1973-01-17

THE PRIME MINISTER


Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is not in his place today. I simply rise, not for the purpose of attempting any eulogy of the Prime Minister's mother, which would be very presumptuous of me, but simply to express on behalf of my colleagues and myself, though realizing that there is nothing of great help one can say in these circumstances, the deepest sympathy with the Prime Minister in the death of his mother.


Mr. David Lewis (York South):: Mr. Speaker, may I just as briefly express on behalf of my colleagues and myself our deepest sympathy to the Prime Minister on the death of his mother. I had occasion once to watch the Prime Minister on television and to learn with what affection and respect he regarded his mother. Even though most of us did not have the opportunity of meeting her when she was alive, we feel deeply for the Prime Minister.


Mr. Real Caouette (Temiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and myself join the Leader of the Official Opposition and the leader of the New Democratic Party in extending to the right hon. Prime Minister our most sincere sympathy on the occasion of the death of his mother. We all know that the loss of a mother is a heavy one. And it is so for a Prime Minister. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we express our sincere sympathy to the right hon. Prime Minister and to all members of the Trudeau family.


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Acting Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, as Acting Prime Minister may I thank the leaders of the other parties for their expressions of sympathy on the bereavement of the Prime Minister and associate members on this side of the House with those sentiments. I will undertake to see that these expressions of sympathy from all quarters of the House are conveyed to the Prime Minister.



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, under Standing Order 41(2) I should like to table in English and in French copies of the letter sent by the Prime Minister to the premiers proposing dates for a federal-provincial conference of first ministers.


FINANCE
Hon. John N. Turner (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 41(2), I should like to table one copy of the report of the Superintendent of Insurance for Canada on small loans companies and money lenders for the year ended December 31, 1971; and one copy of the report of the Superintendent of Insurance for Canada on co-operative credit societies.


MEETING OF FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL MINISTERS- TABLING OF PROPOSED AGENDA
John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I should also like to table with the consent of the House the proposed agenda, as it stands at the moment subject to ratification by the provincial ministers, of the conference beginning tomorrow between myself and the provincial ministers of finance, particularly pursuant to the request of the Leader of the Opposition.


POST OFFICE
Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to move a motion under the provisions of Standing Order 43 in order to bring before the House a question of urgent public importance. I refer to the fact that negotiations to resolve the dispute between the postal workers and the Treasury Board have broken down. The postal workers have accepted the majority report of the conciliation board, but the Treasury Board now appears to be
390

January 17, 1973
Postal Dispute
making use of a report which differs from that which was subject to its previous approval. I would therefore move, seconded by the hon. member for Dartmouth-Halifax East (Mr. Forrestall):
That the House now adjourn for the purpose of discussing this matter of urgent public importance.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member will realize, I am sure, that the motion is out of order. He is asking for the adjournment of the House under the terms of Standing Order 43. This ought to be done under the terms of Standing Order 26. Therefore the motion cannot be put.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, may I rephrase my motion and move, instead, that the subject matter of my motion, namely, the breakdown in postal negotiations, be referred to the Standing Committee on Manpower and Labour?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member is, of course, amending his motion with the consent of the House. There should be no difficulty about that, because he does not need to give notice of a motion under Standing Order 43. This having been said, I have to inquire whether there is unanimous consent.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: There was unanimous consent to the hon. member rephrasing or amending his motion, but not to the motion being considered at this time. Therefore the motion cannot be put.


NEGOTIATIONS TO SETTLE DISPUTE WITH EMPLOYEES- REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Mr. David Orlikow (Winnipeg North):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to move a motion which is in order under Standing Order 43. I would move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles):
That in view of the postal unions' acceptance of the Conciliation Board Report and the announcement by the government of its acceptance thereof, this House calls on the government to desist from seeking to make unilateral changes in that report since such actions by the government may well lead to nationwide work stoppages, and urges that the government stand by its word and reach a settlement forthwith.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member's motion is proposed under the terms of Standing Order 43. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: There is not unanimity. The motion therefore cannot be put.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT, 1971 (No. 1) PROVISION FOR APPROPRIATION TO BE DEEMED ADVANCE
Hon. Robert K. Andras (Minister of Manpower and Immigration) moved: for leave to introduce Bill C-124, to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971 (No. 1).


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

Robert Knight Andras: for leave to introduce Bill C-125, to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971 (No. 2).


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

[Stage Direction]
On the order: Introduction of Bills.
January 15, 1973-Mr. Howard-Bill intituled: "An Act to amend the Territorial Sea and Fishing Zones Act".
Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Skeena.


Mr. Howard:: Stand, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: The Chair will allow the proposed notice to stand, but perhaps I should take this opportunity to indicate to the hon. member that I have had the privilege of reading his proposed bill and was particularly interested, I might say fascinated, by the explanatory notes appended to the bill. I believe that the hon. member, on at least one previous occasion, was reminded by the Chair that explanatory notes ought to be guided by long-established principles.
In this connection may I refer the hon. member to citation 357 of Beauchesne's Fourth Edition, which indicates that explanatory notes ought to be brief. Brevity is a quality which is subjective in many ways and the hon. member's standards may be different from those of the Chair. But I have the impression that this explanatory note is not quite in keeping with the traditions and practices of the House.
I would suggest to all hon. members that explanatory notes should not be a second reading speech. I have the impression that the hon. member is arguing his case rather than giving an explanatory note. Perhaps the hon. member, who has asked that the matter be stood, might take a few minutes of his time to take a look at the explanatory notes and possibly make them a little less argumentative.
January 17, 1973


Frank Howard: Mr. Speaker, may I thank you very much for your advice. I might say that this bill is in precisely the same form, and the explanatory notes precise to the word, as the bill accepted by Your Honour last session.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the President of the Treasury Board. May I ask the minister if he is now prepared to tell the House whether or not the government accepts the conciliation board report on the postal dispute, and whether or not the government accepts it in its unedited form.


Hon. C. M. Drury (President of the Treasury Board):: Mr. Speaker, the Postmaster General announced last week that the government was prepared to accept the majority report of the conciliation board provided that it was also accepted by the Council of Postal Unions.


James Aloysius McGrath: In view of the fact that the report was accepted by a vote of the postal unions, and in view of what appear to be substantive changes in the report which was presented to the negotiating team from the unions, I would ask the minister whether he is prepared, as a sign of government good faith, to call the chairman of the conciliation board before the negotiating team to give evidence whether or not substantive changes were in fact made in the report by the government?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, I think I would prefer to let the Postmaster General respond to that question because he is the one in charge of the negotiations.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, may I redirect my question to the Postmaster General since he now seems to have assumed the role of chief negotiator for the government, which is a new break.


Hon. Andre Ouellet (Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, I think it is quite evident that the government's announced position is to accept the conciliator's report. We have made no alteration to the terms of this acceptance. I, however, want to tell the House that upon the request of the Council of Postal Unions the President of the Public Service Staff Relations Board has called upon the conciliation board to clarify the matter of classification.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, I have one further supplementary question. Since the Postmaster General now admits there were changes made in the report-
Oral Questions


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


James Aloysius McGrath: He did say that, Mr. Speaker, and the record will indicate that he did.


Mr. Hees:: You heard him.


James Aloysius McGrath: May I ask the Postmaster General and/or the President of the Treasury Board whether in the interests of getting the talks back to the table they are now prepared to call the chairman of the conciliation board so this matter can be settled once and for all and negotiations can be resumed?


André Ouellet: Mr. Speaker, I can repeat what the hon. member may not have understood, that it is clear that we made no changes. As far as our interpretation of the report is concerned, we feel that the report is very clear on that matter of job classification. The matter is explained quite clearly in the report and we are ready to accept all its articles. We have said so to the union and we hope to be in a position in the very near future to sign a contract with its representatives as they were recently, authorized to do by vote.


DISPUTE WITH WORKERS-GOVERNMENT POSITION ON JOB CLASSIFICATION
David Orlikow: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact the conciliation board report recommends that the question of job classification should be a subject permitted to be dealt with under the grievance procedure, may I ask the Postmaster General whether in fact the government and its representatives are insisting that this question of classification shall not be covered by the grievance procedure before they sign an agreement?


André Ouellet: Mr. Speaker, in the old contract the matter of job classification could not even be considered as a grievance. We have agreed that it could be one of the grievances that can be discussed within the department itself. However, that a job classification grievance could be submitted to arbitration is something that, to our mind, was not suggested at all by the recommendations of the conciliation board. We feel that this exceeds by far the mandate and recommendations of the conciliator's report.
We are willing to approve immediately the contents of the conciliator's report but we feel that particular part goes far beyond its recommendations.


David Orlikow: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact the Public Service Staff Relations Act excluded the question of classification from collective bargaining, in view of the fact the chairman of the Public Service Staff Relations Board specifically instructed the conciliation board to look at this question because it is so crucial to the whole matter of reaching an agreement, and in view of the fact there is obviously a difference of opinion as indicated in the statement just made by the minister and the interpretation of the union as to what the conciliation board recommended,
392

January 17, 1973
Oral Questions
would the Postmaster General give consideration to calling the chairman of the board to meet with both parties in order that this question can be resolved and we can avoid a work stoppage which already began in the city of Toronto yesterday?


André Ouellet: I answered this question earlier, Mr. Speaker, when I said that the chairman of the Public Service Staff Relations Board had issued a directive requesting explanations from the chairman of the conciliation board on this point.
Anyhow, this issue should not result in work stoppages as it does now. I think it is possible to clarify this point without interrupting work and lowering the quality of services to Canadians.


David Orlikow: If the union is not satisfied with the unilateral decision of the government as to what the chairman of the conciliation board meant, obviously the union has very little leeway. I ask the question again of the Postmaster General: In the interest of having continued good relations-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


David Orlikow: -would he agree to let the chairman of the conciliation board-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. That is, I suggest, the same question as was asked by the hon. member and also by the hon. member for St. John's East.


DISPUTE WITH WORKERS-SUGGESTED TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR NEGOTIATIONS TO DEPARTMENT FROM TREASURY BOARD
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct my supplementary question to the Acting Prime Minister. Since it is obvious that there has been a breakdown in the negotiations between Treasury Board, the postal unions and the Postmaster General, in line with the recommendations of the conciliation board is the government prepared to transfer the responsibility for negotiating a contract to the Post Office from the Treasury Board so that the vitally important postal service may continue uninterrupted?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I, of course, deny the allegations by the hon. member. I believe that the negotiations have been in excellent hands and we are making great progress toward settlement. I hope the hon. gentleman will support us in our efforts.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my next supplementary question to the Postmaster General. In light of the hon. gentleman's remarks in December concerning the breakdown in communications between the government and the postal workers and the consequent loss in morale, would he now accept some responsibility for negotiations as a minister who cares?


DISPUTE WITH WORKERS-GOVERNMENT POSITION ON SUGGESTED PUBLIC INTEREST DISPUTES COMMISSION
Mr. I. M. Forrestall (Dartmouth-Halifax East):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct my supplementary question to the Acting Prime Minister as well. As there is a reasonable likelihood of further difficulty and of a possible work stoppage, may I ask whether the government is now prepared to state if it has accepted or will accept the recommendation of the Woods task force report for the setting up of a public interest disputes commission. If so, could he indicate to the House the present status of the government's attitude in this regard?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman has an advantage over me in being more familiar than I am with this particular report. I will take his question as notice.


J. Michael Forrestall: Mr. Speaker, I crave your indulgence. May I direct a supplementary question to the President of the Treasury Board, who is attempting to advise the Acting Prime Minister. Is the government in a position of a positive nature with respect to that particular recommendation of the Woods task force?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: Mr. Speaker, this is an interesting suggestion emanating from the Woods task force report. The House will be contemplating later this year amendments to the Public Service Staff Relations Act. Perhaps that will be the time to look at it.


An hon. Member:: The minister does not know about it either.


LABOUR RELATIONS
Mr. Paddy Neale (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. If his department is to undertake an inquiry into the situation pertaining to Wardair charter flights, as he indicated yesterday, would he agree that the inquiry should be extended to find out if the pilots of that firm are being forced to fly between 24 and 26 hours without a break?


Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, I will have to take that question as notice.


Charles Patrick (Paddy) Neale: Would the minister order an immediate investigation into the Wardair charter flight that left Vancouver International Airport on the evening of January 15 destined for Sheffield and Gatwick, which in fact ended up in Keflavik, Iceland, and about which there are some serious questions?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, my answer is the same as that to the previous question.
January 17, 1973


WARDAIR STEWARDESSES' STRIKE-MAINTENANCE OF SAFETY REGULATIONS
Mr. Don Mazankowski (Vegreville):: I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Transport, Mr. Speaker, in connection with the Wardair strike. Will the minister undertake to investigate and indeed assure the House that the safety regulations will be looked into because the safety of passengers may be jeopardized, and will he report to the House?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, this is one of the responsibilities of the department. As you know, the department is not responsible for labour disputes or their settlement, but it is responsible for air security and the House may rest assured that we are doing every effort to maintain passenger and aircraft security.


FINANCE
Mr. Gilbert Rondeau (Shefford):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Tomorrow will he finally be able to announce to the provinces the possibility of financing their administration through interest free loans from the Bank of Canada?


Mr. Lawrence:: Mr. Speaker, I wish to rise on a point of order.


Mr. Speaker:: I apologize to the hon. member for Shefford. He will be recognized in a moment. The hon. member for Northumberland-Durham rises on a point of order.


Allan Frederick Lawrence: It has been my belief that when a document was tabled in the House this would enable-


Some hon. Members:: Question!


Allan Frederick Lawrence: My question is on a point of order. My point of order is that presumably the purpose of tabling a document in the House is so that members can get a look at it. The Minister of Finance has indicated that he has not only tabled with the Clerk one copy of the agenda for tomorrow's conference but also 15 extra copies. There are those of us on this side of the House who would like to ask some questions about it. We have sent four different couriers to the table to get a copy only to find that it is not available.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Shefford. [Translation]


Gilbert F. Rondeau: Mr. Speaker, as the Minister of Finance seemed unable to answer the question about interest free loans from the Bank of Canada, can he tell us what solution he intends proposing in the next few days to help the provinces finance their administration and meet their
Oral Questions
financial obligations in a better way than they can do now?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, one of the items on the agenda will be the sharing of tax sources. At any rate, we will discuss these matters in a serious way as of tomorrow.


Mr. Andre Fortin (Lotbiniere):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Could the Minister of Finance tell us if, during this conference on the state of provincial and federal finances, the financial problems of the provinces and of the federal government will be discussed?


INQUIRY AS TO FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR POLICE FORCES
Mr.   Georges-C. Lachance@Lafontaine: I should like to put a supplementary question.
I would like to ask the Minister of Finance whether financial assistance has been requested by the Quebec Justice Minister for the police forces in Quebec and Ontario?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I know nothing about that except what I read in the Montreal Gazette.


