	168	442	1,5461956	24	183	186	487	1,8511957	22	188	159	469	2,0291958	
107	30	185	182	504	2,0541959	
115	37	226	203	581	2,0941960	37	234	180	597	2,0071961	38	224	171	617	2,0081962	43	223	179	706	2,1541963	43	234	189	702	2,3011964	39	270	257	797	2,8281965	57	318	334	937	3,2061966	57	412	391	1,201	3,4461967	45	463	377	1,244	3,2141968	41	461	330	1,219	3,1751969	44	552	392	1,383	3,3761970	54	575	454	1,595	3,3881971	64	585	477	1,691	3,833Ontario	Manitoba	Saskatchewan	Alberta	Prairie Region	British Columbian)(Millions of dollars)	1952	242	313	602	1,157	6041953	286	357	730	1,373	6261954	270	377	627	1,274	5331955	301	349	735	1,385	7071956	364	485	901	1,750	1,0891957	371	455	834	1,660	1,2931958	409	477	890	1,776	9251959	484	467	947	1,898	9441960	487	474	946	1,907	8951961	417	454	981	1,852	9011962	424	513	937	1,874	9271963	491	603	995	2,089	1,0191964	528	648	1,100	2,276	1,2961965	537	773	1,320	2,630	1,7131966	656	928	1,564	3,148	2,0341967	719	964	1,675	3,358	2,1491968	820	943	1,723	3,486	1,9961969	901	755	1,914	3,570	2,2911970 	893	623	1,954	3,470	2.3301971	862	649	1,997	3,508	2,827
Note: 1969 figures are actual, 1970 figures are preliminary actual and 1971 figures are intentions.
^Includes Yukon and Northwest Territories.
Source: DBS and Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce Private and Public Investment in Canada.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1953 to 1971
Atlantic	Prairie	British
Yearn	Canada
1953		 10.6
1954		 -3.7
1955		 12.9
1956		 26.3
1957		 8.7
1958		 -4.1
1959		 0.6
1960		 -1.8
1961		 -1.1
1962		 6.6
1963		 7.8
1964		 16.5
1965		 17.6
1966		 17.3
1967		 1.5
1968		 0.9
1969		 9.5
1970		 4.2
1971		 9.5
Region	Quebec	Ontario	Region	Columbia!1)
(Per cent change from previous year)
6.8	7.0	10.9	18.7	3.61.1	-0.9	-0.8	-7.2	-14.920.4	13.5	8.7	8.7	32.610.2	19.7	25.1	26.4	54.0-3.7	9.6	14.9	-5.1	18.77.5	1.2	-5.0	7.0	-28.515.3	1.9	-6.6	6.9	2.12.8	-4.2	-1.5	0.5	-5.23.4	-	-2.2	-2.9	0.714.4	7.3	9.3	1.2	2.9-0.6	6.8	7.5	11.5	9.913.5	22.9	14.2	9.0	27.217.6	13.4	16.9	15.6	32.228.2	7.5	20.1	19.7	18.73.6	-6.7	1.8	6.7	5.7-2.0	-1.2	4.1	3.8	-7.713.5	6.3	13.0	2.4	14.815.3	0.4	8.7	-2.8	1.76.0	13.1	8.8	1.1	21.3
Note: 1969 figures are actual, 1970 figures are preliminary actual and 1971 figures are intentions.
OJSee footnote (1) on reference table 16.
Souses: DBS and Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce Private and Public Investment in Canada.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Starts	Completions	Under Construction^)Centres	Centres	CentresYears	of 5,000	of 5,000	of 5,000and	Population Other Areas Total	Population Other Areas Total	Population TotalQuarters	and Over<2>	and Over<2>	and Over«>1947	
n.a.	n.a.	74,3001948	
57,671	32,523	90,1941949	
58,370	32,139	90,5091950	
68,599	23,932	92,5311951	
47,374	21,205	68,5791952	
63,443	19,803	83,2461953	
80,313	22,096	102,4091954	
89,755	23,772	113,5271955	
97,386	40,890	138,2761956	
87,309	40,002	127,3111957	
84,875	37,465	122,3401958	
121,695	42,937	164,6321959	
105,991	35,354	141,3451960	
76,687	32,171	108,8581961	
92,741	32,836	125,5771962	
104,279	25,816	130,0951663	
120,950	27,674	148,6241964	
136,206	29,452	165,6581965	
138,779	27,786	166,5651966	
108,434	26,040	134,4741967	
131,858	32,265	164,1231968	
162,z67	34,611	196,8781969	
169,739	40,676	210,4151970	
150,999	39,529	190,5281969	X	
220,100	43,200	263,300II	
178,600	43,000	221,600III	
162.900	41,100	204,000IV	
140,400	36,600	177,0001970	I	
124,700	43,100	167,800II	
104,100	34,900	139,000III	
153,200	38,200	191,400IV	
211,100	44,900	256,0001971	1	
154,100	49,700	203,800
(Number of units)
44,600	27,600	72,200	n.a.	42,20048,006	28,091	76,097	32,217	56,45660,262	27,971	88,233	37,344	59,50362,847	26,168	89,015	41,510	60,53861,167	20,143	81,310	26,783	45,92654,346	18,741	73,087	36,998	55,68973,375	23,464	96,839	42,808	59,92380,593	21,372	101,965	51,302	68,64193,942	33,987	127,929	53,677	79,33995,152	40,548	135,700	44,386	68,57980,995	36,288	117,283	49,508	72,573107,839	38,847	146,686	63,080	88,162108,059	37,612	145,671	59,879	81,90590,513	33,244	123,757	44,975	65,77383,148	32,460	115,608	53,195	73,583100,447	26,235	126,682	60,541	76,153101,529	26,662	128,191	79,233	96,613123,902	27,061	150,963	89,950	107,718125,475	27,562	153,037	101,786	119,854135,134	27,058	162,192	71,722	88,621120,163	29,079	149,242	82,616	102,716136,337	34,656	170,993	106,834	126,368159,089	36,737	195,826	114,386	137,357138,576	37,251	175.827	123,910	148.185(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	148,500	32,800	181,300	115,600	136.900169,300	36,100	205.400	116,300	139.200156,900	39,100	196.000	115.800	139,300157,900	38,200	196,100	111,400	132,600143,300	36,500	179,800	108.800	132.400134,200	39,800	174.000	99.000	120.200150,300	37,300	187,600	97,700	120.000128,400	36,000	164,400	121,000	143,400146,700	33,600	180,300	122,600	150,200
djAt end of period.
riData for years 1967 to 1971 and all quarters are based on areas of 10,000 population and over. Source: CMHC Canadian Housing Statistics[DOT]
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
DWELLING STARTS AND COMPLETIONS, BY TYPE 1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Starts	Completions	Single Detached	SemiDetached and Duplex	Row	Apartments	Total	Single Detached	SemiDetached and Duplex	Row	Apartment	Total(Number of units)	1947	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	74,263	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	72,2181948	.. 73,399	7,488	1,810	7,497	90,194	61,787	4,560	1,607	8,143	76,0971949	7,536	-	11,548	90,509	68,966	7,309	485	11,473	88,2331950	.. 68,675	8,664	631	14,561	92,531	68.685	7,376	145	12,809	89,0151951	.. 53,002	5,658	54	9,865	68,579	60,366	7,568	585	12,791	81,3101952	.. 60,696	5,360	299	16,891	83,246	55,967	5,314	99	11,707	73,0871953	.. 70,782	7,202	553	23,872	102,409	68,916	7,714	372	19,837	96,8391954	.. 78,574	6,498	1,000	27,455	113,527	71,760	6,098	1,065	23,042	101,9651955	10,606	1.909	26,758	138,276	90,553	8,278	1,547	27,551	127,9291956	.. 90,620	9,441	2,263	24,987	127,311	95,656	11,872	2,137	26,035	135,7001957	.. 82,955	9,272	2,214	27,899	122,340	81,096	8,464	2,350	25,373	117,2831958	10,713	2,457	46,954	164,632	96,830	10,004	2,226	37,626	146,6861959	.. 92,178	10,468	1,908	36,791	141,345	95,455	10,923	2,308	36,985	145.6711960	.. 67,171	9,699	2,301	29.687	108,858	78,113	9,911	1,616	34,117	123,7571961	11,650	1,864	35,633	125,577	76,171	10,593	2,019	26,825	115,6081962	.. 74,443	10,975	3,742	40,935	130,095	75,593	11,922	2,451	36,716	126,6821963	.. 77,158	7,891	3,895	59,680	148,624	71,585	7,150	3,487	45,969	128,1911964	.. 77,079	8,706	4,755	75,118	165,658	76,225	8,091	3,861	62,786	150,9631965	.. 75,441	7,924	5,306	77,894	168,665	75,104	8,730	4,097	65,106	153,0371966	.. 70,642	7,281	5,000	51,551	134,474	73,858	7,707	6,412	74,215	162,1921967	.. 72,534	9,939	7,392	74,258	164,123	73,631	9,089	5,431	61,091	149,2421968	.. 75,339	10,114	8,042	103,383	196,878	74,640	10,098	7,896	78,359	170,9931969	.. 78,404	10,373	10,721	110,917	210,415	78,584	10,483	7,827	98,932	195,8261970	10,826	17,055	91,898	190,528	66,615	9,066	11,473	88,673	175,827(Not seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	.. 13,177	1,892	1,646	22,167	38,882	15,840	2,119	1,319	18,373	37,65111	.. 24,712	3,035	2,922	33,079	63,748	18,368	2,738	1,715	29,732	52,553Ill	.. 22,447	2,996	2,716	30,484	58,643	21,696	2,649	2,298	23,368	50,011XV	.. 18,068	2,450	3,437	25,187	49,142	22,680	2,977	2,495	27,459	55,6111970 I	.. 9,058	1,265	2,189	11,781	24,293	15,094	1,956	2,589	17,488	37,127II	.. 18,347	2,560	2,994	16,288	40,189	14,681	2,146	2,374	24,818	44,019Ill	.. 20,814	2,443	4,381	27,033	54,671	17,665	2,394	3,044	24,865	47,968IV	.. 22,530	4,558	7,491	36,796	71,375	19,175	2,570	3,466	21,502	46,7131971 I	.. 10,154	1,673	2,489	15,362	29,678	14,657	2,370	2,724	17,307	37,058
Source: CMHC Canadian Housing Statistics. CMHC Housing in Canada.
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
MANUFACTURERS' INVENTORIES, SHIPMENTS AND ORDERS (Monthly averages)
1961 to 1971
Years,
Quarters
and
Months
Manufacturing
Durable Manufacturing	Non-Durable Manufacturing
New
Shipments Orders Received
Unfilled
Orders
Total
Inventories
Held
Ratio of Goods in Process + Finished Products to Shipments
Shipments
New
Orders
Received
Unfilled
Orders
New
Shipments Orders Received
Unfilled
Orders
1961	
1,953.2	1,985.0ft)	1,959.9	4,529.41962	
2,149.2	2,158.3	2,177.2	4,866.91963	
2,334.6	2,344.4	2,198.6	5,085.01964	
2,571.4	2,600.9	2,497.2	5,435.91965	
2,824.1	2,866.9	2,950.3	5,951.71966	
3,108.6	3,180.6	3,656.4	6,475.11967	3,241.3	4.025.3	7,407.81968	
3,499.7	3,502.6	3,961.1	7,445.71969	
3,759.2	3,796.8	4,199.1	7,997.71970	
3,775.3	3,758.7	4,363.6	8,426.31970 I	
3,792.6	3,765.6	4,436.7	8,387.2II	
3,820.5	3,805.8	4,343.8	8,387.4m	
3,802.0	3,813.9	4,385.3	8,476.0IV	
3,725.3	3,690.3	4,303.0	8,493.11971 Ip	3,925.8	4,401.3	8,344.41970J	
3,776.8	3,804.2	4,491.6	8,344.5F	.... 3,866.6	3,810.4	4,435.4	8,432.2M	
3,734.5	3,682.3	4,383.2	8,384.9A	
3,812.8	3,794.6	4,365.0	8,380.1M	.... 3,809.0	3,771.3	4,327.3	8,386.1J	
3,839.7	3,851.6	4,339.2	8,396.0J	
3,766.8	3,804.2	4,376.6	8,440.4A	
3,855.4	3.883.4	4.404.6	8.488.0s	
3,783.9	3,754.1	4,374.8	8,499.60	
3,719.2	3,696.8	4,352.4	8,500.9N	
3,754.4	3,688.6	4,286.6	8,513.5D	
3,702.2	3,685.6	4,270.0	8,464.971 J	
3,822.8	3,884.7	4,331.9	8,413.4F	
3,979.5	4,033.7	4,386.1	8,290.7Mp	
3,759.4	3,859.1	4,485.8	8,329.2
(Millions of dollars)
1.35	769.3	792.1ft)	1,525.9	1,183.9	1,192.9ft)	434.01.34	882.6	894.0	1,747.3	1,266.6	1,264.0	430.01.31	987.6	994.6	1,783.6	1,347.0	1,349.8	415.01.26	1,120.7	1,150.9	2,069.4	1,450.7	1,450.0	427.81.25	1,281.2	1,318.1	2,490.8	1,542.9	1,548.8	459.51.30	1,421.3	1,488.9	3,140.9	1,687.3	1,691.7	515.51.40	1,477.7	1,474.8	3,513.4	1,768.5	1,766.5	511.81.29	1,627.9	1,622.3	3,384.0	1,871.8	1,880.3	577.11.30	1,768.3	1,805.9	3,588.5	1,991.0	1,990.9	610.61.37	1,749.9	1,735.6	3,764.9	2,025.4	2,023.0	598.7
(Seasonally adjusted)
1.34 1.34 1.37 1.41	1.782.5 1.793.6 1.774.0 1.678.0	1,756.6 1,788.9 1,785.2 1,642.0	3,831.2 3,734.9 3,800.5 3,703.0	2,010.1 2,026.9 2,028.0 2,047.2	2,009.0 2,016.9 2,028.7 2,048.3	605.5 609.0 584.9 600.01.33	1,801.3	1,878.5	3,809.1	2,052.6	2,047.4	592.1
(Seasonally adjusted)
1.34	1,758.2	1,808.3	3,893.9	2,018.6	1,995.9	597.71.33	1,840.2	1,780.0	3,833.7	2,026.4	2,030.4	601.71.36	1,749.1	1,681.5	3,766.1	1,985.4	2,000.8	617.11.34	1,801.3	1,773.1	3,737.9	2,011.5	2,021.5	627.11.34	1,778.9	1,755.5	3,714.5	2,030.1	2,015.8	612.81.34	1,800.5	1,838.2	3,752.2	2,039.2	2,013.4	587.01.37	1,727.2	1,758.8	3,783.8	2,039.6	2,045.4	592.81.36	1,834.3	1,882.4	3,831.9	2,021.1	2,001.0	572.71.39	1,760.5	1,714.3	3,785.7	2,023.4	2,039.8	589.11.41	1,701.1	1,675.1	3,759.7	2,018.1	2,021.7	592.71.40	1,693.1	1,605.0	3,671.6	2,061.3	2,083.6	615.01.41	1,639.9	1,646.0	3,677.7	2,062.3	2,039.6	592.3135.7	1,765.0	1,822.0	3,734.7	2,057.8	2,062.7	597.2127.6	1,892.0	1,940.9	3,783.6	2,087.5	2,092.8	602.5135.2	1,747.0	1,872.5	3,909.1	2,012.4	1,986.6	576.7
p = preliminary.
ft) Eleven month average for 1961 only.
Source: DBS Inventories, Shipments and Orders in Manufacturing Industries, Monthly, Cat. 31-001.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1961 to 1971
Years
and
Months
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1970	J... F... M.. A..
M.	. J... J... A..

[Stage Direction]
N.	. D..
1971	J... F.. Mp.
Nfld.	N.S.	N.B.	Que.Ont.	Man.	Sask.	Alta.	B.C. Canada'')
(Millions of dollars)
11.3	31.8	32.5	585.2	963.6	59.7	27.7	77.9	160.6	1,953.212.0	35.5	33.4	632.5	1,076.6	62.8	29.3	84.6	179.2	2,149.212.9	38.2	38.0	672.7	1,188.5	66.1	30.9	90.4	193.5	2,334.613.8	43.6	41.2	731.2	1,320.3	71.8	31.8	99.5	214.5	2,571.414.5	46.9	42.8	791.0	1,473.0	76.1	35.1	106.9	233.8	2,824.116.2	51.0	45.6	872.0	1,621.0	84.9	39.2	119.2	235.4	3,108.815.5	50.9	47.8	913.9	1,688.3	90.0	39.0	129.6	265.8	3,246.316.5	55.3	52.8	978.5	1,823.2	93.2	40.8	138.9	295.9	3,499.718.0	60.0	55.0	1,058.4	1,952.2	99.9	43.8	150.1	316.8	3,759.219.5	61.1	56.1	1,074.8	1,954.5	101.5	47.8	151.3	303.5	3,775.3(Per cent change from previous year)	6.2	11.6	2.8	8.1	11.7	5.2	5.8	8.6	11.6	10.07.5	7.6	13.8	6.4	10.4	5.3	5.5	6.9	8.0	8.67.0	14.1	8.4	8.7	11.1	8.6	2.9	10.1	10.9	10.15.1	7.6	3.9	8.2	11.6	6.0	10.4	7.4	9.0	9.811.7	8.7	6.5	10.2	10.0	11.6	11.7	11.5	9.2	10.1-4.3	-0.2	4.8	4.8	4.2	6.0	-0.5	8.7	4.1	4.46.5	8.6	10.5	7.1	8.0	3.6	4.6	7.2	11.3	7.89.1	8.5	4.2	8.2	7.1	7.2	7.4	8.1	7.1	7.48.3	1.8	2.0	1.5	0.1	1.6	9.1	0.8	-4.2	0.4(Millions of dollars, not seasonally adjusted)	16.8	62.0	47.9	963.9	1,786.1	95.9	42.7	140.0	289.7	3,449.616.8	56.5	47.3	989.7	1,867.5	96.1	42.9	144.3	291.1	3,555.917.3	56.7	52.3	1,060.6	2,019.6	104.4	46.0	145.5	326.3	3,832.919.6	59.2	51.6	1,061.2	3,083.0	96.8	44.9	149.0	326.6	3,896.118.4	65.5	58.8	1,071.9	2,090.9	98.7	50.5	154.8	298.8	3,910.423.1	64.2	60.2	1,152.3	2,154.4	105.9	52.2	163.9	303.0	4,086.921.3	62.3	60.3	1,024.8	1,782.4	105.6	53.3	159.4	296.2	3,569.822.3	56.3	61.9	1,057.5	1,748.9	103.3	51.9	160.6	281.2	3,549.719.6	63.2	62.2	1,169.0	2,080.8	106.5	50.8	161.0	295.8	4,014.422.3	65.5	59.3	1,149.2	2,018.3	104.0	50.1	152.4	316.4	3,942.118.8	63.4	57.2	1,121.8	1,928.8	100.1	46.0	148.8	310.9	3.800.718.0	57.9	53.8	1,075.9	1,893.7	100.8	43.0	136.0	310.7	3,695.017.1	60.4	50.2	955.1	1,791.9	92.8	41.5	136.8	264.1	3,415.016.1	54.5	51.8	1,004.4	1,956.7	97.6	41.5	140.1	281.7	3,648.918.3	59.6	54.0	1,111.7	2,114.8	101.6	44.7	156.8	308.8	3,974.7
UiPrince Edward Island, Yukon and Northwest Territories are not published separately. They are included in the total for Canada. Sotmcn: DBS Inventories, Shipment and Orders in Manufacturing Industries.
June 18, 1971_______ COMMONS DEBATES	6997
REFERENCE TABLE 22 INDEXES OF REAL DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY INDUSTRY 1947 to 1971 (1961 = 100)								
Years and Quarters	Real Domestic Product	Real Agriculture Domestic Product less Agriculture	Mines,	Manufacturing	and Oil Wells	Total	Non- Durable	Durable	(Weights)	
(100.000)	(4.525)	(95.475)	(4.504)	(24.943)	(13.933)	(11.010)	(5.803)1947	89.2	52.1	27.7	55.4	53.5	57.9	41.41948	92.1	54.0	31.8	57.8	55.3	61.0	46.31949	86.8	56.2	35.3	59.5	57.4	62.0	51.91950	
62.4	94.9	60.0	38.7	63.4	61.4	66.1	56.01951	
67.3	108.3	64.1	43.6	68.9	64.4	74.6	56.51952	132.6	67.8	46.5	71.5	66.2	78.0	64.11953	
75.5	121.2	72.0	50.6	76.6	70.8	84.0	71.91954	
74.3	93.1	72.8	56.1	74.9	71.9	78.7	73.71955	
82.1	114.9	79.5	66.4	82.2	77.2	88.6	81.91956	122.0	86.5	77.1	89.9	83.5	98.0	92.21957	102.6	88.5	84.6	89.7	85.5	95.1	100.21958	
91.0	113.8	89.3	86.0	88.0	86.9	89.5	103.71959	
95.7	110.2	94.6	97.3	94.5	92.9	96.5	98.71960	
98.0	115.3	96.6	97.4	96.1	95.4	97.0	97.01961	
100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962	122.0	106.2	106.2	109.0	106.0	112.7	105.61963	136.9	111.6	112.1	116.2	110.9	122.9	107.11964	123.9	120.2	126.0	127.4	119.5	137.3	117.41965	
129.0	127.6	129.0	131.9	138.8	125.8	155.2	131.61966	
138.0	145.9	137.6	134.2	148.7	133.3	168.2	141.71967	
142.4	118.6	143.5	142.1	152.3	136.3	172.7	141.21968	
149.3	125.1	150.5	150.0	161.1	142.2	185.0	150.61969	
156.2	131.0	157.4	149.5	168.4	148.4	193.7	154.21970	
160.7	124.1	162.5	173.4	167.3	151.1	187.8	149.8(Seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	134.7	156.5	157.1	167.9	147.5	193.9	155.7II	
155.5	129.8	156.7	149.0	168.0	147.0	194.6	154.7HI	
155.6	126.6	156.9	139.3	167.5	149.0	191.0	153.7IV	
158.4	134.8	159.5	153.0	169.1	150.4	192.7	153.81970 I	
159.5	114.1	161.7	170.7	169.5	150.4	193.7	151.8II	
160.0	121.1	161.8	166.9	168.8	150.9	191.6	147.5Ill	
160.6	123.1	162.4	173.1	165.7	148.9	187.1	145.4IV	139.2	103.6	181.0	165.0	153.4	179.6	155.01971 Ip	127.9	165.2	175.7	167.7	151.0	189.0	158.5
p = preliminary.
6998
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 22 (continued)
INDEXES OF REAL DOMESTIC PRODUCT BY INDUSTRY 1947 to 1971 (1961 = 100)
Electric	Trade	Finance,	Total Community,	PublicYears	Power,	Transportation,	Administrationand	Gas and	Storage and	Quarters	Water	Communication	Retail	Estate	Personal	DefenceUtilities	Service	(Weights)	(9.910)	(12.973)	(4.906)	(8.067)	(11.831)	(13.821)	(7.232)1947	
28.4	57.2	57.2	53.8	59.1	n.a.	58.9	n.a.1948	58.1	56.4	54.2	57.7	n.a.	60.8	n.a.1949	58.2	58.8	55.6	60.6	n.a.	63.4	n.a.1950	60.2	63.0	57.7	66.0	n.a.	65.5	n.a.1951	
40.9	65.9	63.7	62.5	64.5	n.a.	68.5	n.a.1952	69.6	68.0	66.4	69.0	n.a.	71.7	n.a.1953	
46.7	70.5	72.6	70.3	74.0	n.a.	74.4	n.a.1954	
51.1	68.8	73.4	70.7	75.0	n.a.	75.8	n.a.1955	
57.9	78.1	81.8	79.9	82.9	n.a.	77.7	n.a.1956	87.1	89.2	88.3	89.7	n.a.	82.4	n.a.1957	
69.5	87.4	89.2	87.3	90.4	n.a.	85.0	n.a.1958	84.4	91.3	88.9	92.7	n.a.	88.2	n.a.1959	
86.6	91.2	97.4	98.0	97.2	n.a.	93.0	n.a.1960	
94.4	93.9	97.6	97.3	97.9	n.a.	96.7	n.a.1961	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962	
105.3	104.1	106.1	106.0	106.2	105.5	105.4	103.11963	
111.6	111.1	111.2	112.0	110.7	110.5	110.9	104.01964	120.3	119.5	123.4	117.2	115.0	119.0	106.31965	127.6	129.4	135.8	125.5	120.8	128.8	108.31966	138.0	137.6	146.4	132.3	125.6	140.4	112.21967	
151.2	145.3	144.7	154.7	138.6	131.4	150.4	118.21968	
162.8	153.0	150.7	163.0	143.3	135.6	156.9	121.01969	161.7	157.9	172.8	148.9	143.2	166.3	123.41970	
191.8	171.8	160.4	178.8	149.2	150.5	174.6	129.3(Seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	
173.9	161.2	157.2	170.7	149.0	139.9	163.2	122.4II	
175.4	158.7	158.0	172.7	149 .0	142.3	165.4	123.0HI	
180.2	160.6	158.1	173.4	148.7	144.2	167.8	123.8IV	
183.2	166.5	159.2	174.8	149.7	146.4	169.0	124.51970 I	
189.4	170.0	157.9	174.9	147.6	148.5	171.7	126.7II	170.8	158.9	177.3	14 7 .8	150.1	174.0	129.6Ill	
191.1	173.3	162.5	184.0	149 .4	151.2	175.3	130.1IV	
196.9	172.8	160.8	178.6	149.9	152.4	177.2	130.91971 Ip	
202.2	172.5	163.5	181.9	152.3	153.9	178.5	131.6
p = preliminary.
Source: DBS Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Industry Occasional. Cat. 61-510. DBS Index of Industrial Production, Monthly, Cat. 61-005.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Real	Real	Mines,	Manufacturing	Domestic Product	Agriculture Product leM Agriculture	and Oil Wells	Total	Non- Durable	Durable	
(Per cent change from previous period)
1947.
1948.
1949.
1950.
1951.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
4.4	-6.1	6.1	5.3	9.3	3.9	16.7	16.63.5	3.3	3.6	14.8	4.3	3.4	5.4	11.83.0	-5.8	4.1	11.0	2.9	3.8	1.6	12.16.8	9.3	6.8	9.6	6.6	7.0	6.6	7.97.9	14.1	6.8	12.7	8.7	4.9	12.9	0.97.7	22.4	5.8	6.7	3.8	2.8	4.6	13.54.1	-8.6	6.2	8.8	7.1	6.9	7.7	12.2-1.6	-23.2	1.1	10.9	-2.2	1.6	-6.3	2.510.5	23.4	9.2	18.4	9.7	7.4	12.6	11.18.5	6.2	8.8	16.1	9.4	8.2	10.6	12.60.4	-15.9	2.3	9.7	-0.2	2.4	-3.0	8.71.7	10.9	0.9	1.7	-1.9	1.6	-5.9	3.55.2	-3.2	5.9	13.1	7.4	6.9	7.8	-4.82.4	4.6	2.1	0.1	1.7	2.7	0.5	-1.72.0	-13.3	3.5	2.7	4.1	4.8	3.1	3.16.9	22.0	6.2	6.2	9.0	6.0	12.7	5.65.4	12.2	5.1	5.6	6.6	4.6	9.0	1.46.8	-9.5	7.7	12.4	9.6	7.8	11.7	9.67.1	3.0	7.3	4.7	8.9	5.3	13.0	12.17.0	14.3	6.7	1.7	7.1	6.0	8.4	7.73.2	-18.7	4.3	5.9	2.4	2.3	2.7	-0.44.8	5.5	4.9	5.6	5.8	4.3	7.1	6.74.6	4.7	4.6	-0.3	4.5	4.4	4.7	2.42.9	-5.3	3.2	16.0	-0.7	1.8	3.0	2.91969	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1970	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1971	Ip..
(Seasonally adjusted)
1.8	7.2	1.6	3.5	0.8	1.2	0.6	2.7-	-3.6	0.1	-5.2	0.1	-0.3	0.4	-0.70.1	-2.5	0.1	-6.5	-0.3	1.4	-1.8	-0.61.8	6.5	1.7	9.8	1.0	0.9	0.9	0.10.7	-15.4	1.4	11.6	0.2	0.5	- 1.30.3	6.1	0.1	-2.2	-0.4	0.3	-1.1	-2.80.4	1.7	0.4	3.7	-1.8	-1.3	-2.3	- 1.41.2	13.1	0.7	4.6	-0.4	3.0	-4.0	6.60.6	-8.1	1.0	-2.4	1.6	-1.6	5.2	2.3
24171-23£
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 23 (continued)

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971 (1961 = 100)
Years
and
Quarters
1947.
1948.
1949.
1950.
1951.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1969	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1970	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1971	Ip..
Electric Power, Gas and	Transportation,		Trade		Finance, Insurance	Community, Business	Public Administration and
					and Real	Personal Service	
Water Utilities	Communication	Total	Wholesale	Retail	Estate		Defence
(Per cent change from previous period)
13.1	8.5	9.0	7.85.6	1.6	-1.4	0.75.3	0.2	4.3	2.613.3	3.4	7.1	3.814.2	9.5	1.1	8.38.8	5.6	6.8	6.24.9	1.3	6.8	5.99.4	-2.4	1.1	0.613.3	13.5	11.4	13.011.6	11.5	9.0	10.57.6	0.3	-	-1.19.8	-3.4	2.4	1.813.5	8.1	6.7	10.29.0	3.0	0.2	-0.75.9	6.5	2.5	2.85.3	4.1	6.1	6.06.0	6.7	4.8	5.78.2	8.3	7.5	10.27.5	6.1	8.3	10.08.9	8.2	6.3	7.86.9	5.3	5.2	5.77.7	5.3	4.1	5.49.3	5.7	4.8	6.07.8	6.2	1.6	3.59.4	n.a.	4.1	n.a.-2.4	n.a.	3.2	n.a.5.0	n.a.	4.3	n.a.8.9	n.a.	3.3	n.a.-2.3	n.a.	4.6	n.a.7.0	n.a.	4.7	n.a.7.2	n.a.	3.8	n.a.1.4	n.a.	1.9	n.a.10.5	n.a.	2.5	n.a.8.2	n.a.	6.0	n.a.0.8	n.a.	3.2	n.a.2.5	n.a.	3.8	n.a.4.9	n.a.	5.4	n.a.0.7	n.a.	4.0	n.a.2.1	-	3.4	-6.2	5.5	5.4	3.14.2	4.7	5.2	0.95.9	4.1	7.3	2.27.1	5.0	7.7	1.95.4	4.0	9.0	3.64.8	4.6	7.1	5.33.4	3.2	4.3	2.43.9	5.6	6.0	2.00.2	5.1	5.0	4.8
(Seasonally adjusted)
2.7	2.3
0.9	-1.6
2.7	1.2
1.7	3.7
3.4	2.1
-0.1	0.5
1.0	1.5
3.0	-0.3
2.7	-0.2
1.9	1.8
0.5	1.2
0.1	0.4
0.7	0.8
-0.8	0.1
0.6	1.4
2.3	3.8
-1.0	-2.9
1.7	1.8
2.1	1.5
-	1.7
-0.2	1.3
0.7	1.5
-1.4	1.4
0.1	1.1
1.1	0.7
0.3	0.8
1.6	1.0
1.6	1.4
1.3	0.5
1.5	0.7
0.7	0.6
1.6	1.8
l.S	2.3
0.7	0.4
1.1	0.6
0.7	0.5
p ** preliminary.
Source: DBS Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Industry. DBS Index of Industrial Production (1961 = 100).
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971 (1961 = 100)
Years and Quarters	Commercial Industries	Commercial Industries less Agriculture	Goods- Producing Industries	Goods-Producing Industries less Agriculture	Service- Producing Industries	Non- Commercial Industries	Commercial Service- Producing Industries	Index of Industrial Production(Weights)	(80.953)	(44.^33)	(39.708)	(55.767)	(14.522)	(41.437)	(32.415)1947	52.1	54.0	48.5	55.7	n.a.	n.a.	48.91948	54.0	56.8	51.3	56.7	n.a.	51.51949	56.1	57.8	53.3	59.1	n.a.	n.a.	53.41950	59.9	62.6	57.6	62.2	n.a.	57.31951	64.0	68,6	62.4	65.8	n.a.	n.a.	62.71952	67.4	74.5	65.5	70.0	n.a.	n.a.	65.31953	71.5	77.4	70.6	73.3	n.a.	n.a.	70.11954	72,2	73.9	71.0	74.7	n.a.	n.a.	70.01955	79.3	83.7	78.8	80.2	n.a.	n.a.	77.71956	86.8	91.9	87.3	85.7	n.a.	n.a.	85.81957	88 6	91.0	89.2	87.7	n.a.	n.a.	87.21958	89.1	92.4	89.1	89.4	n.a.	n.a.	86.71959	94.7	96.8	94.8	94.4	n.a.	n.a.	94.21960	96.5	99.0	96.5	96.6	n.a.	n.a.	96.21961	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962	106.4	109.3	107.8	105.1	104.9	105.2	108.31963	112.2	116.1	113.7	110.0	108.2	110.6	115.21964	121.4	124.8	124.9	116.9	113.8	117.9	126.61965	130.7	134.8	135.6	124.4	119.9	125.9	137.01966	13^.3	144.9	144.8	132.5	128.4	133.9	146.01967	144.6	145.5	148.5	140.0	137.4	140.8	150.81968	151.8	150.0	157.3	145.6	143.1	146.4	159.71969	158.8	160.2	163.5	153.1	149.4	154.2	166.61970	163.3	161.9	166.2	159.8	157.7	160.4	170.4(Seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	158.1	160.9	163.9	151 2	147.3	152.4	166.9II	158.1	159.9	163.3	152.1	149.4	152.9	166.0Ill	158.1	158.1	161.7	153.6	150.6	154.5	164.7IV	161.1	161.8	164.9	155.7	150.6	157.4	168.11970 I	163.0	162.2	167.7	157.4	154.2	158.4	171.5IJ	162.7	161.1	165.7	159.1	157.3	159.6	170.4II	162.9	160.1	164.3	161.0	159.2	161.5	169.1IV	164.2	164.0	166.9	161.3	160.3	161.5	170.11971 Ip	165.8	164.6	168.8	162.6	162.0	162.7	172.1
p = preliminary.
Source: DBS Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Industry. DBS Index of Industrial Production. (1961 =100). DBS Aggregate Productivity Trends 1946-68.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years
and
Quarters
Commercial
Commercial	Industries
Industries	less
Agriculture
Goods-
Producing
Industries
Goods-Producing Industries less Agriculture
Service-
Producing
Industries
Non-
Commercial
Industries
Commercial
Service-
Producing
Industries
Index
of
Industrial
Production
(Per cent change from previous period)
1947.
1948.
1949.
1950.
1951.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1969	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1970	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1971	Ip..
6.6	8.8	5.9	10.0	2.8	n.a.	n.a.	9.43.6	3.6	5.2	5.8	1.8	n.a.	n.a.	5.32.6	3.9	1.8	3.9	4.2	n.a.	n.a.	3.77.2	6.8	8.3	8.1	5.2	n.a.	n.a.	7.37.7	6.8	9.6	8.3	5.8	n.a.	n.a.	9.47.4	5.3	8.6	5.0	6.4	n.a.	n.a.	4.14.1	6.1	3.9	7.8	4.7	n.a.	n.a.	7.4-2.3	1.0	-4.5	0.6	1.9	n.a.	n.a.	-0.111.2	9.8	13.3	11.0	7.4	n.a.	n.a.	11.09.0	9.5	9.8	10.8	6.9	n.a.	n.a.	10.40.2	2.1	-1.0	2.2	2.3	n.a.	n.a.	1.61.4	0.6	1.5	-0.1	1.9	n.a.	n.a.	-0.65.4	6.3	4.8	6.4	5.6	n.a.	n.a.	8.72.2	1.9	2.3	1.8	2.3	n.a.	n.a.	2.12.0	3.6	1.0	3.6	3.5	n.a.	n.a.	4.07.3	6.4	9.3	7.8	5.1	4.9	5.2	8.35.8	5.5	6.2	5.5	4.7	3.1	5.1	6.47.0	8.2	7.5	9.9	6.3	5.2	6.6	9.97.4	7.7	8.0	8.6	6.4	5.4	6.8	8.27.0	6.6	7.5	6.8	6.5	7.1	6.4	6.62.6	3.8	0.4	2.6	5.7	7.0	5.2	3.35.0	5.0	3.1	5.9	4.0	4.1	4.0	5.94.7	4.6	6.8	3.9	5.2	4.4	5.3	4.32.4	2.8	1.1	1.7	4.4	5.6	4.0	2.3(Seasonally adjusted)	1.8	1.6	1.8	1.4	1.7	1.6	n.a.	1.3-0.2	-0.6	-0.4	0.6	1.4	0.3	-0.5-0.1	-1.5	-1.1	1.0	0.8	1.0	-0.82.1	1.9	2.3	2.0	1.4	-	1.9	2.10.4	1.2	0.2	1.7	1.1	2.4	0.6	2.00.1	-0.2	-0.7	-1.2	1.1	2.0	0.8	-0.60.2	0.1	-0 6	-0.8	1.2	1.2	1.2	-0.81.3	0.8	2.4	1.6	0.7	0.7	0.60.6	1.0	0.4	1.1	0.8	1.1	0.7	1.2
p = preliminary.
Source: DBS Aggregate Productivity Trends 1948-68.
DBS Indexes of Real Domestic Product by Industry. DBS Index of Industrial Production (1961=100).
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
MAIN COMPONENTS OF THE LABOUR MARKET*1)
1954 to 1971
Years and	Population	Labour Force	Employment	Months	and Over	Total	Male	Female	Total	Male	Female1954	5,493	(Thousands of persons) 4,263 1,231	5,243	4,044	1,1991955	5,610	4,341	1,269	5,364	4,128	1,2361956	5,782	4,437	1,346	5,585	4.266	1,3201957	6,008	4,573	1,435	5,731	4,329	1,4021958	6,137	4,641	1,496	5,706	4,263	1,4421959	6,242	4,687	1,554	5,870	4,363	1,5071960	6,411	4,754	1,657	5,965	4,368	1,5976,521	4,782	1,739	6,055	4,381	1,6746,615	4,819	1,797	6,225	4,488	1,7371963	6,748	4,879	1,870	6,375	4,567	1,8081964	6,933	4,961	1,972	6,609	4,698	1,9111965	7,141	5,065	2,076	6,862	4,842	2,0207,420	5,193	2,227	7,152	4,983	2,1697,694	5 329	2,365	7,379	5,083	2,2967,919	5,443	2,476	7,537	5,146	2,3918,162	5,560	2,602	7,780	5,272	2,5081970	8,374	5,684	2,690	7,879	5,310	2,569g 1970 J	8,215	(Seasonally adjusted)('>0) 5,591 2,632	7,830	5,297	2,532M	8,255	5,626	2,636	7,842	5,312	2,5308,278	5,631	2,658	7,849	5,283	2,553M	
J	8,316	5,641	2,686	7,848	5,271	2,5708,408	5,707	2,720	7,896	5,294	2,6108,428	5,699	2,723	7,897	5,299	2,5978,423	5,688	2,711	7,870	5,299	2,574S	8,421	5,699	2,675	7,868	5,313	2,5488,470	5,712	2,700	7,898	5,326	2,574N	8,478	5,732	2,708	7,929	5,355	2,5788,484	5,745	2,715	7,936	5,360	2,5878,453	5,741	2,718	7,897	5,320	2,5761971 1	8,539	5,781	2,805	8,006	5,346	2,658M	8,553	5,776	2,815	8,021	5,355	2,6648,533	5,759	2,808	8,018	5,339	2,664
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 26 (continued)
MAIN COMPONENTS OF THE LABOUR MARKET'1) 1954 to 1971
	Years and Months		Unemployment Rate Total Male Female			Participation Rate Total Male Female			Total Unemployment Immigration		Immigrants Destined to the Labour Force
					(Per cent)					(Thousands of persons)	
1954	4.6	5.1	2.6	62.9	82.2	23.7	250	154	841955 ...	4.4	4.9	2.6	52.9	82.1	23.9	245	no	581950 .	3.4	3.9	1.9	53.5	82.2	24.9	197	165	911957	4.6	5.3	2.3	54.0	82.3	25.8	278	282	1521958 ..	7.0	8.1	3.6	53.9	81.7	26.2	432	125	631959	6.0	6.9	3.0	53.8	81.0	26.7	372	107	54I960	7.0	8.1	3.0	54.2	80.7	27.9	446	104	541961	7.1	8.4	3.7	54.1	79.8	28.7	466	72	351962 ...	5.9	6.9	3.3	53.9	79.1	29.0	390	75	37196.1 ..	5.5	6.4	3.3	53.8	78.5	29.0	374	93	461964	4.7	5.3	3.1	54.1	78.1	30.5	324	113	561965....	3.9	4.4	2.7	54.4	77.9	31.3	280	147	743.6	4.0	2.6	55.1	77.8	32.8	267	195	991967 ..	4.1	4.6	3.0	55.5	77.5	33.8	315	223	1201908	4.8	5.5	3.4	55.5	77.0	34.4	382	184	951909	4.7	5.2	3.6	55.8	76.6	35.2	383	162	841970	5.9	6.6	4.6	55.8	70.4	35.5	495	148	78(Seasonally adjusted)<*>	1970 J	4.7	6.2	3.8	55.4	76.0	35.1	385	F	5.0	5.5	3.9	55.5	76.4	35.1	413	31	17M....	5.2	5.9	3.9	55.6	76.3	35.3	429	A	5.6	6.4	4.0	55.7	76.2	35.6	468	M....	6.1	6.9	4.3	56.2	76.8	36.1	512	40	21J	6.3	7.1	4.4	56.1	76.7	36.0	531	J ..	6.6	7.3	5.0	55.9	70.4	35.7	553	A	6.6	7.4	4.7	55.0	76.4	35.2	553	42	22S	6.8	7.8	4.7	55.7	76.4	35.5	572	O .	0.5	7.1	4.9	55.8	76.5	35.5	549	N....	6.5	7.0	5.1	55.8	70.5	35.5	548	34	18D....	6.6	7.2	5.2	55.6	76.3	35.4	556	1971 J	6.2	6.9	5.1	56.5	76.6	36.5	533	F	0.2	6.8	5.2	56.4	76.5	36.5	532	M....	6.0	6.7	5.1	56.0	76.1	36.4	515	
(riSmali differences in totals may arise due to the seasonal adjustment process, or rounding.
Immigration statistics are by quarters and are not seasonally adjusted. Population figures are not seasonally adjusted.
Source: DBS The Labour Force, Monthly, Cat. 71-001.
Department of Manpower and Immigration Immigration Statistics. Department of Manpower and Immigration Quarterly Immigration Bulletin.
[Stage Direction]

June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1954 to 1971
Years	Population	Labour Force	Employment
and	14 Years	

 
[Stage Direction]
Months	and Over	Total	Male Female	Total	Male Female
			(Per cent change from same period a		year ago)		
1954	
2.2	1.8	1.4	3.4	0.2	-0.5	2.31955	
2.0	2.1	1.8	3.1	2.3	2.1	3.11956	
2.0	3.1	2.2	6.1	4.1	3.3	6.81957	3.9	3.1	6.6	2.6	1.5	6.21958	
2.4	2.1	1.5	4.3	-0.4	-1.5	2.91959	1.7	1.0	3.9	-2.9	2.3	4.51960	2.7	1.4	6.6	1.6	0.1	6.01961	1.7	o.e	4.9	J.5	0.3	4.81962	1.4	0.8	3.3	2.8	2.4	3.81963	2.0	1.2	4.1	2.4	1.8	4.11964	2.7	1.7	5.5	3.7	2.9	5.71965	3.0	2.1	5.3	3.8	3.1	5.71966	3.9	2.5	7 3	4.2	2.9	7.41967	3.7	2.6	6.2	3.2	2.0	5.91968	2.9	2.1	4.7	2.1	1.2	4.11969	3.1	2.1	5.1	3.2	2.4	4.91970	2.6	2.2	3.4	1.3	0.7	2.4(Seasonally adjusted)^)	1970 J	1.2	0.8	2.0	1.0	0.6	1.9F	
2.6	1.4	1.6	1.4	0.9	0.9	0.8M	
2.6	1.6	1.5	2.7	0.7	-	2.2A	
2.6	1.5	1.4	2.3	0.3	-0.4	1.7M	
2.6	2.6	1.9	4.0	1.1	-	3.4J	3.2	2.4	4.9	1.5	0.6	3.7J	3.4	2.6	4.3	1.2	0.6	2.5A	3.2	2.7	3.0	1.3	1.1	1.8s	3.8	3.0	3.8	1.8	1.4	2.8o	3.8	3.1	3.9	2.2	1 8	2.9N	3.7	3.1	4.5	2.1	1.6	3.4D	3.0	2.7	3.5	1.1	0.6	2.11971 J	3.9	3.4	6.6	2.2	0.9	5.0F	3.6	2.7	6.8	2.3	0.8	5.3M	3.1	2.3	5.6	2.2	1.1	4.3
(^Population figures are not seasonally adjusted. Source: DBS The Labour Force.
7006
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
PARTICIPATION RATES BY SEX AND AGE GROUPS 1954 to 1971
Years and	14-18	20-24
	Male Female	Male Female
Month*		
1954	33.6	92.0	46.61955	32.9	92.2	46.31956	
48.1	33.9	91.7	47.11957	33.1	91.4	46.51958	32.1	91.7	47.41959	
43.6	32.1	91.0	46.51960	
42.8	32.6	91.2	47.91961	32.3	90.7	48.71962	
39.6	30.9	88.6	49.71963	
39.2	29.9	88.7	50.31964	29.9	88.2	51.01965	30.2	87.6	52.61966	31.4	87.4	55.61967	
39.4	31.6	86.0	56.61968	
39.1	31.3	84.4	58.41969	31.1	84.2	59.31970	30.4	83.2	58.51970 I	
37.7	29.7	82.6	57.9F	30.1	82.7	57.7M	
39.0	30.1	82.1	57.7A	
38.6	30.0	82.9	57.5M	
39.3	30.9	85.1	59.5J	31.9	84.6	58.7j	31.0	83.7	59 0A	30.1	83.4	68.9s	
38.6	29.7	82.6	58.70	
39.2	30.7	82.7	58.5N	29.8	83.2	58.8D	30.0	82.5	68.91971 J	
39.8	32.2	82.5	59.3F	32.4	82.4	59.1M	30.6	82.7	67.625-44	45-54	65+Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female(Per cent)	97.3	23.3	91.3	18.1	33.2	3.797.6	23.8	91.8	19.0	32.3	3.997.6	24.5	92.0	20.8	34.0	4.597.7	25.7	92.5	22.9	34.1	5.097.8	26.2	92.5	24.1	32.1	5.297.8	27.0	92.4	25.1	31.0	5.297.8	28.3	92.5	26.7	30.3	5.697.7	29.2	92.2	28.5	29.3	5.997.7	29.8	91.7	29.4	28.5	5.697.7	30.5	91.9	30.5	26.4	5.997.7	31.7	91.8	31.«	26.8	6.397.6	32.6	91.9	32.9	26.3	6.097.6	34.3	91.8	33.9	26.4	5.997.3	35.7	91.7	35.1	24.7	5.997.0	36.4	91.1	35.4	24.4	5.996.8	38.6	91.0	35.5	23.6	5.596.7	39.6	90.6	36.0	22.7	6.0(Seasonally adjusted)	96.6	39.4	90.6	35.6	22.1	4.896.8	39.0	90.8	35.8	22 5	4.996.7	39.3	90.6	35.9	22.3	5.196.6	39.9	90.5	36.5	22.2	5.196.7	39.9	90.4	36.3	22.5	5.796.9	40.0	90.5	36.3	22.6	5.496.9	40.0	90.4	36.3	22.6	4.897.0	39.6	90.5	35.2	22.8	4.996.9	39.8	90.5	35.8	23.0	5.196.8	39.4	90.7	36.0	22.9	5.096.6	39.5	90.3	36.6	23.3	4.996.4	39.0	91.2	35.9	23.0	5,096.7	40.9	91.8	36.5	22.6	4.896.6	40.8	91.4	36.8	20.6	5.096.5	41.2	90.7	37.0	20.5	5.2
Souroe: DBS T\t Labour Font.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
UNEMPLOYMENT RATES BY SEX AND AGE GROUPS 1954 to 1971
Years
and
Months
20-24
45-64
Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female	Male	Female
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1970	J.. F. M A.

