1973-04-02

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


[Stage Direction]
First report of Special Committee on Trends in Food Prices-Mr. Cullen.
[Editor's note: For text of above report, see today's Votes and Proceedings.]

Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to draw to the attention of all hon. members the presence in your gallery of Karen Magnussen, the figure skating champion of the world.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I think all Canadians shared the thrill and excitement of Karen's dazzling performance recently in Bratislava where she unquestionably became number one. It was the culmination of 14 years of skilled effort, determination and remarkable courage. While she now may belong to the world, Canadians at home claim her as their newest and most charming goodwill ambassador. With her radiance, her grace and her obvious enjoyment of life, she will leave her mark wherever she goes. We wish her all future success.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


TRANSPORTATION OF ALASKAN OIL-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Mr. John A. Fraser (Vancouver South):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a matter of pressing and urgent necessity under Standing Order 43 to ask unanimous consent of the House to act on a matter of urgency concerning the decision announced today by the United States Supreme Court wherein that court refused to overturn a lower court decision blocking the trans-Alaska pipeline project and because there is known opposition to the tanker route in Congress. I therefore move, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver Quadra (Mr. Clarke):
That this House immediately strike a special parliamentary committee consisting of representatives of all parties from the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence, the committee on environment, the Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the Standing Committee on National Resources and Public Works to determine ways and means to respond to the present situation and to submit its recommendation to this House within 30 sitting days so that the Canadian position will be clarified, both as to opposition and regarding alternatives.


Mr. Speaker:: Under the terms of Standing Order 43 the motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


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


AIRPORTS
Hon. lean-Eudes Dube (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 41(2) I would like to lay on the table the report of Mr. Isidor M. Wolfe, the hearing officer in the matter of the Expropriation Act with reference to the Cora Brown and McDonald subdivisions on Sea Island in the municipality of Richmond in the province of British Columbia.

Mr. Speaker, the report is being translated and will be available in French early next week.


COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. David Lewis (York South):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to move a motion under Standing Order 43 on a matter of urgent business arising out of the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission last Friday to give Bell Canada almost all that it requested in its application A. I therefore move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles):
That this House instructs the government to suspend immediately the application of the rate increases granted Bell Canada by the
26087-32i

April 2, 1973
Alaska Oil Transportation
Canadian Transport Commission and to give favourable consideration to rescinding the said decision.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: This motion also requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


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


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. H. T. Herbert (Vaudreuil):: Mr. Speaker, under Standing Order 43 I move, seconded by the hon. member for Montreal-Bourassa (Mr. Trudel):
That this House recognize that the United States has ended its military involvement in the long and costly Viet Nam war, that we applaud the conclusion of the Paris agreements that made this possible and that we endorse wholeheartedly the call of President Nixon for unity in the search for world peace.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: The House has heard the motion proposed by the hon. member for Vaudreuil. Under the terms of Standing Order 43 this motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


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


TRANSPORTATION OF ALASKAN OIL-REQUEST FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO MOVE MOTION
Mr. Randolph Harding (Kootenay West):: Mr. Speaker, I ask the unanimous consent of the House to present a motion of urgent and pressing necessity under Standing Order 43. The matter deals with the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, which was announced today and which will affect profoundly the future of the Canadian north and the west coast of Canada. Therefore I move, seconded by the hon. member for Burnaby-Seymour (Mr. Nelson):
That this House urges the government to enter immediately into meaningful discussion with the U.S. authorities and the government of B.C. on the subject of transporting Alaska oil through Canadian territory in such a way that our social, environmental and economic interests are fully protected.


Mr. Speaker:: The House has heard the motion proposed by the hon. member for Kootenay West. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


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


OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
Mr. Tom Cossitt (Leeds):: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 43 I have a motion which I consider to be of pressing and urgent necessity. It arises out of an unfortunate statement made on the weekend in Washington, D.C., and reported in the press today, by the Commissioner of Official Languages, Mr. Keith Spicer. I move, seconded by the hon. member for Palliser (Mr. Schumacher):
That this House reprimand Mr. Keith Spicer, Commissioner of Official Languages, for his reference to Quebec's English-speaking population as "Westmount Rhodesians" and furthermore, because of such bigotry on the part of Mr. Spicer, that this House request his resignation.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Chair has very serious reservations about the motion proposed by the hon. member on the ground that it includes, in my view, language which is not parliamentary in the sense that it contains a serious charge against a senior official of parliament who is not here to defend himself. I should like to hold the motion under advisement before I put it to the House.
These motions are of importance but hon. members cannot simply assume that because they bring a motion before the House it will be accepted automatically from a procedural standpoint.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: The Chair has to reserve its right to determine whether a motion of this kind ought to be put to the House and hon. members asked to decide whether there should be a debate. For these reasons I should like to hold the matter under advisement.


IMPEACHMENT BILL
Mr. G. W. Baldwin (Peace River) moved: for leave to introduce Bill C-168, respecting impeachment.


Some hon. Members:: Explain.

April 2, 1973


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, the incidence of illegal and improper actions by members of the government has made it necessary to bring forward this measure to declare that the right of impeachment to punish those in high places still exists, to establish rules for procedure, and to fix the penalty as dismissal from office and continuing ineligibility for two years, with no pardon.


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

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre): 1.	What was the total amount of money on the books of the pension funds of the Canadian National Railways as at (a) December 31, 1970 (b) December 31, 1971 (c) December 31, 1972?
2.	What rate of interest was earned on these funds during (a) 1970 (b) 1971(c) 1972?
3.	What amount of interest was credited to these funds during the years ending (a) December 31, 1970 (b) December 31, 1971 (c) December 31, 1972?
4.	What amount of money was added to these funds from employee contributions during the years ending (a) December 31, 1970 (b) December 31, 1971 (c) December 31,1972?
5.	What amount of money was added to these funds as regular or current contributions by the Canadian National Railways during the years ending (a) December 31, 1970 (b) December 31, 1971 (c) December 31,1972?
6.	What amount of money was added to these funds in any other way by the Canadian National Railways during the years ending (a) December 31, 1970 (b) December 31, 1971 (c) December 31,1972?
7.	Is money owed to the above funds by the Canadian National Railways and, if so, how much and what arrangements are being made to meet such debt?
8.	What was the total amount paid out of the above funds in pensions during the years ending (a) Dec. 31, 1970 (b) Dec. 31, 1971 (c) Dec. 31, 1972?


Hon. lean Marchand (Minister oi Transport):: The Management of the Canadian National Railways advises as follows: 1. The total amounts of the investments, cash and other assets in the books of the Pension Trust Funds were: As at December 31, 1970, $818,203,051; As at December 31, 1971, $870,758,014; As at December 31, 1972, $950,613,245.
2.	To calculate the yield we have used the Statistics Canada formula and the information requested in Parts (1) and (3). Under this formula, the investment is deemed to be: Opening Investments etc., plus closing Investments, etc. less earnings. On this basis, the yield is: 1970, 3.05 per cent; 1971, 5.55 per cent; 1972, 7.00 per cent.
3.	Net earnings on investments of the Pension Trust Funds were: year ended December 31, 1970, $23,984,003; year ended December 31, 1971, $45,103,796; year ended December 31, 1972, $60,803,818.
Order Paper Questions
4.	The amount of money added to these funds from employees' contributions was:
Year Ended	Employees'	Refunds
Contributions

31 December 1970	29,883,023	4,533,90431 December 1971	36,848,878	6,196,34531 December 1972	40,344,008	4,597,360
Net

25,349,119
30,652,533
35,746,648
5.	The amount added to these funds as regular or current contributions by Canadian National Railways was: year ended December 31, 1970, $32,634,760; year ended December 31, 1971, $39,494,641; year ended December 31, 1972, $49,144,802.
6.	Payments by Canadian National Railways against the Unfunded Liabilities in accordance with the Pensions Benefits Standards Act: year ended December 31, 1970, $600,152; year ended December 31, 1971, $2,326,714; year ended December 31, 1972, $4,579,425.
7.	As at December 31, 1972 Canadian National Railways owed the fund $2,273,543. This represents the normal monthly clearance paid off in January, 1973 arising from Company and employee contributions less pensions paid and refunds.
8.	Total amounts of the pensions paid out of the Pension Trust Fund were: year ended December 31, 1970, $53,714,534; year ended December 31, 1971, $65,022,721; year ended December 31, 1972, $70,419,462.


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	To what dollar levels has primary and secondary funding carried the DDH-280 construction programme as of December 31, 1972?
2.	What is the current anticipated total cost to the Canadian taxpayer for the four DDH-280 turned over after sea trials with full armament and spares to the Commander, Maritime Command for operational purposes for which they were designed?
3.	What accounting does the Minister of Supply and Services give to the Canadian people for the acceleration in total cost of this programme?


Mr. lohn M. Reid (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: I am informed by the Departments of National Defence and Supply and Services as follows:
1.	As of 31 December, 1972, $221,900,000 has been expended of the Capital program, and $33,000,000 on the secondary, or related, program.
2.	The capital cost of $252,000,000 reported to the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence on 19 April, 1972, is still valid. The related costs, which were reported at the same time, are now estimated at $43,900,000 instead of $42,270,000. The $1,630,000 increase is attributable to an increase in the development costs of the Sea Sparrow missile. This represents the proportion which is chargeable as a related cost to the DDH-280 program, and it includes the additional costs of evaluating the missile by means of test firings on a suitably instrumented range. This missile trial phase will not occur until

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
well after the ships have been put through normal sea trials and turned over to the Commander, Maritime Command.
3.	The Department of Supply and Services in its contracting activities responds to the needs specified by departmental clients.
The Minister of Supply and Services gives an accounting of his responsibilities to the Canadian people when he reports each year to the Standing Committee on Miscellaneous Estimates for the funds requested from Parliament for the next fiscal year.


Mr. Andre: 1.	How many full-time employees of the departments and agencies of the government are now engaged in scientific research and development activities?
2.	How many full-time employees of the departments and agencies of the government were engaged in scientific research and development activities on September 1,1972?


John Mercer Reid: I am informed by the Department of Science and Technology and Statistics Canada as follows:
1.	The data for this question is presently being gathered and will be available sometime in September 1973.
2.	The following table provides data on the number of full-time employees of the departments and agencies of the federal government engaged in scientific research and development activities as of September 1, 1971. Data for September 1, 1972 are not yet available.
Personnel1 Engaged in Scientific Activities Fiscal Year April 1/71 to March 31/72
		Related Scientific	
Category	R & D	Activities	Total
		full-time equivalent	
Executive	41	14	55Scientific and professional.. Administrative and foreign	4,933	1,601	6,534service	530	273	803Technical	5,537	3,600	9,137Administrative support....	2,048	1,830	3,878Operational	3,600	863	4,523Total	16,749	8,181	24,930*
'Excluding military personnel.
20f the 24,930 full-time employees, 22,947 were permanent staff and 1,983 were term, casual or seasonal employees.


Mr. Stackhouse: Has the government decided whether or not to proceed with constructing the proposed new Toronto airport, and, if not, on what date can a final decision on this matter be expected?


Len Marchand: The Government of Canada has confirmed the expropriation of
the land for the new Toronto airport at Pickering. The Government has also announced that an Examination Board to advise on the type and timing of the facilities required will be established, to report within twelve months. We have stated, however, that construction will not begin until this Board has reported, and also that arrangements are being made for those residents who wish to continue in occupation to do so at a nominal rent until December 31, 1974.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that a federal Human Rights Commission be set up that would (a) be directly responsible to Parliament, (b) have power to investigate the administration of human rights legislation as well as the power to enforce the law by laying charges and prosecuting offenders, (c) include within the organization for a period of seven to ten years a division dealing specifically with the protection of women's rights, and (d) suggest changes in human rights legislation and promote widespread respect for human rights?


Hon. John C. Munro (Minister of Labour):: The Department of Justice, together with the Department of the Secretary of State, has been giving serious consideration to the creation of a federal organization that would concern itself with the human rights of all Canadians, not only women.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Federal government include in its selection standards for appointment to its positions the assessment of volunteer experience in evaluating the qualifications of applicants?


John Carr Munro: I have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission. This recommendation has been implemented as follows: 1. On November 4, 1971 a directive was issued by the Public Service Commission to staffing officers in all government departments to include an assessment of relevant volunteer experience in evaluating the qualifications of job applicants.
2.	PSC application forms have been amended accordingly to provide ample space for inclusion of a description of volunteer work experience.
3.	All PSC selection standards now provide for the assessment of skills and abilities developed through education, training, paid work experience and volunteer work experience. In addition, the subject of voluntary experience has been incoporated as a curriculum item by the Commission on its special training program for personnel administrators. The Commission's new Data Stream guide also reminds employees to include relevant volunteer community affairs and part-time work experience, so that this information can be coded on an individual's data stream record.

April 2, 1973


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government (a) provide expanded, comprehensive courses for all public officials and employees and their spouses, working with Indians and Eskimos, to familiarize them with the cultures and traditions of the native people, including training in the native languages; (b) make available to Indian and Eskimo women education courses to provide at least functional literacy in either French or English; (c) encourage native women to participate in school planning and programming, and to serve on school advisory committees; (d) where it is not already being done, train native women as teachers and teachers' aides; (e) provide that teachers' colleges give special training courses in the instruction of English or French as a second language to Indians and Eskimos; (f) make sure that teachers' colleges provide courses in Indian and Eskimo culture, including training in the native languages for teachers planning to work with native people; and (g) make every effort to train Indians and Eskimos to provide the educational services in Indian and Eskimo communities now being performed by nonIndian and non-Eskimo public servants?


John Carr Munro: (a) New
employees entering the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development are given orientation and training concerning native cultures. There are 150 Indian dialects and 25 Eskimo dialects which create obvious difficulties. However, an increase in the number of Indian employees who have fluency in a major Indian language has alleviated the situation. Many courses are now made available through the education departments and universities.
(b)	The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development conducts a variety of courses in French and English for both Indian and Eskimo women. Literacy programs for women working outside the home are organized in conjunction with the Canada Manpower Assistance Plan. Courses are also conducted in the evenings on reserve and in the Northern settlements for women in the home.
(c)	The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development endorses the recommendation that native women participate in school planning and program. A number of school committees have been appointed to date by Band Councils and both women and men serve on these boards. In many regions, Indian women take an active part in parent/teacher association and home and school work association.
(d)	Various programs are available to Indian women interested in becoming teachers' aides. One of the training programs is in Manitoba where Indian women are being trained as aides to Kindergarten teachers. In 1969-70, the last year for which we have accurate figures, 26 Indian women were trained as kindergarten aides in the Manitoba Program. All of the trainees were given appointments. Similar programs are available in other regions and the knowledge of the native language which these people have is extremely valuable in enabling closer communication between the school, the pupils and the community.
While the Department is not a teaching college as such, it has with the assistance of Canadian Universities and the general public, encouraged the development of programs similar to the IMP ACTE program at Brandon University.
Order Paper Questions
(e)	Various summer courses and training programs are conducted at Universities for teachers who are involved in the instruction of English and French as a second language. In Ontario for example summer courses were held in 1970 at the University of Western Ontario and at Trent University, and full year courses was offered at the University of Alberta and the University of Manitoba in their teaching program.
As teacher colleges come under the jurisdiction of the provincial government, we can endorse this recommendation and encourage special courses in this regard.
(f)	Representatives from this Department have made contact with the Canadian Teachers' Federation and Provincial Teachers' Federation with a view to increasing the interest of the teaching profession as a whole in the Native cultures.
Universities right across Canada have developed extension courses in Indian and Eskimo Culture for persons interested in teaching Indian children. In many cases, Indians act as resource persons. These courses include not only aspects of the culture, but also the social and economic background so that the teachers of Indian students become a provincial responsibility.
We will continue to provide an increase in special training for teachers of Indian students in federal schools and, by agreement with the provincial governments, insist that special training and special education be given to the teachers of Indian students who become a provincial responsibility.
(g)	In recent years several Indian people have assumed administrative positions in education with the department and it has helped to increase the number of Indian and Eskimo people providing educational services to Indian and Eskimo communities.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government, in co-operation with the territories ensure that management training programs in the operation of co-operatives and small business enterprises be made available to native women as well as to men and be expanded to fit the growing needs of the northern communities?


John Carr Munro: The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development: 1) works through provincial agencies for co-operatives, where such are set up, by supporting their services and supplementing such when necessary; 2) arranges for service contracts if provincial services are not available; 3) provides assistance directly when no other source of services are available; 4) provides co-operative education and training facilities where necessary.
In the Northwest Territories management training programs in the operation of co-operatives and small business enterprises are, and always have been, available to native women as well as men and every effort is being made to expand such programs to fit the growing needs of native communities.

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
In the Yukon Territory the first phase of a small business management course was instituted in February 1972. The course was sponsored by the Yukon Vocational Training Centre and financial assistance received from Manpower and this department. This first 5-month phase consisted of upgrading the candidates to the grade 10 level via group sessions and visits by community members in government, legal and commercial areas. Women as well as men and husband/wife teams participated and 50 percent of the initial course enrolment was native women. A second five-month course began in September 1972 and 60 percent of the people expected to complete the course are women.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government in co-operation with the territories, include individual native women, as well as couples, in the program under which Eskimos and Indians are brought south on learning trips?


John Carr Munro: The federal government, in co-operation with the Territories, has always included individual native women as well as couples in the program under which Eskimos and Indians are brought south on learning trips. One of the first was a project entitled "Southern Exposure" under which a married Eskimo couple elected by the people from each of the settlements in Arctic Quebec visited many parts of southern Canada, and this practice has been carried on by the Northwest Territories Government with considerable success. The Northwest Territories has sponsored on several occasions groups of native ladies comprised of representatives from various northern communities to attend the Voice of Native Women conferences in Alberta and included in these projects were special educational tours. They also make a regular grant to the Women's Institute in order that they may retain a person full-time in the Territories. The Northwest Territories will shortly be sponsoring a conference of 20 women from all parts of the north in Yellowknife prior to their going to Vancouver for a Women's Institute meeting and related educational tours.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Canadian Citizenship Act be amended so that there is no difference between the residence requirements for the acquisition of Canadian citizenship by an alien husband and an alien wife of a Canadian citizen?


John Carr Munro: The recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women to the Canadian Citizenship Act so that there is no difference between the residence requirements for the acquisition of Canadian citizenship by an alien husband and an alien wife of a Canadian citizen, has been sympa-

thetically considered and opportunity for discussion will be given members of the House at the time the new citizenship bill or major amendments to the current Act are introduced.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that sections 4 and 5 of the Canadian Citizenship Act be amended to provide that a child born outside Canada is a natural-born Canadian if either of his parents is a Canadian citizen?


John Carr Munro: The recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women to amend sections 4 and 5 of the Canadian Citizenship Act to provide that a child born outside Canada is a natural-born Canadian if either of his parents is a Canadian citizen, has been sympathetically considered and opportunity for discussion will be given members of the House shortly at the time the new citizenship bill or major amendments to the current Act are introduced.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Canadian Citizenship Act be amended so that either citizen-parent may apply for the naturalized citizenship of a minor child?


John Carr Munro: The recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Canadian Citizenship Act be amended so that either citizen-parent may apply for the naturalized citizenship of a minor child, has been sympathetically considered and opportunity for discussion will be given Members of the House shortly at the time the new Citizenship Bill or major amendments to the current Act are introduced.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that section 11(2) of the Canadian Citizenship Act be amended so that, in the case of joint adoption the child may be granted Canadian citizenship if either of the adopting parents is a Canadian citizen.


John Carr Munro: The recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women to amend section 11(2) of the Canadian Citizenship Act so that, in the case of joint adoption, the child may be granted Canadian citizenship if either of the adopting parents is a Canadian citizen, has been sympathetically considered and opportunity for discussion will be given Members of the House at the time the new Citizenship Bill or major amendments to the current Act are introduced.

April 2, 1973


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that section 164(l)(c) of the Criminal Code be repealed?


John Carr Munro: Paragraph 164(l)(c) (which in the Revised Statutes became paragraph 175(l)(c)) of the Criminal Code was repealed by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, S.C. 1972, chapter 13, section 12 which came into force July 1, 1972.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that section 164(l)(a) of the Criminal Code be repealed?


John Carr Munro: Paragraph 164(l)(a) (which in the Revised Statutes became paragraph 175(l)(a)) of the Criminal Code was repealed by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, S.C. 1972, chapter 13, section 12 which came into force July 1, 1972.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the words "of previously chaste character" be deleted from all the sections of the Criminal Code?


John Carr Munro: The Minister of Justice agrees in principle that the words "of previously chaste character" should be deleted from the Criminal Code so that the character of the victim would cease to be an element of an offence. However, as the proposal represents a new approach to criminal law, it is essential that it be thoroughly studied by the Law Reform Commission and by the Department of Justice before any specific amendment is proposed.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Criminal Code be amended to extend protection from sexual abuse to all young people, male and female, and protection to everyone from sexual exploitation either by false representation, use of force, threat, or the abuse of authority?


John Carr Munro: The Minister of Justice agrees in principle that the Criminal Code should protect all young people from sexual abuse and protect everyone from sexual exploitation. However, as the proposals represent a new approach to criminal law, it is essential that they be thoroughly studied by the Law Reform Commission and by the Department before any specific amendments are proposed.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that subsection (3) of section 23 of the Criminal Code be amended to apply to both spouses?


John Carr Munro: This proposed amendment was referred to the Conference of Commissioners on Uniformity of Legislation in 1971 who recommended that subsection 23(3) of the Criminal Code be repealed. Accordingly the Minister of Justice is prepared to recommend the repeal of this section the next time that general amendments to the Criminal Code are being considered by the government.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government whenever possible, assign female instead of male police officers to deal with women taken into custody?


John Carr Munro: The Royal Canadian Mounted Police has traditionally recognized the need for special consideration of females taken into custody as it pertains to their protection, privacy, modesty and hygiene. Accordingly, either professional matrons or women acting in a matron capacity are utilized whenever a female is taken into custody. The only exception to this would be if emergencies or isolation should dictate otherwise. The feasibility of engaging female police officers to perform these and other duties is under active consideration.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Prisons and Reformatories Act be revised to eliminate all provisions that discriminate on the basis of sex or religion?


John Carr Munro: A thorough revision of the Prisons and Reformatories Act is contemplated. When legislation is drafted it will be proposed to remove the provisions that discriminate on the basis of sex or religion, except for provisions which divide facilities for correctional or humanitarian reasons.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal, provincial and territorial governments co-operate in order to provide flexible and imaginative programs aimed at the rehabilitation of women offenders which would include (a) a system that provides appropriate living quarters, small "open" institutions where life

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
follows a normal pattern rather than institutional living and is integrated as much as possible with the life of the neighbouring community; (b) programs and services, such as education and vocational training, adapted to the needs of individual female offenders and taking full advantage of the resources of that district; and (c) personnel specially trained in dealing with female offenders?


John Carr Munro: A Special Programs Officer, Miss Johanna Hickey, was appointed by the Canadian Penitentiary Service in 1972. Her responsibility is in the area of minority groups including women. The Department of the Solicitor General is assisting 26 Community Residential Centres for men and women. Of those centres 19 are exclusively for women. Under existing legislation there is authority to arrange for the confinement in appropriate institutions in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory of persons convicted there to serve penitentiary terms. Negotiations are being carried on with a view to enabling persons from those territories to serve penitentiary terms closer to their homes. The role of the federal government in relation to female offenders serving sentences of two years or more is under review. It is expected that arrangements will be made in due course for the purchase of prison services in the various provincial institutions as recommended by the Canadian Committee on Corrections. Such an arrangement would provide greater flexibility in the treatment and placement of female offenders and will assist in the implementation of this recommendation.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission of the Status of Women that the National Parole Board make use whenever possible of members of band councils and government personnel, to provide parole supervision especially in rural and remote areas, for women of Indian and Eskimo ancestry?


John Carr Munro: The Ministry of the Solicitor General has entered into a contractual arrangement with three band councils in Saskatchewan to provide for supervision of persons who are released from prison on parole or under mandatory supervision.
The Ministry of the Solicitor General has a contract with the Native Counselling Service of Alberta to undertake community assessments and do supervision of Indian persons released on parole or under mandatory supervision.
Discussions are underway with Indian Chiefs of Alberta and Manitoba to assist in supervision of Native Peoples released from prison.
There are a number of informal arrangements for supervising Native People by the Band Chiefs or Councils.
The policy of the National Parole Board is to increase this type of participation.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Women's Prison at Kingston be closed?


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that a network of halfway houses for women newly released from correctional institutions be set up in centres across Canada, supported by public and private funds and operated by voluntary groups and agencies, in accordance with approved government standards?


John Carr Munro: In keeping with the recommendation of the Ouimet Committee Report 1969, the Canadian Penitentiary Service is planning to eventually phase out the Prison for Women at Kingston, Ontario, and to contract with Provincial Correctional Systems to provide service for female offenders who are sentenced to two years or more, providing that the individual provincial Correctional Systems for female offenders meet acceptable standards of treatment and training comparable with those established by the Canadian Penitentiary Service. The Ministry has recently initiated discussion with the provinces in this regard.
NAME	LOCATION


John Carr Munro: At the present time, there are in Canada 26 Community Residential Centres or half-way houses which accept both men and women as residents. Nineteen Residential Centres are exclusively for women and provide a maximum bed capacity of 220. Seven of these with a bed capacity of 67 are primarily oriented towards women ex-offenders. The Ministry of the Solicitor General is prepared to write contracts for the already existing half-way houses as the needs arise and they have been advised accordingly. During the current fiscal year, the Ministry has negotiated contracts for residential services, with payments based on services actually provided, with the following:


[Stage Direction]
SELECTIVITY	April-Sept. 72
Dismis House
Vancouver
Elizabeth Fry Society Elizabeth Fry Society Elizabeth Fry Society

Vancouver
Kingston
Toronto
Male and female ex-offenders Females, ex-offenders Females, ex-offenders Females, ex-offenders
[Stage Direction]
April 2, 1973
[Stage Direction]
Foundation
Order Paper Questions
[Stage Direction]
NAME	LOCATION	SELECTIVITY	April-Sept. 'The Inn	Windsor	Females, ex-offenders	NilPembina House	Manitoba	Males and Females	NilSociety, Ninette	Prince George	Prince George	Males and Females	2,120.00Activator Society	ex-offenders	Sancta Maria	Montreal	Females	NilHouse	X-Kalay	Winnipeg	Males and Females	NilFoundation	X-Kalay	Vancouver	Males and Females	26,232.00
Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Roval Commission on the Status of Women that the federa emment establish an implementation committee composed of a number of its senior administrators, to (a) plan for, co-ordinate and expedite the implementation of the recommendations made by the Royal Commission on the Status of Women to that jurisdiction; and (b) report from time to time to its government on the progress it is making?


John Carr Munro: Following the tabling of the Report of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women the government established the Interdepartmental Committee composed of representatives of departments and agencies whose mandates were directly affected by the recommendations. This Committee was responsible for global examination of the Report and related matters and the recommendation of policy guidelines for the consideration of Cabinet. At year end 1971, the Interdepartmental Committee submitted its strong and favourable report based on departmental reports and reports of the Working Parties.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that a federal Status of Women Council, directly responsible to Parliament, be estab lished to (a) advise on matters pertaining to women and report annually to Parliament on the progress being made in improving the status of women in Canada, (b) undertake research on matters relevant to the status of women and suggest research topics tha can be carried out by governments, private business, universities, and voluntary associations, (c) establish programs to correct attitudes and prejudices adversely affecting the status of women (d) propose legislation, policies and practices to improve the status of women and (e) systematically consult with women s bureaux or similar provincial organizations, and with voluntary associations particularly concerned with the problems of women.


John Carr Munro: The minister responsible for the Status of Women announced recently
the government's intention to establish as soon as possible an advisory committee reporting to the minister which would carry out the role envisaged for the Council proposed in the recommendation of the Royal Commission.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government enact legislation establishing 18 years as the minimum for marriage?


John Carr Munro: The question of the minimum age for marriage is being studied at the present time by the Department of Justice and the Law Reform Commission. The question was also studied at the last annual meeting of the Conference of Commissioners on Uniformity of Legislation. The Conference recommended on August 22, 1972 that the minimum age for marriage be fixed at 16 for both sexes and that consent be required prior to the marriage of persons under 18 years of age.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government change its passport application forms in order to indicate that a married woman may obtain her passport either in her maiden surname or in the surname of her husband?


John Carr Munro: The Passport Office began distributing new passport application forms to the public in September, 1972. The revised form "A" advises that passports are normally issued in a woman's married name, but invites a married woman who wishes to have her passport in her maiden name to write the Passport Office for this service.
April 2, 1973

Order Paper Questions


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government modify its policy so that a woman need not apply for a new passport after marriage unless she wishes to obtain it in her husband's surname?


John Carr Munro: This is existing policy. In addition, a new procedure will be introduced shortly as soon as an amended free schedule has been published to allow a married woman to add her married name to a valid maiden name passport.


Mr. Howard: I. What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Indian Act be amended to allow an Indian woman upon marriage to a non-Indian to (a) retain her Indian status and (b) transmit her Indian status to her children?


John Carr Munro: 1. Amendments to the Indian Act would result in fundamental changes in the criteria governing entitlement to Indian status and to membership in Indian bands. Because there is a case before the Supreme Court on this matter the government cannot take any action until a decision has been reached.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Criminal Code be amended so that the wife may be held to support her husband in the same way that the husband may be held to support his wife?


John Carr Munro: The Minister of Justice is prepared to recommend the repeal of this section the next time that general amendments to the Criminal Code are being considered by the government. He considers that support is properly a civil rather than a criminal matter.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Divorce Act be amended so that the Three-year separation period provided in Section 4(l)(e)(i) be reduced to one year?


John Carr Munro: Consideration is being given to this recommendation together with other proposed amendments to the Divorce Act. It is probable that amendments to the Divorce Act will not be proposed

until after a report on the Act has been received from the Law Reform Commission of Canada.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Divorce Act be amended so that the words "educational needs" be added to the list of exceptions where the maintenance of children over the age of 16 years may be ordered as a charge falling to the parents?


John Carr Munro: None. The courts have held that maintenance may be ordered for children over the age of sixteen who are attending school or university. This legal position has been upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of Jackson v. Jackson in a judgment given October 18, 1972.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the National Housing Act be amended to (a) permit the making of loans for the construction, purchase and renovation of buildings for day-care centres, and (b) permit the inclusion of space for day-care centres in housing developments, including university buildings, for which loans are made under the Act?