MEETING OF FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL MINISTERS- PRESENTATION OF GOVERNMENT'S GOALS REGARDING UNEMPLOYMENT AND PRICE INCREASES
Mr. James Gillies (Don Valley):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Inasmuch as the first item on the agenda of the conference with the premiers tomorrow is not known to us, can the Minister of Finance tell us whether or not the government is prepared to present at that time what its goals are with regard to unemployment and price increases in the coming year?


John Napier Turner: I might say to the hon. member for Northumberland-Durham that the document was tabled and as soon as he ascertains the proper procedure I am sure he will get the document.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Allan Frederick Lawrence: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, because it is not covered in the little green book-


Some hon. Members:: Yes, it is.


Mr. Foster:: Check with Bill Davis.


Allan Frederick Lawrence: -how do we get a copy of something that is tabled if we do not ask for it?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend is yelling that I have a copy. I want to assure you that I am just as devoid of copies as the hon. member for Northumberland-Durham.


Mr. Baldwin:: On the same point of order, Mr. Speaker-

January 17, 1973
Oral Questions


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Gerald William Baldwin: -most ministers of a responsible government would not file or table papers only the day before a conference.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I explained to the Leader of the Opposition two days ago what my restrictions were at that time, and to some extent I can understand the Chair's position in trying to find out who is the financial critic for the opposition.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Don Valley on a supplementary.


James McPhail Gillies: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I might have an answer to my question.


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. gentleman and I have discussed the philosophy of targets before.


Mr. Hellyer:: Yes, and you have not answered.


James McPhail Gillies: For clarification, Mr. Speaker, may I say that we did discuss it before, but what I want to find out is whether it is the position of the government that we can make sound economic policies in this country without specific goals and targets?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker,-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The minister may be anxious to reply, but I suggest that is the kind of question that cannot be asked and ought not to be replied to at this time.


CO-ORDINATION OF CAPITAL BORROWING WITH PROVINCES
Allan Frederick Lawrence: Mr. Speaker, if we may get down to specifics, in light of the minister's repeated and I think justified concern about provincial borrowing abroad, would the minister report today on the progress, if any, on the proposal made previously about some practical inducement to the provinces to borrow more fully in Canada?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I dealt with the hon. member's question when his leader put it to me two days ago, suggesting that we had achieved an information centre for the capital requirements of the provinces-


Robert Lorne Stanfield: That is more than we have achieved in this House.


John Napier Turner: -and what they might need. I have not yet succeeded in persuading the provinces to co-ordinate their borrowing requirements both on Canadian capital markets and abroad, but that is a subject that will be discussed again on Thursday or Friday.


Allan Frederick Lawrence: Is the government going to set up some machinery to assure the provinces that they will have

access to sufficient funds in Canadian money markets at interest rates equal to what they have to pay abroad?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I would think that the Canadian market in the last six months, particularly since I put the proposition to the provinces, has been sufficiently flexible and fertile for provincial borrowing requirements. As a matter of fact, their rate of borrowing abroad has dropped considerably since the first six months of last year.


IMPOSITION BY UNITED STATES OF DUTY ON MICHELIN TIRES IMPORTED FROM CANADA-REQUEST FOR TABLING OF PROTEST AND REPLY
Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. In view of the important possible consequences of the recent American decision to impose a special duty on Michelin tires, and in view of the important need to have that decision reversed, would the minister table for hon. members the protest letter that was sent by the government of Canada to the United States and also at the same time table the reply , if one has yet been received?


Hon. Alastair Gillespie (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to clarify a reply I gave the hon. member yesterday. A formal note went to the United States government last summer. There have been representations-


John Edward Broadbent: Last summer!


Alastair William Gillespie: There have been representations since, and there will be a formal note going forward very shortly. I will give consideration to whether that note should be made public.


John Edward Broadbent: In view of the fact the minister has waited almost two weeks to act in this matter, would he assure the House that not only will he consider tabling it but also, in view of the fact that I understand a protest has been sent to GATT, or at least that such a protest is being considered by the government, would he make a commitment to the House that that protest, in its exact wording, will be tabled?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, I will take that representation under consideration as well.


ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Solicitor General and is prompted by the death of Constable James Lothian in Toronto recently and other attempted murders and deaths. In view of the
January 17, 1973

rapidly declining morale in police organizations and law enforcement agencies in the country, does the minister have any plans for a revision of the bail reform legislation which these organizations feel is causing these unfortunate incidents?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Hon. Warren Allmand (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, I do not believe the bail reform law is within my jurisdiction. I believe it is within the jurisdiction of the Minister of Justice.


Erik Nielsen: Mr. Speaker, I redirect the question to the Minister of Justice.


Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister of justice):: Mr. Speaker, I regret I have to ask the hon. member to repeat the question.


Erik Nielsen: The question is prompted by the death of Constable James Lothian in Toronto recently and other murders and attempted murders. In view of the disturbing decline in the morale of police organizations and law enforcement agencies throughout the country, does the government have any plans for revision of its bail reform legislation which these agencies attribute as the cause of these unfortunate incidents?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in the House during my speech on the Speech from the Throne the other day, I believe we are beginning to gain that experience with the bail law as it now stands that is necessary to make it operate effectively. I drew specific attention then to the necessity for police officers, and particularly Crown prosecutors, to exercise their responsibilities in presenting to the courts in the appropriate cases the need to retain a person in custody rather than grant bail, as a definite part of the bail reform law itself. However, I do not anticipate any change that would return to the day when the poor were kept incarcerated and the rich were allowed to remain at large.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Erik Nielsen: In view of the minister's reply, and I hasten to assure him that those on this side of the House are just as eager to see reform in bail legislation as anyone else-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Erik Nielsen: In view of that answer, can the Solicitor General tell us whether the government has any plans to consult with the provinces with respect to provincial law enforcement staffs, and specifically with regard to his own responsibility for the RCMP? Does the government have any plans to increase the staffs of these organizations in order to cope with the doors that have been opened by the bail reform legislation?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, I believe the staffs of the organizations referred to by the hon. member are under provincial jurisdiction.


Erik Nielsen: The RCMP?
Oral Questions


William Warren Allmand: With respect to the RCMP we are doing everything possible to make it more effective, but the majority of the criminal law provisions are administered by the provincial departments of justice.


KILLING OF POLICEMEN-INQUIRY AS TO LEGISLATION TO RESTRICT FURTHER SALE AND DISTRIBUTION OF FIREARMS
Mr. Stuart Leggatt (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is directed to the Minister of Justice. It is also prompted by the incident in Toronto. In view of the increasing homicides occurring as a result of the use of rifles in this country, is the minister considering legislation to restrict further the sale and distribution of firearms?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, that question is one which is under constant consideration and review. The House had an opportunity to address itself to it not long ago, and the government will be addressing itself further to that question.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Chair will recognize the hon. member for Calgary North on one last supplementary on this subject and then try to move on to the next subject.


KILLING OF POLICEMEN-POLICY RESPECTING COMMUTATION OF DEATH SENTENCES OF THOSE CONVICTED
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, I direct this question to the Solicitor General. In light of the fact that about ten people have been convicted of murdering police officers and their death sentences have been commuted by the government, is it the policy of the government of Canada to continue to commute sentences where people are charged and found guilty of murder and capital punishment applies?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, since 1967 when the law was changed with respect to capital punishment there have been four commutations in cases involving policemen and prison guards and each case was decided on its merits. At the present time there are two cases but they have not yet exhausted the appeal procedures.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: The minister says that discretion is used in each case. I think we had better get to the facts. Has there been any case in which someone was found guilty of the murder of a police officer and the government has not commuted the sentence to life imprisonment?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, of the four cases since 1968 there has not been a case where there has been a hanging.

January 17, 1973

Oral Questions HOUSING
nine-page challenge known as the income tax form which says, "it is easier than it looks". Will the minister review the contents of that document?


MEASURES TO ASSIST PURCHASERS OF BADLY CONSTRUCTED HOMES FINANCED BY CMHC
Mr. Roland Godin (Portneuf):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of State for Urban Affairs.
Could he tell us whether he has been advised that houses built 18 months ago and financed by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation at a cost of $14,000 already need repairs amounting to $5,000, since he told us Thursday last that the Corporation meant to control the quality of its dwellings? Could the minister state what he intends to do to assist the buyer who becomes aware during winter that the Corporation had delivered him a shack?


Hon. Ron Basford (Minister of State for Urban Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member would identify the particular houses or subdivision I would ask for a report and see what can be done for these people.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Peace River.


Hon. Robert Stanbury (Minister of National Revenue):: With pleasure, Mr. Speaker.


Gerald William Baldwin: Can the minister indicate if that advertising campaign which is based on the fact that you have a wonderful form was dreamed up by the same bright man who said, "the land is strong"?


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


Paul Theodore Hellyer: A supplementary-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Chair has recognized the hon. member for Wellington.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Will the hon. member resume his seat. The hon. member for Wellington has been recognized on a supplementary.


ALLEGED DIFFICULTY IN PREPARING DUPLICATE RETURNS
Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, I have a question-


Roland Godin: Mr. Speaker, may I put a supplementary question?


Mr. Speaker:: I suggest to the hon. member that such a question could easily be put on the order paper. If the hon. member wishes to put a supplementary question, he may do so now.


Roland Godin: Ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker.


INCOME TAX
Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of National Revenue. Is the minister responsible for the half million dollar advertising spectular which contains this notice which I show to him entitled, "Close up-it is easier than it looks".


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member knows better than or possibly as well as any other member that he cannot use exhibits in the House.


Some hon. Members:: Shame!


Gerald William Baldwin: I appreciate the point but Your Honour will understand how difficult it is to make hon. members opposite understand things without showing them. I should like to ask the minister whether he is responsible for that spectular advertising campaign offering alleged free advice to the poor harried taxpayer, and is he aware of the contents including the statement with regard to the


Mr. A. D. Hales (Wellington):: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is for the Minister of National Revenue. Is the minister aware that the new income tax forms are made of such heavy paper that only one copy can be typed at a time and it therefore costs more to type them separately than to make duplicate copies?


Robert Douglas George Stanbury: No, Mr. Speaker.


Paul Theodore Hellyer: I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Would the minister examine this advertising very critically in order to see if it violates his principles of false and misleading advertising?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


AIR TRANSPORT
Mr. Lome Nystrom (Yorkton-Melville):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport. In view of information I have received that a foreign country has applied for permission to test supersonic transport jets over Canada, can the minister inform the House whether permission has been granted and, if so, to what country?


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, if this is so the request was probably directed to the Canadian Transport Commission. I will inquire whether they have received such an application and, if so, what was decided.
January 17, 1973


FINANCE
Mr. Claude Wagner (Saint-Hyacinthe):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Finance.
In the course of the federal-provincial conference which begins tomorrow, does he intend to discuss the repeal of capital gains tax which unfairly affects the farmers of this country when there is a bequest of family farms?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, if this question is raised, I am prepared to answer it.


Claude Wagner: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a supplementary question.
If this question is not on the agenda, will the minister take the initiative of raising it himself?


John Napier Turner: This is one of a number of issues which are now of considerable concern to me, Mr. Speaker.


MEETING OF FEDERAL AND PROVINCIAL MINISTERS-   DISCUSSION OF APPROACHES AND OBJECTIVES IN PENDING TRADE TALKS WITH UNITED STATES
Mr. Heward Grafftey (Brome-Missisquoi):: I have a supplementary question for the Minister of Finance, Mr. Speaker. At this conference is the minister going to outline the government's objectives and approaches with regard to the pending trade talks with the United States, and is he going to invite the provinces to make suggestions in this area and agree to hold a meeting with them on this critical matter?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, it is not specifically on the agenda although the first item is wide enough for it to be discussed. There are only two days and, as the hon. member can see if he reviews the agenda, we are dealing with the economic situation and outlook, the fiscal situation and outlook, seasonal employment, revenue sharing and taxation, health services financing, the ninth annual review of the Economic Council of Canada with the 15 indicators suggested by the council, and other business. If there is time for it to be discussed it will be, but whether there will be time I do not know.


INCOME TAX
Mr. R. E. McKinley (Huron):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Finance. Can the minister assure the House that he will give consideration to a return to the basic herd concept for farmers when he brings down his budget?
Oral Questions


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of National Revenue and I have responsibility for a committee that Mr. Mahoney announced to the House in the last parliament. This committee was concerned and I am still concerned that the application of the Income Tax Act to the farming community of Canada is well understood not only by the farming community but by the people who write and interpret tax laws. That is one of the subjects under review.


Mr. Horner (Crowfoot):: It is a little late.


LABOUR CONDITIONS
Mr. John Harney (Scarborough West):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Transport. In view of the fact that there is an extremely high unemployment rate in the country and in view of the fact that a department of the government is supplying loans and incentives to increase employment, would the minister indicate to the House whether he proposes to take steps to obviate and eliminate the proposed lay-off of 200 employees of Canadian National Telecommunications?


Jean Marchand: I will have to inquire about that, Mr. Speaker.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: You will be known as the minister of inquiry.


John Paul Harney: While the minister is getting the notice ready for this very large notice board of his, could he inquire whether the proposed lay-off of these 200 employees by Canadian National Telecommunications would in any way violate the provincial laws in Quebec and particularly in Ontario regarding the notice to be given to large groups of employees being laid off?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I suggest to the hon. member that perhaps he is making a representation to the minister. In any even, he is asking the minister to give a legal opinion. Perhaps the hon. member might limit himself to the original question.


CANADA-UNITED STATES AUTO PACT-POSSIBLE DANGER TO CANADIAN INDEPENDENCE AND AUTONOMY
Mr.   Terry@: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce, I gave him notice a few days ago. Has the minister given consideration to the increasing danger to Canadian independence and autonomy resulting from the Canada-U.S. auto pact, specifically as a result of the centralization of decision-making in the automobile industry in the United

January 17, 1973
Oral Questions
States, which decisions are now based mainly on continental rather than national considerations?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for notice. I do not think that the automobile industry has changed significantly in terms of the decision-making centres since the auto pact.


AGRICULTURE
Mr. Bert Hargrave (Medicine Hat):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to address a question to the Minister of Agriculture with regard to the use of diethylstilbestrol or DES as it is commonly known in the cattle feeding industry. Is the minister aware that after May 1 it will be possible for United States fed cattle that have been quite properly finished with DES implants to enter Canada for slaughter in spite of the Canadian suspension of the use of DES implants? If so, what is his department prepared to do about this situation?


Hon. E. F. Whelan (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, I am aware that research is being carried on in the United States and we have some of our officials in the United States observing this research to learn their findings. I am not aware that the report is finalized. Until that report is finalized and brought to my attention, I am not in a position to make a decision.


Herbert Thomas (Bert) Hargrave: Is the minister aware of the unfair advantage United States cattle feeders will have over Canadian feeders because of our loss of the use of DES and a resulting feeding efficiency loss of some 10 to 15 per cent as a result of this imbalance in Canada-United States DES regulations on this product? If so, what will he do about it?