[Stage Direction]
o.
[Stage Direction]
1971	J.. F. M.
Source: DBS The Labour Farce.
(Per cent)
10.0	5.4	7.6	2.7	4.4	2.0	4.3	1.310.1	5.0	7.2	2.4	4.1	1.9	4.2	2.08.1	3.8	5.7	1.9	3.2	1.6	3.3	1.111.2	4.6	8.2	2.7	4.5	1.7	4.2	1.616.6	7.4	12.7	4.1	6.9	2.6	6.7	2.414.3	6.7	10.5	3.7	5.8	2.2	5.8	1.616.4	8.6	12.2	3.9	6.9	2.5	6.9	1.816.4	8.6	11.8	4.2	7.3	2.6	7.3	2.314.4	7.9	10.0	3.7	5.6	2.4	6.1	1.914.0	7.7	9.6	4.1	5.1	2.2	5.4	2.212.3	7.6	7.9	3.3	4.1	2.0	4.5	2.110.2	6.9	5.7	3.1	3.4	1.9	3.9	1.69.7	6.4	5.3	2.5	2.9	1.9	3.7	1.510.9	7.3	6.1	3.2	3.5	2.0	3.8	1.712.7	8.3	7.7	4.2	4.2	2.3	4.3	2.012.3	8.9	7.5	3.7	3.8	2.5	4.2	2.215.0	11.4	10.5	5.1	5.0	3.1	5.0	2.7
(Not seasonally adjusted)
17.4	10.6	10.5	4.6	5.6	3.3	5.4	2.017.0	8.9	11.5	5.4	6.1	3.3	6.4	2.917.6	8.5	13.2	4.5	6.3	2.7	6.6	2.918.1	9.9	12.7	4.5	5.8	3.1	6.6	2.315.4	9.2	11.8	5.9	5.1	3.1	5.1	2.218.6	16.5	10.5	5.5	4.4	2.8	3.9	2.115.4	14.3	8.7	5.2	4.2	2.9	4.2	2.410.4	9.3	8.6	6.2	3.8	3.2	4.3	2.711.9	13.0	8.3	5.3	3.8	2.4	3.6	2.311.7	12.0	8.9	4.9	4.0	2.7	3.7	3.414.3	11.6	10.7	4.9	4.5	3.6	4.5	3.115.4	11.2	11.7	4.9	5.9	3.6	5.7	3.219.8	12.8	15.5	6.4	7.3	4.4	7.0	3.420.3	12.1	15.4	6.7	7.3	4.0	7.1	4.220.0	10.9	14.7	6.1	7.0	3.9	7.6	3.3
24171-24^
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
PARTICIPATION RATES, CANADA AND BY REGION 1954 to 1971
Yeara
and	Canada
Months
1954		 52.9
1955		 52.9
1956		 53.5
1957		 54.0
1958		 53.9
1959		 53.8
1960		 54.2
1961		 54.1
1962		   53.9
1963		 53.8
1964		 54.1
1965		 54.4
1966		 55.1
1967		 55.5
1968		 55.5
1969		 55.8
1970		 55.8
1970	J	 55.4
F	 55.5
M	 55.6
A	 55.7
M	  66.2
J	 56.1
J	 55.9
A	 55.6
S	 55.7
0	 55.8
N	 55.8
D	 55.6
1971	J	 56.5
F	 56.4
M	   56.0
Atlantic Region	Quebec	Ontario	Prairie Region	British Columbia
(Labour force as a percent of population 14 yeara and over)				
46.0	53.7	55.9	51.0	50.446.4	53.5	55.7	51.4	60.946.6	53.1	56.9	52.4	51.547.7	53.6	57.2	52.9	51.947.0	54.0	56.4	53.8	51.547.0	53.5	56.2	54.2	51.747.1	53.6	57.0	54.7	51.748.1	52.8	56.7	55.6	51.847.8	52.5	56.3	55.7	52.346.8	52.6	56.5	55.0	52.847.0	52.6	57.0	55.1	53.648.1	53.2	56.7	55.5	53.848.6	54.3	57.2	55.7	54.948.5	54.8	57.6	55.8	55.848.2	54.3	57.7	56.8	56.048.1	54.5	58.0	56.9	56.747.5	54.3	58.0	57.1	67.3(Seasonally adjusted)	47.3	53.9	57.5	56.4	57.647.2	54.3	57 .7	56.5	57.647.1	53.9	58.0	57.1	57.247.4	53.8	58.1	56.6	58.747.7	54.2	59.1	57.4	57 .547.7	54.9	58.7	57.8	57 .548.1	54.4	57 .7	57.7	57.247.8	53.7	57.8	57 .6	57.047.7	54.3	58.0	57.2	57 .047.6	54.4	58.1	57 .5	56.648.0	54.8	58.0	57.0	56.647.4	55.0	57.6	56.1	57.048.3	55.6	68.8	56.6	57.248.3	55.6	58.8	56.1	67.048.4	55.1	58.2	56.6	57.0
Soorcb: DBS The Labour Force.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 31 LABOUR FORCE, CANADA AND BY REGION 1954 to 1971
Years and Months	Canada	Atlantic Region	Quebec	Ontario	Prairie Region	British Columbia	Canada	Atlantic Region	Quebec	Ontario	Prairie Region	British Columbia
			(Thousands of persons)				(Per cent change from same period a year ago)					
1954	
5,493	501	1,562	2,022	949	461	1.8	-1.0	1.6	3.8	-0.7	2.71955	
5,610	511	1,591	2,059	969	480	2.1	2.0	1.9	1.8	2.1	4.11956	
5,782	520	1,615	2,147	998	503	3.1	1.8	1.5	4.3	3.0	4.81957	
6,008	537	1,678	2,238	1,019	536	3.9	3.3	3.9	4.2	2.1	6.61958	
6,137	535	1,735	2,264	1,055	548	2.1	-0.4	3.4	1.2	3.5	2.21959	
6,242	541	1,758	2,301	1,084	556	1.7	1.1	1.3	1.6	2.7	1.51960	
6,411	550	1,803	2,377	1,115	565	2.7	1.7	2.6	3.3	2.9	1.61961	
6,521	571	1,820	2,401	1,154	575	1.7	3.8	0.9	1.0	3.5	1.81962	
6,615	578	1,852	2,422	1,175	590	1.4	1.2	1.8	0.9	1.8	2.61963	
6,748	577	1,904	2,476	1,181	610	2.0	-0.2	2.8	2.2	0.5	3.41964	
6,933	588	1,951	2,556	1,199	639	2.7	1.9	2.5	3.2	1.5	4.81965	
7,141	611	2,022	2,614	1,228	666	3.0	3.9	3.6	2.3	2.4	4.21966	
7,420	626	2,116	2,719	1,248	710	3.9	2.5	4.6	4.0	1.6	6.61967	
7,694	635	2,196	2,834	1,268	762	3.7	1,4	3.8	4.2	1.6	7.31968	
7,919	643	2,227	2,934	1,318	797	2.9	1.3	1.4	3.5	3.9	4.61969	
8,162	654	2,290	3,031	1,351	836	3.1	1.7	2.8	3.3	2.5	4.61970	658	2,328	3,130	1,380	878	2.6	0.6	1.7	3.3	2.1	5.0(Seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	
8,215	653	2,291	3,059	1,350	866	1.7	-0.2	0.9	1.6	-0.1	6.5F	
8,255	649	2,308	3,073	1,354	867	1.5	-0.8	1.8	1.4	-0.3	6.6M	
8,278	650	2,293	3,092	1,370	864	1.8	-0.5	0.6	2.2	1.2	5.6A	
8,316	654	2,300	3,108	1,365	891	1.5	-1.2	0.2	2.3	0.6	6.7M	
8,408	658	2,315	3,172	1,388	876	2.3	-0.6	1.0	3.6	2.1	3.7j	
8,428	659	2,343	3,159	1,400	886	2.6	-	1.6	4.0	3.1	3.6j	
8,423	671	2,344	3,118	1,398	885	3.2	2.3	1.9	3.0	3.6	7.5A	
8,421	663	2,324	3,138	1,406	882	3.2	1.2	0.6	4.1	4.1	6.4s	
8,470	668	2,356	3,161	1,398	886	3.8	2.9	2.7	4.4	4.1	5.0O	
8,478	662	2,354	3,177	1,406	879	3.7	1.4	2.1	4.8	4.0	3.3N	
8,484	668	2,372	3,176	1,389	881	3.8	2.9	3.0	4.7	3.7	2.3D	
8,453	659	2,377	3,158	1,365	890	3.3	0.9	3.9	3.6	1.0	4.61971 J	
8,539	674	2,394	3,215	1,371	891	3.9	3.2	4.5	5.1	1.6	2.9F	672	2,400	3,223	1,362	892	3.6	3.5	4.0	4.9	0.6	2.9M	
8,533	675	2,383	3,197	1,377	896	3.1	3.8	3.9	3.4	0.5	3.7
Source: DBS The Labour Force.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 32 EMPLOYMENT, CANADA AND BY REGION 1954 to 1971
Years
and
Months
Canada
Atlantic
Region
Quebec
Ontario
Prairie British	_	, Atlantic
Region Columbia	ana a Region
Quebec
Ontario
Prairie British Region Columbia
(Thousands of persons)
(Per cent change from same period a year ago)
1954	
5,243	4681955	
5.364	4781956	
5,585	4891957	
6,731	4921958	
5,706	4691959	
5,870	4821960	
5,965	4921961	
6,055	5071962	
6,225	5161963	
6,375	5221964	
6,609	5421965	
6,802	5661966	
7,152	5861967	
7,379	6931968	
7,537	5961969	
7,780	6051970	
7,879	6091970 J	
7,830	608F	
7,842	602M	
7,849	603A	
7,848	606M	
7,896	612J	
7,897	610J	
7,870	610A	
7,868	610S	
7,898	6110	
7,929	612N	
7,936	617D	
7,897	6036171 J	
8,006	626F	
8,021	623M	
8,018	6261,470	1,945	925	437	0.21,493	1,993	939	462	2.31,535	2,096	976	489	4.11,576	2,161	992	509	2.61,582	2,142	1,013	501	-0.41,620	2,198	1,049	521	2.91,639	2,249	1,069	516	1.61,652	2,269	1,100	527	1.51,713	2.317	1,129	551	2.81,762	2,382	1,138	571	2.41,827	2.473	1,162	605	3.71,912	2,548	1,196	639	3.82,016	2,651	1,222	678	4.22,080	2,745	1,238	723	3.22,082	2,830	1,280	750	2.12,132	2,936	1,312	795	3.22,144	2,996	1,320	810	1.3(Seasonally adjusted)	2,143	2,953	1,306	818	1.02,152	2,962	1,303	820	0.92,132	2,977	1,317	809	0.72,128	2,978	1,306	836	0.32.127	3,035	1,321	804	1.12,146	3.025	1,334	798	1.52,138	2,976	1,336	799	1.22,121	2,996	1,336	804	1.32,152	3,003	1,329	810	1.82,151	3,030	1,328	803	2.22,176	3,020	1,320	808	2.12,174	2,996	1,299	820	1.12,199	3,042	1,309	826	2.22.204	3,054	1,306	830	2.32,198	3,040	1,316	827	2.2-2.1	-0.7	2.0	-1.4	1.22.1	1.6	2.5	1.5	5.72.3	2.8	5.2	3.9	5.80.6	2.7	3.1	1.6	4.1-4.7	0.4	-0.9	2.1	-1.62.8	2.4	2.6	3.6	4.02.1	1.2	2.3	1.9	-1.03.0	0.8	0.9	2.9	2.11.8	3.7	2.1	2.6	4.61.2	2.9	2.8	0.8	3.63.8	3.7	3.8	2.1	6.04.4	4.7	3.0	2.9	5.63.5	5.4	4.0	2.2	6.11.2	3.2	3.5	1.3	6.60.5	0.1	3.1	3.4	3.71.5	2.4	3.7	2.5	6.00.7	0.6	2.0	0.6	1.9-0.5	1.1	0.9	-0.9	5.8-1.3	1.3	0.9	-1.4	6.5-0.7	-0.4	1.2	-1.7	4.0-1.3	-0.9	1.1	-1.1	5.00.3	-0.2	2.8	-0.1	-0.41.2	0.2	3.1	1.4	-2.41.7	-0.2	1.4	2.2	2.01.7	-1.0	2.6	1.9	2.22.5	1.7	2.4	1.7	1.31.7	1.0	3.3	2.2	-0.62.8	2.1	3.1	1.7	-0.2-0.2	2.2	1.8	-0.1	1.63.0	2.6	3.0	0.2	1.03.5	2.4	3.1	0.2	1.23.8	3.1	2.1	-0.1	2.2
Source: DBS The Labour Force.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 33 UNEMPLOYMENT, CANADA AND BY REGION 1954 to 1971
Years and Months	Unemployed	Unemployment Rate	Canada	Atlantic Region	Quebec	Ontario	Prairie Region	British Columbia	Canada	Atlantic Region	Quebec	Ontario	Prairie Region	British Columbia(Thousands of persons)	(Per cent)	1954	.. 250	33	92	77	24	24	4.6	6.6	5.9	3.8	2.5	5.21955	33	98	66	30	18	4.4	6.5	6.2	3.2	3.1	3.81956	.. 197	31	80	51	22	14	3.4	6.0	5.0	2.4	2.2	2.81957	.. 278	45	101	77	27	27	4.6	8.4	6.0	3.4	2.6	6.01958	67	153	122	43	47	7.0	12.5	8.8	5.4	4.1	8.61959	.. 372	59	138	103	35	36	6.0	10.9	7.8	4.5	3.2	6.51960	.. 446	59	164	128	47	48	7.0	10.7	9.1	5.4	4.2	8.51961	.. 466	64	168	132	53	49	7.1	11.2	9.2	5.5	4.6	8.51962	.. 390	62	139	105	46	39	5.9	10.7	7.5	4.3	3.9	6.61963	55	142	94	44	39	5.5	9.5	7.5	3.8	3.7	6.41964	46	124	83	37	34	4.7	7.8	6.4	3.2	3.1	5.31965	.. 280	45	109	66	32	28	3.9	7.4	5.4	2.5	2.5	4.21966	40	100	69	26	32	3.6	6.4	4.7	2.5	2.1	4.51967	42	116	89	29	39	4.1	6.6	5.3	3.1	2.3	5.11968	.. 382	47	145	104	39	47	4.8	7.3	6.5	3.5	3.0	5.91969	.. 383	49	158	95	39	42	4.7	7.6	6.9	3.1	2.9	5.01970	49	184	134	60	68	5.9	7.4	7.9	4.3	4.3	7.7(Seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	.. 385	45	148	106	44	48	4.7	6.9	6.5	3.5	3.3	5.5F	.. 413	47	156	111	51	47	5.0	7.2	6.8	3.6	3.8	5.4M	.. 429	47	161	115	53	55	5.2	7.2	7.0	3.7	3.9	6.4A	.. 468	48	172	130	59	55	5.6	7.3	7.5	4.2	4.3	6.2M	.. 512	46	188	137	67	72	6.1	7.0	8.1	4.3	4.8	8.2J	.. 531	49	197	134	66	88	6.3	7.4	8.4	4.2	4.7	9.9J	.. 553	61	206	142	62	86	6.6	9.1	8.8	4.6	4.4	9.7A	.. 553	53	203	142	70	78	6.6	8.0	8.7	4.5	5.0	8.8s	.. 572	57	204	158	69	76	6.8	8.5	8.7	5.0	4.9	8.6o	50	203	147	78	76	6.5	7.6	8.6	4.6	5.5	8.6N	.. 548	51	196	156	69	73	6.5	7.6	8.3	4.9	5.0	8.3D	.. 556	56	203	162	66	70	6.6	8.5	8.5	5.1	4.8	7.91971 J	.. 533	48	195	173	62	65	6.2	7.1	8.1	5.4	4.5	7.3F	49	196	169	56	62	6.2	7.3	8.2	5.2	4.1	7.0M	.. 515	49	185	157	61	69	6.0	7.3	7.8	4.9	4.4	7.7
Source: DBS The Labour Force.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 34 ESTIMATES OF EMPLOYEES BY INDUSTRY 1961 to 1971
(Thousands)
Years and Months	Forestry	Mines, Quarries and Oil Wells	Total Manufac- turing	Construc- tion	Transportation, Communication and Other Utilities	Trade	Finance, Insurance and Real Estate	Total Community, Business and Personal Services	Public Adminis- tration and Defence*1)	Grand Total**)
CANADA										
... 68.4	106.7	1,302.1	291.5	571.1	743.0	194.8	1,065.1	331.7	4,681.5... 70.2	108.1	1,356.2	305.0	575.4	772.3	205.4	1,117.1	341.7	4,868.71963 	... 68.2	106.4	1,396.9	306.0	581.6	796.8	218.1	1,192.6	345.2	5,021.21964	... 71.1	107.5	1,450.5	323.0	598.9	829.0	229.9	1,270.8	352.8	5,243.9... 71.7	114.2	1,520.1	356.6	616.4	872.5	238.9	1,362.2	362.0	5,523.51966 	... 72.6	116.8	1,597.8	379.6	634.8	920.2	248.8	1,458.7	375.6	5,814.01967	... 71.1	118.5	1,621.8	363.4	652.1	9.494	265.6	1,567.5	399.1	6,017.71968	... 64.5	120.4	1,639.2	361.3	642.3	984.5	280.7	1,679.3	408.1	6,189.31969 	... 64.9	119.3	1,691.4	377.2	662.6	1,061.7	300.1	1,812.3	420.1	6,516.31970	... 62.6	128.4	1,667.6	367.4	671.1	1,095.2	306.7	1,889.8	449.5	6,644.6(Seasonally adjusted)	1970 J 	... 65.6	126.6	1,696.3	389.6	676.2	1,102.7	307.9	1,879.7	438.1	6,702.4F 	... 68.2	128.0	1,695.3	387.1	673.3	1,107.7	306.6	1,891.9	438.6	6,717.2M ..	... 70.2	126.6	1,689.8	386.2	674.5	1,102.1	305.3	1,885.9	448.1	6,699.7A 	... 68.7	129.5	1,679.2	370.5	667.1	1,093.4	303.6	1,914.4	447.4	6,673.7M 	... 60.4	128.4	1,666.1	355.9	663.2	1,113.5	310.7	1,932.4	451.2	6,688.2j 	... 62.2	128.2	1,665.8	354.9	659.9	1,092.1	306.5	1,907.8	460.6	6,643.1j 	... 62.8	129.3	1,654.8	353.3	664.3	1,087.3	307.2	1,784.0	454.1	6,505.4A	... 63.6	130.1	1,674.3	362.1	662.7	1,084.0	310.4	1,801.7	450.4	6,546.9s 	... 61.9	130.2	1,659.5	366.0	674.4	1,099.5	306.1	1,912.8	452.3	6,651.80 	... 60.2	129.0	1,649.7	373.2	676.4	1,095.2	306.6	1,937.5	452.8	6,674.7N	... 60.1	128.2	1,637.9	370.0	680.3	1,102.8	305.9	1,924.9	443.3	6,652.5D	... 58.8	124.9	1,663.1	363.7	692.9	1,093.6	307.4	1,929.3	451.6	6,705.81971 J	... 57.4	128.8	1,654.6	365.0	690.2	1,088.3	308.3	1,932.6	448.4	6,699.5F	128.8	1,656.0	370.6	n.a.	1,092.5	311.6	1,949.3	448.9	6,714.2

[Stage Direction]
tflfil 	
15.0	12.8	59.8	24.2	59.1	62.2	9.6	94.7	35.8	373.41962 	
14.4	12.7	62.9	27.0	58.7	63.3	10.2	96.5	38.1	383.91963 	
12.6	13.8	65.3	25.8	58.4	65.4	10.8	101.2	38.6	392.11964	
14.1	14.3	67.4	25.7	59.6	67.0	11.3	106.9	38.8	405.2
13.7	16.2	71.0	31.9	61.1	69.8	11.7	111.3	40.2	426.91966 	
13.5	16.2	73.0	36.6	63.2	72.5	12.2	116.7	38.6	442.61967 	
12.4	15.7	73.6	34.0	62.9	73.8	12.9	123.1	39.8	448.21968 	
11.2	15.1	76.0	32.1	60.7	76.8	13.4	129.9	41.6	456.91969	
10.6	13.9	76.7	35.4	61.8	81.0	14.4	137.8	43.4	475.01970	
10.3	13.8	75.7	34.3	61.3	85.2	14.9	145.9	45.5	487.0(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	
8.5	13.4	70.8	29.5	61.0	80.3	14.7	140.0	43.0	461.3F	
8.3	13.3	68.5	28.3	60.3	79.9	14.6	139.6	43.1	456.7M	
7.3	12.7	69.9	28.5	58.5	79.2	14.6	140.6	44.1	455.4A	
5.6	13.6	72.1	31.2	56.9	79.9	14.6	141.0	43.4	458.4M	
9.4	14.0	78.8	35.0	58.3	86.3	14.7	148.1	45.4	490.0J 	
13.1	13.9	83.6	37.6	61.9	87.2	15.1	151.9	47.4	512.1J 	
13.9	14.5	82.0	39.7	62.8	86.3	15.2	145.7	49.6	509.7A	
13.3	14.5	82.3	37.9	64.2	86.5	15.1	143.1	49.2	506.0s	
12.6	14.3	79.1	40.6	64.6	87.7	15.0	150.7	46.7	510.2o	
12.5	14.0	77.5	39.2	63.9	87.7	15.0	150.3	46.3	506.5N	
11.2	13.8	74.8	36.4	62.3	91.8	14.7	151.0	43.8	499.8D	13.6	69.4	27.7	60.4	90.0	15.0	148.9	43.8	477.41971 I	
6.9	12.7	69.4	26.9	62.1	83.7	15.0	146.8	43.5	467.7
*
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
		REFERENCE TABLE 34 (continued) ESTIMATES OF EMPLOYEES BY INDUSTRY 1961 to 1971 (Thousands)								
Years and Months	Forestry	Mines, Quarries and Oil Wells	Total Manufac- turing	Construc- tion	Transportation, Communication and Other Utilities	Trade	Finance, Insurance and Real Estate	Total Community, Business and Personal Services	Public Adminis- tration and Defence O)	Grand Total«)
QUEBEC										
1961	... 21.5	24.0	429.9	84.5	151.2	187.6	52.0	278.1	71.6	1,300.51962	... 21.7	24.9	442.8	89.3	152.3	198.0	55.8	297.8	74.3	1,356.71963	... 19.9	24.3	446.4	91.9	153.7	204.0	60.5	317.5	75.7	1,394.21964	... 21.8	24.6	459.9	98.5	158.5	212.9	64.3	340.5	77.6	1,458.61965	... 21.9	26.0	475.3	102.6	164.9	224.1	68.1	367.5	78.1	1,528.51966	... 22.9	26.5	497.3	103.8	170.2	233.3	71.3	395.4	77.7	1,599.21967	... 24.3	26.3	507.0	87.0	176.5	240.1	75.6	429.3	88.4	1,654.61968	... 20.1	25.4	515.5	82.4	175.8	244.7	79.1	451.7	87.5	1,682.21969	... 19.2	25.0	527.0	81.9	180.6	263.2	84.0	482.1	90.8	1,753.51970	... 19.0	25.5	522.2	82.5	180.5	269.6	86.0	503.6	105.4	1,794.2(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	... 17.2	24.8	515.0	74.8	172.3	262.6	85.2	490.7	95.2	1,737.9F	... 15.2	25.1	516.4	72.7	171.3	261.7	84.9	502.4	97.0	1,746.7M	... 10.8	24.6	516.8	71.9	172.6	263.3	84.4	498.7	102.5	1,745.6A	... 8.5	24.8	515.5	74.2	176.1	263.2	84.6	509.6	101.6	1,758.2M	... 16.2	25.4	521.4	77.6	182.8	279.9	86.2	522.3	104.9	1,816.7J	... 25.3	26.7	533.0	85.4	180.5	274.2	86.1	524.2	112.2	1,847.6J	... 26.6	27.2	518.4	84.8	181.5	270.7	87.1	465.1	112.4	1,773.7A	... 26.6	27.2	541.7	94.4	183.4	268.5	87.4	464.8	113.5	1,807.4S	... 24.9	26.0	535.9	96.5	187.5	274.2	85.9	517.5	109.9	1,858.20	... 21.7	25.4	530.5	97.3	185.6	270.9	85.7	520.4	105.4	1,842.9N	... 19.7	24.8	519.4	91.0	186.6	273.9	87.0	516.6	105.2	1,824.1D	... 14.7	23.9	502.0	69.5	185.5	272.4	87.0	511.3	105.5	1,771.81971 J	... 12.9	23.9	603.4	76.4	180.7	260.8	87.2	509.2	105.0	1,759.4ONTARIO	1961	... 11.8	37.1	622.6	113.0	183.6	291.6	88.3	400.4	132.2	1,880.41962	... 12.5	35.7	653.9	114.1	187.4	302.7	91.4	425.9	136.2	1,959.91963	... 13.0	34.0	680.8	113.3	190.4	312.6	96.2	453.6	138.1	2,031.91964	.... 12.7	33.1	712.2	118.7	196.5	324.5	100.5	483.0	142.6	2,123.81965	.... 12.6	33.8	761.1	132.4	201.3	340.5	102.1	512.8	147.4	2,234.01966	.... 12.5	33.2	796.5	140.9	205.9	358.8	105.8	547.2	158.2	2,359.21967	.... 12.6	34.5	806.7	138.1	211.9	369.7	113.4	583.9	162.2	2,433.91968	... 11.3	35.4	810.6	142.8	207.1	385.3	120.9	637.8	168.5	2,520.81969	32.0	837.0	151.3	215.0	424.2	130.5	694.2	171.7	2,666.41970	36.1	821.2	150.4	220.1	438.6	132.6	731.2	179.3	2,722.2(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	.... 11.3	33.9	824.1	131.8	213.5	434.7	132.4	717.7	176.9	2,676.3F	.... 11.3	34.5	828.3	129.4	213.9	433.7	131.5	723.0	173.7	2,682.5M	.... 9.5	34.7	824.2	131.9	213.7	432.0	131.8	726.0	175.8	2,679.6A	.... 7.7	35.2	820.0	141.9	215.8	432.5	131.1	729.2	173.6	2,687.0M	.... 9.5	36.7	824.0	154.7	219.9	440.3	136.2	748.4	178.5	2,748.1J	.... 11.2	37.8	830.3	164.2	224.3	441.9	133.1	744.4	185.3	2,772.4J	.... 11.2	37.9	807.6	164.8	224.3	436.1	133.8	700.0	189.1	2,704.7A	.... 12.1	38.2	844.8	169.2	224.2	431.3	135.7	700.5	187.8	2,743.7s	.... 11.2	36.4	826.1	163.8	227.0	440.4	131.6	737.3	183.8	2,757.5o	.... 10.4	36.3	812.6	163.8	221.9	448.6	131.4	750.0	179.7	2,754.7N	36.0	803.3	156.2	222.1	461.8	130.8	755.6	173.5	2.749.4D	.... 9.6	35.3	808.6	133.1	220.0	455.7	131.6	741.7	174.3	2,709.91971 J	.... 9.7	35.4	806.0	126.9	215.4	430.0	131.3	742.4	174.7	2,671.87014	COMMONS DEBATES _________________June 18, 1971REFERENCE TABLE 34 (continued)	ESTIMATES OF EMPLOYEES BY INDUSTRY	1961 to 1971 (Thousands)	Year* and Months	Forestry	Mines, Quarries and Oil Wells	Total Manufac- turing	Trans- portation, Construe- Communi- Trade tion cation and Other Utilities	Finance, Insurance and Real Estate	Total Community, Business and Personal Services	Public Adminis- tration and Defence*1)	Grand Total**)

[Stage Direction]
1961	24.5	89.7	48.7	113.9	129.7	27.6	188.9	58.6	685.11962	25.0	92.6	51.9	114.3	133.7	29.7	196.5	58.8	706.21963	24.8	95.4	51.3	115.7	137.0	30.9	206.6	58.8	724.01964	
3.8	25.9	99.8	52.1	118.2	142.3	32.5	218.4	59.9	753.01966	
4.2	27.8	105.2	57.1	119.3	149.8	33.9	234.8	61.3	793.31966	29.2	108.3	62.0	121.0	161.5	35.3	248.2	64.5	834.21967	
3.7	30.4	111.5	66.2	123.0	166.4	37.5	267.2	69.1	874.81968	
2.9	32.1	113.6	67.8	120.3	173.0	38.9	284.3	69.8	903.01969	
3.3	35.4	119.8	68.4	123.8	180.3	41.0	306.7	71.8	950.61970	
3.3	37.9	118.8	64.4	123.5	181.6	41.4	315.0	75.0	961.0(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	
3.0	37.3	118.6	57.0	119.1	181.8	41.8	312.3	70.7	941.5F	
3.0	37.9	118.4	55.2	118.1	176.9	41.4	307.8	70.7	930.4M	
2.8	38.4	118.6	54.8	118.1	178.5	41.2	315.0	70.7	938.1A	
2.5	36.1	118.6	56.4	118.2	177.8	41.1	318.6	71.6	941.2M	37.0	121.8	64.2	121.6	184.4	41.6	322.2	75.8	972.2J	38.2	121.6	70.4	125.2	182.6	41.6	320.2	79.5	983.6 1J	
4.0	39.2	120.9	75.4	129.2	182.2	41.7	312.1	81.1	985.6 1A	
3.4	38.9	121.3	76.6	129.5	182.2	41.6	305.7	80.0	979.3 1s	38.3	119.8	73.8	129.4	181.8	40.8	314.1	78.3	979.6]O	
3.2	38.0	118.4	72.7	125.6	181.3	41.9	321.1	76.0	978.1N	
3.3	37.4	115.7	63.0	124.1	184.1	40.8	316.2	73.0	957.6D	38.2	112.3	53.8	123.7	185.4	40.7	314.8	72.4	944.51971 J	38.9	112.2	50.4	121.2	177.5	40.9	313.3	72.0	930.0

[Stage Direction]
1961	6.7	100.2	20.7	61.5	71.8	17.2	100.8	30.8	426.41962	8.1	104.2	22.4	61.4	74.3	18.4	106.5	31.5	444.71963	
18.7	7.7	108.9	23.5	62.1	77.5	19.8	111.6	31.5	461.41964	7.8	111.2	27.6	64.8	82.7	21.3	119.9	31.8	484.81965	
19.7	8.6	117.4	32.5	68.9	87.8	22.9	133.8	33.0	624.61966	9.8	122.9	35.8	73.5	94.4	24.3	148.8	34.6	563.61967	
18.2	9.7	122.8	27.6	76.5	99.2	26.2	161.6	37.6	589.31968	10.0	123.3	35.5	76.9	103.9	28.2	172.6	38.7	608.11969	
21.2	10.6	130.7	39.5	79.9	112.8	30.2	188.6	40.2	653.61970	
19.7	12.0	129.4	35.3	83.8	117.2	32.0	191.1	41.4	661.2(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	11.3	130.3	35.9	80.0	115.6	31.2	190.2	40.4	654.9F	
19.7	11.6	129.6	36.8	80.4	117.9	31.6	192.2	41.5	661.6M	
19.5	11.4	129.0	37.7	80.7	116.8	31.7	191.4	41.1	659.2A	
18.9	11.5	130.4	34.3	82.3	117.0	31.3	194.7	40.7	661.2M	12.1	125.1	32.8	82 5	116.4	31.8	197.1	41.5	655.2J	
18.3	12.6	132.2	31.4	84.9	116.4	32 4	194.5	42.3	665.0J	
20.9	12.9	129.9	34.5	86.0	115.9	32.8	170.9	42.9	646.7A	
22.0	12.9	130.2	37.3	86.6	116.0	33.1	174.4	42 4	654.8S	
22.1	12.3	131.0	38.4	85.1	116.6	32.2	193.4	41.7	672.80	
20.9	12.0	131.0	38.3	85.5	117.4	32.3	199.9	42.0	679.1N	
20.4	11.5	129.2	36.4	86.3	120.1	31.7	198.1	39.8	673.6D	11.4	124.9	30.2	84.8	119.8	31.4	196.3	39.9	656.01971 J	11.5	125.5	30.0	81.4	111.9	31.6	196.4	40.0	646.6
NOTE: December figures and 1970 Annual are preliminary and January figures are advance. ^Excludes non-civilian employees.
**>Employees in fishing and trapping are included in the total.
Source: DBS Estimates of Employees by Province and Industry, Monthly, Cat. 72-008.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1951 to 1970 (1961 = 100)
Years
n . , p	Average	Average
OntnntU) Persons	Total Wages and u pu er Output Per Earnings Per Hourly
p	Employed*1) Man-Hours*1) Salaries „ eT*on Man-Hour Person Earnings
Employed	Employed
Wages and Corporation Salaries	Profits
Per Unit of Per Unit of Output	Output-*)
1951	
67.3	86.7	92.8	50.0	77.6	72.5	57.6	53.8	74.2	104.81952	
72.5	88.0	93.7	56.3	82.4	77.4	63.9	60.0	77.6	94.51953	
75.5	89.1	94.5	61.2	84.8	79.9	68.7	64.8	81.1	89.31954	
74.3	89.2	94.2	62.6	83.3	78.9	70.2	66.4	84.2	80.81955	90.7	95.0	67.2	90.5	86.4	74.1	70.7	81.8	96.21956	
89.1	94.4	98.6	76.2	94.4	90.4	80.7	77.3	85.5	101.71957	
89.5	96.3	99.5	82.7	92.9	90.0	85.9	83.1	92.4	93.91958	
91.0	94.8	97.1	85.0	96.0	93.7	89.6	87.5	93.4	94.31959	
95.7	97.6	99.5	90.9	98.1	96.1	93.2	91.4	95.0	103.81960	
98.0	98.7	99.9	95.9	99.2	98.1	97.1	96.0	97.8	98.01961	
100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962	
106.9	102.6	102.3	107.3	104.2	104.5	104.5	104.8	100.3	105.81963	
112.7	104.9	103.8	114.5	107.4	108.5	109.2	110.3	101.6	110.61964	
120.4	108.6	107.0	125.2	110.8	112.6	115.3	117.0	104.0	123.21965	
129.0	113.1	110.5	140.0	114.0	116.8	123.7	126.7	108.5	125.11966	117.1	113.1	158.5	117.8	122.1	135.3	140.1	114.8	123.01967	
142.4	120.6	116.1	175.2	118.1	122.6	145.3	150.9	123.0	116.81968	
149.3	122.4	115.7	191.2	122.0	129.0	156.2	165.2	128.0	122.41969	
156.2	127.1	118.8	214.9	122.9	131.5	169.0	180.9	137.6	123.41970	
160.7	128.9	119.3	233.6	124.7	134.7	181.2	195.8	145.4	112.9
(Per cent change from previous year)
1952	
7.7	1.5	1.0	12.6	6.2	6.8	11.0	11.5	4.5	-9.81953	
4.1	1.3	0.9	8.8	2.9	3.2	7.4	7.9	4.5	-5.51954	
-1.6	0.1	-0.3	2.3	-1.8	-1.3	2.1	2.6	3.9	-9.51955	
10.5	1.7	0.8	7.4	8.6	9.6	5.6	6.5	-2.8	19.21956	
8.5	4.1	3.8	13.4	4.3	4.6	8.9	9.3	4.5	5.71957	
0.4	2.0	0.9	8.6	-1.6	-0.4	6.5	7.6	8.1	-7.71958	
1.7	-1.6	-2.4	2.7	3.3	4.1	4.3	5.3	1.0	0.51959	
5.2	3.0	2.5	7.0	2.2	2.6	3.9	4.4	1.7	10.11960	
2.4	1.1	0.4	5.4	1.1	2.1	4.3	5.0	3.0	-5.61961	
2.0	1.3	0.1	4.3	0.8	1.9	3.0	4.2	2.2	2.11962	
6.9	2.6	2.3	7.3	4.2	4.5	4.5	4.8	0.3	5.81963	
5.4	2.2	1.5	6.8	3.1	3.8	4.4	5.2	1.3	4.61964	
6.8	3.5	3.1	9.4	3.2	3.8	6.7	6.1	2.4	11.41965	4.1	3.3	11.7	2.9	3.7	7.3	8.2	4.3	1.51966	
7.0	3.5	2.4	13.2	3.3	4.5	9.4	10.6	5.8	-1.71967	
3.2	3.0	2.7	10.6	0.3	0.4	7.3	7.7	7.1	-5.01968	1.5	-0.3	9.1	3.3	5.2	7.6	9.5	4.1	4.81969	
4.6	3.8	2.7	12.4	0.7	1.9	8.2	9.5	7.4	0.91970	
2.9	1.4	0.4	8.7	1.5	2.4	7.2	8.3	6.7	-8.6
ft) Estimates based on data from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics. **) Estimated by the Department of Finance.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
<i *	:

[Stage Direction]
1951 to 1970 (1961 = 100)
Years
Oiitnntd) Persons	Total	Wages and
P	Employed*1* Man-Hours*1* Salaries*2*
Output Per Person Employed
Average
Output Per Earnings Per Man-Hour Person Employed
Average
Hourly
Earnings
Wages and Salaries Per Unit of Output
Corporation Profits Per Unit of Output*25
1951.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
64.0	86.4	90.7	59.3	74.1	70.6	68.7	65.4	92.7	110.267.4	88.5	92.6	65.3	76.1	72.8	73.7	70.5	96.8	101.671.5	89.9	93.5	70.5	79.5	76.4	78.5	75.4	98.7	94.372.2	88.7	91.3	70.0	81.4	79.0	78.9	76.7	96.9	83.279.3	91.5	93.7	74.4	86.7	84.6	81.3	79.4	93.8	99.786.8	97.0	99.6	82.8	89.5	87.1	85.4	83.2	95.4	104.488.6	99.8	101.8	88.4	88.7	87.0	88.6	86.9	99.8	94.989.1	97.3	98.8	89.4	91.6	90.2	91.8	90.4	100.3	96.394.7	99.7	101.3	94.6	95.0	93.5	94.9	93.4	99.9	105.096.5	99.6	100.6	96.4	96.9	96.0	96.8	95.8	99.9	99.6100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0106.4	103.1	103.3	102.7	103.2	103.0	99.6	99.4	96.5	106.3112.2	105.7	105.4	108.2	106.2	106.5	102.3	102.6	96.4	111.0121.4	110.4	110.0	115.7	110.0	110.4	104.8	105.2	95.3	122.0130.7	116.5	115.7	126.4	112.1	112.9	108.5	109.2	96.7	123.2139.3	122.2	119.9	137.1	114.0	116.2	112.2	114.3	98.4	120.7144.6	124.5	121.6	154.5	116.2	118.9	124.1	127.0	106.8	113.5151.8	125.3	121.0	165.8	121.2	125.5	132.3	137.0	109.2	118.7158.8	130.8	124.5	184.9	121.4	127.5	141.3	148.5	116.4	119.7163.3	132.2	124.6	199.2	123.5	131.1	150.7	159.9	122.0	n.a.
(Per cent change from previous year)
5.3	2.4	2.1	10.0	2.7	3.1	7.3	7.7	4.4	-7.76.1	1.6	1.0	8.1	4.5	4.9	6.4	7.1	1.9	-7.21.0	-1.3	-2.4	-0.8	2.4	3.4	0.6	1.6	-1.7	-11.79.8	3.2	2.6	6.3	6.5	7.1	3.0	3.5	-3.3	19.89.5	6.0	6.3	11.4	3.2	3.0	5.1	4.8	1.8	4.62.1	2.9	2.2	6.8	-0.9	-0.1	3.8	4.5	4.6	-9.10.6	-2.5	-2.9	1.0	3.3	3.7	3.6	4.1	0.5	1.46.3	3.5	2.5	5.8	3.7	3.7	3.3	3.2	-0.4	9.01.9	-0.1	-0.7	1.9	2.0	2.7	2.0	2.6	-	-5.13.6	0.4	-0.6	3.8	3.2	4.2	3.3	4.4	0.1	0.46.4	3.1	3.3	2.7	3.2	3.0	-0.4	-0.6	-3.5	6.35.5	2.5	2.0	5.3	2.9	3.4	2.7	3.2	-0.1	4.48.2	4.4	4.4	7.0	3.6	3.7	2.4	2.5	-1.1	9.97.7	5.5	5.2	9.3	1.9	2.3	3.5	3.9	1.5	1.06.6	4.9	3.6	8.4	1.7	2.9	3.4	4.6	1.7	-2.03.8	1.9	1.4	12.7	1.9	2.3	10.6	11.1	8.6	-5.95.0	0.6	-0.5	7.3	4.3	5.6	6.7	7.9	2.2	4.64.6	4.4	2.9	11.5	0.2	1.6	6.8	8.4	6.6	0.92.8	1.1	0.1	7.8	1.7	2.8	6.6	7.7	4.8	n.a.
0* Est;mate8 based on data from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
*** Estimated by the Department of Finance.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1951 to 1970 (1961 = 100)
Years
Output*1)
Persons	Total Wages and
Employed*1) Man-Hours*1) Salaries*2)
Output Per Person Employed
Average
Output Per Earnings Per Man-Hour Person Employed
Average
Hourly
Earnings
Wages and Salaries Per Unit of Output
Corporation Profits Per Unit of Output*1)
1951	
62.4	98.7	103.5	54.0	63.3	60.3	54.7	52.1	86.5	127.61952	
65.5	100.0	104.4	60.5	65.5	62.7	60.5	57.9	92.3	111.31953	100.8	105.5	65.7	70.0	66.9	65.2	62.3	93.1	103.31954	
71.0	97.0	99.6	66.0	73.2	71.3	68.0	66.2	92.9	92.51955	
78.8	100.4	102.7	69.8	78.5	76.7	69.5	67.9	88.5	108.61956	
87.3	106.3	109.1	79.5	82.1	80.0	74.8	72.9	91.1	110.11957	
89.2	107.3	109.1	86.7	83.1	81.8	80.8	79.5	97.2	98.91958	
89.1	101.3	102.7	88.5	88.0	86.8	87.3	86.1	99.3	94.51959	
94.8	103.3	105.2	94.6	91.7	90.1	91.6	89.9	99.8	105.11960	
96.5	101.6	102.8	98.0	95.0	93.9	96.5	95.4	101.6	98.01961	
100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962	
107.8	102.8	104.1	106.9	104.8	103.6	104.0	102.7	99.1	92.81963	
113.7	104.7	105.8	114.4	108.6	107.5	109.3	108.1	100.6	88.01964	
125.0	109.8	110.8	124.3	114.4	112.8	113.2	112.2	99.5	80.01965	
135.7	115.3	117.0	138.3	117.7	115.9	119.9	118.2	101.9	73.71966	
144.9	120.5	121.7	153.5	120.2	119.0	127.4	126.2	106.0	69.01967	
148.7	120.1	120.3	166.7	123.8	123.6	138.8	138.6	112.1	67.21968	
157.4	119.2	118.8	177.2	132.1	132.5	148.7	149.2	112.6	63.51969	
163.7	122.5	119.8	195.7	133.6	136.7	159.7	163.3	119.5	61.11970	
166.3	121.0	117.9	212.9	137.4	141.1	175.9	180.6	128.0	n.a.
(Per cent change from previous year)
1952	1.3	0.9	12.1	3.5	4.0	10.6	11.1	6.8	-12.81953	
7.8	0.8	1.1	8.7	6.9	6.7	7.8	7.6	0.8	-7.21954	
0.6	-3.8	-5.6	0.3	4.6	6.6	4.3	6.3	-0.2	-10.41955	
11.0	3.5	3.1	5.8	7.2	7.6	2.2	2.6	-4.7	17.41956	
10.8	5.9	6.2	14.0	4.6	4.3	7.7	7.3	2.9	1.31957	
2.2	0.9	-	9.0	1.2	2.2	8.0	9.0	6.7	-10.21958	
-0.1	-5.6	-5.9	2.0	5.9	6.1	8.0	8.4	2.1	-4.41959	
6.4	2.0	2.4	6.9	4.2	3.8	4.8	4.4	0.5	11.21960	
1.8	-1.6	-2.3	3.7	3.6	4.2	5.4	6.1	1.8	-6.71961	
3.6	-1.6	-2.7	2.0	5.3	6.5	3.6	4.9	-1.6	2.01962	
7.8	2.8	4.1	6.9	4.8	3.6	4.0	2.7	-0.9	-7.21963	
5.5	1.8	1.6	7.0	3.6	3.8	5.1	5.3	1.5	-5.21964	
9.9	4.9	4.7	8.7	5.3	4.9	3.7	3.8	-1.1	-9.01965	
8.6	5.0	5.6	11.2	2.9	2.7	5.9	5.3	2.4	-7.91966	4.5	4.0	11.0	2.1	2.7	6.3	6.8	4.0	-6.31967	
2.6	-0.3	-1.2	8.6	3.0	3.9	9.0	9.9	5.8	-2.61968	
5.9	-0.7	-1.2	6.3	6.7	7.2	7.1	7.6	0.4	-5.51969	
4.0	2.8	0.8	10.4	1.1	3.2	7.4	9.5	6.2	-3.81970	
1.6	-1.2	-1.6	8.8	2.8	3.2	10.2	10.6	7.1	n.a.
(O Estimates based on data from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
**) Estimated by the Department of Finance.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 38 PRODUCTIVITY AND COSTS COMMERCIAL SERVICE-PRODUCING INDUSTRIES 1951 to 1970 (1961 = 100)											
Average	Wages and	CorporationPersons	Total	Wages and	Output Per	Output Per	Earnings Per	Salaries	ProfitsYears	Output*1)	Employed*1)	Man-Hours*1) Salaries**)	Person	Man-Hour	Person	Per Unit of	Per Unit ofEmployed	Employed	Output	Output**)1951....	75.1	79.0	54.2	87.5	82.5	72.2	68.1	82.5	84.51952....	... 69.4	78.0	82.4	59.8	89.0	84.3	76.7	72.6	86.2	88.31953....	79.9	83.2	65.0	90.6	87.0	81.3	78.1	89.7	80.71954....	81.0	84.1	65.3	90.5	87.1	80.7	77.7	89.1	69.31955....	83.4	86.0	69.0	95.2	92.3	83.5	81.0	87.7	85.91956....	... 85.6	88.6	91.5	77.8	96.6	93.6	87.8	85.1	90.9	95.31957...,	93.1	95.6	83.8	94.1	91.7	90.0	87.0	95.6	88.11958....	93.5	95.4	85.9	94.9	93.0	91.9	90.0	96.8	99.81959...,	... 94.1	96.4	98.0	91.6	97.6	90.0	95.0	93.5	97.4	105.11960...	97.7	98.7	94.9	98.5	97.6	97.1	96.2	98.5	102.21961...,	... 100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962...,	103.4	102.7	104.4	101.7	102.3	101.0	101.6	99.3	104.71963....	100.6	105.1	110.6	103.9	105.4	103.8	105.3	99.9	108.21964...,	111.5	109.3	119.7	105.8	107.8	107.3	109.5	101.5	123.81965....	117.7	114.5	132.3	100.9	109.9	112.4	115.5	105.1	127.6I960....	123.8	118.2	145.0	108.2	113.3	117.0	123.2	108.8	126.81907....	128.0	122.8	165.5	109.5	114.7	128.7	134.7	117.5	127.11998....	131.1	123.0	180.5	111.6	118.9	137.7	140.8	123.4	133.81969....	138.7	128.8	203.1	m.i	119.7	146.5	167.7	131.7	134.01970...,	142.9	130.7	221.6	112.2	122.7	155.1	169.0	138.2	n.a.(Per cent change from previous year)	1952.	3.9	3.5	10.4	1.7	2.2	6.3	6.6	4.5	4.01953 ...	2.4	1.0	8.5	1.8	3.2	0.0	7.5	4.0	-8.7195Y	1.4	1.1	0.6	-0.1	0.1	-0.8	-0.5	-0.7	-14.1ms...,	3.0	2.3	6.6	5.2	6.0	3.5	4.2	-1.6	23.91956...,	6.2	6.4	11.8	1.5	1.4	5.2	5.0	3.7	11.01957...,	5.1	4.5	7.6	-2.6	-2.0	2.4	3.0	6.2	-7.61958...,	0.4	-0.2	2.5	0.9	1.4	2.1	2.7	1.3	13.21959...	3.1	2.7	6.7	2.8	3.2	3.5	3.8	0.5	5.31960...	1.3	0.7	3.0	0.9	1.7	2.2	2.9	1.2	-2.81961...	2.4	1.3	5.4	1.5	2.5	2.9	4.0	1.5	-2.11902...	3.4	2.7	4.4	1.7	2.3	1.0	1.0	-0.7	4.71963...,	3.1	2.3	6.0	2.2	3.0	2.8	3.6	0.6	3.31964...	4.6	4.0	8.2	1.8	2.3	3.4	4.0	1.6	14.51965...	6.6	4.8	10.5	1.0	1.9	4.7	5.5	3.5	3.01966...	6.2	3.2	10.1	1.2	3.1	4.7	6.7	3.5	-0.61967...	3.9	3.9	13.6	1.2	1.2	9.4	9.4	8.1	0.21968...	1.9	0.2	9.1	1.9	3.7	7.0	8.9	5.0	5.31969...	6.8	4.7	12.5	-0.4	0.7	6.4	7.5	6.8	0.11970...	.... 4.0	3.0	1.5	9.1	1.0	2.5	5.9	7.5	4.9	n.a.
0) Estimates based on data from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
**) Estimated by the Department of Finance.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1951 to 1970
(1961 = 100)
Years	Output*1)	Persons Employed*1)	Total Manhours*1)	Wages and Salaries**)	Output Per Person Employed	Output Per Man-Hour	Average Earnings Per Person Employed	Average Hourly Earnings	Wages and Salariee Per Unit of Output	Corporation Profits Per Unit of Output**)1951...	98.2	101.2	59.7	70.2	68.1	60.8	59.0	86.7	120.51952...	... 71.5	100.5	102.6	66.8	71.1	69.7	66.5	65.2	93.5	108.51953...	103.0	106.2	73.0	74.0	72.1	70.5	68.7	95.3	101.81954...	99.0	99.7	72.2	75.7	75.2	72.9	72.4	96.3	90.31955...	101.4	102.6	76.9	81.1	80.1	75.9	75.0	93.0	107.21950...,	... 89.9	105.6	107.6	85.3	85.1	83.5	80.8	79.3	94.9	107.81957...,	... 89.7	106.1	106.8	90.4	84.5	84.0	85.2	84.6	100.7	97.51958...,	100.6	101.3	90.2	87.4	86.9	89.7	89.0	102.5	96.51959...,	101.8	103.1	95.6	92.8	91.6	93.9	92.7	101.1	108.6I960...,	... 96.1	100.8	101.3	98.7	95.3	94.8	97.9	97.4	102.7	99.61961...,	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	loo.o	100.0	100.01962...	102.7	103.8	107.2	100.1	105.0	104.4	103.3	98.3	108.41963...,	105.2	106.7	114.5	110.4	108.9	108.8	107.3	98.5	114.11904...	110.0	112.0	125.1	115.8	113.7	113.8	111.7	98.2	117.01965...,	115.7	117.7	138.6	119.9	117.9	119.8	117.7	99.8	117.0I960...,	121.2	122.4	154.5	122.7	121.5	127.5	126.2	103.9	110.91967....	121.7	122.1	165.3	125.2	124.8	135.8	136.4	108.5	93.21968...,	120.7	121.1	176.6	133.4	133.1	146.3	145.8	109.6	96.81969...,	124.1	122.2	195.5	135.6	137.8	157.6	160.0	116.1	97.71970....	... 167.3	122.4	119.8	206.4	136.7	139.6	108.6	172.2	123.3	n.a.(Per cent change from previous year)	1952...,	2.3	1.4	11.9	1.3	2.3	9.3	10.4	7.8	-9.91953....	... 7.1	3.1	3.5	9.2	4.1	3.4	5.9	5.5	1.9	-6.21954....	-4.4	-6.1	-1.1	2.3	4.3	3.4	5.3	1.1	-11.41955...	... 9.7	2.4	2.9	6.0	7.1	6.5	4.1	3.6	-2.8	18.81956...,	4.1	4.9	10.9	4.9	4.2	6.5	5.7	1.4	0.01957...,	0.5	-0.7	5.9	-0.7	0.6	5.4	0.7	0.2	-9.51958....	-5.2	-5.1	-0.2	3.4	3.5	5.3	5.3	1.8	-1.11959...,	1.2	1.8	5.9	6.2	5.4	4.7	4.1	-1.3	12.5I960....	... 1.7	-1.0	-1.7	3.2	2.7	3.5	4.3	5.1	1.5	-8.31961....	... 4.1	-0.8	-1.3	1.4	4.9	5.5	2.2	2.7	-2.6	0.41982....	... 9.0	2.7	3.8	7.2	6.1	5.0	4.4	3.3	-1.7	8.41963....	... 6.6	2.4	2.8	6.8	4.1	3.7	4.3	3.9	0.2	5.21964....	... 9.6	4.6	5.0	9.3	4.9	4.4	4.5	4.1	-0.3	3.11965....	... 8.9	5.2	5.1	10.7	3.5	3.7	5.3	5.4	1.7	_1966....	... 7.1	4.8	4.0	11.5	2.3	3.1	6.4	7.2	1967....	0.4	-0.2	7.0	2.0	2.7	6.6	7.2	4.4	-10.01968....	-0.8	-0.8	0.8	0.5	6.7	7.7	7.7	1.0	3.91969....	2.8	0.9	10.7	1.0	3.5	7.7	9.7	5.9	1.01970....	... -0.7	-1.4	-2.0	5.6	0.8	1.3	7.0	7.7	0.2	n.a.
(1) Estimates baaed on data from the Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
(*) Estimated by the Department of Finance.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971 (1961 = 100)
Years and Quarters	Personal Expenditure on Consumer Goods and Services	Government Current Expenditure -on Goods and Services	Gross Fixed Capital Formation			Value of Physical Change in Inventories	Exports of Goods and Services	Imports of Goods and Services	Residual Error of Estimate	Gross National Expenditure
			Total	Government Business						
1947	.... 66.0	47.7	61.9	68.8	60.4	105.2	73.0	69.9	67.9	63.11948	.... 74.8	54.2	70.1	77.2	68.5	190.2	78.2	78.2	74.1	70.81949	.... 77.3	57.7	73.5	80.3	71.8	113.0	82.1	80.8	78.3	73.71950	.... 79.7	59.9	76.8	83.8	75.1	98.9	85.8	86.5	78.8	75.41951	.... 88.0	67.3	87.7	99.2	85.2	117.1	95.4	95.5	89.2	84.21952	.... 89.7	70.6	90.4	101.6	88.0	109.2	94.3	88.8	92.2	87.81953	.... 89.6	72.5	90.6	95.6	89.1	113.9	92.1	88.7	92.8	87.81954	.... 90.5	75.4	90.3	95.7	88.8	108.5	91.3	88.9	93.0	89.21955	.... 90.6	78.0	92.9	102.9	90.6	81.1	95.0	90.4	94.3	90.01956	.... 91.9	83.0	97.9	114.1	94.7	127.2	97.6	93.4	97.9	92.91957	.... 94.7	87.3	99.2	107.6	97.1	120.6	97.1	95.8	100.0	94.81958	.... 97.2	89.9	98.6	102.2	97.4	143.0	96.7	97.1	101.4	96.11959	.... 98.4	92.9	99.3	102.4	98.3	137.5	98.2	96.5	102.8	98.21960	.... 99.4	96.6	100.6	103.4	99.7	118.9	98.8	97.4	100.0	99.41961	.... 100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962	.... 101.4	102.6	101.5	101.8	101.4	106.4	103.2	104.4	101.2	101.41963	.... 103.0	106.3	104.1	105.9	103.7	102.8	104.5	106.2	103.5	103.31964	.... 104.3	110.1	107.1	108.6	106.7	119.3	106.9	107.4	105.7	105.81965	116.6	112.3	115.9	111.5	107.0	108.5	107.6	109.3	109.51966	.... 110.0	124.3	117.8	122.3	116.8	107.3	111.7	109.4	114.1	114.51967	.... 113.7	132.9	118.9	121.9	118.2	130.8	113.7	111.6	115.2	118.41968	142.4	120.0	121.8	119.5	121.3	115.2	113.9	122.7	122.51969	.... 122.9	155.2	125.2	126.3	125.0	114.6	117.8	117.0	128.2	128.31970	163.6	129.0	130.1	128.7	290.5	121.7	119.5	131.4	133.6(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	.... 121.1	147.6	123.6	126.6	123.0	114.8	116.6	114.9	126.2	126.0II	.... 122.6	154.4	124.6	123.4	124.9	154.7	118.0	116.3	128.1	128.6Ill	.... 123.7	158.0	125.9	126.8	125.7	105.0	118.0	118.0	129.3	128.9IV	.... 124.4	160.5	126.7	128.3	126.4	102.1	118.7	118.9	129.6	129.91970 I	158.0	128.1	129.8	127.7	327.3	121.3	119.7	131.6	132.4II	162.8	128.3	129.2	128.2	146.6	121.8	120.3	133.0	133.3Ill	165.8	128.9	130.2	128.6	234.8	121.9	119.3	132.9	134.3IV	167.4	130.5	131.1	130.4	161.4	122.0	118.6	140.5	134.51971 I	169.5	132.5	134.1	132.2	271.4	122.2	119.0	136 4	136.0
(OThese implicit price indexes are currently weighted price indexes. They reflect not only pure price change, but also changing expenditure patterns within and between major groups. The implicit price index for gross national expenditure is derived by dividing the total of current dollars by the total of constant dollars.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
[Stage Direction]