John Carr Munro: With respect (a) the proposed amendments to the National Housing Act (Bill C-133, which was given first reading in Parliament on January 30, 1973), include a provision for grants and loans to municipalities for Neighbourhood Improvement Programmes. These programs to be undertaken through federal-provincial agreement, will have as objectives the conservation and improvement of stable residential areas inhabited by low and moderate income people, the improvement of community planning processes and the promotion of higher quality community environments. It is intended that Day Care Centres will qualify under this proposal. With respect to (b) the National Housing Act already provides that all housing projects financed under the various sections of the Act may include appropriate space for purposes other than housing, such as Day Care Centres, in projects that provide family accomodation. This would include housing for married students.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government immediately take steps to enter into agreement with the provinces leading to the adoption of a national Day-Care Act under which federal funds would be made available on a costsharing basis for the building and running of day-care centres meeting specified minimum standards, the federal government to (a) pay half the operating costs; (b) during an initial seven-year period, pay 70 per cent of capital costs; and (c) make similar arrangements for the Yukon and Northwest Territories?


John Carr Munro: The federal government has acted on the intent of this recommenda-
April 2, 1973

tion by providing both the funds necessary to expand the number of day-care centres and by ensuring that certain standards are met. Recent amendments to the Canada Assistance Plan Regulations extend the scope of shareable costs to cover total operating costs, including depreciation on equipment and facilities, as well as purchase of furnishings and equipment. The provisions of the plan apply to all provinces, the Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories. In addition, a grant has been approved under the National Welfare Grants program to the Canadian Council on Social Development to conduct a study which has, as its goal, the establishment of national guidelines. Staff of the National Day Care Information Centre are co-operating with the Canadian Council of Social Development in this undertaking.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Department of National Health and Welfare offer an extension of advisory services to the provinces and territories through the establishment of a unit for consultation on child-care services?


John Carr Munro: Consultative services for child welfare and other related child care services have been available to the provinces and territories under the Canada Assistance Plan since 1966. In addition, a National Day Care Information Centre has been established with a full-time consultant on day care services as well as support staff. The recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women were a major factor in the decision to establish the centre. Furthermore, the Department of Health and Welfare has provided a grant for and is participating in a study by the Canadian Council on Social Development designed to develop guidelines for Day Care Services.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that birth control information be available to everyone?


John Carr Munro: It was largely in response to recommendations made by the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government in July 1970 approved the establishment of a federal family planning program whose mandate includes the dissemination of birth control information to all Canadians who desire it.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Department of National Health and Welfare (a) prepare and offer birth control information free of charge to provincial and territorial authorities,
Order Paper Questions
associations, organizations and individuals and (b) give financial assistance through National Health grants and National Welfare grants to train health and welfare workers in family planning techniques?


John Carr Munro: (a) As part of the federal family planning program, the Department of National Health and Welfare, through its Family Planning Division, provides on request, birth control information free of charge to provincial, territorial and municipal authorities, to voluntary associations and organizations, and to individuals, (b) This program offers financial assistance on a project basis to provincial, territorial, and municipal governments, to voluntary associations and organizations, and to universities for family planning services and demonstration, research and training projects such as the training of health and welfare workers in family planning techniques.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the criminal law be clarified so that sterilization performed by a qualified medical practitioner at the request of his patient shall not engage the criminal responsibility of the practitioner.


John Carr Munro: The Minister of Justice would take the position that sterilization is a matter for medical discretion and that sterilization performed by a qualified medical practitioner at the request of his patient does not "engage the criminal responsibility of the practitioner". Therefore, it is considered that no action is required to clarify the criminal law in respect of sterilization.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Criminal Code be amended to permit abortion by a qualified medical practitioner on the sole request of any woman who has been pregnant for 12 weeks or less?


John Carr Munro: The government is giving no consideration to amendments relating to abortion beyond those introduced in 1970.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Criminal Code be amended to permit abortion by a qualified practitioner at the request of a woman pregnant for more than 12 weeks if the doctor is convinced that the continuation of the pregnancy would endanger the physical or mental health of the woman, or if there is a substantial risk that if the child were bom, it would be greatly handicapped, either mentally or physically?


John Carr Munro: The government is giving no consideration to amendments relating to abortion beyond those introduced in 1970.

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission of the Status of Women that the federal Income Tax Act be amended in order that (a) the extra exemption allowed the taxpayer for the dependent spouse be reduced from the present $1,000 to $600 when the dependent spouse in under 60 years of age, and (b) the extra exemption allowed the taxpayer for a dependent spouse be the same as the individual personal exemption, when a dependent spouse is aged 60 and over?


John Carr Munro: Since the Report of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, the federal Income Tax Act has been amended to provide that the basic exemption to a taxpayer be $1500 and the additional exemption to a taxpayer who supports his spouse be $1350. The recent budget proposed that these amounts be increased to $1600 and $1400 respectively. The amount of the additional exemption is not dependent of the age of the dependent spouse.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that a federal annual taxable cash allowance in the order of $500 be provided for each child under 16 to be paid in monthly instalments to the mother as under the present Family Allowance system?


John Carr Munro: Action has already been taken in relation to this proposal. Bill C-170 before the last Parliament proposed to pay a federal annual taxable cash allowance in the order of $180 or $240 for each child under 18 in monthly instalments (of $15 and $20) to the mother. These allowances would be taxable in the hands of families with incomes above $4,500 at a special tax rate to be applied in advance of payment. This Bill did not receive third reading.
Further plans to improve the family allowances program are now being considered and will be presented to parliament in the near future.
An allowance of $500 a year ($41.67 a month) would entail a gross expenditure (before taxes) of $3.4 billion a year in place of the $640 million allocated for this purpose.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Income Tax Act be amended in order that husband and wife form a taxation unit and be permitted to aggregate their incomes, under a special tax rate schedule, in a joint return signed by both spouses with the option to file separately if they so desire?


John Carr Munro: This is a matter of tax policy. If the Government should decide to recommend an amendment to this portion of the Income Tax Act it would be announced in the usual way.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that a guaranteed annual income be paid by the federal government to the heads of all one-parent families with dependent children?


John Carr Munro: The Department of National Health and Welfare is giving serious consideration to ways and means of improving social benefits to people other than those in the age group of 65 and over, who already benefit through a guaranteed income supplement to the Old Age Security pension. Various low income populations are being looked at including one-parent families with dependent children. Various alternatives are being considered which will provide economic security without limiting the freedom of option for heads of one-parent families with dependent children. These will be discussed with the provinces during the course of the over-all review of the social security system commencing with the federal-provincial conference of Welfare Ministers in April. In addition, federal-provincial co-operation will be necessary to develop appropriate programs so that specific groups such as one-parent families will receive the requisite social as well as economic supports. There is growing impetus to the development of day care services; children of one-parent families have priority access to publicly supported centers.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that (a) the Guaranteed Income Supplement of the Old Age Security benefits be increased so that the annual income of the recipients is maintained above the poverty level, and (b) the Supplement be adjusted to the cost of living index?


John Carr Munro: This recommendation has been effectively implemented. Following the budget of May 1972, the OAS/GIS was raised to $150 monthly for a single pensioner, and $285 monthly for a married couple. Bill C-147, presently before the House, would again raise the level to $170 for a single person ($2,042 annually) and $325 monthly for a married couple ($3,515 annually). Although there is no existing statistical concept of poverty in Canada, Statistics Canada has established low-income cut-offs which have been used to delineated low-income families from other units. For the year 1972, these were set at $2,110 for a single person and $3,516 for a couple. It should be noted that the above annual income of $3,895 is greater than that of a family where the breadwinner earns the provincial minimum wage, (the exception to this case exists in British Columbia where a provincial supplement has raised the total pension to $4,800 for a couple over 65.) It is also significantly higher than what a two unit family, whose members are under 65 years of age, would receive in direct social assistance payments in all provinces. In May of 1972 parliament revised the Old Age Security Act so as to adjust both the Old Age Security pension and the
IMr. Munro (Hamilton East).]
April 2, 1973

Guaranteed Income Supplement according to annual changes in the consumer price index.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government in co-operation with native people, establish or expand friendship centres directed and staffed by people of Indian, Metis or Eskimo ancestry, to provide needed services?


John Carr Munro: Upon the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, the Citizenship Branch of the Department of the Secretary of State instituted a five year program to establish, support and develop friendship centres for native people. This program includes core funding of friendship centres for the first two years of operation, a capital fund to improve the present facilities of friendship centres, and a personnel training fund to secure development opportunities for friendship centre staff. Native people are encouraged to participate in all levels of administration and are, in fact, very active in the entire movement. At present forty one (41) friendship centres have been funded under this program and are located in Quebec, Ontario, the western provinces and the Territories.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government name more women judges to all courts within their jurisdiction?


John Carr Munro: Since the publication of the report of the Royal Commission three women have been appointed as judges. Madam Justice Mable VanCamp was appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court of Ontario in November 1972, Judge Janet Boland was appointed a County Court Judge of Ontario on January 27, 1972 and Madame Justice Claire l'Heureux-Dube was appointed a Judge of the Superior Court of Quebec on February 8, 1973.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Immigration Division of the federal Department of Manpower and Immigration review its policies and practices to ensure that the right of a wife to be an independent applicant for admission to Canada is always respected and that wives are made fully aware of this right?


John Carr Munro: The right of a wife to be an independent applicant is inherent in the Immigration Act and Regulations. The term presently used "head of family" does not mean the husband but that
Order Paper Questions
spouse who is financially responsible for providing the necessities of life for the family on a continuing basis. All immigration counselling officers apply this definition and in those cases where the husband cannot meet the selection criteria, the wife is being examined as "head of family". The possibility of making this fact known to all independent applicants by an explanatory note on the Application for Permanent Admission to Canada is being investigated.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Immigration Act and Regulations be amended by the elimination of the term "head of a family" wherever it appears in the legislation and by the substitution of the exact meaning which is intended in each case?


John Carr Munro: The Immigration Act defines "head of family" as that person in the family upon whom the other members are mainly dependent for support. Operational instructions to Departmental staff clearly indicate that this may be either the husband or the wife. The recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women with regard to this point have been accepted in principle and as soon as the Government's legislative timetable permits, appropriate amendments will be introduced containing more precise terminology which will in no way denote the sex of the individual.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Canadian Citizenship Act be amended to provide for the automatic resumption of Canadian citizenship by women who lost it because they married aliens before January 1,1947?


John Carr Munro: The recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women to amend the Canadian Citizenship Act to provide for the automatic resumption of Canadian citizenship by women who lost it because they married aliens before January 1, 1947, has been sympathetically considered and opportunity for discussion will be given members of the House at the time the new citizenship bill or major amendments to the current Act are introduced.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that (a) a Women's Programme Secretariat be established in the Privy Council Office for promoting a programme for equality of opportunity for women in the federal Government Service and the greater use of

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
their skills and abilities; (b) a Women's Programme Co-ordinator be appointed to each federal government department, Crown Corporation and agency, to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Canadian Forces, and to the staff of the Senate and the House of Commons to promote within the organization the objectives of the Women's Programme and to maintain liaison with the Secretariat; (c) the federal government organizations referred to above be required to give periodic progress reports to the Women's Programme Secretariat of objectives undertaken; and (d) an annual report be tabled in Parliament on the progress being made in the federal Government Service toward the objectives of the Women's Programme?


John Carr Munro: This recommendation has been effectively implemented by the following actions: (a) the establishment in the Public Service Commission of the Office of Equal Opportunities for Women whose responsibility it is to stimulate and facilitate career opportunities for women in the Public Service and to maintain a watching brief on equal opportunities for women in the employment policies, practices and procedures of the service, (b) A number of departments and agencies have appointed officers with the responsibility of promoting equal opportunity for women within their departments or agencies. In addition an interdepartmental committee has been established with representatives from 30 departments to co-ordinate activities in this regard, (c) Departmental representatives on the Interdepartmental Committee present quarterly reports on activities within their departments; (d) The annual report of the Public Service Commission includes a section on the Office of Equal Opportunities for Women outlining the progress being made by that office.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Canada Department of Labour conduct a survey of the use of homeworkers, including handicraft workers, their wages and their other conditions of employment.


John Carr Munro: The Department of Labour in its 1972 Survey of Wages and Working Conditions in Canadian Industry asked two questions concerning the use of homeworkers by Canadian industry. Preliminary tabulations of data on these questions are expected about the end of March 1973.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that women as well as men be admitted to the military colleges operated by the Department of National Defence?


Hon. James Richardson (Minister of National Defence):: It is assumed that the intent of this recommendation is to ensure equality of opportunity for young female applicants who wish to become officers in the Canadian Armed Forces, and that they should have the same opportunity for subsidized training as the cadets at military colleges. Although the military colleges are considered to

be a prime source of combat ready career officers, their graduates in fact comprise less than 20 per cent of the annual officer production. Students attending civilian universities under the Regular Officer Training Plan (ROTP) are subsidized to the same degree as are students at the military colleges. Due to the lack of facilities and unsuitability of the type of training available at the military colleges, women are now given equal consideration for subsidized training at civilian universities under the Regular Officers Training Program, the Medical Officers Training Program, the Dental Officers Program, the University Training Plan for Men and the University Training Plan for Officers. The opening of these plans to female applicants is viewed as a means of providing equality in terms of career development.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government provide special funds for young women and men to acquire university education, such as is provided for young men who attend military college, leading to a degree in fields designated to be of special interest for aid to developing areas, the terms to include commitment to some specified national or inter-national service?


John Carr Munro: No special program of this type has been established.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government set up committees to review all government publications concerned with the choice of occupations and careers in order to select and use only publications that encourage women to consider all occupations, including those which have been traditionally restricted to men?


John Carr Munro: Although no committees have been established, all positions are now advertised as open to both men and women. In addition see answer to question 390.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that (a) the federal government in co-operation with the provinces and territories set up a career information service in each local Canada Manpower Centre which would (i) include personnel specially trained to give information to women on occupations, training requirements, financial help available, and labour market conditions and needs, and (ii) insist on the importance of a broad field of occupational choice for girls; and (b) subject to consultation and agreement with the educational authorities, this career information service be offered to all schools of the area?
April 2, 1973


John Carr Munro: (a) Canada Manpower Centres provide a career information service through manpower counsellors who are qualified to give information on occupations, training requirements and labour market conditions to all clients, male and female. Where other forms of assistance are indicated to enhance an individual's capability to seek and retain employment, liaison is established with appropriate agencies for the provision of such services, (b) Regarding the provision of a career information service to female students, CMC staff over the years have been visiting schools to provide labour market and other occupational information to students and school guidance teachers. In their visits, the counsellors encourage female students to think in terms of a broad range of occupations. In the school year 197172, over 1400 secondary schools were visited by manpower counsellors for the purpose of occupational counselling, participation in "Career Days", distribution of literature or the provision of other forms of assistance. Discussions with provinces are planned early in 1973 to improve career counselling of Canadian youth, male and female.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that, pursuant to section 3(d) of the federal Fitness and Amateur Sport Act, a research project be undertaken to (a) determine why fewer girls than boys participate in sports programs at the school level and (b) recommend remedial action?


John Carr Munro: Since July 1972, the Fitness and Amateur Sport Directorate of the Department of National Health and Welfare has had on staff a women's consultant whose duties include, among other things, defining the problems facing women in sport, end establishing programs to alleviate these problems. Since that time the women's program has developed to the point of proposing various needed programs dealing with women in sport in the following areas: (1) Educational programs to ascertain the reasons behind the lack of female participation and programs to alleviate the problem areas; (2) Coaching programs for increasing the quality and quantity of women coaches; (3) Promotional programs such as symposias, films and printed materials on women in sport; (4) Establishment of an information retrieval center collecting and distributing needed materials on wbmen in sport; (5) Development of women officials for the 1976 Olympics and beyond. With reference to this particular recommendation of the Royal Commission, the above Educational Program will contract the services of physical education experts to: (a) research the present situation and ascertain the reasons why girls do not actively participate in sports; (b) make necessary recommendations to educational boards, physical education departments, and Sport Canada; (c) work through the appropriate channels in the school system to implement recommended programs; (d) establish effective evaluation procedures for the new programs. Implementation of this program is expected to begin in the new fiscal year.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government in co-operation with the provinces and territories ensure that information on the federal Occupational Training for Adults Programme reaches women outside the labour force as well as those employed or actively seeking employment?


John Carr Munro: The Department of Manpower and Immigration continually reviews its information program, and attention is being paid to whether the information being presented, and the media used are such as to reach women both within and outside the labour force. More specifically, the following action has been taken: Manpower training courses are being advertised nation-wide on the CBC network; arrangements have been made with a market research agency to carry out an attitude and awareness survey of manpower services and programs among women, one of the objectives being the determination of the most appropriate media to be utilized for reaching women.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government in co-operation with the provinces and territories expand and widely advertise the part-time training programmes offered by the Department of Manpower and Immigration?


John Carr Munro: The Department of Manpower and Immigration recognizes the importance of part-time training as a means of enabling many women to enter or re-enter the labour force. Parttime training courses are advertised in the local press. The assessment of priority to be given to part-time training under the Canada Manpower Training Program is based on the recommendations of the federal-provincial Manpower Needs Committees in each province and territory.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that section 3(b) of the federal Adult Occupational Training Act be amended so that full-time household responsibility be equivalent to participation in the labour force in so far as eligibility for training allowances is concerned?


John Carr Munro: Amendments to the AOT Act have been passed and the new eligibility criterion for training allowances has been implemented effective July 1, 1972. Under the new rules individuals become eligible for training allowances when they become eligible for training. In the July-December 1972 period the number of females entering training courses (under the new eligibility rules) increased by 35 per cent compared to the same period of 1971.

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Department of Manpower and Immigration, in co-operation with provinces and territories, develop policies and practices that will result in (a) an increase in the number of women undertaking educational upgrading programmes and training for more highly skilled occupations, (b) the enrolment of women in courses in line with their capacities without regard to sex-typing of occupations, (c) an increase in the number of women training for managerial and technical positions, and (d) the consideration by women of the whole spectrum of occupations before choosing training courses?


John Carr Munro: A number of steps have been taken by the Department of Manpower and Immigration to implement a policy of encouraging women to consider occupations outside the traditional female ones, and to refer such clients to a broader range of occupations for training and for employment. These steps include the following: A career information service in Canada Manpower Centres is being strengthened by an extensive program to produce reliable and detailed data on current and future manpower requirements and supply, by an automated client information system, by the development of a computer-assisted career counselling system, and by other measures. A position has been established at the Department's Headquarters to provide advice and functional guidance in the matter of employment problems of women. Regarding the sex-typing of occupations, the Department issued instructions to the field to consider female clients for a wider range of courses and to bring these courses to the attention of clients. Further action planned on this matter includes the advising of CMC counsellors to encourage female clients to consider occupations outside traditional female ones; to refer such clients to a broader range of occupations for employment; to ensure that sex-typing of occupations does not occur in its publications or advertising messages; to ensure that its publications will encourage women to consider a broad range of occupations in keeping with the individual's interests and abilities.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government, in cooperation with the provinces and territories, extend the present system of student loans to include part-time students?


John Carr Munro: The subject of assistance to part-time students is under active consideration by the federal government in close consultation with all provincial governments.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government, in co-operation with the provinces, provide through the

Occupational Training for Adults programme (a) training courses which will lead to a diploma for visiting homemakers for emergency assistance, the planning of which will be in conjunction with local welfare agencies, and (b) training courses leading to a diploma for household workers other than visiting homemakers?


John Carr Munro: Courses for various categories of household workers, including homemakers have been purchased under the CMTP. Because of the generally poor economic and social status of these occupations, the Department of Manpower and Immigration feels that further expansion of training depends on such factors as the improvement of labour standards and working conditions, market demand and earnings. The Department is prepared to enter into discussions with voluntary organizations and provincial agencies with a view to establishing a plan of action for improving conditions in these occupations.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that women be given the same opportunity as men to participate in any programmes at present or in the future, that are sponsored by government for the retraining and rehabilitation of rural people, such as those begun under the Agricultural and Rural Development Act (ARDA)?


John Carr Munro: The Adult Occupational Training Act, as amended July 1, 1972 provides that an adult who has not attended school on a regular basis for any period of at least twelve months, at any time since attaining provincial school leaving age, may apply to a manpower officer for occupational training, and the manpower officer may arrange training suitable for that adult, that will increase his or her earning capacity or opportunities for employment.
Further, the Canada Agricultural Manpower Committee, a federal-provincial body, has accepted the task of informing and encouraging rural Canadians, particularly farmers, vis-a-vis the availability and value of agricultural training courses which may be undertaken within the Canada Manpower Training Program, in co-operation with the respective Provincial departments of agriculture and education. The principles this committee has accepted include the need to re-structure courses to meet the needs of women, and to offer training priority to the farm-family partner who has primary responsibilities for the functions covered by the training undertaken. Moreover all women, both rural and urban dwellers, may apply for training under the Canada Manpower Training Program and be considered for training that is commensurate with their abilities and aspirations.
As concerns the Agricultural and Rural Development Act, it has been and will continue to be the policy and practice of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion to attempt to ensure that women are given the same opportunity as men in relation to retraining and rehabilitation available under ARDA and other programs affecting rural people. ARDA cost-sharing agreements signed with the various provinces contain specific clauses to safeguard against discrimination in employment by reason of race, sex, religion, national origin, color, or
April 2, 1973

political affiliation, as well as other provisions designed to ensure the equitable application of the agreements to all eligible people. While these agreements assign to the provinces, not the federal government, the direct responsibility for the implementation of the various programs, it should be emphasized that no complaint has been received by the Department of any discrimination in their application.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Department of the Secretary of State, through its Citizenship Branch, in cooperation with the provinces and territories, (a) conduct surveys in all areas of Canada where immigrants are settling to ascertain the special educational needs of immigrant women, (b) suggest programs by which these needs could be met, (c) make these needs and programs known to voluntary workers in the community, and (d) assist volunteers in the implementation of these training programs?


John Carr Munro: (a) The Citizenship Branch of the Department of the Secretary of State has made recent studies of the needs of immigrants, including immigrant women, in all areas of Canada where immigrants are settling, (b) Programs by which these needs could be met are under study, (c) and (d) The regional liaison officers of the Citizenship Branch work closely with voluntary organizations in the community assisting in the adjustment of immigrants. As studies are completed and programs are developed regional liaison officers employ them in their work with the voluntary sector.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government, in co-operation with provinces and territories, review language training programs in order to ensure that the needs of immigrant women are being met?


John Carr Munro: The Department of the Secretary of State is reviewing its language training agreements with the provinces to ensure that they adequately meet the needs of immigrants, including immigrant women. Preliminary discussions have been with most provinces on this matter.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government, in co-operation with the Northwest Territories, make sure that the education program in relation to housing is continued?


John Carr Munro: Home management supervisors have been working in the Baffin and Keewatin regions for several years for that express pur-
Order Paper Questions
pose and in both areas Eskimo women trainees work closely with the Supervisors with a view to taking over this responsibility as sufficient training is completed. Similar positions have now been established in the Fort Smith region and five trainee positions approved, all native northern women, to undergo training which will qualify them to take over senior positions in this field.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal commission on the Status of Women that the federal government encourage Eskimo and Indian women to take training in adult education for work in the northern communities?


John Carr Munro: The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development has been successful in attaining the support of a number of agencies for adult basic education and up-grading programs. Band councils, social committees, local school boards, provincial Departments of Education, Canada Manpower and others share in the planning, organization, administration and financing of these programs. More programs involving more women are being developed at present and it is hoped that the number of native women participating in such programs will increase substantially in the near future.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Governments and organizations which plan to use the Canadian satellite telecommunications system (a) consult knowledgeable women as to the types and quality of programs and the hours of scheduling in order to meet the needs and convenience of women in Canada and (b) include women professionals and specialists in all branches of program production and broadcasting so that women will have equal opportunities with men in the development, operation and use of this new medium?


John Carr Munro: Representatives of the English Services Division, the French Services Division and of Engineering Headquarters have been designed to study means of implementing applicable recommendations of the Report of the Royal Commission. Additionally, qualitative and quantitative assessments of the present situation within the CBC have gone forward to the Co-Ordinator, Status of Women. Measures to give effect to the above mentioned recommendation are part of the objectives for CBC personnel relations for 1973/74.


Mr. Howard: *What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that federal, provin-

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
cial, territorial and municipal governments provide financial assistance to citizens' committees operating Citizen's Information Centres?


John Carr Munro: Following the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, the Citizenship Branch of the Department of the Secretary of State has provided financial assistance in the amount of $97,942 to citizens' committees operating citizens' information and referral centres. The money has been distributed as follows:
Fiscal year 1971-1972: Hamilton & District Central Information Centre, Ontario, $15,000; Community Information Service of Ottawa/Carleton, Ontario, $10,000; Community Information Service, Russell, Manitoba, $8,000; Centre de reference et d'lnformation de Sherbrooke, Quebec, $8,000; Information London, Ontario, $6,000; Total, $47,000.
Fiscal year 1972-1973: Thorncliffe Information Post-Toronto, Ontario, $1,500; Weston Information & Referral Centre-Toronto, Ontario, $6,500; Rexdale Community Information Directory, Toronto, Ontario, $5,000; Bloor-Bathurst Information, Toronto, Ontario, $8,942; Information Orillia, Orillia, Ontario, $3,000; Information Scarborough, Toronto, Ontario, $2,500; Sudbury and District, Sudbury, Ontario, $2,000; Agincourt Community Services, Agincourt-Toronto, Ontario, $2,000; Community Information Service, Minnedosa, Manitoba, $2,500; Chimo Help Centre, Fredericton, New Brunswick, $6,000; Information Abitibi-Temis, Rouyn, Quebec, $5,000; Community Integration, Montreal, Quebec, $6,000; Total, $50,942; Grand Total, $97,942.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that, for the next 10 years, the number of women enrolled in each course in the Career Assignment Program of the federal Public Service be no less than 10 per cent of the total number of people enrolled in the course?


John Carr Munro: I have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission: There are approximately 120, or 3.5 per cent, of the women throughout the service, compared with 3,437 men, who currently meet the CAP eligibility criteria. Consequently, it appeared that the 10 per cent female participation target referred to in the recommendation would not be attainable. However, through continued special efforts, the 10 per cent level was attained in 1972, with 10 women out of a total of 94 persons participating in the CAP program during the year. This compares with a total of eight women out of 350 persons who had participated from 1968, when the program began, up to 1972. The Commission is continuing its efforts to ensure that all qualified women in the service are considered for nomination to this executive development program and in its efforts to raise the proportion of women eligible for participation in the CAP Program through increased training and development opportunities for women in the lower and middle management levels in the service.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that (a) the federal Public Service Terms and Conditions of Employment Regulations be amended so that part-time employees will receive pay increases on the same basis as full-time employees, and (b) collective agreements for the federal Public Service contain this provision?


John Carr Munro: (a) The
application of the Public Service Terms and Conditions of Employment Regulations to managerial and confidential employees excluded from collective agreements, has been modified to permit pay increments for part-time employees within salary ranges negotiated for employees of the applicable bargaining unit. If the collective agreement for the bargaining unit involved is silent on the subject, part-time employees are granted pay increments in accordance with the provisions of the Clerical and Regulatory Agreement. Generally, an excluded employee whose hours of work, on an annual basis, average 18 hours or more per week, receives pay increments. The increment period is determined through a formula which requires that a part-time employee work a longer period between increments in order to gain the same amount of experience as the full-time employee, (b) A number of collective agreements provide for pay increases for parttime employees, generally if their scheduled hours of work, on an annual basis, average 18 hours or more per week. The general formula for determining the date on which the part-time employee receives the increase is the same as for the excluded employees described above and results in the part-time employee obtaining an increase in pay when he has worked the same number of hours as the full-time employee is required to work in order to receive a pay increment.
Because it is a negotiable matter, any extension or modification of this provision will be determined by collective bargaining between the Employer and the Bargaining Agent.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that federal Crown Corporations and agencies (a) ensure that women scientists and technologists receive equal consideration with men for appointment, and (b) make a special effort to give graduate women employees a chance to take post-graduate degrees?


John Carr Munro: (a) Crown Corporations and agencies now afford equal consideration to women as to men for appointments in the fields of science and technology as in all other fields, (b) Where educational assistance programs are available generally speaking these are now available to both men and women and every effort is made to ensure that female employees are not overlooked.
April 2, 1973


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that federal Crown Corporations and agencies (a) develop transfer and promotion measures that will encourage women to move out of the traditionally female occupations into other occupations, and (b) emphasize in recruitment programs that all occupations are open equally to women and men?


John Carr Munro: (a) Generally speaking, Crown Corporations and agencies continue to encourage women to seek transfers and promotions to all available positions for which they have the qualifications and aptitudes. In some cases, (where applicable), those not qualified are given on-the-job training and formal training opportunities and encouragement, (b) In recruiting programs, it is emphasized that all jobs are open equally to men and women.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that each federal Crown Corporation and agency devise a long-term plan for the better use of womanpower within its organization?


John Carr Munro: Generally speaking, no special provision has been made in long term development plans since women are considered on an equal basis with men.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that, where the size of staff warrants it, federal Crown Corporations and agencies appoint one or more qualified people whose primary duty for the next five to eight years will be to provide for the training and development of women in their organizations?


John Carr Munro: In most Crown Corporations and agencies, the size of the staff does not warrant the appointment of a special person for the training and development of women in their organizations. Where applicable, some corporations have appointed special persons for this function; others have assigned the responsibility to the relevant branches of the personnel department.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that federal Crown Corporations and agencies with rotational programs between field and head offices ensure that women are considered for rotation on the same basis as men and are not judged in advance on their freedom to rotate?
Order Paper Questions


John Carr Munro: Generally speaking, the policy of Crown Corporations and agencies, which have rotational programs, has been to consider women for rotation on the same basis as men.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that federal Crown Corporations and agencies (a) review their selection procedures to ensure that women are used in recruitment and selection programs, and (b) have senior women officers on their personnel administration staffs?


John Carr Munro: (a) Generally speaking, selection procedures have been reviewed and where necessary more women are being used in recruitment and selection procedures, (b) Many Crown Corporations and agencies now have senior women officers on their personnel administration staffs.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that different provisions on the basis of sex be eliminated from superannuation and insurance plans for federal Crown Corporations and agencies?


John Carr Munro: Employees of many Crown Corporations and agencies are under the Public Service Superrannuation Act and Regulations. As indicated in the answer to question no. 397 the Act has been studied by the Advisory Committee on the Public Service Superannuation Act and a report has been made to the Minister. The Government's decision will be announced in due course. With respect to other Crown Corporations and agencies, where such provisions are still included in superannuation and insurance plans, changes in the plans are under consideration.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that federal Crown Corporations and agencies (a) make clear to educational institutions, and to the public, that career opportunities within their organizations are open to women and that they are encouraging women to prepare themselves for such careers; and (b) require each private organization with which they do business to include in each contract, a clause that prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of sex?


John Carr Munro: (a) Generally speaking, the Crown Corporations and agencies make clear to educational institutions and to the public that career opportunities within their organizations are open to women, (b) Generally speaking, no such stipulation is

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
included in contracts with private organizations, although some corporations do make provision for safeguards in this respect.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act be amended so that its provisions will be the same for both female and male contributors?