Eugene Whelan: As I said, Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the study that is being carried on. I am hoping this report will come forward early in February. At least, this is what I have been told. I am also aware of the disadvantage our producers will be under if American producers are allowed to use the product DES, as it is commonly referred to, in the United States. I am willing to go as far as discussing the matter with my counterpart in the United States. I have also discussed it with the Minister of National Health and Welfare for Canada to find out where we will go from there if the use of DES is still allowed in the United States.


INVESTIGATION OF ANTIBIOTICS ADDED TO CATTLE FEED
Mr. Paul Yewchuk (Athabasca):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Agriculture. It is supplementary to that asked by the hon. member for Medicine Hat. Is the

minister prepared to take any action with regard to antibiotics routinely added to cattle feed as there is a good deal of evidence to indicate these may be more harmful to humans in some ways than diethylstilbestrol?


Eugene Whelan: Mr. Speaker, I have been told by my department and the Department of National Health and Welfare that this is under constant study. Before any decisions are made, we want to make sure that we will be able to make the right decisions.


FISHERIES
Mr. Allan B. McKinnon (Victoria):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Fisheries. During his speech on January 11 the minister promised the addition of three large ships and 12 medium-sized patrol craft to the fisheries and marine services. Can he now assure the House that at least the vessels for use on the west coast will be built on the west coast?


Hon. Jack Davis (Minister of Fisheries):: Mr. Speaker, I cannot give that assurance. We always try to get these ships at the lowest possible cost. Nevertheless, it has been the habit of the government to buy in the area where the vessels are used.


SOCIAL SECURITY
Mr. Rene Matte (Champlain):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare.
Does he intend to follow up the wishes expressed by the Quebec Minister of Social Affairs concerning the necessity to hold a federal-provincial conference before amending the Old Age Pensions Act?


Hon. Marc Lalonde (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: 
OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH PROGRAM-REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON GRANT DISTRIBUTION AMONG INCOME CLASSES    CONSULTATION ON WEEKLY PAY RATE WITH PROVINCES
Mr. Cyril Symes (Sault Ste. Marie):: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Secretary of State. Will the minister make a statement on motions outlining what measures the government has taken to ensure a more equitable distribution of the benefits of opportunities for youth grants among the youth of various income classes? In particular, what criteria are employed to guarantee that an adequate allocation of funds goes to youths of low-income families?


Hon. lames Hugh Faulkner (Secretary oi State):: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure I will do that by way of a statement on motions-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


James Hugh Faulkner: -but I would like to elaborate on this. The two points raised by the hon. member are important. It was one of the strengths of the opportunities for youth program in the past that it did get to low income and remote areas. I would like to find some method of providing some information to the House.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for York-Simcoe.


Reginald Cyril Symes: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Perhaps we might allow the hon. member for Sault Ste. Marie a supplementary. The Chair will then recognize the hon. member for York-Simcoe and then call orders of the day.


Reginald Cyril Symes: Will the Secretary of State inform the House whether he had any consultation with the provincial ministers responsible for post-secondary education about the financial requirements of students before he determined the weekly pay rate under the opportunities for youth program recently announced?


James Hugh Faulkner: No, Mr. Speaker.


AIRPORTS
Mr. Sinclair Stevens (York-Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transport or the Minister of State for Urban Affairs. In view of widespread interest in the proposed Pickering airport, will the Minister of Transport inform the House whether the government now intends to use the lands which are under notice of expropriation in the Pickering area for a land bank rather than for the proposed second Toronto airport?
Oral Questions


Jean Marchand: Mr. Speaker, I believe I mentioned in the House that we have received the report of the commission which conducted an inquiry on the expropriations. We are now studying it and the cabinet will be taking a decision by February 2 and at that time the hon. member will no doubt be exactly informed of the government's decision concerning the Pickering airport.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: Mr. Speaker, I am not sure whether the minister understood my question. I am not speaking about the Swackhammer report. I am referring to the possible change of decision which I understand has been recommended or suggested to him. Has a decision been made to use the land for a land bank rather than for a second Toronto airport?


Jean Marchand: The answer is no, Mr. Speaker.


Mr. Speaker:: Orders of the day.


BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. As this is the last day of the throne speech debate, possibly the government House leader might indicate the business for the rest of this week, next week and as far as he is able to look into the future.


Mr. MacEachen:: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we propose to call the resolution establishing the joint committee on food prices. Following that I would like to call the unemployment insurance bills, particularly Bill No. 1. Depending on the progress we make on these measures, we will then consider the capital punishment bill.


Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, with regard to the order of business, I wonder if I may put a question to the government House leader. In view of the confusion that is developing between the automatic increase in pensions that will take place in April and the government's promise to make a substantial increase in the rate of pensions, will the government bring on that pension bill at an early date so that people will know as soon as possible-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


George Harris Hees: You voted against that.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Yes, Mr. Speaker. "At an early date" may be variously interpreted, but will be as soon as possible. It will not be delayed.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Good. [Translation]


Mr.   La Salle@: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege.

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. Morgan
As I was unable to ask a question during the question period, I would like to ask the Chair if, in view of the importance for the Montreal Olympic Committee of the budget it must submit on February 3, the federal government still intends to refuse financial assistance for these games?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member could put this question only with the unanimous consent of the House and it is with reluctance that I allow members to ask questions after raising on a question of privilege or on a point of order once the question period has ended.
The hon. member might ask his question tomorrow since it is not urgent. At any rate I shall give the hon. member priority at that time.

[English] SPEECH FROM THE THRONE


CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from Tuesday, January 16, consideration of the motion of Mr. J. J. Blais for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session.
Mr. Trevor Morgan (St. Catharines):: Mr. Speaker, I have learned that it is traditional to congratulate you, Sir, on your election to the high office which you now hold; but what I have to say to Your Honour is not out of tradition nor out of custom but out of sincere sentiment, well founded. Your reputation, Sir, has gone before you; you are not like a prophet who is without honour in his own land.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


J. Trevor Morgan: There is one thing on which I must compliment this government, new as they may be, and that is the appointment of the Deputy Speaker, the hon. member for Halifax-East Hants (Mr. McCleave). I believe in the principle that justice must not only be done but must be shown to be done, and I do congratulate Mr. Deputy Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, as a novice in this chamber I listened extremely carefully to the Speech from the Throne as presented to this House. I listened to and evaluated what other members said here, older and wiser ones than I, what they thought about the Speech from the Throne and just what it meant to the people of Canada. The sublimation of all this listening and all this evaluation can, for me, be reduced to a very few lines:
There was a young man from Australia,
On his backside was painted a dahlia,
The artistry was there,
The resemblance was there,
But the smell was a horrible failure.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


J. Trevor Morgan: Mr. Speaker, I have the proud privilege of representing the riding of St. Catharines. The city of St. Catharines lies in the midst of the industrial fruitland. That is not a contradiction in terms, for in and about the

riding of St. Catharines is the tender fruit industry which is a $50 million-a-year industry. This has a great deal of commercial vitality to the city of St. Catharines. St. Catharines has been potentially a very active industrial centre. I say "has been" and "potentially," for if the government ever attempted to sacrifice the safeguards of the auto pact, the dynamics of this industry would be destroyed. If this should ever happen, there should be such a hue and cry from the people in my riding that even the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) would quickly quit the quiescent quilt where he now silently sleeps in the shade.
I have indicated to you, Mr. Speaker, that the city of St. Catharines is the business and commercial hub of the Niagara region, a region comprising some 350,000 people. St. Catharines is also the seat of government for the new regional municipality of Niagara which has been in existence for just over three years. I had the privilege of serving on that council from its inception until my election to this House.
The financial plight of this municipality, as well as all other municipalities across the country, must not and cannot be ignored by the government. More money must be funnelled into municipal coffers in order that the heavy burden on the home owner, through real estate taxation, can be alleviated. A distinction must surely be made between taxation representing services for people and taxation representing services for property. There is no logical reason why services such as welfare, education, hospitals, homes for the aged, day care centres, the work of children's aid societies, and so on, should be charged against land and buildings and become a burden on the home owner through real estate taxation.
The recent tri-level conference of federal, provincial and municipal leaders was perhaps a recognition of this problem and a first step, if a somewhat tentative one, toward a solution. The government has it in its power right now to assist the home owner in the dilemma in which he finds himself. I have already placed a notice of motion on the order paper calling for an amendment to the Income Tax Act to allow a home owner to deduct the real estate tax paid by him up to a maximum of $500 and to deduct from his taxable income, as well, the mortgage interest paid by him up to a maximum of $2,000.1 shall, of course, have more to say on this topic at a later date.
This particular problem has been aggravated for the citizens of St. Catharines by the lack of growth in the industrial sector. In a recent survey of some 1,200 industries throughout 21 major industrial cities across Canada, in terms of growth the city of St. Catharines was twenty-first on the list. Dead last! The national average in terms of growth was just under 7 per cent. The percentage for St. Catharines was just over three.
I suggest there are two major reasons for this situation. First, there has been an unrealistic and unsympathetic approach on the part of DREE and by the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce in making the grants and supplying the incentives necessary in the region of Niagara. Second-and I agree this is a provincial matter-there has been an unwarranted rise in hydro rates to power users. This has caused several industries to leave St. Catharines and the region of Niagara.
January 17, 1973

If it really cares, this government could do three things to alleviate the situation. First, DREE and the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce could be more realistic, quicker to realize why we are losing these industries. They should provide the grants and incentives needed to make these industries stay in the area and become more prosperous. Secondly, I suggest that the Department of Transport, through the St. Lawrence Seaway Authority, commence immediately the construction of a new Welland ship canal, the land for which was expropriated and paid for four or five years ago. The land is sitting there idle and being allowed to waste. Formerly it was good farmland.
The construction of this canal would have a double effect on the city of St. Catharines and the Niagara region. Firstly, this kind of project would tend to have a high labour content and would compensate somewhat for the miserable conduct of the government in relieving unemployment. Secondly, although St. Catharines lies within a radius of about 500 miles of markets of well over 100 million people, due to the lack of adequate road and rail facilities these markets have been effectively closed. With a new canal, with fewer but larger and deeper locks, as well as adequate harbour facilities, we would go a very long way toward solving this problem.
There is a third way in which I think this matter of growth can be cured, not only for St. Catharines but for Canada as a whole: it is for the government to take a realistic approach in combating the DISC program of the U.S. by encouraging the growth of secondary manufacturing industry within Canada. I suggest a Canada-square program consisting of sensible quotas undertaken against resource exploitation-the words speak for themselves. With this three-pronged approach I am sure we would go a long way toward solving inadequate growth not only in the Niagara region and St. Catharines but throughout the country.
The right hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefen-baker), in using, if you will pardon the expression, Mr. Speaker, rather pregnant prose, described the mangled meeting which took place between the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lang) and the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis). I shall make no further comment than to say that when I heard about this particular incident my mind waxed somewhat lyrical as follows:
Two politicians alone in a room,
Both dreamed of power they wished to assume;
But they argued all night,
As to who had the right,
With what, and with which, and to whom.
The same right hon. member for Prince Albert, and the hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr. Atkey) also touched on the mumbo-jumbo recently espoused by the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) regarding his constitutional authority to dissolve this House. That I will describe in one word- "poppycock". It is without a scintilla of truth, and I give him no credit for it.
When as a rookie Member of Parliament I first took my place in this House, I thought my job was fairly simple and straightforward, namely, to do the best job I could in getting good legislation through, not only for the people of
The Address-Mr. D. J. MacDonald
St. Catharines but for every person in our beloved country. My hopes were soon dashed when I heard the Prime Minister on January 8. He reminded me of the man who. was an agnostic until he realized that he was God. Then I, along with other members of the opposition, was subjected to vindictiveness, calumny, smear and character assassination. I happen to be very proud to be a Canadian and I think, with all humility, that I am a good one. Let me remind the Prime Minister of Iago:
He who steals my purse, steals trash. It is something, it is nothing. It was mine, it is his. Hide the tears. But he who filches from me my good name robs me of that which does not enrichen him but makes me poor indeed.
Then came the speech of the hon. member for York South, following which I went back to my office not knowing whether to laugh or cry. Sitting there silently, the words of a very old poem came to me and I should like to commend it to the Prime Minister and the hon. member for York South:
God giveth man a time like this to command.
Great minds, true faith, strong hearts and ready hands;
Men whom the lust of office cannot kill,
Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy,
Men who have opinions and a will,
Men who have honour,
Men who will not lie,
Men who can stand before a demagogue and damn his treacherous flatteries without winking,
Tall men who stand proud above the fog of public duty and in private thinking;
For a while the rabble with their thumbworn creeds,
Their large professions and their petty deeds,
Mingle in the common strife.
Lo freedom weeps,
Strong rules the land,
And waiting justice sleeps.


Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I wish first of all to offer my congratulations on your appointment to your high office. I also congratulate Mr. Deputy Speaker. As I sit here and watch you perform your duties in the House, in the short time I have been here I have come to realize that yours was a most judicious choice and that this House is privileged to have a man of your wisdom preside over its deliberations. I also wish to extend my congratulations to the mover and the seconder of the Speech from the Throne; on their first appearance both certainly did a very honourable job.
I should also like to thank the people of Cardigan for the honour they have done me in electing me their representative in Ottawa. It is a great privilege, as well as a great responsibility, to represent a riding such as Cardigan. It is a challenge that I look forward to with great excitement. I think I have a fair knowledge of the problems of Cardigan riding, having lived there for so many years and having had the privilege of representing part of the riding in the provincial legislature of Prince Edward Island. May I simply say, Sir, that I intend to work my hardest and best on behalf of those wonderful people.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: I feel even more privileged because the people of Cardigan decided to elect me at a

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. D. J. MacDonald particularly exciting time in our political history. The party representation is such that the government could indeed be defeated in the House at any moment. However,
I do not think hon. members-I am addressing myself here especially to my Liberal colleagues-should develop ulcers over this situation. I had the occasion of living through a situation similar to this in Prince Edward Island from 1966 to 1970. The Liberal government of Premier Alex Campbell governed Prince Edward Island with a majority of one vote, that of the Speaker. I think it is fair to say that this was a particularly successful period of our provincial history.
I am particularly pleased, Mr. Speaker, that my maiden speech in this House should coincide with the centennial of the province I have the honour of representing. As hon. members will know, Prince Edward Island celebrates this year its one hundredth anniversary as a member of the great Canadian confederation. We know that the road to confederation started in Prince Edward Island in 1864. However, Prince Edward Island took a few more years before joining confederation. We islanders like to think twice before we embark on any serious adventure, but in 1873 we felt that Canada was ready for us. It has now been 100 wonderful years and, needless to say, we have never regretted our decision nor do we regret it now.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: As hon. members will know, the celebrations of our centennial have already started. We were privileged to have His Excellency the Governor General and Mrs. Michener officially open the centennial celebrations at the beginning of January. As was pointed out in the Speech from the Throne, we will be honoured by a visit by Her Majesty the Queen, later this year. Needless to say, Sir, all islanders look forward with great excitement to that historic occasion. If I may at this point, Mr. Speaker, I would like to extend, on behalf of all islanders, a most cordial invitation to all members of this House to visit us during our centennial year. Even hon. members opposite are invited!