June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
(1961 = 100)
Years and Quarters	Personal Expenditure	Government Current Expenditure on Goods and Services	Gross Fixed Capital Formation	Value of Physical	Exports of Goods	Imports of Goods and Services	Residual	GrossOil Couaumer Goods an Services	Total	Government	Business	Change in Inventories	and Services	Estimate	Expenditure1947	7.4	10.5	(Per cent change from previous period) 9.7 10.6 -23.9 12.3	12.0	12.6	8.81948	13.6	13.2	12.2	13.4	80.8	7.1	11.9	9.1	12.21949	6.5	4.9	4.0	4.8	-40.6	5.0	3.3	5.7	4.11950	3.8	4.5	4.4	4.6	-12.5	4.5	7.1	0.6	2.31951	12.4	14 .2	18.4	13.4	18.4	11.2	10.4	13.2	11.71952	4.9	3.1	2.4	3.3	-6.7	-1.2	-7.0	3.4	4.31953	2.7	0.2	-5.9	1.2	4.3	-2.3	-0.1	0.7	-1954	4.0	-0.3	0.1	-0.3	-4.7	-0.9	0.2	0.2	1.61955	.... 0.1	3.4	2.9	7.5	2.0	-25.3	4.1	1.7	1.4	0.71956	.... 1.4	6.4	5.4	10.9	4.5	56.8	2.7	3.3	3.8	3.51957	5.2	1.3	-5.7	2.5	-5.2	-0.5	2.6	2.1	2.01958	3.0	-0.6	-5.0	0.3	18.6	-0.4	1.4	1.4	1.41959	3.3	0.7	0.2	0.9	-3.8	1.6	-0.6	1.4	2.21960	.... 1.0	4.0	1.3	1.0	1.4	-13.5	0.6	0.9	-2.7	1.21961	3.5	-0.6	-3.3	0.3	-15.9	1.2	2.7	-	0.61962	2.6	1.5	1.8	1.4	6.4	3.2	4.4	1.2	1.41963	3.6	2.6	4.0	2.3	-3.4	1.3	1.7	2.3	1.91964	3.6	2.9	2.5	2.9	16.1	2.3	1.1	2.1	2.41965	.... 2.1	5.9	4.9	6.7	4.5	-10.3	1.5	0.2	3.4	3.51966	6.6	4.9	5.5	4.8	0.3	2.9	1.7	4.4	4.61967	6.9	0.9	-0.3	1.2	21.9	1.8	2.0	1.0	3.41968	7.1	0.9	-0.1	1.1	-7.3	1.3	2.1	6.5	3.51969	9.0	4.3	3.7	4.6	-5.5	2.3	2.7	4.5	4.71970	.... 3.4	6.4	3.0	3.0	3.0	153.5	3.3	2.1	2.5	4.11969 I	-0.5	2.1	3.9	(Seasonally adjusted) 1.7 14.2	1.2	0.2	1.7	2.9II	4.6	0.8	-2.5	1.5	34.8	1.2	1.2	1.5	2.1Ill	2.3	1.0	2.8	0.6	-32.1	-	1.5	0.9	0.2IV	1.6	0.6	1.2	0.6	-2.8	0.6	0.8	0.2	0.81970 I	-1.6	1.1	1.2	1.0	220.6	2.2	0.7	1.5	1.9II	3.0	0.2	-0.5	0.4	-55.2	0.4	0.5	1.1	0.7Ill	1.8	0.5	0.8	0.3	60.2	0.1	-0.8	-0.1	0.8IV	1.0	1.2	0.7	1.4	-31.3	0.1	-0.6	5.7	0.11971 I	.... 0.8	1.3	1.5	2.3	1.4	68.2	0.2	0.3	-2.9	i.i
(DSee footnote (1) on reference table 40.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounte.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
CONSUMER PRICE INDEXES: STANDARD CLASSIFICATIONS
1947 to 1971 (1961 = 100)
Years and Months	All Items	Food	Housing	Clothing	Transportation	Health and Personal Care	Recreation and Reading	Tobacco and AlcoholWeights	.. (100.0)	(26.7)	(32.2)	(11.-3)	(12.0)	(6.6)	(4.7)	(6.5)1947	64.1	n.a.	70.1	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.1948	78.6	n.a.	85.0	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.1949	80.6	75.1	88.9	71.1	64.4	68.4	86.01950	82.7	78.2	88.6	75.0	65.6	69.8	88.31951	94.4	85.4	97.6	80.4	71.5	75.1	95.91952	94.2	88.6	99.4	83.5	75.9	79 .2	97.41953	.. 89.4	90.8	90.1	97 .9	84.8	77.3	79.9	92.91954	.. 89.9	90.5	91.3	97.2	85.3	80.2	81.8	92.31955	.. 90.1	90.4	91.9	96.0	84.3	81.6	83 .9	92.31956	.. 91.4	91.5	93.2	96.5	87 .7	83.7	85.8	92.61957	.. 94 .3	95.6	95.1	96.4	92.4	89.0	88.8	94.11958	.. 96 .8	98.5	96.8	97 .5	95.2	93.6	94.7	95.11959	.. 97 .9	97.7	98.6	97.7	98.4	96.7	97.0	98.01960	.. 99.1	98.5	99.0	98.6	99.8	99.5	98.8	99.6196KD	.. 100.0	100 .ow	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01962	.. 101.2	101.8	101.2	100.9	99.9	102.0	100.8	101.31963	.. 103.0	105.1	102.3	103.4	99.9	104.6	102.2	101.51964	.. 104.8	106.8	103.9	106.0	101.0	108.0	103.9	103.41965	.. 107.4	109.6	105.8	107.9	104.8	113.0	105.6	105.11966	.. 111.4	116.6	108.7	112.0	107.3	116.5	108.6	107.61967	.. 115.4	118.1	113.4	117.6	111.8	122.5	114.1	110.41968	.. 120.1	122.0	118.6	121.1	114.7	127.4	119.7	120.41969	.. 125.5	127.1	124.7	124.5	120.0	133.6	126.8	125.01970	.. 129.7	130.0	130.9	126.8	124.8	139.5	131.2	126.5(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	.. 128.2	130.1	128.1	125.5	122.7	136.8	128.0	126.5F	.. 128.7	131.3	128.3	125.1	123.5	137.7	129.0	126 .5M	.. 128 .9	130.5	129.2	126.0	124.0	137.7	129.5	126.5A	.. 129.7	131.5	129.8	126.8	124.6	139.3	129.6	126.5M	.. 129.6	130.3	130.4	126.8	124.8	139.8	130.1	126.5J	.. 129.9	130.9	130.7	126.9	125.1	139.8	130.3	126.5J	.. 130.5	131.6	131.5	126.9	125.2	139.8	132.4	126.5A	.. 130.5	131.9	131.5	126.2	125.3	140.2	132.5	126.4s	.. 130.2	130.0	131.8	127 .0	125.3	140.1	133.0	126.40	.. 130.3	128.5	132.8	128.2	125.2	141.2	133.1	126.4N	.. 130.3	127.5	133.3	128.4	125.8	140.8	133.7	126.4D	.. 129.8	125.6	133.4	127.9	126.1	140.7	133.6	126.41971 J	.. 130.3	126.5	134.1	127.0	126.4	140.7	134.2	127.0F	.. 130.9	127.5	134.5	125.9	128.3	140.7	134.8	127.6M	.. 131.3	128.2	134.8	126.8	128.8	141.0	135.0	127.6
<*>1957 weight* replace 1947-48 weights beginning January 1961.
<*>The system of variable weights for seasonal foods was revised beginning January 1961.
Soubcts: DBS Prices and Price indexes, Monthly, Cat. 62-002.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 43 CHANGES IN THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEXES: STANDARD CLASSIFICATIONS 1947 to 1971 (1961=100)								
	Yea.ra All Months Items	Food	Housing	Clothing	Transportation	Health and Personal Care	Recreation and Reading	Tobacco and Alcohol
			(Per cent change from same period a year ago)					
1947	13.6	n.a.	14.0	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.1948	
14.5	22.6	n.a.	21.3	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.1949	2.5	n.a.	4.6	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.1950	
2.8	2.6	4.1	-0.3	5.5	1.9	2.0	2.71951	
10.6	14.1	9.2	10.2	7.2	9.0	7.6	8.61952	
2.5	-0.2	3.7	1.8	3.9	6.2	5.5	1.61953	-3.6	1.7	-1.5	1.6	1.8	0.9	-4.61954	
0.6	-0.3	1.3	-0.7	0.6	3.8	2.4	-0.61955	-0.1	0.7	-1.2	-1.2	1.7	2.6	-1956	
1.4	1.2	1.4	0.5	4.0	2.6	2.3	0.31957	
3.2	4.5	2.0	-0.1	5.4	6.3	3.5	1.61958	
2.7	3.0	1.8	1.1	3.0	6.2	6.6	1.11959	
1.1	-0.8	1.9	0.2	3.4	3.3	2.4	3.01960	
1.2	0.8	1.0	0.9	1.4	2.9	1.9	1.61961 (1>	
0.9	1.5«>	0.4	1.4	0.2	0.5	1.2	0.41962	
1.2	1.8	1.2	0.9	-0.1	2.0	0.8	1.31963	
1.8	3.2	1.1	2.5	-	2.5	1.4	0.21964	
1.7	1.6	1.6	2.5	1.1	3.3	1.7	1.91965	2.6	1.8	1.8	3.8	4.6	1.6	1.61966	
3.7	6.4	2.7	3.8	2.4	3.1	2.8	2.41967	1.3	4.3	5.0	4.2	5.2	5.1	2.61968	
4.1	3.3	4.6	3.1	2.6	4.0	4.9	9.11969	
4.5	4.2	5.1	2.8	4.6	4.9	5.9	3.71970	
3.3	2.3	5.0	1.8	4.0	4.4	3.5	1.2(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	4.0	5.1	3.3	5.5	5.6	3.1	4.3F	6.0	4.9	2.7	5.3	6.2	3.4	3.8M....	5.4	5.2	1.8	4.8	6.3	3.5	3.8A....	5.2	4.9	2.0	3.9	4.2	3.3	0.8M....	4.2	5.0	2.4	3.7	4.2	2.1	0.6J	2.4	4.8	1.6	3.7	4.2	2.3	0.6J	2.2	5.0	1.7	3.7	4.2	3.9	0.2A....	1.0	4.9	1.0	4.0	4.5	3.8	-s	1.2	4.9	1.4	3.6	3.8	3.9	-0....	
2.8	0.5	5.1	1.7	3.5	3.7	3.9	-N....	-1.0	5.0	1.7	3.3	3.2	4.0	0.1D....	-3.2	4.5	1.2	3.4	2.9	4.3	-0.11971 J	-2.8	4.7	1.2	3.0	2.9	4.8	0.4F	-1.8	4.8	0.6	3.9	2.2	4.5	0.9M....	
1.9	-2.8	4.3	0.6	3.9	2.4	4.2	0.9
d>, (*>
See footnotes (1) and (2) on reference table 42.
Source: DBS Prices and Price Indexes.

7024___________ ________ COMMONS DEBATES___________________June 18, 1971
		REFERENCE TABLE 44		
	CONSUMER PRICE INDEXES: SUPPLEMENTARY CLASSIFICATIONS			
		1949 to 1971 (1961 = 100)		
Years and Months	Total Consumer Price Index	Total „ T°t8L C°m"°?itie8 Non-Durables Commodities Excluding Food	Non-Durables . Excluding Durables 0 °.a Food Services	Services Excluding Shelter(Weights)	
(100.0)	(70.2)	(43.6)	(57.9)	(31.2)	(12.3)	(22.3)	(12.7)1949	83.3	84.9	82.9	84.5	86.1	64.4	61.51950	85.0	86.2	84.5	85.9	87.6	68.0	63.91951	
88.0	95.0	94.9	94.3	93.5	99.7	72.5	68.61952	
90.2	95.8	96.8	94.9	95.4	101.8	77.2	73.41953	93.7	95.8	92.6	94.3	100.9	79.9	75.71954..\v	93.4	95.4	92.4	94.1	100.1	82.7	78.41955	92.8	94.4	92.0	93.5	97.5	84.6	80.11958	93.5	94.8	92.8	94.2	97.2	87.3	83.41957	90.2	96.4	95.6	95.5	99.7	90.8	88.01958	
96.8	98.4	98.0	97.9	97.2	101.2	94.0	91.91959	
97.9	98.7	99.3	98.1	98.0	102.1	96.6	95.31960	
99.1	99.5	99.9	99.0	99.4	101.8	98.7	98.1196K1)	
100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.01902	100.9	100.2	101.2	100.7	99.3	101.4	102.11963	102.6	101.0	103.3	101.7	99.5	102.8	104.11964	
104.8	103.9	102.1	104.9	103.4	98.6	105.4	107.91965	
107.4	105.6	103.2	107.0	104.9	98.7	109.8	114.61966	
111.4	109.5	105.3	111.7	107.7	99.1	113.6	119.61967	
115.4	112.4	109.2	114.6	111.9	102.1	119.7	127.01968	116.4	113.2	119.0	116.9	103.9	125.0	132.61969	120.3	116.2	123.6	120.5	104.9	132.3	141.81970	122.9	118.6	126.4	123.4	106.2	138.7	148.9(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	122.0	117.4	125.4	121.7	106.1	135.5	145.3F	122.7	117.5	120.1	121.9	106.1	136.4	146.5M	
128.9	122.7	117.9	126.2	122.5	106.0	137.1	147.3A	
129.7	123.4	118.4	126.9	123.0	106.2	137.8	148.3M	123.0	118.6	126.5	123.2	106.4	138.5	148.9J	
129.9	123.8	118.7	127.5	123.4	106.3	138.9	149.3J	
130.5	124.0	119.0	127.9	123.8	100.2	139.2	149.6A	123.5	118.7	127.2	123.6	106.1	139.5	149.8s	122.8	118.9	126.4	123.9	105.9	139.7	150.10	
130.3	122.7	119.3	126.1	124.4	106.0	140.2	150.4N	
130.3	122.4	119.6	125.7	124.6	106.7	140.4	150.5D	
129.8	121.5	119.4	124.6	124.3	106.7	140.7	150.91971 J	121.9	119.4	125.1	124.3	106.7	141.2	151.7F	122.6	119.6	125.7	124.2	107.5	142.0	152.5M	123.3	120.0	126.5	124.7	107.7	142.4	153.1
<*>See footnote H) on reference table 42.
Source: DBS Prices and Price Indexes.
[Stage Direction]
WKBtRBH
June 18, 1971_ COMMONS DEBATES	7025
REFERENCE TABLE 45 CHANGES IN THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEXES: SUPPLEMENTARY CLASSIFICATIONS 1950 to 1971									
	Years and Months	Total Consumer Price Index	Total Commodities	Total Commodities Excluding Food	Non-Durables	Non-Durables Excluding Food	Durables	Total Services	Services Excluding Shelter
				(Per cent change from same period a year ago)					
1950	
2.8	2.0	1.5	1.9	1.7	1.7	5.6	3.91951	
10.6	11.8	10.1	11.6	8.8	13.8	6.6	7.41952	
2.5	0.8	2.0	0.6	2.0	2.1	6.5	7.01953	
-0.9	-2.2	-1.0	-2.4	-1.2	-0.9	3.5	3.11954	
0.6	-0.3	-0.4	-0.2	-0.2	-0.8	3.5	3.61955	
0.2	-1.6	-1.0	-0.4	-0.6	-2.6	2.3	2.21956	0.8	0.8	0.9	0.7	-0.3	3.2	4.11957	
3.2	2.9	1.7	3.0	1.4	2.6	4.0	5.51958	
2.7	2.3	1.7	2.4	1.8	1.5	3.5	4.41959	
1.1	0.3	1.3	0.2	1.4	0.9	2.8	3.71960	
1.2	0.8	0.6	0.9	0.8	-0.3	2.2	2.91961!*	
0.9	0.5	0.1	1.0	0.6	-1.8	1.3	1.91962	
1.2	0.9	0.2	1.2	0.7	-0.7	1.4	2.11963	
1.8	1.7	0.8	2.1	1.0	0.2	1.4	2.01964	
1.7	1.3	1.1	1.5	1.7	-0.9	2.5	3.71965 	
2.5	1.6	1.1	2.0	1.5	0.1	4.2	6.21966 	
3.7	3.7	2.0	4.4	2.7	0.4	3.5	4.41967 	
3.6	2.6	3.7	2.6	3.9	3.0	5.4	6.21668 	
4.1	3.6	3.7	3.8	4.5	1.8	4.4	4.41969 	
4.5	3.4	2.7	3.9	3.1	1.0	5.8	6.91970	
3.3	2.2	2.1	2.3	2.4	1.2	4.8	5.0(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 1	
4.6	3.3	2.7	3.6	3.0	1.7	6.0	7.1F	
5.0	3.9	2.4	4.3	2.8	1.7	6.1	7.2M....	
4.6	3.6	2.3	4.0	2.7	1.3	6.0	6.8A....	
4.1	3.4	2.1	3.7	2.2	1.0	4.9	5.0M....	
3.8	2.7	2.2	2.9	2.3	1.3	4.8	4.6J	
3.2	2.0	2.0	2.1	2.2	1.2	4.4	4.3J	
3.2	2.1	2.2	2.2	2.5	1.3	4.3	4.3A	
2.8	1.6	2.0	1.5	2.1	1.5	4.4	4.4s	
2.8	1.5	1.9	1.5	2.1	1.3	4.2	4.2O....	
2.8	1.5	2.1	1.4	2.3	1.3	4.2	4.2N....	
2.3	0.7	1.9	0.7	2.4	0.5	4.4	4.3D....	
1.5	-0.5	1.4	-0.7	1.9	0.4	4.2	4.41971 J	
0.4	-0.1	1.7	0.2	2.1	0.6	4.2	4.4F	
1.7	-0.1	1.8	-0.3	1.9	1.3	4.1	4.1M....	
1.9	0.5	1.8	0.2	1.8	1.6	3.9	3.9
U>See footnote 0) on reference table 42. Sourcs: DBS Prices and Price Indexes.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1963 to 1970
-	1963	1964	1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970
				(Percentage points)				
All items	1.8	2.4	3.7	3.5	4.1	4.5	3.3Food	
0.9	0.4	0.7	1.6	0.4	0.9	1.1	0.6Housing	0.5	0.6	0.9	1.4	1.5	1.6	1.6Clothing	0.3	0.2	0.4	0.5	0.3	0.3	0.2Transportation	0.2	0.4	0.3	0.5	0.3	0.5	0.4Health and personal care	0.2	0.3	0.3	0.4	0.3	0.4	0.3Recreation and reading	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.2	0.2	0.3	0.1Tobacco and alcohol	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.6	0.3	0.1All items	1.8	2.4	3.7	3.5	4.1	4.5	3.3All commodities	0.9	1.0	2.4	1.6	2.4	2.3	1.5Durables	-	-0.1	-	-	0.3	0.2	0.1	0.2Non-durables	1.0	1.0	2.4	1.3	2.2	2.2	1.3Non-durables excluding food	
0.3	0.5	0.4	0.8	1.0	1.4	0.9	0.8Services	
0.3	0.7	1.1	1.0	1.4	1.0	1.4	1.1Portion of shelter excluded*l>	0.2	0.3	0.3	0.5	0.7	0.8	0.7
(^Includes new houses, property taxes and mortgage interest. Source: DBS Prices and Price Indexes.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years and Months	Prices of Com- modities and Services Used by Farmers	Farm Prices * of Agricultural Prod-ucts*1)	Wholesale Price Indexes	Building Materials	Merchan- dise Export Prices	Merchan- dise Import Prices	Terms of Trade*3*Raw and Partly Manufactured Goods*2*	Fully and Chiefly Manufactured Goods*2*	Tmlm*	trial Materials	Resi- dential	Non- Resi- dential	(1935-39	(1961	= 100}	II o o	(1035-39=100)	(1961	= 100)	CO 00 II 1	1947	
157.5	83.6	164.3	162.4	187.0	61.7	64.5	91.6	88.0	104.11948	
183.7	99.1	196.3	192.4	222.7	74.4	73.2	100.0	100.0	100.01949	
191.7	98.9	197.1	199.2	218.0	77.9	76.3	103.3	102.6	100.71950	101.0	212.8	211.0	244.6	83.0	80.1	108.3	110.3	98.21951	115.0	237.9	242.4	296.1	97.8	90.5	123.9	126.2	98.21952	106.3	218.7	230.7	252.6	97.4	93.9	121.8	110.4	110.31953	
225 3	97.0	207.0	228.8	232.3	96.6	94.8	118.3	109.4	108.11954	
224.2	91.7	204.8	224.2	223.7	94.9	92.9	115.1	109.5	105.11955	
224.5	90.1	209.7	224.5	236.0	96.9	94.2	117.7	110.5	106.51956	
230.3	90.9	215.8	231.5	248.2	100.1	97.7	121.3	113.0	107.31957	
238.7	91.2	209.4	237.9	240.3	100.1	99.2	121.3	116.4	104.21958	
242.7	95.2	209.3	238.3	229.8	99.2	99.0	120.6	116.5	103.51959	
249.7	95.2	210.9	241.6	240.2	101.3	100.5	122.8	114.4	107.31960	
254.7	96.1	209.6	242.2	240.4	100.7	101.0	123.0	115.5	106.51961	
259.0	100.0	212.6	244.5	243.2	100.0	100.0	124.0	119.1	104.11962	104.3	223.8	249.0	248.0	100.7	99.1	128.1	124.5	102.91963	
273.8	102.9	226.9	254.2	253.5	104.1	101.8	128.9	129.4	99.61964	
281.6	101.3	225.7	256.4	258.3	109.5	106.6	130.7	130.8	99.91965	107.8	231.2	261.3	258.7	115.8	111.5	132.4	130.8	101.21966	
305.2	117.0	242.7	268.6	261.4	120.5	115.4	137.9	132.5	104.11967	
322.6	116.0	246.1	274.2	253.1	125.3	117.8	97.7	97.7	100.01968	
338.9	114.0	249.1	281.6	254.0	132.1	120.7	100.0	100.0	100.01969	
354.0	115.8	260.0	294.9	267.7	139.2	126.1	102.5	102.3	100.21970	113.3	265.0	298.4	268.9	137.6	129.5	105.3	104.5	100.8(Not seasonally adjusted)	1970 J	
355.8	115.4	268.9	298.1	271.9	137.4	129.4	104.7	104.6	100.1F	116.7	271.6	298.5	270.8	137.7	128.7	105.7	104.2	101.4M	116.6	273.0	299.3	272.7	137.0	129.4	106.0	106.1	99.9A	
363.1	115.8	271.0	298.2	271.6	136.7	129.4	106.4	105.6	100.8M	115.3	269.4	298.9	272.3	137.0	129.6	106.5	106.4	100.1J	114.5	265.3	299.2	270.2	137.4	129.6	106.0	104.7	101.2J	113.3	264.2	298.2	268.7	137.4	129.6	105.5	104.3	101.2A	
363.1	111.6	261.6	296.7	267.3	138.0	129.7	104.9	103.5	101.4S	110.4	260.9	297.6	265.8	138.1	129.7	104.0	102.8	101.2o	108.9	259.2	298.9	265.1	138.1	129.7	104.6	103.3	101.3N	110.3	258.3	298.3	265.5	138.3	129.6	104.5	103.6	100.9D	110.9	256.9	299.2	264.4	138.4	130.1	104.5	104.1	100.41971 I	-	109.4	258.0	300.6	264.2	139.0	130.5	104.1	104.9	99.2F	111.4	258.0	302.3	266.0	140.0	131.0	103.8	105.1	98.7M	110.5	257.1	303.3	266.4	141.2	132.0	103.6	105.0	98.7
(^Exclusive of Newfoundland. Western grain prices used in the construction of the index prior to August 1,1967 are final prices. From August 1, 1968 to date, the western grain prices used in the index are initial prices only for wheat, oats and barley. For the period August 1, 1967 to July 31, 1968, the western grain prices used in the construction of the index are final prices for oats and barley and initial prices for wheat.
*2>These two series comprise the general wholesale price index.
(*>The index of the ratio of merchandise export prices to merchandise import prices.
*4>1967 to 1971 indexes are based on 1968=100. Figures prior to 1967 on a 1968 base are not available.
Soubce: DBS Prices and Price Indexes.
DBS Trade of Canada Exports, Monthly, Cat. 65-004.
DBS Trade of Canada Imports, Monthly, Cat. 65-007.
DBS Price Index Numbers of Commodities and Services Used by Farmers, Monthly, Cat. 62-004.
DBS Index Numbers of Farm Prices of Agricultural Products, Monthly, Cat. 62-003.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 48 CHANGES IN OTHER PRICE INDEXES 1947 to 1971
Prices of	Farm	Wholesale Price Indexes	[DOT] Thirty Industrial Materials	Building	Years and Months	modities and Services Used by Farmers	Pi ices of Agricultural Products(1)	Raw and Partly Manufactured Goods <2>	Fully and Chiefly Manufactured Cnndfld)	Materials NonResidential Residential	dise Export Prices(4>	dise Import Prices(4)	Terms of Traded [DOT]<*>1947....	5.7	17.3	(Per cent change from same period a 17.7 25.8 16.7	year ago) 12.7	14.6	15.0	-0.31948....	... 16.6	18.5	19.5	18.5	19.1	20.6	13.5	9.2	13.6	-3.91949....	-0.2	0.4	3.5	-2.1	4.7	4.2	3.3	2.6	0.71950....	2.1	8.0	5.9	12.2	6.5	5.0	4.8	7.5	-2.51951....	13.9	11.8	14.9	21.1	17.8	13.0	14.4	14.4	-1952....	... 5.7	-7.6	-8.1	-4.8	-14.7	-0.4	3.8	-1.7	-12.5	13.11953....	... -2.0	-8.7	-5.3	-0.8	-8.0	-0.8	1.0	-2.9	-0.9	-2.01954....	-5.5	-1.1	-2.0	-3.7	-1.8	-2.0	-2.7	0.1	-2.81955....	... 0.1	-1.7	2.4	0.1	5.5	2.1	1.4	2.3	0.9	1.31956....	... 2.6	0.9	2.9	3.1	5.2	3.3	3.7	3.1	2.3	0.81957....	... 3.6	0.3	-3.0	2.8	-3.2	-	1.5	-	3.0	-2.91958....	... 1.7	4.4	-	0.2	-4.4	-0.9	-0.2	-0.6	0.1	-0.71959....	... 2.9	-	0.8	1.4	4.5	2.1	1.5	1.8	-1.8	3.7I960....	. 2.0	0.9	-0.6	0.2	0.1	-0.6	0.5	0.2	1.0	-0.71961....	... 1.7	4.1	1.4	0.9	1.2	-0.7	-1.0	0.8	3.1	-2.31962....	4.3	5.3	1.8	2.0	0.7	-0.9	3.3	4.5	-1.21963....	... 3.0	-1.3	1.4	2.1	2.2	3.4	2.7	0.6	3.9	-3.21964....	... 2.8	-1.6	-0.5	0.9	1.9	5.2	4.7	1.4	1.1	0.31965....	... 2.7	6.4	2.4	1.9	0.2	5.8	4.6	1.3	-	1.31966....	8.5	5.0	2.8	1.0	4.1	3.5	4.2	1.3	2.91967....	-0.9	1.4	2.1	-3.2	4.0	2.1	2.0	0.8	1.21968....	-1.7	1.2	2.7	0.4	5.4	2.5	2.4	2.4	-1969....	1.6	-7.7	4.7	5.4	5.4	4.5	2.5	2.3	0.21970....	-2.2	1.9	1.2	0.4	-1.1	2.7	2.7	2.2	0.61970 J..	2.3	5.2	2.6	(Not seasonally adjusted) 3.7 0.6	5.1	3.8	3.5	0.3F.	3.2	6.2	2.2	2.8	-1.6	3.9	4.3	2.7	1.6M.	3.4	7.1	1.5	3.3	-3.6	3.1	4.1	4.4	-0.3A.	... 2.2	1.7	5.5	0.8	1.5	-4.7	2.5	4.6	3.8	0.8M.	-1.9	3.5	1.0	0.6	-4.0	2.2	4.4	4.4	-J..	-4.7	0.8	0.9	-0.3	-1.7	2.5	4.2	2.1	2.0J..	-5.5	0.8	1.4	-0.1	-1.1	2.9	3.6	1.5	2.2A.	... 0.9	-5.2	-	0.7	-0.7	-0.3	2.6	2.7	0.6	2.4s..	-5.1	-0.4	0.8	-1.7	0.6	2.4	2.1	-0.3	2.4o.	_	-5.5	-0.6	1.0	-0.6	1.2	2.1	1.4	0.4	1.0N.	-3.7	-1.1	1.1	-0.9	0.9	1.5	0.8	0.3	0.5D.	... -	-3.6	-3.1	0.4	-1.9	0.7	1.7	0.2	-0.5	0.71971 }..	-5.2	-4.1	0.8	-2.8	1.2	0.9	-0.6	0.3	-0.9F.	-4.5	-5.0	1.3	-1.8	1.7	1.8	-1.8	0.9	-2.7M.	-5.2	-5.8	1.3	-2.3	3.1	2.0	-2.3	-1.0	-1.2
CO, CD, (*) and <0 gee footnotes (1), (2), (3) and (4) on reference table 47.
Source: DBS Prices and Price Indexes.
DBS Trade of Canada Experts.
DBS Trade of Canada Imports.
DBS Price Index Numbers of Commodities and Services Used by Farmers. DBS Index Numbers of Farm Prices of Agricultural Products.
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 49 TOTAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES (National Accounts Basis)
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Direct Taxes Persons	Direct Taxes Corporations	Withholding Taxes	Indirect Taxes	Transfers from Persons	Investment Income**)	CPP and QPP	Capital Consumption Allowances	Total Revenue *[DOT]>
(Millions of dollars)				
1947	,... 927	702	35	1,855	35	261	146	3,9611948	,... 986	687	41	1,907	47	261	171	4,1001949	,... 956	723	47	1,955	57	242	-	187	4,1671950	.... 915	993	54	2,129	62	280	201	4,6341951	.... 1,279	1,431	56	2,677	77	285	248	6,0531952	.... 1.588	1,403	55	2,901	82	368	265	6,6621953	.... 1,748	1,244	54	3,107	84	378	-	280	6,8951954	.... 1,776	1,115	58	3,131	73	373	-	293	6,8191955	... 1,855	1,310	67	3,407	79	420	320	7,4581956	.... 2,127	1,443	69	3,858	97	537	-	365	8,4961957	... 2.360	1,378	83	4,095	106	490	-	385	8,8871958	1,350	48	4,186	124	542	-	404	8,8681959	.... 2,444	1,615	74	4,651	224	604	-	434	10,046I960	... 2,794	1,588	79	4,901	234	649	465	10,7101961	... 2,944	1,649	116	5,159	256	710	531	11.3651962	.... 3,180	1,753	125	5,807	268	784	-	574	12,4911963	.... 3,387	1,891	127	6,115	274	885	629	13,3081964	... 3,917	2,084	140	6,877	316	983	-	676	14,9931965	... 4,433	2,194	168	7,734	371	1,089	768	16,7571966	... 5,812	2,440	203	8.690	391	1,200	719	864	19,6001967	... 7,011	2,397	218	9,442	405	1,433	886	921	21,8271968	... 8,247	2,809	209	10,320	539	1,577	1,005	988	24,6891969	... 10,047	3,070	232	11,322	794	2,045	1,135	1,083	28,5931970	... 11,456	2,854	267	11,975	1,049	2,454	1,248	1,190	31,245(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	... 9,120	3,184	212	11,108	768	1,992	1,100	1,044	26,384II	... 10,064	3.096	248	11,212	688	2,016	1,176	1,072	27,324Ill	... 10,360	2,968	260	11,380	728	2,032	1,140	1,096	27,728IV	... 10,644	3,032	208	11,588	992	2,140	1,124	1,120	28,6041970 I	... 10,676	2,952	304	11,848	1,004	2,320	1,172	1,148	29,104II	... 11,580	2,908	244	11,952	1,032	2,356	1,292	1,176	30,072Ill	... 11,604	2,920	244	12.132	1.084	2,604	1,232	1,204	30,588IV	2,636	276	11,968	1,076	2,536	1,296	1,232	30,4561971 I	... 12,180	2,796	244	12,596	1,072	2,472	1,372	1,260	31,360
^Includes CPP and QPP.
^Includes CPP investment income. ^Excludes inter-governmental transfers.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
7030
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 50 TOTAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES (National Accounts Basis)
1947 to 1971
Years	Goods
and	and
Quarters Services*1)
National
Defence
Transfers	Interest on
to	the Public
Persons	Debt
Subsidies
Capital Withholding Assistance**) Taxes
[Stage Direction]
and
[Stage Direction]
Total
Expenditures**)
Gross
Capital
Formation
Deficit (-) or
Surplus
(Millions of dollars)
1947	. 1,343	227	834	559	177	6	46	-	2,965	233	7631948	. 1,454	236	857	558	75	10	32	-	2,986	392	7221949	. 1,722	361	942	572	77	13	15	-	3,341	483	3431950	. 1,928	493	1,023	544	64	10	14	-	3,583	497	5541951	. 2,811	1,157	1,024	609	129	13	21	-	4,607	620	8261952	. 3,620	1,800	1,343	651	102	14	28	-	5,758	847	571953	. 3,824	1,907	1,449	620	113	14	37	-	6,057	755	831954	. 3,825	1,727	1,626	650	89	13	23	-	6,228	865	-272
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1970
4,036	1,760	1,719	664	86	8	36	-	6,549	949	-404,426	1,802	1,746	718	127	27	42	-	7,086	1,138	2724,573	1,765	2,052	774	120	29	52	-	7,600	1,306	-194,854	1,661	2,605	826	150	18	67	-	8,520	1,426	-1,0784,976	1,559	2,721	1,023	250	22	85	-	9,077	1,570	-6015,281	1,546	3,090	1,093	314	17	74	_	9,869	1,511	-6706,350	1,613	2,709	1,169	321	21	77	-	10,647	1,679	-9616,770	1,680	2,912	1,300	361	41	59	-	11,443	1,898	-8507,149	1,572	2,979	1,413	401	77	88	-	12,107	1,971	-7707,684	1,584	3,175	1,527	436	92	93	-	13,007	1,967	198,307	1,559	3,402	1,642	454	95	118	-	14,018	2,433	3069,829	1,709	3,722	1,811	634	64	193	-	16,244	2,846	51010,934	1.805	4,640	1,974	656	74	216	-	18,114	2,998	33512,158	1,812	5,346	2,268	643	86	170	15	20,671	3,024	99413,680	1,806	6,060	2,621	675	107	184	51	23,327	3,058	2,20815,802	1,868	6,804	3,030	724	124	244	104	26,728	3,239	1,278(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	i	12,996	1,820	5,628	2,476	652	92	156	32	22,000	3,024	2,404II....	13,368	1,740	6,052	2,580	688	92	188	48	22,968	3,028	2,400III...	14,068	1,840	6,216	2,648	688	112	188	60	23,920	3,080	1,824IV...	14,288	1,824	6,344	2,780	672	132	204	64	24,420	3,100	2,204i	15,024	1,964	6,472	2,940	696	148	224	80	25,504	3,164	1,584ii...	15,708	1,880	6,584	2,976	856	136	168	100	26,428	3,208	1,612III...	15,968	1,820	7,064	3,080	712	108	316	108	27,248	3.288	1,256IV...	16,508	1,808	7,096	3,124	632	104	268	128	27,732	3,296	660I	17,108	1,864	7,532	3,232	652	248	248	144	29,020	3,416	184
*') In eludes National Defence, CPP and QPP.
<*>From 1961 on, this item is treated as government current expenditures; prior to 1961, it was treated as capital transfer. ^Excludes inter-governmental transfers.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
18 June, 1971____ COMMONS DEBATES
		REFERENCE TABLE 51 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES (National Accounts Basis) 1947 to 1971						
Years	Direct	Direct	Transfers	Capital	and	Taxes	Taxes	Withholding	Indirect	from	Investment	Consumption	Quarters	Persons	Corporations Taxes	Taxes	Persons	Income	Allowances	Revenue(Millions of dollars)	.. 	..	1947	.... 825	631	35	1,136	4	102	43	2,7761948	.... 875	568	41	1,086	6	91	50	2,7171949	.... 841	593	47	1,048	7	109	54	2,6991950	.... 806	847	54	1,115	7	133	58	3,0201951	.... 1,158	1,242	56	1,494	6	143	66	4,1651952	.... 1,461	1,294	55	1,594	7	205	71	4,6871953	1,168	54	1,697	2	200	75	4,8091954	1,051	58	1,612	1	187	77	4,6081955	1,248	67	1,743	1	220	82	5,0081956	1,364	69	1,970	1	296	88	5,6981957	1,170	83	1,989	2	230	93	5,6721958	.... 1,965	1,105	48	1,906	2	285	98	5,4091959	.... 2,183	1,340	74	2,120	2	316	104	6,1391960	.... 2,503	1,308	79	2,177	3	336	111	6,5171961	.... 2,629	1,345	116	2,188	2	382	117	6,7791962	.... 2,605	1,314	125	2,400	1	410	124	6,9791963	.... 2,730	1,412	127	2,449	2	471	132	7,3231964	.... 3,129	1,565	140	2,845	2	528	139	8,3481965	.... 3,333	1,651	168	3,245	3	551	151	9,1021966	1,834	203	3,571	3	633	167	10,0551967	1,786	218	3,705	3	749	179	10,9311968	.... 5,107	2,105	209	3,761	4	780	191	12,1571969	2,294	232	4,024	4	1,036	209	14,3001970	2,142	267	4,033	3	1,211	230	15,284(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	... 5,820	2,384	212	3,984	4	1,064	200	13,668n	2,312	248	3,944	4	972	208	14,204in	2,212	260	4,048	4	1,028	212	14,472IV	2,268	208	4,120	4	1,080	216	14,8561970 I	... 6,964	2,208	304	3,972	4	1,132	220	14,804II	.... 7,356	2.196	244	3,960	4	1,172	228	15,160Ill	.... 7,560	2,192	244	4,172	4	1,300	232	15,704IV	.... 7,712	1,972	276	4,028	0	1,240	240	15,4681971 I	... 7,628	2,092	244	4,136	4	1,224	248	15,576
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
24171-25£
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 62 FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES (National Accounts Basis)
1947 to 1971
						Transfer	Transfers			
National	Transfers	Interest	Capital	Payments	to Other	Total	Gross	Deficit(-)on the Subsidies	Assistance^*)	to Non-	Levels of	Expenditures	Capital	orQuarters	Services^1)	Persons	Public Debt	Residents	Government	Formation	Surplus
(Millions of dollars)
1947	651	227	611	453	171	1	46	192	2,125	-36	6871948	628	236	570	453	71	i	32	150	1,905	47	7651949	757	361	583	461	73	1	15	187	2,077	138	4841950	923	493	615	427	60	1	14	251	2,291	79	6501951	1,634	1,157	580	486	124	0	21	259	3,104	90	9711952	2,315	1,800	975	515	96	2	28	368	4,299	193	1951953	2,462	1,907	1,043	471	106	1	37	412	4,532	126	1511954	2,316	1,727	1,165	482	84	1	23	430	4,501	153	-461955	2,364	1,760	1,229	487	75	3	36	450	4,644	162	2021956	2,517	1,802	1,221	516	118	16	42	485	4,915	185	5981957	2,513	1,765	1,460	531	108	20	52	521	5,205	217	2501958	2,524	1,661	1,893	568	131	13	67	663	5,859	317	-7671959	2,387	1,559	1,782	733	229	19	85	880	6,115	363	-339I960 	2,426	1,546	1,973	753	283	15	74	994	6,518	228	-2291961	2,586	1,613	2,005	786	285	18	77	1,128	6,885	304	-4101962	2,690	1,680	2,110	865	322	38	59	1,134	7,218	268	-5071963	2,619	1,572	2,134	935	355	74	88	1,169	7,374	234	-2851964	2,755	1,584	2,241	995	379	89	93	1,252	7,804	207	3371965 	2,827	1,559	2,312	1,052	370	88	118	1,434	8,201	350	5511966	3,302	1,709	2,478	1,151	496	62	193	1,662	9,344	417	2941967	3.574	1,805	2,932	1,245	524	68	216	1,992	10,551	465	-851968	3,792	1,812	3,277	1,409	518	72	170	2,452	11,690	500	-331969	4,293	1,806	3,602	1,589	560	88	184	2,728	13,044	483	7731970	4,511	1,868	4,053	1,861	593	100	244	3,397	14,759	537	-12(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	4,224	1,820	3,480	1,460	544	76	156	2,676	12,616	480	572II....	4,136	1,740	3,596	1,592	576	84	188	2,752	12.924	464	816III...	4,404	1,840	3,700	1,588	564	88	188	2,768	13,300	496	676IV...	4,408	1,824	3,632	1,716	556	104	204	2,716	13,336	492	1,0281970 I ....	4,612	1,964	3,800	1,824	588	116	224	3,112	14,276	508	20II....	4,840	1,880	3,992	1,864	716	128	168	3,204	14,912	532	-284III...	4,152	1,820	4,172	1,812	560	84	316	3,736	14.832	596	276IV...	4,440	1,808	4,248	1,944	508	72	268	3,536	15,016	512	-601971 I	4,624	1,864	4,276	1,928	480	196	248	4,364	16,116	556	-1,096
(^Includes national defence.
(2)See footnote (2) on reference table 50.
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
18 June, 1971______________COMMONS DEBATES______________________ 7033
REFERENCE TABLE 53 PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES (National Accounts Basis) 1947 to 1971								
Years	Direct	Direct	Transfers	Transfers	Capital	and	Taxes	Taxes	Indirect	from	Investment	from Other	Consumption	TotalQuarters	Persons	Corporations Taxes	Persons	Income	Levels of	Allowances	RevenueGovernment	(Millions of dollars)	1947	71	359	28	101	199	44	8991948	119	418	37	111	159	53	1,0021949	130	462	46	79	197	59	1,0821950	146	515	51	89	261	62	1.2261951	189	575	60	117	270	80	1,4121952	109	607	61	140	378	81	1,5031953	76	652	64	154	424	83	1,5881954	64	690	56	165	443	88	1,6601955	62	762	59	186	465	100	1,8421956	79	864	72	221	494	125	2.0721957	208	958	78	240	533	129	2,3911958	245	1,016	94	234	657	132	2,6271959	275	1,087	191	264	880	143	3,1011960	280	1,131	197	287	979	154	3,3191961	304	1,270	211	298	1,110	156	3,6641962	439	1,572	217	341	1,105	172	4,4211963	479	1,713	225	372	1.134	193	4,7731964	519	2,006	261	400	1,217	211	5,4021965	543	2,250	312	472	1,387	253	6,3171966	606	2,632	332	498	1,595	288	7,4051967	611	2,982	341	576	1,938	299	8,6181968	704	3,451	469	636	2,405	319	10,1991969	776	3,871	718	788	2,674	340	11,7001970	712	4,150	970	951	3,360	361	13,507(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	800	3,704	696	748	2,632	332	11,200II	784	3,844	612	816	2,708	340	11,616III	756	3,900	652	800	2,692	344	11,768IV	764	4,036	912	788	2,664	344	12,2401970 I	744	4,092	932	932	3,108	352	12,852II	712	4,204	952	892	3,132	360	13,384III	728	4,164	1,000	1,028	3,704	364	13,976IV	
3,200	664	4,140	996	952	3,496	368	13,8161971 I	704	4,372	988	932	4,312	372	15,064
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
7034_____ ________________COMMONS DEBATES ________________18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 54 PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES (National Accounts Basis) 1947 to 1971									
Years	Goods	Transfers	Interest on	Transfers	Gross	Deficit (-)to	the Public	Subsidies	Capital	to Other	Total	Capital	orQuarters	Services	Persona	Debt	Assistance	Levels of	Expenditure	Formation	SurplusGovernment	(Millions of dollars)	1947	
268	204	68	6	5	101	652	152	951948	266	68	4	9	129	794	193	151949	336	72	4	12	157	968	172	-581950	384	75	4	9	171	1,034	196	-41951	
470	416	78	5	13	197	1,179	229	41952	
502	334	83	6	12	215	1,152	290	611953	
498	368	88	7	13	242	1,216	265	1071954	417	94	5	12	259	1,306	301	531955	
578	449	93	11	5	327	1,463	351	281956	
688	485	101	9	11	362	1,656	460	-441957	
703	547	116	12	9	452	1.839	536	161958	
816	658	115	19	5	545	2,158	519	-501959	
907	874	121	21	3	622	2,548	566	-131960	
986	1,044	143	31	2	714	2,920	612	-2131961	
1,055	625	160	36	3	1,520	3.399	546	-2811962	
1,080	718	184	39	3	1,828	3.852	625	-561963	
1.229	759	212	46	3	1,964	4.213	659	-991964	
1,344	849	238	57	3	2,220	4,711	777	-861965	
1.539	1,002	260	84	7	2,552	5.444	875	-21966	
1,947	1,154	307	138	2	3.034	6.582	987	-1641967	1,616	357	132	6	3.593	7,954	1,046	-3821968	
2,560	* 1.953	447	125	14	4,119	9,218	958	231969 	
2,736	2,302	587	115	19	4,567	10,326	1,025	3551970	2,533	679	131	24	5,444	12,558	1,062	-113(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	
2,448	2,012	584	108	16	4,408	9,556	1,068	576II	
2,668	2,304	572	112	8	5,184	10.848	960	-192Ill	
2,760	2,352	620	124	24	4,104	9,984	1.008	776IV	2,540	592	116	28	4,572	10,916	1,064	2601970 I	
3,276	2,488	620	108	32	6.480	12,004	1,068	-220II	
3,412	2,376	620	140	8	5,560	12 116	1,056	212Ill	
4,092	2.672	784	152	24	5,076	12,800	1,068	108IV	
4,208	2,596	692	124	32	5,660	13,312	1,056	-5521971 I	
4,348	2,964	736	172	52	£.604	13,876	1,162	36
Source: DBS National Incom tand Expenditure Account«.
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 55 LOCAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES (National Accounts Basis)
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Direct Taxes	Indirect Taxes	Investment Income	Transfers from Persona	Transfers from Governments	Capital Consumption Allowances	Total Revenues
				(Millions of dollars)			
1947	5	360	58	3	101	59	5861948	6	403	59	4	129	68	6691949	6	445	54	4	157	74	7401950 	7	499	58	4	172	81	8211951	-	608	25	11	199	102	9451952	-	700	23	14	218	113	1.0681953	-	758	24	18	245	122	1,1671954	-	829	21	16	261	128	1,2551955	-	902	14	19	334	138	1,4071956	-	1,024	20	24	371	152	1,5911957	-	1,148	20	26	468	163	1,8251958	-	1,264	23	28	568	174	2,0571959	-	1,444	24	31	646	187	2,3321960	-	1,593	26	34	746	200	2,5991961	-	1,701	28	41	874	212	2,8561962	-	1,835	31	47	1,107	229	3,2491963	-	1,953	39	44	1,200	250	3,4861964	-	2,026	52	50	1,342	268	3.738965	-	2,239	63	53	1,531	299	4,185166	-	2,487	61	53	1,892	336	4,829967	-	2,755	68	58	2,219	364	5,464968	-	3,108	77	63	2,496	393	6,137969	-	3,427	88	69	2,704	440	6,7281970	-	3,792	94	73	3,246	494	7,699(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	-	3,420	88	68	2,620	424	6,62011	-	3,424	84	68	3,336	432	7,344Ill	-	3,432	88	68	2,232	444	6,264IV	-	3,432	92	72	2,628	460	6,6841970 I	-	3,784	100	68	3,256	476	7,684IX.	-	3,788	88	72	3,448	484	7,880Ill	-	3,796	96	76	2,844	500	7,312IV	-	3.800	92	76	3,436	516	7,9201971 I	-	4,088	108	80	3,224	532	8,032
Source: DBS National Incoma and Expenditure Account$.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 56 LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES (National Accounts Basis)
1947 to 1971
Years
and
Quarters
1947.
1948.
1949.
1950.
1951.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1969	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1970	I...
11..