John Carr Munro: Appropriate legislative amendments to the Public Service Superannuation Act are under active review respecting benefits to female contributors. Consequently changes affecting the Public Service Superannuation Act will, where appropriate, result in similar amendments being made to the R.C.M. Police Superannuation Act.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that enlistment in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police be open to women?


John Carr Munro: For many years the Royal Canadian Mounted Police has engaged females for certain functions within the Force. Presently, a study is being conducted into force requirements to determine where females, if engaged as regular members, could be used to best advantage.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that all trades in the Canadian Forces be open to women?


James Armstrong Richardson: A study was conducted to ascertain which trades and classifications in the Canadian Armed Forces could be opened to women. Women will be excluded from those classifications and trades which call for service in primary combat roles, sea-going duty and duty in isolated areas. However, the following trades and classifications are now open to women and this new policy could over a period of time increase the number of women in the Forces to some 2,000 officers and about 5,000 other ranks: Officer Classification-Open to Women: Aerospace Engineer; Communications/Electronics Engineer; Dental; Medical; Medical Associate; Nursing; Air Traffic Controller; Air Weapons Controller; Legal; Meteorology; Musician; Personnel Development; Personnel Support. Other Ranks Trades-Open to Women: Meteorological Technician; Photographic Technician; Air Traffic Controller; Air Traffic Control Assistant; Operation Plotter; Teletype Operator; Communications Operator; Terminal

Equipment Technician; Teletype and Cipher Technician; Communication Technician; Safety Systems Technician; Metals Technician; Machinist; Refinisher Technician; Medical Assistant; Operating Room Assistant; Laboratory Technician; X-Ray Technician; Hygiene Technician; Biosciences Technician; Dental Clinical Assistant; Dental Laboratory Technician; Dental Equipment Maintenance Technician; Dental Therapist; Administrative Clerk; Accounting and Finance Clerk; Physical Education and Recreation Instructor; Musician; Draughtsman; Supply Technician.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the prohibition on the enlistment of married women in the Canadian Forces be eliminated?


James Armstrong Richardson: Marital status is not one of the enrolment criteria for enlistment in the Canadian Armed Forces for either men or women.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the length of the initial engagement for which personnel are required to enlist in the Canadian Forces be the same for women and men?


James Armstrong Richardson: Both men and women are enrolled as other ranks in the Canadian Forces for an initial five year period. Officers, however, are enrolled for indefinite service or for a fixed period depending on the plan under which they receive their commission.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that release of a woman from the Canadian Forces because she has a child be prohibited?


James Armstrong Richardson: The present policy concerning a woman who has a child while serving in the Canadian Forces is that release will only occur where the individual woman so requests it, or where there is a clear indication that her retention will conflict with service requirements. Maternity benefits available to the serving woman now include leave entitlement and medical care.
April 2, 1973


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act be amended so that its provisions will be the same for male and female contributors?


James Armstrong Richardson: The recommendation to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act so that its provisions will be the same for both male and female contributors is being studied in concert with other government pension plans. Any change would require legislation and would be presented to parliament in the normal manner.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that (a) the federal government issue a policy statement to the Ministers of all federal government departments, the heads of Crown Corporations and agencies, and the Speakers of the Senate and the House of Commons, expressing its intention to (i) ensure equality of opportunity in employment for women and the greater use of womanpower, and (ii) undertake short-term special measures where these are necessary to achieve its objectives; and (b) an information programme be undertaken so that management and supervisors at all levels in the Government of Canada be made aware of the government's policy regarding its employment of women?


John Carr Munro: With respect to part (a) of the Recommendation, a Cabinet Directive was issued to deputy heads of all government departments and agencies in April 1972, directing them to "take steps to encourage the assignment and advancement of more women into middle and upper echelon positions". With respect to (b), this has been effectively implemented through the Cabinet Directive, the departmental activities and the service-wide Committee on Equal Opportunities for Women in the Public Service developed by the Public Service Commission's EOW Office and jointly chaired by the Commission and the Treasury Board, as well as the widespread public attention being focussed on the federal government's equal opportunities program.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the National Housing Loan Regulations be amended so that (a) for purposes of the gross debt service ratio, either husband or wife may be deemed to be the purchaser or owner and (b) up to 50 per cent of the income of the spouse of the purchaser or owner, or of the spouse of the person deemed to be the purchaser or owner, may be included in computing the annual income?


John Carr Munro: (a) and (b) The
National Housing Loan Regulations were amended by Order in Council P.C. 1971-1767, August 18, 1971 to provide that either the husband or wife could be considered the home owner or the home purchaser, and that up to 50
Order Paper Questions
per cent of the spouse's income can be included with the applicant's income. A further amendment to the National Housing Loan Regulations by Order in Council P.C. 19721836, dated August 24, 1972, makes it possible to include up to 100 per cent of the spouse's income for the purpose of qualifying for an NHA loan.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission of the Status of Women that (a) both the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans be amended so that the spouse who remains at home can participate in the Plan, and (b) the feasibility be explored of (i) crediting to the spouse remaining at home a portion of the contributions of the employed spouse and those contributions made by the employer on the employed spouse's behalf, and (ii) on an optional basis, permitting the spouse at home to contribute as a self-employed worker?


John Carr Munro: The Minister of National Health and Welfare will meet with his provincial colleagues in April to examine the total Canadian social security system, and to determine the manner and extent to which the present system might be more satisfactorily organized and made more responsive to the needs of Canadians. Such issues, as posed by the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, would fall within the scope of these discussions. With respect to the Quebec Pension Plan, amendments were made on January 1st, 1973, and no action was taken by the Government of Quebec in regard to these particular recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government (a) make greater use of women's voluntary associations; and (b) increase their financial support ot (i) women's voluntary associations engaged in projects of public interest, and (ii) voluntary associations working in fields of particular concern to women?


John Carr Munro: The Citizenship Branch of the Department of the Secretary of State has increased its financial support to women's voluntary organizations engaged both in projects of public interest and projects related directly to the concern of women from $6,000 in 1971-72 to $75,000 in 1972-73.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that a federal-provincial conference on labour legislation affecting women in Canada be called to prepare for Canada's ratification of the International Labour Organization Convention Concerning Equal Remuneration for Men and Women Workers for Work of Equal Value (Convention 100)?

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions


John Carr Munro: Canada deposited with the ILO the Instrument of Ratification of Convention 100 on November 16, 1972.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Female Employees Equal Pay Act be amended to apply to all employees of the Government of Canada?


John Carr Munro: The Female Employees Equal Pay Act was revoked, effective July 1, 1971, by an Act to amend the Canada Labour (Standards) Code and equal wages provisions are now included in Part III of the Canada Labour Code (Labour Standards). Part III of the Code does not apply to employees of the Government of Canada.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Female Employees Equal Pay Act, the federal Fair Wages and Hours of Work Regulations and equal pay legislation of provinces and territories require that (a) the concept of skill, effort and responsibility be used as objective factors in determining what is equal work, with the understanding that pay rates thus established will be subject to such factors as seniority provisions; (b) an employee who feels aggrieved as a result of an alleged violation of the relevant legislation, or a party acting on her behalf, be able to refer the grievance to the agency designated for that purpose by the government administering the legislation; (c) the onus of investigating violations of the legislation be placed in the hands of the agency administering the equal pay legislation which will be free to investigate, whether or not complaints have been laid; (d) to the extent possible, the anonymity of the complainant be maintained;
(e)	provision be made for authority to render a decision on whether or not the terms of the legislation have been violated, to specify action to be taken and to prosecute if the orders are not followed;
(f)	where someone has presented the aggrieved employee's case on her behalf and the aggrieved employee is unsatisfied with the decision, she have the opportunity to present her case herself to the person or persons rendering the decision who may change the decision; (g) the employee's employment status be in no way adversely affected by application of the law to her case; (h) where the law has been violated, the employee be compensated for any losses in pay, vacation and other fringe benefits; (i) unions and employee organizations, as well as employers and employer organizations, be subject to this law; (j) penalties be sufficiently heavy to be an effective deterrent; and (k) the legislation specify that it is applicable to part-time as well as to full-time workers?


John Carr Munro: 1. The Canada Labour (Standards) Code as amended on July 1, 1971, revoked the former Female Employees Equal Pay Act and set out provisions relating to equal pay which substantially meet the requirements of these recommendations.
2.	The recommended amendments to the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Regulations are under consideration.
3.	The Minister of Labour cannot answer for the provinces and the territories.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the pay rates for nurses, dietitians, home economists, librarians and social workers employed by the federal government be set by comparing these professions with other professions in terms of the value of the work and the skill and training involved?


John Carr Munro: Members of the Nursing, Home Economics, Library Science and Social Work occupational groups, like members of most other occupational groups in the Federal Public Service, bargain collectively for their terms and conditions of employment under the Public Service Staff Relations Act. They are represented by the union of their choice. Employees represented by union have the fullest opportunity to advance those factors which they believe should be taken into account in determining terms and conditions of employment including rates of pay. In the event that agreement cannot be reached by negotiation, employees have a choice of arbitration or conciliation as a means of dispute resolution. The Employer's position in all Public Service negotiations has consistently been that of paying salaries commensurate with those paid by other employers in Canada, i. e. those paid by the competition.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that legislation on the Canada Pension Plan and the Quebec Pension Plan be amended so that the provisions applicable to the wife and children of a male contributor will also be applicable to the husband and children of a female contributor?


John Carr Munro: See response to Question 378.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Unemployment Insurance Act and Regulations be amended to provide a common definition for "dependants" of women and men contributors?


John Carr Munro: When regulations were made on 6 July, 1971 under the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971, the subsection which placed a limit on the earnings that a dependant could receive and still be considered a dependant was changed from what it had read under the former Act to provide a common definition for "dependant" of men and women contributors. Also under these regulations a common law wife can be considered a dependant of a claimant. On 20 June, 1972, the regulations were amended so that a common law husband could be considered as a dependant. The only difference that now remains is that the regulations provide that a man can consider his wife as a dependant if
(Mr. Howard.]
April 2, 1973

she is being maintained wholly or mainly by him whereas a wife can consider her husband as a dependant if he is dependant on her.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Unemployment Insurance Act be amended to apply to all employees working in an established employee-employer relationship?


John Carr Munro: The new
Unemployment Insurance Act which came into force on June 27, 1971, effectively implemented Recommendation 15 of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women, which stated: "We recommend that the federal Unemployment Insurance Act be amended to apply to all employees working in an established employee-employer relationship". This new Act extends considerably unemployment insurance coverage, with the result that the great majority of employees working in an employer-employee relationship are now protected. About 98% of persons under a contract of service are now covered. The very few individuals who are not, remain outside the plan for reasons such as having only a very casual or minor attachment to the labour force, they can be considered to have retired or they should not be insured in their employment at a particular time because of their relationship to their employer.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the amendment of the federal Fair Employment Practices Act provide for (a) an employed woman's entitlement to 18 weeks maternity leave, (b) mandatory maternity leave for the six-week period following her confinement unless she procures a medical certificate that working will not injure her health, and (c) prohibition of dismissal of an employee on any grounds during the maternity leave to which she is entitled?


John Carr Munro: Part III of the
Canada Labour Code (Labour Standards) now includes provisions for maternity leave of 17 weeks, and the other requirements of recommendations (b) and (c).


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Unemployment Insurance Act be amended so that women contributors will be entitled to unemployment benefits for a period of 18 weeks or for the period to which their contributions entitle them, whichever is the lesser, (a) when they stop paid work temporarily for maternity reasons or (b) when during a period in which they are receiving unemployment benefits, they become unable to work for maternity reasons?


John Carr Munro: The amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act which became effective on June 27, 1971, fulfilled the intent of this 26087-33
Order Paper Questions
recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women. The Unemployment Insurance Act (1971) provides that women with the necessary attachment to the labour force, which is defined as 20 or more weeks of contributions in a qualifying period, are entitled to 15 weeks of benefit which are payable as follows: eight weeks before the week of confinement, the week of confinement and six weeks after the confinement.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the elimination of any discrimination on the basis of sex in the terms and conditions of employment for air crew on air lines?


John Carr Munro: On may 10,
1972 the Minister of Labour tabled for first reading Bill C-206, an act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Public Service Employment Act with respect to discrimination in employment based on age, sex and marital status. The Bill would have prohibited discrimination in respect of any term or condition of employment on grounds of sex in respect of all employment within the legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada. That employment includes air crews on airlines. The Bill died on the order paper in the last parliament.
The Department of Labour is reviewing Bill C-206 with a view to preparation of a successor Bill.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that sex-typing of occupations be avoided in the text and in the illustrations of all federal government publications?


John Carr Munro: I have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission.
It is now a policy of the Public Service Commission to avoid any sex-typing of occupations in the text and illustrations of its publications, which are subject to regular review through the Commission's Public Relations Division and the Office of Equal Opportunities for Women. The bulk of the federal government careers and occupations material is produced by the Public Service Commission, thus ensuring implementation of the recommendation generally throughout the service.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the Canada Department of Manpower and Immigration refuse to make arrangements for firms to interview students in connection with

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
positions for which the firms have specified sex preferences or sex requirements?


John Carr Munro: Canada Manpower Centres, in the conduct of their referral operations, are bound by the Unemployment Insurance Act, 1971, which stipulates inter alia, that they shall not discriminate in the referral of any job applicant to an employer on the basis of sex, except where such a limitation, specification or preference is based upon a bona fide occupational qualification.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that (a) the Fair Employment Practices Act be amended to (i) include "sex" and "marital status" as prohibited grounds for discrimination, and (ii) apply to all employees of the Government of Canada; and (b) The Fair Wages and Hours of Work Regulations be amended to include "sex" and "marital status" as prohibited grounds for discrimination?


John Carr Munro: (a) On May 10,
1972, the Minister of Labour tabled in the House of Commons Bill C-206, an act to amend the Canada Labour Code and the Public Service Employment Act with respect to discrimination in employment based on age, sex and marital status. The Bill died on the order paper in the last parliament. A successor Bill is under consideration. (b) The recommended amendments to the Fair Wages and Hours of Labour Regulations are under consideration.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government increase significantly the number of women on federal Boards, Commissions, Corporations, Councils, Advisory Committees and Task Forces?


John Carr Munro: The government has made 200 Order-in-Council appointments of women since it took office in 1968. These include twenty-four full-time appointments, among whom are two at the deputy minister level, Dr. Sylvia Ostry and Dr. Jean Boggs, four are judges and the rest are to full-time positions on such boards as the Canadian Transport Commission, the Economic Council of Canada, the National Parole Board, the Pension Board, the Public Service Commission, the Citizenship Court, the Canadian Pension Commission, The Immigration Appeal Board, as well as the Law Reform Commission and the LeDain Commission. There have also been 176 appointments to part time boards such as the Science Council, the National Film Board, the Canada Development Corporation and others. When a position is vacant, a reminder is sent out to the minister responsible for filling the position, to take into account not only the ethnic, linguistic and geographic factors but also the need to appoint more women.
[Mr. Howard.)


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government undertake a study of the feasibility of making greater use of part-time work in the Canadian economy?


John Carr Munro: The Canada Department of Labour is now studying this question.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the differential treatment of Nursing Assistants and Nursing Orderlies in the federal Public Service be eliminated?


John Carr Munro: There has recently been an amendment to the classification standard which places nursing assistants and nursing orderlies at the same wage level thus removing the wage differential. After discussions with the bargaining agent this change in the standard has been made retroactive to January 1, 1972.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the positions of secretaries in the federal Public Service be classified by one of the methods used for other classes in the federal Public Service?


John Carr Munro: Arising from the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women several alternative methods of evaluating secretarial positions in the Public Service have been examined. The most feasible method is to be determined after a test is carried out using actual positions in a number of major departments. These studies are expected to be completed by the end of September 1973.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Public Service Superannuation Act be amended so that (a) there will be no differences in the provisions on the basis of sex, and (b) the surviving spouse of a contributor will be paid the supplementary death benefits?


John Carr Munro: At the request of the President of The Treasury Board, this recommendation was studied by the Advisory Committee on the Public Service Superannuation Act and a report has been made to the Minister. The Government's decision will be announced in due course.
April 2, 1973


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Removal Expenses Regulations be amended so that the expenses paid for the wife of an employee will also be paid for the husband of an employee?


John Carr Munro: A new "Relocation Directive" including appropriate provisions to implement the recommendation is being developed by the Treasury Board Secretariat with a view to issuance in the near future. The Relocation Directive will replace the Removal Expenses Regulations.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Public Service Terms and Conditions of Employment Regulations be amended by (a) deleting section 50(2), and (b) substituting the provision that, during the six weeks period preceeding the expected date of an employee's confinement, a deputy head may direct the employee to proceed on maternity leave unless she produces a medical certificate that she is able to work?


John Carr Munro: (1) Section 50(2) of the Public Service Terms and Conditions of Employment Regulations has not been deleted; (2) Section 50 of the said Regulations was amended by Treasury Board on September 23, 1971 as follows: "(1) Every female employee who becomes pregnant and who applies for leave of absence without pay (hereinafter called "maternity leave") shall be granted maternity leave by her deputy head for a period commencing at least eleven weeks before the expected date of the termination of her pregnancy and ending not later than six months after the date of the termination of her pregnancy." "(2) the deputy head may, (b) grant maternity leave to any female employee to commence earlier than eleven weeks before the expected termination of pregnancy;" This amendment increased from two months to eleven weeks the length of time a female employee is entitled to be granted maternity leave prior to the expected termination date of her pregnancy. This amendment brings the subsection in line with amendments to the Canada Labour Code as passed by parliament and proclaimed July 1, 1971.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal government continue to pay the employer's contribution to the superannuation and Group Surgical-Medical Plans when an employee is on maternity leave?


John Carr Munro: On March 30, 1972 the Treasury Board revoked the Group Surgical-Medical Insurance Regulations and approved the Public Service Health Insurance Regulations. Among the provisions contained therein was one providing supplementary 26087-331
Order Paper Questions
health insurance coverage at the regular cost to employees on maternity leave.
The recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women in relation to the Group Surgical-Medical Insurance Plan has therefore been implemented.
The further recommendation relating to superannuation contributions is being considered with the other recommendations on the provisions of the Public Service Superannuation Act referred to in Question No. 397.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that federal Public Service bindery positions at levels 1 and 2 be open to women and men on the same basis and that the job title "journeywomen" be eliminated?


John Carr Munro: The Public Service bindery positions at levels 1 and 2 are now open to men and women on the same basis and the job title "journeywomen" has been eliminated.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that, until the sextyping of occupation is eradicated the federal Public Service Commission and federal government departments (a) take special steps to increase the number of women appointed to occupations and professions not traditionally female, (b) review and, where necessary alter their recruitment literature and recruiting programs to ensure that it is abundantly clear that women are wanted in all occupations and professions, and (c) take special steps to obtain applications from qualified women when appointments for senior levels are outside the service?


John Carr Munro: I have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission. With reference to part (a) of the Recommendation, the establishment of the Commission's Office of Equal Opportunities for Women in February 1971 constituted a "special step" in this direction, since one of the functions of this Office is to propose and promote programs and special measures within the public service that will ensure equality of opportunity is provided in all aspects of employment, including recruitment and selection, training and development, promotion, etc. Further special impetus came with the issuing of a Directive by the Cabinet in April 1972, sent to deputy heads of all government departments directing them to "take steps to encourage the assignment and advancement of more women into middle and upper echelon positions". The Cabinet Directive provided a policy framework for departmental activities and resulted in the establishment by the Commission's EOW Office of an interdepartmental committee to co-ordinate action and provide a mechanism for exchanging information and measuring progress. Twenty-three departments are represented on the committee which meets in full session four times yearly, with work groups meeting on an ad hoc basis to deal with

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
special problem areas and matters affecting the employment of women in the public service. A further point on part (a) of the Recommendation: appointment activity in recent months indicates there is an increase of women in non-traditional occupational groups. To illustrate, a women has been appointed director of the Secretary of State department's Social Action Branch; another has been appointed director of information for the Department of Communications; another woman has been appointed director of the Socio-Economic Program at the Public Service Commission; the Agriculture Department has appointed four female agricultural officers, the first in the history of the department; three women are in trade commissioner training at the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, etc. An employment information counsellor is being appointed at the Public Service Commission to further assist capable women both within and those from outside the service, in learning of employment opportunities throughout the service. On part (b) of the Recommendation action has been taken through the development of special education and information projects by the Commission, among them the production of an equal opportunities audio-visual presentation, an equal opportunities newsletter entitled "Interaction", (25,000 copies of which are issued five times yearly), and brochures and posters which have been distributed across Canada, both within and outside the public service, to heighten awareness of the federal government as an equal opportunities employer. In addition, special attention is being paid through recruiting programs, speeches, seminars and discussions in universities, community colleges and high schools to encourage girls and young women to prepare for careers in "shortage areas" and traditional male-oriented occupations, such as accounting, commerce, economics, statistics, financial administration, etc. The Commission's new advertising policy, noted above, requiring all advertising posters to carry immediately below the logo, the words "This competition is open to both men and women," has become a further means of making it "abundantly clear that women are wanted in all occupations and professions". Early trends on results of this new policy, indicate that it is resulting in an increase of applications from women, particularly in the non-traditional applied sciences fields. A more detailed evaluation of policy is currently being conducted. Regarding part (c) of this recommendation, special efforts are being made to ensure that capable women from within the service as well as outside the service are fully considered for competitions at the senior levels. An inventory has been compiled of qualified women within the service who would be suitable candidates for senior executive positions. (Two new appointments of women to the senior executive category were made in November, 1972). In addition, in order to increase the number of applications from capable women outside the service, universities, national associations, and other sources have been drawn upon as resources for developing a roster of qualified women from whom such applications may be derived. The advertising policy directive of June, 1972 is another special means of increasing applications from women inside as well as outside the service.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Public Service Commission and federal government departments have as an objective the elimination of the imbalance in the proportion of women and men in senior positions and (a) as much as is feasible, emphasize potential rather than experience as a basis for appointment or promotion; (b) ensure that vacancies are open to employees at a classification level low enough to permit consideration of qualified women; and (c) when a job opens, make sure that women candidates get full consideration including the evaluation of their experience in volunteer work and running a household if it is relevant?


John Carr Munro: I have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission. Regarding part (a) of this Recommendation, "potential" is one of the three major factors in the evaluation of a candidate for selection and promotion, the other two being "knowledge" and "experience". On part (b) the Office of Equal Opportunities for Women maintains an inventory by department, group and level of all women in the public service in the scientific and professional and administrative and foreign service categories and is carrying out comparative analyses on the career and mobility patterns of men and women in the service, with a view to identifying problem areas requiring special action. The Commission has responsibility for defining the area of competition, under Section 13(b) of the Public Service Employment Act, and in so doing care is taken to ensure that the area is broad enough to include qualified persons at lower levels who have potential for development. Action on part (c) of the Recommendation has been taken with the issuing of a directive by the Public Service Commission to departments concerning the assessment of all relevant volunteer experience in candidate selection.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that the federal Public Service Commission and federal government departments (a) introduce programmes that will ensure the consideration of secretaries for administrative positions, and (b) open up intermediate and senior administrative positions to women in traditionally female professions?


John Carr Munro: I have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission: Part (a) of this recommendation is being implemented with the development by the Commission of two special courses: (i) Self-Development and Career Growth for Secretaries (two weeks in length), and (ii) Special Officers' Development Course for the Administrative Support Category (three weeks in length) During the 1972-73 fiscal year six courses in each of the two programs have been held with an average 33 participants each. A similar number of courses in both programs is scheduled for the 1973-74 fiscal year, available in both French and English. The two programs are the initial steps in longterm efforts to improve opportunities for administrative
(Mr. Munro (Hamilton East).]
April 2, 1973___________COMMONS DEBATES______________________2833
support personnel, the majority of whom are women, to advance into the officer groups. Comprehensive evaluations are being carried out by the Public Service Commission in 1973, to assess the effectiveness of the two programs, and in the case of the Special Officers' Development program, to assess the post-course assignment phase of the program, in which course participants return to their home departments for a six to ten month developmental assignment to prepare them for promotion competitions for officer positions. Initial indications from the assignment of the first Officers' Development Course of February 1972, indicate a positive trend. Eight months after the course, of the 29 first course participants, eight had been promoted to officer positions with a further nine promotions predicted within four months. On part (b) of the Recommendation, the Commission is examining the occupational and salary levels of women in traditionally female professions such as nursing, library science, and social welfare work as a preliminary step in determining appropriate means of increasing opportunities for persons in these groups to attain intermediate and senior administrative positions.


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that (a) a special effort be made to attract more women applicants for administrative trainee positions in the federal Public Service, and (b) federal government departments ensure that women administrative trainees are given the kind of training assignments that will prepare them for advancement to the senior levels?


John Carr Munro: Currently, approximately 30 per cent of administrative trainee positions are filled by women. However, special efforts are being made by the Commission through the university recruitment programs, the EOW newsletter "Interaction", speeches, literature and audio-visual presentations, etc., to attract more women at the point of intake, as well as to ensure that the assignments of both male and female administrative trainees are creative and preparatory for career advancement. A major evaluation of the administrative traipee program is being carried out by the Commission program responsible for recruiting administrative trainees, and will track the 1967-1969 period using linguistic and sex breakdowns, examining the AT population, the assignment phase of the program, advancement rates, attrition rates etc., with a view to determining future courses for action. On the matter of female representation levels in the AT group, it should be noted that currently approximately 37 per cent of all university graduates are women, and, as a consequence, the proportional intake of female university graduates is relatively comparable to the population from which the administrative trainee program draws.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Howard: What action has been taken with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women that action be taken to increase greatly the enrolment of promising women in federal Public Service management courses, including the step of waiving salary floors and age ceilings where necessary in their case?


John Carr Munro: I have been given the following information by the Public Service Commission: A number of special projects are being undertaken in efforts to increase the number of women nominated by departments to centrally-run (i.e., Bureau of Staff Development and Training operated) mangement courses. The average participation rate of women in management courses currently is approximately 11% of the eligible female population in the service. These special efforts include: (a) Development of one or two day modules discussing the role of women in the work world, the management world, the attitudes of men and women and the socio-cultural influences affecting female work patterns, etc. These are being developed for incorporation by "animators" and trainees in BSDT courses to assist in attitude changing and motivating both men and women about changing work patterns and work roles, (b) Administering of an attitude survey to all participants of BSDT courses in 1972 (some 2,500 persons) sponsored by the Equal Opportunities for Women Office as a further means of changing attitudes, (c) Development of a special edition of the EOW newsletter "Interaction" on training and development policy and opportunities throughout the federal services. It is being prepared for March distribution with a basic 25,000 copies to be distributed to the regular "Interaction" audience, plus an additional 10,000 for selected distribution to training and development officers and women in junior and middle management positions in the service.
To further assist in improving female participation rates on departmentally run courses, the Commission, in conjunction with a Treasury Board Specialist (Women's Interests), is maintaining a watching brief on the training rates in the service through the Board's annual review of training and education.


Mr. Wagner: 1.	How many members of Canada's Embassy in Moscow are Trade and Commerce officers or directly involved in improving U.S.S.R.-Canada Trade?
2.	Does the government have any consulates or trade missions in the U.S.S.R. located outside of Moscow?
3.	Has the government approached the Government of the U.S.S.R. in the hope of establishing consulates or trade missions outside of Moscow and, if so, what has been the response?
4.	In what other countries of the Warsaw Pact does Canada have consulates or trade offices outside the Capital City?
5.	What efforts are being made to establish such offices?


Hon. Alastair Gillespie (Minister of Industry. Trade and Commerce):: 1. The Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce has three officers at the Canadian Embassy in Moscow and all are directly involved in trade work.

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
2.	There are no Canadian government offices outside Moscow in the U.S.S.R.
3.	When Canada agreed to the establishment of a Soviet Consulate General in Montreal, one condition was that Canada should be able to establish, when it was required, a comparable office in the U.S.S.R., subject to mutual agreement at the time. This commitment was confirmed in the general communique issued at the end of Mr. Martin's visit to the U.S.S.R. in November 1966.
4.	Canada has no offices outside the capital city in countries of the Warsaw Pact.
5.	There are currently no efforts underway to establish such offices. Trade officers in capital cities currently travel extensively throughout their territory.


Mr. Symes: 1.	What amounts have been deemed repayable to the Receiver General in accordance with Section 49(1) of the Unemployment Insurance Act for each quarter of the calendar year 1972?
2.	What amounts repayable to the Receiver General have been written off for each category under Section 175 of the Unemployment Insurance Act Regulations for each quarter in the calendar year 1972?


Mr. Mark MacGuigan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister oi Manpower and Immigration):: 1. Quarter ending 31 March 1972, $4,902,638; Quarter ending 30 June 1972, $9,057,250; Quarter ending 30 Sept. 1972, $8,732,297; Quarter ending 31 Dec. 1972, $8,108,466.
2.	Quarter ending 31 March 1972, $116,096; Quarter ending 30 June 1972, $93,920; Quarter ending 30 Sept. 1972, $169,333; Quarter ending 31 Dec. 1972, $216,172.


Mr. Latulippe: How much money was there in the Unemployment Insurance Fund as of March 31 (a) 1968 (b) 1969 (c) 1970 (d) 1971 (e) 1972?


Mark R. MacGuigan: March 31/1968, $302,652,438; March 31/1969, $382,340,546; March 31/1970, $458,141,955; March 31/1971, $323,636,998; March 31/1972, $33,686,598.


Mr. Latulippe: 1.	What was the total cost for publishing the Canada Year Book in (a) 1971 (b) 1972?
2.	What were the receipts obtained from the sale of the Canada Year Book in (a) 1971 (b) 1972?
3.	How many copies were (a) printed (b) sold in (i) 1971 (ii) 1972? Hon. John C. Munro (Minister of Labour):

1. (a) 1970-71 Edition
English	$163,969.21		
French	$110,497.14		
(b) 1972 Edition			
English	$201,382.75		
French	$116,143.42		
	2(a)	3(a) (i)	3(b) (i)
1970-71 Edition			
Cloth edition			
English	$25,290.80	10,495	6,271French	4,684.80	2,312	1,376Paper edition	English	18,436.68	6,934	5,449French	8,428.80	3,122	2,634TOTALS:	$56,841.08	22,863	15,7302(a)	3(a) (i)	3(b) (i)1972 Edition	Cloth edition	English	$12,705.60	10,350	3,647French	3,475.20	2,261	1,124Paper edition	English	4,552.80	7,142	1,454French	4,134.40	3,075	1,292TOTALS:	$24,868.00*	22,828	7,517*
*Sales for period December 15, 1972 to February 1, 1973.


Mr. Latulippe: Is it the intention of the government to build an underground tunnel linking the Confederation Building and the West Block for Members of Parliament to go from one building to the other and, if so, on what date will the project be implemented?
Hon. ]ean-Eudes Dube (Minister of Public Works): The
whole matter of interconnection amongst the several buildings on and adjacent to Parliament Hill, including the Confederation Building, has been and is under study and review. Until this study has been completed, it is impossible to say what, it any, action will be taken in respect of a tunnel to the Confederation Building.