Mr. Marshall:: Transportation free?


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: For a short while islanders are prepared to forget even their politics and, God knows, this is not always too easy. It is our birthday and we invite you to come and celebrate it with us. It will be a year to remember for those who are lucky enough to be islanders and all those who wish they were.
Having regard to the island, Sir, there are a few points I should like to touch on briefly. Hon. members will recall that a comprehensive development plan came into effect in March, 1969. Implementation of the plan covers the 15 years from 1969 to 1984 and it involves further development of all major areas of activity on the island-from agriculture to tourist facilities, from fisheries to manufacturing industries and many other fields of activity. May I simply recall here that federal participation in the plan is in the order or $225 million.
In the agricultural sector a new family farm program has been initiated. Under this program, grants of up to $6,000 are available to farm operators who can demonstrate through the presentation of a five-year plan that a
[Mr. MacDonald (Cardigan).l
grant would improve their net income. The response to the program has been encouraging and it is evident that farmers are taking advantage of the results of research and agricultural counselling and are recommending modern agricultural practice in both the planning and implementation of their proposals.
The Land Development Corporation, a provincial Crown corporation, is also supported with DREE funds and provides many programs to assist farmers in the expansion and improvement of their operations. DREE has provided financial assistance in the design and construction of new or improved waste disposal systems for several food processing plants in Prince Edward Island. In addition, departmental grants of over $700,000 and loans of $1 million have been authorized for the construction of sewage disposal facilities in Souris, Montague, Summerside and Charlottetown. A road building program, in effect since 1969, is producing a system of allweather roads to assist the social and economic development of the province, at a cost of over $7 million in federal funds.
As a result of an amendment to the plan in 1971 making provision for federal assistance in the construction of educational facilities, schools at Ellerslie and St. Louis have been completed, and work is under way on additional facilities at Cornwall, Sherwood and the Murray River-Sturgeon school. DREE is also helping with assistance to home improvement projects and home ownership in Prince Edward Island. Grants of up to $1,000 are available for home improvements, and forgiveable loans of up to $4,000 may be obtained to assist low-income families in the purchase of homes. To date, approximately 3,500 families have benefited under this program.
As an attraction for the many tourists visiting the island, the two governments have created a major tourist attraction at Brudenell, where a resort and golf course were built at a cost of approximately $2 million. A major urban development is now under way on the Summerside waterfront. I might say, when referring to this item, that it brings back the memory of something going on today in Prince Edward Island. The minister of the provincial government responsible for this program, a very smart young man of 47 years of age, is being buried today. I say this with due respect to him and the contribution he has made to Prince Edward Island. This major urban development is now under way on the Summerside waterfront-at least that dear fellow saw it commence-where a modern complex of commercial buildings, a convention hotel and marina are being constructed, with federal assistance, on reclaimed acreage in the harbour area.
Before leaving the topic of DREE programs, sir, I would add that I was extremely pleased to note in the Speech from the Throne that not only is the government pledged to carry on its fight to reduce regional economic disparities but the Department of Regional Economic Expansion will be decentralized to a greater degree. I think such a move will be most beneficial to those regions directly affected by the DREE programs, one of those regions being, of course, Prince Edward Island.
I should like to say a word about another industry which is vital to the economy of Prince Edward Island, that is, our fisheries. The year 1970 marked a turning
January 17, 1973

point in Prince Edward Island's fisheries development with the catch that year exceeding 100 million pounds, double the normal harvest, and worth a record $11 million to the fishermen. The catch and landed value dipped slightly from that mark in 1971, but preliminary figures indicate that the 1972 catch will again be worth more than $10 million. Lobsters are, of course, the island's most valuable fishery resource, with a landed value estimated at $6.3 million in 1972.
During the current fiscal year, approximately $100,000 has been allocated by the federal government toward shared-cost, federal-provincial projects aimed at extending and modernizing the fishing industry in Prince Edward Island. Approximately the same amount was allocated in 1971. These projects include the technical upgrading of fishermen to improve their efficiency, various types of exploratory fishing, and demonstration programs of new fishing methods and gear such as oyster rakes, otter boards, power blocks for use on small vessels, hydraulic-bar clam dredges and refrigeration aboard inshore boats.
Considerable attention has been devoted to developing the island's oyster industry, and during the past summer a new oyster leasing policy was introduced covering the entire maritime provinces. It is anticipated that the changes will substantially increase oyster production and will improve management by encouraging large lease holdings and the formation of small companies or cooperative fishing associations.
The opening of a new school of fisheries at Summer-side, Prince Edward Island, last fall reflects the importance which the provincial government places on the development of the island's fishing industry and the need to keep its fishermen abreast of modern techniques and technology.
I was pleased the other day to hear my colleague, the Minister of the Environment and Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Davis), talk about new legislation that will provide financial assistance to small inshore fishermen who require ice-making, ice storage and fish-chilling facilities. As the minister pointed out in his speech, this legislation will be particularly helpful to the disadvantaged parts of the country. I was happy to hear the minister say that as a result of this new legislation the earnings of all our inshore fishermen should be increased by about 30 per cent. That indeed is very good news to the inshore fishermen.
My remarks about some of the issues pertaining to Prince Edward Island would not be complete without a word on transportation. We islanders are blessed with many advantages that mainlanders may not know about, but transportation in general and transportation costs are still problems that we have to face on a daily basis. Some progress is being made in that regard, but much remains to be done.
With regard to freight rates, I am particularly pleased that this government has announced its intention to meet with provincial governments to examine the impact of freight rates on economic development and consumer prices. While I do not believe that lower freight rates are
The Address-Mr. D. J. MacDonald
the complete answer to the transportation problem of the Atlantic provinces, I do believe positive action must be taken to ensure economic transportation access to markets in central Canada for Atlantic provinces producers. I am encouraged by the co-operative attitude of the railways with whom the Minister of Transport (Mr. Mar-chand) has discussed this matter. Also, a closer interfacing with DREE is now envisaged and will help.
I am aware of the large amount of subsidy money, about $20 million per year, already contributed directly to transportation movements by road and rail under the Maritime Freight Rates Act and the Atlantic Region Freight Assistance Act. I am pleased to note the activities of the federal-provincial committee on Atlantic region transportation, working in co-operation with the Atlantic provinces transportation commission, to find more effective ways of spending this subsidy money, currently disbursed on a blanket basis for almost all commodity movements within and from the Atlantic provinces. I hope this work will help to provide some indication of how the over-all moneys might be channelled into more effectively solving this particular problem, that is, maintaining access to the eastern markets and offsetting transportation costs which are most disadvantageous to our region.
Another particular concern of my province is that of the future of the rail car fleet for moving potatoes. Within the next few years this fleet will be due for replacement. The impact of such replacement on rates for moving potatoes could be quite dramatic. This is a matter which might well be an item for discussion in the upcoming federal-provincial meeting on consumer prices. I am aware that the solution need not lie exclusively in the rail mode.
In so far as the ferry services to Prince Edward Island from the mainland are concerned, particularly with respect to the centennial year, I am pleased to note that plans have been implemented that should provide a service that will have even more increased capacity than P.E.I. enjoyed this past summer. In fact, in the planning a traffic increase of 17 per cent was used, to allow a sufficient margin for such an important event as the P.E.I. centennial celebration. To meet the projected demand, MV Lucy Maud Montgomery will be taken from the Newfoundland service and added to last year's fleet on the Borden-Cape Tormentine route.


Jack Marshall: Watch it.


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: I thank the hon. member for his vote. Additionally, capacity was increased on the Wood Islands-Caribou service by 50 per cent by adding the new ferry, MV Prince Edward, in November, 1972. With these additions, I believe the previous high standard of service that was established in 1972 will be not only maintained but enhanced.
I would now like to say a few words about my own department. Having been elected Member of Parliament for Cardigan, I came to Ottawa, like any other freshman MP, ready to tackle the job. Needless to say, I was pleased, surprised and honoured when the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) asked me to become Minister of Veterans Affairs. As hon. members may know, I have had a very close relationship with the department for a good number of years, and I believe I had a fair knowledge of the

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. D. J. MacDonald department even before I came here. I realize that there is still a good deal to be learned.
After nearly 30 years of observation and experience of the veterans affairs department and agencies from the output point of view, I have been most interested to be able to study it from the input end. This I have been doing pretty intensively for the past two months. I am not going to take time on this occasion to talk at length about the Department of Veterans Affairs programs and achievements, however desirable that might be, but I do want to say a few words on two or three points that I think are of interest both to hon. members and to veterans in Canada.
The first point concerns pensions; more specifically, the basic rate of pensions. My ministerial legacy included a report on this subject by a joint study group composed of representatives of veterans' associations, the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Canadian Pension Commission. It was set up last July under the chairmanship of Allan O. Solomon, commission chairman, and its findings were announced early last November jointly by my predecessor Hon. Arthur Laing, now Senator Laing, and Robert Smellie, president of the Royal Canadian Legion.
In essence, the report recommends that the basic pension rate, which is the amount of compensation paid to an unmarried, 100 per cent disability pensioner, should be related directly to the earning power of five categories of unskilled employees in the federal public service. At pay rates in effect at the time the report was presented, that would make for a basic rate of $4,529 per year and that was the figure recommended in the report. As I pointed out in this House the other day, when the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs has been reconstituted I will introduce a resolution referring the report to the standing committee.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: My second point also concerns pensions-the adjudication of pension claims and why decisions are sometimes months in coming. I want to begin my comments on this point by saying that the chairman of the Pension Review Board and the chairman of the Canadian Pension Commission, the two adjudicating agencies, believe that their primary responsibility is to award pensions; they do not consider themselves to be guardians of the privy purse. I support them wholeheartedly in that philosophy. At the same time they, and I, realize that pension entitlement cannot be awarded irresponsibly, that enough credible evidence must be presented to justify a favourable decision being rendered on a claim.
The other pensions agency, the Bureau of Pensions Advocates, and the veterans' associations go to great lengths to obtain and present that evidence. But not generally known-certainly, I did not know it until recently- is the magnitude of the problem that has been faced by the Canadian Pension Commission which is responsible for the first two levels of the adjudication of claims.
The 1971 amendments to the Pension Act were described by the then minister of veterans affairs, the hon. member for Restigouche (Mr. Dube), as the most

extensive and comprehensive in half a century, giving Canada what I am sure is a world model for legislation dealing with compensation for disability and death related to military service. But perhaps of greater improtance from the veterans' point of view was the removal of restrictions and the expansion of the basis for pensions claims, a more generous definition of the benefit of the doubt clause, an improved adjudication procedure and a more liberal attitude toward pension claims generally.
It was a new ball game for pension applicants and also for the commissioners and the commissions' employees. The implications of the amended act had to be carefully considered, new procedures had to be worked out, new staff had to be found and trained, old employees had to be retrained, priorities had to be established and potential claimants had to be informed of the extended benefits, including the three year retroactivity provision.
As expected, a deluge of pension applications descended upon the commission. It may be easing a bit now, but it has continued at a higher level for much longer than was anticipated; for example, applications in November and December of 1972 were somewhat higher than in the same months of 1971. Predictably, many of these claims were the renewal of applications that had been turned down under the old act, or were from widows who were entitled to apply under the amended legislation. Very many of these applications were for pension entitlement for medical conditions identified years after service which may be attributable to incidents that took place 30 to 50 years ago.
Regardless of whether the end result is a favourable decision or an adverse one, the medical appreciation of a claim and the ultimate adjudication of it is very time consuming, and the decision must be a written one. The law requires that it be in complete detail if it is unfavourable. Then, in addition to the time required for these procedures, many man-hours may be devoted to seeking or verifying evidence required to justify a favourable decision; and sometimes this hinges on evidence provided by commanding officers, comrades, archives, and so on, resulting in further delays while records and memories are searched and letters and reports are written.
There is more I could say about the reasons for the substantial backlog of claims and about the time required to render decisions, but I prefer to talk about the way the commission is handling this problem. All claims for pension had a fresh start under the terms of the new legislation, that is, as of March 30, 1971, when the act was amended. The act also provides that pensions may be paid from the date of application or retroactively for three years, whichever is the later. There is provision, also, for further extensions to compensate for administrative delays, if that section needs to be invoked.
The first priorities of the commission were the automatic awards to Hong Kong veterans and to the exceptionally incapacitated. These groups were dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the amended act during the 1971-72 fiscal year. Generally speaking, widows' claims now have priority, especially is they have been recently widowed, veterans of World War I and their dependants have priority over those of World War II, for obvious reasons, and priority is also given to claims where there is a social or medical urgency attached to them. Apart from
January 17, 1973

these special considerations, applications are handled as far as possible in the order of receipt.
Thus, I can assure hon. members that whenever a justifiably urgent case is brought to the attention of the commission it is given priority attention. In other words, so far as we are aware prompt consideration is being given to all claims where there is real need. Last fall seven more commissioners were appointed and they will soon be able to carry their full share of the load. Support staff has also increased substantially and more will be taken on as fast as they can be trained for these highly specialized jobs.
The cumulative result of these measures is that the output of the commission is rising substantially. This trend, and the fact that the trend of new applications is downward, leads to the conclusion that, hopefully before summer comes, decisions rendered will outnumber applications received. But even when the current backlog has been completely eliminated, much time will still be required to deal with the continuing flow of applications based on service of long ago. As I have already said, this type of application constitutes a large part of those now awaiting decision.
Before leaving veterans affairs subjects I want to say a few words about our treatment services. In 1964 it was announced that the government was prepared to transfer DVA hospitals to suitable public authorities, subject to certain conditions. Stated briefly, those conditions would guarantee adequate accommodation and satisfactory standards of treatment for veterans, and the continued employment of the hospital staffs at rates of pay and other benefits equivalent to those they enjoyed as federal public servants. Since then, several DVA treatment institutions have been turned over to such authorities, notably Sunnybrook Hospital in Toronto, Ste. Foy Hospital near Quebec City and, last November, Lancaster Hospital near Saint John, New Brunswick. Negotiations for the transfer of other DVA hospitals are in various stages of discussion.
I want to assure hon. members that the policy of this government on that point remains the same. Indeed, it can be no other way if we are to fulfil our obligation of providing satisfactory medical treatment for the veterans for whom we have treatment responsibilities. Very few veterans are now under 50 years of age, and it is increasingly difficult to recruit highly qualified medical and technical staffs for hospitals which are chiefly providing chronic treatment to older people.
I do not want to imply that the standards of medical treatment in our remaining hospitals are not high. We still have many well qualified, dedicated, medical, nursing and technical services employees, but it is becoming more and more difficult to replace those who retire, for younger professionals in the medical sciences prefer to work in hospitals offering wider experience and more constructive challenges.
Our responsibility is to provide quality treatment for veterans, and we intend to do so. It is apparent that in the years to come it will be more effective and economical to buy that treatment than to provide it, and our policy is to continue to work toward that objective.
The Address-Mr. Carter


Stanley Howard Knowles: Would the minister permit a question? Can he tell us what the backlog of applications is at present? I am referring to the cases before the Canadian Pension Commission.