[Stage Direction]
1971	I...
Goods	Transfers	Interest	Transfers	Gross	Deficit (-)and	to	on the	to Other	Total	Capital	orServices	Persons	Public Debt	Governments	Expenditure	Formation	Surplus424	19508	21578	23614	24707	28803	34864	38990	441,094	411,221	401,357	451,514	541,682	651,869	732,003	792,217	842,402	862,582	852,826	883,335	903,674	924,227	1014,891	1055,586	1144,652	1044,832	1045,116	1044,964	1085,244	1045,520	1165,744	1125,836	1246,060	148
(Millions of dollars)
38	7	488	117	-1937	9	575	152	-5839	10	650	173	-8342	11	691	222	-9245	13	793	301	-14953	13	903	364	-19961	15	978	364	-17574	15	1,123	411	-27984	22	1,241	436	-270101	18	1,380	493	-282127	28	1.557	553	-285143	17	1,728	590	-261169	24	1,940	641	-249197	17	2,156	671	-228223	34	2,339	679	-162251	28	2,580	847	-178266	33	2,787	927	-228294	31	2,992	834	-88330	37	3.281	1,058	-154353	55	3.833	1,251	-255372	56	4,194	1,289	-19412	66	4,806	1,349	-18445	67	5,508	1,337	-117490	69	6,259	1,420	20(Seasonally adjusted at annual rate)	452	64	5,272	1,260	88416	72	5,424	1,392	528440	60	5,720	1,372	-828472	72	5,616	1,324	-256496	68	5,912	1,364	408492	52	6,180	1,400	300484	72	6,412	1,408	-508488	84	6,532	1,508	-120568	52	6,828	1,484	-280
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 57 HOSPITAL REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES (National Accounts Basis)
1961 to 1971
Revenues	Expenditures
Years and Quarters	Invest- ment Income	Transfers from Other Levels of Government	Transfers from Persons	Capital Consumption Allowances	Total Revenues	Goods and Services	Total	Gross Capital Formation	Deficit (-) or Surplus1961	698	2	46	748	706	706	150	-1081962	778	3	49	832	783	783	158	-1091963	
3	832	3	54	892	899	899	151	-1581964	944	3	58	1,008	1,003	1,003	149	-1441965	1,105	3	65	1,176	1,115	1,115	150	-891966	
3	1,264	3	73	1,343	1,236	1,236	191	-841967	
3	1,484	3	79	1,569	1,436	1,436	198	-651968	1,736	3	85	1,828	1,579	1,579	217	321969	1,984	3	94	2,086	1,760	1,760	213	1131970	2,304	3	105	2,417	1,958	1,958	220	239(Seasonally	adjusted at	annual rates)	1969 I	1,896	0	88	1,988	1,672	1,672	216	100II	1,964	4	92	2,064	1,732	1,732	212	120Ill	2,008	4	96	2,112	1,788	1,788	204	120IV	2,068	4	100	2,180	1,848	1,848	220	1121970 I	2,296	0	100	2,400	1,892	1,892	224	284II	2,236	4	104	2,348	1,936	1,936	220	192Ill	2,336	4	108	2,452	1,980	1,980	216	256IV	2,348	4	108	2,468	2,024	2,024	220	2241971 I	2,484	0	108	2,596	2,076	2,076	224	296
Source: DBS National Income and Expenditure Accounts.
7038
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
GOVERNMENT OF CANADA FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS 1961-62 to 1970-71
	1961-62	1962-63	1963-64	1964-65	1965-66	1965-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71<*>
(Millions of dollars)					
Budgetary Revenue										
Personal income tax	. 1,793	1,744	1,865	2,103	2,143	2,474	2,849	3,419	4,562	5,263Corporate income tax	. 1,202	1,183	1,259	1,524	1,607	1,593	1,671	2,030	2,612	2,217Other direct taxes	. 197	216	216	233	279	305	323	318	350	378Sales tax	. 760	806	946	1,205	1,395	1,514	1,601	1,570	1,717	1,708Other indirect taxes	. 1,161	1,287	1,247	1,302	1,428	1,554	1,572	1,649	1,715	1,778Non-tax revenues	. 617	642	720	813	844	936	1,060	1,205	1,368	1,425Total	. 5,730	5,878	6,253	7,180	7,696	8,376	9,076	10,191	12,324	12,769Budgetary Expenditure	National Health and Welfare	. 1,503	1,594	1,682	1,824	1,786	1,994	2,154	2,384	2,734	3,191Economic Development and Support	. 667	847	850	805	975	1,205	1,473	1,527	1,777	1,856Public Debt	. 839	927	994	1,051	1,111	1,191	1,301	1,480	1,717	1,921Defence	. 1,638	1,588	1,693	1,550	1,556	1,651	1,760	1,762	1,792	1,778Fiscal Transfer Payments to Provinces	. 541	275	254	358	466	515	738	867	932	1,229Transportation and Communications	. 675	646	667	763	839	941	1,018	932	893	942Education Assistance	. 19	26	27	28	29	90	114	287	315	457Other Expenditure^)	. 639	667	705	839	973	1,211	1,314	1,528	1,772	1,813Total	. 6,521	6,570	6,872	7,218	7,735	8,798	9,872	10,767	11,932	13,187BUDGETARY SURPLUS (+) OR DEFICIT	.. -791	-692	-619	-38	-39	-422	-795	-576	393	-418
Non-budgetary Transactions (requirements excluding foreign exchange) <2>
Financing of lending institutions
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation	
-190	-102	-113	-222	-315	-489	-634	-385	-481	-593Farm Credit Corporation	
-54	-59	-70	-102	-147	-164	-169	-128	-78	-49Export Development Corporation	
-5	-20	-23	-33	-36	-36	-35	-33	-42	-81Municipal Development Loan Board	
-	-	-	-8	-101	-122	-49	-2	9	9Others	
-11	-19	-21	-14	-24	-68	-89	-45	-66	-31Sub-total	-200	-227	-379	-623	-879	-976	-593	-658	-745Loans to other Crown Corporations	-136	-161Atomic Energy of Canada	
-5	13	-	-12	-12	-28	-33	-69	St. Lawrence Seaway	-7	-11	-19	-20	-27	-18	-23	-30	-44Air Canada	-	-	-	1	-1	-3	-1	-50	-71	-112Canadian National Railways	
-72	-275	29	-25	-59	-124	-163	-150	-102	-93Others	
-24	-31	-30	-23	-17	-65	-78	-48	-53	-16Sub-total	
-115	-300	-12	-78	-109	-247	-293	-340	-392	-392
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 58 (continued) GOVERNMENT OF CANADA FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS 1961-62 to 1970-71
	1961-62	1962-63	1963-64	1964-65	1965-66	1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71H>>
(Millions of dollars)					
Loans to government departments										
External Affairs	5	-5	6	-2	3	-26	-47	-81	-114Regional Economic Expansion	... -3	-4	-5	-1	-2	-30	-29	-43	-45	-70Transport	2	-	-	1	-2	-2	-5	-10	-57Others	-14	-5	-14	-9	-34	-31	-16	-38	-52Sub-total	-11	-15	-9	-12	-63	-88	-111	-174	-293Major receipts, net	Annuity, insurance and pensions	... 302	256	316	400	650	632	574	629	733	718Others	128	37	-1	-47	-107	8	3	156	238Sub-total	384	353	399	603	525	582	632	889	956Other non-budgetary transactions	Wage suspense account	-	-	120	-56	36Wheat acreage reduction	-	_	100	-58Provincial tax collections	... 39	-51	3	59	18	26	28	51	3	-88Unemployment insurance	-51	-12	43	101	116	36	80	77	-138Exchange fund profits	-35	-63	-64	-63	-61	-55	-85	-105	-176Refundable corporation income tax	-	-	-	-	-	196	39	-95	-103	-34Others	-2	278	91	173	101	102	23	211	168Sub-total	-139	206	129	229	378	150	94	127	-290NET NON-BUDGETARY TRANSACTIONS	(excluding foreign exchange)	... -93	-266	305	62	88	-286	-625	-318	-208	-764TOTAL FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS	(excluding foreign exchange)	... -884	-958	-314	24	49	-708	-1,420	-894	185	-1,182FOREIGN EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS^	... 223	-276	-15	-403	-113	287	662	-681	-347	-1,255TOTAL FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS^	... -661	-1,234	-329	-379	-64	-421	-758	-1,575	-162	-2,437
p = preliminary actual.
^Includes Internal Overhead Expenses; General Government Services; Culture and Recreation and Foreign Affairs.

Except advances required for the transfer of Exchange Profits to budgetary revenue.
(«)Foreign Exchange Transactions include advances to and repayments from the Exchange Fund Account; non-interest bearing notes payable to International Organizations; subscriptions to the capital of International Organizations; the holdings of special United States Government Securities; investments in bonds of International Organizations both the allocation of Special Drawing Rights; changes in debt outstanding in other than Canadian currency. Advances required for the transfer of Exchange Fund Profits to budgetary revenue are included under other non-budgetary transactions.
(<>The "Total Financial Requirement" differs from "Overall Cash Requirement" as per Public Accounts because of the inclusion under Non-Budgetary Transactions of the change in the special non-marketable bonds held by the Unemployment Insurance Commission and debt in other than Canadian currency. In tho Public Accounts the change in these holdings is reflected in the net change in Unmatured Debt Outstanding.
Source: Public Accounta of Canada,
24171-26£
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
INTERNATIONAL PAYMENTS: CURRENT ACCOUNT 1947 to 1971
Current Receipts:
Years
and
Quarters
Gold
Merchandise	Production
Exports	Available
(Adjusted)	for
Export
Travel
Expenditures
Interest
and
Dividends
Freight
and
Shipping
Inheritances
and
Immigrants'
Funds
Other
Current
Receipts
Total
Current
Receipts
(Millions of dollars)
1947	
2,723	99	251	64	322	69	220	3,7481948	
3,030	119	279	70	336	84	229	4,1471949	
2,989	139	285	83	303	68	222	4,0891950	
3,139	163	275	94	284	57	218	4.2301951	
3,950	150	274	115	351	77	230	5,1471952	150	275	152	383	85	289	5,6731953	
4,152	144	302	164	318	91	322	5,4931954	
3,934	155	305	147	313	89	305	5,2481955	
4,332	155	328	161	398	86	399	5,8591956	
4,837	147	337	142	457	99	456	6,4751957	
4,894	144	363	153	445	124	406	6,5291958	
4,890	157	349	167	401	97	391	6,4521959	
5,151	148	391	180	420	109	414	6,8131960	
5,392	162	420	171	442	102	447	7,1361961	
5,889	162	482	213	486	104	452	7,7881962	
6,387	155	562	202	509	124	484	8,4231963	
7,082	154	609	230	563	151	500	9,2891964	
8,238	145	662	332	644	169	557	10,747 *1965	
8,745	138	747	322	668	216	645	11,4811966	
10,326	127	840	318	758	268	759	13,396 *1967	
11,338	112	1,318	295	830	329	863	15,0851968	
13,537	120	978	353	891	370	935	17,184 *1969	
14,874	108	1,074	414	936	363	1,326	19,095 11970	
16,841	95	1,219	513 1,048 (Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	388	1,476	21,580 11969 1	
14,872	120	1,020	388	920	352	1,220	18,892 1II	
14,456	112	1,072	460	940	360	1,284	18,684 *Ill	
14,548	108	1,052	412	900	344	1,340	18,704 *IV	
15,620	92	1,152	396	984	396	1,460	20,100 *1970 I	
17,044	96	1,224	484	1,056	404	1,400	21,708 III	
17,000	104	1.208	504	1,056	368	1,452	21,692 *Ill	
16,604	88	1,164	568	1,048	384	1,532	21,388 *IV	
16,716	92	1,280	496	1.032	396	1,520	21,532 *
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 59 (continued) INTERNATIONAL PAYMENTS: CURRENT ACCOUNT
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters					Current Payments:				
		Merchandise Imports (Adjusted)	Travel Expenditures	Interest and Dividends	Freight and Shipping	Inheritances and Official Immigrants' Contributions Funds		Other Current Payments*1)	Total Current Payments
					(Millions of dollars)				
1947	. 2.535	167	337	278	49	38	295	3,6991948	. 2,598	134	325	279	50	23	287	3,6961949	. 2,696	193	390	253	59	6	315	3,9121950	. 3,132	220	475	301	61	5	349	4,5491951	. 4,101	280	452	354	70	9	393	5,6591952	. 3,854	341	413	375	94	16	393	5,4861953	. 4,212	365	406	374	96	25	463	5,9411954	. 3,916	389	424	356	99	11	477	5,6721955	. 4,543	449	473	415	110	24	526	6,5451956	. 5,565	498	524	502	131	30	597	7,8471957	. 5,488	525	594	515	157	40	661	7,9801958	. 5,066	542	614	460	159	53	695	7,5891959	. 5,572	598	671	525	165	72	697	8,3001960	. 5,540	627	656	533	184	61	768	8,3691961	. 5,716	642	764	668	176	56	794	8,7161962	. 6,203	605	783	595	175	30	856	0,2531963	. 6,579	585	860	648	185	65	888	9,8101964.	. 7,537	712	1,010	679	201	69	963	11,1711965	. 8,627	790	1.086	761	211	93	1,037	12,6111966	. 10,102	900	1,140	823	198	166	1.229	14,5581967	. 10,772	895	1,211	861	213	182	1,450	15.5841963	. 12,162	1,008	1,259	931	209	133	1,589	17,2911969	. 14,014	1,292	1,345	991	194	144	1,866	19,8461970	. 13,839	1,454	1,624	1,012	211	201	2,042	20,283(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 I	. 13,792	1,216	1,300	964	192	116	1,768	19,348II	. 13,800	1,292	1,340	1,024	192	148	1,816	19,612Ill	. 14,012	1,372	1,332	956	196	152	1,900	19,920IV	. 14,452	1,288	1,408	1,020	196	160	1,980	20,5041970 I	. 14,230	1,356	1.656	1,040	204	172	1,940	20,604II	. 14,344	1,440	1,460	1,004	212	136	2,000	20,590ITI	. 14,024	1,544	1,564	1,012	212	272	2,056	20,684IV	. 12,752	1,476	1,416	992	216	224	2,172	19,248
^'Includes personal and institutional remittances.
Source: DBS Quarterly Estimates of the Canadian Balance of International Payments, Quarterly, Cat. 07,001, Occasional Cat. 67-505.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Travel Expenditures	Inheritances and Migrants' Funds	Freight and Shipping	Interest and DividendUnited States	Rest of World	All Countries	United States	Rest of World	All Countries	All Countries	All Countries(Millions of dollars)	1947	
89	-5	84	-19	39	20	44	-273194g	
154	-9	145	-19	63	34	57	-2551949	
102	-10	92	-26	35	9	50	-3071950 	-18	49	-16	12	-4	-17	-3811961	
12	-18	-6	-23	30	7	-3	-3371952 	-29	-66	-39	30	-9	8	-2611953	
-25	-38	-63	-37	32	-5	-50	-2431954	
-37	-47	-84	-30	26	-10	-43	-2771955 	
-60	-01	-121	-45	15	-30	-17	-312195C 	
-82	-79	-161	-03	31	-32	-45	-3821957 	
-78	-84	-162	-77	44	-33	-70	-4411958 	
-104	-89	-193	-57	-5	-62	-59	-4471959 	
-97	-liO	-207	-71	15	-56	-105	-491I960	
-87	-120	-207	-92	10	-82	-91	-4851961	
-24	-136	-160	-85	13	-72	-82	-5511962 	
93	-136	-43	-78	27	-51	-86	-5811963 	
161	-137	24	-87	53	-34	-85	-030
109	-159	-50	-80	48	-32	-35	-6781965 	
112	-161	-49	-69	74	5	-93	-164I960	
102	-162	-60	-39	109	70	-65	-8221967	
537	-114	423	n.a.	n.a.	116	-31	-9161968 	-211	-30	n.a.	n.a.	161	-40	-9061969 	n.a.	-218	n.a.	n.a.	169	-55	-9311970 	n.a.	-235	n.a.	n.a.	177	36	-1,011(Seasonally adjusted at annual rates)	1969 T	n.a.	-190	n.a.	n.a.	160	-44	-912II	n.a.	-220	n.a.	n.a.	168	-84	-880HI	n.a.	-320	n.a.	n.a.	148	-50	-920IV	n.a.	-136	n.a.	n.a.	200	-36	-1,0121970 I	n.a.	-132	n.a.	n.a.	200	16	-1.172II	n.a.	-232	n.a.	n.a.	156	52	-956III	n.a.	-380	n.a.	n.a.	172	30	-996IV	n.a.	-196	n.a.	n.a.	180	40	-920
Soubcb: DBS Quarterly Estimates of the Canadian Balance of International Payments.
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 61 SUMMARY OF BALANCE OF PAYMENTS 1947 to 1971 **)
	Years and Quarters		Merchandise Trade Balance	Deficit on Non- Merchandise Transactions*1)	Current Account Balance*1*	Gold Production Available for Export	Capital Movements Inflows and Outflows (-):		Special Drawing Rights	Total
							Long-term Forms	Short-term Forms		
						(Millions of dollars)				
1947	188	-238	-50	99	-721	4	-6681948	432	-100	332	119	43	-2	4921949	293	-255	38	139	-29	-20	-	1281950	7	-489	-482	163	810	431	7221951	-151	-511	-662	150	666	-98	561952	485	-448	37	150	455	-605	_	371953	-60	-632	-592	144	649	-239	-381954	18	-597	-579	155	599	-51	-	1241955	-211	-631	-842	155	414	229	-441956	-728	-791	-1,519	147	1,490	-70	481957	-594	-1,001	-1,595	144	1,320	28	-1051958	-176	-1,118	-1,294	157	1,153	93	1091959	-421	-1,214	-1,635	148	1,179	297	-	-111960	-148	-1,247	-1,395	162	929	265	__	-391961	173	-1,263	-1,090	162	930	288	2901962	184	-1,169	-985	155	688	297	1551963	503	-1,178	-675	154	637	30	.	1461964	701	-1,270	-569	145	820	-33	-	3631965	118	-1,386	-1,268	138	864	425	_	1591966	224	-1,513	-1,289	127	1,167	-364	-3591967	566	-1,177	-611	112	1,355	-836	201968	1,375	-1,602	-227	120	1,654	-1,198	_	3491969	860	-1,719	-859	108	2,257	-1,441	-	651970	3,002	-1,800	1,202	95	814	-581	133	1,663(Not seasonally adjusted)	1969 1	237	-532	-295	31	560	-334	-38II	.91	-444	-353	28	532	-261	-54III....	233	-250	-17	27	596	-611	-5IV....	299	-493	-194	22	569	-235	-	1621970 I	631	-601	30	25	644	-305	133	527II	650	-424	226	26	-44	573	781III....	731	-275	456	22	149	-401	226IV....	990	-500	490	22	65	-448	-	129
(^Excluding gold production available for export.
**) Represent differences in Canadian dollar equivalents as between receipt and repayment of special international assistance denominated in US dollars, including, in 1062, a swap with the UK authorities.	*
Sonnrn: DBS Quarterly Estimates of the Canadian Balance of International Payments.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
INTERNATIONAL PAYMENTS: CAPITAL MOVEMENTS 1947 to 1971
Years and Quarters	Direct Investment in Canada	Direct Investment Abroad	Canadian Securities:	Foreign Securities (Total)	Loans and Capital Subscriptions by Government of Canada	Columbia River Treaty Net	Long-Term Capital Transactions not included elsewhere*1)Trade in Outstanding Bonds and Debentures	Trade in Outstanding Common and Preference Stocks	New Issues	Retire- ments	Advances, etc.	Repayments to Canada	(Millions of dollars)	1847	61	6	-13	95	-364	5	-598	in	-	-241948	71	15	-	3	150	-114	-8	-142	80	-	-121949	94	13	-	8	105	-147	20	-126	18	-	-141850	225	35	329	210	-284	76	-60	74	-	-51851	320	-30	-	38	411	-184	15	-	68	-	281852	360	-85	-168	73	323	-89	-11	-	58	-	-41853	450	-70	-52	21	335	-146	-1	-	87	-	251954	425	-90	-66	129	333	-205	-24	-	72	-	251855	445	-85	-165	137	166	-185	-5	-	69	-	371858	650	-105	11	187	667	-141	-3	-4	69	-	1591857	545	-80	-45	142	800	-134	1	-1	50	-	421858	430	-40	-	88	688	-158	1	-34	64	-	,1141959	570	-85	82	110	709	-258	-34	-1	34	-	421860	670	-60	3	51	448	-266	-19	-11	32	-	711961	560	-80	61	39	548	-301	-35	-8	38	-	1081962	505	-105	64	-115	720	-319	-65	-22	129	-	-1131963	280	-135	39	-170	984	-404	22	-18	25	-	141864	270	-95	77	-98	1,100	-382	-52	-10	10	54	-541965	535	-125	55	-274	1,240	-390	-85	-14	10	32	-1201966	790	-5	-104	-136	1,465	-499	-401	-35	24	32	361967	691	-125	-57	12	1.307	-357	-432	-38	34	44	2681968	590	-225	-70	114	1,917	-431	-467	-78	5	88	1821869	655	-265	. 2	53	2,067	-396	106	-89	22	32	681870	760	-215	-40	-155	1,269	-474	61	-142	36	31	-181(Not seasonally adjusted)	1969 T	156	-52	17	37	616	-84	-50	-11	-	-	-56II	233	-103	-6	44	516	-124	-8	-43	2	-	51Ill	79	-25	-12	-4	565	-53	62	-15	-	-	-8IV	187	-75	3	-24	370	-135	102	-20	20	32	821970 I	200	-150	4	-4	535	-87	113	-25	-	-	50II	155	-20	-26	-83	208	-239	79	-59	7	-	-29m	115	15	- 17	-37	304	-49	-28	-35	-	-	-52IV	290	-60	-i	-31	222	-99	-103	-23	29	31	-150
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 62 (continued) INTERNATIONAL PAYMENTS: CAPITAL MOVEMENTS 1947 to 1971
Change in Certain Canadian Assets of Foreigners:	Net Capital
[Stage Direction]
 Movements
Canadian Bank	Excluding
Years and Quarters	Canadian Dollar Deposits	Government of Canada Demand Liabilities	Canadian Treasury Bills	Short term paper	Finance	Balances	All Other Trans- actions	Monetary Items shown in the following column	NetCanadian Commercial Paper	Canadian Finance Paper	Obligations not included elsewhere	Short-term Funds Abroad	Monetary Movements**)1947	... -26	33	-<t)	(Millions of dollars) -(* *>
-O)	-8	5	-717	-8881948	-	-	-	-	-	-2	21	41	4921949	... 33	-	8	-	-	-	-2	-59	-49	1281950	-4	-3	11	192	1,041	7221951	... -190	-8	2	-	-	-	-14	112	568	561952	... -66	-5	1	-(«)	-(*)	35	-165	-405	-150	371953	... -22	-11	-2	-	-	-2	-80	-122	410	-381954	... 27	-15	8	-	-	10	-75	-6	548	1241955	... 60	-9	29	-	-	23	91	35	643	-441956	... -30	-	3	-	-	64	-216	109	1,420	481957	... -15	-	-18	-	-	4	-274	329	1,346	-1051958	45	21	-	-	24	-58	22	1,246	1091959	... 10	-8	14	-	-	68	-119	332	1,476	-111960	... 79	-12	56	[DOT] 	59	-60	143	1,194	-391961	... 33	-2	-58	-	-	95	142	80	1,220	2921962	... -10	-4	4	-	-	119	92	95	984	1541963	... 43	1	-27	-23	93	35	-259	166	666	1451964	... 28	-	-16	-11	196	52	-527	246	788	3641965	... 31	2	12	10	-162	209	140	183	1,289	1591966	... 10	5	-15	4	-1	154	-603	81	803	-3591967	... 24	-4	4	13	-64	34	-259	-585	519	201968	21	48	-1	-132	19	-401	-822	456	3491969	... 60	-34	35	39	176	116	-1,604	-229	816	651970	... 22	-11	-73	101	208	-79	-376	-373	233	1,6031969 I	... -11	-2	13	-1	(Not seasonally adjusted) 159 23	-156	-357	226	-38II	... 25	-30	-10	23	71	28	-568	221	271	-54m	... -4	1	13	-15	-71	3	-621	88	-15	-5IV	... 50	-3	19	35	17	62	-259	-181	334	1621970 I	... 31	-2	-9	6	-75	-52	206	-410	339	527II	... 36	27	-6	-36	174	74	-5	309	529	781Ill	... 5	1	-44	-2	75	-40	-470	74	-252	220IV	... -50	-37	-14	133	34	-61	-107	-346	-383	129
(OFrom 1949 to 1961, includes export credits extended from Canada directly or indirectly at risk of the Government of Canada. <*)Included in "ail other transactions" from 1947 to 1951.
(*)Included in ''Canadian finance obligations n.i.e." from 1952 to 1962.
(4>Includee other special international financial assistance.
Soubce: DBS Quarterly Estimates of the Canadian Balance of International Payments.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Years
and
Quarters
Government of Canada (Including Guaranteed)
New	Retire-	NetIssues	ments	Proceeds
Provincial Governments (Including Guaranteed)
New	Retire-	NetIssues	ments	Proceeds
Municipal Governments
New	Retire-	NetIssues	meuts	Proceeds
(Millions of dollars)
1947	39	n.a.1948	
150	36	1141949	96	31950	
63	159	-971951	94	-871952	
1	18	-171953	
6	84	-781954	
8	69	-611955	100	-951956	
9	83	-741957	
16	29	-131958	
76	25	511959	101	-451960	58	-281961	
37	48	-111962	
158	86	701963	
173	76	971964	
43	88	-451965	
28	85	-571966	203	-1711967	
20	95	-751968	
288	57	2311969	
34	83	-491970	
26	154	-1281969 I	
16	-	16IT	
9	49	-40m	
5	9	-4IV	
4	25	-211970 I	
2	3	-1IT	
8	126	-118Ill	13	-5IV	12	-4n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.-	n.a.	n.a.	-	n.a.	n.a.-	n.a.	n.a.	6	n.a.	n.a.96	n.a.	n.a.	20	n.a.	n.a.262	43	219	72	12	60107	38	69	55	17	38143	28	115	76	15	61126	63	63	46	28	183	19	-16	44	18	26224	15	209	112	18	94136	25	111	123	24	99168	45	123	148	30	118334	41	293	157	33	124103	57	46	135	38	9766	24	42	47	38	9148	22	126	74	41	33343	70	273	62	77	-15439	66	373	182	53	129297	31	266	84	53	31448	65	384	177	96	81760	61	699	163	53	110852	76	776	124	60	641,068	93	975	181	88	93525	111	414	84	84	-(Not seasonally adjusted)	335	40	295	17	15	2206	17	189	95	14	81329	19	310	21	10	11198	17	181	48	49	-1259	31	228	50	23	2762	49	13	20	17	3186	9	177	5	13	-818	22	-4	9	31	-22﻿18 June, 1971_____ COMMONS DEBATES___________________________ 7047REFERENCE TABLE 63 (continued) NET PROCEEDS FROM NEW ISSUES OF CANADIAN BONDS AND DEBENTURES TO NON-RESIDENTS 1947 to 1971	Years and Quarters	Total Government*	Corporations (Including Railroads)	Total	New Issue*	Retire- ments	Net Proceeds	New Issues	Retire- ments	Net Proceeds	New Issues	Retire- ments	Ns* Proceeds(Millions of dollars)	1947	39	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	n.a.	95	n.a.	n.a.1948	
150	36	114	-	n.a.	n.a.	150	n.a.	n.a.1949	
105	96	9	-	n.a.	n.a.	105	n.a.	n.a.1960	
178	159	19	28	n.a.	n.a.	206	n.a.	n.a.1951	
341	149	192	28	n.a.	n.a.	369	n.a.	n.a.1952	
163	73	90	136	16	121	299	88	2111953	
225	127	98	64	13	51	289	140	1491954	
180	160	20	133	35	98	313	195	1181955	
52	137	-85	51	41	10	103	178	-751956	
345	116	229	252	20	232	597	136	4611957	
275	78	197	464	31	433	739	109	6301958	
392	100	292	253	42	211	645	142	6031959	
647	175	372	114	66	48	661	241	4201960	
268	153	115	154	104	50	422	257	1651961	
150	110	40	354	136	218	504	246	2581962	
378	149	229	331	140	191	709	289	4201963	
578	223	355	392	101	291	970	324	6461964	
664	207	457	414	117	297	1,078	324	7541965	
409	169	240	807	214	593	1 216	383	8331966	
657	364	293	751	131	620	1.408	495	9131967	
943	209	734	312	129	183	1.255	338	9171968	
1 264	193	1.071	586	233	353	1.850	426	1.4241969	
1,283	264	1,019	571	131	440	1,854	395	1,4591970	
635	349	286	561	125	436	1,196	474	722(Not seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	
368	55	313	175	29	146	543	84	459II	
310	80	230	123	43	80	433	123	310Ill	
355	38	317	171	15	156	526	63	473IV	
250	91	159	102	44	58	352	135	2171970 I	
311	57	254	188	30	158	499	87	412II	
90	193	-103	110	47	63	200	239	-39Ill	
199	35	164	94	14	80	293	49	244IV	
35	65	-30	169	34	135	204	99	105
Source: DBS Sales and Purchases of Securities Between Canada and Other Countries, Monthly, Cat. 67-002.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1967	to 1971
1969	1970
	1967	1968	1969	1970	i	II	III	IV	I	II	III***	rv
								(Millions of dollars)				
With U.S. residents:												
Assets	130	811	-175	256	15	270	270	-364	-88	253	24Liabilities	-302	338	67	171	82	-57	.142	-62	62	48	19Net	432	473	-242	85	-67	327	128	-302	-150	205	5Other non-residents: Assets	624	1,391	1,109	472	699	222	-2	293	218	-27	625Liabilities	687	1,360	852	488	317	432	123	210	308	22	312Net	-63	31	257	-16	382	-210	-125	83	-90	-49	313Total non-residents:	Assets	754	2,202	934	728	714	492	268	-71	130	226	649Liabilities	
228	385	1,698	919	659	399	375	265	148	370	70	331Net claims* *0*	
366	369	504	15	69	315	117	3	-219	-240	156	318With Canadian residents:	Assets(b*	
-Ill	-56	215	147	-56	220	8	43	73	62	124	-112Liabilities***1	
332	84	1,232	-80	174	800	376	-118	15	-484	447	-58Net	-140	-1,017	227	-230	-580	-368	161	58	546	-323	-54Changes in banks' own position****	229	-513	242	-161	-265	-251	164	-161	306	-167	264
(^Adjusted for variations in exchange rates.
***Commencing with September 30, 1970, changes in assets and liabilities with residents of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are included with residents of the United States instead of with other non-residents.
Balance of payments effects:
<** + with sign reversed, is major component of D.17.1, in Quarterly Estimates of the Canadian Balance of Payments, "bank balances and other-short-term funds abroad" as follows:
-(a)i -j- (a)2	
-255	-313	-719	-162	-13	-535	-125	-46	146	178	-280	-206D.17.1	
-259	-401 -1,604	n.a.	-156	-568	-621	-259	206	-5	-470	-107
*b*is divided between D.17.5 and D.13 respectively: short and long-term residual capital items.
*°*with sign reversed is net balance of payments effect of banks' foreign currency operations.
Source: Department of Finance.
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1947 to 1971
Transaction* with U.S. (Excluding	Other Transactions:
International Financial Agencies):	
[Stage Direction]
	Years and Quarters	Current Account Deficit (Excluding Gold)	Capital Inflow from U.S.	Net Amount to be Financed by Other Transactions	Current Account Surplus with Rest of World	Net Capital Movement from or to Rest of World	New Gold Production Available for Export
				(Millions of dollars)			
1947	-163	-1,396	1,183	-554	991948	111	-401	844	-70	1191949	64	-676	778	-113	1391950	946	-398	66	95	1631951	556	-539	433	12	1501952	-106	-1,086	1,017	-44	1501953	199	-852	459	211	1441954	379	-576	376	169	1551955	368	-818	342	277	1551956	891	-906	278	529	1471957	942	-781	128	404	1441958	1.045	-279	30	201	1571959	1,312	-57	-260	164	1481960	974	-547	126	220	1621961	1,311	-192	413	-93	1621962	1,073	-174	262	-88	1551963	829	-473	627	-162	1541964	1,639	-141	1,211	-852	1451965	437	-1,638	807	850	1381966	1,059	-1,098	868	-256	1271967	300	-1,154	843	217	1121968	-136	-1,057	694	592	1201969	1,092	251	-18	-276	1081970	715	653	1,264	-482	95(Not seasonally adjusted)	1969 I	216	-202	123	10	31II	634	292	-ii	-363	28Ill	-31	43	-91	16	27IV	273	118	-39	61	221970 I	412	118	324	-73	25II	540	414	352	-11	26Ill	-187	23	246	-65	22IV	
148	-50	88	342	-333	22
Source: DBS Quarterly Estimates of the Canadian Balance of International Payments.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
CANADA'S RESERVE POSITION WITH THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND<*«'<a)
1946 to 1971
Years
and
Quarters
IMF Transactions with Canada
Increase in Gold Subscriptions
Drawings (-) and
Repayments
Sales of Gold and SDRs
Other
Transactions*4^
[Stage Direction]
Transactions with Other Countries in Canadian Dollars
Reserve Position at End of Period*5)
1946	
1.0	_	-	-	1.01947	
74.0	-	-	-	-	75.01956	
-	-	-	-	15.0	90.01958	_	-0.1	90.01959	
62.5	-	-	-	-	152.51961	-25.0	_	84.6	212.11962	_	-300.0	-	-	-50.3	-138.21963	-	79.7	-	-	-	-58.51964	166.0	-9.0	-	99.0	197.51965	
-	-27.5	-	183.4	353.41966	47.6	448.51967 	_	-	-	-	-15.1	433.41968	-	-361.2*®)	-	+2.8	131.2	206.21969	-	-8.6	+0.2	280.30	478.11970	
90.0	-	-45.2	+1.0	145.7	669.61969 I	_	15.0	221.2II	- 2.5	-	103.5	322.2Ill 	- 6.1	-	86.2	402.3IV	
-	-	+0.2	75.6<7>	478.11970 I	- 8.8	-	45.7	515.0II ..	-	7.5	522.5Ill	-36.4	-	87.5	573.6IV	
90.0	-	-	+1.0	5.0	669.61971 I	-	-	-	-	-83.3	586.3
*1)Only those years are shown in which transactions occurred.
*2>Columns may not cross-add due to rounding.	.
*8>Reserve position equals the Canadian quota plus outstanding loans under the General Arrangements to Borrow (GAB) minus IMF holdings of Canadian dollars. This is the amount of foreign exchange which Canada is entitled to draw from the Fund on demand for balance of payments purposes.
^Representing Canada's share in IMF dividends paid to members in their own currencies.
(®)A negative figure indicates the amount by which IMF holdings of Canadian dollars are in excess of Canada's quota.
(^Includes the IMF's repayment of its 1965 borrowing from Canada under the GAB ($35 million).	...	.
*7includes a transfer to Cunada of $30 million in GAB notes, formerly issued to the Federal Republic of Germany, in connection with the German drawing of November 1969.
Source: IMF International Financial Statistics, Monthly.
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
CANADA'S OFFICIAL INTERNATIONAL RESERVES (1>
1961 to 1971
Years	Foreign Currencies'*)	Special	Reserve	and	Gold	Drawing	Position	TotalMonths	U.S. Dollars Other'*)	Rights	in IMF	1961	10.7	(Millions of U.S. dollars) 946.2 -	212.1	2,292.01962	9.2	708.5	-	-	2,560.51963	9.5	817.2	-	-	2,613.31964	11.8	1,025.7	-	197.5	2,889.51965	12.8	1,150.8	353.4	3,036.91966	12.4	1,045.6	448.5	2,701.91967	13.4	1,014.9	-	433.4	2,716.91968	11.6	863.1	-	206.2	3,045.81969	12.3	872.3	-	478.1	3,106.31970	14.5	790.7	182.1	669.6	4,679.01969 J	12.0	863.1	212.2	3,089.9F	11.2	863.1	-	212.2	3,044.7M	9.0	863.1	-	221.2	3,010.7A	16.1	863.1	-	231.2	3,030.8M	14.4	863.1	-	236.2	3,011.9J	14.8	865.8	-	322.2	2,960.9J	12.8	865.8	-	355.7	2,934.4A	10.8	865.8	-	360.7	2,966.6S	14.3	872.0	-	402.3	2,956.1O	13.3	872.0	-	406.5	3,050.0N	16.5	872.2	-	444.5	3,075.2D	12.3	872.3	-	478.1	3,106.31970 J	11.6	869.9	129.3	472.6	3,311.2F	12.8	879.1	132.3	501.4	3,423.9M	13.9	879.1	133.1	515.0	3,597.6A	13.6	879.1	133.1	496.8	3,822.4M	17.4	879.5	138.1	522.5	4,084.0J	17.5	879.5	143.1	522.5	4,333.4J	13.8	879.5	143.1	597.5	4,444.0A	13.0	880.0	144.7	610.0	4,615.7S	13.4	880.0	181.1	573.6	4,553.00	15.0	880.0	181.1	579.6	4,606.9N	12.4	880.4	181.1	579.6	4,644.5D	14.5	790.7	182.1	669.6	4,679.01971 J	13.3	790.7	299.8	669.6	4,799.1F	13.1	791.2	299.8	669.6	4,850.3M	15.0	791.2	299.8	586.3	4,844.7
(1)At end of period.
(^Convertible foreign currency holdings of the Exchange Fund Account, the Receiver General of Canada and the Bank of Canada. (*>Valued at official parity rates in terms of U.S. dollars.
Soubce: Department of Finance.
7052	COMMONS DEBATES_________________18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 68 DETAILS OF NEW ISSUES AND RETIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT OF CANADA DIRECT AND GUARANTEED MARKETABLE BONDS FROM JANUARY 1, 1970 TO JUNE (Millions of dollars par value)										1, 1971	
Net Change	Term of	YieldRetirements .	Amount	Sub-Total	New Bonds	Sub-Total	in Amount	New Bonds	toOutstanding	Years	Months	MaturityFebruary 15	. 6% Feb.	1, 1970	2S5	8% June 1, 1971	75	1	33	8.11285	8% Oct. 1, 1974<D	200	275	-10	4	73	8.13April 15	. 5% Oct.	15, 198701	1	1	- 1	May 1	. 33% May	1, 1970	200	7% Feb. 1, 1973	150	2	9	7.1063% May	1, 1970	50	7}% Apr. 1, 1975	225	4	11	7.407% May	1, 1970	125	7% Sept. 1, 19770)	200	7	4	7.8241% Sept.	1, 1972	200	575	575	-	May 15	. 53% May	15, 1970ul	35	53% Aug.	1, 19S0«)	14	49	-49	June 24	. 53% May	15, 1971(0	36	6% May	15, 1972(«>	37	73	-73	July 1	. 5% July	1, 1970	315	6}% Apr. 1, 1972	115	1	9	6.5873% July	1, 1970	130	63% July 1, 1973	150	3	6.72445	73% July 1, 1975	260	525	+80	5	7.49August 15	73% Deo. 15, 1975«)	200	200	+200	5	4	7.25October 1	. 63% Oct.	1, 1970	105	63% Apr. 1, 1972	100	1	6	6.617% Oct.	1, 1970	275	63% July 1, 1973	200	2	9	6.7573% Oct.	1, 1970	40	7}% Dec. 15, 19750)	250	5	23	7.258% Oct.	1, 1970	30	450	550	+100	October 15	. 5% Oct.	15, 19870)	1	1	- 1	December 15	. 53% Dec.	15, 1970	300	5J% Dec. 15, 1972	100	2	5.368% Dec.	15, 1970	75	6% June 15, 1974	200	3	6	6.08375	7% Sept. 1, 1977	300	600	+225	6	83	6.90December 29	. CN 5}% Dec. 15, 1971(*>	3	CN 5% May 15, 1977<*>	1	C N 5f% Jan. 1. 1985«>	2	CN 5% Oct. 1, 1987«)	3	8	- 8	TOTAL	(Calendar 1970)..	2,262	2,725	+463	January 16	. CN 23% Jan. 16, 1971	40	40	-40	February 15	63% Feb. 15, 1989	150	150	+150	18	6.85Total	(Fiscal 1970/71)..	[DOT]	2,017	2,600	+583	April 1	. 6% Apr.	1, 1971	225	5% Apr. 1, 1974	100	3	5.0063% Apr.	1, 1971	200	53% Oct. 1, 1976	175	5	6	5.50425	63% Apr. 1, 1980	200	475	+50	9	6.40June 1	. 5% June	1, 1971	350	5% Apr. 1, 1974	2	10	5.158% June	1, 1971	75	5f% June 1, 1976	5	5.98425	63% June 1, 1979	475	+50	8	6.66
(^Exchangeable into an equal par value of 8% bonds due October 1, 1986 to yield 8.05% for 16 years 7$ months.
WU.S. pay issue subject to partial redemption for sinking fund on prorated basis.
(*>These bonds were offered only in exchange for an equal par value of 4J% bonds due September 1, 1972.
<4)Payable in Italian lire and placed directly with the Italian Exchange Office.
(^Cancellation of securities subject to purchase fund.
(^Exchangeable into an equal par value of 10 year 8% bonds due Deoember 15, 1985 to yield 8.00% for 10 years commencing December 15, 1975 and 7.63% for the full 15 year 4 month period commencing August 15, 1970.
(^Exchangeable into an equal par value of 10 year 8% bonds due December 15, 1985 to yield 8.00% for 10 years commencing December 15, 1976 and 7.64% for the full 15 year 2§ month period commencing October 1, 1970.
(Cancellation of securities held by purchase funds. Total does not add due to rounding.
Souse*: Department of Finance.
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1964 to 1970
1964	1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970New Issues in Canadian dollars: Government of Canada-Direct and Guaranteed Securities*1*	-45	-380	82	(Millions of dollars) 800	1,177	-109	1,301Canada Savings Bonds.	480	253	223	230	40	324	714Total Government of Canada issues	435	-127	305	1,030	1,217	215	2,015Provinces and Municipalities**)	868	739	1,028	1,045	614	410	938Corporations	618	986	538	800	565	578	1,222Total Canadian dollar issues	1,920	1,598	1,871	2,875	2,396	1,203	4,175Foreign-Pay Bond Iflsues:	Government of Canada	-	-5	-5	-205	266	14	-110Provinces and Municipalities	471	267	424	800	905	1,021	381Corporations	213	395	529	160	370	417	306Total Foreign-pay issues	m	657	948	755	1,541	1,452	577TOTAL BOND ISSUES	2,604	2,255	2,819	3,630	3,937	2,655	4,752Taken up by:	Bank of Canada	29	352	3	329	136	173	184Chartered Banks	-191	54	113	873	1,102	-491	1,807Non-bank Holders Market Bonds	160	939	1,531	1,460	1,639	1,703	1,498Canada Savings Bonds.	480	253	223	230	40	324	714Holders of Canadian Foreign-Pay	684	657	949	738	1,020	946	549TOTAL BOND ISSUES	2,604	2,255	2,819	3,630	3,937	2,655	4,752
^Includes Treasury bills and excludes non-marketable bonds. (^Excludes securities bought by the Canada Pension Plan. Source: Bank of Canada and Department of Finance.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 70 MORTGAGE LOAN APPROVALS'" 1968 to 1970
1909	1970
1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	I	II	hi	IV	I	ii	III	rvResidential Private lenders NHA	
191	356	832	711	(Millions of dollars) 937 153 231	169	158	135	287	246	269New	356	832	701	858	153	231	167	150	124	268	222	244Existing	-	-	10	79	-	-	2	8	11	19	24	25Conventional	1,400	1,535	1,652	1,183	419	588	357	287	234	331	302	317New	
674	745	963	990	539	266	362	199	163	115	166	120	138Existing^*)	655	572	662	644	153	227	158	124	119	165	182	179Total private	14756	2,367	2,362	2,120	572	820	526	444	368	617	547	587New	1,101	1,795	1,690	1,397	419	593	366	313	239	434	342	382Existing	655	572	672	732	153	227	160	131	129	183	205	205CMHC8)	
593	740	504	609	945	83	120	153	254	84	98	419	348New	698	454	549	914	77	107	135	231	77	91	413	333Existing	
19	42	50	60	31	6	13	18	23	7	7	6	11Total residential	2,496	2,871	2,971	3,065	655	940	679	698	452	715	966	931New	
1,340	1,799	2,249	2,239	2,311	496	700	501	544	316	525	755	715Existing	
490	697	622	732	754	159	240	178	154	136	190	211	216Total public and private	2,865	3,206	3,403	3,573	745	1,069	792	797	539	834	1,088	1,111Residential	2,496	2,871	2,971	3,065	655	940	679	698	452	715	966	931Non-residential	369	335	432	508	90	129	113	99	87	119	122	180
0>Data are on a gross basis, i.e., they do not necessarily take account of cancellations or alterations of loans after initial approval, iblncludes data on farm property.
Oilncludes student housing.
Source: Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1966 to 1970
	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	i	1969 II	hi	IV	I	1970 II III		IV
					(Millions of dollars)								
Chartered Banks	254	447	381	510	93	150	79	58	65	123	151	171Residential	-	230	430	365	493	87	148	75	55	61	115	150	168New	-	128	333	284	379	63	114	64	43	49	94	111	125Existing*2*	-	102	97	81	114	24	34	11	12	12	21	39	43N on-residential	
-	24	17	16	17	6	2	4	3	4	8	1	3Life Companies	
804	802	845	622	456	141	223	153	104	100	104	95	155Residential	
585	629	687	433	216	109	169	103	52	50	68	45	53New	
459	494	614	379	177	93	152	91	43	41	58	36	43Existing*2)	
126	135	73	54	39	16	17	12	9	9	10	9	10N on-residential	
219	173	158	189	240	32	54	50	52	50	36	50	102Loan, Trust, etc*3)	
815	1,072	1,411	1,791	1,663	428	576	408	382	291	509	424	442Residential	
652	898	1,251	1,564	1,412	376	503	349	338	258	434	353	367New	
307	480	848	1,027	842	263	326	211	228	149	282	195	215Existing*2)	
345	418	403	537	570	113	177	138	110	109	152	158	152Non-residential	
163	173	160	227	251	52	73	59	44	33	75	71	75Total residential	
1,237	1,756	2,367	2,362	2,120	572	820	526	444	368	617	547	587Total non-residential	
382	369	335	432	508	90	129	113	99	87	119	122	180Total private lending	
1,619	2,125	2,702	2,794	2,628	662	949	639	543	455	736	669	767
">Data are on a gross basis, i.e., they do not necessarily take account of cancellations or alterations of loans after initial approval. *2)In eludes data on farm property.
<3)Includes loan and trust companies, Quebec Savings Banks, fraternal and mutual benefit societies.
Source: Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970
			(Millions of dollars)			
Government of Canada						
Direct and Guaranteed Securities*1*	-300	212	875	1,239	8	1,240Canada Savings Bonds	253	223	230	40	324	714Sub-total	-47	435	1,105	1,279	332	1,954Provinces*2* and Municipalities	Bonds	739	1,490	1,714	1,318	1,215	1,801Bank loans	198	137	81	29	83	-38Subtotal	937	1,627	1,795	1,347	1,298	1,763Corporations and Others**	Bonds.	986	538	800	565	578	1,222Stocks	468	588	449	516	789	279Commercial and Industrial Credit and Bankers' Acceptances	254	-49	-65	77	651	379Short-term Commercial Paper	-116	40	114	143	229	-62Bank loans	1,491	533	1,205	1,085	1,284	230Sub-total	3,083	1,699	2,503	2,386	3,531	2,089Individuals	Mortgages	1,574	1,057	988	1,303	1,618	1,400Consumer Credit	887	613	819	1,217	1,264	550Sub-total	2,461	1,670	1,807	2,520	2,882	1,950TOTAL	6,434	5,431	7,210	7,532	7,711	5,802
e-estimated.
^Includes Treasury bills and non-marketable bonds.
^Includes securities purchased by Canada Pension Plan.
(^"Others ' include unincorporated business, farmers, non-financial, religious and non-profit institutions. Source: Bank of Canada and Department of Finance.
18 June, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 73 FINANCIAL FLOWS: CHARTERED BANKS
1968	to 1970
1968	1969	1970	1969	1970	I	ii	hi	IV	I	ii	III	IVGross domestic savings	
198	180	180	47	(Millions of dollars! 46 52 35	63	53	52	12Non-financial capital formation	71	59	14	14	14	29	16	15	15	13Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)	
152	109	121	33	32	38	6	47	38	37	-1Net financial investments	
153	117	106	32	8	9	68	14	-34	-18	144Net increase in financial assets	1,272	2,918	576	315	-189	570	-177	904	390	1,801Currency and bank deposits	
168	84	68	-161	103	27	115	-85	-7	58	102Consumer credit	485	506	205	312	-51	19	-31	176	168	193Loans	1,362	206	502	420	62	378	-15	-273	25	469Provinces	-20	-33	-62	-16	-4	62	-57	29	25	-30Municipalities	103	-5	238	-102	-89	56	208	-133	-190	110Grain dealers	264	-394	79	55	131	-1	-52	-203	-41	-98Sales finance companies	69	-101	-72	8	-6	139	-230	56	-46	119Other loans to persons	
67	-23	-12	-46	-64	-89	176	-98	-89	-61	236Farmers	105	77	-44	103	21	25	-63	49	34	57Business	
649	1,065	246	496	463	100	6	132	7	232	-125Stock brokers and investment dealers	
180	-198	275	-153	7	-19	-33	22	59	-3	197Day-to-day loans	
-113	-10	127	54	-34	21	-51	110	-49	84	-18Other loans	
-33	7	26	12	-	-4	-1	13	1	-9	21Government of Canada Treasury bills	-37	602	31	65	-56	-77	110	436	77	-21Mortgages	265	132	76	91	64	34	-11	38	47	58Government of Canada bonds	-462	932	21	-325	-30	-128	-21	227	243	483Provincial bonds	-13	98	8	-19	-9	7	8	-1	10	81Municipal bonds	-9	9	4	-5	-5	-3	-4	-9	22Other Canadian bonds	-3	166	33	-51	18	-3	88	-3	-51	132Claims on associated enterprises	43	70	2	3	31	7	21	9	11	29Net foreign currency assets	-437	156	-142	-295	-233	233	-229	321	-188	252Other financial assets	1	-27	-5	5	-8	9	-8	-19	-1	1Net increase in liabilities	1,155	2,812	544	307	-198	502	-191	938	408	1,657Currency and bank deposits*1*	
3,309	1,025	2,962	539	238	-246	494	-137	855	438	1,806Government of Canada	551	-107	-254	201	-193	797	-353	-721	-121	1,088Personal savings Chequable	-1,009	-949	-431	-175	-157	-315	-302	-192	-145	-18	-76Non-chequable	
1,565	1,323	1,121	388	317	445	173	438	344	291	48Fixed-term	
1,278	1,055	887	336	265	368	86	187	323	287	90Non-personal term and notice	
743	-773	948	509	-666	-324	-292	-28	602	121	253Demand	
488	173	103	-638	348	35	428	-855	337	315	306Float	
-191	-118	18S	365	-129	-41	-313	458	-157	-141	28Adjustment	
232	-237	253	8	59	-221	-83	208	272	-296	69Loans	-8	-1	-4	-1	-	-3	-1	Bonds	-	-	-	-	-	-	_	Stocks	66	18	7	35	2	22	13	1	4	Other liabilities	72	-167	2	35	46	-11	-66	82	-34	-149Discrepancy*1*	-8	15	1	24	29	-62	33	72	55	145
«>The breakdown ot currency and bank deposits is based on the average of Wednesdays in the last month of the quarter. The difference between these data and the month-end data used in the financial flows is shown in the item "adjustement".
>!>Part of the discrepancy is due to the fact that the banks' earnings are reflected both in the savings and investments accounts of the Chartered Bank sector. Double counting is inevitable because the "balance of revenue", as indicated by the banks, is not allocable to a specific item on a uniform basis during their fiscal year.
Sotjbce: DBS Financial Flow Accounts, occasional, Cat. 13-530, Quarterly, 13-002.
Bank of Canada.
7058	COMMONS DEBATES_________________ 18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 74 FINANCIAL FLOWS: TRUST COMPANIES 1968 to 1970											
1968	1969	1970	1969	1970	I	II	III	IV	i	ii	hi	rv(Millions of dollars)	Gross domestic saving	16	1	4	4	3	5	5	1	2	-7Non-financial capital formation	4	-6	-	2	2	-	1	-	-2	-5Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)	12	7	4	2	1	5	4	1	4	-2Net financial investment	12	7	4	2	1	5	4	1	4	-2Net increase in financial assets	787	808	219	191	217	160	358	169	114	167Currency and deposits	10	128	97	-39	-75	27	-7	45	-28	118Loans	21	6	-	-17	5	33	6	-38	36	3Short-term notes and bills	73	74	45	12	69	-43	162	19	-52	-54Mortgages	
304	547	562	61	133	183	170	134	126	141	161Government of Canada bonds	
63	74	-46	17	60	12	-5	6	-58	21	-15Provincial bonds	
-1	1	27	2	2	-17	14	18	9	-1	1Municipal bonds	-25	5	-5	1	-5	-16	11	8	-11	-3Other Canadian bonds	9	4	-5	21	-1	-6	4	23	-10	-13Claims on associated enterprises	25	-33	22	3	22	-22	1	24	-27	-31Stocks	
8	8	1	-1	2	7	1	4	-2	1	-2Foreign investments	
22	28	31	-19	18	15	12	-3	9	12	13Other financial assets	
10	17	49	5	5	12	-5	23	4	32	-10Net increase in liabilities	
605	775	801	215	189	216	155	354	168	110	169Demand and savings deposits	
61	113	134	22	69	-17	39	16	5	18	95Certified debentures and term deposits	
467	636	602	185	121	204	126	294	180	80	48Bank loans	
-1	1	6	1	4	1	-5	3	5	-	-2Other loans	
3	-1	-23	1	-3	-	1	-2	-17	-1	-3Claims on associated enterprises	
27	3	19	-7	9	5	-4	12	15	-5	-3Stocks	
23	11	40	2	8	3	-2	2	-4	-2	44Other liabilities	
25	12	24	11	-20	21	-	29	-16	20	-9Discrepancy	
1	
Source: DBS Financial Flow Account«.
DBS Financial Institutions, Quarterly, Cat. 61-006.
18 June, 1971