Mr. Hellyer: Was the description of the required material in tender file No. LKT8080-2-1392 Inshore Oil boom that of a specific industrial product rather than a general specification and, if so, for what reason was this practice followed?


Hon. lean-Pierre Goyer (Minister of Supply and Services):: The description of the required material requested in the tender was a general specification.
April 2, 1973


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many OFY employees in 1971 and in 1972 were women and how many were married students?
2.	What percentage of all of OFY employees were women?
3.	What percentage of all OFY employees were married students?
4.	How many and what percentage of women and married students employed by OFY in 1971 and in 1972 returned to university each fall?


Hon. James Hugh Faulkner (Secretary oi State):: 1. The
Opportunities for Youth Program provided employment to 7,403 women in 1971 and 13,449 in 1972. There are no available statistics on the number of married students.
2.	In 1971, 26.6%; in 1972, 44.9%.
3.	There are no available statistics on the number of married students.
4.	There are no available statistics for 1971. In 1972, 22,046 or 73.6% of all Opportunities for Youth project participants said they were continuing their education in the fall of 1972; these statistics were not broken down by sex and marital status.


Mr. Fortin: Has the Department of the Secretary of State invested funds in the constituency of Lotbiniere through the Opportunities for Youth Programme and, if so (a) what is the amount (b) what is the complete list of individuals responsible for accepted projects (c) what was the amount of each grant allocated and the number of jobs thereby created?


James Hugh Faulkner: A list of all projects funded under the 1972 Opportunities for Youth program has been completed. Projects are classified by province and in alphabetical order of the towns and cities in which the projects were carried out, not by constituency. Information includes the project title and number, a short description of the projects' activities, amount of the grant, number of participants, and the name and address of the project representative. This 421 page listing can be obtained from the Secretary of State Department.


Mr. Macquarrie: Is it the intention of the Post Office Department to emulate that of the U.S.S.R. and other countries in issuing a stamp honouring the great poet Robert Burns?


Hon. Andre Ouellet (Postmaster General):: It is not the
intention of the Canada Post Office to issue a postage stamp honouring the Scottish poet Robert Burns. The policy of the Canada Post Office is that subjects selected for postage stamps should illustrate the cultural and economic life of Canada or contribute to an awareness of our traditions, accomplishments and history. Only ten to twelve subjects can be selected each year from several hundred suitable themes of significance and interest to Canada and Canadians. The revised commemorative
Order Paper Questions
stamp programme for 1973 is as follows: 31 January, Francois de Laval; 21 February, Algonkian Indians; 9 March, Royal Canadian Mounted Police Centennial; 18 April, Jeanne Mance; 16 May, Joseph Howe; 8 June, J.E.H. MacDonald; 29 June, Centennial of Prince Edward Island's; Entry into Confederation; 2 August, Royal Visit and Commonwealth Meeting; 14 September, Bicentennial of Arrival of Scottish; Settlers at Pictou, N.S.; 10 October, Nellie McClung; 1 November, Christmas; 28 November, Algonkian Indians.


Mr. Horner (Crowfoot): By Province, how much money was paid out under the Unemployment Insurance scheme in the years 1970, 1971 and 1972?


Mark R. MacGuigan: Province		Benefits Paid		
1970	1971	1972Newfoundland	$ 25m.	$ 33m.	$	71m.Prince Edward Island	$ 4m.	$ 5m.	$	11m.Nova Scotia	$ 26m.	$ 39m.	$	73m.New Brunswick	$ 25m.	$ 35m.	$	71m.Quebec	$212m.	$278m.	$	567m.Ontario	$230m.	$317m.	$	607m.Manitoba	$ 25m.	$ 43m.	$	66m.Saskatchewan	$ 22m.	$ 26m.	$	51m.Alberta	$ 34m.	$ 54m.	$	110m.British Columbia	$ 92m.	$lllm.	$	248m.Yukon	n.a.	n.a.	$	3m.Northwest Territory	n.a.	n.a.	$	lm.CANADA	$695m.	$941m.	$l,879m.


Mr. Stackhouse: 1.	Was a fund established for the financing of the government's "User-Pay" policy with respect to airport and air terminal facilities and, if so (a) on what date (b) by what method has it received monies (c) what is the fund's total at the present time?
2.	Of this total how much has been used for the specific purposes of the fund?
3.	Of the monies used, have any been used for the contraction of new or the replacment of existing facilities and, if so (a) what are the specific instances (b) how much has been expended in each case?
4.	Have any monies been designated for use at (a) Ste. Scholas-tique Airport (b) Malton Airport (c) the proposed Pickering Airport and, if so (i) what are the amounts in each case (ii) over what period?


Len Marchand: Vote L160 was established in the 1969-70 Estimates. The purpose of establishing this Vote was: "To authorize the operation of an Airports Revolving Fund in the current and subsequent fiscal years in accordance with terms and conditions prescribed by the Treasury Board, for the purpose

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
of the operation and development of the Montreal and Toronto International Airports and such other airports as Treasury Board may approve. . . " (a) April 1, 1969 (b) The Fund receives (a) all monies received from the operation of the said airports, and (b) all loans made by the Minister of Finance, (c) The Funds total Assets as at March 31, 1972 as shown in Public Accounts is $290,429,000.
2.	Of this total all has been used for the specific purposes of the Fund.
3.	Some of the money has been used for the construction of new facilties and some has been used for the replacement of exisitng facilities (a) and (b):
Montreal and Toronto International Airports
Construction Replacement of	of
New	Existing
Facilities Facilities
Total
Dorval	$ 11,345,000	$1,241,000Ste. Scholastique 127,818,000 Malton	44,638,000	981,000Pickering	1,801,000$185,602,000	$2,222,000


[Stage Direction]
The above covers Fiscal Years 1969-70 to 1971-72 inclusive.
4.	(a) yes, (i) $255,449,000, (ii) Fiscal year 1969-70 to 197273 incl.; (b) yes, (i) $127,782,000, (ii) Fiscal year 1969-70 to 1972-73 incl.; (c) yes, (i) $67,888,000, (ii) Fiscal year 1969-70 to 1972-73 incl.
Mr. Marshall: Is it the intention of the Secretary of State to ensure that every effort will be extended to providing all information to students who live in remote and isolated areas, and do not have access to reasonable TV, radio and telephone communications, of the Opportunities for Youth Programme and, if so, will the Minister look into the reasons for the delays by CBC to provide normal TV service to Northern Newfoundland?


James Hugh Faulkner: The Secretary of State has taken steps to ensure that information on Opportunities for Youth programs is provided students living in remote and isolated areas and not having access to TV, radio and telephone communications through project officers who personally solicited applications from such areas, and through contacts with local school officials, community leaders, etc. In addition, Opportunities for Youth program operations were decentralized this year in an effort to afford a more effective response to the diversified character of regional and subregional needs. All staff have been recruited from the region in which they will serve and operations are being directed on a regional basis. In so far as the second part of the question is concerned, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has greatly improved its television coverage to the Great Northern Peninsula of Newfoundland by establishing a rebroadcasting station at Bonne Bay in

1971 by increasing the power of its existing station at St. Anthony's and by applying for yet another rebroadcasting station at Mount St. Margaret's which is expected to go on air in the fall of 1973.


Mr. Marshall: 1.	Is it the intention of the Secretary of State to seek the co-operation of Information Canada to ensure that all Canadians who live in remote and isolated areas and do not have access to reasonable TV and radio communication and are out of reach of Manpower Centres will receive all pertinent material and assistance, so that they will have equal opportunity to submit applications for employment and, if so, how will this be implemented into communities in Northern Newfoundland in the constituency of Humb-er-St. George's-St. Barbe which takes in the Great Northern Peninsula?


Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (President of the Privy Council):: I am informed by the Department of the Secretary of State and Information Canada as follows: 1. Information brochures on "Summer 73", OFY applications and accompanying brochures on how to apply for a grant in the Opportunities for Youth program were distributed to all Information Canada Centres. In addition, Opportunities for Youth made pertinent program material and assistance available through project officers who personally solicited applications from such areas (including communities in Northern Newfoundland in the constituency of Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe which takes in the Great Northern Peninsula) and through contacts with local school officials, community leaders, etc.
2.	No. Information Canada was dissatisfied with the reports because they were not representative of the country. It is expected the reports will recommence when Enquiry Systems are established in all Regions.


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	Will a polar icebreaker be constructed in Canada and, if so, are there shipyards in Canada large enough to build a vessel of 100,000 horsepower or more and from which competitive bids could be obtained?
2.	What mandatory minimum percentage of special equipment required in such vessels will be of Canadian content?


Len Marchand: 1. Studies are presently being carried out on questions related to the design of a polar icebreaker. A team is being assembled to gather all the pertinent data to bring about a polar icebreaker design, cost estimate, and anticipated Arctic traffic that it may be required to support. Following this, a recommendation will be made that construction be proceeded with immediately or set aside until a more appropriate time. Yes, there are Canadian shipyards capable of building such a ship and providing competitive bids.
2. It is the Ministry of Transport's policy to ensure that Canadian equipment, where available and competitive, must be used in ships being built for the Coast Guard fleet.
April 2, 1973


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	What steps does the government intend to take in order to make commercial marine transportation in the Arctic safe and acceptable?
2.	Does the government have any programme in operation that would produce the necessary ongoing oceanographic services in order to produce reliable navigational charts of the region and (a) if so, at what stage are these programmes in terms of eventual completion date (b) if not, is it the intention of the government to commence such studies, and, if so (i) on what date (ii) with what projected completion dates?


John Mercer Reid: In so far as the Department of Environment is concerned: 1 and 2. Nautical Charts based largely on reconnaissance surveys presently exist for the major Arctic Waterways. Detailed charting activities of existing and potential ports and routes are being accelerated to meet demands. Intensive survey work has been carried out over the past twenty years but, because of the requirement for continued updating of Nautical Charts, a final completion date cannot be projected. In so far as the Ministry of Transport is concerned: 1. The government presently provides aids to navigation, icebreaking support and regulations concerning ship construction and manning in the north.
2.	These are continuously under review and are being updated to meet the need.


Mr. Stackhouse: Did CNR incur a deficit from providing commuter service in the Montreal area during (a) 1971 (b) 1972 and, if so, was this deficit paid by (i) moneys from the government and/or the Quebec Government (ii) CNR from its general revenues?


Len Marchand: The Management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows: (a) Yes. (b) Yes. (i) No. (ii) Yes.


Mr. Lawrence: Who, or what organizations, resident or located in the County of Durham, in the Province of Ontario, received Opportunity for Youth Fund grants cr financial assistance, what were their respective addresses, what was the purpose of each such grant, and how much was paid to each, in each of the years 1971 and 1972?


James Hugh Faulkner: A list of all projects funded under the Opportunities for Youth program in 1971 has been completed. Projects are classified by Province and then by type of project, not by constituency. A list of all projects funded under the 1972 Opportunities for Youth program has been completed. Projects are classified by Province and in alphabetical order of the towns and cities in which the projects were carried out, not by constituency. Information includes the project title and number, a short description of the project's activities, amount of the grant, number of participants and the name and address of the project representative. This 421 page listing can be obtained from the Secretary of State Department.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Lawrence: Who, or what organizations, resident or located in the County of Northumberland, in the Province of Ontario, received Opportunity for Youth Fund grants or financial assistance, what were their respective addresses, what was the purpose of each such grant, and how much was paid to each, in each of the years 1971 and 1972?


James Hugh Faulkner: A list of all projects funded under the Opportunities for Youth program in 1971 has been completed. Projects are classified by Province and then by type of project, not by constituency. A list of all projects funded under the 1972 Opportunities for Youth program has been completed. Projects are classified by Province and in alphabetical order of the towns and cities in which the projects were carried out, not by constituency. Information includes the project title and number, a short description of the project's activities, amount of the grant, number of participants and the name and address of the project representative. This 421 page listing can be obtained from the Secretary of State Department.


Mr. Coates: In each year 1961 to 1972 (a) what repairs were effected to the Prime Minister's home at Harrington Lake (b) what new furniture and furnishings were provided to this property (c) were there any other outlays in those years and, if so, what were the specific expenditures for?


Jean-Eudes Dubé: In so
far as the Department of Public Works is concerned. A. 1961-62, Minor repairs and upkeep; 1962-63, Minor repairs and upkeep; 1963-64, Minor repairs and upkeep; 1964-65, Minor repairs and new porch; 1965-66, Minor repairs and new porch; 1966-67, Minor repairs and new porch; 1967-68, Repairs to flooring and install new tiles first floor. Excavation to install new water line from Main House to well. Excavation for frozen water line and change defective foot valve. Minor repairs and maintenance. 1968-69, Minor repairs and upkeep; 1969-70, Exterior painting, new asphalt shingle roof; Minor repairs and upkeep; 1970-71, Minor repairs and upkeep; 1971-72, Interior painting, repairs to pipes and water pump, repair frozen water line, oil leak. Clean basement floor and equipment caused by oil leak. Minor repairs and upkeep.
B.	1965-66, Replaced old furnishings (no details available, as all bills are only kept 5 years.); 1966-67, Replaced old furnishings (no details available-see above); 1968-69, Mattress, box spring, bedspread, etc. Extermalite No. 455, installation of rugs, 1st floor installation of carpets, 2nd floor-bedrooms and hall; 1971-72, Roller blinds and Venetian blinds.
C.	1964-65, Installation fire alarm; 1966-67, Installation Aerators-Edwards Lake; 1967-68, Installation of Water Softener; Construction of Dam-Edwards Lake; New aluminum flag pole; Metal storm windows; 1968-69, Alterations to Boat House. Underground water and electrical services. Chlorination (Guest House).
2838

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions CNR-REEFER CARS, FREIGHT


Mr. MacLean: 1.	What action is the Department of Transport and/or the Canadian National Railways taking to assure a sufficient supply of modern, temperature-controlled freight cars for the movement to market of potatoes and other perishable goods in the Atlantic Region of Canada?
2.	What research, if any, is being done into the possibility of an improvement over the reefer-type railway cars now in use?


Len Marchand: The Management of Canadian National Railways advises as follows: 1. Canadian National continues to see to it that an adequate supply of temperature-controlled freight cars for the movement of potatoes to market is maintained in the Atlantic Region.
2.	Research is being carried out, on a feasibility basis, of the use of other cars and modal types of equipment for transportation to markets in Central Canada.


Mr. Knight: 1.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1970 in the Department of Transport?
2.	How many of those employees were earning more than $15,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000 intervals?
3.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1973 in the Department of Transport?
4.	How many of those employees were earning more than $18,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000 intervals?


Len Marchand: 1. 16,534
2.	Information not available.
3.	14,834.
4.	$18,000/18,999, 99; 19,000/19,999, 104; 20,000/20,999, 51; 21,000/21,999, 41; 22,000/22,999, 38; 23,000/23,999, 30; 24,-000/24,999, 30; 25,000/25,999, 42; 26,000/26,999, 14; 27,-000/27.999, 9; 28,000/35,000, 9; 34,000/40,000, 5; 40,000/45,000, 2.


Mr. Oberle: 1.	How many job enquiries were made during the past year at the Canada Manpower Centre in the City of Prince George, B.C.?
2.	How many jobs were (a) listed (b) found for people for the same period?
3.	How many offices does the Department of Manpower and Immigration have throughout the City?
4.	How many employees are there and what are their salaries?
5.	What are the complete operational expenses, including telephone, electricity, rent, etc.?


Mark R. MacGuigan: 1. In 1972, there were 20,054 client registrations (job enquiries) received.
2.	(a) 8,884 vacancies were notified, (b) 6,523 placements were effected.
3.	Four (4).
4.	35 employees-

17	at	$10,597-$12,046	4	at	5,486-	6,0283	at	4,207-	6,2922	at	7,496-	8,2382	at	6,233-	6,8492	at	11,586-	13,1651	at	15,737-	17,8831	at	13,070-	14,8521	at	9,305-	10,2251	at	6,707-	7,3721	at	8,569-	9,4155.	$334,674 (April 1, 1972 to January 31, 1973)


Mr. Reynolds: 1.	On February 1, 1973, did Hospitality Personnel Service of 1015 Burrard Street, Vancouver, B.C. request UIC assistance in the placement of 80 people and, if so, what was the reply?
2.	Did Mr. G. E. Hubley, Director of Manpower Operations for the Pacific Region write Hospitality Services on February 2, 1973 to indicate that Manpower Offices do not refer workers to employment agencies and, if so, for what reason?


John Mercer Reid: I am informed by the Unemployment Insurance Commission and the Department of Manpower and Immigration as follows: 1. Yes. Unemployment Insurance Commission representatives met with Hospitality Services on February 5, 1973, to discuss employment opportunities available through this company. The company was advised that the Unemployment Insurance Commission was prepared to make unemployed, experienced hotel and restaurant employees aware of job vacancies as registered with Hospitality Services.
2. Yes. Mr. G. E. Hubley's letter to Hospitality Services explained the Department's policy as it relates to private fee-charging employment agencies only. The policy is as follows: Canada Manpower Centres may refer clients to private fee-charging employment agencies provided that those clients referred are to fill bona fide vacancies on the agencies' staff. But Canada Manpower Centres will not refer clients to such agencies for re-referral to employer clients of these agencies. Notwithstanding this policy, pilot projects involving the reciprocal referring of vacancies have been established between the Department and some private fee-charging employment agencies, in Toronto and Montreal, as a first step in the process of reviewing this policy. Work is also underway towards the establishment of similar pilot projects in Vancouver, B.C. and Halifax, N.S.


Mr. Caouette (Charlevoix): 1.	Has the government made funds available for (a) installation (b) maintenance (c) improvement of the municipal airport of Ber-geronne (a private airport used by Anglo-Pulp and Hydro-Quebec) and, if not, is the government considering investing funds in this airport?
April 2, 1973

2.	Has the government reached or is it considering negotiating an agreement with respect to this airport and, if so, on what date will it take effect and for what period of time?


Len Marchand: 1. The
government has not made funds available for (a) the installation or (b) the maintenance of the municipal airport of Bergeronne. The Ministry of Transport provided $12,000 for improvements to the runway and this is expected to be paid in the near future.
2.	The municipality of Grande Bergeronne has not approached the Ministry of Transport for a further agreement with respect to this airport.


Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse): Has the Department of Manpower and Immigration made a LIP grant for a project under the name of Innovation Quebec whose address was 4101 Jarry East, Montreal and, if so (a) what were the names and addresses of the promoters of the project (b) what was the amount of the grant (c) to whom were the cheques issued (d) on what date and in what amounts?
(Translation]


Mark R. MacGuigan: (a) The sponsors of the project were Mr. Marcel Ducharme, President, of 8400 23rd Avenue, St. Michel 456, and Mr. Fernand Laliberte, Secretary, of 7490 22nd Avenue, Montreal 453. (b) The Department made a grant to a project entitled Innovation Quebec under the 1971-72 Local Initiatives Program. The grant was initially for $112,320 for the period February 14, 1972, to May 31, 1972, which was subsequently increased on April 21, 1972, to $131,976. On May 30, 1972, the project was extended to September 30, 1972, the contract value being increased from $131,976 to $317,304, and on September 21, 1972, a further extension to November 30, 1972, was granted, the contract value being increased to $408,968. Cheques have been issued as follows:
Order Paper Questions
reports that: Crime figures are not broken down by locality where the offence is committed. Any offence committed on a university campus would be reported to us by the Police Department policing the municipality where the campus is located as part of their total statistics.


Mr. Hueglin: 1.	What is the estimated amount of money saved by UIC benefit disqualifications in (a) 1972; (b) 1971?
2.	Of all claims disqualified in (a) 1971 (b) 1972 how many resulted in application of penalties?


Mark R. MacGuigan: 1. It is not possible to determine the unpaid benefits resulting from disentitle-ments. There is no way of knowing how long the disenti-tlement actually lasts. Claimants may stop reporting to the Commission when they find they are ineligible for benefits or perhaps they have found work. Therefore benefits not paid because of a disentitlement cannot be measured.
	1971	1972
2. Failure on the part of the		
Claimant to apply for or accept employment	3,286	6,433Discharged for misconduct	18,638	28,291Voluntary Separation	133,716	255,168Note:	Disentitlements of the nature described above
create a potential reduction of three weeks benefit per claimant.
Disentitled for misrepresentation, and a monetary penalty
imposed	13,195	9,689
(c) Payee
Innivation
Quebec
Mr. Ducharme Mr. Ducharme Mr. Ducharme Mr. Ducharme Mr. Ducharme Mr. Ducharme
(d) Date
March 7, 1972 April 17, 1972 May 19, 1972 June 5, 1972 July 11, 1972
(d) Amount


[Stage Direction]
September 4, 1972	40,590.12
September 22, 1972 92,664.00
Mr. Nowlan: What on-the-job training grants were made to fish packing plants in Nova Scotia for the period ending January 31, 1973 and what was (a) the name of the recipient companies (b) the amount of each grant involved (c) the number of people being trained (d) the period of training involved?


Mark R. MacGuigan: 


Mr. Mather: What was the rate of "campus crime", i.e. theft, violence, rape in each year 1962 to 1972?


Mr. Herb Breau (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry. Trade and Commerce):: Statistics Canada
(a)	(b)*	(c)	( d ) *!I.M.O. Foods Ltd.	$114,372	140	517D. Goldman Sons Ltd.	644	1	3C. W. McLeod Fisheries	2,846	4	12National Sea Products	3,900	2	12Canso Seafoods Ltd.	139,951	185	555Nickerson Bros. Ltd.	7,142	8	30Pierce Fisheries Ltd.	405	1	3
2840

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
(a)	(b) *	(c)	(d) *!LeBlanc Fisheries Ltd.	45,396	78	234Cheticamp Fishermen	29,055	24	110Mersey Seafoods Ltd.	2,025	1	6Comeaus Sea Foods Ltd.	1,500	1	5National Sea Products	4,241	1	10H.F. Russell Sea Food	4,991	6	15Riverport Seafoods Ltd.	720	1	4
^Canada Cost of Agreement * * Total Man/Months of Training


Mr. Harding: 1.	How many environmental studies which relate to the James Bay Project and in which the government has participated, have been completed or are currently in progress?
2.	(a) What is the objective of each project (b) on what date did each commence (c) on what date was the study completed or expected to be completed?


Mr. William Rompkey (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of the Environment):: 1. Environmental studies relating to the James Bay Project are currently in progress in the fields of climate, oceanography, wildlife, fish, vegetation, water quality, archeology, geomorphology and biophysical mapping. One has been completed.
2.	(a) The objectives of each project are: 1. To establish baseline data with which to assess the impact of development in the James Bay area of Quebec on the environment. 2. To enable recommendations to alter the design, construction or operation of the development, as required, to protect the environment, (b) All studies began in the late summer and fall of 1971. (c) One project on Ice Accretion on Structures was completed in December, 1972. All other studies except those of a monitoring nature are scheduled for completion by March 31, 1976. It is expected that interim results for specific areas will be available earlier and certain migratory bird studies will be completed in 1974.


Mr. Paproski: 1.	How many full-time employees were under salary in the Department of National Defence on (a) January 1, 1963 (b) January 1, 1973?
2.	How many people of each of these years were receiving salaries of (a) under $10,000 (b) between $10,000 and $20,000 (c) over $20,000?


James Armstrong Richardson: 1.	(a) Jan. 1/63; DND. 40,457; DRB. 2,380; (b) Jan. 1/73; DND. 30,559; DRB. 1,636.
2.	Prior to June 30, 1970, records were not maintained in a manner which would permit numbers in each salary category on Jan. 1, 1963 to be readily identified, nor does the Department have the resources that would be required to employ the additional staff that would be required to research this information. As of January 1,

1973: (a) DND. 26,167; DRB. 787; (b) DND. 4,182; DRB. 612; (c) DND. 210; DRB. 237.


Mr. Paproski: 1.	How many full-time employees were under salary in the Solicitor General's Department on (a) January 1, 1963 (b) January 1, 1973?
2.	How many people in each of these years were receiving salaries of (a) under $10,000 (b) between $10,000 and $20,000 (c) over $20,000?


Hon. Warren Allmand (Solicitor General):: Ministry Secretariat	(a) as of (b) as of 1 Jan. 1963 1 Jan. 1973 non existent 10	
Royal Canadian Mounted Police*	8,598	14,280Canadian Penitentiary Service*	3,042	5,150National Parole Board*	123	486(a)	Ministry Secretariat	not applicable	64Royal Canadian Mounted Police	8,531	5,927Canadian Penitentiary Service	3,018	3,513National Parole Board*	105	270(b)	Ministry Secretariat	not applicable	31Royal Canadian Mounted Police	67	8,246Canadian Penitentiary Service	24	1,587National Parole Board	8	203(c)	Ministry Secretariat	not applicable	12Royal Canadian Mounted Police	nil	107Canadian Penitentiary Service	nil	50National Parole Board	nil	13
* In 1963, these three agencies were part of the Department of Justice.


Mr. Darling: 1.	Has the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources any knowledge of plans to construct another natural gas pipeline from the West into Ontario?
April 2, 1973

2.	Has the Department received any applications from firms or individuals interested in constructing such a pipeline?
3.	If such applications are filed, has the Department considered requiring that any new pipeline be constructed along Highway 69 when it passes through the Parry Sound-Muskoka area, in order that an entire new region would have access to natural gas?


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: In so far as the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources is concerned: 1. No, other than the eastward extension of the proposed Mackenzie Valley gas pipeline and the looping of the existing system of Trans-Canada PipeLines Limited.
2.	No.
3.	This requirement is not within the Department's authority.


Mr. Reynolds: 1. Does the Department of Transport have blueprints of the Halifax, Quebec City and Toronto Airports and, if so, do they show five car rental firms in each airport?


Len Marchand: 1. Yes, the Department of Transport does have blueprints of the Halifax, Quebec City and Toronto Airports and, no, they do not show five car rental firms in each airport.


Mr. Haliburton: 1.	Has the government initiated any study by the Department of Transport or by consultants regarding future requirements of ferry services between New England and Nova Scotia during the period 1967 to date?
2.	Has the government initiated any study into the nature and extent of demand for ferry services between Bar Harbor, Maine and Yarmouth, Nova Scotia as presently served by M.V. Bluenose with a view to determining (a) whether there is traffic which might be handled by a vessel using end-loading techniques (b) whether there is sufficient traffic to justify a second ferry on that run at any season of the year?
3.	Has the Department initiated any investigation of the M.V. Bluenose to determine the life expectancy of that vessel and to estimate how long it might effectively serve on its present run?


Len Marchand: 1. Yes.
2.	(a) Yes, (b) Yes.
3.	Yes.


Mr. Towers: 1.	During 1972, how many tractors manufactured (a) in Canada were sold in the United States (b) in the United States were sold in Canada?
2.	During 1972, how many automobiles were manufactured (a) in the United States and sold in Canada (b) in other countries and sold in Canada?
3.	What countries and how many automobiles in each were manufactured and sold in Canada?
Order Paper Questions


Herb Breau: Statistics Canada
reports that:
(a) Tractors manufactured in	Canada and sold in the	
United States during 1972	(exports) were as follows:	
	Units	
Description	Number of	Value $000
Wheel tractors, new		
and used	1,618	9,689
Parts of wheel tractors Tractors & tractor parts		9,321
(not elsewhere specified)		9,976
(b) Tractors manufactured in the U.S. and sold in Canada		
(imports) were:		
Lawn & garden tractors Wheel tractors new	17,276	9,693(not specified elsewhere) Track-laying tractors.	14,278	89,319carb. (nes.) Track-laying tractors,	6	14diesel new	2,370	63,550Used tractors Tractors not elsewhere	1,225	7,404specified	85,9272. Statistics Canada does not collect data on the number of automobiles manufactured in other countries, however the data provided below show the number of automobiles	exported from the various	countries.	These figuresinclude cars exported from a	country other than where	they were manufactured and	also used	cars exportedfrom the country by an individual for his own use-i.e., not to be sold in Canada, (a) During 1972 there were 395,319 automobiles imported into Canada from the United States, (b) The following table provides data on the number of automobiles imported into Canada from other	countries during 1972.	Imports of Automobiles into Canada,	1972Country	No. of	AutomobilesUnited Kingdom	26,837West Germany	34,710Italy	6,595Japan	149,613France	8,259Sweden	6,789Belgium-Luxembourg	18Denmark	5Netherlands	25Portugal	1Spain	2Switzerland	2East Germany	2Roumania	6
April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
Country	No. of Automobil
Yugoslavia	3
Lebanon	1
United Arab Republic	1
Nigeria	1
South Africa	1
Morocco	1
South Korea	2
Bahamas	1
Bermuda	1
Barbados	1
Honduras	1
Mexico	1
3. Not available for reasons cited in 2 above.


Mr. Towers: What was the dollar value of coffins imported from the U.S. or any other country during 1972?


Herb Breau: Statistics Canada
reports that: The dollar value of coffins imported from the United States during 1972 was $388,000. Coffins were not imported from other countries during 1972.


Mr. Stackhouse: 1.	How many offenders were released on bail in 1972?
2.	How many were subsequently charged with offences allegedly committed while they were on bail?


Herb Breau: Statistics Canada reports that: Statistics Canada did not collect the information requested in this question for 1972.


Mr. Knight: What are the salaries for the following Statistics Canada staff for the year 1973 (a) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for business statistics (b) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for household and institutional statistics (c) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for economic accounts (d) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for statistical services (e) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for marketing services (f) Director-General for administration (g) Director-General for policy, planning and evaluation?


Herb Breau: Statistics Canada
reports that: Salary ranges for the following Statistics Canada staff for the year 1973 are: (a) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for business statistics, $28,000 to $35,000; (b) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for household and institutional statistics, $28,000 to $35,000; (c) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for economic accounts, $28,000 to $35,000; (d) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for statistical services, $28,000 to $35,000; (e) Assistant Chief Statistician responsible for marketing services, $25,000 to $31,000; (f) Director-General for
[Mr. Breau.l
Administration, $25,000 to $31,000; (g) Director-General for policy, planning and evaluation, $25,000 to $31,000.


Mr. Reynolds: Were any of the recommendations of the hearing officer (Fisher) on the Lancaster area hearings (Sea Island-Vancouver International Airport) accepted and, if so, what were they?


Jean-Eudes Dubé: No
recommendations were made by the Hearing Officer. The Expropriation Act recites the Duties of the Hearing Officer in Section 8 (4) and requires that he "submit to the Minister a report in writing on the nature and grounds of the objections made."


Mr. McKinnon: Has it been decided that the winter wharfage for the fishing fleet in Victoria Inner Harbour is to be phased out and the operation moved to Sooke Harbour and, if so, is it the intention of the Minister of the Environment to review the matter, giving cognizance to the views of the Mayor and Council of Victoria and the Pacific Trollermen who want the wharfage increased in Victoria Inner Harbour?