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, I did not have my earpiece on, but I believe the hon. member asked about the backlog of applications at present. The figure may not be exact, but I believe that at present it amounts to 9,400.


Jack Marshall: Mr. Speaker, first of all I should like to congratulate the new minister on his appointment. In view of the fact that it will be impossible to get evidence on cases which go back 10 or 15 years, would the minister consider and discuss with the pension commission the relaxation of the benefit of the doubt clause, because it seems to be part of the problem? If we are going to give them the benefit of the doubt, let us give them the real benefit of the doubt. Will the minister take that matter into account?


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: Yes, I will take it seriously into account. If I might be allowed to elaborate for a moment, Mr. Speaker, some of us know of cases of veterans with whom we served. We are aware of something that happened to them, something that is not recorded in their papers. This is why I would be in favour of this suggestion, and I will bring it to the attention of the commission.


Mr. Walter C. Carter (St. John's West):: I should like to join other hon. members of the House who have taken part in this debate in extending to His Honour, the Speaker, my sincere congratulations on his re-election to that very important post. I have every confidence, as have my colleagues, that His Honour will discharge the awesome responsibility which has been entrusted to him with dignity and fairness to all members of the House. I would also like to extend to you, Sir, my sincere congratulations on your election to the very important office of Deputy Speaker. I am sure that you, too, will discharge your responsibilities with the same dignity and fairness to all members of the House regardless of political affiliation.
Needless to say, I am honoured to have been re-elected by the voters of St. John's West to represent them once more in this House. To other hon. members who were re-elected, I offer my sincere congratulations. To those who occupy seats in this House for the first time I wish the very best and I hope their tenure of office will be rewarding and fruitful to themselves and to the people they represent.
The Speech from the Throne opening this session of our twenty-ninth parliament contained very few surprises for the average Canadian. However, it does stand out as representing the fastest reversal, the fastest about-turn in government policy since the Prime Minister's recognition of the Queen. But I am afraid, Sir, that it contains about as much sincerity. It seems that the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) and his ministers have come to realize that people, their needs, desires and expectations must be considered top priority by any legislative body, and the House of Commons is no exception. People are very important,

The Address-Mr. Carter
and they were very much in evidence on October 30 last. The lesson learned by the government that day must be a bitter one indeed.
One must credit the government tor finally recognizing that something must be done to assist Canadians who are less fortunate than the majority. I am talking about the elderly people, the underpaid, the unemployed, those on welfare and those who are living in conditions that are less than satisfactory. However, it is questionable whether the government has in any real sense come to grips with the problems these people experience. It is questionable because although the Speech from the Throne sounds promising, it provides no real, fundamental changes in the programs being advocated as solutions by the government. The Speech from the Throne demonstrates clearly that the government has noticed there are problems in need of solution. However, it does not provide any assurance that the government is prepared to undertake any meaningful action to accomplish its stated objectives.
Representing, as I do, a Newfoundland constituency in the economy of which the fishing industry plays a very important part, I was most disappointed, but I might say not really surprised, to learn that the Speech from the Throne did not contain any reference to the fishing industry. The fishermen of my riding have become reconciled to the fact that the government is totally insensitive to their problems. The attitude of the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Dube)-I am glad to see him in the House this afternoon-toward the need for improved and additional wharves, landing and harbour facilities in my riding would make Scrooge look like a big-time spender. In almost every community there you can see evidence of neglect on the part of the government. Public wharves are allowed to deteriorate, in many cases to a point where it is not safe for people to walk on them, and those that are being maintained are so overcrowded as to make their use by fishermen almost impossible.
Breakwaters are required in many parts of my riding. I presume the same situation prevails in most communities in eastern Canada. Breakwaters are required to provide shelter for boats and other property. Fishermen are forced to haul up their boats from the water on makeshift slipways. They run the risk of losing their boats during storms because of inadequate shelter and proper haul-out facilities. For this I give full marks to the Minister of Public Works because it is quite obvious that he and the Minister of the Environment and Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Davis) are still battling over the old question of which comes first, the hen or the egg or, in this case, which comes first, fishermen or fishing facilities.
The Minister of Public Works refuses to take any action to correct these problems, on the basis that his colleague, the Minister of Fisheries, will tell him there is no need for breakwaters in St. Mary's Bay, or a wharf or community stage, because there are no fishermen in St. Mary's Bay. What the minister does not realize is that in order for there to be fishermen in that part of my riding there must be fishing facilities. That is why it is amusing to see the struggle that is taking place within the minds of both ministers as to what we should do first, whether we should provide fishing facilities or try to provide fishermen.
I say to the Minister of Public Works that if the government accepted its responsibility, if it performed the function that it was intended and supposed to perform, there would be fishermen in that area. I ask him to be more sympathetic to the needs of the fishermen in my riding. In Newfoundland and eastern Canada generally, wharves, breakwaters and other facilities are an essential matter. The federal government has responsibility to provide and maintain certain marine facilities in our harbours. These facilities are essential to our fishermen if they are to be given a fighting chance to eke out a living for themselves and their families.
God knows, the life of a fisherman is not easy even under the best circumstances, but it is much more difficult when he has to operate under these conditions, when he has to contend with a government, with the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of Public Works who are totally indifferent and insensitive to his needs.
Not only does the government have responsibility for the provision and maintenance of harbour facilities for our fishermen; it also has a responsibility to protect our fish stocks against the plundering of foreign fishing ships, and to protect our inshore fishermen against the encroachment of larger ships-I might say both foreign ships and local ships-which run rampant over their fishing grounds, leaving in their wake destruction and chaos.
Mr. Speaker, on numerous occasions I have reported to the Minister of Fisheries instances of foreign and local ships coming into the harbours and bays in my riding without regard to the fishermen and their gear. They use the fishing grounds and destroy gear, then thumb their noses at the fishermen and sail into the sunset, leaving no compensation to the people affected. Foreigh ships continue to plunder our fishing stocks, ignoring our rights and challenging our authority. This goes on without a word of protest from the Minister of the Environment or the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Sharp).
The fishermen of eastern Canada realized a long time ago, Mr. Speaker, that they were not going to get much sympathy from the Secretary of State for External Affairs. It is not hard to detect in his attitude his absolute dislike of fish and his indifference to the treatment of fishermen. I suppose we have to make some allowances for the fact that he is a big-time city slicker from Upper Canada. However, it is another matter when speaking of the Minister of Fisheries who now prefers to call himself Minister of the Environment. It cannot be overlooked that the Minister of Fisheries shows complete indifference to the problems of fishermen and the fishing industry. We are unable to forgive him for that. We expect our Minister of Fisheries to at least go through the motions of showing interest in what is happening and to support our fishermen in their fight for survival. We expect him to take a stand in their efforts to get protection against these twentieth century pirates who infest the waters of our coasts and our bays.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Walter C. Carter: We expect the minister to show concern for the lack of proper harbour facilities, and we expect him to

January 17, 1973

impress upon his colleague, the Minister of Public Works, the need for funds to help the fishermen of this country. Unfortunately, the minister is so wrapped up in matters pertaining to the environment and protecting people against pollution that he appears to have forgotten the fishermen. It is not my intention to play down the need for efficient laws with respect to pollution-indeed, I think perhaps more rigid laws are needed to protect the environment-but a great many east coast fishermen have problems just as pressing, for which no solutions are forthcoming.
It is very difficult for a fisherman of St. Mary's Bay in my riding, or in the Ferryland district or the Placentia area to appreciate this government's expenditure of $2 million on a navy when he is left to his own resources in order to protect himself and his gear against foreign fishing ships.
There presently prevails across Canada a severe shortage of family housing at reasonable prices. Despite past efforts on the part of this government to alleviate the situation, there appears to be no improvement when one reviews the statistical information on the cost of housing, building materials and land. For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, I cannot become enthusiastic over the Speech from the Throne proposals in the area of housing and urban development.
Most of these proposals are not new. We must remember that the Minister of Manpower and Immigration (Mr. Andras) had the same proposals ready for introduction at the beginning of last year. Despite the timing of the Minister of Urban Affairs (Mr. Basford), breaking open the cookie jar did not prove too profitable for the rest of Canada when he introduced new measures last June, although they no doubt helped the minister's election results.
Having studied the previous proposals and realizing their shortcomings and the insufficient impact they would have on the social conditions of this country, I cannot believe the minister has suddenly taken a turn for the better and that matters will improve in his department in so far as helping those in need of housing is concerned. On the other hand, if by some stroke of luck things have changed, the minister might be interested to know something about housing problems in Newfoundland.
An article which appeared in this morning's issue of the Globe and Mail gave statistics with reference to the housing problem in my province. It stated that Newfoundland appears to have the worst record of housing of any province. Regretfully, I have to agree with that statement, Mr. Speaker. We have very serious overcrowding in my riding and in Newfoundland generally. There are not sufficient subsidized housing units to accommodate the people who are desperately anxious for a decent place in which to live and raise a family. In my city, with a population of less than 100,000, there are more than 500 families desperately in need of public housing. Their names have been listed with the St. John's housing authority for quite some time, but there is very little hope of their getting better housing in the foreseeable future.
The average cost of a new house built under the National Housing Act in St. John's, Newfoundland, exceeds the average cost of the same house built under the National
The Address-Mr. Carter
Housing Act in other parts of Canada. That in itself is not so frightening, Mr. Speaker, until we realize that in my province and in my city the per capita income is far less than that enjoyed by other Canadians, in my province and in my city the rate of unemployment is higher than that experienced in other Canadian cities and provinces, and in my province and in my city the cost of living exceeds that in other provinces and cities.
When all these things are added together, I am sure it will be seen that there is a very serious problem for the average salaried, blue collar worker living in the city of St. John's and in Newfoundland in general. Mr. Speaker, we must ask ourselves how we can expect a person who is forced to live and raise a family in a home that is unfit for human habitation to appreciate the problems of national unity or the multimillion dollar spending spree of this government on bilingualism and biculturalism. It is about time members of this government, both English-speaking and French-speaking, faced a few very important facts of life. I should like to remind the Minister of Transport (Mr. Marchand) and the Prime Minister, who devoted their entire speeches in this debate to the problems of French Canada, that Quebec is not the only province whose people have problems and who in many instances are treated like second-class Canadians. I admit that in some areas these problems are peculiar to that province, but basically there is not much difference between the problems of Quebec and those of the other disadvantaged regions of Canada. These problems are as basic as bread and butter or meat and potatoes; they are as basic as the difference between have and have-not. Misery and suffering brought on by poverty knows no linguistic or cultural boundaries.
I would like the minister and the Prime Minister to appreciate that the extent to which the fishermen in Quebec must struggle for existence is no different from that of the fishermen in St. Mary's Bay in my constituency. The pleas of a child who is fighting to overcome the stigma of social welfare, struggling to make his own way, to find his place in the sun and beat the system that has forced him and his family on welfare, are no different whether they are spoken in English or in French.
I believe that the problems in Quebec and in other parts of Canada are not linguistic or cultural, as certain people would have us believe; rather, they are problems of people not unlike people in my constituency and in other parts of Canada who demand social and economic equality. Their problems are no different, no less acceptable and no less palatable than the problems of people living in Newfoundland or in other so-called have-not provinces.
I wish to make some comments with regard to the need for more and better legislation for consumer protection. We must recognize the fact that the rapid growth of consumer credit in Canada has created an urgent necessity for more rigid and restrictive standards of consumer protection. Lack of substantial controls and regulations in this area has allowed the public to be subjected to gross misrepresentation through false and deceitful advertising. Numerous worldwide cartels have imposed unfair prices and impositions on the consumer, with little opposition from the government.

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. Carter
Since the advent of television we have been mercilessly bombarded by the ingenious advertising gimmicks of Madison Avenue-type ad writers who have succeeded in giving their usurious clients an almost divine right to the minds, bodies and souls and, in many cases, the future earnings of unsuspecting consumers. It is for these reasons that a definite program of government control should be instituted in order to provide protection for the consumer.
In my opinion, the following steps should be taken by the government if it is willing to embark on a crusade to end exploitation of the consumer. A reorganization of the Consumer Council of Canada should be undertaken to assume the position of the major advisory link between the government and the consumer. The council should be reorganized along the following lines. More money should be granted to aid its purpose; more research staff should be added to pursue the ways and means that could be implemented to combat consumer exploitation; membership in the council should be extended to include provincial representatives in order to provide a more realistic link between the government and the people; the reformed council should be independent of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. This would ensure an unbiased look at the situation as it now exists.
Despite the fact that the council would be independent of the department, it would still have to proceed with full awareness of the government's intentions for consumer protection. The council must have a clearcut definition of its purposes and its function. I feel this is very essential. The council's reports should be made public. Its independence from the department would ensure that this would be made possible. If the council is to be at all effective, it should ensure that the public is made fully aware of its rights and what laws and regulations assure these rights. I feel these are worth while suggestions and should be given very careful consideration by the government.
If such a course of action as the one outlined above is enforced, the public will no longer have the problem of assessing the value of products purchased. The standards set by the council will not only improve the quality of the products on the market but the consumer will be made aware of the value of what he is buying.
A perfect example of the need for consumer protection is the plight of those plagued by finance companies. The "bill-payer loan", which promises to consolidate all monthly bills into one, fails to get the basic truth across. Its deceit lies in the fact that, while consolidating bills might be a good idea, the interest payments are not. In effect, when a consumer is talked into this type of arrangement he is paying for paying his bills. While many will say that in the case of finance companies it is the fault of the consumer for not reading the fine print, it is not until he becomes involved in this type of arrangement that he realizes the effect bill collectors and collection agencies can have on the mental and physical condition of those in such situations.
In many instances people who have committed themselves to become overextended, credit-wise, and have fallen into the clutches of loan sharks have been driven almost to the brink of insanity and physical exhaustion by the merciless hounding of the usurers or their representa-

tives. Unfortunately, the vast majority of those who fall victim to these goings-on are those who through no fault of their own can least afford the costs involved and in too many cases are unable to look after themselves. All too often they are people who have not been permitted by the system to rise above the bottom half of the social and economic ladder in our society. They are the real victims of inflation, greedy landlords and selfish employers. They are the unemployed, the underpaid, the widowed and the exploited, the so-called have-nots. These are the people who because of their circumstances cannot afford legal counsel to protect them against the garnishee-brandishing, judgment-seeking people and money lenders who would have no more compunction about attaching a person's wages, home, furniture, the food on his table and the clothes on an orphan than they would in driking a double martini at their favourite country clubs. These are the people who continue to fall victims to the vultures in our society.
Since 1968, the government has passed ten bills dealing with consumer and corporate affairs. Four of them were amendments to existing legislation. The fact remains that the legislation was not properly co-ordinated; it was piecemeal. In addition there was a considerable time lag between the passage of a bill dealing with consumer protection and its actual operation. An example is the Hazardous Products Act which only became effective in January, 1972, almost two years after the bill had been passed by this House. The Packaging and Labelling Act was passed in June of 1971, yet I understand it has not yet been proclaimed; consequently, its regulations have no force in law. The government has been slow to ensure that acceptable standards of quality, safety and fairness characterize the production and sale of consumer products in this country.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. I regret to interrupt the hon. member, but the time allotted to him has expired. He may, however, continue with unanimous consent. Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Walter C. Carter: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have only a few more sentences-


Mr. Bell:: Mr. Speaker, may I say that I hope my hon. friend will take just a minute or two, perhaps, in which to conclude. We have a long list of speakers who wish to take part in this debate.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member has been given extra time and he may continue.