[Stage Direction]
FINANCIAL FLOWS: MORTGAGE LOAN COMPANIES 1968 to 1970
1668	1969	1970	1969	1970	I	II	hi	IV	i	II	in	IV(Millions of dollars)	Gross domestic savings	8	20	2	1	5	1	2	17Non-financial capital formation	13	4	1	11	2	-1	1	2	-1	2Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)	-5	16	1	-10	-2	6	1	15Net financial investment	-5	16	1	-10	-2	6	1	15Net increase in financial assets	348	440	58	119	80	91	114	53	125	148Currency and deposits	
36	-53	14	-32	-10	-3	-8	11	-23	18	8Loans	3	4	3	-1	1	1	3	4	-4Short-term notes and bills	6	33	12	-9	-8	11	25	-4	10	2Mortgages	280	318	25	75	100	80	56	67	88	107Government of Canada bonds	1	-7	-5	3	1	2	3	-9	-3	2Provincial bonds	6	-3	1	-1	-1	7	11	5	-11	-8Municipal bonds	-1	1	1	-1	Other Canadian bonds	2	-1	-2	3	1	2	-4	1Claims on associated enterprises	58	64	11	62	-6	1	4	1	19	40Stocks	30	-4	32	-1	-1	-2	-2Foreign investments	2	18	4	9	-2	-4	-3	6	4	11Other financial assets	8	4	9	-2	2	-1	8	4	1	-9Net increase in liabilities	353	424	57	129	82	85	114	53	124	133Demand and savings deposits	-8	41	2	-15	-12	21	4	-10	18	29Certified debentures and term deposits	194	338	15	77	26	76	52	133	59	94Bank loans	22	-36	-10	15	11	6	8	-39	-1	-4Other loans	42	38	12	8	18	4	38	-39	22	17Claims on associated enterprises	2	-8	10	-13	22	-17	13	-6	-15Stocks	87	29	1	84	-4	6	2	5	13	gOther liabilities	13	22	30	-28	21	-10	11	-11	19	3Discrepancy	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Source: DBS Financial Flow Accounts.
DBS Financial Institutions.
[Stage Direction]
18 June, 1971
REFERENCE TABLE 76 FINANCIAL FLOWS: MUTUAL FUNDS 1968 to 1970
Gross domestic saving	
Non-financial capital	
Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)	
Net financial investment	
Net increase in financial assets...
Currency and deposits	
Foreign currency and deposits	
Trade receivables	
Short-term notes and bills	
Mortgages	
Government of Canada bonds	
Provincial bonds	
Municipal bonds'1*	
Other Canadian bonds	
Claims on associated enterprises***
Stocks	
Foreign investments	
Other financial assets	
Net increase in liabilities	
Trade payables	
Bank loans	
Other loans	
Stocks	
Other liabilities	
Discrepancy	
1968	1969	1970-3	5	-46-3	5	-46-3	5	-46377	243	-7477	6	-432	33	-3731	8	-36-13	23	-4-4	1	-2	-4	-1214	5 0	-107	7	-8-	-	484	186	105384	-40	-39-	16	6380	238	2858	-45	83	-3	-11	-4	-1318	289	-31-	1	-3i	ii	hi	IV2	(Millions of dollars) 3-4 4	-	-	-	-2	3	-4	42	3	-4	4115	74	47	754	3	20	-716	11	10	68	-6	-22	2833	-32	56	-34-1	1	1	--1	-1	-3	11	-3	3	42	-	-	-6	-	3	-21	-1	-	-9	41	17	119-8	60	-43	-495	1	5	5113	71	51	3-36	2	9	-20-3	3	-3	--2	2	-3	-1156	64	45	24-2	-	3	-i	ii	Ill	rv-41	5	-12	2-	-	-	--41	5	-12	2-41	5	-12	2-18	-59	30	-27-1	90	-24	-108-5	9	-36	-511	-52	3	249	-41	36	-48-	-	-	-1	-7	2	-8-8	-2	_	-1-5	-7	-2	6-	-	-3	752	15	1	37-112	-70	53	90-	6	-1	123	-64	42	-2922	-24	25	-15-	-1	-	--1	-	-	-2	-39	18	-12-	-	-1	-2
0'Included in provincial government bonds prior to 1969. **>Included in stocks prior to 1969.
Source: DBS Financial Flow Accounts.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
REFERENCE TABLE 77 FINANCIAL FLOWS: CLOSED-END FUNDS 1968 to 1970
1968	1969	1970i	ii	in	IV	I	ii	in	IV(Millions of dollars)	Gross domestic savings	-10	-4	-a	1	-1	1	-2	-2	-1	1Non-financial capital acquisition	-	Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)	-10	-4	-11	1	-1	1	-2	-2	-1	1Net financial investment	-10	-4	-11	1	-1	1	-2	-2	-1	1Net increase in financial assets	-37	46	-48	16	-9	4	14	30	4	-2Currency and deposits	-22	-2	-11	-7	-5	1	-4	6	-4Foreign currency and deposits	-	-1	-1	2	-1	-2	1	1	-1Trade receivables	-1	-2	-1	-1	-1	Short-term notes and bills	-6	-8	8	-1	-5	2	-1	-1	Mortgages	Government of Canada bonds	4	-3	3	2	-1	-1	-2Provincial bonds!	Municipal bonds J	1	-	1	-1	-	-	-	-Other Canadian bonds	-11	22	-11	22Claims on associated enterprises^	7	9	13	-12	6	7	2	4	-4Stocks	1	24	-13	6	6	2	14	26	-16Foreign investments	-7	1	-2	-5	-2	2	-2	-2	2	3Other financial assets	-2	-2	-3	1	-2	Net increase in liabilities	-27	60	-37	15	-8	3	16	32	5	-3Trade payables	-9	1	-6	-2	-1	1	-1	2	-1Bank loans	u	4	14	-8	5	-5	3	4	2Other loans	-i	6	1	-1	-1	7	-1	-1	Bonds	-	Stocks	-34	43	-32	2	-3	12	31	Other liabilities	<	-3	2	-	i	3	i	-	-4Discrepancy	1	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	-
u>In eluded in stocks prior to 1969.
Sourcb: DBS Financial Flow Accounts.
7062
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
FINANCIAL FLOWS: LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES 1968 to 1970
*

1970
1970
[Stage Direction]

Gross domestic savings	
Non-financial capital acquisitions... Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)..
Net financial investment	
Net increase in financial assets_
Currency and deposits	
Consumer credit	
Short-term notes and bills...
Mortgages	
Government of Canada bonds..
Provincial bonds	
Municipal bonds	
Other Canadian bonds	
Stocks	
Net increase in liabilities....
Life insurance and pensions..
Soubcb: DBS Financial Flow Accounta.
(Millions of dollars)
12	12	16	2	4	3	3	4	4	431	85	77	30	13	11	31	13	16	24	24-19	-73	-61	-28	-9	-8	-28	-9	-12	-20	-20-19	-73	-61	-28	-9	-8	-28	-9	-12	-20	-20709	647	681	159	190	149	149	175	161	148	1975	24	18	-20	-3	-7	55	-47	-12	34	4362	105	99	12	26	37	30	28	35	21	155	40	51	69	8	3	-40	76	27	-1	-51368	291	155	51	83	85	72	50	55	32	187	21	21	-2	7	3	13	11	-5	7	852	4	66	3	8	-14	7	7	22	16	21-16	-17	-6	-3	1	-1	-14	2	1	-6	-3114	40	178	8	17	19	-4	16	17	35	110112	138	97	41	43	24	30	31	21	11	34728	720	742	187	199	157	177	184	173	168	217728	720	742	187	199	157	177	184	173	168	217
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
FINANCIAL FLOWS: SALES FINANCE AND CONSUMER LOAN COMPANIES
1968 to 1970
1968	1969	1970
1970
Gross domestic savings	
38	61Non-financial capital acquisition	
14	18Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)	
24	43Net financial investment	
24	43Net increase in financial assets	
439	057Currency and deposits	
_29	16Foreign currency and deposits	
17	16Consumer credit	
229	408Other loans	
221	79Short-term notes and bills	
-16	64Mortgages	
23	36Government of Canada bonds	
7	-Provincial bonds	
_3	-26Other bonds	
-	-7Claims on associated enterprises	
-13	59Stocks	
-2	__Foreign investments	
1Other financial assets	
5	12Net increase in liabilities	
415Trade payables	
3Bank loans	
-26Other loans	
-21Demand and short-term notes (Canadian)	
344Demand and short-term notes (Foreign)	
-15Mortgages	Long-term bonds (Canadian)	
60Long-term bonds (Foreign)	
-27Claims on associated enterprises	
26Stocks	
1Unearned income	
67Other liabilities	
3
Discrepancy.
6
24 63
38
77
89
25 122
Source: DBS Financial Flow Accounts. DBS Financial Institutions.
1	11	hi	IV75	14	(Millions of dollars) 13 16 18	16	4	5	3	659	10	8	13	1259	10	8	13	12-169	81	173	188	21532	-4	2	-1	19-5	-4	9	8	3-184	14	165	143	86-125	58	-9	-31	6146	46	1	-2	1932	-42	22	26	30-19	-	-	-	--	-	-18	-8	-4	-7	-8	4	4-23	23	17	21	-2-1	-	-	-	-1	-	-	-	173	-3	-8	28	-5-228	71	165	175	203-3	-1	3	4	-1-93	-119	82	-32	93-42	8	27	-8	26-122	117	-122	142	55-19	22	37	-4	-17-1	1	-	-	199	-18	48	-21	6819	17	5	-9	-1-78	21	34	26	812	2	10	-2	158	8	42	43	29-9	14	-1	36	-73-	-	-	-	-
6
13
-7
-161
-6
-3
-7
-1
7
-2
-44
-70
7
-4
16

[Stage Direction]
19	21	163	4	316	17	1316	17	13161	-58	-181-2	12	298	-5	-685	-40	-6845	-130	-137-19	55	1618	12	-6-6 	0	-8	-2-& 8	1	26	20	-32-	7	-520	18	28145	-75	-1941	1	-3-	-44	9211	-4	-5-55	-26	-19219 -1 32	57	-254	761	-1	1246	-17	-10617	-1	-28	-6	-1245	-39	-31_
24171-27£
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
FINANCIAL FLOWS: FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANIES
1968 to 1970
	1968	1969	1970	I	1969 ii	III	IV	I	1970 n	in	IV
					(Millions of dollars)						
Gross domestic savings	19	75	1	19	4	-5	9	32	10	24Non-financial capital acquisition	-1	4	-1	-1	-	1	1	1	Net lending (+) or borrowing (-)	20	71	2	20	4	-6	8	31	9	20	71	2	20	4	-6	8	31	9	23Net increase in financial assets	214	323	-3	76	81	60	24	115	118	66Currency and deposits	7	39	-48	14	19	23	-38	5	45	27Trade receivables	
30	26	28	31	31	5	-41	36	39	-4	-43Short-term notes and bills	104	-11	42	25	5	32	-8	-1	8	-102	8	-1	1	2	-	2	2	3	1Government of Canada bonds	
8	37	-13	-19	8	31	17	-32	15	6	-2Provincial bonds	
50	-	98	18	-7	-13	2	15	20	19	444	32	4	-3	5	-2	7	-3	20	8Other Canadian bonds	50	90	4	15	12	19	13	23	20	34Claims on associated enterprises	
7	2	-7	-5	1	-	6	-6	1	4	-6
53	33	48	9	11	8	5	10	14	10	14Foreign investments	
4	-2	8	-1	-4	-	3	1	2	-	5Other financial assets	12	3	-4	10	-7	13	24	-2	-13	-6Net increase in liabilities	
117	194	252	-5	56	77	66	16	84	109	43Trade payables	
8	-8	16	-5	-4	-3	4	- 1	-4	8	13Claims on associated enterprises	
-10	16	57	-12	3	2	23	10	14	21	1211	8	1	1	2	7	-6	- 1	13	2Other liabilities	
120	175	171	11	56	76	32	13	75	67	16Discrepancy	
Source: DBS Financial Flow Accounts.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
FINANCIAL FLOWS: CREDIT UNIONS AND CAISSES POPULAIRES
1968 to 1970
Gross domestic savings	
Non-financial capital acquisitions... Net lending (-f) or borrowing
Net financial investment	
Net increase in financial assets_
Currency and deposits	
Consumer credit	
Loans	
Mortgages	
Government of Canada bonds...
Provincial bonds	
Municipal bonds	
Other Canadian bonds	
Claims on associated enterprises Other financial assets	
Net increase in liabilities	
Currency and deposits	
Bank loans	
Other loans	
Other liabilities	
Discrepancy	
1968	1969	197034	27	2815	12	1119	15	1715	17	13335	353	44844	25	100152	156	9317	-4	17129	102	123-8	6	81	39	3111	12	687	4	24-18	6	-6320	335	435312	314	467-1	12	-315	4	-114	5	104	-2	4i	II	in	IV-31	(Millions of dollars) 14 24 20	1	3	5	3-32	11	19	17-33	10	23	18-26	172	111	96-11	19	17	--24	68	52	57-1	12	-5	77	31	42	22-3	4	3	218	10	2	9-4	-	10	16-10	16	-6	4-	-	-	-19	12	-4	-217	162	88	7818	124	99	73-6	24	-7	16	12	-5	31	2	1	11	1	-4	i	II	m	IV-32	15	26	192	4	3	2-34	11	23	17-35	10	22	1652	154	82	16062	-10	13	35-49	74	29	391	5	-2	1318	36	19	507	-3	3	13	4	7	1719	7	20	1215	-11	18	2-24	52	-25	-987	144	60	144115	126	71	155-23	6	-9	-5-8	8	-4	-73	4	2	11	1	1	1
Source: DBS Financial Flow Accounts.
June 18, 1971


[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction	 7071
Highlights of the government's financial operations during 1970-71	 7071
Budgetary transactions	 7075
Revenue	 7075
Expenditure	 7083
Assets and liabilities as at March 31, 1971	 7109
Summary	 7109
Liability accounts	   7110
Asset accounts	 7119
Net debt	 7129
The cash position	 7130
The public debt	 7134
Supplementary detailed tables	 7141
June 18, 1971


[Stage Direction]
This review presents in summary form the financial operations of the Government of Canada for the fiscal year 1970-71. Although the fiscal year of the government ends on March 31, the books must remain open for some time after that date to record adjusting entries and to take into account section 35 of the Financial Administration Act which permits payments made up to April 30 to discharge debts incurred before March 31 to be included in the accounts for any fiscal year. The final figures for the fiscal year will therefore differ to some extent from those given in the following pages.
The financial operations of the government include the raising of tax and other revenues and their allocation to departmental and other expenditures; such
operations are provided for in its annual administrative budget. In addition, the government undertakes other transactions which do not enter into the calculation of its budget surplus or deficit. These transactions include all receipts and payments leading to changes in the assets or liabilities of the government. Among such receipts and payments are those arising from debt operations and changes in the bank balances of the Receiver General: these two types of operation are undertaken to finance the deficit or dispose of the surplus arising from all the other operations of the government, whether budgetary or non-budgetary. Accordingly, in what follows, debt operations and changes in the bank balances of the Receiver General are distinguished from other non-budgetary transactions.

[Stage Direction]
This section outlines the financial operations of the government in 1970-71 giving a brief summary of the budget and other receipts, outlays and lending, the unmatured debt transactions and the changes in the
cash position and the debt position during the fiscal year. More detailed explanations are given in subsequent sections of this review.
24171-28J
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
THE FINANCIAL OPERATIONS OF THE GOVERNMENT (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31				
	1971 (preliminary)		1970	
Budgetary transactions-				
Revenue-				
Tax	11,344	10,955	Non-tax	1,425	1,369	12,769	12,324	Expenditure	-	-13,187	-11,931	Surplus or deficit (-)	-418	393Non-budgetary transactions (excluding unmatured debt transactions)	Old Age Security Fund	- 4	100	Canada Pension Plan	[DOT]	912	824	Canada Pension Plan Investment Fund	- 869	- 810	Unemployment Insurance Fund	16	Other annuity, insurance and pension accounts	684	740	Loans, investments and advances-	To crown corporations	-1,119	- 867	To others	- 214	- 258	Foreign exchange reserves	-1,317	- 424	Other operations	140	58	Net amount required for non-budgetary transactions	-1,771	-637Overall cash requirements to be financed by Increase in unmatured debt or decrease In cash balances	-8,189	-244Net Increase In unmatured debt outstanding	Marketable bonds	631	- 17	Treasury bills	840	55	Canada savings bonds	1,226	411	Other	- 85	8,612	27	476Net increase or decrease (-) in Receiver General bank balances	483	232Add Receiver General bank balances at beginning of year	832	600Receiver General bank balances at end of year	1,255	832
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Budgetary transactions
Revenue at $12,769 million for 1970-71 is £447 million or about 3§ per cent more than the total collected in 1969-70. The increase of $447 million in receipts between 1969-70 and 1970-71 was the result of a rise of $389 million in tax revenue and an expansion of $58 million in non-tax revenue. The yield from personal income taxes (including social development tax) is $701 million higher, from corporation income tax it is $395 million lower, and from return on investments it is $129 million higher than in 1969 -70.
Expenditure at $13,187 million is $1,257 million or 11 per cent higher than in 1969-70. The major changes in expenditures between 1969-70 and 1970-71 are increases of $204 million in public debt charges, $297 million in payments to provinces, $220 million in respect of the Medical Care Act and $88 million for regional economic expansion.
Given revenue of $12,769 million and expenditure of $13,187 million, there will be a budgetary deficit of $418 million as compared with a surplus of $393 million in 1969-70.
Non-budgetary transactions (excluding unmatured debt transactions)
Social security accounts
The three social security accounts are those for the Old Age Security Fund, the Canada Pension Plan and the Unemployment Insurance Fund. Details of their transactions in 1969-70 and 1970-71 are given in table 2.
The Old Age Security Fund is financed by tax receipts. These receipts are $1,903 million in 1970-71 an increase of 4 per cent over their level in 1969-70. Payments rose to $1,907 million in 1970-71 or only $4 million more than receipts. In 1969-70, receipts of $1,831 million exceeded disbursements by $100 million.
The Canada Pension Plan had receipts of $1,024 million in 1970-71 which exceeded its disbursements of $112 million by $912 million. The greater part of the excess was invested in purchasing $869 million of provincial and federal government bonds. At March 31, 1971 the balance in the Canada Pension Plan Investment Fund was $3,701 million as compared with $2,833 million at March 31, 1970.
The Unemployment Insurance Fund received $704 million in 1970-71, mainly in the form of contributions. Benefits paid were $837 million, an increase of $295 million over the amount paid in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNTS (in millions of dollars)
Receipts	1969-70	1970-71	Disbursements	1969-70	1970-71	
		Old Age Security Fund				
Income tax	1,254	1,340	Old age pensions	1,467	1,634	Sales tax	577	563	Guaranteed income sup-	plement	
Deposit with Receiver	264	273	General	100	- 4	1,831	1,903	1,831	1,903	Canada Pension Plan	Contributions	746	812	Pensions	47	92	Investment income	144	212	Expenses	18	20	Investments	
Deposit with Receiver	810	869	General	15	43	890	1,024	890	1,024	Unemployment Insurance Fund	Contributions	590	675	Benefits	542	837	Investment income	28	29	82	-141	Unredeemed warrants,	etc	
Deposit with Receiver	-6	- 8	General	16	618	704	618	704	
June 18, 1971
Other non-budgetary transactions (excluding unmatured debt transactions)
Other operations include receipts from other annuity, insurance and pension accounts, loans, investments and advances, sums required to finance additions to foreign exchange reserves and a variety of miscellaneous operations. The net balances from these operations are shown in table 1.
Other annuity, insurance and pension accounts include the superannuation accounts of the public service, the Canadian forces and the R.C.M.P., the government annuities account and certain other accounts of a similar nature such as the account for retiring allowances to Members of Parliament. The net receipts from these accounts fell from $740 million in 1969-70 to $684 million in 1970-71.
Loans, investments and advances are made to crown corporations, provincial governments, governments outside Canada, international organizations, private businesses and individuals. The greater part of these loans, investments and advances are made to crown corporations: in 1970-71 net loans to and investments in crown corporations were $1,119 million as compared with $867 million in 1969-70. Other loans, investments and advances were $214 million in 1970-71 and $258 million in 1969-70.
Foreign exchange operations to finance increases in Canada's international reserves include receipts from Special Drawing Rights (S.D.R.'s) issued by the International Monetary Fund and payments arising from subscriptions of capital to the International Monetary Fund, advances to the Exchange Fund and the redemption of non-interest-bearing notes payable to the International Monetary Fund. During 1970-71, the receipts from SDRs w'ere $119 million, bringing the total value of those held to $253 million. The net increase in advances to the Exchange Fund during the year was $1,239 million as a result of advances to and repayments from it of $2,438 million and $1,199 million respectively. The net effect of all foreign exchange operations of this type was to finance a net increase of $1,317 million in Canada's foreign exchange reserves in 1970-71 as compared with $424 million in
1969-70. The large sums required for this purpose reflect the strength of the Canadian dollar in foreign exchange markets.
Miscellaneous operations produced a net receipt of $140 million in 1970-71 and a net receipt of $58 million in 1969-70.
Unmatured debt transactions
The net cash requirement arising from the budget, operations of social security funds and other operations was $2,189 million in 1970-71 as compared with $244 million in 1969-70. Table 1 shows that the increased sums required to finance additions to foreign exchange reserves was a major factor in this expansion of cash requirements.
The increase in cash requirements was met almost entirely by net issues of marketable bonds, treasury bills and Canada savings bonds. In 1969-70, there was a net redemption of $17 million of marketable bonds but, in 1970-71, the net increase in the issues of these bonds was $631 million. In addition, there was a net increase of $840 million in treasury bill issues as compared with $55 million in 1969-70. The Canada savings bond issue of 1970-71 proved very attractive and produced a net amount of $1,226 million as compared with $411 million in 1969-70. Other borrowing produced a net payment of $85 million as compared with net receipts of $27 million in 1969-70.
A summary of all these operations is given in table 1 which shows that their net effect was to increase the bank balances of the Receiver General, including those in foreign currencies, by $423 million from $832 million at March 31, 1970 to $1,255 million at March 31, 1971.
Changes in debt position
As a result of all the operations just described, the gross public debt increased by $4,816 million to $42,966 million at March 31, 1971, net recorded assets increased by $4,398 million to $25,605 million and the net debt increased by $418 million to $17,361 million.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Balance at March 31	Increase
[Stage Direction]
 or
1971	1970	decrease (-)
(preliminary)
Gross liabilities	
42,966	38,150	4,816Less recorded net assets	
25,605	21,207	4,398Net debt	
17,361	16,943	418

[Stage Direction]
Total budgetary revenue is estimated at $12,769 million in 1970-71, budgetary expenditure at $13,187 million and the budgetary deficit at $418 million.
Inj1970-71, the practice whereby revenue arising from a particular vote is credited thereto was extended toxinclude Department of Insurance vote 20, Public
Service Commission vote 100 and Department of Transport vote 1.
The following table, covering a decade, shows unchanged figures for prior years but subsequent tables include amended 1969-70 figures for comparative purposes.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Fiscal Yeas ended March 31	Budgetary	Budgetary	Surplus orrevenue	expenditure	deficit (-)1962	1963	1964	1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971	(preliminary)5,729.6	6,520.6	-791.05,878.7	6,570.3	-691.66,253.2	6,872.4	-619.27,180.3	7,218.3	- 38.07,695.8	7,734.8	- 39.08,376.2	8,797.7	-421.59,076.6	9,871.4	-794.810,191.1	10,767.2	-576.112,323.9	11,931.3	392.612,769.0	13,186.6	-417.6
Revenue
Budgetary revenue at $12,769 million is $447 million or 4 per cent higher than the total received in 1969-70. Tax revenue of $11,344 million accounts for 89 per cent of the total and non-tax revenue of $1,425 million accounts for 11 per cent.
The main changes are increases of $612 million in personal income taxes, and $129 million in returns on investments and a decrease of $395 million in corporation income taxes.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Source	Fiscal year ended March 31 1971 jg7o (preliminary)	Increase or decrease (-)	Amount	Per cent	Amount	Per cent	Amount	Per centTax revenue- Income tax- Personal WW	4,697.0	36.8	4,085.1	33.1	611.9	15.0Corporation <*)<*)	2,217.0	17.3	2,612.0	21.2	-395.0	-15.1On dividends, interest, etc. going abroad	258.0	2.0	248.5	2.0	9.5	3.8Social development tax	566.0	4.4	476.5	3.9	89.5	18.8Excise taxes- Sales*1)**)	1,708.0	13.4	1,716.9	13.9	- 8.9	- 0.5Other'®	403.0	3.2	378.4	3.1	24.6	6.5Customs import duties*2)	814.0	6.4	818.3	6.7	- 4.3	- 0.5Excise duties'®	561.0	4.4	518.8	4.2	42.2	8.1Estate tax	119.7	0.9	100.6	0.8	19.1	19.0Other taxes	0.3 11,844.0	88.8	0.3 10,965.4	88.9	888.6	8.6Non-tax revenue- Return on investments	989.0	7.7	860.0	7.0	129.0	15.0Post office net postal revenue	330.0	2.6	354.8	2.9	-24.8	- 7.0Other non-tax revenue	106.0	0.9	152.1	1.2	-46.1	-30.31,425.0	n.t	1,806.9	11.1	68.1	4-STotal budgetary revenue'®	12,769.0	100.0	12,322.3	100.0	446.7	3.6.1970-71	1969-70
(* Excluding credits to the old age security fund
Personal income tax	
Corporation income tax	
Sales tax	
1,903.4	1,831.0
1,132.5	1,026.5
207.9	227.1
563.0	577.4
(*>
Net after deduction of refunds and drawbacks.
(3) Department of Insurance vote 20, Public Service Commission vote 100 and Department of Transport vote 1 gave authority to credit thereto revenue arising from services provided thereunder. For purposes of comparison the 1969-70 figures have been adjusted.

[Stage Direction]
Federal-provincial fiscal arrangements
Under fiscal arrangements, that became operative in 1962, the federal government withdrew in part from the field of direct taxation and left the vacated area to the provinces. The federal government offered to collect the provincial income taxes without charge provided that provincial personal income tax was expressed as a percentage of federal personal income tax otherwise payable and provincial corporation income tax applied to taxable income calculated in the same way as for federal income tax purposes. To allow for the imposition of the provincial income taxes,
the Income Tax Act was amended to abate the federal income tax otherwise payable by individuals in all provinces. The abatement was 28 per cent for taxpayers in all provinces except Quebec and 50 per cent for taxpayers in the Province of Quebec. The higher abatement for Quebec takes account of the fact that the payment of youth allowances and full cost of certain programs, which are supported jointly by federal and provincial governments in the other provinces, have been assumed by Quebec. The federal corporation income tax rates were abated by 10 percentage points for taxable income earned in all provinces. The federal government has entered into tax-collection agreements under which it collects the
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ended March 31
BUDGETARY REVENUE	BUDGETARY EXPENDITURE
BY MAJOR SOURCE	BY MAJOR FUNCTION
For Fiscal Year Ended March 31,1971
[Stage Direction]

June 18, 1971
provincial personal income taxes of all provinces except Quebec and the provincial corporation income taxes of all provinces except Ontario and Quebec.
Under these collection agreements, payments are made monthly to each province based on an estimate of that province's tax revenue. The actual amounts due, based on assessed returns, are established as at December 31 following the end of the fiscal year and adjustments are made with the provinces.
Under the present fiscal arrangements, the federal government agreed to abate its estate tax by 50 per cent in the fiscal years 1962-63 and 1963-64, and by 75 per cent thereafter, in a province that imposed its own succession duties. To a province that did not wish to re-enter the succession duty field the federal
government agreed to pay 50 per cent of the federal estate tax revenue from within that province in 1962-63 and 1963-64 and 75 per cent thereafter. During 1962-63, Quebec and Ontario collected their own succession duties while the other provinces received a payment in lieu of imposing duties. Starting in 1963-64 British Columbia joined Ontario and Quebec in imposing its own succession duties. When the estate tax abatement was raised to 75 per cent in 1964-65, British Columbia increased its succession duty rates accordingly but Quebec and Ontario preferred to take in lieu of the extra abatement a payment equivalent to 25 per cent of the federal estate tax in those provinces. This arrangement also carried into the years succeeding 1964-65.

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ending March 31 Billions of Dollars

[Stage Direction]
TOTAL REVENUE FROM TAXES 89%


[Stage Direction]
1967	1968
* Preliminary.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Tax on personal income
In 1970-71 personal income tax is again the largest source of government budgetary revenue. Its yield (excluding the old age security tax) is $4,697 million or 37 per cent of total budgetary revenue. In 1969-70 the yield was $4,085 million or 33 per cent of total revenue. The increase is due mainly to a higher level of personal incomes in 1970-71.
In addition to the federal revenue it is estimated that $1,722 million (representing provincial income taxes collected by the federal government for certain provinces) will be allocated to the provincial tax collection agreements account for payment to the provinces in accordance with the terms of federal-provincial fiscal arrangements. The comparable figure in 1969-70 was $1,328 million.
The tax on personal incomes levied under the Old Age Security Act and credited to the Old Age Security Fund is estimated to be $1,133 million compared with $1,027 million in 1969-70.
Corporation income tax
Corporation income tax is the second largest source of government budgetary revenue. The yield (excluding the old age security tax) is $2,217 million or 17 per cent of total budgetary revenue compared with $2,612 million or 21 per cent in 1969-70. The decrease of $395 million is due mainly to lower corporate incomes during 1970-71 and to the termination in 1970-71 of the acceleration of corporate income tax payments.
In addition to the federal revenue, it is estimated that $224 million (representing provincial corporation taxes collected by the federal government for certain provinces) will be allocated to the provincial tax collection agreements account for payment to the provinces in accordance with the terms of federal-provincial arrangements. The comparable figure in 1969-70 was $239 million.
The tax on incomes of corporations levied under the Old Age Security Act and credited to the Old Age Security Fund is estimated to be $208 million compared with $227 million in 1969-70.
Taxes on dividends, interest, etc., going abroad
Revenue in this category is derived from taxes withheld from dividends, interest, rents, royalties, alimony and income from estates and trusts paid to non-residents.
Collections of $258 million are $10 million higher than in 1969-70.
Social development tax
This tax took effect for the taxation year 1969. The tax, which is imposed on individuals, is the lesser of 2 per cent of the taxable income or $200. During 1970-71, its yield is $566 million compar;d with $476 million in 1969-70.
Excise taxes
Excise taxes including the sales tax total $2,111 million or 17 per cent of total budgetary revenue compared with $2,095 million or 17 per cent in 1969-70.
From a revenue standpoint the general sales tax is the most important tax under the Excise Tax Act. Receipts (excluding the old age security tax) are $1,708 million, $9 million less than in 1969-70.
The sales tax levied under the Old Age Security Act and credited to the Old Age Security Fund is $563 million compared with $577 million in the previous year.
The yield from other excise taxes is $403 million, of which $319 million is in respect of tobacco products. In 1969-70 the yield was $378 million of which $296 million was in respect of tobacco products.
Customs import duties
Receipts from this source of $814 million are $4 million lower than in 1969-70.
Excise duties
Excise duties are levied on alcoholic beverages (other than wines) and tobacco products. (Additional taxes on tobacco products are levied under the Excise Tax Act.) Net receipts of $561 million are $42 million more than in 1969-70.
Gross receipts of $359 million from duties on alcoholic beverages consist of $210 million in respect of spirits and $149 million in respect of beer and are $25 million higher than receipts of $334 million in 1969-70 of which $195 million was in respect of spirits and $139 million in respect of beer. Gross receipts of $212 million in respect of tobacco products are $16 million higher than in 1969-70.
Refunds and drawbacks of $10 million bring net excise duty collections to $561 million. In 1969-70 refunds and drawbacks were $9 million.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Estate tax	Other taxes
Revenue in this category is derived under the Estate Revenue under this heading of $300,000 is approxi-Tax Act. Net receipts of $120 million are $19 million mately the same as in 1969-70. more than in the previous fiscal year.

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ended March 31

[Stage Direction]
Non-tax revenue in the amount of $1,425 million is
$58 million more than in 1969-70. The main change is an increase of $129 million in return on investments.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended	Increase or
	March 31	decrease (-)
Non-Tax Revenue	1971 loyn (preliminary)	Amount Per centReturn on investments	
989.0	860.0	129.0	15.0Post office net postal revenue	354.8	-24.8	- 7.0Refunds of previous years' expenditures	
18.6	29.7	-11.1	-37.4Services and service fees	
16.8	20.4	- 3.6	-17.6Proceeds from sales	
13.8	16.7	- 2.9	-17.4Privileges, licences and permits	
24.8	29.7	- 4.9	-16.5Bullion and coinage	
15.6	19.9	- 4.3	-21.6Premium, discount and exchange	
1.0	11.0	-10.0	-91.0Miscellaneous	
15.4	24.7	- 9.3	-37.6
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Return on investments
These receipts, amounting to $989 million, consist of income derived from loans and advances made by the government and from investments by the government in productive or earning assets. In 1969-70 receipts totalled $860 million.
Receipts from crown corporations at $702 million are $81 million more than in 1969-70. The main changes are increases of $22 million in Bank of Canada profits paid to the government and $37 million
in payments by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
The yield from other loans and investments at $287 million is $48 million more than in 1969-70. The main changes are an increase of $70 million in profits from the exchange fund account and a decrease of $26 million in interest on Receiver General deposits with the chartered banks, partly because in the first eight months of the fiscal year the cash balances were lower than in the previous year and partly to lower interest rates.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Return on Investments	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Loans to, and investments in, crown corporations-			
Bank of Canada-profits	
250.3	228.7	21.6Canadian Broadcasting Corporation	
5.0	6.1	-1.1Canadian National Railways	
58.4	50.7	7.7Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation	
266.0	228.7	37.3Export Development Corporation	
13.0	6.4	6.6Farm Credit Corporation	
67.0	59.8	7.2The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority	
12.9	10.3	2.6Other	
29.4	30.4	-1.0702.0	621.1	80.9Other loans and investments-	National governments	
24.3	24.8	-0.5Exchange fund account	
175.5	105.1	70.4Interest-bearing deposits with chartered banks	
25.2	51.0	-25.8Municipal Development and Loan Board	
14.6	14.6	Soldier and general land settlement loans and veterans land act	advances	
22.0	18.9	3.1Miscellaneous	
25.4	24.5	0.9287.0	288.9	48.1989.0	860.0	129.0
Post Office revenue
Gross receipts from post office operations are $409 million for 1970-71, but authorized disbursements from revenue of $54 million for salaries and rent allowances, other allowances and commissions at semi-staff and revenue offices, commissions at sub-offices, transit charges on Canadian mail forwarded through and delivered in foreign countries, etc. and revenue credits of $24 million to expenditure resulted in net revenue of $330 million. In 1969-70 comparable amounts were gross receipts of $430 million, authorized disbursements of $52 million, credits of $23 million to expenditure and net revenue of $355 million.
As shown in the section on budgetary expenditure, net costs of operating the Post Office during 1970-71 are $370 million resulting in a net operating deficit of $40 million for 1970-71. In 1969-70 net costs were $341 million resulting in a net operating surplus of $14 million.
However, the total shown for post office revenue does not include any receipts for parliamentary and departmental mail or for certain miscellaneous services provided for other government departments and agencies. In addition the operating costs of the Post Office exclude any charges for premises occupied or for accounting and special services provided by other departments.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Post Octtce Revenue	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)0	
Postage-	,. 386.0	406.8	-20.8From foreign countries	.. 7.0	6.7	0.3Money orders	.. 10.0	10.8	-0.8Rental of post office boxes	5.0	4.9	0.1.. 0.5	1.2	-0.7408.5	4*0.4	-SI. 9Less-	.. -24.9	-23.4	-1.5Salaries and allowances-	Revenue post offices	.. -12.1	-13.2	1.1Semi-staff post offices	.. -29.1	-27.1	-2.0Sub post offices	.. -6.1	- 6.0	- 0.1Postage and transit charges to or through foreign countries	.. - 4.5	- 4.1	- 0.4Other	.. -1.8	- 1.8	-78.5	-75.8	- S.9330.0	354.8	-24.8
Refunds of previous years' expenditure
Revenue under this heading of $19 million include $4 million in receipts by the Department of National Defence, mainly from adjustments to cost audits and to adjustments on contracts with the United States government, and $4 million in receipts by the Department of Veterans Affairs, mainly from refunds of veterans pensions, allowances and re-establishment credits. In 1969-70 receipts were $30 million.
Services and service fees
Revenue of $17 million from this source include $8 million in receipts by the Department of Agriculture, mainly for services in connection with the inspection, weighing, storage and elevation of grain and $3 million in receipts by the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs for electricity, gas, weights and measures inspection fees. In 1969-70 receipts totalled $21 million.
Proceeds from sales
Revenue of $14 million include receipts of $7 million by the Department of Supply and Services, mainly from the sale of surplus crown assets, and $3 million in receipts by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation from sales of properties. In 1969-70 such receipts totalled $17 million.
Privileges, licences and permits
Revenue in this category of $25 million include $7 million in receipts by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development from fees, leases and royalties in respect of oil, gas and gold, receipts of $8 million by the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs from patents, trade marks, charters, etc., and receipts of $5 million by the Department of Public Works from rentals of public buildings and sites. In 1969-70 such receipts totalled $30 million.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Bullion and coinage
This revenue, which was derived from transactions in bullion and coinage, is $16 million compared with $20 million in 1969-70.
Premium, discount and exchange
These transactions reflect a net revenue of $1 million compared with net revenue of $11 million in 1969-70.
Other non-tax revenue
Miscellaneous revenue is $16 million compared with $25 million in 1969-70.
Expenditure
In 1970-71 budgetary expenditure of $13,187 million is $1,257 million more than the 1969-70 total of $11,930 million.
The main changes are increases of $383 million in the Department of National Health and Welfare, $295 million in the Department of Finance, $154 million in the Department of the Secretary of State, $131 million in the Department of Manpower and Immigration, $88 million in the Department of Regional Economic Expansion, and a decrease of $106 million in the Department of Agriculture.