Bill Rompkey: It has not been decided nor are there any plans that the winter wharfage for the fishing fleet in Victoria Inner Harbour be phased out and the operation moved to Sooke Harbour.


Mr. Beaudoin: 1.	Is the Post Office Department considering the possibility of establishing a postal delivery service in the Municipality of Windsor and, if so (a) what criteria are required by the Department for the establishment of such service (b) what steps are to be taken by the Department until this service is actually in operation?
2.	According to the Department, if the Municipality of Windsor meets the required standards, what is the approximate date on which this postal delivery service will be instituted?
3.	Does the Post Office Department consider the present Windsor Post Office adequate to meet the new role it will be given if the Municipality's request is accepted?
4.	Is the Post Office Department considering the possibility of recommending the enlargement of the Windsor Post Office if the Municipality's request for postal delivery service is accepted and, if so, what will be the nature of this construction or alteration of the present Post Office?


André Ouellet: 1. Yes. A preliminary survey is to be conducted later this month to determine whether the area qualifies for this service. 1. (a) The principal requirement is the availability of at least
2,000	points of call in a compact, well built-up area. Subsidiary conditions are: 1. Walking conditions within the area must be satisfactory on a year round basis. 2. There must be access to the homes by means of pathways or driveways, where conditions under foot are deemed to be
April 2, 1973

satisfactory. 3. The premises must be numbered in accordance with a municipal numbering plan and numbers must be placed so that they are clearly visible frorrj the street. 4. Street names and signs must be erected at intersections. 5. It must be possible to make transportation arrangements for the letter carriers, when necessary, due to the serving of areas well removed from the Post Office. 6. Suitable letter slots or boxes must be installed. 1. (b) Information concerning procedures to be followed prior to the establishment of this service covers some 17 pages in a manual and is considered too lengthy to be repeated here.
2.	This is contingent on the results of the preliminary survey mentioned in Part 1.
3.	See part 2.
4.	See part 2.


Mr. Knight: 1.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1970 in the Department of Labour?
2.	How many of those employees were earning more than $15,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000 intervals?
3.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1973 in the Department of Labour?
4.	How many of those employees were earning more than $18,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000 intervals?


John Carr Munro: 1. Seven hundred and sixty-nine.
2.	Information not available.
3.	Seven hundred and sixteen.
4.	$18,000-$19,000-5; $19,000-$20,000-6; $20,000-$21,-000-11; $21,000-$22,000-7; $22,000-$23,000-2; $23,000-$24,000-9; $24,000-$25,000-9; $25,000-$26,000-3; $26,000-$27,000-2; $27,000-$28,000-2; $28,000-$35,000-4; $34,000-$40,000-1.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Rowland: 1.	Has the government received representations from Mr. Charles P. Bennett and M. Dimentberg of Winnipeg, Manitoba, to the effect that the costs of construction of a Northern gas pipeline could be reduced by a factor of 50% if the system was designed to transport natural gas in a liquid rather than vapour state?
2.	Has the government investigated the accuracy of the submission and, if so, by whom was the investigation carried out and what were the findings?
3.	Has the government investigated the proposal for a liquid natural gas pipeline from the point of view of its potential for reducing damages which might result from a break and, if so, by whom and with what results?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: 1. Yes.
2.	The federal government has been making such an appraisal on an interdepartmental basis.
3.	Yes, as part of 2.


[Stage Direction]
Question No 1,275-Mr. Rowland:
Is the government giving consideration to providing funds for the construction of a test loop for the purpose of evaluating the efficacy of a liquid natural gas pipeline in transporting natural gas from the North of Canada to the South and, if not, for what reason?
Donald Stovel Macdonald: The federal government is not giving consideration to providing funds for this purpose because test loop feasibility work for pipelines is a responsibility of industry.


Mr. Cossitt: What are the names of all persons employed by, on loan to or attached to, the Office of the Solicitor General and in each case a) what are the duties performed by such individuals b) what are their salaries for the current fiscal year, in dollars?


William Warren Allmand: For the Ministry of the Solicitor General:
A) In exempt positions, appointed under Section 37 of the Public Service Employment Act;


[Stage Direction]
NAME	FUNCTION	LEVEL	RANGEMr.	Zavie Levine	Executive Asst.	7	$17,500-$20,000Dr.	Terry McGrath	Special Asst.	6	$15,000-$17,500Mr.	Jim McDonald	Special Asst.	5	$12,500-$15,000Mrs.	S. Smith	Private Secretary	4	$10,000-$12,500Miss	J. Morin	Secretary	3	$ 7,500-$10,000Mr.	Guy Deslauriers	Registry Supervisor	3	$ 7,500-$10,000Mr.	Carl Charette	Confidential Messenger and Driver	2	$ 5,000-$ 7,500B)	In classified positions,	according to the Public	Service classification:
[Stage Direction]
NAME	FUNCTION	LEVEL	RANGEMr. J. Cameron	Departmental Asst.	AS 4	$12,329-$14,010Miss C. Cook	Secretary	ST 5	$ 6,676-$ 7,338Mrs. J. Heathcote	Secretary	ST 4	$ 6,233-$ 6,849Miss L. Beland	Typist	ST 2	$ 5,102-$ 5,607
April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
[Stage Direction]
Mrs. L. Powers Mrs. H. Stafford Mr. J. Cloutier
[Stage Direction]
Secretary Secretary Registry Clerk
SALARY RANGE LEVEL	RANGE
CR 3	$	6,707-$	7,372CR 3	$	6,707-$	7,372CR 2	$	5,486-$	6,028
Mr. Lawrence: 1.	What use was being made of the two Search and Rescue Otter aircraft based at Trenton, "along with the wide variety of military aircraft such as the Hercules, the Voyageur helicopter and other craft", which form the normal supplement and complement of the Search and Rescue force based at Trenton, Ontario, as listed in the answer to Question No. 719, from 0900 hours through to 1500 hours on September 14, 1972?
2.	If any of the aircraft were on any sort of mission, what was the purpose of each of the missions, authority for the missions, the names, serial numbers and rank of the crew, the names and travel authority of each of the passengers, military or civil, the duration of each of the missions and the destinations of each of the missions?
3.	If any of the said aircraft were non-operational due to repairs or maintenance taking place, what was the nature of the repairs or maintenance and the duration the aircraft was non-operational for these purposes?
4.	Were any aircraft called upon during the indicated time for a search and rescue missions and, if so, what was the nature of the request and what was the result of the request?


James Armstrong Richardson: 1 and 2. One of the two Twin Otter aircraft based at CFB Trenton was used to carry out a para rescue training exercise in the Trenton area from 0905 to 1035 on September 14, 1972, under the authority of the Commander, Air Transport Command. The crew list was as follows: Aircraft Commander, 612 008 417, Maj. Merklinger BA; First Officer, 431 077 031, Capt. Carscadden ER; Crewman,
106	364 151, Sgt. Lafosse W.; Para Rescue, 612 067 629, Cpl. Radcliffe J.; Para Rescue, 608 939 674, Cpl. Davis W.; Para Rescue, 611 496,696, MCpl. Jarbeau GF.; Para Rescue,
107	600 322, Cpl. Bollong DG.; Para Rescue, 435 774 864, Cpl. Campbell AK. Captain E.R. Caird, 223 001 306, Officer in charge of the Trenton Rescue Co-ordination Centre was embarked to observe the training mission. During the remainder of the time period the crew and aircraft were on standby duty at CFB Trenton. The other Twin Otter aircraft was not flown that day. The fleet of Hercules aircraft based at CFB Trenton during that same time period were tasked for a NATO exercise "Strong Express" under the authority of the Chief of Defence Staff-destination Norway, and were not involved in any search and rescue mission. The Voyageur helicopter used to support the search and rescue role in the Trenton Search and Rescue region is held on secondary search and rescue standby at CFB Ottawa.
3.	Two of the Hercules aircraft were non-operational undergoing inspection and wing modification at Northwest Industries Ltd., Edmonton, Alberta, during the period referred to in part one above.
4.	No aircraft were called upon during that period to perform a search and rescue mission.


Mr. Godin: Has the Public Service Alliance of Canada recently signed a contract with the Treasury Board on behalf of employees of the Department of National Defence at CFB Valcartier who perform miscellaneous services (cleaning, help, etc.) and, if so (a) what is the nature of the contract (b) what are the working conditions of this group (c) does the Department plan to increase their wages and, if so, on what date will they receive it?


James Armstrong Richardson: Not yet. (a) The Treasury Board and the Public Service Alliance of Canada have been negotiating a new collective agreement to cover the General Services Occupational Group since September 6, 1972; (b) This Occupational Group includes personnel such as kitchen help, storemen and cleaners; (c) As negotiations are still in progress at this time, it is impossible to predict the changes, if any, which will be negotiated with respect to wages or terms and conditions of employment, or when these changes will become effective.


Mr. Diefenbaker: What action has been taken by the Prime Minister and the government to carry out the promise made during the election that the City of Toronto would be given an 80 acre waterfront park paid for by the government?


John Mercer Reid: Mr. Speaker, because of the length of the answer to starred question 1,380, could it be tabled as a return with the others?


Mr. Speaker:: Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
Return tabled.


Mr. Reynolds: In light of the increase of foreign competition in the cordage industry on the West Coast, is the Minister of Finance considering amending tariff item 68200-1 to afford restrictive duty on this particular product, i.e. braided leadcore leadline?

April 2, 1973


Hon. John N. Turner (Minister of Finance):: It has been the policy of successive Canadian Governments to allow duty-free entry of equipment for the use of the commercial fisheries in Canada. No change in this policy is contemplated at the present time.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Is the government giving consideration to proposing abolition of the Senate?
2.	Is the government giving consideration to reform of the Senate with a view to permitting it to perform more useful functions in the governmental process?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: 1. No.
2. The government presented to the Constitutional Conference in 1969 propositions with respect to the Senate in a working paper entitled "The Constitution and the People of Canada" and these propositions were subsequently discussed with the provincial governments. No further discussions are planned at present.


Mr. Rowland: 1.	What was the cost of repairs to damages incurred by HMCS Restigouche during refit?
2.	For what period of time was HMCS Restigouche out of service due to the damages referred to in Part 1?
3.	Is there evidence that any of the damage was the result of deliberate action?
4.	Is legal action against the shipyard comtemplated?
5.	(a) Is HMCS Restigouche being transferred from the East Coast flotilla to the West Coast flotilla (b) was HMCS Restigouche slated for such a transfer prior to her refit or has the decision been made subsequent to the inquiries?
6.	Is court martial action against naval engineering staff being contemplated?


John Mercer Reid: I am informed by the Departments of National Defence and Supply and Services as follows:
1.	It is estimated that when repairs are completed towards the end of April, labour costs plus replacement components will be in the neighbourhood of $750,000.
2.	Approximately seven months.
3.	No.
4.	In all contract cases when the department feels that the full terms of the contract have not been met, it is the practice to have legal officers of the Department of Justice to study the circumstances. This is being done with regard to HMCS Restigouche.
5.	(a) and (b) Yes; the decision was made before discovery of corrosion damage and subsequent repair.
6.	No.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. McKinnon: 1.	What steps is the government taking to alleviate the serious shortage of marine engineers in the sea element on the West Coast?


Len Marchand: 1. The
Ministry of Transport maintains a close liaison with the West Coast marine engineering schools under the control of the Province of British Columbia, in order to co-operate in the establishment and availability of suitable courses for marine engineers requiring basic and advanced training.


Mr. Orlikow: 1.	Of Indian students attending university in 1971-72, how many of those who began the first year completed the full course in each year?
2.	How many Indian students attending university in 1971-72 withdrew before the end of the academic year?


Hon. Jean Chretien (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: 1. 282
2. 105


Mr. McGrath: 1.	What is the total strength of Canadian Forces personnel stationed in each of the four Atlantic Provinces-Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick?
2.	What defence establishments are located in these Provinces?
3.	What is the total strength of Canadian Forces for each of the other six provinces, the Yukon and the Northwest Territories?


James Armstrong Richardson: 1.	Newfoundland, 794; Prince Edward Island, 1,069; Nova Scotia, 12,809; New Brunswick, 4,748; total; 19,420.
2.	Newfoundland: Canadian Forces Station Gander; Canadian Forces Station Goose Bay; Canadian Forces Station St. John's. Prince Edward Island: Canadian Forces Base Summerside. Nova Scotia: Canadian Forces Base Cornwallis; Canadian Forces Base Greenwood; Canadian Forces Base Halifax; Canadian Forces Base Shearwater; Canadian Forces Station Barrington Canadian Forces Station Mill Cove; Canadian Forces Station Shelburne; Canadian Forces Station Sydney. New Brunswick: Canadian Forces Base Chatham; Canadian Forces Base Gagetown; Canadian Forces Base Moncton.
3.	Quebec, 10,691; Ontario, 24,150; Manitoba, 4,172; Saskatchewan, 1,521; Alberta, 8,111 British Columbia, 8,480; Yukon, 4; Northwest Territories, 325.


Mr. McKinnon: 1.	What firm has been given the architects contract for the Ratings Mess at CFB Esquimalt?

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions
2.	Was the contract the subject of tendering procedure?
3.	Approximately how much money will be paid to the architect or architects firm securing the contract?


James Armstrong Richardson: 1. There is no Ratings Mess being designed for Canadian Forces Base Esquimalt. However a contract has been let for the design of a new Junior Ranks Club at this site and the firm of Wade, Stockdill, Armour and Blewett, Architects and Designers, 914 Gordon Street, Victoria, B.C., has been retained.
2.	No, consultant contracts are not normally the subject of a tendering procedure. Design contracts and others of a similar nature are negotiated on a selective basis depending on the experience and capabilities of the consultant with regard to the nature of the work requirement.
3.	Approximately $50,000 which includes architects fees, specialist services for cost control, survey, soil investigations and sundry expenses.


Mr. Knight: 1.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1970 in the Ministry of State for Science and Technology?
2.	How many of those employees were earning more than $15,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000 intervals?
3.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1973 in the Ministry of State for Science and Technology?
4.	How many of those employees were earning more than $18,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000 intervals?


Hon. Jeanne Sauve (Minister of State for Science and Technology):: 1. N/A Ministry not in existence until August
1971.
2.	N/A Ministry not in existence until August 1971.
3.	108.
4.	$18-19,000, nil; 19-20,000, 1 person; 20-21,000, 3 persons; 21-22,000, 1 person; 22-23,000, 6 persons; $23-24,000, 4 persons; 24-25,000, 1 person; 25-26,000, 1 person; 26-27,000, 1 person; 27-28,000, 1 person; Over $30,000: Salary range of $25,000,-$31,000, 1 person; Salary range of $28,000,-$35,-000, 2 persons; Salary range of $40,000,-$45,000 1 person; 12 persons.


Mr. Kempling: 1.	What are the full titles of studies dealing with the erosion effects of high water in Lake Ontario?
2.	(a) How many were completed, commenced or underway during the last year by the Canada Centre for Inland Waters in Burlington, Ontario (b) what was the date they were (i) commenced (ii) completed (c) what were the names of the principal contributors and authors (d) what were the names of those municipal, provincial or foreign governments or companies for whom or in co-operation with whom each study was produced and what was the extent of that co-operation?


Bill Rompkey: 1. (a) "Geotechnical Aspects of Shoreline Erosion-Western Lake Ontario" (b) "Tropical Storm 'Agnes' Effects on Shore Erosion-Niagara Penin-

sula" (c) "Shore Erosion-Cause and Cure" (Pamphlet containing material on Ontario services to shore property owners.) (d) "A Preliminary Summary of CCIW Shore Erosion Studies" (e) Continuing study by CCIW using 27 permanent erosion stations to assess annual rate of shoreline changes on Lake Ontario, (f) Continuing updating by CCIW of strip maps showing physical characteristics of Great Lakes shorelines (for use by all federal, provincial and municipal agencies and citizens).
2. (a) No studies were completed, three new studies were commenced, two continuing studies were underway at CCIW Burlington in 1972. (b) i. "Geotechnical Aspects of Shoreline Erosion-Western Lake Ontario". Commenced May 1972, to be completed March 1973. ii. "Tropical Storm "Agnes" Effects on Shore Erosion-Niagara Peninsula". Commenced November 1972, to be completed in 1973. iii. "Shore Erosion-Cause and Cure". Commenced December 1972, published February 1973. iv. "A Preliminary Summary of CCIW Shoreline Erosion Studies". Commenced February 1973, to be completed in March 1973. v. Continuing study of shoreline erosion-commenced in 1971. vi. Continuing updating of strip maps-commenced in 1966 by Department of Public Works, (c) i. "Geotechnical Aspects of Shoreline Erosion-Western Lake Ontario"-Prof. O. White, E. Matyas, Le Lievre (University of Waterloo) and Drs. Sly, Rukavina, Lewis and Mr. Coakley (CCIW). ii. "Tropical Storm "Agnes" Effects on Shore Erosion-Niagara Peninsula"-N. G. Freeman, T.
S.	Murty, W. S. Haras (CCIW). iii. "A Preliminary Summary of CCIW Shoreline Erosion Studies"-J. Coakley, W. Haras, M. Skafel (CCIW). (d) i. "Geotechnical Aspects of Shoreline Erosion-Western Lake Ontario"-Cooperative Study with University of Waterloo, Civil Engineering Department, ii. "Shore Erosion-Cause and Cure"- Developed in collaboration with Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.


Mr. Matte: What are the current gold reserves of the Bank of Canada and on which criteria is the issuing of paper currency and coins based?


John Napier Turner: The Bank of Canada does not own any gold, either for reserve or for other purposes. Pursuant to Section 21 of the Bank of Canada Act, the Bank has sole right to issue notes intended for circulation in Canada. The Bank does not maintain gold reserves as a counterpoint of outstanding notes. The amount of the note and coin issue is determined by the general public's demand, and depends on whether the public prefers to hold its liquidities in the form of notes and coins rather than in the form of deposits with chartered banks and other financial institutions. Currency outside banks (coins and notes) represents only a portion of the money supply, which is usually defined to include currency outside banks and total Canadian dollar deposits with chartered banks. For economic stabilization purposes, the Bank of Canada's efforts are therefore directed towards controlling the total money supply rather than one of its components.
April 2, 1973


Mr. Nystrom: 1.	What was the total cost to the Department of National Revenue for the advertisement regarding income tax forms called "Follow the Blue-It will guide you through the new tax form"?
2.	(a) What was the total amount spent in daily and weekly newspapers (b) what was the total amount spent in magazines, periodicals and other publications?
3.	What was the total cost of the advertisement (a) on television (b) on radio?
4.	(a) What is the name and address of the advertising firm who prepared the advertisement (b) what was paid to the firm?


Hon. Robert Stanbury (Minister of National Revenue):: Insofar as the Department of National Revenue, Taxation, is concerned: 1. $607,767.09
2.	(a) $267,346.00 (b) $13,929.60
3.	(a) $161,278.20 (b) $74,500.20
4.	(a) Inter-Canada Advertising Agency, 1350 Sherbrooke West, Montreal, (b) Agency's commission is paid by the media, not by the Department.


[Stage Direction]
Order Paper Questions
James Armstrong Richardson: 1. No.
2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Not applicable.


Mr. Rowland: 1.	Are the Canadian Armed Forces currently conducting evaluation tests of a possible replacement vehicle for the 5 ton tactical support and cargo vehicles currently in service?
2.	What are the names of the vehicles and their manufacturers currently being considered for this role?
3.	What is the anticipated total cost of this purchase program?
4.	What is the number of vehicles it is anticipated will be purchased and what is the anticipated per unit cost?
5.	Will any eventual purchase contract contain the provision that the vehicle must be constructed in Canada?
6.	Will any eventual purchase contract contain provisions for regional distribution of expenditures on the vehicle?
7.	On what date may an announcement with respect to the letting of a contract be expected?


James Armstrong Richardson: 1. No.
2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Not applicable.


Mr. Rowland: 1.	Are the Canadian Armed Forces currently conducting evaluation tests of a possible replacement vehicle for the 21 ton military cargo vehicles currently in service?
2.	What are the names of the vehicles and their manufacturers currently being considered for this role?
3.	What is the anticipated total cost of this purchase program?
4.	What is the number of vehicles it is anticipated will be purchased and what is the anticipated per unit cost?
5.	Will any eventual purchase contract contain the provision that the vehicle must be constructed in Canada?
6.	Will any eventual purchase contract contain provisions for regional distribution of expenditures on the vehicle?
7.	On what date may an announcement with respect to the letting of a contract be expected?


Mr. Knight: 1.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1970 in the Department of Supply and Services?
2.	How many of those employees were earning more than $15,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000?
3.	How many full-time employees were there as of January 31, 1973 in the Department of Supply and Services?
4.	How many of those employees were earning more than $18,000 annually, distributed according to $1,000 intervals?


Jean-Pierre Goyer: 1. to 4.
Annual Salary in Thousands
Full Time Employees	15	16	17	18	19Jan. 31, 1970	8162	52	97	145	30	104Jan. 31, 1973	8175	91	93


[Stage Direction]
20 21	22	23	24	25	26	27	28, GOO-35,00013 5	9	4	9	6	2	3	4169 42	59	60	49	9	10	5	15personnel	serving	north of	the	55th	parallel	to be
identified.
Mr. McKinnon: 1.	How many members of the Canadian Armed Forces are now serving in Canada north of the 55th parallel of latitude?
2.	How many were serving north of the 55th parallel of latitude in March, 1963?


James Armstrong Richardson: 1. Six hundred and fifty-four.
2. In 1963 records were not maintained in a manner which would permit the number of Canadian Forces'


Mr. Brewin: 1.	Is Canada participating in a UN Population Year and Conference in 1974?
2.	Has the government received requests from the UN Secretariat for Population Year for a "country statement" to be completed by March 1973?
3.	Has the task of preparing such a "country statement" been referred to an inter-departmental committee?

April 2, 1973
Order Paper Questions ,
4.	Is it proposed to publish the results of the statement and, if so, where and in what manner?
5.	Has the government consulted interested Canadian groups including the Churches in regard to the content of the "country statement"?
6.	Will the government make available to Members of Parliament, by tabling or otherwise, the contents of the Canadian "country statement"?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: 1. Yes.
2.	Yes.
3.	Yes.
4.	Yes. The statement will be tabled in the House
5.	Due to the extremely short deadline imposed by the United Nations there was insufficient time actively to request participation of non-federal government organizations in the preparation of the paper but a number of unsolicited submissions by interested groups were taken into account. The matter of further consultations on this subject is under consideration.
6.	Yes. The Government will make the Canadian "country statement" available to members of Parliament by tabling.


Mr. Stewart (Okanagan-Kootenay): 1.	How many veterans of the Boer War are there in Canada?
2.	How many veterans of the Boer War are receiving veterans pensions?
3.	What is the average pension received by a veteran of the Boer War?


Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: 1, 2 and 3. Estimates of the veteran population and record of pensions in payment do not separately identify veterans of the Boer War. These data are included in World War I figures provided to answer to Question No. 1,670.


Mr. Stewart (Okanagan-Kootenay): 1.	How many veterans of the Korean War are there in Canada?
2.	How many veterans of the Korean War are receiving veterans pensions?
3.	What is the average pension received by a veteran of the Korean War?


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: 1. Based on information obtained from the 1961 Census and adjusted for mortality by the Canadian Life tables, 1960-62, the estimated number at June 1, 1973 will be 26,000.
2.	Two thousand and forty-three as at December 31,
1972.
3.	Two thousand and forty-three Korean Campaign veterans as at December 31, 1972, were receiving a total amount of $2,272,008. Their average annual pension as at the date was $1,112.09.


Mr. Stewart (Okanagan-Kootenay): 1.	How many veterans of the First World War are there in Canada?
2.	How many veterans of the First World War are receiving veterans pensions?
3.	What is the average pension received by a veteran of the First World War?


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: In the records maintained by the Department of Veterans Affairs, information with reference to veterans of World War I includes the veterans of the Boer War. Consequently the answers to Parts 1, 2 and 3 of this question incorporate the information requested in Question No. 1,668. 1. Based on information obtained from the 1961 Census and adjusted for mortality by the Canadian Life Tables, 1960-62, the estimated number at June 1, 1973 will be 81,000.
2.	Eighteen thousand nine hundred and thirty-five as at December 31, 1972.
3.	Eighteen thousand nine hundred and thirty-five World War I veterans, as at December 31, 1972, were receiving a total amount of $28,537,125. Their average annual pension as at that date was $1,507.11.


Mr. Stewart (Okanagan-Kootenay): 1.	How many veterans of the Second World War are there in Canada?
2.	How many veterans of the Second World War are receiving veterans pensions?
3.	What is the average pension received by a veteran of the Second World War?
Hon. Daniel ]. MacDonald (Minister of Veterans Affairs): 1. Based on information obtained from the 1961 Census and adjusted for mortality by the Canadian Life Tables, 1960-62, the estimated number at June 1, 1973 will be 769,000.
2.	One hundred thousand five hundred and four as at December 31, 1972.
3.	One houndred thousand five hundred and four World War II veterans, as at December 31, 1972, were receiving a total amount of $126,511,500. Their average annual pension as at that date was $1,258.77.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Broadbent: 1. What are the names of the persons presently in the public service seconded to the service by private enterprise on a temporary basis and, in each case (a) what are the names and addresses of their companies (b) what are the positions these persons occupy in the public service (c) what are the duties of these positions (d) what salary ranges do these positions carry (e) for what period of time were these appointments made?
April 2, 1973

2. What are the names of public servants who are presently on secondment on a temporary basis to private enterprise and, in each case (a) what are their positions and salary ranges in the public service (b) what are the names of the companies involved (c) for what period of time was the secondment made?
Return tabled.



CANADIAN ARMED FORCES-DISPOSAL OF JEEPS

Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Were any jeeps which were the property of the Canadian Armed Forces disposed of in any way since April 1968 and, if so, what was the manner of disposal?
2.	Were any jeeps which were the property of the Canadian Armed Forces sold since April 1968 and, if so, for each vehicle (a) what was the name of the purchaser (b) what was the date of sale (c) what was the sale price?
Return tabled.



COST OF CONSTRUCTION OF GRAIN COMMISSIONERS BUILDING, WINNIPEG

Mr. Rowland: 1.	What is the current projected total cost of construction, to completion, of the Grain Commissioners Building in Winnipeg?
2.	Does this represent an increase from the original projected cost and, if so, by how much?
3.	Have any alterations, additions or modifications been made in or to the building at the request or order of the Department of Public Works or the project manager, by the use of "change orders", "change notices" or other means and, if so, what is the description of each modification, addition or alteration, and the cost thereof?
Return tabled.



AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How much money was spent for agricultural research by the government in the past year in (a) Department of Agricultural facilities (b) National Research Council (c) university faculties of agriculture?
2.	How much money is it proposed to spend in the coming year for agricultural research through each of the above three categories?
Return tabled.



LOCAL INITIATIVE PROJECT

Mr. Lessard: As at February 10, 1973, how many Local Initiative Projects were accepted and what amounts were distributed in each county of the Province of Quebec?
Return tabled.



RETIREMENT AT AGE 55

Mr. McKinnon: Does the government allow employees of any department(s) to retire at the age of 55 and draw the two-percent cost of living increase on their pensions each year thereafter and, if so (a) what departments (b) is the same treatment made available to retired
Order Paper Questions
members of the Department of National Defence and, if not, for what reasons?
Return tabled.



NATIONAL REVENUE DEPARTMENT-NUMBER OF PERSONNEL 1963-1973

Mr. Paproski: 1.	How many full-time employees were under salary in the National Revenue Department on (a) January 1, 1963 (b) January 1, 1973?
2.	How many people in each of these years were receiving salaries of (a) under $10,000 (b) between $10,000 and $20,000 (c) over $20,000?
Return tabled.



IMPORTS OF OFFICE EQUIPMENT

Mr. Towers: 1.	What was the amount, in dollars, of office equipment imported from the United States during 1972?
2.	Is there any office equipment manufactured in Canada and sold to the U.S. or to any other country and, if so, in what amounts?
Return tabled.



PENITENTIARY SENTENCES

Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How many persons were serving penitentiary sentences in each penitentiary in Canada during 1972?
2.	Of those serving penitentiary sentences, how many were (a) Indians within the meaning of the Indian Act (b) of Indian ancestry in each penitentiary during the year 1972?
Return tabled.



AGRICULTURE-TOTAL CROPS, SEEDED AREAS AND RAPESEED

Mr. Caouette (Charlevoix): 1.	By province, since 1967, what was (a) the seeded area (b) the total crops (c) the value of the rapeseed crop?
2.	What part of such crops was exported and what part was consumed in Canada?
3.	What were the rapeseed and its by-products used for in Canada?
4.	What industries or enterprises are the largest buyers of rape-seed and its by-products and for what purpose are they used?
5.	Does the government make grants of any kind to rapeseed growers and, if so, under what form?
Return tabled.


Mr. Diefenbaker:: Mr. Speaker, I rise to make reference to starred question No. 1,658, which asks:
1.	What information has the Department of External Affairs been able to secure concerning the disappearance of the aircraft operating under the auspices of ICSC which carried Mr. J. W. Douglas Turner, an external affairs officer, and two other Canadians on board en route to Hanoi on October 18, 1965?
2.	Did the minister of external affairs, when in Hanoi, bring up this matter with the authorities in North Viet Nam, in Laos or South Viet Nam and, if so, what was he able to ascertain?

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada Rate Increases
This is a very touching situation. The parents of this young man have been trying since 1965 to find out something concerning their son and the other two Canadians who disappeared at the same time. They have had a harrowing experience for eight long years. Some have endeavoured to get an answer to this question and have made inquiries of the Department of External Affairs, but without success. The Secretary of State for External Affairs was over there. The question could easily be answered and should be answered. No one who has not had a relative missing with no report of the missing person for years can fully appreciate how terrible is the plight for the mother and father of this young man.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I have approved the answer to the question and I do not understand why it was not given today. I will make inquiries, but may I say I have answered oral questions about these people who disappeared, and I share the right hon. gentleman's concern.


John George Diefenbaker: With no information in the oral answers.


Mr. Danson:: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wonder if we can have some assurance that Hansard will be published on time tomorrow in view of the fact more questions on the order paper have been answered than at almost any other previous session of parliament, and answered promptly by the government.


Gerald William Baldwin: Go back three years.


An hon. Member:: You haven't even come close to it.


Mr. Hees:: Never was such a large backlog answered with so little.


Mr. Reynolds:: Mr. Speaker, I have had a question on the order paper since January 4, the first day the House sat. I should like the assurance of the parliamentary secretary that the question will be answered by Wednesday.


John Mercer Reid: Mr. Speaker, I will be delighted to look into it.