Walter C. Carter: I apologize to the House. I realize I may have gone beyond the time allotted to me, but I felt that the matters raised were of sufficient importance to my riding, to my province, and maybe to the country, if I may be so bold as to say so, as to justify a little extra time being taken.
I shall close by saying that the government should take immediate action in many areas to correct serious inequities which exist in Canada, including serious inequities
January 17, 1973

which affect the fishermen in my constituency and the facilities afforded them. I hope the government will, indeed, take action to correct these inequities.


Mr. Harry Olaussen (Coast Chilcotin):: Mr. Speaker, as a new member I have been impressed by the rituals and by the debates in the House of Commons. There is no doubt that the debates in the House play an important role in expressing the feelings of all parts of Canada through their elected representatives. As a new member from British Columbia it has been my privilege to meet members from various parts of Canada, most of whom, I am sure, are deeply concerned about the problems of their constituencies and the direction in which the country is headed. It is also my privilege, as a new member, to deal with the problems of my own riding and to take the necessary action.
A riding as large and as diversified as that of Coast Chilcotin has, no doubt, a diversity of problems some of which are brought to the member's attention to be dealt with as effectively as possible. I will touch on some of the problems in my riding, but first of all I would like to express my concern on one particular issue of interest.
Mr. Speaker, a good, reliable transportation system is the lifeline of a modern, civilized, industrial nation such as Canada. We have seen how transportation played a remarkable role in the opening-up and development of western Canada. We have seen how this country developed and grew as a result of the growth of a modern transportation system which enabled this huge country of ours to remain united in spite of the vast distances that separate the east from the west and the north from the south. We owe our existence as a sovereign nation to those who have struggled, sometimes under harsh conditions, to build, maintain and operate a transportation system which, despite some of its current shortcomings in many areas, can justify our sharing a sense of pride with all Canadians in the fulfilment of our national dream.
However, this pride gives way to a sense of guilt and shame when we consider that this country, one of the world's largest exporting nations and one of the most industrialized, has practically no merchant marine to speak of other than those ships engaged in coastal and inland waters. As an ex-merchant seaman, I am vitally interested in seeing this country develop a merchant marine, not only for economic reasons but also to give us a sense of pride in and respect for the maritime traditions which have been part of this country's development since the early settlers first arrived in Canada.
The subject of a Canadian merchant marine has been raised many times in past sessions of the House, and will undoubtedly be raised again in this and future sessions until such time as the matter can be resolved in accordance with the wishes of those who have repeatedly brought up the issue on their own behalf and on behalf of those who are interested in seeing the establishment and development of an active merchant marine. As a first step toward this goal, it is my feeling and the feeling of other concerned parties that the Darling report on the coastal trade of Canada and related marine activity must be implemented without delay.
The Address-Mr. Olaussen
Considering that services traditionally provided by Canadian ships and Canadian workers have been transferred to foreign flag vessels which are built, manned and supplied by other countries and are exempted from Canadian taxes, safety codes and labour standards, it is my fervent hope that members of this House will join me in endorsing the main recommendations set down in the report.
The first is that the Canadian coastal trade should be reserved to Canadian flag vessels only. Adoption of this recommendation would result in the employment of an estimated additional 40,000 seamen and shipbuilding workers, and would assure Canadian control over domestic shipping and Canadian sovereignty in our coastal and Arctic waters. Second, the development of resources in the Arctic and the offshore areas should contain conditions on the extent of use of Canadian shipping to be required. This policy would result in substantial participation of Canadian shipping and would be a logical part of any campaign to restore a Canadian flag, deep sea merchant marine. Third, the policy of issuing permits should be directed as far as possible toward replacing foreign vessels by Canadian vessels. Permits to non-Canadian flag vessels should be given only when Canadian vessels are either unavailable, insufficient or inadequate for the purpose. This policy would encourage the development of sufficient Canadian flag tonnage to handle all coastal trade requirements. Fourth, the reservation of coastal trade to Canadian flag vessels should extend to other marine activities, dredging, salvage, seismographic, supply and support vessels in offshore drilling.
It is recommended that marine activities in connection with the economic exploitation of the continental shelf be placed in the category of coastal trade and other marine activity which would be reserved to Canadian ships. It is unthinkable that the exploitation of Canadian resources should take place without the full coverage of Canadian law. It is also desirable that any exploitation of these resources provide the maximum return to Canada.
Fifth, government assistance to new industries in the marine sector should have attached to it conditions on the extent of use of Canadian shipping to be required. There is no doubt that shipping policy needs to be fully integrated into regional development policy, as recommended in this report, since shipping itself is one of the most likely possibilities for regional economic development, especially in areas such as the east coast.
It is my belief that there must be continual demands for a review of Canadian shipping policy, not only with regard to the coastal trade as recommended in the Darling report but with regard to the possibilities of a deep sea merchant marine. These studies, both of the coastal trade and of the deep sea fleet, are a necessary prelude to any development of an effective policy for the shipbuilding industry. Besides the many economic advantages to be gained from the development of an active Canadian deep sea merchant marine, this country would see to the training and development of a new generation of merchant seamen dedicated to Canada's maritime traditions, traditions that have played a very essential role in the growth and development of this country.

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. Olaussen
There is no doubt in my mind that a merchant marine as envisaged by me and others in the House will soon become a reality, reality that will result in an expanded shipbuilding industry on the west coast as well as on the east coast, one that will result in increased employment within the industry itself and in the other areas directly or indirectly associated with the shipping industry. Not only will the government derive more revenue from such a program but it will also be able, with this revenue, to offset subsidies that may be required.
Speaking for my province of British Columbia, I welcome a policy that will result in greater Canadian control of its shoreline in matters of pollution; I welcome a policy that will result in greater activity in the shipping industry, and I welcome a policy that will stimulate the economy and encourage the growth of secondary industry in the province.
It is indeed heartening to note that the government, in its throne speech, believes that a greater measure of decentralization of industrial activity is necessary and that it recognizes that western Canadians wish to build industrial strength on top of their region's great resource and energy base. It is also heartening to note that the government is suggesting improvement of the total transportation system, so basic to overcoming the problems of distance. This will be a matter of interest to my riding of Coast Chilcotin where federal-provincial co-operation is necessary in order to resolve some of the problems there, specifically with reference to a possible connecting line between the British Columbia railway and the Canadian National Railways in the Squamish-Lillooet area.
On the subject of the throne speech, it is also heartening to note that the government is interested in efficient communications between all parts of the country, that it will in the near future submit proposals for a national communications policy and for resolving problems arising from the growing interaction between broadcasting and other forms of telecommunication, giving due weight to the interests and concerns of the provinces. This will also be of some significance to my riding of Coast Chilcotin in which people living in isolated areas have little or no communication with the outside world and are virtually deprived of such facilities as are necessary in a civilized world. There is no room for little Siberias in a modern and enlightened country such as ours.
I welcome any significant changes that will improve the quality of life and benefit the people of Coast Chilcotin. I welcome the government's decision to recognize the needs of the western provinces and to take specific action as required in order to carry out its decisions. I have no doubt that the people in my riding will greatly benefit from the government's future course of action, one that can only help unite this country. It is the kind of action that has been long overdue, and if the proposals contained in the throne speech are carried out as promised there is no doubt that this country will greatly benefit from improved relations between the east and the west.
I assure you, Mr. Speaker, that the west stands on the threshold of a new era, an era in which economic and industrial growth will be accompanied by concern for the environment and a demand that effective anti-pollution standards must be enforced if industrial growth is to be
[Mr. Olaussen.J
encouraged. In my riding of Coast Chilcotin, great importance is attached to the environment as the riding is blessed with the kind of natural beauty probably unsurpassed by any other riding in Canada. It is our intention to keep as much of it as possible in its natural state, unspoiled by the blight of industrial growth so common to other areas of the world.
I am pleased to note that the government of British Columbia is anxious to bring about industrial development in the province and is also anxious to see to it that beautiful British Columbia will continue to be beautiful through effective pollution controls and concern for the environment. I am sure that many of my constituents in Coast Chilcotin share my feelings regarding industrial growth and the need at the same time to protect the environment. There is talk of zero growth in terms of population and industry; there is talk of wildlife protection, there is talk of unemployment, there is talk of pollution, there is talk of industrial growth, there is talk of improved transportation and communications, there is talk of incentives and government grants. These and other topics interest the people of my constituency because they are topics which are of great concern to western Canadians in their search for the good life. We must be willing to share their concern as Canadians, because by sharing their concern we can learn something about the good life and how to achieve it without destroying our environment.
This country has the opportunity and the resources to bring, not merely a higher standard of living to those who have so long been neglected but to improve the quality of life for all Canadians. I feel that in our search for a Canadian identity, in our search for the good life in terms of cultural and social advancements, and in our search for ways to preserve the environment, we are taking a course of action that identifies us as civilized and responsible people. It is a course of action that I approve and support. It is a course of action that is necessary if we are to enjoy the benefits of a civilized and environment-conscious country. However, we must remember that in our search for quality, human survival in terms of job requirements is essential. Not only is it important to reduce the high rate of unemployment that is part of our economic system; it is equally important to recognize the right of workers to organize and to have a voice in all areas of decision-making that affect their welfare.
It is unfortunate that in a country which believes in the sanctity of the free enterprise system there are more than five million unorganized workers who must accept a system in which human values are easily neglected in the mechanization of production. The master-servant relationship continues to be the only acceptable kind of relationship in the minds of economic and political dinosaurs who use any opportunity they can to discredit unions as scapegoats for our economic troubles.
The people of Canada have been led to believe that it is they who have to serve the corporate system and the corporate interests. It is not the people who have to serve the system, but the system that must serve the interests of the people, and it seems that members, who are elected by the people, are sometimes prone to ignore this fact. We
January 17, 1973

have an obligation to the people who elected us. Let us fulfil that obligation in the interests of the people.
Justice for the people means justice not only for majority groups but also for minority groups. The Indian people of Canada find themselves in perhaps the weakest position of all minorities. They constitute one of the most deprived groups of Canadian society. Their plight can be studied in the province of British Columbia in which
50,000	"status" Indians live, most in out-of-the-way parts of a vast and forbidding region.
One constituency in which almost a quarter of the British Columbia Indians make their homes happens to be my constituency of Coast Chilcotin. Large settlements are found on the coast at Sechelt, Powell River, Bella Bella and Bella Coola. Other large settlements are found at Squamish, Mount Currie, Lillooet and the Chilcotin country.
Early in this century the Chilcotins, like so many other Indians, were on the trail to extinction. That trend has been reversed since then, due to better health care and medical responsibilities. In the meantime, instances of violence and manslaughter continue to exist, and it is not surprising when one sees the misery, the alcoholism, the extremely high rate of unemployment and the lack of pride in an almost non-existent culture. This is the tragedy in which the Indians find themselves. This is the tragedy in which a once proud and resourceful race now finds itself.
However, progress is slow and the basic problems continue to exist. The government of British Columbia has taken the right initiative in areas such as financial assistance, education, legal rights and participation by native Indians in matters affecting Indians. It is time to realize that direct participation of Indians in all decisions affecting their development is essential, and that education must play an important role in their future development. There are very good reasons for the present high Indian drop-out rate and it is time something was done about this.
It has been my privilege over the past year to meet many progressive-minded Indians in my constituency who show deep concern for the future of their people. These are the people who have the capability of providing the kind of effective leadership that is essential to the future development of the Indian people. This is the kind of leadership that is required if Indian people are to participate directly in all decisions affecting their development. The paternalistic attitude of the government must be replaced by such participation on the part of the Indian people as a step in the right direction. It is my belief that we must focus our attention on the plight of minority groups in Canada, for there is no way in which a just society can be established unless we bring in effective measures to eliminate social and economic injustices which continue to exist in our society.
Mr. Speaker, in concluding my speech I wish to thank you for giving me the opportunity to address the House of Commons for the first time. May I also take this opportunity to congratulate you on your appointment as Speaker of the House and wish you every success in the dis-
The Address-Mr. Caccia
charge of your duties to the satisfaction of every member of this House.