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ending March 31
12
8
4
0
* Preliminary.
1. Does not include payments out of old age security fund.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
[Stage Direction]
 Increase or
Department	1971	1Q7n	decrease (-)
(preliminary)
Amount	Per cent	Amount	Per cent	Amount Per cent	Agriculture.	
277.5	2.1	383.8	3.2	-106.3	-27.7Communications	
384.0	2.9	353.9	3.0	30.1	8.5Consumer and Corporate Affairs	
20.2	0.2	16.7	0.1	3.5	21.0Energy, Mines and Resources	
200.8	1.5	195.7	1.6	5.1	2.6External Affairs	
281.5	2.1	242.2	2.0	39.3	16.2Finance	
3,140.0	23.8	2,844.6	23.9	295.4	10.4Fisheries and Forestry	
81.0	0.6	76.9	0.7	4.1	5.3Governor General and Lieutenant-Governors	
1.1	1.1	Indian Affairs and Northern Development	
355.6	2.7	311.4	2.6	44.2	14.2Industry, Trade and Commerce	
250.0	1.9	296.1	2.5	-46.1	-15.6Justice	
22.8	0.2	19.7	0.2	3.1	15.7Labour	
192.5	1.5	155.5	1.3	37.0	23.8Manpower and Immigration	
570.0	4.3	439.5	3.7	130.5	29.6National Defence	
1,822.0	13.8	1,789.5	15.0	32.5	1.8National Health and Welfare	
2,340.4	17.7	1,957.0	16.4	383.4	19.6National Revenue	
159.2	1.2	144.6	1.2	14.6	10.1Parliament	
27.3	0.2	23.0	0.2	4.3	18.7Privy Council	
57.0	0.4	55.2	0.5	1.8	3.3Public Works	
330.0	2.5	286.8	2.4	43.2	15.1Regional Economic Expansion	
321.5	2.5	236.1	2.0	85.4	36.3Secretary of State	
707.2	5.4	553.2	4.6	154.0	27.8Solicitor General	
223.4	1.7	184.1	1.5	39.3	21.3Supply and Services	
75.2	0.6	82.3	0.7	-7.1	-8.6Transport	
470.4	3.6	467.3	3.9	3.1	0.7Treasury Board	
466.0	3.5	391.1	3.3	74.9	19.2Veterans Affairs	
410.0	3.1	422.4	3.5	-12.4	-3.913,186.6	100.0	11,929.7	100.0	1,256.9	10.5

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Function^1*	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971 (preliminary)	Amount	Per cent	Amount	Per cent	Amount	Per cent	Amount	Per cent	Amount	Per centGeneral government services	. 353	5	376	4	411	4	505	4	579	4Foreign affairs	. 230	3	217	2	227	2	243	2	281	2Defence	. 1,651	19	1,760	18	1,763	17	1,792	15	1,778	14Transportation and communica-	tions	. 887	10	951	10	910	8	893	8	942	7Economic development and	support	. 1,205	13	1,473	15	1,527	14	1,777	15	1,856	14Health and welfare	. 1,987	22	2,148	22	2,378	22	2,734	23	3,191	24Education assistance	. 90	1	114	1	287	3	315	3	457	4Culture and recreation	. 218	2	280	3	244	2	®381	3	270	2Fiscal transfer payments	. 515	6	738	8	867	8	932	8	1,229	9Public debt	. 1,191	14	1.301	13	1,480	14	1,717	14	<*1,921	14Internal overhead expenses	. 391	5	440	4	644	6	641	5	683	68,718	100	9,798	100	10,738	100	11,930	100	13,187	100
W Payments out of the Old Age Security Fund, the Canada Pension Plan and the Unemployment Insurance Fund are not included.
<2>
Includes the EXPO deficit of $123 million.
<*>
Includes additional interest in respect of the Public Service, the Canadian Forces and the R.C.M.P. superannuation accounts.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ended March 31 Billions of Dollars

[Stage Direction]
4 r
fiscal TRANSFER PAYMENTS

[Stage Direction]
-1 2
1967	1968	1969	1970 I97P1967	1968	1969	1970	1971*
* Preliminary.
1. The unshaded areas of the columns in *he chart for health and welfare represent payments out of old age security fund not charged to budgetary expenditure.
Agriculture	Commission, the Canadian Livestock Feed Board and
Expenditures of the Department of Agriculture the Farm Credit Corporation total $278 million com-together with those in respect of the Canadian Dairy pared with $384 million in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Agriculture	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Department-			
Production and marketing-			
Agricultural stabilization board-net operating loss	... 126.4	136.3	-9.9Reserve for wheat inventory	100.0	-100.0Other	30.6	-3.8US. 8	866.9	-US. 7Research program	45.9	1.7Health of animals	21.6	2.4Board of Grain Commissioners	9.6	1.2Administration and general	8.6	2.5246.7	352.6	-105.9Farm Credit Corporation-net operating loss	8.7	0.9Canadian Dairy Commission	0.4	Canadian Livestock Feed Board	.... 20.8	22.1	-1.3277.5	383.8	-106.3
June 18, 1971
Outlays for production and marketing at SI53 million are $114 million less than in 1969-70. The charge to expenditure in 1970-71 in respect of the operations of the Agricultural Stabilization Board is $126 million compared with $136 million in 1969-70. Also, the 1969-70 expenditures included $100 million for a reserve for wheat inventory reduction payments.
Expenditures for research are $48 million in 1970-71 compared with $46 million in 1969-70, expenditures for health of animals are $24 million compared with $22 million, expenditures for the Canadian Livestock Feed Board are $21 million compared with $22 million and the estimated loss of $10 million of the Farm Credit Corporation is $1 million more than in the previous fiscal year.
Communications
Expenditures of $385 million in respect of Communications, including the Post Office, are $31 million higher than in 1969-70.
Post Office
Gross expenditures of the Post Office total $448 million compared with $416 million in 1969-70.
Operational costs are $325 million, $19 million more than in 1969-70, and transportation of mail costs were $97 million in each year.
However, as authorized by the Post Office Act, remuneration of postmasters and staffs at revenue and semi-staff offices and certain other disbursements are paid from revenue. These payments amounted to $54 million ($52 million in 1969-70). Also vote 10, Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1970 authorized that revenue arising from services provided thereunder be credited thereto. This amounted to $25 million compared with $23 million in 1969-70.
Consequently net expenditures are $370 million compared with $340 million in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Communications and Post Office	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)
Post Office- Operating expenditures- Salaries and allowances- Headquarters, regional and district offices, staff post			
offices and railway mail services		278.0	258.3	19.7
Postmasters and staff-			
Revenue offices	12.0	13.7	-1.7Semi-staff offices	29.0	27.7	1.3Sub postmasters	6.0	6.0	sss.o	SOS. 7	19.3Transportation of mail-	Rail	12.2	13.0	-0.8Land	51.7	52.0	-0.3Air	27.1	26.8	0.3Water	1.5	1.5	Payment to foreign postal administrations	4.5	4.1	0.497.0	97.4	-0.4Other	21.0	9.6	11.4443.0	412.7	30.3Capital expenditure	5.4	3.3	2.1Grants and contributions	0.1	0.1	Gross expenditures	448.5	416.1	32.4Less:	Revenue credited to appropriations	-24.9	-23.4	-1.5Revenue charged to expenditure under the Post Office Act..	-53.6	-52.2	-1.4Net expenditure	370.0	340.5	29.5Communications	14.0	13.4	0.6384.0	353.9	30.1
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
As net Post Office receipts total $330 million as shown in the revenue section of this report and net expenditures are $370 million there is a net operating deficit of $40 million for 1970-71. In 1969-70 net receipts of $355 million and net expenditures of $341 million resulted in an operating surplus of $14 million.
However, it is to be noted that post office expenditures do not reflect any charges for premises occupied by the Post Office or for certain accounting and miscellaneous services provided by other departments, nor does post office revenue reflect any receipts for the franking privilege covering parliamentary and departmental mail or other miscellaneous services provided for other government departments and agencies.
Communications
Expenditures for Communications are $14 million,
of which $8 million is operating costs and $6 million is capital expenditure. In 1969-70 expenditures of $13 million included $7 million for operating costs and $5 million for capital costs.
Consumer and Corporate Affairs
Expenditures of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs are $20 million, $4 million higher than comparable figures for 1969-70.
Expenditures for this department include $7 million for consumer affairs, $7 million for corporate affairs and $2 million for the Prices and Incomes Commission. In 1969-70 expenditures of $17 million included $7 million for consumer affairs, $7 million for corporate affairs and $1 million for the Prices and Incomes Commission.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Consumer and Corporate Affairs	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)
7.4	6.6	0.8
7.3	6.7	0.6Combines investigation and competition policy program	
1.6	1.5	0.1
2.2	0.6	1.6
1.7	1.3	0.4
20.2	16.7	3.5
Energy, Mines and Resources
Expenditures of the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources, including Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, the Atomic Energy Control Board, the Dominion Coal Board and the National Energy Board, total $201 million, an increase of $5 million over 1969-70 expenditures.
Expenditures for minerals, energy and earth sciences amount to $56 million, $13 million for emergency gold mining assistance, $13 million for field and air surveys, mapping and aeronautical charting, $12 million for geological surveys and research and $9 million for mining and metallurgical investigations and research. In 1969-70 expenditures of $57 million included $14 million for emergency gold mining assistance, $13
million for field and air surveys, mapping and aeronautical charting, $10 million for geological surveys and research and $9 million for mining and metallurgical investigations and research.
Expenditures for the water resources program of $52 million include $23 million for research and investigations on inland water resources and $22 million for marine surveys and research. In 1969-70 expenditures of $47 million included $21 million for research and investigations of water resources and $21 million for marine surveys and research.
Expenditures for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited amount to $69 million compared with $69 million in 1969-70, for Atomic Energy Control Board $8 million compared with $6 million and for the Dominion Coal Board $6 million compared with $9 million.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
TABLE 14 (in millions of dollars)
Energy, Mines and Resources	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Minerals, energy and earth sciences-			
Emergency gold mining assistance	.. 13.2	13.7	-0.5Field and air surveys, mapping and aeronautical charting	.. 12.6	13.0	-0.4Geological surveys and research	.. 11.9	10.5	1.4Mining and metallurgical investigations and research	.. 9.4	9.6	-0.2Research in geophysics	.. 4.0	5.4	-1.4Other	.. 4.9	4.5	0.466.0	66.7	-0.7Water resources-	Research and investigations on inland water resources	.. 23.0	20.6	2.4Marine surveys and research	.. 22.0	20.6	1.4Other	.. 7.0	5.7	1.36S.0	46.9	6.1Administration and general	.. 7.7	6.5	1.2115.7	110.1	5.6Atomic Energy Control Board	.. 7.7	5.9	1.8Atomic Energy of Canada Limited	.. 69.0	69.0	Dominion Coal Board	.. 6.0	8.8	-2.8National Energy Board	.. 2.4	1.9	0.5200.8	195.7	5.1
External Affairs
Expenditures of the Department of External Affairs, including the Canadian International Development Agency and the International Joint Commission, in the amount of $282 million are $39 million more than the total for the previous year.
Expenditures of the department in the amount of $72 million include $46 million for foreign operations and $16 million for membership and support of international organizations. In 1969-70 expenditures totalled $73 million of which $49 million was for foreign operations and $13 million was for membership and support of international organizations.
Expenditures of the Canadian International Development Agency are $209 million compared with $169 million in 1969-70. Included in these expenditures are
$132 million for economic assistance ($101 million in 1969-70), $31 million for technical assistance ($31 million in 1969-70) and $24 million for grants to multilateral international assistance ($24 million in 1969-70).
Finance
Expenditures of the Department of Finance including those of the Auditor General and the Department of Insurance are $3,140 million compared with $2,845 million in 1969-70.
The main changes are increases of $106 million in public debt charges and $297 million in payments to provinces, partly offset by the decrease of $123 million covering the write-off in 1969-70 of the federal share of the EXPO deficit.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
External Affairs	1971 (preliminary)	1970	Foreign operations	46.0	48.5	-2.5Membership and support of international organizations	16.0	13.3	2.7Administration and general	10.0	11.2	-1.272.0	7S.0	-1.0Canadian International Development Agency-	Economic assistance	132.2	100.6	31.6Technical assistance	31.0	30.8	0.2Grants to multilateral international assistance programs	23.6	23.6	Contributions to development assistance projects of Canadian	organizations	8.0	6.4	1.6Other	14.2	7.3	6.9209.0	168.7	Ifi.SInternational Joint Commission	0.5	0.5	281.5	242.2	39.3TABLE 16	
(in millions of dollars)
Finance	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Public debt charges	.. '*1,823.0	1,716.9	106.1Fiscal transfer payments	.. 1,228.9	932.4	296.5Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition-deficit	122.9	-122.9Municipal grants	49.5	4.5Guaranteed loans	12.3	9.3Administration and general	.. 8.5	7.1	1.43,136.0	2,841.1	294.9Auditor General	2.9	0.2Insurance	0.6	0.33,140.0	2,844.6	295.4
<* Additional interest of $45.7 million is included in Department of National Defence expenditures, $49.5 million in Treasury Board expenditures and $2.3 million in Royal Canadian Mounted Police expenditures.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Public debt charges
Public debt charges consist of interest on the public debt, the annual amortization of bond discounts and commissions, the cost of issuing new loans and other costs incurred in servicing the public debt. These charges in the amount of $1,823 million include interest on public debt of 1,780 million of which $1,426 million is in respect of unmatured debt and $354 million in respect of other liabilities.
The increase of $129 million in interest on unmatured debt reflects an increase in unmatured debt and higher interest rates.
Other public debt charges of $43 million are $2 million more than in 1969-70.
When considering the magnitude of these public debt charges and the burden they place upon the public treasury, it must be borne in mind that a substantial portion of the debt is attributable to, or is invested in, productive or earning assets. Therefore, in calculating the net burden of the government's annual interest charges, the income derived from loans, investments and other productive assets must be taken into account. For 1970-71 this income is $989 million as shown in the non-tax revenue section under the heading "return on investments". This amount deducted from the gross total of $1,877 million for interest as shown in the table leaves a net amount of $888 million compared with a net of $816 million in 1969-70. Measured as a percentage of the net debt, the burden of the net annual interest charges is 5.12 per cent in 1970-71 compared with 4.82 per cent in 1969-70. As a percentage of the gross national product for the calendar year ending within the fiscal year, the relative burden is 1.05 per cent compared with 1.04 per cent in 1969-70.
TABLE 17 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31 

 Increase
Interest and Other Public Debt Charges	1971	or
(preliminary)	decrease (-)
Interest on public debt-
Unmatured debt including treasury bills-
Payable in Canadian dollars	
Payable in foreign currencies	
Other liabilities-
Annuity, insurance and pension accounts	
Deposit and trust accounts	
Refundable portion of corporation income tax	
Total interest on public debt	
Other public debt charges-
Annual amortization of bond discounts and commissions.
Cost of issuing new loans	
Servicing of public debt	
1,406.8	1,271.5	135.318.8	24.7	-5.91,J,25.6	1,296.2	129.4<0 346.4	369.5	-23.17.6	6.2	1.40.1	4.0	-3.9$54.1	379.7	-25.6<'>1,779.7	1,675.9	103.839.1	34.0	5.12.9	3.4	-0.51.3	3.6	-2.34$.s	41.0	2.S<'>1,823.0	1,716.9	106.1
(i) Additional interest of $45.7 million is included in Department of National Defence expenditures, $49.5 million in Treasury Board expenditures and $2.3 million in Royal Canadian Mounted Police expenditures.
TABLE 18 (in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Net Burden of Annual Interest Charges	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Total interest on public debt	
Less return on investments	1,675.9 860.0	201.3 129.0Net interest cost	815.9	72.3Net interest cost as a percentage of net debt	
5.12	4.82	
U) Includes additional interest of $98 million in respect of the Public Service, the Canadian Forces and the R.C.M.P. superannuation accounts.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Fiscal, subsidy and other payments to provinces
Budgetary expenditure for payments to the provinces is $1,229 million, $297 million more than in 196970.
Payments of $987 million under the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act are $252 million higher than in 1969-70.
Payments of $213 million under the Established Programs (Interim Arrangements) Act to the Province of Quebec are in respect of compensation to that province for its opting out of the following programs: hospital insurance and diagnostic services, old age assistance, disabled persons allowances, blind persons
allowances, unemployment assistance and Canada assistance plan; and in part, the general health grants program. Payments in 1969-70 were $165 million.
Subsidies to provinces payable under the British North America Acts and other statutory authority are $32 million, the same as in 1969-70.
The transfers of certain public utility tax receipts of $24 million in 1970-71 are approximately the same as in 1969-70 and represent the transferable portion of income tax received from corporations whose main business is the distribution to, or generation for distribution to, the public of electrical energy, gas and steam.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31			
Fiscal, Subsidy and Other Payments to Provinces	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Payments under the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements	987.4	735.2	252.2Payments under the Established Programs (Interim Arrangements)	Act	213.1	164.5	48.6Statutory subsidies	31.8	31.8	Transfer of certain public utility tax receipts	24.1	23.9	0.2Federal-Provincial Fiscal Revision Act (youth allowances)	-27.5	-23.0	-4.51,228.9	932.4	296.5
TABLE 20 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31, 1971 (preliminary)
Fiscal, Subsidy and Other Payments to Provinces	Payments under fiscal arrange- ments	Payments under Interim Arrangements Act	Statutory subsidies	Recovery under the Federal-Provincial Fiscal Revision Act (youth allowances)	Transfer of certain public utilities tax receipts	TotalNewfoundland	. 94.1	9.7	1.0	104.8Nova Scotia	. 93.7	2.1	1.7	97.5Prince Edward Island	. 22.1	. 0.7	0.2	23.0New Brunswick	. 81.6	1.7	0.1	83.4Quebec	. 558.0	213.1	4.0	-27.5	3.0	750.6Ontario	, 28.4	4.6	10.6	43.6Manitoba	. 56.7	2.1	0.8	59.6Saskatchewan	. 45.7	2.2	47.9Alberta	7.1	3.0	6.0	16.1British Columbia	1.7	0.5	2.2Yukon and Northwest Territories	0.2	0.2987; 4	213.1	31.8	-27.5	24.1	1,228.9
June 18, 1971
Fisheries and Forestry
Expenditures for the Department of Fisheries and Forestry in the amount of $81 million are $4 million more than in 1969-70.
Fisheries management and development costs are $36 million compared with $33 million in 1969-70 and include $23 million for management of fishery resources and their environment compared with $20 million in 1969-70, $5 million for economic research, intelligence and assistance compared with $4 million and $5 million for regulation and improvement of fish processing and handling compared with $6 million.
Aquatic renewable resources research costs are $19 million compared with $16 million in 1969-70 and include $7 million for commercial and recreational fisheries research compared with $8 million in the previous year and $5 million for environment research compared with $2 million.
Expenditures for forestry research and services in the amount of $23 million include $19 million for forest resource research and services and $3 million for forest products research and services. In 1969-70 comparable amounts were approximately the same.
Governor General
Included in these expenditures are the salaries of the Governor General and the Lieutenant-Governors of the provinces and other expenses of these offices. Expenditures of $1 million are approximately the same as in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Fisheries and Forestry	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)
Fisheries management and development-			
Management of the fishery resources and their environment	22.5	20.3	2.2Economic research, intelligence and assistance	4.6	3.9	0.7Regulation and improvement of fish processing and handling-	4.7	5.9	-1.2Other	3.7	2.9	0.8SB.5	SS.O	2.5Aquatic renewable resources research-	Commercial and recreational fisheries research	6.6	7.5	-0.9Environment research	. 4.6	1.7	2.9Other	7.5	7.2	0.318.7	18.4	t.SForestry research and services-	Forest resources	. 19.3	20.2	-0.9Forest products	. 3.5	3.4	0.1. 0.6	0.5	0.12S. 4	84.1	-0.7Administration and general	. 3.4	3.4	81.0	76.9	4.1
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Expenditures of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development at $356 million are $44 million more than in 1969-70.
These expenditures include $227 million for Indian and Eskimo affairs, $82 million for northern development and $38 million for conservation. Comparative amounts in 1969-70 were $204 million, $58 million and $42 million, respectively.
Expenditures for Indian and Eskimo affairs include $105 million in respect of education ($103 million in 1969-70), $98 million for community affairs ($77 million in 1969-70) and $10 million for economic development ($12 million in 1969-70).

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Indian Appairs and Northern Development	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)
Indian and Eskimo affairs-			
Education	.... 104.9	102.8	2.1Community affairs	.... 97.6	76.8	20.8Economic development	.... 9.6	12.5	-2.9Other	.... 14.8	12.0	2.8m.9	204.1	22.8Northern development-	Northern economic development	.... 22.0	17.9	4.1Territorial relations	.... 23.7	17.4	6.3Grants and contributions	.... 36.7	22.2	14.582.4	57.5	24.9Conservation-	National parks	27.0	-4.8Historic sites	.... 8.2	7.0	1.2Canadian wildlife services	.... 4.7	5.0	-0.3Other	.... 3.2	3.3	-0.1S8.S	42. s	-4.0Administration and general	.... 8.0	7.5	0.5355.6	311.4	44.2
Expenditures for northern development include $22 million for northern economic development ($18 million in 1969-70), $24 million for territorial relations ($17 million in 1969-70) and $37 million in grants and contributions mainly payments to the Governments of the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory ($22 million in 1969-70).
Expenditures for the conservation program include $22 million in respect of national parks ($27 million in 1969-70), $8 million for historic sites ($7 million in 1969-70) and $5 million for the Canadian wildlife services ($5 million in 1969-70).
Industry, Trade and Commerce
Expenditures of this department, including those of the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, are $250 million, $46 million less than the 1969-70 total.
Expenditures of $143 million in respect of the trade and industrial program include $64 million for technological capability in industry (defence $47 million, non-defence $17 million), $30 million for general
7094
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
incentives to industry for the expansion of scientific research and development in Canada and $12 million in respect of capital subsidies for the construction of commercial and fishing vessels. In 1969-70 comparative expenditures of $129 million include $54 million for technological capability in industry ($49 million defence, $5 million non-defence), $23 million for general incentives to industry and $14 million in respect of capital subsidies for the construction of commercial and fishing vessels.
Payments of $11 million in respect of tourism are the same amount as in 1969-70.
Expenditures in respect of grains total $54 million compared with $120 million in 1969-70, and include $24 million in respect of carrying costs of temporary wheat reserves ($67 million in 1969-70), $12 million in respect of the Prairie Grain Advance Payments Act ($12 million in 1969-70) and $18 million in respect of payments to the Canadian Wheat Board ($40 million in 1969-70).
Dominion Bureau of Statistics expenditures of $39 million are $7 million higher than in the previous fiscal year.
TABLE 23 (in millions of dollars)
Industry, Trade and Commerce
Fiscal year ended March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Trade-Industrial program-
Technological capability (defence)	
Technological capability (non-defence)	
Capital subsidies for the construction of commercial and fishing
vessels	
General incentives to industry	
Administration and general	
Tourism program. Grains program... World exhibitions.
Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
47.0	48.5	-1.516.9	5.3	11.612.0	14.2	-2.230.1	23.0	7.137.4	38.2	-0.8tis. i	f*9.S	H.s11.1	11.1	53.6	119.3	-65.72.8	4.1	-1.3210.9	263.7	-52.839.1	32.4	6.7250.0	296.1	-46.1
Justice
Expenditures of the Department of Justice are $23 million compared with $20 million in 1969-70.
Judges' salaries and allowances are $13 million compared with $11 million in 1969-70, legal services
at $5 million and administration and general costs at $4 million are approximately the same as in the previous year.
TABLE 24 (in millions of dollars)
JU8TIC1	Fiscal year ended March 31		
1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Legal services	4.7	0.3Judges' salaries and allowances	10.8	2.6Administration and general	
4.4	4.2	0.222.8	19.7	3.1
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Labour
Expenditures of the Department of Labour including the Unemployment Insurance Commission amount to $193 million compared with $156 million in 1969-70.
Expenditures in respect of the Unemployment Insurance Commission in the amount of $179 million include the government's contribution of $99 million
to the fund, $54 million for administration and general costs and $26 million for supplementary benefit payments. In 1969-70 comparative amounts were the government's contribution of $98 million and administration and general costs of $44 million.
Expenditures of the department total $14 million compared with $13 million in 1969-70.
TABLE 25 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Increase
Labour	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Unemployment Insurance Commission- Government's contribution to the unemployment insurance fund	99.0	98.4	0.6Supplementary benefit payments	26.0	26.0Administration of the Unemployment Insurance Act and general	54.0	44.0	10.0179.0	se.eDepartment	13.5	13.1	0.4192.5	155.5	37.0
Manpower and Immigration
Expenditures of the Department of Manpower and Immigration at $570 million are $131 million more than in 1969-70.
Development and utilization of manpower is $529 million compared with $399 million in the previous fiscal year. The main items are $352 million for employment and training services, $47 million more than

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
Manpower and Immigration	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Development and utilization of manpower-			
Employment and training services		351.8	304.9	46.9
Co-operation with the provinces in the provision of training			
facilities	170.3	88.4	81.9Administration and general	6.7	6.1	0.66X8.8	899. J,	189. iImmigration-	Recruitment selection	13.5	15.8	-2.3Enforcement and control	7.0	6.9	0.1Administration	2.4	1.3	1.121.9	H.O	-1.1Program development	6.1	5.4	0.7Immigration appeal board	1.0	0.6	0.4Administration and general	11.2	10.1	1.1570.0	439.5	130.5
24171-29J
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
in 1969-70, and $170 million for provision of training facilities, $82 million more than in 1969-70.
Outlays for immigration are $23 million compared with $24 million in the previous year and include $14 million in respect of recruitment selection ($16 million in 1969-70) and $7 million in respect of enforcement and control, the same as in the previous year.
Outlays for program development of $6 million are $1 million more than in 1969-70.
National Defence
Expenditures of the Department of National Defence in the amount of $1,822 million for 1970-71 are $32 million more than the total of $1,790 million for 1969-70.
Expenditures of $1,748 million for defence services include $1,308 million for operating expenses, $217 million for capital expenses and $223 million for military pensions, pension contributions and other benefits. In 1969-70 expenditures of $1,717 million included
$1,295 million for operating expenses, $247 million for capital expenses and $175 million for military pensions, pension contributions and other benefits.
Military pensions, pension contributions and other benefits include $70 million in respect of the government's contribution to the Canadian Forces Superannuation Account, $89 million for amortization of deferred charges and $46 million in respect of additional interest on the balance in the superannuation account. In 1969-70 the government's contribution was $66 million and amortization of deferred charges was $92 million. Additional interest for the superannuation fund in 1969-70 in the amount of $25 million was included in expenditures of the Department of Finance under "interest on public debt".
The government's contribution to the Canadian forces superannuation account consists of an amount equal to 1 4/5 times the contributions of the permanent services personnel.
Defence research costs of $46 million are $2 million more than in 1969-70.
TABLE 27 (in millions of dollars)
Nationap Defence
Fiscal year ended March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Defence services-
Operating expenditures	1,308.2	1,294.5	13.7Capital expenditures	217.0	247.2	-30.2Military pensions, pension contributions and other benefits- Public service superannuation account-	Government's contribution	70.4	65.6	4.8Amortization of deferred charges	89.4	92.2	-2.8Additional interest on the balance	45.7	(1)	45.7Other pensions, contributions and benefits	17.0	17.2	-0.21,747.7	1,716.7	31.0Defence research	*	45.6	44.1	1.5Mutual aid to NATO countries including contributions towards	military costs of NATO	14.4	14.1	0.3Civil emergency measures	5.1	5.0	0.1Defence Construction (1951) Limited	2.2	2.1	0.1Administration and general	7.0	7.5	-0.51,822.0	1,789.5	32.5
0) In 1969-70 additional interest of $24.7 million was charged to Department of Finance expenditures.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Mutual aid to NATO countries including contributions of $14 million towards military costs of NATO are approximately the same as in 1969-70.
Expenditures in respect of the civil emergency measures program are $5 million, the same as in 1969-70.
National Health and Welfare
Expenditures of the Department of National Health and Welfare including the Medical Research Council are $2,340 million compared with $1,957 million in 1969-70.
Outlays for welfare services amount to $1,035 million compared with $937 million in 1969-70; outlays for health insurance and resources are $1,194 million compared with $922 million; outlays for medical services are $45 million compared with $41 million; and outlays in respect of the medical research council are $34 million compared with $31 million in 1969-70.
Family allowances, family assistance and youth allowances
These expenditures total $619 million of which $558 million is family allowances, $58 million is youth allowances and $3 million is family assistance. In 1969-70 the total was $618 million of which $560 million was family allowances, $55 million was youth allowances and $3 million was family assistance.
Family allowances are payable in respect of all children under sixteen years of age, resident in Canada, with minor exceptions such as in the case of children of immigrants who must reside in Canada one year before family allowance is payable. The monthly allowance is $6 if the child is under 10 years of age and $8 in the age group 10 to 15.
Family assistance is payable at the same rates to children of immigrants and settlers during their first year of residence in Canada.
Youth allowances are payable at the rate of $10 per month in respect of persons resident in Canada who
TABLE 28 (in millions of dollars)
National Health and Welfare
Fiscal year ended March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Welfare services-
Family allowances	558.0	560.0	-2.0Youth allowances	58.0	55.1	2.9Family assistance	2.7	2.9	-0.2Canada assistance plan-payments to provinces	390.8	294.2	96.6Other	25.5	25.2	0.31,036.0	937.4	97.6Health insurance and resources-	Government's contributions under the Hospital Insurance and	Diagnostic Services Act	734.0	635.9	98.1Health resources fund	39.0	34.4	4.6Medical Care Act	400.5	181.0	219 5General health and hospital construction grants to provinces	19.7	67.6	-47.9Other	0.0	2.7	-2.11,193.8	931.6	m.tMedical services	45.2	40.6	4.6Health services	8.2	8.3	-0.1Food and drug services	15.7	12.2	3.5Administration and general	8.1	5.7	2.42,306.0	1,925.8	380.2Medical Research Council-	Scholarships and grants in aid of research	34.1	30.9	3.2Administration	0.3	0.3	34-4	31. t	3.22,340.4	1,957.0	883.4
June 18, 1971
have attained the age of 16 years and have not attained the age of 18 years and who are in full-time attendance at a school or university or are by reasons of mental or physical infirmity precluded from attending school or university. No payments were made in respect of persons resident in the Province of Quebec. However, under authority of the Federal-Provincial
Fiscal Revision Act, 1964, abatements in federal income tax otherwise payable by individuals resident in that province were allowed in compensation of the fact that the payment of youth allowances had been assumed by the province and to allow for the imposition of the required provincial income taxes.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Family Allowances, Family Assistance and Youth Allowances Payments
Newfoundland	
Nova Scotia	
Prince Edward Island	
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest and Yukon Territories,
Fiscal year ended March 31, 1971 (preliminary)
Family allowances	Family assistance	Youth allowances	Total17.0	2.1	19.121.0	0.1	3.2	24.33.1	0.4	3.517.9	2.7	20.6159.8	0.3	160.1191.6	1.5	28.1	221.225.1	0.1	3.7	28.925.2	0.1	3.9	29.244.4	0.2	6.2	50.851.2	0.4	7.6	59.21.7	0.1	1.8558.0	2.7	58.0	618.7
Canada Assistance Plan
Payments to provinces under the Canada Assistance Plan total 1391 million compared with $294 million in 1969-70. The Canada Assistance Plan Act which was enacted in 1966 authorized the federal government to enter into agreements with the provinces for sharing
the costs of assistance and welfare services provided by the provinces, territories and municipalities to persons in need, including the costs of food, shelter, clothing, fuel and utilities, essential household supplies, expenses incidental to a trade, care in a home for special care, travel and transportation, funerals and burials, health

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Canada Assistance Plan
Newfoundland	
Nova Scotia	
Prince Edward Island	
New Brunswick	
Ontario.,	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest and Yukon Territories.
Fiscal year ended March 31 

 Increase
1971	1970	or
(preliminary)	decrease (-)
22.0	20.3	1.716.8	15.2	1.63.4	3.3	0.115.2	11.8	3.4176.3	132.2	44.128.2	19.3	8.920.6	17.2	3.439.3	31.4	7.968.2	43.1	25.10.8	0.4	0.4
390.8
294.2
96.0
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
care services, prescribed welfare services including rehabilitation, and comfort allowances. The rate of federal contribution is 50 per cent of the shareable costs; the rates of assistance granted and the specific conditions of eligibility applied are determined by the provinces and their municipalities and take into account the budgetary requirements as well as the income and resources of the applicants. Contributions under this plan have replaced certain contributions which formerly had been made under the Old Age
Assistance Act, the Disabled Persons Act, the Blind Persons Act and the Unemployment Assistance Act.
Under federal-provincial agreement the Province of Quebec has opted out of this program.
Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act
Contributions of $734 million to the provinces in 1970-71 under this act are $98 million more than in 1969-70. Under federal-provincial agreement the Province of Quebec has opted out of this program.
TABLE 31 (in millions of dollars)
Government's Contributions under the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act
Newfoundland	
Nova Scotia	
Prince Edward Island	
New Brunswick	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest and Yukon Territories.
Fiscal year ended March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-;
23.0	21.0	2.037.5	32.3	5.24.9	4.0	0.929.0	25.1	3.9369.5	320.9	48.646.1	40.4	5.744.2	42.5	1.781.2	67.3	13.996.4	80.5	15.92.2	1.9	0.3734.0	635.9	98.1
Medical Care Act
The Medical Care Act authorizes the payment of contributions by Canada towards the cost of insured medical services incurred by provinces pursuant to provincial medical care insurance plans.
The Provinces of Saskatchewan and British Columbia became participating provinces effective July 1, 1968; Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Manitoba effective April 1, 1969; Alberta effective July 1, 1969; Ontario effective October 1, 1969; Quebec effective
TABLE 32 (in millions of dollars)
Contributions to Provinces under the Medical Care Act
Newfoundland	
Nova Scotia	
Prince Edward Island
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia...
Fiscal year ended March 31 

 Increase
1971	1970	°r
(preliminary)	decrease (-)
12.3	9.5	2.817.7	13.7	4.00.9	0.93.4	3.456.1	56.1174.4	65.0	109.423.2	17.8	5.422.5	17.7	4.838.1	21.2	16.951.9	36.1	15.8400.5	181.0	219.5
June 18, 1971
November 1, 1970; Prince Edward Island effective December 1, 1970; and New Brunswick effective January 1, 1971.
Payments of $401 million in 1970-71 are $220 million higher than in 1969-70.
Health resources fund
The Health Resources Fund Act provides for the establishment of a health resources fund to assist provinces in the acquisition, construction and renovation of health training facilities and research institutions.
Expenditures in 1970-71 amount to $39 million compared with $34 million in the previous fiscal year.
General health grants and hospital construction contributions to provinces
Grants to provinces for general health services and contributions for hospital construction total $20 million compared with $68 million. Under federal-provincial agreement the Province of Quebec has opted out of a portion of this program.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Contributions to Provinces under the Health Resources Fund Act	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Newfoundland	
0.6	0.1	0.5Nova Scotia	
2.4	3.2	-0.8Prince Edward Island	
0.1	0.3	-0.2New Brunswick	
0.8	0.8	Quebec	
9.2	6.0	3.2Ontario	
14.6	19.5	-4.9Manitoba	
1.1	(1)	1.1Saskatchewan	
2.5	2.5	Alberta	1.3	4.2British Columbia	
2.2	0.7	1.539.0	34.4	4.6
<*>
Less than $50,000.
National Revenue
Expenditures of the Department of National Revenue are $159 million, an increase of $15 million over the 1969-70 total.
Outlays of $74 million in respect of the collection of customs import duties, excise taxes and excise duties are $4 million higher and outlays of $84 million in respect of taxation are $10 million higher than in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
National Revenue	Fiscal year ended March 31		
1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Customs and excise	70.1	4.3Taxation	
84.4	74.2	10.2Income tax appeal board	
0.4	0.3	0.1159.2	144.6	14.6
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Parliament
Costs of Parliament in the amount of $27 million are $4 million higher than in 1969-70.
Privy Council
Expenditures for Privy Council, including those in
respect of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, the Office of the Chief Electoral Officer, the Economic Council of Canada, the Public Service Staff Relations Board and the Science Council of Canada, at $57 million are $2 million more than in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Parliament	Fiscal year ended March 31		
1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)House of Commons	
21.1	17.6	3.5The Senate	
5.1	4.6	0.5Library of Parliament	
1.1	0.8	0.327.3	23.0	4.3

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Privy Council	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Administration and general	
7.6	7.3	0.3Office of the Chief Electoral Officer	
1.2	0.3	0.9Economic Council of Canada	
1.7	1.6	0.1Public Service Staff Relations Board	
1.3	1.2	0.1Science Council of Canada	
1.2	1.2	Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation- Housing research and community planning	
4.3	4.5	-0.2Public housing projects and land development	
9.4	5.5	3.9Municipal sewage treatment assistance	
6.9	6.2	0.7Urban renewal assistance	
23.4	26.2	-2.8Cite du Havre	1.2	-1.2U-0	4S.6	0.457.0	55.2	1.8
Public Works
Expenditures in 1970-71 are $330 million compared with $287 million in the previous year.
Expenditures for accommodation services are $218 million, $27 million higher than the 1969-70 total of $191 million.
Outlays of $143 million for general purpose buildings are $27 million higher than in 1969-70 and outlays of
$64 million for single purpose buildings are $5 million less than in 1969-70.
Expenditures for transportation and other engineering services are $52 million compared with $40 million in the previous year. Included in these expenditures are contributions of $39 million to provinces in respect of the Trans-Canada Highway compared with $28 million in 1969-70.
Expenditures for marine services are $35 million compared with $31 million in the previous year.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
TABLE 37 (in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Public Works	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)
Accommodation services-			
General purpose buildings	142.6	115.7	26.9Single purpose buildings	63.5	68.6	-5.1Other	11.6	6.6	5.0gn. 7	190.9	96.8Transportation and other engineering services- Contributions to provinces under terms of the Trans-Canada	Highway Act	39.3	27.8	11.5Other	12.5	11.9	0.661.8	S9.7	18.1Marine services	34.9	31.3	3.6Professional and technical services	13.6	13.9	-0.3Administration and general	12.0	11.0	1.0330.0	286.8	43.2
Regional Economic Expansion
Expenditures for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion, including those for the National Capital Commission and the Cape Breton Development Corporation, total $322 million compared with $236 million in 1969-70.
The increase of $85 million was due mainly to higher expenditures in respect of contributions to provinces for economic expansion and social adjustment which are $230 million compared with $153 million in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Regional Economic Expansion	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Operating expenditures	22.8	18.2	4.6Capital expenditures	4.8	8.4	-3.6Grants and contributions	230.3	152.8	77.5257.9	179.4	78.5Cape Breton Development Corporation- Payment to the Cape Breton Development Corporation covering	mining losses	25.8	22.0	3.8Payment to the Cape Breton Development Corporation under	sections 19 and 24 of the Act	11.5	10.7	0.837.3	S8.7	4.6National Capital Commission-	Operating expenditures	10.9	10.2	0.7Payment to the national capital fund	15.4	13.8	1.686.3	84.0	8.S321.5	236.1	85.4
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Secretary of State
Included under this heading are expenditures of the Department of the Secretary of State and those in respect of the Canada Council, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the Canadian Film Development Corporation, the Canadian Radio-Television Commission, the Company of Young Canadians, the National Arts Centre Corporation, the National Film Board, the National Library, the National Museums of Canada, the Public Archives, the Public Service
Commission and the Office of the Representation Commissioner.
Expenditures total $707 million in 1970-71 compared with $553 million in the previous year.
Post-secondary education payments to provinces of $389 million are $87 million more than in 1969-70 and expenditures of $53 million in respect of the bilingualism development program are $52 million more than in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
SlCRETABT OP STAT1	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Post-secondary education payments to provinces	
388.6	301.4	87.2Bilingualism development	1.7	51.6Citizenship	4.9	3.2Translation bureau	6.3	2.2Administration and general	
10.8	5.2	5.6lfi9. S	sia.t	Ufi.8Canada Council	
24.0	23.7	0.3Canadian Broadcasting Corporation	
166.0	166.0	Canadian Film Development Corporation	
0.3	0.4	-0.1Canadian Radio-Television Commission	
3.3	2.8	0.5Company of Young Canadians	
1.9	1.9	National Arts Centre Corporation	
2.6	2.5	0.1National Film Board	10.5	-0.4National Library	
2.5	2.0	0.5National Museums of Canada	7.3	0.9Public Archives	2.4	0.5Public .Service Commission	14.1	1.9Office of the Representation Commissioner	0.1	707.2	553.2	154.0
7104
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Solicitor General
Expenditures of the Department of the Solicitor General including those of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police amount to $223 million, $39 million more than the previous year's total. There are increases of $33 million in respect of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and $6 million in respect of correctional services.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Gross expenditures are $188 million in 1970-71 but receipts of $42 million arising from services provided
by those expenditures will bring the net amount charged to budgetary expenditure to $146 million.
In 1969-70 gross expenditures were $150 million and receipts were $37 million resulting in a charge of $113 million to budgetary expenditures.
Correctional services
Expenditures in respect of these services at $76 million are $6 million more than in 1969-70 and include outlays of $55 million for care of inmates compared with $50 million in 1969-70 and $12 million for rehabilitation of inmates compared wTith $12 million in the previous fiscal year.
TABLE 40 (in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31		
Solicitor General	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Royal Canadian Mounted Police- Law enforcement- Police services under contract	79.0	63.2	15.8Enforcement of federal statutes and executive orders	39.0	35.2	3.8Administration	17.0	12.2	4.8Support services	14.0	9.4	4.6National police services	8.1	6.1	2.0167.1	1SB.1	S1.0Pensions and other benefits- Pensions	7.1	6.4	0.7Royal Canadian Mounted Police superannuation account- Govern ment's contribution	8.9	7.4	1.5Amortization of deferred charges	11.1	9.5	1.6Additional interest	2.3	(1)	2.3Other	1.7	1.1	0.6Sl.l	UA	6.7188.2	150.5	37.7Less: receipts and revenue credited to the vote	-41.7	-37.3	-4.4146.5	113.2	33.3Correctional services- Care of inmates	55 A	50.0	5.4Rehabilitation of inmates	12.4	11.9	0.5Parole and community services	4.6	5.2	-0.6Administration	3.1	2.9	0.275.5	70.0	5.5Departmental administration	1.4	0.9	0.5223.4	184.1	39.3
(1) In 1969-70 additional interest of $1.1 million was charged to Department of Finance expenditure.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Supply and Services
Expenditures for this department including Information Canada, Canadian Arsenals Limited and the Canadian Commercial Corporation are $75 million compared with $82 million in the previous fiscal year.
Expenditures in respect of the Canadian Government Exhibition Commission which were formerly reported under the Department of Public Works are now included in the expenditures of Information Canada. Previous year's figures have been adjusted for purposes of comparison.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31	
Supply and Services	1971 1970 (preliminary)	or decrease (-)
Supply-
Purchasing	14.9	15.3	-0.4Materiel management	4.9	5.8	-0.9Program administration	3.6	3.5	0.1Other	2.2	6.9	-4.725.6	31.5	-5.9Lets receipts credited to vote	-3.4	-3.3	-0.122.2	28.2	-6.0Services-	Program administration	12.1	10.9	1.2Pay and employee benefit administration	8.9	7.2	1.7Management services	7.4	5.3	2.1Payment and reporting services	3.9	6.3	-2.4Social and economic assistance payments administration	9.5	11.9	-2.4Government of Canada Accounting	1.7	1.5	0.243.5	43.1	0.4Less receipts credited to vote	-5.9	-2.4	-3.537.6	40.7	-3.1Administration	4.1	4.0	0.163.9	72.9	-9.0Information Canada	6.4	5.5	0.9Canadian Commercial Corporation	3.9	3.4	0.5Canadian Arsenals Limited	1.0	0.5	0.575.2	82.3	-7.1
June 18, 1971
Transport
Expenditures of the Department of Transport including those in respect of the Canadian National Railways, the Canadian Transport Commission, the National Harbours Board and The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority in the amount of 1470 million are $3 million more than in 1969-70. Payments under the
Maritime Freight Rates Act, which were formerly reported under the department's expenditure are now reported under the Canadian Transport Commission; and those for Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation formerly reported under Transport are now shown under Privy Council. Prior year's figures have been adjusted for comparative purposes.
TABLE 42 (in millions of dollars)
Transport	Fiscal year ended March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Marine services-			
Aids to navigation	. 46.0	41.3	4.7Canals	. 8.5	7.8	0.7Arctic resupply	1	. 9.7	8.7	1.0Shipbuilding	. 1.8	13.8	-12.0Other	. 24.8	24.0	0.890.8	95.6	-4.8Railways and steamships-	Ferry services-(C.N.R.)	. 33.0	21.8	11.2Capital expenditures	. 7.9	9.6	-1.7Railway employees provident fund	. 6.3	6.4	-0.1Other	. 1.3	1.8	-0.548.5	59.6	8.9Air services-	Airports and other ground services	. 27.0	30.0	-3.0Air traffic control	. 31.8	22.8	9.0Meteorological services	. 38.5	35.4	3.1Radio aids to navigation	. 38.3	30.1	8.2Other	. 26.2	26.6	-0.4161.8	W-9	16.9Administration	. 9.0	7.3	1.7310.1	287.4	22.7Canadian National Railways operating deficit	. 29.7	24.6	5.1Canadian Transport Commission-	Payments under the National Transportation Act	. 65.7	79.7	-14.0Contributions to the railway grade crossing fund	. 20.0	15.0	5.0Steamship subventions for coastal services	. 0.0	13.2	-7.2Maritime Freight Rates Act	. 14.0	14.6	-0.6Subsidies to regional air carriers	. 1.8	3.4	-1.6Payments under the Atlantic Region Freight Assistance Act...	. 2.8	4.4	-1.6Other	. 7.7	5.9	1.8118.0	156.2	-18.5National Harbours Board	. 2.5	8.6	-6.1The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority-	Welland canal deficit	. 8.2	7.9	0.3Other	. 1.9	2.6	-0.710.1	10.5	-0.4
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Marine services
Net expenditures of $91 million are $5 million less than in the previous year and include $46 million for aids to navigation compared with $41 million in 1969-70.
Railways and steamships
These expenditures total $49 million, $9 million higher than in the previous fiscal year and include $33 million for ferry services operated by the Canadian National Railways ($22 million in 1969-70).
Air services
Net expenditures of $162 million are $17 million more than in 1969-70, and include $27 million for airports and other ground services ($30 million in 1969-70), $32 million for air traffic control ($23 million in 1969-70), $39 million for meteorological services ($35 million in 1969-70) and $38 million for radio aids to navigation ($30 million in 1969-70).
Canadian National Railways
The 1970 deficit of the Canadian National Railways of $30 million, charged to budgetary expenditure, is $5 million higher than the amount charged to cover the 1969 deficit.
Canadian Transport Commission
Expenditures of $118 million for the Canadian Transport Commission are $18 million less than in 1969-70. Payments pursuant to the National Transportation Act total $66 million compared with $80 million in 1969-70 and contributions to the railway grade crossing fund of $20 million are $5 million higher than in 1969-70.
National Harbours Board
Non-active advances to the board to be charged to budgetary expenditure are $3 million compared with $9 million in 1969-70 and include $2 million for capital expenditures compared with $5 million in the previous year.
The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority
Budgetary expenditures in respect to The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority are $10 million, slightly
less than in 1969-70. The 1970 operating deficit of the Welland Canal, charged to budgetary expenditure, is $8 million compared -with the 1969 deficit of $8 million charged in 1969-70.
Treasury Board
Expenditures of the Treasury Board, including the National Research Council, are $466 million compared with $391 million in 1969-70.
The government's outlays in respect of the public service pension accounts total $249 million compared with $189 million in 1969-70. Contributions to the Public Service Superannuation Account, in an amount equal to the estimated current and prior service payments of individuals, are $86 million compared with $74 million in 1969-70.
A further amount of $85 million, to cover the annual amortization charge in respect of the actuarial deficiencies arising out of pay increases and the actuarial, deficiency revealed by the quinquennial evaluation made as at December 31, 1967, was charged to budgetary expenditure. In 1969-70 amortization charged to budgetary expenditure was $92 million. Also included in 1970-71 expenditures is an amount of $50 million for additional interest; in 1969-70 an amount of $25 million was charged to Department of Finance expenditures for this purpose.
Expenditures in respect to the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans total $19 million, the same as in the previous fiscal year.
Public service social insurance contributions amount to $19 million compared to $15 million in 1969-70 and include surgical-medical and other insurance premiums of $17 million compared with $13 million in the previous year.
An amount of $65 million is included in budgetary expenditure and will be credited to the liability account "reserve for salary revisions" to cover salary revisions in respect of 1970-71 and prior fiscal years. In 1969-70 the comparable amount was $59 million.
National Research Council
Expenditures of the National Research Council at $126 million are $4 million more than in 1969-70.
Outlays for scholarships and grants together with assistance towards research in industry amount to $73 million compared with $71 million in 1969-70.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Fiscal year ended March 31	
Treasury Board	1970 (preliminary)	or decrease (-)
Public service pensions-
Superannuation account-
Government's contribution	
85.9	73.5	12.4Amortization of deferred charges	
85.0	91.9	-6.9Additional interest	
49.5	(1)	49.5Canada and Quebec pension plans	
18.8	19.4	-0.6Other	
9.6	3.7	5.9848.8	188.5	60. SPublic service social insurance-	Surgical-medical and other insurance premiums	
17.1	13.1	4.0Other	
1.9	1.9	19.0	15.0	4.0Reserve for salary revisions	58.7	6.3Administration and general	
7.7	7.2	0.5340.5	269.4	71.1National Research Council of Canada-	Operating expenditures	46.6	1.4Capital expenditures	
5.0	4.0	1.0Grants and contributions	
72.5	71.1	1.4185.5	181.7	8.8466.0	391.1	74.9
<*>
In 1969-70 additional interest of $26.0 million was charged to Department of Finance expenditure.
Veterans Affairs
Expenditures of the Department of Veterans Affairs total $410 million compared with $422 million in the previous fiscal year.
Welfare services at $109 million are $2 million less than in 1969-70; pensions at $217 million are $6 million less; and treatment services at $66 million are $6 million less.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Veterans Ate airs
Fiscal year ended March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Pensions-*
Grants and contributions	
213.1	218.5	-5.4Operating expenditures	
3.4	3.8	-0.4816.5	888.3	-6.8Welfare services-	War veterans allowances	
90.0	92.0	-2.0Other	18.2	0.3108.5	110.8	-1.7Treatment services	
66.1	72.1	-6.0Veterans land administration	10.7	-0.6Administration	7.1	1.7
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
The government's asset and liability account bal- decreases during 1970-71 are summarized in the ances at March 31, 1971 as now estimated, the following table: balances at March 31, 1970 and the net increases or