MOTION TO ADJOURN UNDER S.O. 26 COMMUNICATIONS BELL CANADA RATE INCREASES

David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, I ask leave, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), to move the adjournment of the House under Standing Order 26 for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely, the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission to grant Bell Canada almost all the rate increases it requested in its application A, and the need for the government to suspend the application of the decision immediately and to consider rescinding it as unacceptable and contrary to the public interest.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for York South has given the Chair the required notice of his intention to propose this motion under the terms of Standing Order 26. Since then I have given the matter very serious thought, but even at this moment I feel that the decision should perhaps be delayed for a while as authorized by the Standing Order. I appreciate, as the hon. member does, and I am sure as all hon. members do, how important this matter is. I recognize it is a matter of urgency, a matter of national importance and one of concern to all members of the House.
What concerns me is that perhaps the method proposed under Standing Order 26 for discussion of this important matter may not be the best in the world and not the best in the circumstances. Hon. members know that a debate under Standing Order 26 is really an open-ended debate with no motion before the House except that the House adjourn, and the adoption of such a motion means that hon. members go home. I am not sure whether, in the circumstances and in view of the importance and interest in this matter, the best way would be to have a debate under Standing Order 26. It is a matter of substance and perhaps we should have it before us under a substantive motion rather than under a motion to adjourn the House.
It is because of this uncertainty and these qualms that I would like to be given an opportunity to give the matter further thought, perhaps in light of the question period and what may transpire later this afternoon, and then make a ruling, as I am authorized to do under Standing Order 26, later this afternoon, in any event at or before five o'clock. If there is to be a debate today it would take place at eight o'clock this evening, but at or before five the Chair will be in a better position to make a more informed and enlightened decision.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Mr. lames A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister. In view of the appeal made by the Minister of Finance to labour and business to use restraint this year, I should like to ask whether the government intends to ask the Canadian Transport Commission to review its recent decisions granting increases in rates to Bell Canada and to CN-CP Telecommunications?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we are considering this question, and if an announcement is to be made it will be made.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister whether the cabinet is reviewing this recent decision
April 2, 1973

by the CTC in view of the significance to the economy and to the inflationary expectations in the country?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I have just answered the question, Mr. Speaker.


M. McGrath:: In view of the very serious problem of the high cost of living faced in Canada today by all Canadians, may I ask the Prime Minister if the government is prepared to set an example by enforcing guidelines on areas within the government's jurisdiction?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I believe we indicated as long as four years ago that to combat inflation we were indeed prepared to recommend guidelines and apply them ourselves.


BELL CANADA RATE INCREASES-REQUEST FOR SUSPENSION OF IMPLEMENTATION UNTIL GOVERNMENT STUDY COMPLETED
David Lewis: I have a supplementary, Mr. Speaker. I wish to direct it to the Minister of Communications. Arising out of the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission of last Friday, I ask the minister whether he has had a chance to study the decision and whether he will take steps to suspend the operation of that decision until the government has had time to study it and take action on it.


Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Minister oi Communications):: Mr. Speaker, as just stated by the Prime Minister, the matter is under consideration. The hon. member knows that parliament has deemed it advisable to entrust control to an independent body, the Canadian Transport Commission. He also knows that the government, that is the governor in council, cannot decide to alter, suspend or annul a decision unless there is an extremely serious reason to do so-for example, if the decision is based on a false assumption-or on serious factual mistakes.
When I learned that decision, as did all hon. members on Friday last, I acted as is normally done in the Department of Communications when such decisions are made; I asked my officials to determine as soon as possible whether government intervention is warranted. Once I have on hand the conclusions of that study and the consideration by the government, I will be in a position to answer the hon. member's question in the House.


David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, I fully appreciate what the minister has said, but in view of the fact that the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission states toward the end that the change in tariffs will come into effect one week after the tariffs are tabled with the commission, in view of the fact that this may happen very soon, and finally in view of the fact that once those tariffs are imposed changing them or rolling them back would present the government with great difficulty, may I ask the minister whether he is now studying-I hope favourably- the possibility of suspending the operation of the decision so that he and his colleagues may have time to decide what they may do about it?
Oral Questions


Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, in order to recommend to the government if only to suspend that decision, what I have just said must be ascertained. There must certainly be an extremely important reason. There are very few precedents in this field. In view of the philosophy of the government, and even of parliament quasi judicial bodies are independent from the executive power, as much as possible, and this government endeavours to respect this autonomy. However, as I said, I for one have asked senior officials of the department to review this question as soon as possible and I certainly do not propose to delay the decision making process regarding this.


Mr. MacDonald (Egmont):: A supplementary-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Chair will recognize the hon. member for York South on his second or third supplementary and then the hon. member for Egmont. If there are further supplementaries, hon. members will be recognized after I give an opportunity to an hon. member of the other party to my right to ask a question. For the moment, the hon. member for York South has the floor.


David Lewis: May I ask the minister whether, in view of the fact that the law has not only set up the Canadian Transport Commission and given it certain authority but has also given the Governor in Council authority to vary or rescind any decision made by the commission, in view of the fact that parliament must have given that authority to the government so that the government could use that authority when the appropriate circumstances are present, and because of the other facts I stated in my last question, could he guarantee to present an answer to the House within a week from this day before the new tariffs are likely to come into operation?


Gérard Pelletier: I can promise, Mr. Speaker, to do everything I can to that end, but I think that it would be presumptuous of me to promise that, within the next five days, the department's review would be concluded. I could not promise him that. I can only assure him that I will hurry.


BELL CANADA RATE INCREASES-SUGGESTED APPOINTMENT OF DEFENDER OF INTERESTS OF GENERAL PUBLIC IN SUCH APPLICATIONS
David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that these recent rate increases and other actions taken by the Canadian Transport Commission indicate there is an obvious lack in the workings of the commission in that there is little opportunity for the public to be represented with the same degree of effectiveness that large corporations such as Bell Telephone and others have in presenting their cases, are the Prime Minister and his colleagues giving some thought to introducing legisla-

April 2, 1973
Oral Questions
tion so that all of these impartial boards, such as the CTC, would have before them from time to time, when requests are being made such as the Bell Telephone application, those who would act on behalf of the public interest or as a defender of the general public in order to present their case with the same effectiveness as that possessed by those speaking on behalf of very large corporations that have the resources to make their presentations effectively?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, under the law which created the CTC and which was debated at great length in parliament not many years ago, the CTC was set up indeed as a defender of the public interest, one which was to look into all aspects of any question before authorizing any rate increase. That is why in a sense the control of rates, of prices and of wages in our economy, if recommended at all, will have to be done by boards that represent the public interest, as does the CTC. I will certainly consider the suggestion made by the hon. member to see if in some way the board can be assisted in its duties of representing the public interest, and if the suggestion has merit we will discuss legislation.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: In this consideration would the Prime Minister consider as an example the months of testimony before the CTC, when it appeared obvious that the role of the CTC was that of a judge hearing the facts impartially. The fact that one very large corporation had tremendous resources while those who attempted to represent the public interest did so, unfortunately, with very limited effectiveness because they lacked similar resources, and that this may be one reason for the decision with which we are faced now?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: The hon. member is really questioning the philosophy which is at the base of all public interest boards. I believe parliament agreed at the time-and I certainly still share that view-that tribunals, boards and judicial or quasi-judicial bodies are set up to represent the public interest. The idea that they are automatically influenced by some strong representation made to them is not one which I share. I repeat that there may be some added procedures that might be introduced to ensure that the board is enlightened further, but until I have seen evidence to the contrary I do take the view that these boards are there and that they do speak for the public interest. Indeed that is why, as the Minister of Communications just indicated in his answer, they are removed from the executive power, to make sure that there will be no undue interference by politicians in the subject.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, I have one final supplementary question. In attempting to review this process-and I think it is the process, not the philosophy, with which hon. members are concerned-would the Prime Minister inquire or those who did make representations at the recent hearing whether they felt they had adequate resources to deal effectively with some of the very complicated issues that were adjudicated by the CTC?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I can certainly look into the matter, but I am afraid there is a difference of principle between the

attitude of the hon. member and that of the board as it is set up under the law. I can only remind the House that, indeed, if any form of control is to be introduced it has to be set at arms' length from the government and it should not be subject to interference, not only by the government but by parliament, on a day to day basis.


Mr. Stanfield:: That is not the question.


Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, would the Prime Minister, in his reconsideration of this very important matter of principle, look at the debate on the establishment of the CTC which took place in January, 1967, and in particular examine the motion of the hon. member for Peace River, seconded by myself, on this very point in which we gave the examples of Australia and Saskatchewan as a way of not interfering with the efficient handling by the CTC but at the same time giving parliament some control, and look in particular at how the vote took place on that amendment?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Kootenay West.


SUGGESTED IMMEDIATE DISCUSSIONS WITH UNITED
Randolph Harding: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. In view of the Supreme Court decision announced today in Washington, which effectively barred the Alaska pipeline and the proposed tanker route along the Pacific coast, is the minister considering holding immediate discussions with the United States authorities, the British Columbia government and others on the subject of the only alternative left to the United States, namely, the transport of Alaskan oil through Canadian territory?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, we would like to see the decision and have a full report on it and also get an assessment of its impact under United States law, namely, whether the decision of the Supreme Court effectively bars Alyeska or whether possible Congressional action can remove that particular bar.
As I have told the House several times, the government has been active in presenting to the U.S. administration the possibilities of the Mackenzie route through Canada for Alaskan oil and, as I also indicated, this, of course, is dependent upon the terms of the National Energy Board Act which in the first instance puts the judgment on this in the hands of the National Energy Board. What we would like to do is to get a full assessment of the U.S. position before making further public statements at this time.


Randolph Harding: Will the minister consider placing this important matter before the appropriate standing committee of the House for investigation and study without delay?
April 2, 1973


Donald Stovel Macdonald: It really is before a committee now, as the hon. member knows as a participant in the National Resources and Public Works Committee. If the committee chooses to elect this particular subject matter under the estimates of my department, I would be prepared to go ahead and have a full discussion of it. It is up to the steering committee to decide on the subject matter with which they would like to deal under this general heading.


CO-ORDINATION OF CANADIAN OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED WEST COAST OIL TANKER ROUTE THROUGH JOINT GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE
[Stage Direction]
Mr. ]ohn A. Fraser (Vancouver South): Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the minister. Can he advise the House whether there is now a joint task force or committee of the federal government and the B.C. government instructed to co-ordinate Canadian opposition to the tanker route, and I emphasize the word "now"?
Donald Stovel Macdonald: As I indicated to the House, we immediately requested of Premier Barrett the information and the professional studies upon which he had put forward his Yukon railway proposal, and I sent to British Columbia last week the assistant deputy minister of my department to look further into the preparation that the B.C. government had done prior to this. I might mention to the hon. member who is the environmental critic, that not all environmental critics favour the Mackenzie pipeline route as a means of dealing with the transportation of oil products.


John Allen Fraser: Mr. Speaker, may I ask the minister to again consider what I asked him, and that is whether there is any joint committee? Is there any plan on behalf of the government to set up a joint co-ordinating committee with British Columbia, and has British Columbia been invited in specific terms of join in such a committee, because even the Prime Minister said eight weeks ago that time was of the essence?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, we are dealing here with federal responsibility for the Mackenzie Valley and with a pipeline which in essence will not go through British Columbia at all. I have a little difficulty in understanding why the British Columbia government would be participating in this kind of decision, to be taken under federal law, with regard to a pipeline passing through federal territory. We regard ourselves in this parliament as representing the interests of so far as the west coast is concerned, British Columbia, and it is for that reason I have been active in the past year in presenting this alternative to the United States authorities.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I note that there are a number of supplementaries on this subject. I am not sure whether the right hon. member for Prince Albert also wishes to ask a supplementary on this matter.
Oral Questions COMMUNICATIONS


BELL CANADA RATE INCREASES-AUTHORITY OF GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL IN REGARD TO FINAL DECISION
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, my question is supplementary to one asked earlier and concerns a statement by the Prime Minister in connection with what, on the face of it, appears to be an outrageous increase in rates on the part of the Bell Telephone Company. The Prime Minister told the House that, after all, the Canadian Transport Commission is an independent body, set up free for parliament, and so on. Is it not a fact that regardless of how independent it is, the final decision as to whether the increases shall be granted rests with the Governor in Council, the cabinet, which has the power to suspend, postpone, alter, or do away with altogether the recommendations that are made by the commission? Does not the final power rest with the Prime Minister and his cabinet?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, it seems that the right hon. gentleman is asking for a legal opinion.


John George Diefenbaker: Oh, no.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: And if on the face of it the rate increase is so obviously outrageous, I do not see why his party does not condemn it unequivocally.


John George Diefenbaker: This is a typical example of the Prime Minister playing with the parliament of Canada.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John George Diefenbaker: I would be the last to ask him for a legal opinion.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Mitchell William Sharp: Why did you ask, then?


John George Diefenbaker: Oh, he even has the support of his Secretary of State for External Affairs. I ask him this question: has not the government of Canada the right under the statute to do that which I suggested a moment ago, or has he not read the statute?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the right hon. gentleman says that he would be the last to ask me for a legal opinion. He has just asked me for a legal opinion. I can only say that as he is constantly bemoaning that this place is not lively enough I am sure he and I will want to contribute to the liveliness of it.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John George Diefenbaker: On a question of privilege-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. If the right hon. member is rising on a question of privilege he will be recognized for that purpose. I was under the impression that we were going to deal with supplementaries to the second question. When we have settled the question of privilege the Chair will return to the hon. member for Kootenay West, then

April 2, 1973
Oral Questions
the hon. member for Calgary North and then the hon. member for Yukon who have supplementaries on the second subject.


John George Diefenbaker: I rise on a question of privilege on behalf not only of parliament but of the people of Canada. The Prime Minister refuses to admit his responsibility and that of his cabinet. He tries to brush it aside by an imaginary suggestion that a legal opinion is involved. The people of Canada look to the government, although I know unsuccessfully, to protect them from this type of inflation.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Kootenay West.


REQUEST FOR THOROUGH EXAMINATION OF BRITISH COLUMBIA PROPOSAL THAT ALASKAN OIL BE TRANSPORTED BY RAIL
Randolph Harding: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is directed to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member for Kootenay West has the floor and he should be given an opportunity to ask his question.


Randolph Harding: My supplementary relates to the Alaska pipe line. I felt the minister indicated that preference would be given to the Mackenzie Valley route. I would like to ask him whether he will assure the House and the government of British Columbia that a very thorough discussion and examination of its proposal of a railway to transport oil from Alaska will be undertaken before any decision is made as to which route, if any, is to be taken?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Yes, Mr. Speaker, but I would only say that if Premier Barrett in fact did any studies before making his Yukon railway proposal, I am certain he will be glad to make these background studies available to the government of Canada. I hope they will be forthcoming shortly.


U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION BARRING ALASKA PIPELINE-SUBMISSION OF CANADIAN POSITION-REQUEST FOR POLICY STATEMENT
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, in light of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, has the minister now officially or unofficially put forward Canada's position very clearly so that the U.S. Congressional hearing at least will have that knowledge? Second, since there seems to be some question of where the government stands on this issue, would the minister undertake to make a clear and unequivocal statement on the energy policy of the government, particularly when we are dealing with an energy problem that really is a world crisis?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the second question would require a statement rather longer than I would be allowed to give during the question period. With respect to the first question, I would remind the hon. member that repeatedly during the past year and several months since I have been in this portfolio I have put the position of the government regarding the possibilities of the Mackenzie route before the House and the government of the United States. I am, however, governed by the National Energy Board Act as to the decision that should be taken.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Speaker, I am well aware that it would take too long today, but I am asking if tomorrow or very soon the minister will make an unequivocal statement on the national energy policy of the government, dealing with this matter of whether we are going to have a supertanker route down the west coast or whether we are going to have a pipeline, because that energy is going to be moved in spite of this government that will not be moved?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I think it is important to remind the hon. member that the oil resource he is talking about is not here in Canada. It is in Alaska and the Americans are seeking to move it to the southern 48 states. If he pauses to think about it for a moment he will realize that the question of a trans-Alaska pipeline is one of U.S. energy policy and not of the government of Canada.


Mr. Speaker:: The Chair will recognize the hon. member for Yukon and after his supplementary try to go to another subject.


REQUEST THAT TERRITORIES BE REPRESENTED ON ALL BODIES CONCERNED WITH POSSIBLE NORTHERN PIPELINE
Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon):: Mr. Speaker, I have only one supplementary. I would like to direct it to the Prime Minister since it involves several departments of government and the question of a pipeline. I ask him to give the people of the Yukon and the Northwest Territories his personal assurance, and that of his government, that in all discussions, on all task forces, and in all consideration given to the matter of a pipeline to be built through the northern portion of this country, the people there will be represented through their elected representatives on the territorial councils?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, whenever it is appropriate we do ensure such representation.


INDIAN AFFAIRS
Miss Flora MacDonald (Kingston and the Islands):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of


April 2, 1973

Indian Affairs and Northern Development. In view of the fact that a program of tubal ligation is being carried out on native women who apparently do not understand the consequences or claim they have not been informed that they are being sterilized, can the minister say what steps are being taken to rectify this shocking situation?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: First of all, Mr. Speaker, I do not accept the hon. member's statement that this program was set up by the government.
I listened myself to yesterday's CBC program; the Deputy Minister of National Health had given instructions concerning these operations.
Mistakes may have been made, and I know that my colleague, the Minister of National Health and Welfare, is studying the problem at the moment. But the government has no established policy concerning the sterilization of Indian women.	v


Flora Isabel MacDonald: Is the minister suggesting that the native women who were interviewed on the CBC and said the operation was done either against their will or without their knowing were in fact making false statements?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I said just now that there is always a possibility of mistakes. But the government's policy on this is quite clear, and these operations only take place when requested by the person concerned. The Department of National Health and Welfare requires in every case that there should be an interpreter present to facilitate conversation between the two doctors and the patient.


FINANCE
Mr. H. W. Danforth (Kent-Essex):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Because of the government's action in lowering the tariff on food imports and in setting up a special committee to study trends in food prices, and because of the concern expressed about the tremendous increase in food imports into Canada, is the government now considering controls or guidelines or direct action aimed at any other segment of the Canadian economy, or are the farmers of this nation and their families to bear the entire financial burden of the government's fight against high living costs?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member will appreciate and will agree, I am sure, that the second part
Oral Questions
of his question is argumentative and in this way the question is not in order.


Harold Warren Danforth: Mr. Speaker, may I rephrase the
question?


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member should not be allowed to ask a supplementary to a question that is out of order, but I will be pleased to allow the hon. member to rephrase the question.


Harold Warren Danforth: Mr. Speaker, that was my point. Thank you. May I ask the minister if the government contemplates imposing any controls or guidelines on any other segment of the Canadian economy comparable with those now imposed on the primary producers of this nation?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, despite the fact that the hon. gentleman has rephrased his question I want to say to the House that I do not accept his preamble and that the budgetary measures to which he refers also include a good many benefits to the farmers of this country, including transfers on death of the family farm and a good many items affecting farmers as consumers.


Gerald William Baldwin: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Chair will recognize the hon. member for Peace River on a supplementary and then recognize the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway.


JURISDICTION RESPECTING IMPOSITION OF PRICE CONTROLS-STATEMENT BY MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE-GOVERNMENT POSITION
Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. Would he at the earliest opportunity make a statement on motions indicating if the Minister of Agriculture was enunciating government policy when he said in the House on Friday that only provincial governments have the right to deal with questions of controls? Would he at the same time indicate what are the circumstances of emergency under which this government would see fit to act?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that is a question of constitutional law.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


George Harris Hees: This is a new low for non-answers, Pierre.


FOOD PRICES
Mrs. Grace Maclnnis (Vancouver-Kingsway):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question to direct to the Prime Minister. Would the Prime Minister assure the House that he will assign to his cabinet top priority for the consideration of

April 2, 1973
Oral Questions
the recommendations of the Special Committee on Trends in Food Prices?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the minister will report to cabinet on the findings of the committee.


Winona Grace MacInnis: In view of the urgency of the situation of rising food prices, resulting in protest movements of consumers across Canada, would the Prime Minister assure the House that he or one of his ministers will make a statement on motions within a week as to the government's intention in regard to implementing the recommendations of the committee report?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I will consider that
suggestion.


Mr. Gordon Ritchie (Dauphin):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. Did the government take any initiative to discourage Japanese food buyers from buying food, especially pork, in the last two weeks or so in this country?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, I know of no such initiative.


IMMIGRATION
Mr. Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the minister responsible for immigration. Is he aware that on Friday, I believe just prior to the deadline, 60-odd persons were arrested in the city of Toronto? If so, could he shed some light on this procedure which calls for an explanation, failing which the gentle hand theory would perhaps go out the window?


Hon. Robert K. Andras (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, I think the number is overstated. All the persons who were arrested last week in Toronto had arrived in Canada during November and December of last year and at that time they were not considered bona fide non-immigrants. Ail were released under bond to appear at a later date for a special inquiry. Those arrested had failed to appear and were arrested under provisions of the Immigration Act; all will appear at inquiries early this week.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: As there seems to be an indication by some immigration officers that they are extending time for registration, is this now government policy, or is the minister giving consideration to this matter in terms of extending the time for registration?


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, people wishing to register can come forward at any time, but the deadline for registration as indicated in the release and the regulations early in January will stand. However, I expect to be able to make a more definitive and complete statement on this within a

few days, and I hope to have the opportunity before the appropriate committee, I believe later this week.



NATIONAL DEFENCE


Mr. Stan Schumacher (Palliser):: Mr. Speaker, my question is either for the Acting Minister of National Defence or for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is HMCS Saguenay helicopter equipped and has it been dispatched to Southeastern Asia waters to join the Terra Nova?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I will be pleased to take the question as notice on behalf of my colleague.



INDIAN AFFAIRS


Mr. Alex Patterson (Fraser Valley East):: Mr. Speaker, I wanted to direct my question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare but in his unavoidable absence I will direct it to the parliamentary secretary. It is based on a letter received from the minister under date of March 29 with respect to the Coqualeetza complex in my constituency, in which he states: "I have agreed to delay a final decision until March 23 pending receipt of the proposal." He was referring to the brief of the Indian chiefs. May I ask the parliamentary secretary if a final decision has yet been taken with regard to the future of the Coqualeetza complex?


Mr. Norman A. Cafik (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, the presentation made by the Indians has been received by the department, is under active consideration, and no final decision has yet been reached.


Alexander Bell Patterson: In view of the fact that the decision has not been made and also in view of the fact that action that is contemplated will destroy years of work and progress in reviving their native art and establishing sales outlets, could the parliamentary secretary advise the House why the Salish weavers have been ordered to vacate the Coqualeetza premises by March 31?


Norman Augustine Cafik: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of the point made by the hon. member and can neither confirm nor deny it, but I certainly agree that it is a matter of considerable interest. It will be looked into by the department immediately.
April 2, 1973



CONSUMER AFFAIRS


Mr. A. P. Gleave (Saskatoon-Biggar):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct my question to the Prime Minister. In view of the finding of the food committee that the producer is suffering as much as the consumer from the fact that prices between the farm gate and the consumer continue to widen, will he meet with farm organizations in order to obtain the benefit of their views on current trends in prices?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the cabinet met less than three weeks ago with two farm organizations which made representations to cabinet on this and many other matters. I am always prepared to meet with representative organizations.


Alfred Pullen Gleave: May I ask the Prime Minister if, in view of the recent meeting of the four western premiers in which they expressed some unhappiness over the treatment that western Canada is now getting from Ottawa, he will contact the western premiers in order to ensure that there will be a meaningful exchange of views and concrete action at the forthcoming meeting next July with regard to some of these problems?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, surely the House realizes that it is the federal government that initiated these meetings and suggested they were necessary to meet problems that exist in the west. Therefore the hon. member's enjoinder should be addressed to the premiers rather than to this government.



NATIONAL PARKS


Mr. Jack Marshall (Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. Can the minister advise, as he indicated he would, whether he has reached a decision with regard to the request by the province of Newfoundland to renegotiate the boundaries of Gros Morne Park as they now discriminate against communities whose citizens do not .want to move?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I have made a decision and I hope to be able to inform the government of Newfoundland of it next week. I prefer not to inform the House so as not to be accused of favouritism.


Jack Marshall: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development indicated he would be providing information to the
Oral Questions
province of Newfoundland. As national parks fall within federal jurisdiction and as the member for Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe represents that district, will the minister indicate why I cannot get the information?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I will communicate with both at the same time so that one will not be jealous of the other.



REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION


Mr. Elmer M. MacKay (Central Nova):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion. Is the minister going to meet soon with the Native Council of Canada as requested by its president, Mr. Tony Belcourt, so that the council can have an input into the revised DREE policies which I understand will be announced in the not too distant future?


Hon. Donald C. Jamieson (Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: Mr. Speaker, I will be more than pleased to meet with the particular group to which the hon. member refers. I had some meetings three or four weeks ago with one group, the Manitoba Indian groups that may wish to meet with me.



SUGGESTED AMENDMENT TO LEGISLATION TO GIVE CROWN EQUITY IN CORPORATIONS RECEIVING GRANTS

Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion a question in terms of the review of his policy. Is the minister in a position to inform the House today whether the government will make it a requirement in the future that companies receiving financial assistance of any form from the federal government, will give the government of Canada some degree of equity in the corporation, as a consideration for the assistance?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: Mr. Speaker, this is one of several facets of the changes in the Regional Development Incentives Act that we are considering. The hon. member and I have had conversations on this. There are cases where it is an attractive proposition and, where that exists, we are certainly prepared to exercise that option.



INDIAN AFFAIRS


Mr. Heath Macquarrie (Hillsborough):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. This matter was raised by my

April 2, 1973
Oral Questions
colleague, the hon. member for Kingston and the Islands. Can the minister, in conjunction with his colleague, the Minister of National Health and Welfare, take such steps as will be necessary to assure these unfortunate native mothers that there will be on the staff of the Charles Camsell Hospital in Edmonton people who are able to communicate with them in their own language and dialect concerning the problems surrounding the very matter the hon. lady has been discussing?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, it is already the government's policy to ensure that there is an interpreter present. That may not be necessary in every case, but when the problem is discussed, the policy established by my colleague is that the choice must be given to the person concerned through an interpreter if this is necessary; I believe the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare may have more information to give the House.



ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS


Mr. J. M. Forrestall (Dartmouth-Halifax East):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment. Will the minister use his good offices to suspend the dredging program in connection with the auto port in Halifax harbour until such time as the environmental protection service people have had an opportunity to meet with the fishermen and work out an adequate way of dumping the dredged material?


Hon. Jack Davis (Minister of the Environment):: Mr. Speaker, I will make inquiries and ensure that the necessary steps are taken.



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, my question is addressed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. I put this question to the Acting Prime Minister on Friday. Has the government received information that six Greek lawyers involved in the defence of students on trial in Athens have themselves been arrested, are being detained in police headquarters there and are reported to have been subjected to torture? If so, will the minister take the appropriate steps to indicate the humanitarian concern of the Canadian government and the Canadian people?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member, I have been aware of these reports. First, I ought to make it clear there are no Canadians involved, neither as lawyers nor students, so we are not directly concerned to make representations on behalf of Canadians. However, we are concerned about the suppression of civil liberties in Greece. I have made representations along these lines to the Greek government and have made them publicly as well. However, one has to bear in mind that when dealing with an intervention in a legal proceeding one has to be careful not to do damage to those people one is trying to help.



INDUSTRY


Mr. Perrin Beatty (Wellington-Grey-Dufferin-Waterloo):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. On Friday, the minister referred to "new proposals which I am preparing in order to provide additional special assistance to small business." Is the minister willing to indicate to the House whether he can make a statement on motions tomorrow indicating what those proposals will be to help this very vital sector of our economy?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, these proposals are under very active consideration at the present time. When I have an announcement to make on policy changes, it will be made in the normal fashion.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. We are reaching the end of the question period. The hon. member can ask a supplementary, and I will then try to recognize one or two additional questioners without supplementaries.


Henry Perrin Beatty: Can I ask the minister whether he intends to introduce these proposals while there are still some small businesses left in this country?



MANPOWER


Mr. Gordon Towers (Red Deer):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. Due to the fact that manpower centres have not been able to complete contracts under the training-on-the-job program relating to the job creation element, which includes agriculture, as of the March 31 closing date because of shortage of applicants for available jobs, will the minister consider extending this program until April 30?


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, I will give the representation consideration.
April 2, 1973



INDIAN AFFAIRS


Mr. Keith Taylor (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct my question to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. Is the minister aware of the dispute between his department and The Pas Indian band concerning operating funds? In view of the fact the band has relinquished all responsibility for programs on the reserve, and in view of the fact that over 300 children are not attending school, will the minister assure the House that he will take the necessary action to resolve the dispute without delay?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I have been informed of the situation. I feel it is unfortunate because just a few years ago there was absolutely no program vesting Indians with the authority to administer their own funds. However, we must operate within a budget and we are unable to meet the requirements of all Indians; I hope to be able to meet some of their requests. I do not believe it is possible to meet all their aspirations within one year. We have progressed tremendously in this area during the past few years, and attitudes of the kind that have been taken recently are not likely to further the cause of Indians more rapidly.


Mr. Speaker:: Orders of the day.


James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I hesitate to do so. I had hoped to ask a question on this. In replying to a question on the government's jurisdiction over the Canadian Transport Commission with regard to the decision-making of that body, the Minister of Communications left some doubt whether he knew what he was talking about. He seemed to indicate there was some question whether the government had any jurisdiction after a decision had been made. Since that time I have had an opportunity to examine the National Transportation Act. For the education and edification of the Minister of Communications, may I refer him to Section 64(1) which gives the Governor in Council the authority to rescind any order of the Canadian Transport Commission.



TRANSPORT


Mr. John Lundrigan (Gander-Twillingate):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I am not sure how to get my point across to Your Honour and the House. For the past six or eight weeks the east coast of Newfoundland has been suffering from the worst ice blockade in history. Today, we received serious reports about a fuel shortage and the fact that one vessel is dangerously stuck in the ice floes. Despite the diligent efforts of the departmental officials to serve all the needs of the local inhabitants, they
Foreign Investment Review
have not been able to do so. I wonder if I could ask the minister today to state whether he could mobilize some icebreaker facilities to assist in what could be a very serious situation. I am reluctant to ask this question, but it is of a nature that is very urgent and not the typical question raised in the House.