Mr.   Chas. L. Caccia@Davenport: Mr. Speaker, each participant in this debate has opened his remarks by congratulating you and the hon. member for Stormont-Dundas (Mr. Lamoureux) for your election to the important offices which you hold. This however is more than mere routine. It shows a sincere conviction that the destiny of the House is in good hands and attests to the wisdom of its members. I so take this opportunity to join other hon. members who have expressed these feelings.
The Speech from the Throne includes proposals relating to almost every aspect of our nation's life and is in fact a varied and detailed program that has been welcomed by most hon. members. This response has indeed ensured the government of the confidence it needed to proceed forward and face the many and very real problems which confront any nation today.
However, what upsets me is awareness that some situations which should not create problems seem to do so, which tends to undermine the unity of Canada.
After 100 years of Confederation, the concept of bilingualism has found practical expression in the legislation of the country, and this due to the exceptional leadership of the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau).
I must however deplore the lack of understanding in some parts of Canada of the philosophy of bilingualism according to which a citizen should be able to communicate with his government in either of the two official languages. In fact, I find the persistence of this gap surprising. It might be less so to me if I were born in this country.
As all can notice from my pseudo Irish accent, I belong to the group of men and women who were born outside the boundaries of Canada and who deliberately chose this country to be their new fatherland. To put my thought in more simple terms, I am a Canadian not by accident, but by choice.
When, over 17 years ago, I was handed an immigration form to sign, it was bilingual. It should therefore not be surprising that millions of immigrants like myself instinctively sensed that they were entering a bilingual country. It was thus normal that we should consider that the controversy over bilingualism had been solved once and for all and that bilingualism was one of the values to be taken for granted in Canadian life. And this, not only in the text of the act, but also in our daily contacts with Canadians.
How can there be any hope of mutual understanding if we can only communicate through an interpreter? So long as all Canadians will not feel truly at home, whether in Quebec or in any other region of the country, we shall really not have achieved much in this country.
We must resolve this internal problem before we can consider dealing with the external problems that are in store for us. This is as essential as a close family relationship, when one has to be well prepared to face the outside world. If we are not united, how can we hope to sign agreements with the powerful European common market now that the United Kingdom is part of it? How can we

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. Caccia
negotiate with other powerful trading countries or groups if we fail to put an end to our domestic problems?
We can find in our country the full measure of its force and energy only if we understand each other. And we will not achieve that understanding about which we are so anxious as long as we need interpreters to communicate among ourselves. As long as such aids are necessary, in this House or elsewhere, we shall remain strangers to each other.
Mr. Speaker, I also wish to point out that our exports to French-speaking countries have increased four-fold since 1968. That fact shows that when referring to bilingualism, we are at the same time referring to our daily bread and butter.
I shall also deal with another aspect of Canadian life which seems to violently contrast with the state of mind of our time which bears the stamp of space exploration, scientific and technological discoveries, rapid growth, speedy development of communications all over the globe, the behaviour of provincial governments within the Canadian framework. For instance, we are being informed of the intentions of a province that pursues some restricted goals and individual interests, while taking no account of the rest of Canada, as if it were a state by itself, that considers that the federal government is spending too much in another province, that, finally, wishes to share all its natural resources while the other provinces oppose such a policy. No wonder that some people are asking themselves whether the provincial premiers really have at heart the interest of Canada as a whole and where our country would end if Ottawa allowed all those provincial bigwigs to have their way.
As federal members, Mr. Speaker, we consider that there are no frontiers. As representatives of the federal government we direct our efforts where they are needed. We lend money in places where there is unemployment or again we attend to the needs in the housing field. We are not doing it for New Brunswick, Quebec or Nova Scotia but for Canada as a whole. This is why we feel repulsion at anything that smacks of ethnic favouritism.
Provinces have a role to play in the attainment of Canadian unity. They must have a larger vision of the events instead of trying only to get money from the federal government; they must think and act with a view to attaining national objectives. If they are so convinced, they will work through the Canadian offices abroad instead of their own offices throughout the world.
That behaviour on the part of some of the provinces which set up their own offices abroad proves a lack of confidence in Canada. We see it again, Mr. Speaker, when the provincial treasurers refuse to cooperate with the federal government, when the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) makes reasonable suggestions to co-ordinate the loans required to meet the needs of the provinces.
That is why, as we start a new year, we wonder where we are heading. For my part, Mr. Speaker, the answer is quite clear: We must endeavour to achieve that unity which will make us stronger and allow us to face the problems that will assail us from outside. We must stop our internal strifes; we must not tolerate provincial

barons who pursue aims contrary to the national interest. On that highway that leads to Canadian unity, the provinces can and must play a positive role.
In addition, the daily practice of bilingualism, and not only its acceptances by all Canadians, can and must play a unifying role. We must accelerate and not decelerate, Mr. Speaker. We must not wait for the next generation to do it for us. It may then be too late. A bilingual Canada implies a multi-cultural Canada. Fashioned of all those strengths, Canada will grow richer.


Mr. Doug Neil (Moose law):: Mr. Speaker, may I first join other hon. members of the House in offering you my sincere congratulations. In the short period I have been in the House, your tactfulness and fairness in presiding over sometimes stormy debates and question periods have impressed me greatly. I also want to congratulate the hon. member for Halifax-East Hants (Mr. McCleave) on his election as Deputy Speaker.
As a new member, I wish to say that it is a great honour for me to be in the House representing the people of the Moose Jaw constituency. I will do my utmost to represent them in a good and statesmanlike manner and not betray the trust they have placed in me.
I represent a constituency where there are people of all racial extractions. There are people who came to Canada from various parts of Europe before the turn of the century to take up homesteads. There are descendants of these homesteaders, as well as newer immigrants-people of Ukrainian, Romanian, Russian, Finnish, English and Scottish extraction, as well as many others, all living together in harmony and proud to be Canadians. They are people who, while celebrating their national holidays and retaining much of their culture, place Canada first and foremost. I am proud, Mr. Speaker, to represent these people.
If any hon. members have travelled on the Trans-Canada highway through Saskatchewan, they will find, if they start at a point just east of the city of Moose Jaw and travel west to the town of Herbert, that this approximates the southern boundary of my constituency. The constituency stretches north from both Moose Jaw and Herbert to a line drawn east and west approximately 20 miles south of the city of Saskatoon. It is a large constituency, covering approximately 9,000 square miles, with a population of roughly 62,000. It contains some of the finest farmland in the west and, while a good deal of wheat and coarse grains are produced in the area, there is a large livestock industry. Potash and sodium sulphate are also mined in the area.
Within the boundaries of my constituency lies the Gardiner dam, an earthfilled dam some 210 feet in height, extending across the South Saskatchewan River valley some three miles. This dam is among the largest of its kind in the world. It dams the waters of the South Saskatchewan River and has created a man-made lake of mountain water some 140 miles in length, 185 feet in depth at the dam, with a shoreline of 475 miles. The lake is known as Diefenbaker Lake in honour of the right hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker) who as leader of the Conservative government in 1958 had the
January 17, 1973

foresight to enter into an agreement with the province of Saskatchewan to start construction of the project.
The dam is a source of power for the province, and the waters from the lake are fed into the Qu'Appelle River system, guaranteeing a domestic water supply for the cities of Moose Jaw and Regina. The project has created possibilities for extensive recreational development, not only on the lake itself but also by assuring a water supply in the Qu'Appelle River system. It has also provided a source of water to create Blackstrap Lake as a recreational area for the people of Saskatoon. It has made water available for irrigation in the Outlook area of the constituency.
Irrigation projects are costly in terms of capital investment, and many farmers who have become involved in an irrigation program are suffering from lack of capital. I suggest to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Whelan) that he and the officials of his department, when meeting with representatives of the province, give consideration to the development of a program to assist those farmers who are already involved in irrigation projects, as well as those who have land suitable for development.
The city of Moose Jaw, with a population of 32,000, is the only city in the constituency and is located in the extreme southeast corner. Moose Jaw is the home of the Kinsmen international band festival, the largest band festival in North America if not in the world. It is a three-day festival, held on the May 24 weekend, with competing bands and contestants coming from various parts of Canada and the U.S.A. It grew from a humble beginning in 1950, when there were two adjudicators judging 12 bands, to some ten adjudicators from Canada, the U.S.A. and Scotland judging some 70 bands, 700 soloists and 56 ensembles in 1972.
On behalf of the city of Moose Jaw I wish to invite all hon. members of the House and their families to visit Moose Jaw on the May 24 weekend this year to see one of the most spectacular band concerts and festivals in the world.
The Canadian forces base at Moose Jaw, a training station for Canadian and NATO pilots, is located three miles south of the city, and in 1972 hosted one of the largest air shows ever held in Canada. Some 125,000 people from the three prairie provinces and the northern United States attended. The commanding officer and his men did a commendable job, and it is hoped that with the blessing of the Department of National Defence this show will become an annual event.
The economy of the Moose Jaw constituency is primarily agricultural; there is very little industry. The proximity of the city of Moose Jaw to the capital city of Regina, some 40 miles away, has to a certain extent inhibited the industrial growth of Moose Jaw. There is a tendency for government at both the provincial and federal level to encourage industry to locate or expand in more densely populated centres. The result is that the smaller centres tend to stagnate and later deteriorate, losing the youth who have to leave their homes to find employment.
I hope that the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion (Mr. Jamieson), when considering programs and 25714-27
The Address-Mr. D. Neil
holding discussions with the provincial authorities, will give priority to the encouragement of industrial growth in smaller centres such as Moose Jaw and including some of the larger towns in the rural area.
I am aware of the fact that we on the Prairies cannot expect too much development in the field of primary industry, but there certainly is plenty of opportunity to develop secondary industries to process our agricultural products. This will require, however, the full co-operation of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion and a complete restructuring of our freight rates. I would therefore suggest to the House and to the minister that the development of secondary industry in Saskatchewan should be given top priority.
Saskatchewan has been losing population at the rate of
10,000	a year, primarily from the rural areas. Why is this happening? It is happening, not only because of the lack of industrial development to create jobs for the youth but also because of the fact that no attempt has been made in the past to retain the family farm. The loaning policies of the Farm Credit Corporation have been such that unless a young person had capital of his own, or unless a parent or close relative was in a position to assist him, he could not take up farming as a career. The result has been that farmers' sons born and raised on the farm and skilled in farming have no choice, on finishing their education, but to find their way into the labour market or professional field. Once established, they never return to farming.
The small farm development program will not solve the problem. It will require a widening of the regulations under the Farm Credit Corporation Act. I was pleased to hear the Minister of Agriculture indicate yesterday that he proposes changes in the act and regulations, and that he is open to suggestions. I imagine that he will be getting quite a few suggestions from many of the farmers and their representatives from the province of Saskatchewan.
I have been disturbed, however, by the recent announcements of the Minister of Agriculture. His news releases indicate that he advocates marketing boards. If he means marketing boards whose function is to develop markets for products, this is fine; but if he is talking about the supply management type of boards I would suggest to him that the farmers, particularly those in the west, do not want more controls, they do not want more programs like Operation Lift which by threat restricted the production of wheat and which cost the farmers approximately $600 million.
With all the starving people in the world today, we should be expanding the production of agricultural products by developing markets in the underdeveloped countries. The function of the federal government, I would suggest, is to develop these markets in co-operation with the other major grain producing countries in order that we can produce to the maximum and ensure stability of prices for the farmer.
I would now like to spend a few moments discussing the changes in the Income Tax Act as they relate to the farmer. For many years, farmers as well as fishermen were given the opportunity to use either the straight line part 17 or the diminishing balance part 11 method of

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. D. Neil
calculating depreciation. The majority of farmers I have dealt with have been making use of the straight line method. The few who have been using the diminishing balance method have done so at the suggestion of officers of the Department of National Revenue, much to their sorrow for they were locked into that method and could not change. This meant that on the sale of a piece of farm equipment they found that, unlike those on the straight line basis, they had to recapture the depreciation, if the article was sold for more than the undepreciated capital cost, and pay tax on the difference.
Under the new act, on new equipment purchased after January 1, 1973, a farmer has no option; he is compelled to calculate depreciation on the diminishing balance basis and to pay tax on any recaptured depreciation. With the rising cost of farm machinery over the past number of years, it is not uncommon for a farmer to trade in a piece of farm machinery, and obtain a trade-in price that is more than the undepreciated capital cost. This gave him a certain advantage when he was dealing in farm equipment, in that the difference in value between what he received for his trade-in and the undepreciated capital cost was not taxable in his hands. The effect of compelling a farmer to convert to the diminishing balance method of depreciation will, in the end, mean that the cost of a new machine is increased by the amount of income tax paid on the recaptured depreciation.
I think most hon. members are aware of the spiralling cost of farm machinery. For the government to add even more to its cost by the changes in the Income Tax Act is something that has not been well received by the western farmers. I would urge the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Stanbury) to consider seriously an amendment to the act to allow a farmer to continue to use the straight line or part 17 method of calculating depreciation.
Further, Mr. Speaker, the institution of the capital gains tax as it affects the family farm, coupled with the provincial succession duties that we have in Saskatchewan and with the recaptured depreciation provision, will have a disastrous effect at the time of the death of a farmer. Very few farm estates are liquid, and the combination of these three taxes will mean that farmland will have to be sold in order to pay them, thus destroying the farm as a viable economic unit.
I can appreciate that this subject may be discussed when the federal and provincial ministers meet later this summer, but I feel that conferences of this nature generally discuss policies and not the results of the application of the policies. Politicians and civil servants administering acts do not appreciate the implications of taxing statutes.
Perhaps the answer is consultation with solicitors, accountants and trust companies actively involved in estate practice, as they are in a position to give concrete examples of the hardships involved and of what the practical application of a change in tax laws can mean to a particular segment of our society.
There are a number of other matters of vital concern to my constituents, Mr. Speaker, but time will not permit me to discuss them this afternoon. They include such items as rail line abandonment, the rationalization of grain handling and transportation facilities, the marketing of feed grains, the effect of the elimination of the basic herd, the

Canada Pension Plan as it applies to farmers, low-cost housing, and pensions. I hope to be able to deal with these matters in the future.
Finally, I might say that while we in the west have sometimes felt ignored by eastern Canada and that we were being treated like poor relatives, we are proud of Canada. We believe in one Canada, a Canada that has regional differences but not a Canada of five countries, as the Minister of Transport (Mr. Marchand) suggested last Friday. We, as members, cannot afford the luxury of being supersensitive. We must be able to accept criticism or comment without taking it as a personal affront to ourselves, our constituency or region. The freedom to criticize or comment is basic to our democratic way of life. Criticism, Mr. Speaker, is not bigotry.


Mr. Mark MacGuigan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to join those who have preceded me in congratulating you and your deputies on your well-merited election to office.
Since there is such a short time left in the Speech from the Throne debate, I have been asked to keep my remarks very brief so that another hon. member can follow me. I shall try to do that, but I do want to say a few words about a very important subject which I do not believe has yet been broached in this debate, and that is the high water condition on the Great Lakes. I know that many other honourable members of the House-I mention the hon. member for Sarnia (Mr. Cullen) in particular-are very concerned about this problem and I want to bring it to the attention of the House.
In the past year we have seen some record and many near-record water levels established on the Great Lakes. It is being freely predicted that in 1973 all records during the previous 70 years of record keeping will be surpassed. For the sale of perspective I think we should keep in mind that as recently as 1964 the water levels on the Great Lakes were at a critical low point, but, while this may be some consolation, it is no solution to the problem.
The Great Lakes system is comprised of some 95,000 square miles and is probably the largest body of fresh water in the world. It is bordered by eight of the American states and by the province of Ontario, has some 10,000 miles of shoreline and there are some 40 million people living on its shores.
The lake in the system with which I am most particularly concerned is Lake St. Clair, not one of the larger ones but nevertheless a very important lake, lying roughly halfway between Lake Huron and Lake Erie. As I have mentioned, the predictions for the present year are not encouraging ones. One engineering expert forecasts that all previous records may be surpassed, including records of damage done in the past, and most recently the damage done in 1952.1 believe that in mid-November we had only a foretaste of what may be in store for us with the flooding that occurred in Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie.
There is considerable disagreement about what causes the present high levels. The position taken by the International Joint Commission, which has some responsibility for supervision in this area, is that there are no practical measures within its jurisdiction that can be taken to
January 17, 1973