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Balance at March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
-	1971 (preliminary i	1970	
LlABILITI E9			
Current and demand liabilities	3,033.9	2 307.2	726.7Deposit and trust accounts	440.0	491.9	-51.9Annuity, insurance and pension accounts	13,792.7	12 184.5	1,608.2Undisbursed balances of appropriations to special accounts	263.9	273.4	-9.5Refundable corporation tax	4.0	38.2	-34.2Provision for compound interest on Canada savings bonds	18.6	20.3	-1.7Deferred credits	206.6	192.9	13.7Suspense accounts	4.6	4.6	Unmatured debt	25,201.2	22 637.1	2,564.1Total liabilities	42,965.5	38,150 1	4,815.4Assets	Current assets	1,665.3	1,171.4	493.9Departmental working capital advances	208.7	201.0	7.7Cash in blocked currency	(1)	(l)	Advances to the Exchange Fund Account	4,578.4	3,220.4	1,358.0Investments in United States dollar securities issued by other than	the Government of Canada	25.7	58.0	-32.3Canada pension plan investment fund	3,701.3	2,832.8	868.5Investments held for the retirement of unmatured debt	6.9	13.8	-6.9Loans to, and investments in, crown corporations	10,753.0	9,634.5	1,118.5Loans to national governments	1,406.0	1,327.9	78.1Other loans and investments	2,843.0	2,333.6	509.4Securities held in trust	124.4	114.4	10.0Deferred charges	743.5	750.6	-7.1Capital assets	(2)	(2)	Inactive loans and investments	94.8	94.8	Total recorded assets	26,151.0	21,753.2	4,397.8Less reserve for losses on realization of assets	-546.4	-546.4	Net recorded assets	25,604.6	21,206.8	4,397.8Net debt represented by excess of liabilities over net recorded assets.	17,360.9	16,943.3	(,)417.6
<*) Less than $50,000.
(2>
Shown at nominal value of $1.
I*1 Reflecting the budgetary deficit of $417.6 million.
Summary
The gross liabilities of the government are $42,966 million as at March 31, 1971 compared with $38,150 million at March 31, 1970. The increase of $4,816 million is due mainly to unmatured debt -which is $2,564 million higher than at March 31, 1970 and to annuity, insurance and pension accounts which are $1,608 million higher than at March 31, 1970.
Net recorded assets at $25,605 million are $4,398 million higher than the previous year-end total of
$21,207 million. The main changes are increases of $1,358 million in advances to the exchange fund account, $1,119 million in loans to, and investments in, crown corporations and $869 million in the Canada pension plan investment fund.
The net debt of Canada, or the excess of liabilities over net recorded assets, is $17,361 million as at March 31, 1971 compared with $16,943 million at March 31, 1970.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ending March 31 Billions of Dollars
1% OTHER LIABILITIES
1% DEPOSIT AND TRUST ACCOUNTS


[Stage Direction]
* Preliminary.
1968	1969
1970	1971*
1971*
Liability Accounts
Current and demand liabilities
These liabilities, which consist of obligations of the government payable currently or on demand, in the amount of S3,034 million, are $727 million more than the total at March 31, 1970.
These are increases of $263 million in non-interestbearing notes, $119 million in the allocation of special drawing rights in the International Monetary Fund, $164 million in interest due and outstanding, and $117 million in outstanding cheques.
Non-interest-bearing notes represent those portions of Canada's equities in the capital of certain international agencies which are not covered by cash or gold. Notes in respect of the International Monetary Fund in the amount of $635 million are $271 million higher than at March 31, 1970.
Special Drawing Rights in the International Monetary Fund represent an allocation to Canada by the International Monetary Fund of an international reserve asset. These Special Drawing Rights have been advanced to the Exchange Fund Account and are included therein. There was an increase of $119 million during the year bringing the balance to $253 million.
Deposit and trust accounts
Sundry funds deposited with, or held in trust by, the Receiver General for Canada for various purposes are recorded in these accounts.
There is a net decrease of $52 million during 1970-71 bringing the total to $440 million as at March 31, 1971.
The main change is a decrease of $88 million in the provincial tax collection agreements account which is $86 million compared with $174 million at March 31, 1970.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
TABLE 46 (in millions of dollars)
	Balance at March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
Current and Demand Liabilities	1971 (preliminary)	1970	Outstanding cheques	632.9	515.9	117.0Accounts payable	575.0	602.6	-27.6Non-interest-bearing notes payable to-	The International Monetary Fund	635.0	364.0	271.0The International Development Association	9.7	-9.7The Asian Development Bank	6.7	5.4	1.3The Caribbean Regional Development Bank	0.4	0.4642.1	S79.1	26S.0Allocation oi Special Drawing Rights in the International Monetary	Fund	253.4	134.4	119.0Matured debt outstanding	32.7	21.2	11.5Interest due and outstanding	325.6	161.6	164.0Interest accrued	495.6	434.0	61.6Post office outstanding money orders	42.6	34.5	8.1Outstanding letter of credit cheques	6.4	5.4	1.0Other current liabilities	27.6	18.5	9.13,033.9	2,307.2	726.7
TABLE 47 (in millions of dollars)
Deposit and Trust Accounts	Balance at March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Canadian Dairy Commission	.... 19.7	7.5	12.2Canadian Pension Commission-administration trust fund	.... 13.3	13.5	-0.2Contractors holdbacks-sundry departments	.... 14.4	16.1	-1.7Contractors securities-sundry departments	.... 2.2	2.3	-0.1Crown corporations deposits	26.1	9.9Guarantee deposits-sundry departments	107.9	12.8Indian band funds	31.7	-0.7Instalment purchase of bonds	17.4	1.9National Harbours Board-special accounts	25.1	-0.9Prairie farm emergency fund	16.1	-0.9Provincial tax collection agreements account	174.3	-87.7Other	53.9	3.5440.0	491.9	-51.9
June 18, 1&71
Annuity, insurance and pension accounts
This category records the government's liability in respect of various annuity, insurance and pension accounts.
It is estimated that these account balances will total $13,793 million at March 31, 1971, an increase of $1,608 million during the fiscal year.
Unemployment Insurance Fund The Unemployment Insurance Fund is expected to decrease by $126 million bringing the balance to $354 million at March 31, 1971. Of this amount $326 million will be invested in bonds and accrued interest and $27 million will be held by the Receiver General.
TABLE 48 (in millions of dollars)
	Balance at March 31		
Annuity, Insurance and Pension Accounts	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Unemployment insurance fund	.... 353.7	479.8	-126.1Less: investments and accrued interest	.... 326.3	468.0	-141.7Uninvested funds on deposit with the government	
Superannuation accounts-	.... 27.4	11.8	15.6Public service	.... 3,987.6	3,599.4	388.2Canadian forces	.... 3,572.6	3,306.4	266.2Royal Canadian Mounted Police	.... 199.7	165.8	33.97,759.9	7,on.6	688. SCanada pension plan account	.... 3,843.7	2,932.3	911.4Government annuities	.... 1,313.4	1,321.1	-7.7Old age security fund	721.4	-3.5Other	126.3	4.113,792.7	12,184.5	1,608.2
TABLE 49 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Unemployment Insurance Fund	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971 (preliminary)
Receipts- Contributions-					
Employees and employers*1*	343.8	347.4	433.1	491.8	575.9Government®	68.8	69.5	86.6	98.4	99.0Net income from investments	10.9	15.9	18.9	27.5	29.2Other income	0.2	0.2	0.2	0.2	423.7	433.0	538.8	617.9	704.1Disbursements-	Benefit payments	-307.0	-388.6	-459.1	-542.1	-836.6Excess of receipts over disbursements or disburse-	ments over receipts (-)	116.7	44.4	79.7	75.8	-132.5Balance at credit of fund at fiscal year-end	258.2	302.7	382.4	458.2	325.7Unredeemed benefit warrants and deposits from	employers	22.2	17.6	16.5	21.6	28.0Balance in fund at March 31	280.4	320.3	398.9	479.8	353.7investment in bonds and accrued interest	-266.6	-303.9	-386.8	-468.0	-326.3Balance on deposit with the government	13.8	16.4	12.1	11.8	27.4
«) Contributions by employees and employers on an equal basis.
0) Government contribution is equal to 20 per cent of the combined employee-employer contributions.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Public Service Superannuation Account
The balance of $3,988 million in this account is $388 million higher than at March 31, 1970. Receipts of $499 million include employees contributions of $95 million, the government's contribution of $86
million, interest of $148 million, an actuarial liability adjustment of $162 million and contributions of $6 million by crown corporations. Contributions by the government and crown corporations are equal to the estimated current and prior service payments by individuals in 1969-70.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
		Fiscal year ended March 31			
Public Service Superannuation Account , 1967		1968	1969	1970	1971 (preliminary)
Receipts- Contributions- Employees-					
Government	66.0	71.6	84.9	88.0Crown corporations	
3.8	5.2	5.1	5.3	7.0Government	59.6	66.0	73.5	85.9Crown corporations	
3.8	5.0	4.8	5.3	6.0Interest	110.9	118.0	131.0	147.7Actuarial liability	21.5	121.0	215.1	161.8Other	2.2	3.0	1.8	2.4374.0	270.4	389.5	516.9	498.8Disbursements-	Annuities	-68.2	-74.7	-83.3	-103.9Withdrawals of contributions	
-11.1	-10.8	-10.3	-10.5	-4.7Other	-5.1	-1.9	-2.1	-2.0-74.9	-84.1	-86.9	-95.9	-110.6Excess of receipts over disbursements..,	
299.1	186.3	302.6	421.0	388.2Balance in fund brought forward	
2,390.4	2,689.5	2,875.8	3,178.4	3,599.4Balance at credit of fund	
2,689.5	2,875.8	3,178.4	3,599.4	3,987.6
<*>
Net after deduction of $4.1 million in respect of dual contributions temporarily required in respect of the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans in 1965-66.
Canadian Forces Superannuation Account
The balance of $3,573 million reflects an increase of $266 million during the fiscal year.
Receipts of $353 million include $39 million in contributions by personnel, $70 million in contributions by the government, $136 million in interest and $108 million to provide additional liabilities arising from salary increases. Government contributions are made at the rate of If times the current and prior service contributions by personnel.
Disbursements of $87 million include $81 million in pensions and retiring allowances and $6 million in cash termination allowances and return of contributions.
In 1969-70 receipts were $358 million and disbursements were $75 million.
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Account
The balance of $200 million in this account is $34 million higher than the balance at March 31, 1970.
Receipts of $36 million during the year include contributions of $5 million by personnel, the government's contribution of $9 million, interest of $7 million and a provision of $14 million for additional liabilities arising from salary increases.
Disbursements of $2 million consist mainly of annuities and allowances.
In 1969-70 receipts were $36 million and disbursements were $1 million.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
TABLE 51 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31					
Canadian Forces Superannuation Account	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971 (preliminary)
Receipts-					
Contributions-					
Personnel	<l>25.1	33.1	33.9	38.7	39.5Government	42.6	58.4	57.0	65.6	70.4Interest	91.7	105.2	112.1	124.4	135.6Actuarial liability	279.2	159.6	129.0	107.5Other	0.3	1.4	0.1	0.1438.9	198.1	362.6	357.8	353.1Disbursements-	Pensions and retiring allowances	-36.8	-45.7	-55.2	-67.4	-80.6Cash termination allowances and return of con-	tributions	-9.2	-6.0	-7.0	-7.5	-6.2Other	-0.1	-0.1	-0.1	-0.1	-0.1-46.1	-51.8	-62.3	-75.0	-86.9Excess of receipts over disbursements	392.8	146.3	300.3	282.8	266.2Balance in fund brought forward	2,184.2	2,577.0	2,723.3	3,023.6	3,306.4Balance at credit of fund	2,577.0	2,723.3	3,023.6	3,306.4	3,572.6
m Net after deduction of $2.1 million in respect of dual contributions temporarily required in respect of the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans in 1965-66.
TABLE 52 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Account	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971 (preliminary)Receipts- Contributions- Personnel	(1)2.2	2.8	3.4	4.2	5.2Government	4.5	4.2	6.6	7.4	9.3Interest	2.9	3.5	4.5	5.5	6.9Actuarial liability	11.1	10.1	12.7	19.2	14.220.7	20.6	27.2	36.3	35.6Disbursements-	Annuities and allowances	-0.7	-0.8	-0.9	-1.0	-1.4Cash termination allowances and return of contributions	-0.3	-0.2	-0.2	-0.3	-0.3-1.0	-1.0	-1.1	-1.3	-1.7Excess of receipts over disbursements	19.7	19.6	26.1	35.0	33.9Balance in fund brought forward	65.4	85.1	104.7	130.8	165.8Balance at credit of fund	85.1	104.7	130.8	165.8	199.7
<* Net after deduction of $0.2 million in respect of dual contributions required in respect of the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans in 1965-66.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Canada Pension Plan Account
The balance of $3,844 million is $911 million higher than the March 31, 1970 balance of $2,932 million.
Credits to the account of $1,024 million include $812 million in contributions under the act, $207 million in interest on investments and $4 million in interest on the operating balance on deposit with the Receiver General. Charges of $112 million include $92 million in benefit payments and $20 million in administrative expenses.
In 1969-70 receipts were $890 million and disbursements were $65 million.
The amount by which the operating balance of the Canada Pension Plan in any month exceeds the estimated amount required to meet all payments in the following three-month period is available for the purchase of securities of participating provinces. Securities of Canada are purchased with the excess remaining after purchasing securities of each province as required.
It is estimated that securities totalling $869 million will have been purchased during the year bringing the total amount invested to $3,701 million at March 31, 1971. These are recorded in the asset account "Canada Pension Plan Investment Fund".
TABLE 53 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Canada Pension Plan Account	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971 (preliminary)
Receipts-					
Contributions	587.2	640.2	698.0	745.7	812.4Interest on investments	11.0	42.2	84.4	139.7	206.9Interest on operating balance	1.1	1.4	2.4	3.8	4.0Other	0.6	0.9	0.2	0.4	0.5599.9	684.7	785.0	889.6	1,023.8Payments-	Benefit payments	-0.1	-1.3	-15.6	-17.7	-91.9Administration expenses	-8.3	-11.5	-14.4	-47.4	-20.5-8.4	-12.8	-30.0	-65.1	-112.4Excess of receipts over payments	591.5	671.9	755.0	824.5	911.4Balance in fund brought forward	89.4	680.9	1,352.8	2,107.8	2,932.3Balance at credit of fund	680.9	1,352.8	2,107.8	2,932.3	3,843.7Less investments in securities held in the Canada pension plan investment fund	-615.5	-1,280.8	-2,023.0	-2,832.8	3,701.3Operating balance on deposit with the government..	65.4	72.0	84.8	99.5	142.4
Government Annuities Account
The balance of $1,313 million in this account is $8 million less than the balance at March 31, 1970.
Receipts of $62 million include $12 million from premiums and $50 million in interest. Disbursements
of $70 million consist mainly of vested annuity and commuted value payments and refunds of premiums.
In 1969-70 receipts totalled $64 million and disbursements were $68 million.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
TABLE 54 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31					
Old Age Security Fund	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971 (preliminary)
Tax receipts-					
Sales tax	559.5	544.5	528.1	577.4	563.0Personal income tax	576.6	800.1	915.0	1,026.5	1,132.5Corporation income tax	149.5	150.0	183.0	227.1	207.9Total tax receipts	1,285.6	1,494.6	1,626.1	1,831.0	1,903.4Pension payments	-1,033.4	-1,153.3	-1,296.8	-1,467.0	-1,633.9Guaranteed income supplement'1)	-39.6	-234.8	-244.5	-263.5	-273.0Excess of receipts over payments or disbursements	over receipts (-)	212.6	106.5	84.8	100.5	-3.5Balance in fund brought forward	217.0	429.6	536.1	620.9	721.4Balance in fund	429.6	536.1	620.9	721.4	717.9
a>
Effective January 1, 1967.
Old Age Security Fund
The Old Age Security Act, 1951 directed that this fund be established and that credits to the fund should consist of a 2 per cent sales tax, a 2 per cent tax (maximum tax $60) on individual incomes and a 2 per cent tax on corporation incomes, and that pension payments of $40 per month be paid to all eligible persons over 70 years of age. Payments were effective from January 1952.
Amendments to the act have increased these tax rates: on individual incomes to 4 per cent effective January 1, 1964 (maximum tax $120 increased to $240
effective January 1, 1967); on corporation incomes to 3 per cent effective January 1, 1959; and on sales to 3 per cent effective April 10, 1959.
Pension rates also have been increased by amendments to the act to $75 per month effective October 1, 1963, to $76.50 per month effective January 1, 1968, to $78 per month effective January 1, 1969, to $79.58 effective January 1, 1970 and to $80 effective January 1, 1971.
The act was further amended to authorize pension payments effective January 1966 to all persons who satisfied the residence requirements of the act who
TABLE 55 (in millions of dollars)
Old Age Security Payments'1*
Newfoundland	
Nova Scotia	
Prince Edward Island	
New Brunswick	
Quebec	
Ontario	
Manitoba	
Saskatchewan	
Alberta	
British Columbia	
Northwest and Yukon Territories
Fiscal year ended March 31 

 Increase
1971	1970
(preliminary)	decrease (-)
39.7	36.4	3.383.0	76.1	6.915.0	13.8	1.262.7	57.7	5.0464.0	415.8	48.2680.0	618.1	61.9107.0	98.0	9.0105.0	96.2	8.8130.0	117.2	12.8219.0	199.8	19.21.5	1.4	0.11,906.9	1,730.5	176.4
0) Includes $273 million in 1970-71 and $263.5 million in 1969-70 for guaranteed income supplement.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
had attained the age of 69 years on or before January 1, 1966; the age limit being reduced by one year on January 1st of each subsequent year until 1970. A further amendment to the act in 1966-67 authorized the payment of a monthly guaranteed income supplement to eligible pensioners. The amount of the supplement that may be paid to a pensioner for a month is 40 per cent of the amount of the pension that may be paid to him for that month dependent upon the amount of his income for the preceding year.
Receipts of $1,903 million include $563 million from sales tax, $1,132 million from the tax on personal incomes and $208 million from the tax on corporation incomes.
Payments of $1,907 million consist of $1,634 million in pension payments and $273 million in guaranteed income supplements.
In 1969-70 receipts were $1,831 million and payments were $1,731 million.
A distribution of payments, by provinces, is shown in the preceding table:
Undisbursed balances of appropriations to special accounts
This category records the undisbursed balances of appropriations to special accounts from which disbursements may be made for authorized purposes. They fall into two classes. The first of these, comprising the majority of the accounts, consists of those cases where parliament has appropriated moneys for specific purposes. The other class consists of accounts to which is credited moneys received from the sale of materials, supplies, equipment, land, works and buildings and which are available for purposes of the Department of National Defence.
The balance of $264 million is $10 million less than the balance of $274 million at March 31, 1970.
The main changes are a decrease of $58 million in the reserve for wheat inventory reduction payments and an increase of $36 million in the reserve for salary revisions.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Undisbursed Balances of Appropriations to Special Accounts	Balance at March 31		- Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Reserve for wheat inventory reduction payments	
42.4	100.0	-57.6International assistance account	
79.5	85.0	-5.5Reserve for salary revisions	
100.4	64.3	36.1National Capital fund	11.8	Railway grade crossing fund	
3.4	(1)	3.4Surplus crown assets	
23.8	10.8	13.0Other	1.5	1.1263.9	273.4	-9.5
<*>
Less than $50,000.
Refundable corporation tax
This account records the refundable corporation tax on cash profits of businesses that is payable by all corporations not exempt from tax under section 62 of the Income Tax Act and by certain types of trusts on specified types of income.
During the year $34 million was refunded to the corporations leaving a balance of $4 million at March 31, 1971.
Provision for compound interest on Canada savings bonds
This account records the estimated amount for the prorated provision for the special compound interest feature applicable to certain Canada savings bonds.
The balance of $19 million is $2 million less than the balance at March 31, 1970.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Deterred credits
Recorded in these accounts are amounts due the government in respect of which payment is deferred. These are contra accounts to corresponding items under the asset categories "loans to, and investments in, crown corporations", "loans to national governments" and "other loans and investments".
The balance of $207 million is $14 million more than at March 31, 1970.
Deferred interest of $84 million in respect of The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority is $12 million more than at March 31, 1970.
Suspense accounts
These consist of balances where some uncertainty as to disposition exists.
The balance of $5 million is the same as at March 31, 1970.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Deferred Credits
Balance at March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Deferred interest-
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited	.. 0.2	0.2	Northern Canada Power Commission	.. 10.0	10.0	The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority	.. 84.1	71.9	12.2United Kingdom Financial Agreement Act, 1946	.. 101.1	101.1	195.4	188.3	13.3Crown Assets Disposal Corporation-government equity	.. 9.4	9.2	0.2.. 1.8	0.5	1.3206.6	192.9	13.7
Unmatured debt
The unmatured debt of Canada at $25,201 million as at March 31, 1971 is comprised of $24,864 million payable in Canadian dollars, $263 million payable in United States dollars and $74 million payable in
German deutsche marks. Notes in the amount of $108 million, payable in Italian lire, were redeemed during the year.
The increase in unmatured debt is due to securities payable in Canadian dollars.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Unmatured Debt
Balance at March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Payable in Canadian dollars-
Marketable bonds	
Non-marketable bonds-*
Canada savings bonds	
Canada pension plan	
Unemployment insurance commission,
Treasury bills	
Payable in United States dollarsOK*__________
Payable in German deutsche marksOMO Payable in Italian lire<l><2>

12,988.7	12,248.0	740.77,804.6	6,578.8	1,225.820.8	15.4	5.4315.0	453.0	-138.031,129.1	19,295.2	1,833.93,735.0	2,895.0	840.024,864.1	22,190.2	2,673.9263.3	265.0	-1.773.8	73.8	108.1	-108.125,201.2	22,637.1	2,564.1
O) Marketable bonds.
W Converted at the official parity rates.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Details of the various loan issues, maturities, cancellations and redemptions resulting in the net increase are described more fully in the section "The Public Debt".
Asset Accounts
Current assets
These accounts consist of various cash accounts and the securities investment account.

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ending March 31
* Preliminary.
1. At shown on table "Summary of assets and liabilities". This chart does not reflect the reserve for losses on realization of assets.
TABLE 59 (in millions of dollars)
	Balance at March 31		* Increase or decrease (-)
Current Assets	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Cash accounts-			
Cash in current deposits*1*	1,255.0	831.8	423.2Cash in special deposits	1.5	1.5	Cash in hands of collectors and in transit	305.0	196.3	108.7Customs and excise temporary deposits	0.5	0.5	Indian agencies revenue trust bank accounts	0.3	0.3	Moneys received after March 31 but applicable to the current year	26.0	19.9	6.1Post office-cash on hand and in transit	20.1	23.7	-3.61,608.4	1,074.0	664-4Securities investment account	56.9	97.4	-40.51,665.3	1,171.4	493.9
<*) Receiver General year-end balances in London, New York, Paris, Brussels, Bonn, Rome and Frankfurt are at the Canadian dollar equivalent of exchange rates at March 31.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Total current assets at $1,665 million are $494 million more than at March 31,1970. The main changes are increases of $423 million in cash in current deposits and $109 million in cash in hands of collectors and in transit and a decrease of $41 million in the securities investment account.
Departmental working capital advances
These accounts record advances outstanding at the close of the fiscal year for working funds for certain departmental activities.
The balance of $209 million is $8 million higher than at March 31, 1970. The main changes are increases of $6 million in miscellaneous departmental advances, $6 million in the stockpiling of uranium concentrates account and $6 million in the defence production revolving fund and a decrease of $11 million in the bullion and coinage account.
Bullion and coinage consists of separate accounts for bronze, gold, nickel and silver, in which are recorded transactions in respect of purchases and sales. Debits include the cost of all coin and bullion purchased from the Royal Canadian Mint. Credits represent the face value of all coin issued to the Bank of Canada, gold bullion transferred to the Bank of Canada and sales of silver bullion.
The balances at March 31, 1971 total $8 million compared to $19 million at March 31, 1970.
The defence production revolving fund records the cost of materials procured for use in the manufacture of defence equipment until such time as they are billed to the Department of National Defence or sold to defence contractors for use in the manufacture of defence equipment, as well as working capital loans and advances for their production. The balance of $34 million in the account is $6 million more than at the previous year-end.
The stockpiling of uranium concentrates account records the acquisition of uranium concentrates in accordance with contracts entered into with the approval of the Governor in Council by Eldorado Nuclear Limited on behalf of Her Majesty in right of Canada with certain mining companies. The balance of $101 million is $6 million higher than the balance at March 31, 1970.
Cash in blocked currency
The balance in this account is $4 thousand at March 31, 1971, the same as in the previous fiscal year.
Advances to the Exchange Fund Account
Advances during the year to finance the purchase of gold and foreign exchange are $2,438 million and repayments are $1,199 million bringing outstanding advances to $4,546 million at March 31, 1971. These

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Departmental Working Capital Advances	Balance at March 31		
1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Bullion and coinage	... 7.5	18.8	-11.3Defence production revolving fund	... 34.0	27.6	6.4Miscellaneous departmental imprest and standing advances	... 16.0	14.0	2.0Miscellaneous departmental accountable advances	... 25.0	18.6	6.4Stockpiling of uranium concentrates	94.6	6.4Transport stores account	8.2	0.3Other	19.2	-2.5208.7	201.0	7.7
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
figures do not include any adjustments for the decrease in the value of holdings of foreign currencies as reflected in the accounts of the Exchange Fund. Also included in the account are special drawing rights issued by the international monetary fund which increased during the year by SI 19 million to $253 million, bringing the balance in the account to $4,578 million.
Investments in special United States of America Securities issued by other than the Government of Canada
This account records the special securities issued by the Government of the United States of America and purchased by Canada pursuant to agreements made to carry out the Columbia River Treaty between the Government of the United States and the Government of Canada. During 1970-71 securities in the
amount of $32 million have been redeemed leaving a balance of $26 million in the account at March 31, 1971.
Canada Pension Plan Investment Fund
This account records securities purchased under the Canada Pension Plan Act and the sale of these securities. The amount by which the operating balance of the Canada pension plan fund in any month exceeds the estimated amount required to meet all payments in the following three-month period is available for the purchase of securities of participating provinces. Securities of Canada shall be purchased with the excess remaining after purchasing securities of each province as required. The holdings in the account as at March 31, 1971 are $3,701 million of which $3,680 million is provincial government securities and $21 million is federal government securities.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Canada Pension Plan Investment Fond	Balance at March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Securities of-			
Newfoundland	53.5	16.7Nova Scotia	108.7	33.9Prince Edward Island	10.4	3.4New Brunswick	83.0	25.7Quebec	7.7	4.8Ontario	1,586.4	477.6Manitoba	166.3	51.3Saskatchewan	131.8	42.9Alberta	258.8	82.1British Columbia	410.8	124.7Government of Canada	15.4	5.43,701.3	2,832.8	868.5
Investments held for retirement of unmatured debt
Recorded herein are the government's holdings of the 5§ per cent loan issued August 1, 1962 and maturing August 1, 1980. The balance at March 31, 1971 is $7 million compared with $14 million at March 31, 1970.
Loans to, and investments in, crown corporations
Loans and investments in this category at $10,753 million as at March 31, 1971 are $1,119 million more than the March 31, 1970 balance.
The main changes are increases of $593 million in loans to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, $161 million to Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, $112 million to Air Canada, $93 million to Canadian National Railways and $81 million to the Export Development Corporation.
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited The balance of $504 million, which is $161 million higher than at March 31, 1970 consists of $15 million in capital stock and $489 million in loans.
At March 31, 1970 the balance of $343 million consisted of $15 million in capital stock and $328 million in loans.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Loans to, and Investments in, Crown Corporations
Balance at March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited	
Bank of Canada	
Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation	
Canadian Arsenals Limited	
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation	
Canadian Commercial Corporation	
Canadian Dairy Commission	
Canadian Film Development Corporation	
Canadian National Railways	
Air Canada	
Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation	
Cape Breton Development Corporation	
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation	
Eldorado Nuclear Limited	
Export Development Corporation	
Farm Credit Corporation	
Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation	
National Capital Commission-excluding Greenbelt	
National Harbours Board	
Northern Canada Power Commission	
Northern Transportation Company Limited	
Polymer Corporation Limited	
Royal Canadian Mint	
The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority-
Loans	
Deferred interest	
Interest-free loans	
Recovery likely to require parliamentary appropriations-
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation	
National Capital Commission-Greenbelt	
Other crown corporations	
504.4	343.4	161.0	
5.9	5.9		
11.4	30.5	-19.1	
4.5	4.5		
9.0	9.0		
15.5	15.5		
23.4	45.2	-21.8	3.8	1.7	2.1	2,122.0	2,029.4	92.6	*240.9	129.4	111.5	I2,662.9	2,168.8	204.1	42.3	45.9	-3.6	'*4.0	8.0	-4.0	5,035.0	4,441.8	593.2	%35.2	25.5	9.7	354.4	273.5	80.9	1,176.7	1,127.7	49.0	:4.7	2.2	2.5	"23.4	29.7	-6.3	270.2	265.7	4.5	149.5	44.7	4.8	V16.1	10.0	6.1	*30.0	30.0	*1.0	2.0	-1.0	*459.6	415.9	43.7	84.1	71.8	12.3	tv75.0	75.0	618.7	562.7	56.0	111.0	112.0	-1.0	138.1	37.4	0.7	149.1	149.4	-0.8	1.9	1.2	0.7	i10,753.0	9,634.5	1,118.5	[DOT]f
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Canadian National Railways (including Air Canada)
Outstanding advances to the Canadian National Railways (including Air Canada) of $2,363 million are $204 million higher than at March 31, 1970.
During 1970-71 the government made $226 million available to the Canadian National Railways (including Air Canada) and received repayments of $22 million.
The government made advances of $50 million to the C.N.R. for capital purposes and the refunding of debt in the hands of the public and loans of $117 million to Air Canada for capital purposes.
To assist the C.N.R. to finance further capital expenditure during the year, the government purchased $34 million of the 4 per cent preferred stock of the company. This stock was issued under the
authority of the Canadian National Railways Capital Revision Act, 1952 in an amount equal to 3 per cent of the gross revenue of the company.
At March 31, 1970 temporary loans of $10 million were outstanding to the railway company in respect of its 1970 deficit. Additional loans of $2 million were advanced during the year for its 1970 operations. These have been charged to 1970-71 budgetary expenditure upon parliamentary approval. Further loans of $20 million were advanced during the year in respect of the company's 1971 operations.
At March 31, 1970 temporary loans of $7 million were outstanding to Air Canada in respect of its 1970 operations. An additional $3 million was advanced during the year for its 1970 operations. These have been repaid by the company. Additional loans of $1 million were advanced in 1971 in respect of the 1971 operations.
TABLE 63 (in millions of dollars)
Advances to the Canadian National Railways (including Air Canada)	Balance at March 31		
1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Canadian National Railways- Capital Revision Act, 1952- Preferred stock	1,204.1	1,170.6	33.5Twenty-year obligation	100.0	100.0	Refunding Act, 1955	541.1	501.1	40.0Financing and Guarantee Acts	197.4	197.4	Interim financing of income deficit	20.0	10.0	10.0Loans for maintenance, repair and acquisition of passenger equipment	1.6	2.0	-0.4Temporary loans-acquisition of bonds	40.8	31.3	9.5Canadian government railways	17.0	17.0	2,122.0	2,0X9.4	92.6Air Canada-	Financing and Guarantee Acts	239.8	122.8	117.0Interim financing	1.1	6.6	-5.5240.9	129.4	111.62,362.9	2,158.8	204.1
June 18, 1971
TABLE 64 (in millions of dollars)
Advances to, and Repayments by, the Canadian National Railways (including Alb Canada)
Balance at March 31
(preliminary)
Increase
or
decrease (-)
Advances-
For the refunding of debt	
Financing and Guarantee Acts-
Air Canada	
Temporary loans-acquisition of bonds	
Interim financing-
Canadian National Railways	
Air Canada	
Total advances	
Purchase of 4 per cent preferred stock (C.N.R. Capital Revision Act, 1952)	
Repayments-
Maintenance, repair and acquisition of passenger equipment Interim financing-
Canadian National Railways	
Air Canada	
Net increase during the fiscal year
40.0	50.0	-10.0117.0	68.0	49.09.5	10.1	-0.622.0	30.0	-8.04.1	19.8	-15.7192.6	177.9	14.733.5	37.3	-3.8m.i	215.2	10.9-0.4	-0.4	-12.0	-25.0	13.0-9.6	-16.5	0.9-21.0	-41-9	19.9204.1	173.3	30.8
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation
The balance at March 31, 1971 is $5,035 million, $593 million higher than at March 31, 1970.
Loans and advances of $739 million are partly offset by repayments of $146 million.
Advances include $604 million for direct lending, limited dividend and public housing, $50 million for
sewage treatment projects, $50 million for university housing projects, $30 million for federal-provincial projects and $5 million for urban renewal.
Repayments include $123 million for direct lending limited dividend and public housing, $11 million for sewage treatment projects and $7 million for federal-provincial projects.
TABLE 65 (in millions of dollars)
Advances to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation
Direct lending, limited dividend and public housing
Federal-provincial proj ects-housing	
Loan and mortgage purchase fund	
Municipal sewage treatment	
University housing	
Housing projects	
Urban renewal	
Capital stock	
Balance at March 31
1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-'4,129.0	3,648.1	480.9228.8	205.6	23.24.7	4.9	-0.2233.5	194.6	38.9339.2	291.0	48.260.5	62.8	-2.314.3	9.8	4.525.0	25.0	
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
TABLE 66 (in millions of dollars)
Advances to, and Repayments by, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation	Balance at March 31		Increase or decrease (-)
	1971 (preliminary)	1970	
Advances-			
Direct lending, limited dividend and public housing	463.5	140.5Sewage treatment projects	39.9	10.1University housing projects	57.5	-7.5Federal-provincial projects	43.5	-13.5Urban renewal	8.0	-3.07S9.0	618.4	126.6Repayments-	Direct lending, limited dividend and public housing	-111.4	-11.2Sewage treatment projects	-10.0	-1.4University housing projects	-1.1	-0.7Federal-provincial projects	-5.1	-1.9Loan and mortgage purchase fund	-0.2	Housing projects	-2.3	Urban renewal	-0.2	-0.3-145.8	-1S0.S	-15.5Net increase during the year	482.1	111.1
Export Development Corporation
The outstanding balance of $354 million in this account at March 31, 1971 consisted of $10 million for capital stock, $10 million for working capital and $334 million for loans under section 21A of the Export Development Corporation Act. This section of the act authorizes the making of loans on security of a guaranteed instrument, to the corporation by the Minister of Finance.
Comparable amounts in 1969-70 were $10 million for capital stock, $10 million for working capital and $254 million for loans.
Farm Credit Corporation
The government provides loans to the corporation which makes loans on farm property. The balance of
$1,177 million shown in the account consists of the crown's investment of $45 million in the capital of the corporation and $1,132 million in loans. At March 31, 1970 the balance of $1,128 million consisted of $44 million capital and $1,084 million in loans.
The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority Outstanding obligations in this account in the amount of $619 million consist of $460 million in interest-bearing loans, $75 million in interest-free loans and $84 million in deferred interest. At March 31, 1970 outstanding obligations were $563 million of which $416 million was interest-bearing loans, $75 million was interest-free loans and $72 million was deferred interest.
7126
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Loans to national governments
Loans to national governments in the amount of $1,406 million are $78 million higher than the balance of $1,328 million at March 31, 1970.
The United Kingdom repaid $20 million of the $1,185 million loan made under the $1,250 million credit authorized by the United Kingdom Financial Agreement Act, 1946, reducing the principal to $917 million at March 31, 1971.
Advances under Part II of the Export Credits Insurance Act to Belgium, France and The Netherlands to assist them in the purchasing of goods in
Canada were reduced by repayments of $2 million by Belgium, $8 million by France and $5 million by The Netherlands, bringing the balance at March 31, 1971 to $100 million.
The special loan assistance-developing countries account records loans which are subject to terms and conditions as the Governor in Council may approve, for the purpose of undertaking agreed-upon economic, educational and technical projects. The balance in the account at March 31, 1971 is $288 million, an increase of $114 million during the year.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
	Balance at March 31		
Loans to National Governments	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)
Loans to United Kingdom-			
The United Kingdom Financial Agreement Act, 1946....		 916.6	937.0	-20.4
		 101.1	101.1	
1,017.7	1.0S8.1	-to. 4Loans under the Export Credits Insurance Act, Part II-	
13.9	16.2	-2.3
58.5	66.9	-8.4
27.5	32.1	-4.699.9	115. *	-15.3Miscellaneous-	France-interim credits-consolidated interest	
0.6	0.7	-0.1Special loan assistance-developing countries	
287.7	173.7	114.0
0.1	0.2	-0.1m.4	174.6	113.81,406.0	1,327.9	78.1
Other loans and investments
Balances in these accounts amount to $2,843 million, $509 million higher than at March 31, 1970.
Canada's subscriptions to the capital of international organizations at $1,424 million are $377 million higher than in 1969-70, due mainly to additional subscriptions of $349 million to the International Monetary Fund and $25 million to the International Development Association.
Loans to provincial governments at $352 million are $32 million more than at March 31, 1970.
Advances under the Veterans Land Act at $493 million are $21 million higher and advances under the Municipal Development and Loan Act at $264 million are $9 million less than at March 31, 1970.
Miscellaneous loans and advances in the amount of $310 million are $88 million higher than at the previous year-end, due mainly to increases of $7 million for loans to manufacturers of automotive products in Canada, $14 million for loans to the Northwest Territories and Yukon Territory and a new loan of $11 million to Hydro Quebec research institute.
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
TABLE 68 (in millions of dollars)
Balance at March 31			
Other Loans and Investments	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)
Subscriptions to capital of, and working capital advances and loans			
to, international organizations-			
Canada's subscription to capital of-			
Asian Development Bank	13.4	10.8	2.6Caribbean Regional Development Bank	1.8	1.1	0.7International Bank for Reconstruction and Development....	85.0	85.0	International Development Association	164.8	139.8	25.0International Finance Corporation	3.5	3.5	International Monetary Fund	1,148.9	800.0	348.9Working capital advances and loans to international organizations	6.6	6.8	-0.21,494.0	1,047.0	377.0Loans to provincial governments	352.0	319.6	32.4Veterans land act fund	521.3	498.7	22.6Less reserve for forgiveness of indebtedness	-28.2	-26.6	-1.6493-1	479.1	91.0Municipal development and loan board advances	264.0	272.8	-8.8Miscellaneous-	Airports capital loans	52.0	5.1	46.9Assisted passage scheme	7.0	9.2	-2.2City of Montreal-notes re Expo	13.5	14.1	-0.6Development of space	10.0	9.9	0.1Construction or acquisition of commercial and fishing vessels..	14.0	5.7	8.3Crown Assets Disposal Corporation-government equity in	agency account	9.4	9.2	0.2Defence plant modernization	21.0	18.3	2.7Housing projects for Canadian forces	21.4	21.4	Hydro Quebec research institute	11.0	11.0Investment in share of Panarctic Ltd	21.0	13.6	7.4Loans to manufacturers of automotive products in Canada	41.0	33.7	7.3Northwest Territories	30.0	20.9	9.1Vancouver International Airport-construction of bridges...	5.0	3.0	2.0Yukon Territory	24.0	18.8	5.2Other	29.6	39.2	-9.6309.9	399.1	87.82,843.0	2,333.6	509.4
Securities held in trust
Recorded herein are the security holdings in connection with various deposit and trust accounts and annuity, insurance and pension accounts. Bonds and certified cheques held in connection with contractors securities are also recorded under this heading. The balance at March 31, 1971 is SI24 million compared with $114 million at March 31, 1970.
24171-31J
Deferred charges
These consist of the unamortized balances of actuarial deficiencies in the superannuation accounts and the outstanding loan flotation costs.
The balances in these accounts in the amount of $744 million are $7 million less than at March 31,1970.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
TABLE 69 (in millions of dollars)
	Balance at March 31		
Deferred Charges	1971 (preliminary)	1970	or decrease (-)Unamortized portions of actuarial deficiencies- Canadian forces superannuation account	... 227.2	254.8	-27.6Public service superannuation account	... 311.1	283.7	27.4Royal Canadian Mounted Police superannuation account	... 30.1	29.3	0.8568.4	567.8	0.6Unamortized loan flotation costs	... 175.1	182.8	-7.7743.5	750.6	-7.1
Unamortized 'portions of actuarial deficiencies
Any actuarial deficiency revealed by quinquennial valuations is credited to the superannuation accounts and charged to these accounts and amortized to budgetary expenditure in five equal annual instalments commencing in the fiscal year in which the report is laid before Parliament. Also the cost of benefits payable under the superannuation acts as a result of the authorization of salary increases are credited to the superannuation accounts and charged to these accounts and amortized to budgetary expenditure over a period of five years commencing in the year in which the increase is authorized.
Amendments to the superannuation regulations provided for the calculation of interest at a revised rate (related to the Canada Pension Plan interest rate) commencing with the quarter ended September 30,
1969.	The Act provides that the amount, by which the interest calculated at the revised rate exceeds the amount of interest calculated at the rate used in the latest actuarial report, may be used to reduce the amortization of actuarial deficiencies.
The unamortized portion of the actuarial deficiency in the Canadian Forces Superannuation Account is $227 million compared with $255 million at March 31,
1970.	During the year $108 million was charged thereto as a result of salary increases and $135 million was amortized to budgetary expenditure of which $46 million was charged to interest on public debt.
The unamortized portion of the actuarial deficiency in the Public Service Superannuation Account is $311 million compared with $284 million at March 31, 1970. During the year $162 million as a result of salary increases was charged thereto and $135 million was amortized to budgetary expenditure of which $50 million was charged to interest on public debt.
The unamortized portion of the actuarial deficiency in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Account is $30 million compared with $29 million at March 31, 1970. During the year $14 million was charged thereto as a result of salary increases and $13 million was amortized to budgetary expenditure of which $2 million was charged to interest on public debt.
Unamortized loan flotation costs
This account records the residual balances of discounts, commissions, redemption bonuses and conversion premiums on loan flotations that have not been charged to budgetary expenditure. The balance of $175 million is $8 million lower than at March 31, 1970.
Cost of new loans issued during 1970-71 and charged to this account is $67 million, of which $35 million is in respect of treasury bills discounts which will be charged to interest on public debt in 1971-72. Credits of $75 million to the account include $37 million (representing discount applicable to 1970-71 on treasury bills sold in 1969-70) charged to the budgetary item "interest on public debt".
Treasury bills discounts applicable to the current fiscal year are charged to interest on public debt at the time of sale. That portion of the discounts applicable to the subsequent fiscal year is charged to this account and transferred to interest on public debt in the following year.
Capital assets
Assets of the government such as land, buildings, works and equipment, etc. that are charged to budgetary expenditure at the time of acquisition or
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Unamortized Loan Flotation Costs
(preliminary)
Balance of account at beginning of fiscal year	
New loan flotation costs to be amortized-
7% loan May 1, 1970-February 1, 1973	
71% loan May 1, 1970-April 1, 1975	
7% loan May 1, 1970-September 1, 1977	
6i% loan July 1, 1970-April 1, 1972	
61% loan July 1, 1970-July 1, 1973	
71% loan July 1, 1970-July 1, 1975	
71% loan August 15, 1970-December 15, 1975	
6|% loan October 1, 1970-July 1, 1973	
51% loan December 15, 1970-December 15, 1972	
6% loan December 15, 1970-June 15, 1974	
6J% loan February 15, 1971-February 15, 1989	
Adjustments	
Treasury bills discounts	
Canada savings bonds-new issues	
7% loan April 1, 1969-May 1, 1970	
71% loan April 1, 1969-April 1, 1972	
7\% loan April 1, 1969-April 1, 1974	
7f% loan July 1, 1969-July 1, 1970	
8% loan July 1, 1969-July 1, 1978	
7\% loan August 15, 1969-October 1, 1970	
8% loan August 15, 1969-February 1, 1973	
8% loan October 1, 1969-October 1, 1970	
8% loan October 1, 1969-October 1, 1971	
8% loan October 1, 1969-October 1, 1974	
8% loan December 15, 1969-December 15, 1970	
8% loan February 16, 1970-June 1, 1971	
Adjustments	
Treasury bills discounts	
Canada savings bonds-new issue	
Less-
Amortization applicable to fiscal year-
Canada savings bonds and general loans	
Discounts on treasury bills charged to interest on public debt
182.8	163.4
0.5
2.1
1.6
0.6
1.1
3.4 1.8 0.3 0.3 0.9
2.4
0.2
34.5
17.2
66.9
-37.6
-37.0
-74.6
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.2
(i)
0.5
2.4
0.1
0.1
0.2
37.0
43.9
86.2
-32.8
-34.0
-66.8
Increase or decrease during the year	
-7.7	19.4Balance of account at end of fiscal year	
175.1	182.8
(1) Less than $50,000.
construction, are included in this category and are shown on the statement of assets and liabilities at a nominal value of $1.
Inactive loans and investments
Loans and investments which are not currently revenue-producing or realizable are recorded herein. Included are the loan of $49 million to China under the Export Credits Insurance Act, loans totalling $24 million and $7 million made to Roumania and Greece, respectively, in 1919-20 and 1920-21 and advances of $15 million in respect of the implementation of guarantees (Ming Sung Industrial Company Limited).
Reserve for losses on realization of assets
There has been no change in this reserve since the fiscal year 1956-57. The balance is $546 million.
Net Debt
The net debt of Canada, or the excess of liabilities over net recorded assets, is estimated at $17,361 million as at March 31, 1971 compared with $16,943 million at March 31, 1970. The increase of $418 million reflects the 1970-71 budgetary deficit.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
The government's cash account represents balances of current and special deposits to the credit of the Receiver General for Canada in the Bank of Canada, chartered banks in Canada and certain banks in London, New York, Brussels, Bonn, Frankfurt and Rome. These balances are expected to amount to $1,257 million at March 31, 1971 an increase of $423 million over the balance at March 31, 1970.
The following statement summarizes both the budgetary and non-budgetary transactions in 1970-71 and indicates how they affected the government's cash position. For purposes of comparison the corresponding figures for 1969-70 are also shown.
TABLE 71 (in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Change in Cash Position	1971
(preliminary)
Budgetary transactions-
Revenue	
12,769.0	12,323.9Expenditure	
13,186.6	11,931.3
-417.6	

 392.6
Non-budgetary transactions (excluding unmatured debt transactions)
Receipts and credits (net)	
1,304.0	959.5Disbursements and charges (net)	
3,074.7	1,596.2
-1,770.7	

 -636.7
Overall cash requirement to be financed by increase in unmatured
debt or decrease in cash balances	 -2,188.3	- 244.1
Net Increase in unmatured debt outstanding-
Unmatured debt-
Marketable bonds	
Canada savings bonds	
Treasury bills	
Unemployment insurance bonds	
Canada pension plan bonds	
Securities investment account	
Investments held for retirement of debt...
Net increase in Receiver General bank balances.
630.9	-10.4
1,225.8	410.5
840.0	55.0
-138.0	77.0
5.4	4.1
2,664-1	5S6.2
40.5	-53.0
6.9	-7.4
2,611.5	

 475.8
423.2	231.7
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
The cash position of the government is affected not only by budgetary transactions but also by changes in the government's unmatured debt and other nonbudgetary transactions. Non-budgetary transactions are those which affect the government's asset and liability accounts and must be taken into account when considering the full scope of the government's financial operations and their effect on the economy of the country.
On the asset side, the non-budgetary transactions consist, for the most part, of loans and advances to, and repayments by, crown corporations and other government agencies and funds, national, provincial and municipal governments, international organizations, veterans and other borrowers. On the liability side they relate mainly to receipts and payments in connection with the many deposit and trust accounts, and annuity, insurance and pension funds held or administered by the government.
In 1970-71 an estimated deficit of $418 million in budgetary transactions and an estimated net requirement of $1,771 million for non-budgetary transactions (excluding unmatured debt transactions) will
result in a net cash requirement of $2,188 million. As transactions in unmatured debt during the year are expected to result in an increase of $2,611 million in outstanding unmatured debt as at March 31, 1971, Receiver General bank balances will increase by $423 million. In 1969-70 the budgetary surplus of $393 million and net requirements of $637 million for non-budgetary transactions resulted in a cash requirement of $244 million. As there was an increase of $476 million in outstanding unmatured debt, Receiver General bank balances increased by $232 million.
The implication of the level of cash balances at any given time can be misinterpreted because of their wide fluctuations throughout the year, as is illustrated in the following table. Furthermore, because many cheques are issued at the end of the month and are not redeemed until the first few days of the following month whereas the largest percentage of receipts are not received until later, cash balances may drop in the early days of each month by as much as $125 to $300 million.
At End of Month
January___
February..
March	
April	
May	
June	
July	
August____
September, October... November, December.