Len Marchand: Mr. Speaker, I am ready to consider that and discuss it with the hon. member.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed, from Friday, March 30, consideration of the motion of Mr. Gillespie that Bill C-132, to provide for the review and assessment of acquisitions of control of Canadian business enterprises by certain persons and of the establishment of new businesses in Canada by certain persons, be read the second time and referred to the Standing Committee on Finance, Trade and Economic Affairs.
David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, when this debate was adjourned on Friday, I was in the course of emphasizing that the economic nationalism, if you like to call it that, to which my hon. friends and I subscribe is not an expression of xenophobia but an essential ingredient of individual and national dignity. I said last Friday, in effect, that it was neither arid nationalism nor a case of outdated chauvinism. It is, as far as I am concerned, an assertion of a healthy national individuality. I put it to you, Mr. Speaker, that we cannot have confidence in ourselves if we lack confidence in our own country, and that a country incapable of making its own decisions would, indeed, deserve no confidence. That is the road along which we are now travelling. Fortunately, however, Canada at the present time still deserves our confidence; our people across the country know this and are proud of this. But we must take immediate steps to make sure that our ability to maintain this status is not further eroded.
The fact is that over the last five years an endless stream of statistics and studies has convinced even the most sceptical of Canadians that our economy is largely controlled from outside our borders and, this being so, many political decisions must at least be influenced by pressures which do not originate in Canada and which therefore fail to reflect Canadian interests.
May I remind the House of a couple of statements made by the President of Mexico last Friday-statements which I accept without reservation? I quote from page 2802 of Hansard:
The control of the state over the main economic processes is a necessary condition to maintain the autonomy of its political decisions. That is why there is a general concern to study and regulate

April 2, 1973
Foreign Investment Review
the characteristics of foreign investment and of ways to absorb technological resources.
I will simply say that this has been the position taken by the New Democratic Party since its foundation. We have emphasized that it is impossible in modern conditions for a country to be politically self-reliant if it continues to be an economic dependency of a powerful neighbour, as is rapidly becoming the case as far as Canada is concerned.
The President of Mexico, a little further on in his address, said something which I also consider to be of great value and importance when he stated:
Within a framework of independence we shall accept and use technology in so far as it adjusts to the aims of our economic policy. We shall try to eliminate practices or stipulations which limit our exports, prevent the development of our own technology, make production more expensive or hinder our autonomous development. In short, we want technology to be an instrument of progress, not of subjection.
Nothing could be more relevant to this discussion. I subscribe to that comment without reservation. It is an eloquent statement of the position which my hon. friends and I have presented to the people of Canada for many years. Canadian governments and business leaders in this country have in the past made a fetish of economic growth for its own sake, without considering the quality of that growth or what it held for the future of Canada and what it did to the lives of Canadians in the process of the exploitation of their resources. The result is that we have a branch plant manufacturing industry which is not as efficient as it should be, one which is not as rationalized or as specialized as it should be to meet world competition. Second, there is little research done in Canada. Business leaders and governments have relied on foreign-owned corporations to carry out research elsewhere because it was cheaper to do so in that fashion than to be concerned with the skills and talents of scientists and others in this country and the future of Canada in a technological world.
In the resource industries, we have permitted these multinational corporations to ship out not merely Canadian resources but Canadian jobs, because we have allowed them to make use of our raw materials with little processing or refining or development done in this country. We ship out raw materials and later we buy back the finished product made from those materials in the United States or elsewhere. This is the way to the exhaustion of our natural resources without benefit to the people of Canada. It is not the way of a country which is proud, self-reliant and determined to define its own future.
Indeed, as I pointed out in great detail during the last election campaign, we have developed a taxation system deliberately designed to make it possible for multinational corporations to exploit our resources, and concentrate economic development particularly in the acquisition of massive investments in oil, energy and mineral products rather than in the manufacturing and service industries which provide Canada with the jobs that are needed. I say that this development, encouraged by Liberal and Conservative governments, as well as by the leaders of business in Canada-all continentalists, no matter how much they may deny it-has left Canada at the mercy of multinational corporations. This applies particularly in the sphere of exports where these corporations divide up world export

markets. Canadian governments have helped this process. I refer, for instance, to the agreement by the Conservative party in the early sixties to divide Canada into two oil markets, one for the distribution of Canadian oil from the west and the other, east of the Ottawa River, for the sale of oil imported by the very international corporations which exploit our western reserves-oil imported from Venezuela and other countries. We have deliberately adopted policies designed to encourage this division of Canada, policies which have worked to the advantage of multinational corporations and to the disadvantage of the people of Canada.
Figures have already been placed on record in Hansard. Let me put a few further figures on record, because they are so revealing. The fact is that foreign control of our economy has been increasing steadily, particularly in the area of the resource industries. It has not been reduced in any sector. It has been increasing steadily year by year. Note these figures for the year 1969. They are updated from the figures in the Gray report which were based on
1968	statistics. In metal-mining 55.5 per cent is foreign-owned. The point I wish to make here is that this 55.5 per cent represents an increase from 38.5 per cent in 1965. In only four years or so, from 1965 to 1969, there was an increase amounting to about 75 per cent in the foreign control of our metal-mining industry. Control of fuels in
1969	amounted to 82.5 per cent. The figure for rubber products was 92.7 per cent-it could not increase any more. In the wood industry, the figure was 42.6 per cent, increased from 28.2 per cent in 1965.
Similarly, in 1969 the printing and publishing sector became 20.4 per cent foreign controlled, an increase from 11.3 per cent in 1965. In the machinery sector foreign control amounted to 73.2 per cent, transportation equipment 86.4 per cent, and in petroleum and coal a staggering 99.5 per cent. Almost all of our resources are controlled by foreign multinational corporations. In chemicals and chemical products, foreign control was 80.4 per cent and in manufacturing as a whole, 57 per cent. This was the extent to which Canadian industry in 1969 was controlled by these powerful multinational corporations.
I want to underline, in connection with these statistical facts, that the picture becomes even more frightening when you examine the situation in terms of size of these corporations to see which corporations have the real levers of control in the economy. Let us see to what extent they are Canadian controlled and to what extent they are foreign controlled.
Looking at all corporations in Canada in terms of size of assets, you find that corporations with assets of less than $1 million are only 9 per cent foreign controlled, 91 per cent being Canadian controlled. But corporations with assets from $1 million to $5 million are 29 per cent foreign controlled; corporations with assets from $5 million to $25 million are 50 per cent foreign controlled; and corporations with assets of over $25 million are 54 per cent foreign controlled. So you see that the larger the corporation, the greater its power over the economy, and the larger the proportion of foreign control in that particular sector of the industry.
April 2, 1973

As hon. members know, the picture in the extractive industries is really frightening for the future of this country. Foreign corporations in the extractive industries account for 70.6 per cent of the assets and about the same proportion of all profits. In the mineral fuels sector, foreign corporation account for 82.5 per cent of the assets and 90.7 per cent of all the profits.
The picture in the total mining industry, again in terms of asset size, shows that corporations with assets of under $1 million are only 33 per cent foreign controlled. That is high enough since it means one third of our mining corporations are foreign controlled. But when you move on to corporations with $1 million to $5 million worth of assets, the proportion of foreign control becomes 62 per cent; corporations with assets between $5 million and $25 million are 80 per cent foreign controlled; and those with assets over $25 million are 88 per cent foreign controlled.
The point that disturbs me about the position taken by the Liberal and Conservative parties is this. Last Friday the minister and also the hon. member for Trinity argued that foreign control, foreign capital and foreign investment in the past have assisted our development. I would ask, whom did it assist? Whose development has this foreign capital assisted? From the figures I have already cited, and from many other figures one can lay one's hands on, I would suggest that this foreign capital has meant foreign corporations have been assisted in exploiting our natural resources mainly for their own profit, not for the benefit of Canadians.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


David Lewis: The position taken by the hon. member for Trinity was that foreign capital has been useful and beneficial to Canada. Members of the Conservative party who have made interjections underline the fact that all of them believe that. They believe in that only because their concern is with the value and power of the corporations of this country and not with the value and power of the people of Canada. They are concerned with what the minister calls economic growth, without considering the consequences of that growth on present and future generations of Canadians.
The fact is that we have not needed foreign capital in this country for years. We have been selling Canada out with our own money. We have permitted foreigners to buy us out with our own dollars. In 1968, as all hon. members know, only 6 per cent of foreign capital expansion in this country was derived from parent corporations in the United States and other United States sources; 94 per cent came from Canadian sources, such as undistributed profits, from retained earnings, from various reserves, not least of which is the tax reserve that we permit these corporations to defer without interest for years on end, and from borrowing on the Canadian capital market.
I draw to the attention of hon. members, particularly Tory members in view of the comments they have made, that between 1960 and 1969 Canada had a net loss as a result of foreign investment in this country. In those 10 years, 1960 to 1969 inclusive, U.S. investments totalled in round figures about $5.5 billion. But we paid to parent corporations that invested this money in Canada, $6.25 billion by way of interest and dividends, and a further
Foreign Investment Review
$1.75 billion in royalties and fees of all sorts. Thus we paid out to United States corporations a total of $8 billion in return for a total investment of $5.5 billion in ten years. In other words, we paid out to American corporations $2.5 billion more than we got from them in the form of direct investment.
Yet members of the Liberal and Conservative parties still claim that we need foreign investment. On behalf of the New Democratic Party I say that, except for the occasional area that may occur, we do not need foreign investment in this country. Canadian savings are sufficient to provide us with all the capital necessary to develop this country through the efforts and skills of Canadians alone. In view of this net outflow of $2.5 billion in the space of ten years, I ask the minister and the hon. member for Trinity, where in heaven's name has there been any benefit to Canada from capital investment in this country during the last ten years?
This brings me to the bill which is before the House. I agree with the minister that this bill is a great improvement over the bill which we opposed last year, which we were determined to stall and did prevent from passing. It is obvious that this bill is a response by the government to growing concern right across the country about the issue of foreign investment and control of our economy. I dare to suggest-because I know it is true-that the improvements contained in the bill before the House are also a response to the New Democratic Party's objections to last year's bill and because the government knew that if they produced last year's bill it would not get our support on second reading. The bill, instead of dealing with a minor part of the problem as the bill last year did, with merely foreign takeovers, now deals with screening of new enterprises by foreign investment, and screening also of investments by existing foreign corporations into unrelated fields.
Because it has extended its purview, its area and concern, we will support the bill on second reading, but I want to make very clear to the minister that even this extension cannot satisfy members of the New Democratic Party. Indeed, I appeal to him that it should not satisfy him or his colleagues in the Liberal party either. It will satisfy the Conservatives who do not really want any limit on foreign investment.


An hon. Member:: No, it doesn't. Don't speak for us.


David Lewis: Their main concern, as the hon. member for Trinity showed us on Friday, is to make further concessions to corporations and investors in the hope that they will be Canadian corporations rather than foreign corporations. I say to the minister that if he meant what he said at the beginning of his speech last Friday, and if the Throne Speech means what it says, he ought not to be satisfied with the bill he has presented to this parliament. There are obvious areas for extension of that bill and we intend to propose these areas to the committee when this bill reaches that stage.
I want to make this appeal to the minister. What he has presented to parliament is not a bill prohibiting certain things. He has presented parliament with a bill for screen-

April 2, 1973
Foreign Investment Review
ing certain areas on the basis of certain criteria, and since that is the case and since the screening agency will have the authority to make recommendations as to whether something should be allowed or disallowed, then I say to him there is no reason in the world he should not have had the courage to go beyond the three areas his bill now covers.
This bill now covers takeovers; it covers new investments and it covers screening also of the expansion by existing foreign corporations into unrelated areas. Since it is merely a screening process with power in the agency and the minister to decide whether to allow or disallow a certain thing, again I urge him that the bill should immediately be extended into the following areas.
The bill ought to cover the screening of imports of parts and components into Canada in order to make sure that those parts and components could not be produced in this country with Canadian capital and Canadian labour in order to increase the number of available jobs. There is no reason this screening agency could not look into the importation of parts and components by existing foreign corporations in this country.
The second area this bill ought to deal with is the screening of the export of raw materials in order to make certain that raw materials have sufficient processing, refining and development in this country before they are exported at the expense of Canadian jobs. I appreciate that this will require joint action by the federal and provincial governments concerned, but I urge upon the minister that this provision be put in the bill subject to the necessary consultation and provincial supplementary action.
I urge the minister that the bill should cover another area as well, and there is no reason a screening agency could not do this. I repeat, since it will not make the final decision and does not prohibit certain things, the final decision being made by the minister on recommendation of the screening agency, this bill ought immediately to provide for the screening of export ,agreements by and among multinational corporations in Canada in order to make certain that any restrictive covenants in them are removed, or these export arrangements should not be permitted. This, too, is emphasized by me on behalf of my party because again there are hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs constantly being put into jeopardy by the fact that the multinational corporations have among themselves and their subsidiaries around the world arrangements which are restrictive on exports from one country, since any one country is merely another source as far as they are concerned.
Fourth, and perhaps most important of all, I see no reason why this bill should not give the screening agency authority to screen expansion of foreign corporations in Canada into related areas to those that have been occupied. In spite of the repetition, I say again that there is no reason for leaving this out of the ambit of the screening agency. There is every reason it should have that authority in order to be able to look into the books of companies to find out exactly what they are doing and to what extent they are really further buying out Canadian business or expanding their own at the expense and at the cost of Canadian people.
(Mr. Lewis.]
That is the first set of things I wanted to tell the minister and this House that we feel ought to be changed in those directions. Second, I want to tell the minister that we strongly oppose the change he has made from last year in the definition of non-Canadian corporations to satisfy Tory demands. They were the only ones who demanded it and the minister ought to have had the courage to withstand that demand. In last year's bill a non-Canadian corporation was defined as one in which foreign control is 5 per cent of the voting shares and 20 per cent of the non-voting shares. This bill provides for 25 per cent instead of 5 per cent and 40 per cent instead of 20 per cent. That is a sellout to reaction, and I tell the minister that this ought to be changed back to what it was. There is no reason he should have done this.


An hon. Member:: It is a sellout to the Tories.


David Lewis: Sure, it is a sellout to the Tories, and that is why I said it was a sellout to reaction.
I want to say to the minister that we are not satisfied with the provisions for proclaiming the bill. The fact that he cannot make the bill law with Royal Assent can be appreciated, because presumably time will be needed to prepare rules and regulations and he cannot do that within 24 hours. However, I object strenuously to the fact that he is going to proclaim the new areas only at some later date. There is no reason for that and the bill ought to be proclaimed in total at the same time.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. I regret to interrupt the hon. member, but his allotted time has expired. He may continue only if he is given more time by unanimous consent.


Some hon. Members:: Continue.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


David Lewis: Fortunately, Mr. Speaker, I need only a minute or two, and I am grateful to hon. members of the House for giving me that opportunity.
Thus, there are three areas which we are going to seek to strengthen when this bill is in committee: One is additional areas of authority to the screening agency; the second is the definition of non-Canadian corporations, to bring this back to the 5 per cent and 20 per cent as in last year's bill, and the third is that the entire bill ought to be proclaimed at the same time. I simply cannot buy the minister's argument that the reason he wants more time for the proclamation of those sections of the bill dealing with new investment or expansion by existing corporations into unrelated fields is that he wants to have some experience. I think that is what he said was the reason for it. I cannot buy that. I am not sure that experience in one area would be of value to him in another. He had better start getting the experience right away in all areas. I am sure he needs it as I need it. The only way he will do a job is, to proclaim all the bill at the same time instead of this kind of pussyfooting. Because I cannot buy this argument, I have an ingrown suspicion that the reason for the delay on that part of the bill is that the government is not serious about it. I want to tell the minister that if he is to
April 2, 1973

convince us he is fully serious about action in the field of foreign investment he had better change his requirement about the time in respect of the proclamation. There is no excuse for dividing up the bill in the way he suggests.
I did not hear the interjection by the hon. member for Trinity, but in this connection I want to say that his objections and the objections of the Conservative party are that the bill represents another "don't do"-I think his words were "don't do"-among the cures that we have. Let me say on behalf of my party that we have had the development which we have had, that we have reached the dangerous situation we have reached, precisely because Canada has been the only country in the world which has permitted foreign investment without rule, without regulation, without limits and without concern for the future of this country. The time is long overdue-I say this without any hesitation-for this country to impose limits on and conditions for continuing foreign investment in Canada. Unless there are limits and unless conditions are there and are sternly applied, we will continue to have an expansion of foreign investment. The private entrepreneurs that hon. members in this House talked about last Friday will be entrepreneurs as long as it pays them better to do it at the expense of the Canadian people through certain tax concessions than it pays them to sell out to some United States, Japanese or West German concern.
One of the two ways to guarantee that foreign investment can be limited in this country and that its expansion can be stopped is by imposing limits and conditions. Because this bill gives the government an opportunity to impose conditions, we will vote for it on second reading subject to our attempts to strengthen it in committee. But, Mr. Speaker, we will eventually-and if we in the New Democratic Party had the opportunity eventually would not be very long hence-have to repatriate Canada's economy. It is not sufficient merely to limit further expansion. The time has come for Canada to take steps to repatriate control of its economy and make sure not only that further expansion is Canadian but that a large part of that business now in foreign hands becomes Canadian.


Mr. Hellyer:: That is the Conservative philosophy.


David Lewis: That is the Conservative philosophy through the measures the hon. member for Trinity suggested Friday, which consist of further concessions to the corporations and to the investors. My suggestions are entirely different in principle.
First, we have in Canada now between $5 billion and $6 billion in foreign exchange reserves. I urge on behalf of the New Democratic Party that the government use a large part of those foreign exchange reserves to buy into the resource industries of this country and make them Canadian through public participation in those industries. Second, I say that the time is long overdue for us to withdraw the present tax give-aways in our tax system which are made use of particularly by the resource industries to the disadvantage of our economic development. This would help a great deal in stopping the rape of Canada's resources. Third, I urge that the government
Foreign Investment Review
consider imposing export taxes on the export of raw materials and energy resources so that we may have a pool of money to assist the people who are affected by those exports. We could make much more money available directly to the people of Alberta rather than permitting the multinational corporations to increase their prices so that they receive 15/16's of the added price and the government of Alberta receives only 1/16 of that additional price.
Fourth, we urge that this country must take steps to rationalize and specialize our manufacturing industry because the branch plant manufacturing will eventually destroy Canada's place in the international markets in that area. It has not yet, and there is still time if there is direct government intervention to rationalize our manufacturing industry and insist that it specialize in producing those things which Canada can produce best at least cost. Finally, I repeat what I said on May 29 last year that what would really assist in this problem of foreign investment is if the Canada Development Corporation were entirely revamped and made an entirely new organization. If it were publicly controlled and publicly managed with a massive fund obtained by a law requiring that a certain proportion of the investment capital from public as well as private corporations be invested in the CDC, then we could do a number of things. We could use the CDC to invest in new industries as well as to buy into existing foreign corporations. Above all, we could make the CDC a source of investment capital for the provinces which need it because the provinces are constantly concerned about the fact that their development within their borders cannot be made without capital and there is no source of such capital in Canada. The Canada Development Corporation, properly organized, could provide such a source.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I say to hon. members of this House that in my travels across this country I have been persuaded that large numbers of Canadians have become very concerned about the extent of foreign control of our economy, about the extent of foreign influence in our cultural development and about the need to give Canada funds to build in this part of North America a distinct society. This is not being anti-American. I merely say that the Canadian people are capable of building a society distinct from the American society and I would hope a society which is much fairer, much more decent and much more human than some events to the south of us in the last number of years would lead us to believe is the case there.


Mr.   J.-J. Blais@Nipissing: Mr. Speaker, before undertaking the preparation of the speech I intend to deliver-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It is customary to recognize the spokesmen for each party for the first round. I did not see the gentleman on the far right rising. Perhaps he wished to take part. So, I would ask the indulgence of the hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. Blais) and I would recognize the hon. member for Roberval (Mr. Gauthier) at this time.

April 2, 1973
Foreign Investment Review


Mr. Gauthier (Roberval):: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.
The hon. member who was to speak this afternoon on behalf of our party has not yet arrived; he has missed his train and I would like his turn to be reserved. He will certainly speak tonight.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: I thank the hon. member for Roberval. The hon. member for Nipissing has the floor.


Mr. Blais:: As I said, Mr. Speaker, before preparing the speech I intend to deliver and in view of the importance of this subject, I saw fit to inquire from my constituents so as to know their position with regard to the bill before us.
It is my pleasure to inform the House that the results have been more positive than I had hoped for. I have received only one negative reply and I consider it negative since it is supporting the statu quo.
Indeed the majority of the replies I received either approved the bill without any reserve or approved it by requesting stricter controls or the adoption of a completely new bill.
It is therefore obvious that Canadians know we must protect our heritage and independence.

It is indeed the latter concept which seems to preoccupy my constituents, and I can appreciate their concern. We have dealt since the beginning of this parliament with a number of worthwhile projects and measures of considerable social import. The two main documents which have been the vehicle of this government's policy have been the budget speech and the Throne Speech. Both documents did indeed contain legislative proposals which received plaudits for their progressive social measures. We had bills increasing old age security payments and amendments to the War Veterans Allowance Act, amendments to the National Housing Act, amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act, tax reductions, increased exemptions available to lower income groups, and many other measures which are an expression of the concern of Canadians for social justice.
No one in the House, indeed no one in Canada, would dispute that Canada is a leader in providing for the material security of its citizens. The same can be said for Canadian laws relating to and affecting the rights and freedom of individuals in Canada. The Canadians' equality before the law, their right of access to judicial administrative and political redress are ensured. However, it would appear that Canadians, having achieved in considerable part the goals that they have set for themselves relating to material and personal security, those achievements may now be made vulnerable to the financial and industrial decisions made in the corporate boudoir outside our national boundaries, corporate decisions made beyond our control in foreign capitals and predominantly in the United States. That indeed is a justifiable concern and it should be stressed, as, I am sure, most speakers participating in this debate will stress.

Canada has been very fortunate to have been able to foster an economy which has provided the material advantages that are ours, an economy able to provide social justice and indeed justice in all its aspects. However, having achieved these goals, Canadians are now concerned that perhaps the freedom they have secured for themselves may be curtailed by an increase in economic competition, competition for investment capital, for sophisticated technology, for consumer markets, for energy supplies and for raw materials. It is becoming more evident that this parliament and all its committees are dealing with subjects of considerable import. Perhaps it is just the fact that I am new in the House, but I feel very strongly that not only is United States presence felt in the matter of foreign control but it is felt in the matter of the development of our whole economy, the direction that we are going to take so far as our cultural and political evolution is concerned.
It becomes evident that the United States is facing and will be facing in the next two decades a considerable economic upheaval. It is facing shortages in energy; it has difficulties with population control, and it has difficulties with its whole constitutional system. Indeed, it will have difficulty in repatriating the massive amount of capital the export of which its policies since the turn of the century have encouraged, the export of billions and trillions of American dollars that are now invested in economies that are not the American economy. Evidently, legislation is presently before the congress to limit the future export of capital and encourage the repatriation of huge amounts of American capital.
It is in that context that I think this bill is timely. I hope that the government will find that this bill is but one of the bills to be enacted which will have as its goal the control of Canadian investment and the protection of national interests. This bill contains provisions whereby the government, through the minister in charge of the administration of this legislation, will be able to negotiate the terms of investment in Canada. This negotiation will, of course, depend on the support that is to be afforded to the minister by the Canadian public. It is, therefore, essential that the public be informed of all the perils that Canada is facing with reference to its economy and the perpetuation of Canadian control over the destiny of Canadians.
The provisions of this bill have been set out by the minister and in the speeches of the hon. member for Trinity (Mr. Hellyer) and the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis). Central to the bill is the question that the minister, in this instance the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce (Mr. Gillespie), will initially have to make the decision with reference to whether to allow the takeover or a new investment. The minister will be assisted by an agency in performing this task.
Initially, when I intended to take part in the debate on this bill, I was under the impression that the minister was to be assisted by a quasi-judicial commission. At that time, it was of some interest to me to ensure that that particular commission have adequate representation from my area and from other not so favoured areas of Canada. Now, I see that because the legislation foresees a ministerial decision there can be an input from members of the House regarding these decisions, and although it is
April 2, 1973

not official at least it may perhaps be persuasive in the stage between the notification by the foreign investor and the eventual decision by the minister. The agency itself is but an advisory agency and that is as it should be.
It might also be pointed out to the hon. member for York South, who indicated that he would like to see a provision whereby Canadians would be encouraged to buy back those industries and concerns that have been taken over by Americans, that it is the intention of some of the provisions in this bill that that be done. Indeed, the bill's provisions apply in the event of a foreign investor attempting to take over a Canadian company, even though that company may already be owned by foreign interests. The foreign investor has to give notice under the legislation, so that a review of his intentions can be carried out. May I suggest that in this way an opportunity would be provided to determine if the takeover, by a foreign investor of a foreign-owned Canadian concern, would be in the best interests of Canadians.
The bill further provides for a review agency, with ministerial discretion, to consider the establishment of new businesses by non-residents, or of Canadian corporations controlled by non-residents, but it does not include review of expansionary investment in a business already carried on in Canada, by an investor, notwithstanding the fact that he is a non-resident. I thoroughly agree with that particular provision, because we have already experienced how sensitive capital investment is to radical legislation. I recall that during the Quebec crisis of 1970-71 there was a flight of capital from Quebec, and it was correctly analysed at the time as being the direct result of unsettled economic conditions in that province, and of the threat of political upheaval. If radical measures were taken now, the same result might well follow throughout Canada.

It is essential to point out that the bill before us does not try to prohibit foreign investments nor the purchase of a Canadian enterprise by foreign interests.
In fact the question is to examine the intentions of the investor who would try to take advantage of a favourable financial climate in Canada and to study, through an agency, the advantages of investments under non-Canadian control.
This examination would not be made in a vacuum but in the light of five basic principles which, in my opinion, would be guidelines to the minister responsible for it.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to explain simply the effect of these five criteria. First, the question of the effect of the acquisition or establishment on the level and nature of economic activity in Canada, including employment.
It is obvious that the minister must make sure that investments favour the industrial development policy in Canada. Secondly, the degree and significance of participation by Canadians in the business enterprise must be dealt with. It means therefore that through investments Canadians will be called upon to participate more actively in the proposed industrial development through acquisition or investment. Third, the minister must also consider
Foreign Investment Review
the effect of the acquisition or establishment on productivity, industrial efficiency, technological development, product innovation and product variety in Canada.
Mr. Speaker, some Canadians want us increasingly to develop our own technology in Canada. With the help of this technology we could develop goods for use in a typically Canadian context, that we could make in accordance with our own traditions, our own imagination and our own initiative, for the general benefit not just of Canada, but of other countries too.
Mr. Speaker, the member for York South (Mr. Lewis) spoke just now of Canadian participation, of the question of industrialization, of the rationalizing of industry and of specialization in certain areas of manufacturing. I am delighted to see the member for York South adopting a policy which is basically the Liberal philosophy, namely industrial specialization in Canada. He did so, and I congratulate him for it. I note that clause 2(2)(c) of the bill deals directly with developing such specialization by encouraging development of technology in Canada.
The fourth criterion is the effect that buying or founding will have on competition in one or more industries in Canada. I need say no more about that, because it goes without saying. The fifth question is that of the compatibility of buying or founding with national policy in the industrial and economic fields, bearing in mind the aims of the economic and industrial policies put forward by some provincial authorities.
And so this is a new concept, Mr. Speaker. It is one by which the federal government, seeing the need for investment and for investment control, also sees that there is economic inequality in Canada, and therefore realizes that it must make sure that the industrial interests of the provincial governments are protected and that the latter are consulted at every stage. All that amounts to helping the minister decide, taking all the factors into account, whether investment is or is not likely to be of significant benefit to Canada.

Thus, Mr. Speaker, we are speaking of significant benefit to Canada. Those are the key words, and to my mind they ought to be interpreted as synonymous with the national interest. I will go even further. I will suggest that this bill is fundamental to the whole political philosophy of the Liberal party, because in those criteria that have been announced-


An hon. Member:: Boy oh boy, what a lousy philosophy!


Jean-Jacques Blais: Mr. Speaker, nothwithstanding the narrowness of view indicated by the comment from across the chamber, this legislation, as indicated by the particular formulation of the words used in it, is fundamental to that political philosophy. Full employment is indeed encouraged. Canadian control of the economy is also encouraged. The development of Canadian technology is encouraged. Regional development and the removal of regional disparities are encouraged. Those four factors represent the backbone of the government's policy. They are being written into law, and it is to encourage the realization of these aims that this bill is being represented at this time.

April 2, 1973
Foreign Investment Review
Further, Mr. Speaker, the final decision is to be a political one. It will not be buried in the dark rooms of officialdom, subject to the decisions of deputy ministers, assistant deputy ministers, and third assistant deputy ministers. The decisions will be determined in the political arena, and in making a decision in that way a minister makes himself politically liable. The decisions made in this sphere will receive more and more publicity, and all this as a result of the interest of Canadians as a whole in economic nationalism and in preserving control over their economic destiny. I welcome the fact that takeovers will be the subject of political review, and I am sure that this legislation will help us preserve Canadian control over our own development. There are some advantages that flow from this legislation, and I disagree with my colleague for York South-


An hon. Member:: I am sorry, but he is not your colleague.


Mr, Blais:: Mr. Speaker, I wish that interventions from hon. members were a bit louder, so that I might know their import. It appears that the collection of information that is to flow from the investigations will be most advantageous to the future development of this government's policies in the field of economic nationalism.
The theory of the "corporate veil" has been and still is dominant in corporate law in Canada. That theory, indeed, has worked to considerable disadvantage in the fields of Canadian knowledge and information. These relate to economic decisions that are made in Canada and affect Canada's destiny. I hope that the regulations to be drafted, which cover the necessity of disclosure by foreign controlled companies and foreign investors seeking to purchase Canadian companies, will be most elaborate and permit a complete review of the circumstances in question. I feel this is important, as we will need to make decisions for some time to come on the desirability of any given investment. The more information we can gather, the better the situation will be.
One concept is not included in this bill, and I should like to see it included, if not in this bill then in some other forthcoming piece of legislation. I am referring to the use of the CDC. The hon. member for York South indicated that he wanted to change the whole structure of the CDC. It is all very well for him to suggest a complete change. Sudden or radical changes may be very well to advocate, but those who have the responsibility of governing cannot always advocate such changes. If I may speak for the record, let me suggest that the CDC could be employed in this particular process with respect to which we are now legislating. It could be used in the creation of an adversary system in this field.
Our deliberations in this House are based on an adversary system, and I submit that we should employ that system in the process that we are now contemplating. I am suggesting the involvement of Canada Development Corporation because I firmly believe that that corporation will in time evolve as our main agent in securing Canadian control over commercial enterprises. I might suggest, further, that the use of that organization at this time with respect to the process being devised would be premature.