afford relief. In its view any improvement can only be achieved by long-term changes such as are already being studied by the commission's international Great Lakes' levels board. In discussions with officials of the International Joint Commission I found that the tendency is to attribute the present high level of water to natural causes. While this may be the explanation, there are many people who feel otherwise. We have recently had brought to our attention a letter directed by 34 members of the United States House of Representatives to the President of the United States calling for action which would involve Canada as well as that country.
I have been in touch with Representative James O'Hara, one of the leading members of the group, and it seems to me that it is very important that we Canadians consider the proposals made by this group of American legislators, especially the suspicion which is implied in their views that the problem is, at least in part, man-made.
The three steps which these American legislators suggest to remedy the problem are as follows: first, significantly decreasing the amount of water flowing into the Great Lakes system from the Hudson Bay watershed. The water from two Canadian inland lakes has for years been diverted into Lake Superior for navigation and power purposes. They say they have been informed that the agreement under which this was done was a verbal one between United States and Canadian officials, and take the position that an arrangement as informal as this one should be readily susceptible to modification and certainly should not be allowed to continue to the detriment of the Great Lakes and the bordering communities.
Second, the Lake Superior board of control, an arm of the International Joint Commission, should agree to impound water in Lake Superior up to the limits currently permitted in the rules of regulation. By reducing the flow of water from Lake Superior into the rest of the Great Lakes system, the levels of these other lakes would be lowered and the threat of further flooding and flood-related damage would be eased. Third, the court case limiting the amount of water which the Chicago sanitary district can divert from Lake Michigan should be reopened, so that increased water can be drawn off through the Chicago ship canal, further lowering the level of the lakes in question.
The American Congressmen suggest that they were informed by an officer of the American Corps of Engineers in testimony before the Conference of Great Lakes Congressmen that these three steps, taken in concert, would result in lowering the levels of Lakes Michigan and Huron by eight inches in a year's time, with comparable but smaller reductions in the levels of Lakes St. Clair and Erie.
I am not competent to judge whether these proposals would in fact have the effect which the Congressmen wish them to have. There is a great deal of confusion on this subject and I think it is very important that the causes of and solutions to the present levels of the Great Lakes should be thoroughly and publicly investigated in Canada as well as in the United States. I believe that a committee of the provincial government is looking into this matter
25714-27)
The Address-Mr. MacGuigan
and I think that some federal body should be conducting a similar investigation.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mark R. MacGuigan: In addition to the question of the levels of the lakes themselves, Mr. Speaker, the damage which resulted from the mid-November floods showed us a number of the other aspects of the problem. For example, the Minister of Transport (Mr. Marchand) and the Solicitor General (Mr. Allmand), the latter through his responsibility for the RCMP, are involved with respect to alleged speeding by commercial vessels in the Great Lakes system. At a time of high water this speeding is especially detrimental to the shoreline because of the great waves which are sent crashing against either the structures which are there to protect it or in some cases the unprotected shoreline.
The Department of National Defence may be involved because of the insufficient number of sandbags for the protection of areas which are in the process of being flooded and the insufficient number of pumps for removing water once it has gained the land. The Department of Manpower and Immigration may be involved with respect to winter capital works projects. I have informed the three municipalities in my district, the city of Windsor, the town of Tecumseh and the village of St. Clair Beach, that they would be eligible for federal winter works projects, but I do not believe that any of them have submitted applications, although I think that the town of Tecumseh has asked the provincial government for some winter works assistance in this respect.
I suggest that the Department of Urban Affairs is also involved, Mr. Speaker. In the United States, in 1968 the federal government, through the department of housing and urban affairs, set up an emergency flood insurance program. It is difficult, if not impossible, for home owners to obtain commercial insurance which will protect them against the risk of flooding along the Great Lakes. Insurance companies do not look upon this as a very good risk for them. There is a serious need for a government program of insurance against flood damage in Canada just as there is in the United States.
The Department of Public Works is also involved because of the question of erosion. The Minister of Public Works has taken the position in regard to the waters of Lake St. Clair that because the distance to the navigation channel from the shoreline varies from 6,000 feet at Peach Island, which is the beginning of Lake St. Clair, to over
20,000	feet at Pike Creek east of St. Clair Beach, any erosion damage which occurs on shore is not sufficiently clearly related to commercial navigation to give rise to any federal responsibility. That part of my constituency along the St. Clair shore which was most severely affected by the storm would, therefore, not appear to have the right to claim any assistance from the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Dube) under the existing erosion policy.
Mr. Speaker, this may be reasonable as the response of a single department which is concerned with the administration of one existing policy which has to do with erosion caused by commercial shipping, but it is not acceptable as the total response of the federal government to the problem which has arisen in the past few months. There is also

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. MacGuigan the possibility that the Emergency Measures Organization may have a continuing role to play.
I do not want to overlook the other levels of government either. All municipal governments are involved. In Essex County, a conservation authority has been voted down several times but I believe one is likely to be set up at the end of this month. Such a body and the municipalities may have some direct responsibility in dealing with all flooding problems.
In addition, there is the responsibility of the provincial government. I have been in touch with Mr. Bernier, the minister of lands and forests for Ontario, and he expects to be able to announce his government's policy with respect to the problems of lake flooding by the end of this month. In general, Mr. Speaker, after having contacted with half a dozen federal departments, the provincial minister of lands and forests and all the municipalities involved, I have to say that there has been an inadequate response by government in general to this most serious problem.
I would fear that the lake problem is likely to worsen. What we need is some co-ordination of the activities of all governments and departments involved. Action is necessary at the international level, at the national level, at the provincial level-and perhaps some action involving the provinces and states together-and at the municipal level, as well as involvement of bodies like the Ontario Water Resources Commission. We must put the interests of all these governments and bodies of governments into manageable form so that we can have a coherent and total policy to deal with all the problems which result from high lake waters.
At the moment, Mr. Speaker, I see no signs that this is being done and that is why I want to bring it to the floor of the House this afternoon. Whether there is an immediate solution for the problems of high lake levels directly- that is, whether or not we can in some way lower the levels of the lakes-we must still deal with the consequences of the flooding which may occur. We must have policies for holding back water, especially in some of the low lying areas, and we must establish an insurance policy for home owners along the lakes. It is not a viable position for us to suggest to the lakeshores owners that they should move their dwellings or move off their land.
The governments of this country bear a very considerable responsibility to assist the individual who happens to be located along the lakeshore in his battle with these natural forces. I should point out that it is not those who live right on the shore who may be involved. The people who live further inland found in the mid-November storm that they were likely to be as affected. Once the waters cross-the barriers on the shoreline, they may keep on coming. In some cases there is no appreciable flooding at the shoreline, but hundreds of feet inland. Since all the land in Essex county is low-lying, this presents a problem for all property owners, not just those who live along the shore but those who live inland as well.
Perhaps I have said enough to indicate the seriousness of this problem. I must allow time for the following speaker. However, I want to reiterate that we need co-ordinated

action in this area. We need a coherent explanation to the public, as far as this is possible, by the federal government of the causes of the flooding and whether the solutions are as simple as many people believe them to be. Concerted action must be taken to deal with these problems. If we can have that within the next few months, we may be in a position to deal with the higher lake levels which may come in the spring. If we do not, we will surely bear a great responsibility to the people of Canada. I am not only speaking of the federal government but of the collective governments of Canada. They will bear a responsibility to the people in these areas for not having acted when there was time.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Knowles (Norfolk-Haldimand):: Would the hon. member permit a question?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order, please. The hon. member knows he can ask a question only with the hon. member's consent.


Mr. Duncan M. Beattie (Hamilton Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, it is with great pleasure that I rise and follow the many fine replies to the Speech from the Throne. This will probably be one of the shortest speeches, because of the time; but one of the best speeches I ever heard was also one of the shortest. It was an after-dinner speech. It consisted of only four words, "I'll pick up the check".
As a new member serving his apprenticeship in this House, I congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, and your deputies on your appointments to the prestigious and important positions in which you now serve.
I am indeed the fortunate one in representing the riding of Hamilton Mountain. I say this in all sincerity, because I collected only 40 per cent of the popular vote. Let me assure you now, though, Mr. Speaker, as well as the 60 per cent who wanted a representative other than me, that I shall be constant to my duties and I promise to do the best I can for my country, Canada, in general and my riding in particular.
From Mountain lookout the visitor enjoys a scenic panorama with miles of residential and commercial developments in the foreground; in the middle distance, the heavy industry of Canada's third most important manufacturing city and Canada's two largest steel mills, the whole framed by the dramatic Burlington skyway in the background. Front and centre in Canada's golden horseshoe area, Hamilton is the industrial heart of the nation, at the strategic west end of Lake Ontario.
Only one third of Hamilton's labour force lives in the actual city. As is the trend in most large metropolises, many workers now live in the suburbs and commute to the city. Today 30 per cent of the population lives atop the escarpment, hence the term "split-level city" and hence the name Hamilton Mountain riding, which I proudly represent. I say this with great humility, Mr. Speaker, as a member of a large family that emigrated from my native land of Scotland 22 years ago.
Last week two hon. members stated with great pride the fact that they now represent ridings formerly represented by fathers of confederation. Well, let me tell you, Sir, I
January 17, 1973

was born and raised in the shadow of Sir John A. Macdonald's birthplace and bring to the House an accent similar to that great statesman-with full apologies to the interpreter. Just console yourself with the fact that I cannot speak French, because then you would really be in trouble, although I admit it is a rare gift indeed to be able to express oneself as eloquently as the Minister of Transport (Mr. Marchand) did last Friday.
In that speech he reminded me of the village bully who also had the only football in our poor area. If we did not play by his rules, he picked up the ball and went home. It may be of interest to some hon. members to know that I never learned how to play football. I do, however, recognize something sinister cooking when the minister states, "If the atmosphere does not get healthier, I don't think we will be here very long". This is either a game of blackmail or a frantic plea to get on the post office calendar mentioned by the hon. member for Richmond (Mr. Beaudoin) as "Saint Jean Marchand".
Much has been said about the implementation of the Official Languages Act. Let me say briefly and with all the sincerity I can muster, if the real reason for the bill was to keep Quebec in confederation, then in my opinion it is the wrong policy being pursued for the right reason. Confederation has to be preserved by other means. The only way I know to preserve it is by having all hon. members playing the game by the rules set down by this House. Surely ethnic background, religion, language or political affiliations can take a back seat to this crucial but worthwhile task.
Now, back briefly to Hamilton Mountain. The problems besetting the riding, I would say, are similar to those of other urban ridings; problems such as unemployment, concerns of the general management of the economy and the high cost of serviced land. Although we have a high percentage of home owners compared to the city proper, we have little or no heavy industry. We do, however, have a regional airport which the transport department wants to expand and which many constituents would like moved out of the area.
The many letters I receive also express concern about our penal system, and in light of the fact that the Mary Nelles kidnapping made the news yesterday, accompanied by the kidnapping of the wife of the mayor of North York, I think it appropriate to mention the rehabilitation and parole system. Here is a case where four of the criminals served approximately 18 months of a five-year sentence. The reason for their parole: they were rehabilitated.
I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that these bandits were rehabilitated the day they were caught. But what about the deterrent? The ringleader, who is awaiting parole after serving three years of a 15-year sentence, has been having a ball running a ski resort in Bracebridge. I can only assume that the reason he is still in custody is that he does not want to leave. And who would? What other position would reward him with six weeks' holidays a year?
I try to allay the fears of the people by telling them things will get better with the new Solicitor General (Mr. Allmand). They couldn't get much worse. However, I do not want to be too critical of the former Solicitor General, the Minister of Supply and Services (Mr. Goyer), as I
The Address-Mr. Beattie
understand he is a lover of Scottish people. Rumours persist that after last year's prison break from Kingston penitentiary, he was going around whistling that famous Scottish tune, "Will ye no come back again".
Some hon. Members; Hear, hear!


Duncan M. Beattie: What faith, what confidence in the perfecta-bility of criminals! My constituents also write to me about capital punishment, an emotional issue on which I hope to speak during the debate. I also get letters, Mr. Speaker, about the punishment of capital. By that I mean the capital of those whose fixed incomes are rapidly being eroded by rampant inflation. I contend that more consideration should be given to people who have gone without many of life's luxuries in order to live the evening of their days in modest comfort.
I would say there is a great community spirit on "The Mountain" and many people work hard on various projects. The one foremost in my mind is the work done by volunteers in the fight against that killer disease, cancer. How much time will pass before we gain dominion over this disease? How many more lives will be lost? How many more will be blighted?
There are statistics, of course. It has been said that we North Americans are enamoured of those neat, bloodless figures. I shall not cite them here, impressive though they are, as humanity is not a game of numbers. Medical research, on the other hand, is very much a game of numbers. Increments, accidents and chance are still very applicable words to describe the processes of scientific research. But we have also learned that by careful organization, by systematic approaches, by co-ordinated efforts, by employing more highly qualified people and using more sophisticated equipment we can greatly affect the outcome of research. All of which is just another way of saying that the outcome of research is today as much dependent upon money as it is upon mentality. Money may not be the root of all progress in science, but it does possess the miraculous power to compress time. And we have at last begun to realize that time is what we are fighting against. Time is the enemy.
Now, what kinds of research are we going to buy? The priorities obsess our best minds. What comes first-population control or expansion of food supply; prevention of killer diseases or solutions to serious urban crises? Establishing a meaningful system of priorities in medical research is well-nigh impossible. Millions of dollars poured into one promising direction could yield nothing, while relatively modest sums expended in some other area might well bring about a significant advance. And there is always the possibility that one scientist may come up with something that turns all the priorities topsy-turvy, requiring an immediate shift of both money and manpower into some other hitherto unexplored avenue. Yet despite these obstacles, a massive assault on cancer deserves our support; for if it is successful, the same all-out approach might then become our means of dealing with other great scourges of mankind, medical, social and environmental.

January 17, 1973
The Address-Mr. Beattie
Within the medical field itself, the priorities are by no means clearly established. What shall be done with the limited funds available? There are those who continue to insist on emphasizing research into the leading killer diseases. There are others, equally insistent, who feel we have a greater need right now for improving the delivery of health care services. It cannot be denied that health care is still very much a cottage industry. We urgently need to improve our means of making quality health care available to great masses of people.
Must this be done at the expense of research? And if so, how long could we hope to stay ahead of the game without finding still simpler and less costly ways of preventing and curing serious physical afflictions? The dilemma is even: we cannot afford to abandon basic research, nor can we ignore the need for improved health care delivery. Somehow we must accomplish both of these objectives. But how? Perhaps the answer is implicit in another question, the one that asks, "If we can land men on the moon, why can't we find a cure for cancer?"
With increasing frequency these days, this question leads to a demand that the United States make the conquest of cancer a national goal, just as its moonlanding effort was. How simple a solution that appears to be. And yet in many ways it poses problems considerably more complex than those of getting a man to the moon and back again. For one thing, an all-out attack on cancer lacks the element of competitiveness so inherent in the space race. I somehow have the feeling that very few people in Canada or the United States would be very upset if we learned tomorrow that the Russians had discovered a cure for cancer.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order, please. It being 5.45 p.m. it is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 38 (5), to interrupt these proceedings and forthwith put every question necessary to dispose of the main motion.
Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?


Gerald William Baldwin: On division.
Motion (Mr. Blais) agreed to.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: That the said Address be engrossed and presented to His Excellency the Governor General by Mr. Speaker.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Allan Joseph MacEachen: That this House do, at its next sitting, consider the business of supply.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Gerald William Baldwin: Including Governor General's warrants.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Is it the pleasure of the House that we call it six o'clock?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
At 5.50 p.m. the House adjourned, without question put, pursuant to Standing Order.

Thursday. January 18. 1973