[Stage Direction]
Government op Canada Canadian Cash Balances
1966	1967	1968	1969	1970925.6	670.5	1,065.2	853.5	1,440.7807.7	823.4	940.6	761.2	1,366.6603.8	795.7	997.2	587.0	808.4496.4	594.7	609.7	713.0	527.0600.4	866.7	458.4	804.1	540.0561.3	650.4	328.6	879.8	311.8687.3	686.7	248.4	874.4	345.9503.1	661.5	381.2	841.9	433.8491.5	367.0	190.8	636.4	296.0530.9	194.9	391.8	479.0	262.31,048.9	607.1	995.0	1,537.1	1,345.5941.8	650.1	706.6	1,377.5	1,446.6
June 18, 1971
Non-budgetary receipts and credits (excluding unmatured debt transactions)
Non-budgetary receipts and credits of $1,304 million include net receipts of $55 million in social security funds, $684 million in respect of other annuity, insurance and pension accounts, $102 million in repayments of loans, investments and advances and $463 million in sundry other accounts.
Further details are given in the following table:
TABLE 73 (in millions of dollars)
Receipts and Credits (Net)
Fiscal year ended March 31
(preliminary)
Repayments of loans, investments and advances-
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation	
1.0	-19.6Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation	
19.1	-7.0Canadian Dairy Commission	
21.8	-3.2National Capital Commission	
5.6	-1.3Cape Breton Development Corporation	
4.0	2.0Municipal Development and Loan Board	
8.8	8.5Bullion and coinage account	
9.8	-3.9Investments in United States securities	
32.3	32.3Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition	
148.0108.4	155.8
Annuity, insurance and pension accounts-
Canada Pension Plan account	
Canada Pension Plan investment fund
Old Age Security Fund	
Unemployment Insurance Fund	
Superannuation accounts-
Public service	
Canadian forces	
Royal Canadian Mounted Police.. Other	
911.4	824.5
-868.5	-809.8
-3.5	100.5
15.6	-0.3
388.2	421.0
266.2	282.8
33.9	35.0
-4.5	0.9
738.8	854.6
Other receipts and credits-
Outstanding cheques	
Interest due and outstanding,
Interest accrued	
Matured debt	
Reserve for salary revisions.,
Deferred credits	
Other	
117.0	13.4
164.0	-1.3
61.6	34.6
11.5	-18.5
36.1	-56.2
13.7	18.6
58.9	-41.5
468.8	-50.9
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
Non-budgetary disbursements and charges (excluding unmatured debt transactions)
Non-budgetary disbursements and charges of $3,075 million include $1,435 million for loans, investments
and advances, $1,317 million in respect of foreign exchange reserves and $323 million for sundry other accounts.
Further details are given in the following table:

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Fiscal year ended March 31
Disbursements and Charges (Net)
(preliminary)
Loans, investments and advances-
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited	
Canadian Film Development Corporation	
Canadian National Railways (including Air Canada)	
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation	
Export Development Corporation	
Farm Credit Corporation	
Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation	
National Harbours Board	
Northern Canada Power Corporation	
Eldorado Nuclear Limited	
Northern Transportation Company Limited	
The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority	
Exchange Fund Account-
Advances	
Special Drawing Rights in the International Monetary Fund
Defence production revolving fund	
National governments	
Provincial governments	
Veterans land act advances	
Airports capital loans	
International Monetary Fund-
Government's equity	
Revaluation of government's equity	
Allocation of special drawing rights	
Non-interest-bearing notes	
Other subscriptions to international organizations	
Defence plant modernization	
Hydro Quebec research institute	
Panarctic Oils Limited	
Loans to manufacturers of automotive products	
Stockpiling of uranium concentrates	
Northwest and Yukon Territories	
Construction or acquisition of commercial and fishing vessels_
Other	
Other disbursements and charges-
Accounts payable	
Cash in hands of collectors and in transit	
Provincial tax collection agreements account...
Refundable corporation income tax	
Deferred charges	
Reserve for wheat inventory reduction payments.
161.0
2.1
204.1
593.2 80.9
49.0
2.5
4.5 4.8 9.7 6.1
56.0
1,239.0
119.0
6.4
78.1
32.4
21.0
46.9
348.9
-119.0
-271.0
28.1
2.7
11.0
7.4
7.3
6.4 14.3
8.3
-9.3
2,761.8
27.6 108.7
87.7 34.2
7.1
57.6
822.9
8,074.7
136.0
1.3
173.3
481.2
41.9
77.8
2.2
4.5
2.6
17.2
8.0
41.5
219.0
134.4
-6.9
58.7
49.3
50.4 5.1
17.3 -134.4
188.0
30.6 3.7
13.5
12.1
7.4
9.3
32.7 1,677.7
-132.4
-86.2
-2.9
102.7
137.3
-100.0
-81.6
1,596.2
7134
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Gross and net debt
The gross debt of Canada, or the total of liabilities as recorded on the statement of assets and liabilities, is estimated to be $42,966 million as at March 31, 1971, an increase of $4,815 million over the total at March 31, 1970. The main changes are increases of $1,608 million in annuity, insurance and pension accounts and $2,564 million in unmatured debt. Unmatured debt at $25,201 million represents 59 per cent and annuity, insurance and pension accounts at $13,793 million represent 32 per cent. At March 31, 1970 unmatured debt was $22,637 million or 59 per cent and annuity, insurance and pension accounts in the amount of $12,185 million were 32 per cent of total liabilities.
The government's net recorded assets are estimated to amount to $25,604 million as at March 31, 1971, an increase of $4,398 million over the total at March 31,
1970. The main changes are increases of $1,119 million in loans to, and investments in, crown corporations, $868 million in the Canada Pension Plan Investment Fund, and $1,358 million in the Exchange Fund Account. Loans to, and investments in, crown corporations at $10,753 million represent 43 per cent, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Fund at $3,701 million represents 15 per cent and the Exchange Fund Account at $4,578 million represents 18 per cent. At March 31, 1970, loans to, and investments in, crown corporations were $9,635 million or 45 per cent, the Canada Pension Plan Investment Fund was $2,833 million or 13 per cent and the Exchange Fund Account at $3,220 million was 15 per cent of the total.
Based on the above figures the net debt of Canada will be $17,361 million at March 31, 1971 reflecting an increase of $418 million, equivalent to the 1970-71 estimated deficit.

[Stage Direction]
Fiscal Years Ended March 31 Billions of Dollars

[Stage Direction]
Billions of Dollars
Preliminary.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Statement of Public Debt, Net Recorded Assets and Net Debt of Canada
(in millions of dollars)
Increase or
Gross public debt	Less net	decrease (-)
As at March 31	
[Stage Direction]
recorded	Net	in net debtUnmatured Other	Total	assets	debt	during thedebt liabilities	fiscal year1967	
19,940.2	10,400.0	30,340.2	14,375.2	15,965.0	421.51968	
20,579.9	12,344.3	32,924.2	16,164.4	16,759.8	794.81969	
22,101.0	13,818.3	35,919.3	18,583.4	17,335.9	576.11970	
22,637.2	15,512.9	38,150.1	21,206.8	16,943.3	- 392.61971	(preliminary)	
25,201.2	17,764.3	42,965.5	25,604.6	17,360.9	417.6
Unmatured debt
Total unmatured debt of $25,201 million is $2,564 million more than at March 31, 1970.
The government's holdings of its own securities as at March 31, 1971 are estimated to be $64 million comprised of $57 million in the securities investment account (of which $45 million is Canada savings bonds held in respect of the employees instalment purchase plan) and $7 million in investments held for retirement of unmatured debt. This is a decrease of $47
million over the previous year-end total, when holdings were $97 million in the securities investment account ($44 million in investments in the employees instalment purchase plan account) and $14 million in investments held for retirement of unmatured debt.
Of the total unmatured debt, $24,864 million is payable in Canadian dollars, $263 million in United States dollars and $74 million in German deutsche marks. Securities payable in foreign currencies have been valued at official parity rates.

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Unmatured Debt Transactions
Balance at beginning of year	
New issues-
Canada savings bonds-
523		
524		
525		
Marketable bonds	
Unemployment Insurance Commission bonds,
Canada Pension Plan bonds	
Treasury bills (net)	
Revaluation of bonds payable in deutsche marks.
Maturities, redemptions, cancellations and conversions- Marketable bonds-
Matured	
Exchanged	
Redeemed	
Cancelled	
Unemployment Insurance Commission bonds-
Redeemed	
Canada savings bonds-
Matured	
Redeemed	
Increase in unmatured debt Balance at end of year.
Fiscal year ended March 31
(preliminary)
22,637
22,101
2,022
2,600
5
5,670
4,722
1,665
4
___6
6,662
-1,680
-2
-219
-1,555
-125
-77	-19
-840	-4,321
-3,106	-6,126
2,564	536
25,201	22,637
7136
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
Summary of security issues, maturities, cancellations and redemptions
Excluding the refunding of treasury bills which matured weekly, the government issued securities in an amount of $5,670 million and maturities, exchanges, cancellations and redemptions will total $3,106 million.
Net sales of Canada savings bonds series 25 of $2,022 million and additional net sales of series 24 of $122
million exceed maturities and redemptions of $918 million by $1,226 million bringing the total Canada savings bonds to $7,805 million at March 31, 1971.
Treasury bills in the amount of $3,735 million are $840 million more than at March 31, 1970 and consist of $2,145 million in three-month bills, $1,115 million in six-month bills and $475 million in special bills.

[Stage Direction]
New Securities Issued Dubing Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 1971 (in millions of dollars)
Total
[Stage Direction]
	amount
issued
Marketable bonds-
7% 1970-73	
F	50	150.071% 1970-75	
F	51	225.07% 1970-77	
F	52	500.061% 1970-72	
F	53	215.061% 1970-73	
F	54	150.071% 1970-75	
F	55	260.071% 1970-75	
F	56	450.061% 1970-73	
F	58	200.051% 1970-72	
F	59	100.06% 1970-74	
F	60	200.061% 1970-89	
F	61	150.0
2,600.0
Non-marketable bonds-
Unemployment Insurance Commission-
61%	 48.0
61%	 33.0
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds-*
Nov. 1, 1969-Nov. 1, 1978	
S 24	121.6Nov. 1,1970-Nov. 1, 1971	
S 25	2,021.8
2,143.4
Canada pension plan	 5.4
Treasury bills (net)	 840.0
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Debt Matured, Redeemed, Converted or Cancelled During the Fiscal Year Ended
March 31, 1971 (preliminary)
(in millions of dollars)
-	Series	Matured	Redeemed	Converted	Cancelled	Total
Marketable bonds-						
3i% 1958-70	T 24	200.0	200.04J% 1958-72	T 28	200.0	200.05*% 1962-80	AT14	7.6	7.65% 1966-70	CT 19	175.0	175.05% 1966-70	F 2	140.0	140.05}% 1966-70	F 8	300.0	300.05i% 1966-80	CT 26	5.1	5.15i% 1966-80	F 3	1.7	1.77% 1968-70	F 27	275.0	275.06|% 1968-70	F 30	105.0	105.06f% 1968-70	F 34	50.0	50.07% 1969-70	F 36	125.0	125.07}% 1969-70	F 40	130.0	130.07J% 1969-70	F 42	40.0	40.08% 1969-70	F 44	30.0	30.08% 1969-70	F 48	75.0	75.05% 1962-87 (NY)	1.7	1.75J% 1968-70 (Italy)	34.6	34.65}% 1968-71 (Italy)	36.3	36.36% 1968-72 (Italy)	37.2	37.2t,679.6	1.7	200.0	87.9	1,969.2Non-marketable bonds-	Canada savings bonds (S12-24)	77.1	840.5	917.6Unemployment Insurance Commission	219.0	219.01,756.7	1,061.2	200.0	87.9	3,105.8

[Stage Direction]
As at March 31
[Stage Direction]

June 18, 1971
Interest rates
The estimated average interest rate on the government's unmatured debt is 6.03 per cent compared with 6.09 per cent at March 31, 1970.
The average yield on three-month treasury bills was 3.02 per cent at tender on March 25, 1971 compared with 7.00 per cent at tender on March 25, 1970; on six-month bills it was 3.08 per cent at tender on
March 25, 1971 compared with 6.76 per cent at tender on March 25, 1970; and on one-year treasury bills it was 4.98 per cent at tender on February 11, 1971 compared with 8.01 per cent at tender on November 27, 1969.
The following table shows the average high and low yields together with the average yield on the latest issues for the fiscal years 1966-67 to 1970-71 inclusive:

[Stage Direction]
Treasury Bills Average Yields at Tender
Fiscal Year Ended March 31	High	Low	Last issueper cent	per cent	per centThree-month bills- 1967	
5.20	4.10	4.131968	
7.01	3.96	6.981969	5.48	6.581970	
7.83	6.54	7.001971	2.99	3.02
Six-month bills-
1967		
1968		
1969		
1970		
1971...,	
5.33	4.04	4.117.02	3.97	6.987.01	5.43	6.807.93	6.74	6.766.82	3.08	3.08
Other bills (from nine to twelve months)-
1968		
1969		
1970		
1971		
5.65	5.65	5.656.53	5.90	5.908.01	7.46	8.016.80	4.98	4.93
Indirect debt or contingent liabilities
In addition to the direct debt set out in the statement of assets and liabilities, the government has assumed certain indirect or contingent obligations. These consist of securities of the Canadian National Railways, guaranteed as to principal and interest, and a number of miscellaneous guarantees, the chief of which are the guarantee of insured loans made by chartered
banks and other approved lending institutions under the National Housing Act, 1954, advances under the Export Development Act, bank loans under the Canada Student Loans Act and the Farm Improvement Loans Act and bank loans to the Canadian Wheat Board.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
Contingent Liabilities
		Amount of guarantee	Amount outstanding
	$	$
Railway securities guaranteed as to principal and interest-		
Canadian National 5j% due December 15,1971	
178,443,500	178,443,500Canadian National 3J% due February 1, 1974	
200,000,000	200,000,000Canadian National 2J% due June 15, 1975, U.S. $6,000,000®	
6,000,000	6,000,000
Canadian National 5% due May 15,1977..
Canadian National 4% due February 1,1981. Canadian National 5i% due January 1,1985.. Canadian National 5% due October 1, 1987.. Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company...
78.840.000 300,000,000
91.980.000
147,756,000
5,399,500
1,008,419,000
78.840.000 300,000,000
91.980.000
147,756,000
5,399,500
1,008,419,000
Other outstanding guarantees and contingent liabilities-
Loans made by lenders under Part IV of the National Housing Act, 1954 for home extension and improvements®	
Insured loans made by approved lenders under the National Housing Act, 1954®®
Liability for insurance and guarantees under the Export Development Act®.
Loans made by chartered banks under the Farm Improvement Loans Act	
Loans made by chartered banks and credit unions under the Fisheries Improvement Loans Act	
Loans made by chartered banks under the Small Businesses Loans Act	
Loans made by chartered banks and credit unions under the Canada Student Loans Act®	
Loans made by chartered banks to the Canadian Wheat Board®	
Loans made by lenders under the Cape Breton Development Act	
Loans made by lenders under the General Adjustment Assistance Program....
30,000,000	22,317,000
15,000,000,000	8,051,000,000
900,000,000	500,700,000
199,000,000	98,700,000
3,500,000	2,200,000
37,700,000	24,100,000
470,450,000	434,700,000
655,000,000	323,727,000
100,000,000	30,000,000
100,000,000	15,340,000
18,504,069,000	10,511,203,000
Loans maintained by approved lending institutions under National Housing Acts prior
to 1954 Act	 Unstated
Guarantees to owners of returns from moderate rental housing projects16 .
Unstated
Indeterminate
Indeterminate
lb Liability is subject to exchange rate in effect June 15, 1975. t2)As of December 31, 1970.
<3>As reported (in accordance with section 45, National Housing Regulations) by approved lenders as of December 31,1970. ® Includes contingent liability in respect of alternative payments to non-participating province.
®As of December 31, 1970, funds totalling $6,041,693 were held by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for the purpose of settling claims. In 1970 rental contracts totalled $7,734,000.
[Stage Direction]


June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
SUPPLEMENTARY DETAILED TABLES Revenue Expenditure
Annual Changes in Loans and Investments
Unmatured Debt
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
____	1961H57	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70 1970-71
				(preliminary)
Tax revenue- Income tax-
Personal'11 <21	
2,473.8	2,849.6	3,356.4	4,085.1	4,697.0Corporation (*>
<2>	
1,593.2	1,670.6	2,030.0	2,612.0	2,217.0On dividends, interest, etc., going abroad	
203.6	220.5	205.6	248.5	258.04,170.8	4,740.7	5,592.0	6,945.6	7,172.0Social development tax	63.0	476.5	566.0Excise taxes-	Sales tax'11'21	
1,513.6	1,601.1	1,569.8	1,716.9	1,708.0Other taxes-	Cigarettes, tobacco and cigars	
251.4	266.7	304.2	295.8	319.0Jewellery, watches, ornaments, etc	
8.9	10.2	9.5	10.4	10.2Matches and lighters	
1.2	1.2	1.1	1.1	1.1Television sets, radios and phonographs	32.6	35.3	40.8	38.6Toilet preparations	
15.5	17.9	18.6	19.7	21.4Wines	
4.8	5.3	5.9	7.0	8.1Sundry commodities	
1.2	1.5	1.7	2.6	4.1Interest and penalties	
1.9	2.2	2.4	2.2	2.1Less refunds	
-0.5	-0.6	-0.8	-1.2	-1.6SIS. 6	537.0	577.9	578.4	405.0Customs import duties'21	
777.6	746.4	761.7	818.3	814.0Excise duties-	Spirits	
158.2	180.5	185.4	194.7	209.4Beer	
113.3	120.2	135.0	139.4	149.2Cigarettes, tobacco and cigars	
196.4	194.6	196.6	193.8	212.2Less refunds	
-6.9	-6.7	-7.7	-9.1	-9.8481.0	488.8	509.S	518.8	661.0Estate tax	
101.1	102.2	112.4	100.6	119.7Miscellaneous tax revenue	
0.2	0.3	0.3	0.3	0.3Total tax revenue	
7,439.7	8,016.3	8,986.4	10,955.4	11,344.0Non-tax revenue- Return on investments	
Post office-net postal revenue	
Other	
Total non-tax revenue	
Total revenue	
519.1 	
253.3 	
106.4	612.3 281.6 119.1 1,013.0 9,029.3	697.2 288.4 190.9 1,176.5 10,162.9	860.0 354.8 153.7 1,368.5 12,323.9	989.0 330.0 106.0 1,425.0 12,769.0(*'Excluding credits to the old age security fund-	1970-711966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	(preliminary)Personal income tax	800.1	915.0	1,026.5	1,132.5Corporation income tax	
149.5	150.0	183.0	227.1	207.9Sales tax	
559.5	544.5	528.1	577.4	563.0
(9Net after deduction of refunds and drawbacks as well as transfers to the old age security fund.
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Agriculture-
Administration and general	
Agricultural commodities stabilization account-net operating loss..
Wheat inventory reduction payments	
Canadian Livestock Feed Board	
Farm Credit Corporation-net operating loss	
Canadian Dairy Commission	
Communications-
Administration and general	
Post Office	
Consumer and Corporate Affairs-
Administration and general	
Prices and Incomes Commission	
Energy, Mines and Resources-
Administration and general	
Atomic Energy	
Dominion Coal Board	
Minerals, energy and earth sciences	
Water resources	
National Energy Board	
External Affairs-
Administration and general	
Canadian International Development Agency	
Assessments, contributions and other payments to international organizations and international multilateral economic and special
programs	
International Joint Commission	
Finance-
Administration and general	
Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition-deficit
Grants to municipalities and provinces in lieu of taxes.
Public debt charges including interest and amortization.
Subsidies and fiscal arrangements payments to provinces_
Tariff Board	
Auditor General	
Insurance	
Fisheries and Forestry-
Fisheries	
Forestry	
Governor General and Lieutenant-Governors	
Indian Affairs and Northern Development-
Administration and general	
Conservation program	
Social program	
Development program	
1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71 (preliminary)113.7	111.1	117.0	116.3	120.388.7	139.7	145.4	136.3 100.0	126.421.0	21.6	18.2	22.1	20.82.6	3.8	6.0	8.7	9.6(1)	0.3	0.3	0.4	0.4226.0	276.6	286.9	S8S.8	277.69.5	14.5	12.9	13.4	14.0268.5	301.8	319.5	340.5	370.0278.0	S16.S	332.4	S5S.9	384.010.4	12.9	13.8	16.1	18.10.6	2.110.4	12.9	13.8	16.7	20.22.9	4.2	4.9	6.5	7.660.2	69.3	72.6	74.9	76.738.0	33.6	7.2	8.8	6.053.9	53.9	54.8	56.7	56.331.5	40.8	38.7	46.9	51.81.1	1.6	1.5	1.9	2.4187.6	203.4	179.7	195.7	200.839.3	48.5	53.7	57.9	56.0173.8	150.1	156.8	168.8	209.017.1	16.7	15.3	15.1	16.00.3	0.4	0.4	0.4	0.5230.5	215.7	226.2	242.2	281.662.7	36.4	23.7	19.0 122.9	29.737.6	41.5	45.1	49.5	54.01,190.5	1,300.8	1,480.0	1,716.9	1,823.0515.5	737.5	867.1	932.4	1,228.90.4	0.5	0.4	0.4	0.42.1	2.3	2.4	2.9	3.11.7	1.9	1.9	0.6	0.91,810.5	2,120.9	2,420.6	2,844.6	3,140.041.5	52.6	56.2	52.8	57.624.8	21.2	22.8	24.1	23.466.3	73.8	79.0	76.9	81.00.8	1.0	1.0	1.1	1.14.3	5.3	5.8	7.5	8.034.8	35.8	41.0	42.3	38.3118.9	139.4	165.2	191.7	226.939.4	50.9	55.0	69.9	82.4197.4	231.4	267.0	311.4	355.6
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71
(preliminary)
Industry, Trade and Commerce-
Department	143.4	163.9	179.2	263.7	210.9Dominion Bureau of Statistics	26.6	22.5	24.0	32.4	39.1170.0	186.4	m.s	296.1	250.0Justice	12.2	15.4	16.9	19.7	22.8Labour	24.9	10.9	11.1	11.5	13.5Unemployment Insurance Commission- Administration and general	37.3	37.6	38.8	45.6	53.5Government's contribution to the fund	68.8	69.5	86.6	98.4	125.51S1.0	118.0	136.5	165.6	192.5Manpower and Immigration-	Administration and general	.	7.9	20.6	23.4	28.1	12.2Development and utilization of manpower	254.2	342.3	337.4	381.6	528.8Immigration	20.5	21.6	29.4	24.0	22.9Municipal winter works incentive program	37.8	30.5	21.5	0.4	6.1Program development	2.9	4.4	5.4	320.4	417.9	416.1	439.6	570.0National Defence-	Administration and general	27.0	25.8	25.9	26.7	26.2Canadian forces superannuation account-	Government's contribution	42.6	58.4	57.0	65.6	70.4Amortization of deferred charges	72.6	72.6	104.5	92.2	89.4Additional interest	
Defence services	1,435.3	1,528.2	1,507.7	1,541.8	45.7 1,525.2Defence research	38.2	40.6	44.1	44.1	45.6Mutual aid to NATO countries	18.7	18.0	15.3	14.1	14.4Civil emergency measures organization	9.2	8.0	6.3	5.0	5.11,643.6	1,761.6	1,760.8	1,789.6	1,822.0National Health and Welfare-	Administration and general	3.0	3.9	4.2	5.7	7.1Food and drug services	6.5	7.9	9.1	12.2	15.7Health insurance and resources-	General health and hospital construction grants to provinces....	45.1	46.0	44.0	67.6	19.7Government's contributions under the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act	397.4	468.6	561.9	635.9	734.0Health resources fund	4.7	32.7	33.9	34.4	39.0Medical Care Act	
Other	0.2	1.3	33.0 1.6	180.9 2.8	400.5 0.6Health services	8.4	8.6	7.7	8.3	8.2Medical Research Council	14.8	20.7	27.2	31.2	34.4Medical services	38.5	42.5	39.3	40.6	45.2Welfare services-	Family allowances	555.8	558.8	560.2	560.0	558.0Youth allowances	47.4	49.4	52.4	55.1	58.0Old age assistance, blind persons and disabled persons allowances	38.1	18.3	11.8	7.0	5.3Unemployment assistance	143.3	6.1	1.1	0.7	Canada assistance plan	10.5	225.6	256.8	293.6	390.8Other	16.7	18.3	18.4	21.0	23.91,330.4	1,608.7	1,662.6	1,957.0	2,340.4
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71
(preliminary)
National Revenue- Customs and Excise.
Taxation	
Tax Appeal Board...
Parliament-
House of Commons__
Senate	
Library of Parliament
Privy Council-
Administration and general	
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
Economic Council of Canada	
Chief Electoral Officer	
Public Service Staff Relations Board....
Science Council of Canada	
Public Works-
Administration and general	
Accommodation services	
Marine services	
Trans-Canada highway-contributions to provinces.
Regional Economic Expansion-
Department	
Cape Breton Development Corporation. National Capital Commission	
Secretary of State-
Administration and general	
Bilingualism development program	
Canada Council	
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation	
Canadian Film Development Corporation	
Canadian Radio-Television Commission	
Centennial Commission	
Company of Young Canadians	
National Arts Centre Corporation	
National Film Board	
National Library	
National Museums of Canada	
Office of the Representation Commissioner	
Post-secondary education payments to provinces pursuant to the
Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act, 1967	
Public Archives	
Public Service Commission	
University grants	
Solicitor General-
Administration and general	
Correctional services	
Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
53.8	56.7	59.5	70.1	74.451.8	58.1	60.2	74.2	84.40.3	0.3	0.3	0.3	0.4105.9	115.1	120.0	1U-6	159.213.9	14.3	14.3	17.6	21.13.3	3.4	3.6	4.6	5.10.6	0.6	0.7	0.8	1.117.8	18.S	18.6	28.0	27. S5.6	8.1	6.3	7.3	7.620.1	23.1	29.7	43.6	44.01.4	1.5	1.5	1.6	1.70.9	0.7	13.5	0.3	1.21.0	1.1	1.2	1.30.1	0.4	0.4	1.2	1.228.1	84.8	52.5	55.2	67.038.0	48.4	43.4	38.2	38.1108.5	133.8	172.0	190.5	217.738.1	43.9	32.1	31.3	34.981.0	64.7	37.3	26.8	39.3265.8	290.8	284.8	286.8	880.090.2	134.7	125.7	179.4	257.91.7	30.1	32.7	37.333.0	23.2	25.0	24.0	26.3128.2	159.6	180.8	236.1	821.513.7	28.8	24.5	18.1	27.453.316.9	20.6	23.7	24.2115.2	143.3	148.3	166.0	166.00.2	0.4	0.30.6	1.0	1.9	2.8	3.330.2	31.2	0.8	2.4	1.9	1.9	1.90)	1.0	1.1	2.5	2.68.0	9.3	10.0	10.5	10.11.1	1.6	1.7	2.0	2.54.5	6.7	7.1	7.3	8.20.2	0.1	0.1	0.1	0.1108.0	276.6	301.4	388.61.6	2.0	2.2	2.4	2.910.1	12.7	12.9	14.1	15.887.1	0.2	278.1	865.2	509.1	658.2	707.20.6	0.9	0.5	0.8	1.459.6	64.9	63.6	70.0	75.584.1	87.7	101.8	113.3	146.5144.8	158.5	165.9	184.1	228.4
June 18, 1971
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURE BY DEPARTMENTS AND MAJOR CATEGORIES FOR THE LAST FIVE FISCAL YEARS (in millions of. dollars)
	1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71 1 (preliminary) I
Supply and Sebvices-					
Administration and general	2.6	3.0	4.3	4.0	4.1Services	30.0	32.8	34.6	40.7	37.6 *Supply	20.3	21.5	21.6	28.2	22.2 1Public Printing and Stationery	4.0	4.7	3.5	4.0	Canadian Arsenals Limited	1.3	0.4	0.3	0.5	1.0 *Canadian Commercial Corporation	2.0	2.1	3.4	3.9 *Information Canada	1.5	6.4 H58. g	65.4	66.4	82. S	75.2 *Transport-	Administration and general	6.3	7.1	7.9	7.3	9-(>
1Air services	129.5	132.1	150.3	144.9	161.8 1Canadian Transport Commission-	Administration and general	3.0	3.6	4.2	10.3	10.5 1Payments to railways and transportation companies under the	National Transportation Act	120.9	126.0	93.7	79.7	65.7 1Contributions to the railway grade crossing fund	15.0	15.0	15.0	15.0	20.0 1Maritime Freight Rates Act	14.4	14.2	13.9	14.6	14.0 1Steamship subventions	10.8	11.1	12.2	13.2	6.0 1Subsidies to air carriers	0.4	1.2	1.3	3.4	1.8 1Canals and works entrusted to The St. Lawrence Seaway Authority.	12.9	10.6	11.4	10.5	10.1 1Marine services	91.9	92.0	91.5	95.6	90.8 1Non-active assets-National Harbours Board	7.0	4.8	6.6	8.6	2.5 IRailways and steamships-	Deficits-	Canadian National Railways	24.6	35.8	29.2	24.6	29.7 *Ferry services	17.6	21.7	22.0	21.8	33.0 .130.3	37.0	19.1	17.8	15.5 *m.e	512.2	478. S	467. S	470.4 1Treasury Board-	Administration and general	,	37.8	38.3	43.2	45.4	55.1 1Reserve for salary revisions	120.5	58.7	65.0 1Public service superannuation account-	Government's contribution	59.3	59.6	66.0	73.5	85.9 1Amortization of deferred charges	56.3	60.6	84.8	91.8	85.0 1Additional interest	49.5 1National Research Council	79.9	101.0	117.8	121.7	125.5 1233. S	259.5	432.3	S91.1	466.0 1Veterans Affairs-	Administration and general	9.6	10.1	10.1	10.9	8.8 |Pensions for disability and death	195.9	205.6	223.3	218.5	216.5 1Veterans land administration	8.7	9.5	9.7	10.7	10.1 1Treatment services	57.9	61.4	71.6	72.1	66.1 1Welfare services	118.7	114.2	112.9	110.2	108.5 *390.8	400.8	427.6	422.4	410.0 18,740.0	9,824.1	10,739.0	11,929.7	13,186.6 I
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
(in millions of dollars)
Loans to, and investments in, crown corporations-
Air Canada	
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited	
Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation	
Canadian Arsenals Limited	
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation	
Canadian Commercial Corporation	
Canadian Corporation for the 1967 World Exhibition	
Canadian Dairy Commission	
Canadian National Railways	
Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation	
Cape Breton Development Corporation	
Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation	
Eldorado Nuclear Limited	
Export Development Corporation <D	
Farm Credit Corporation	
Freshwater Fish Marketing Corporation	
National Capital Commission	
National Harbours Board	
Northern Canada Power Commission	
Northern Transportation Company Limited	
Royal Canadian Mint	
St. Lawrence Seaway Authority <*>
Other	
Loans to national governments-
United Kingdom	
Export Credits Insurance Act	
Special loans to Colombo plan countries to finance the purchase of
wheat and flour from Canada	
Loans to India for the purchase in Canada of aircraft and associated
spare parts and equipment	
Special loan assistance-developing countries	
Other	
1966-67	1967-68	1968-69	1969-70	1970-71 (preliminary)3.1	0.6	50.1	71.3	111.528.4	32.9	68.5	136.0	161.029.4	-5.9	7.0	-19.1-0.5	35.0	18.4	18.3	19.6	-1.04.5	6.5	-1.0	131.0	30.0	-57.0	-148.0	0.1	22.1	19.8	3.2	-21.8124.2	163.2	150.3	102.0	92.6-2.7	2.6	-3.1	-3.4	-3.65.2	4.8	-2.0	-4.0488.6	633.9	385.2	481.2	593.217.2	9.736.2	34.7	32.5	41.9	80.9164.1	169.2	128.2	77.8	49.02.2	2.57.0	0.8	-9.2	1.3	-5.619.5	27.8	11.1	4.5	4.50.8	2.9	8.5	2.6	4.82.0	8.0	6.12.0	-1.029.8	26.7	28.8	41.5	56.00.3	1.3	2.81,069.6	1,206.9	832.2	866.7	1,118.5-18.9	-19.2	<3>18.1	-20.0	-20.4-2.	-2.3	-2.3	-2.3	-15.3-9.9	-0.3	-2.4	-2.7	-1.3	9.8	29.1	48.5	81.1	114.00.1	-0.1	0.1	-0.1	-0.2-23.6	4-6	63.1	58.7	78.1
Other loans and investments-
Subscriptions to capital of, and working capital advances and loans to, international organizations-
Canada's subscription to capital of-
Asian Development Bank	
Caribbean Regional Development Bank	
International Monetary Fund	
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development__
International Development Association	
Working capital advances and loans to international organizations
Loans to provincial governments	
Municipal Development and Loan Board	
Veterans Land Act advances	
Airports-capital loans	
Development of space and terrestrial communications.
Investment in shares of Panarctic Oils Ltd	
Loans to manufacturers of automotive parts in Canada.
City of Montreal-notes re Expo	
Defence plant modernization	
Other	
Net total of changes in loans and investments,
2.7	2.7	2.7	2.7	2.6
			1.1	0.7
205.4			17.3	348.9
4.5				
15.0	15.0	27.1	27.0	25.0-0.1	-0.3	-0.3	-0.2	-0.226.8	64.2	82.6	49.3	32.4122.3	48.5	1.6	-8.5	-8.855.2	71.5	38.7	50.4	21.05.1	46.99.9	-9.913.6	7.412.5	7.9	1.1	12.1	7.314.1	-0.610.2	4.4	3.7	2.76.5	11.5	11.2	21.6	34.0450.8	231.2	169.1	219.2	509.41,496.8	1,442.6	1,064.4	1,144.6	1,706.0
(1) Formerly the Export Credits Insurance Corporation.
Includes deferred interest.
(,) Deferred interest.
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971

[Stage Direction]
AND THE ANNUAL INTEREST THEREON (preliminary)
[Stage Direction]
Date of
[Stage Direction]
Rate
[Stage Direction]
Amount
[Stage Direction]
Annual
[Stage Direction]
maturity
[Stage Direction]
per cent
[Stage Direction]
of loan
[Stage Direction]
interest
[Stage Direction]
Payable in Canadian dollars-
Loan of 1936	 P 1
Loan of 1967	 F 20
Loan of 1968	 F 35
Loan of 1964	 CT 15
Loan of 1970	 F 49
Loan of 1968	 F 31
Loan of 1969	 F 45
Canada savings bonds, 1961	 S 16
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1967 and 1968
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
17
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1969
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
37
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
53
[Stage Direction]
Conversion loan, 1958
[Stage Direction]
T 28
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F 59
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1969
[Stage Direction]
F 43
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F 50
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1968
[Stage Direction]
F 25
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F 54
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F 58
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1965
[Stage Direction]
CT 17
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1967
[Stage Direction]
F 11
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1958
[Stage Direction]
S 13
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1967
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
22
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1969
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
38
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1968
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
28
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
60
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1969 and 1970
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
46
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1964
[Stage Direction]
S 19
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1967
[Stage Direction]
F 14
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1968
[Stage Direction]
F 32
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F 51
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F 55
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1959
[Stage Direction]
T 36
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1965
[Stage Direction]
CT 24
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1967
[Stage Direction]
F 9
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1963
[Stage Direction]
S 18
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
56
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1960
[Stage Direction]
T
[Stage Direction]
38
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1954
[Stage Direction]
T
[Stage Direction]
11
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1962
[Stage Direction]
S 17
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1970
[Stage Direction]
F
[Stage Direction]
52
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1965
[Stage Direction]
S 20
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1953 and 1958
[Stage Direction]
T 5
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1969
[Stage Direction]
F 41
[Stage Direction]
Special replacement series
[Stage Direction]
SRS
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1969
[Stage Direction]
S 24
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1954
[Stage Direction]
T 13
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1966
[Stage Direction]
CS
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1962
[Stage Direction]
AT 14
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1966
[Stage Direction]
CT 26
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1966 and 1967
[Stage Direction]
F 3
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1967
[Stage Direction]
S
[Stage Direction]
22
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1970
[Stage Direction]
S
[Stage Direction]
25
[Stage Direction]
Canada savings bonds, 1968
[Stage Direction]
S
[Stage Direction]
23
[Stage Direction]
Conversion loan, 1958
[Stage Direction]
T
[Stage Direction]
29
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1969
[Stage Direction]
F 47
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1963
[Stage Direction]
AT 21
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1964
[Stage Direction]
CT 9
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1971
[Stage Direction]
F 61
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1964 and 1965
[Stage Direction]
CT 12
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1967
[Stage Direction]
F 12
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1966 and 1967
[Stage Direction]
F 6
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1968
[Stage Direction]
F 33
[Stage Direction]
Conversion loan, 1956
[Stage Direction]
T
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
Three-month treasury bills
[Stage Direction]
Six-month treasury bills
[Stage Direction]
364-day treasury bills
[Stage Direction]
Perpetual
[Stage Direction]
3
[Stage Direction]
55,000,000
[Stage Direction]
1,650,000
[Stage Direction]
1971 Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
6
[Stage Direction]
225,000,000
[Stage Direction]
13,500,000
[Stage Direction]
Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
200,000,000
[Stage Direction]
12,500,000
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
350,000,000
[Stage Direction]
17,500,000
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
75,000,000
[Stage Direction]
6,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
200,000,000
[Stage Direction]
12,500,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
170,000,000
[Stage Direction]
13,600,000
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
33,666,900
[Stage Direction]
1,683,045
[Stage Direction]
Dec.
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
6
[Stage Direction]
285,000,000
[Stage Direction]
17,100,000
[Stage Direction]
1972 Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
71
[Stage Direction]
235,000,000
[Stage Direction]
17,037,500
[Stage Direction]
Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
215,000,000
[Stage Direction]
13,975,000
[Stage Direction]
Sept.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
41
[Stage Direction]
1,067,203,100
[Stage Direction]
45,356,132
[Stage Direction]
Dec.
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
5}
[Stage Direction]
100,000,000
[Stage Direction]
5,250,000
[Stage Direction]
1973 Feb.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
110,000,000
[Stage Direction]
8,800,000
[Stage Direction]
Feb.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
7
[Stage Direction]
150,000,000
[Stage Direction]
10,500,000
[Stage Direction]
Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
7
[Stage Direction]
475,000,000
[Stage Direction]
33,250,000
[Stage Direction]
July
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
150,000,000
[Stage Direction]
9,750,000
[Stage Direction]
July
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
200,000,000
[Stage Direction]
13,500,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
275,000,000
[Stage Direction]
13,750,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
200,000,000
[Stage Direction]
10,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
4}
[Stage Direction]
15,712,950
[Stage Direction]
667,800
[Stage Direction]
Dec.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
225,000,000
[Stage Direction]
14,062,500
[Stage Direction]
1974 Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
71
[Stage Direction]
125,000,000
[Stage Direction]
9,062,500
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
7
[Stage Direction]
250,000,000
[Stage Direction]
17,500,000
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
6
[Stage Direction]
200,000,000
[Stage Direction]
12,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
424,950,000
[Stage Direction]
33,996,000
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
53,946,250
[Stage Direction]
2,697,313
[Stage Direction]
Dec.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
100,000,000
[Stage Direction]
5,500,000
[Stage Direction]
1975 Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
200,000,000
[Stage Direction]
13,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
7}
[Stage Direction]
225,000,000
[Stage Direction]
16,312,500
[Stage Direction]
July
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
71
[Stage Direction]
260,000,000
[Stage Direction]
18,850,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
310,361,000
[Stage Direction]
17,069,855
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
50,000,000
[Stage Direction]
2,750,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
70,000,000
[Stage Direction]
3,850,000
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
57,912,800
[Stage Direction]
2,895,640
[Stage Direction]
Dec.
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
7}
[Stage Direction]
450,000,000
[Stage Direction]
32,625,000
[Stage Direction]
1976 Apr.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
436,198,000
[Stage Direction]
23,990,890
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
31
[Stage Direction]
247,046,500
[Stage Direction]
8,029,011
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
91,261,800
[Stage Direction]
5,019,399
[Stage Direction]
1977 Sept.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
7
[Stage Direction]
500,000,000
[Stage Direction]
35,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
51,030,700
[Stage Direction]
2,551,535
[Stage Direction]
1978 Jan.
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
31
[Stage Direction]
207,911,500
[Stage Direction]
7,796,681
[Stage Direction]
July
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
125,000,000
[Stage Direction]
10,000,000
[Stage Direction]
Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
7
[Stage Direction]
220,060,350
[Stage Direction]
15,404,225
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
4,404,247,700
[Stage Direction]
352,339,816
[Stage Direction]
1979 Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
3}
[Stage Direction]
343,246,500
[Stage Direction]
11,155,511
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
228,357,000
[Stage Direction]
12,559,635
[Stage Direction]
1980 Aug.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
104,822,500
[Stage Direction]
5,765,238
[Stage Direction]
Aug.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
73,831,500
[Stage Direction]
4,060,732
[Stage Direction]
Aug.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
158,271,000
[Stage Direction]
8,704,905
[Stage Direction]
Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
126,287,500
[Stage Direction]
6,630,094
[Stage Direction]
1981 Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
2,021,828,800
[Stage Direction]
136,473,444
[Stage Direction]
1982 Nov.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
6}
[Stage Direction]
500,289,300
[Stage Direction]
33,769,528
[Stage Direction]
1983 Sept.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
41
[Stage Direction]
1,992,679,450
[Stage Direction]
89,670,575
[Stage Direction]
1986 Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
50,000
[Stage Direction]
4,000
[Stage Direction]
1988 June
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
100,000,000
[Stage Direction]
5,000,000
[Stage Direction]
June
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
50,000,000
[Stage Direction]
2,500,000
[Stage Direction]
1989 Feb.
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
150,000,000
[Stage Direction]
10,125,000
[Stage Direction]
1990 May
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
225,000,000
[Stage Direction]
11,812,500
[Stage Direction]
May
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
125,000,000
[Stage Direction]
6,562,500
[Stage Direction]
1992 Sept.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
51
[Stage Direction]
225,000,000
[Stage Direction]
12,937,500
[Stage Direction]
1995 Oct.
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
100,000,000
[Stage Direction]
6,500,000
[Stage Direction]
1998 Mar.
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
31
[Stage Direction]
197,045,000
[Stage Direction]
7,389,188
[Stage Direction]
various
[Stage Direction]
2,145,000,000
[Stage Direction]
89,446,500
[Stage Direction]
various
[Stage Direction]
1,115,000,000
[Stage Direction]
51,178,500
[Stage Direction]
4.98
[Stage Direction]
475,000,000
[Stage Direction]
25,222,500
[Stage Direction]
June 18, 1971
[Stage Direction]
UNMATURED DEBT INCLUDING TREASURY BILLS AS AT MARCH 31, 1971 AND THE ANNUAL INTEREST THEREON (preliminary)
[Stage Direction]
Date of
[Stage Direction]
Rate
[Stage Direction]
Amount
[Stage Direction]
Annual
[Stage Direction]
maturity
[Stage Direction]
per cent
[Stage Direction]
of loan
[Stage Direction]
interest
[Stage Direction]
Payable in Canadian dollars-Concluded
[Stage Direction]
%
[Stage Direction]
$
[Stage Direction]
Special non-marketable bonds-
[Stage Direction]
Unemployment Insurance Commission
[Stage Direction]
6
[Stage Direction]
53,000,000
[Stage Direction]
3,180,000
[Stage Direction]
Unemployment Insurance Commission
[Stage Direction]
6f
[Stage Direction]
48,000,000
[Stage Direction]
3,180,000
[Stage Direction]
Unemployment Insurance Commission
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
33,000,000
[Stage Direction]
2,227,500
[Stage Direction]
Unemployment Insurance Commission
[Stage Direction]
7*
[Stage Direction]
100,000,000
[Stage Direction]
7,500,000
[Stage Direction]
Unemployment Insurance Commission
[Stage Direction]
8
[Stage Direction]
81,000,000
[Stage Direction]
6,480,000
[Stage Direction]
Canada pension plan investment fund
[Stage Direction]
various
[Stage Direction]
20,821,000 24,864,039,100
[Stage Direction]
1,617,792 1,501,825,484
[Stage Direction]
Payable in United States dollars-
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1949
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
21
[Stage Direction]
48,755,627
[Stage Direction]
1,340,780
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1950
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
21
[Stage Direction]
30,301,591
[Stage Direction]
833,294
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1962
[Stage Direction]
15
[Stage Direction]
5
[Stage Direction]
76,108,032
[Stage Direction]
3,805,402
[Stage Direction]
Loan of 1968
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
108,108,000 263,273,250
[Stage Direction]
7,432,425 13,411,901
[Stage Direction]
Payable in German deutsche marks-
[Stage Direction]
Notes of 1968
[Stage Direction]
1
[Stage Direction]
61
[Stage Direction]
73,844,250 25,201,156,600
[Stage Direction]
4,984,487 1,520,221,872
[Stage Direction]
The interest shown is a projection for one year at the annual rates on principal amounts outstanding at March 31, 1971. Where various rates of interest are applicable during the term of a loan the interest rate in effect at March 31,1971 has been used.
Bonds payable in New York and Germany have been converted at the official parity rate.
[Stage Direction]
Monday, June 21, 1971