In future there will be ample time to review, discuss and debate the suggestion I am making.
Under the adversary system, Canada Development Corporation could be given notice of the intention of a foreign investor to invest in Canada. At that stage, Canada Development Corporation would have a chance of reviewing the company which is subject of the proposed takeover and it could see if perhaps it could not make an offer to the minister with respect to the takeover of that particular company. I truly believe that in many instances in the past foreign takeovers were forced upon companies as a result of their not having sufficient capital to solidify or consolidate their position, or to expand. I am sure that if CDC were involved, it could intervene in the transaction. It would have the ability to invest in the company sought to be taken over by the foreign concern, the result being that that particular company would stay in Canadian hands. The same reasoning would apply to the creation of new businesses, Mr. Speaker.
We are in the present situation because there has been an absence of information available to Canadians regarding the effects of the potential investment. I feel that as a result of the information in this field that is to be made available to us by virtue of the passage of this legislation, Canadians will be better able to determine where their money should go and what is proper investment. Indeed, the Canada Development Corporation would be the instrument for carrying out the will of the people, because it could invest with a full knowledge of the areas in which investments ought to be made.
I am pleased to have been able to participate in the debate on this long awaited piece of legislation. I feel that, to be effective, it will require public support, and public awareness. There must be public recognition of the importance of each decision taken under the provisions of this legislation. Inevitably, because of the wide scope of its terms, each decision will be precedent setting. Of necessity, I believe Canadians should follow the whole process, so that by their participation and by their reaction, the government may know where the people think we should go. The exercise of the ministerial discretion will, of course, be governed by what is the national interest and the public good. Only an aware public, recognizing the difficulties with which the minister is faced, will be able to advise the minister on the propriety of any decision.


Mr. Ian Arrol (York East):: Mr. Speaker, Canada up to recent times has been a juvenile giant unable to stand on its own feet. It was spoon fed first by Britain-there was no spoon feeding from France-and then by the United States. In our infancy we were fed from Britain, nourished by her money and technology. When we became older we left mother for a more interesting and swinging personality from whom to receive, a personality just across the way, Uncle Sam. Besides giving us money, Uncle Sam did most of our thinking for us.
Uncle Sam developed such ideas for us to copy as the factory assembly line, the use of the computer, cost accounting, data processing, and new packaging and marketing methods. It was Uncle Sam's money that was used for research, so that even without an idea in our heads we could have money in our pockets. Uncle Sam built our early libraries and stocked them with books and educated
April 2, 1973

our university graduates with grants from the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford and Fullbright foundations. In fact, in our relationship with the United States, we received everything but pride in ourselves. However, the times are changing. Canada is no longer just a fat copycat. Canada is developing a unique way of life. Canada is becoming the place to talk about.
For many observers, Canada is the centre of sophistication. To speak only briefly, and of the province in which I live, there is the Ontario Science Centre, the new Toronto City Hall, Ontario Place, the Shaw Theatre in Niagara-on-the-Lake as well as the Shakespeare Festival at Stratford, Ontario, the unique outdoor zoo that is being created in Scarborough and so on. There are the television centres of Toronto where artists flock from the United States to make their shows. There is the Ontario Educational TV channel which recently sold to the NBC in the United States more than $2 million worth of educational productions which are regarded by NBC as among the best educational ones in the world.
Further, in the field of entertainment, the whole world is singing our songs, be it Gene McClelland's "Put Your Hand in the Hand of the Man from Galilee" or the songs of Canada by Gordon Lightfoot, Joni Mitchell or a score of others. In Canada there is new energy, imagination and ideas, new writers whose books are appearing throughout the world and new film makers whose movies are applauded by the sophisticated film critics of the world. This cultural flowering, this developing Canadian style, can only be sustained if there are continuing initiatives in the business field. Culture grows out of national prosperity. Culture grows out of money.
We find that not only in the world today do we have a cultural flowering and not only do we have industrial development in our own terms, but in the industrial field, we have multinational development. Until 1946, Canadian Pacific was only 9 per cent Canadian controlled by its shares. In 1973, it is 60 per cent Canadian owned. Canadian Pacific is spreading throughout the world. It is a multinational company with offshore oil rigs in the Mediterranean, a tin mine in Australia, mineral exploration in Greenland and in South Africa, a Canadian Pacific trucking fleet in Great Britain and hotel projects in Israel, Mexico and Portugal. Canadian Pacific has foreign investments which, in just the past few months, have run into tens of millions of dollars. At home, CP has a 53 per cent ownership of Cominco Limited, a major producer of lead, zinc, silver and chemical fertilizer. CP has a 51 per cent interest in Great Lakes Paper Company.
I find it strange that when a member of the Progressive Conservative party proposed initiatives that should be adopted for greater business prosperity in order to provide for our own development and personality, the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) criticized the hon. member for Trinity (Mr. Hellyer). When the hon. member for Trinity stated his ideas on initiatives that should be taken in Canada by the government in order to have the kind of stimulation that is needed for Canada to maintain its present prosperity, let alone going to greater prosperity, the hon. member for York South referred to greater tax concessions. He referred to stimulations as being
Foreign Investment Review
everything to build Canadian entrepreneurship at the expense of the Canadian people.
The hon. member for York South quoted from his particular selection of statistics to show how bad the situation is at present. It is true that if we look at corporate taxation as compared with taxation of individuals, according to the figures of the Canadian Tax Foundation, whereas corporations paid as a percentage of direct taxes 28 per cent in 1950, in 1973 they are expected to be contributing only 12.2 per cent. The hon. member for York South utterly ignored the fact that, although in 1950 the individual paid 26.7 per cent of direct taxes and in 1973 he is expected to pay 50 per cent of direct taxes, the income of individuals has increased 700 per cent since 1950. The income of individuals for 1972 is expected to amount to $50 billion. The income of corporations for 1972 is expected to be $7 billion, an increase of 300 per cent over 1950. He ignored the fact that the number of taxpayers in 1950 was 2.4 million and in 1972, 8 million. He ignored the fact that this increase in the number of taxpayers came about as a result of the increased prosperity brought about by business. This made it possible for individuals en masse to have 700 per cent increase in income since 1950 for a total of $50 billion.
I wonder what my friends to the left think happens if there should be a $2 million profit for a company after it has paid all its taxes. I know what they would propose. They would propose that this profit be immediately taxed and sent to the government. However, this $2 million is either invested, which provides for further jobs and which in turn provides for further increases in income tax, or it is sent to shareholders as dividends. These shareholders must pay income tax on the amount they receive. The income tax is probably close to 50 per cent. Also, the shareholders may decide to reinvest this money.
I have more faith in income in corporations being spent by the corporations instead of being shoveled over to the government and spent by the bureaucrats. The most successful countries industrially in the world today, Japan and Germany, have arrangements whereby the government has a very low corporate income tax. As an example, at the present time there is a higher corporate income tax in Canada and the United States than in Sweden, which is supposed to be the place for social democracy. In Russia, all profits go to the state. The result is that they had to bring in the Fiat Motor Company of Italy to show them how to manufacture cars, the Japanese to show them how to drill for oil and process it and the Hilton company to show them how to build hotels where the elevators do not creak.
In Canada, we must have a continuing encouragement for initiative, not a discouragement of those who would invest from outside the country. If we are going to put on those types of restrictions, then we in Canada will find it difficult for our investments outside the country. We can only exist in this world in a prosperous way if we have the initiative to have multinational companies. With our achievements so far, we are merely on the threshold of unique achievement. The threshold is slippery. We will fail in the highly competitive world of today and tomorrow unless we lay the foundation for continuing productive Canadian initiatives.

April 2, 1973
Foreign Investment Review
With the kind of projects it is encouraging today for those who will be the business leaders of tomorrow, those who will make or break Canada's future our youth, the government, with merely the measures of Bill C-132, will only scratch the surface of a solution to the economic problems of Canada. It will add to the bureaucracy and uncertainty in the economic field. As the hon. member for Trinity stated, it will be basically negative in its approach. Unless it seizes initiatives as alternatives for the basic necessities for Canada's growth, it will not be the basis for independent survival, let alone a possible great future for Canada.
The kind of productive initiatives needed are those described by Mr. Gary Price, President of the Student Enterprises and Assistance League of Toronto. Mr. Price says:
We feel that Canada's most valuable natural resource is not its oil, minerals or fresh water, but its youth, and the segment of this resource most vital to our country's economic growth, the young Canadian entrepreneurs, have never been given the opportunity to live up to its full potential. Young people with creative drive are today usually found operating government-sponsored projects since it is common knowledge that these are the easiest source of capital available to youth who wish to "do their own thing". The obvious danger of this policy is that we run the risk of producing an abundance of artists, social workers, survey-takers etc. without sufficient businessmen to sustain them. As we see it, the alternatives open to the two major sources of capital in Canada, government and corporations are either to assist more young people to become productive and self-supporting or to suffer the consequences in rising welfare costs and social unrest in the future.
Projects of the kind Mr. Price and his associates in the organization known as SEAL have in mind for 1973 should increasingly be attracting attention and action in this House. This is the philosophy which will guide the SEAL entrepreneurial program for 1973:
Priority will be given to supporting small business ideas which have the potential to become on-going. We will attempt to start these small businesses with a minimum of seed capital and after the initial start-up period operate them on a profit-sharing basis. Any small business that cannot become self-sustaining after a reasonable start-up period will be discontinued. Any employees who are not meeting performance levels will be dismissed. We have found that young people working on profit-sharing ventures do not tolerate slackers; once a crew is paid commensurate to its performance those who do not shoulder their fair work load are quickly weeded out by their fellow workers.
All profit generating businesses will set aside a pre-determined percentage of weekly revenues to replay initial capital requirements.
There are other voices offering guidance as to what the government should be doing in providing incentives to youth and laying a foundation for the Canada of tomorrow. Prominent among them is Mr. John Bulloch, President of the Canadian Federation of Independent Business who had this to say concerning the ideas he has for New Ventures in an article he wrote for the Toronto Star of August 10, 1972:
The over-riding philosophy would not be to "make work" or engender a false sense of productivity. It would be to create new enterprise that aims at becoming permanent and perhaps financially independent; a dues-paying member of the community performing necessary services, creating jobs and contributing new technology. This program would rely heavily on the private sector for know-how and financial support.

Mr. Bulloch notes that as the basis of his recent thesis, "Can Canada achieve economic independence?", Professor George Sinclair of the University of Toronto, establishes that innovation, new products and jobs stem from small companies and inventive individuals. A national policy to encourage such activity is, therefore, a logical step toward achieving economic autonomy. Mr. Bulloch tells us:
... the motivation of those who wish to create and innovate is not primarily profit, as is commonly supposed; it is the desire to build, to do something better than someone else, to create something new and useful.
It is small businesses which are the source of most of the innovation and engineering advances that change and build our society.
New Ventures takes direct aim at one of the real mistakes in our society-the fact that millions of Canadians, old, young, employed and unemployed possess unique energies and skills which presently benefit neither society nor themselves.
As circumstances have developed, Mr. Bulloch says:
Youth becomes disillusioned, the able-bodied opt out for unemployment and welfare subsidies. Pride in performance becomes a memory.
Mr. Bulloch labels his ideas "New Ventures, Canada". New Ventures, he explains, would work this way:
Young professionals would be brought together to provide free services in such areas as law, accountancy, engineering and marketing, while low-cost space, in an old warehouse, perhaps, would be provided for anyone who wished to start a new venture.
Such office services as typing, duplicating and book-keeping would be available from the New Venture pool and lists of high-risk capitalists willing to invest in likely-looking new enterprises would be compiled.
The whole of Canada would be involved in this enterprise. Those who today wish to "create for Canada" so that they can have pride not only in their own efforts but pride in the country which is developing freely, will be such as accountants, lawyers and engineers who would give their services without charge so as to ensure a nucleus of healthy business practices. As each successful venture reached self-sufficiency, it would be replaced by new consultants.
I am sure the provinces would co-operate with the federal government in encouraging organizations whose objective is to educate for positive, contributing citizenship. I am sure the provinces would wish to get together with the federal government to find alternatives to the expensive "formal education for all" concept which is tending to bankrupt the country. The idea of formal education for all is one which must be replaced. Formal education for all, in an abstract sense, isolated from what should be the mood of a developing country, is a highly over-rated concept. Because, today, everyone must stay in school, teachers entertain when they cannot explain, using films, records and "do-your-own-thing". In response to the resulting din and confusion, new educational philosophies are developed to justify and sanction the chaos. When most students fail, their marks are raised and new courses are invented or slapped together in the hope that something will seem to have been accomplished.
Good citizenship is learnt, primarily, in a student's home and community, from friends and from people he admires. It is learnt there or not at all. Forcing an unhappy student to sit inside the formal walls of school for six
April 2, 1973

hours a day, at a total cost to the nation of billions of dollars-$2 billion a year in the province of Ontario alone-instead of initiative productive enterprises in which learning can take place in the spirit of a new Canada, has probably done more than anything else to make poor citizens. It has probably done more than anything else to undermine the spirit of initiative which should characterize our great nation.
In addition, then, to seeking other alternatives, we should look for new ways in which to channel the energies of the youth of today so that these energies do not become corroded by frustration or ebb away in bitterness or utter resignation. This is an even more urgent issue than fears which have been expressed concerning an American takeover: emphasis must be directed mainly not to temporary, make-work projects, as is now the case, but to "take-off" programs, initiatives supported by the government in the hope that the enterprises assisted in this way can become self-sustaining and generators of jobs and services on their own. Canadian prosperity must be based on the development of this country's human resources. Canada can no longer be regarded as a country of untold riches whose resources can be tapped or dug into-as one would go to a bank when money was needed. The deposits are running low. The foundation of Canada's prosperity can no longer be a policy of resource depletion. Assessments have shown that Australia possesses natural resources in similar measure to our own. Brazil has more than Australia and Canada combined, and Siberia has more than all three.
We live in an insecure economic world where the only security lies in the development of human resources. Bill C-132 is an attempt to bring about a bettter Canada by encouraging Canadians to maintain control over their own economic destiny. This is an approach that this bill is supporting. What the House should pay heed to is the tremendous necessity for a massive change in policy that is needed to enable Canada to develop a prosperous future.


Mr.   C.-A. Gauthier@Roberval: Mr. Speaker, I must first explain this delay in taking the floor, which I was not expected to do. One of my colleagues was supposed to deal with this matter, but as transportation means are not always most efficient in the province of Quebec, unexpected inconveniences frequently occur.
Yet I am very pleased to be able to say a few words about Bill C-132, an Act to provide for the review and assessment of acquisitions of control of Canadian business enterprises by certain persons and of the establishment of new businesses in Canada by certain persons.
Mr. Speaker, after listening to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce (Mr. Gillespie) introduce the motion for second reading of Bill C-132, I asked myself some questions. I wondered, for instance, what benefit the passage of such a bill, designed to provide for the review and assessment of acquisitions of control of Canadian business enterprises, would bring to the Canadian economy?
Foreign Investment Review
For 11 years I have been a member of parliament and I have heard in this House that we simply must do something to encourage Canadian businessmen or industrialists in order to protect them against the American giant and against all sorts of foreign control over the Canadian economy. Are we likely to find in Bill C-132 a real answer to the questions all Canadians are asking themselves? I say no, Mr. Speaker, and I refer to the words of the minister himself when he said, and I quote:
I do not expect this bill to change the situation in our country overnight.
Of course a bill that proposes only a review, a study, an appraisal of the foreign takeover of our Canadian industries cannot ensure concrete and immediate action likely to solve this problem so familiar to all Canadians namely that for a hundred years all our governments have been selling our economy to foreigners, retaining only a modicum of administration for the Canadian people. I say that this is another smoke screen to hide their shame and leave Canadians hoping, until the next election at least, and that it is the characteristic attitude of a government whose only motivation is the next election.
To prove that fear is the beginning of wisdom, I have taken a note of a statement by the hon. minister at the beginning of his speech-statement which is full of truth- and I quote:
.. . the Canadian future is not something that just happens. Our future does not need to be merely a response to external factors, however important they may be.
At that moment, some hon. members said:
Hear, hear!
Yes, Mr. Speaker, "Hear, hear!" But it is not new. Many other ministers and hon. members uttered these words well before the present minister. If civil servants suggested these words to him, I should advise them to modernize their literature.
Further, the hon. minister also started that we had to examine what exists in fact, namely the foreign takeover of our Canadian industries.
I invite the hon. minister to go further in his research, because we should have gone beyond the stage of studies in this area. In fact, everybody knows that 80 per cent of our mines are owned by foreigners, as well as 90 per cent of our oil and 60 per cent of our manufactures. Both the minister and Canadians know it. The hon. minister recognizes all this but he foregets to say why it happened.
Why do Americans buy our Canadian industries by the dozen?
As a matter of fact, one has the impression that, when a manufacturing of marketing industry seems to be flourishing, the two levels of government, one after the other, are always on its tracks and so persistently bombard it with taxes of all kinds that comes a day when it cannot survive and is forced to have recourse to financial companies. And then comes the first threat because the banks are never there to grant assistance to those industries and refuse further credit. It is then that our industrialists, in despair and in order not to loose everything fall into the hands of the first bidder; and, as it happens that first bidder is always an American. And the most tragic aspect of it all is that the American industrialist will buy that
!

April 2, 1973
Foreign Investment Review
Canadian industry with the same credits that had been refused the Canadians owner, that is to say the very same Canadian bank which refused the necessary financing to the Canadian industrialist will offer double the amount to an American who will become the new owner with disbursing more than 10 per cent of his asset.
I have concrete examples, Mr. Speaker, of the problem I just spoke about and this is why I am very surprised not to hear about that way of doing things from our banking institutions. However, the minister knows quite well that our banks favour foreigners a lot more than they do Canadians.
I have in mind an actual case of one of my friends who had an investment of over $1 million and who only needed $250,000 to avoid bankruptcy. No bank wanted to finance him, so he had two choices-bankruptcy or selling out to American interests. He chose the latter. Two days after the new American owner went to the same bank which had said it did not have the available money for the Canadian owner and received $400,000 on the same collaterals.
That is the major cause of many business and industrial bankruptcies in Canada, the major cause of the transfer of our secondary and tertiary industries to foreign hands. I wonder when the minister will finally act and stop making studies whose results are already known to everybody.
The minister says that he will provide an incentive for Canadians to invest in their own industries. As a matter of fact we already have the 20 per cent tax reduction on the first $50,000 of income of Canadian companies, but we will need more. This government will have to consider further participating in the promotion of mixed industry.
Obviously, we cannot recognize the socialist doctrine of the New Democratic Party whose only solution to the control of our economy is nationalization of our industries.
We are more democratic than they, and we do not want to do without the excellent asset that private enterprise, private initiative represents. We realize that it has performed miracles in the last centuries. We claim that today, because of the advent of the machine, electronics and all the scientific discoveries, the state must help the new large corporations develop themselves without dehumanizing society. If Canadians really want to own their economy, they will have to increase their participation.
Mr. Speaker, by participation I mean that of the employer as well as that of the employee. To my mind, the salvation and the recovery of our industries still depend on that participation; it is essentiel today because the businesses or industries whose owners have encouraged the participation of their staff or who simply gave their employees shares in the undertaking, are flourishing today. There are no strikes in those industries; the employees are interested and, of course, the owners make less income. Although they may get only 50 per cent of the income, they enjoy 90 per cent more security and obtain 90 per cent more services.

This is why I say that the secret of Canadian success would be to accelerate that participation through implementation of legislation favouring the investment of working capital in our industries. I think that by encouraging labour-management participation the minister would be taking a great step toward the control of our industries.
Some people tell us that we are against foreign investment in Canada, which is incorrect. In fact, we approve of it provided it is profitable to Canadians rather than simply providing white nigger jobs for French Canadians and letting the bigger revenues go to foreign countries while leaving us the crumbs.
That is not what we want. Everyone's participation is invited and we welcome foreign capital but here again, to the extent possible, the government should adopt legislation to control the inflow of foreign capital. This would entail payments of royalties instead of accepting this capital as if it were a favour.
In my opinion, we are doing foreigners a favour by allowing them to invest in Canada. Investors ought to pay their share of royalties. Then and then only shall we begin not to reject foreign capital but to welcome it as long as we obtain appropriate returns from it.
That is why I was pleased to hear the minister announce support for Canadian industries and grants necessary for their expansion.
The second issue raised by the minister is that Canada should derive maximum benefits from foreign capital.
That is our wish and you can be assured that on certain points we will give our support to the minister.


MOTION TO ADJOURN UNDER STANDING ORDER 26 COMMUNICATIONS BELL CANADA RATE INCREASES
Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Before moving on to the next order of business, perhaps I should refer to the matter raised earlier today when the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) proposed the adjournment of the House under Standing Order 26 to discuss an order of the Canadian Transport Commission.
Hon. members agreed with my suggestion that the Chair be given additional time to consider the proposed motion. When it came before the House, I expressed reservations about the adequacy of the debate on an adjournment motion to consider this important issue. At the same time I recognized that the motion deals with a suggestion that is national in scope and of urgent importance.
After much thought I can say that the apparent urgency of the matter, the fact that it is of national interest and concern and, a factor which is even more material, the fact that there does not appear to be an early opportunity for debate would suggest that it would be the general consensus of the House that the Chair should accept the
April 2, 1973

motion. This is essentially a borderline case, and, since I can see no reasonably early opportunity for the House to debate the issue, I feel that the hon. member should be given the benefit of the doubt. While it may be that a more appropriate vehicle should be available to members for the purpose of a debate on this issue, I would have to rule that, on balance, the motion ought to be accepted.
Does the hon. member have leave to propose his motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: According to the Standing Order, the motion will be put and the debate will take place at eight o'clock this evening.
Before going to the next matter of business I would urge representatives of the different parties, perhaps the House leaders or the party whips, to confer before eight o'clock in an effort to agree on an adjournment hour. My experience, and I am sure the experience of all members, has been that a debate which does not have a closing hour tends to drag on and its best speeches are not necessarily those that are made at one o'clock in the morning. From my experience, and I suggest this with all sincerity to hon. members, I think perhaps we would have a better debate if it were kept relatively brief with shorter speeches. Hon. members may want to consider the advisability of agreeing that the motion to adjourn be passed sometime around ten o'clock, ten thirty o'clock or eleven o'clock, depending upon the arrangement which can be made between hon. members.


Norman Augustine Cafik: Mr. Speaker, on question of order, under these circumstances what would normally happen to the late show or will that be decided at that particular time?


Mr. Speaker:: What the hon. member refers to as the late show, the adjournment proceedings, would automatically be suspended and delayed regrettably until tomorrow night.

It being five o'clock, the House will now proceed to the consideration of private members' business as listed on today's order paper, namely notices of motions and public bills.


PRIVATE MEMBERS' MOTIONS
Mr. W. B. Nesbitt (Oxford) moved:: That, in the opinion of this House, where any person has an income of such amount that he is unable to pay for, in whole or in part, the cost of drugs that are medically prescribed for him or a dependent, the government should consider the advisability of
Health
taking steps, by itself or in co-operation with provincial authorities, to ensure that he is supplied with such drugs.
He said: Mr. Speaker, in presenting this motion this afternoon I have in mind, as do many but not all members of this House, a situation one encounters among our constituents from time to time. I refer to the fact that a person with a very modest income by any standards, who is not receiving assistance from any federal or provincial plan, is faced with a heavy burden through having to buy drugs under prescription in order to remain alive or remain in moderately good health.
As I am sure everyone knows, these drugs often are exceedingly expensive. The financial drain on persons with a modest income becomes almost intolerable. I have in mind people of any age who suffer from diseases of a permanent nature, such as diabetes, some forms of cancer, heart disease, kidney disease and other diseases, and who are literally kept alive through constant dosages of drugs. This is a particularly heavy burden on those of low or modest income. This motion is designed primarily for the benefit of such persons. May I say I purposely phrased the motion in very general terms so that if the government should take notice of it or agree to it, which I admit is probably highly unlikely, the government would then have the widest possible terms of reference within which to take some action. The first part of the motion reads:
-where any person has an income of such amount that he is unable to pay for, in whole or in part, the cost of drugs that are medically prescribed for him or a dependent,-
I say "any person" because people in all age groups are affected by this problem. It is true that those who are older are more likely to suffer, but occasionally younger people also suffer from some kind of chronic ailment. I am sure every member of this House could give a similar example, but I know of a young man 28 years of age who is suffering from a coronary attack and must take a variety of expensive drugs for a long time. I know of another young person, the head of a household, who has a very severe kidney problem involving very heavy medical expense in respect of a variety of drugs.
The next point in the motion concerns the words "unable to pay for, in whole or in part". This, of course, might be a matter of judgment because what one person might consider insufficient income another person might consider sufficient. We all know that some years back the poverty level in Canada, according to either the Economic Council of Canada or the Senate Committee on Poverty,- I forget which-was considered to be $3,000 for a family. Since then, after a period of inflation, I would think that an income of somewhere in the area of $4,000 or $4,500 might be considered to be the poverty level for a family. For a single person, it might be considered to be $3,000.
I do not believe I should suggest what might be the best method to prescribe free prescription drugs to those persons who might be concerned. There are a number of administrative ways in which this could be done. I will suggest some, but it will be up to the government to decide what administrative level would be the most effective and cheapest. Of course, the expense involved in buying these drugs could be shown as a deduction from taxable or net income. There is some relief at the present time in the
26087-36J

April 2, 1973
Health
Income Tax Act but I do not think this is of practical help to the people I have in mind, since it merely involves expenditures in excess of 3 per cent of income. However, something along this line might be pursued. The government should take into consideration the fact that people of low income usually are required to pay cash for drugs, and cannot hold the bill for a period of a year in order to receive the benefit of a rebate. Perhaps some form of direct payment of these accounts should be considered by the government. The government might undertake this by itself or in co-operation with the provincial authorities.
Some weeks ago in this House I posed a question to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Lalonde), who indicated that he would discuss this matter with his provincial counterparts. For the information of the House and the minister, I might say I have also made this suggestion to the provincial ministers of health and to the Ontario Minister of Community and Social Services. I have letters in front of me which indicate that the province of Ontario would be very happy to consider such a plan in co-operation with the federal government, because at the present time there is no such provision in respect of drugs in the province of Ontario, with certain exceptions which I shall mention in a moment. As I pointed out earlier those who are particularly affected by this matter are those who are over 65 years of age. While it is quite true that the recent increase in the old age pension certainly is helpful in matters of this kind, nevertheless the fixed incomes on which elderly people live are not too great.
When it comes to spending money in order to keep oneself alive, perhaps an appropriate expression would be that used in the movie "The Godfather",-"make an offer that can't be refused". To paraphrase that, even though people have a limited amount of money they must use it in order to keep themselves alive or in reasonable health. I would point out in this respect that 50 per cent of Canadians over 65 years of age live in poverty. This is the finding of an 18-month study of the income patterns of the aged. The study, conducted by two economists in conjunction with the Canadian Council of Social Development and the Ministry of State for Urban Affairs, concluded that the aged are poor whether they work or not.
The basic conclusion of the report described the situation as follows:
Whether they work or not, they are destined to obtain a minimum subsistence income. For some, the decision to leave the labour force is merely a decision to accept a different poverty lifestyle.
The level of poverty among the aged is two to three that of other age groups. In 1968, 41 per cent of families whose head was over 65 years of age had an average annual income of less than $3,000, as compared to 8 per cent of families whose head was under 65. Elderly people spend a large portion of their income on prescription drugs, yet there are no assistance programs, either federal or provincial, which deal specifically with the aged. They are covered, however, under the following circumstances in most provinces. First, if they are in hospital, drugs are provided free of charge in certain cases. Second, if they are welfare recipients, most provinces will provide some assistance.

In Ontario this also occurs under the family benefits plan. Third, if they reside in nursing homes which are under provincial jurisdiction, drugs are usually issued free.
A new plan is being undertaken by the Ontario ministry of health to provide free drug care through community pharmacies in home care cases. This will be designed as a full reimbursement program, but again is not specifically related to the elderly.
The Nova Scotia council of health recently concluded an 18 month study on all aspects of health care within the province. Their conclusion was that too many people still cannot get the health care they need and deserve. They recommended that free drugs should be made available to people receiving old age security supplements and to those who pay more than 3 per cent of their taxable income on drugs. People cannot afford the high cost of drugs and often end up in hospital as a result of improper medical treatment. This results in considerable expense to the taxpayer.
I know that many people would point out the high cost of the drug plan, but let me point out the high cost of no drug plan. As a matter of fact, a hospitalization and a medicare plan which results in not obtaining treatment at an early date often leads to serious medical problems which have to be paid for under the present federal-provincial plan. Some elderly people and poor people are often in the high drug utilization group; in fact, I would add that most of them are, yet they are the ones who can least afford it. In Ontario, recent estimates of the cost of drugs distributed from pharmacies in the province, showed an expenditure of $155 million a year. Of this, at least $28.5 million is spent by the over 65 age group, representing approximately 18.4 per cent of the total. Yet, the elderly are the ones who rely most heavily on drugs. The above mentioned figures can be interpreted to illustrate that the aged and people in the low income groups, while composing the group utilizing drugs the most, do not even spend an amount that would equal half of their need.
As I mentioned earlier, I have deliberately left the terms of the resolution very broad indeed so that should the government take some action on the matter they would have a carte blanche so far as the resolution goes. They could make some arrangements with the provinces, which would be more practical than doing something entirely on their own.
May I say in conclusion that I earnestly plead with the government to take some note of this resolution, because I feel that if nothing is done it will cost the country more in the long run. The government has certainly taken a great deal of credit to itself for its generosity toward the low income groups and the aged by its recent increases in old age pension. While the government in its wisdom did not see fit to lower the age of eligibility at which old age pensioners will receive their increased amount, I hope they might see fit to try to make some arrangement to provide prescription drugs to persons of any age, and particularly the elderly who require these to stay alive.
At present there are many persons-we all know of some-with extremely modest incomes who are just beyond the reach of any provincial or federal assistance. They do not seek welfare or charity with regard to drugs;
April 2, 1973

in fact, they simply will not ask for it and have great difficulty when they have heavy drug hills every month in trying to stay alive or even in reasonably good health. I hope the government will give consideration to this problem and take the necessary action.


Mr. Cullen:: Would the hon. member permit a question? Is the hon. member at liberty to tell us which provinces he wrote to and which of them replied? Perhaps I should preface my question by complimenting the hon. member on raising this issue. I know the hon. member for Simcoe North (Mr. Rynard) raised it in the last session, and they are both to be complimented. Is he at liberty to tell us how many provinces he wrote to and those which replied and whether they were prepared to look at the situation?


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: I had only written to the province of Ontario and there was some indication of what the province of Nova Scotia had recommended. I wrote to the minister concerned in the province of Ontario. I did not feel I should take the liberty of writing to ministers outside the province. Perhaps I should have done so.


Mr. S. Victor Railton (Welland):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt) introduced this motion on January 12. It really asks for aid for those people who find it difficult to pay for their drugs. The history of assistance schemes goes back to the early depression years. Different provinces brought in their own plans, and the federal government did also. But in 1966, the Canada Assistance Plan bill was passed in the House. It superseded four previous acts and underwrote the provincial medicare and welfare plans to the tune of 50 per cent. The act clearly states that people, even on minimum assistance, are entitled to payment for prescribed drugs.
However, the provinces in general have not incorporated drugs into their specific medicare programs, except for two or three instances. Yet, the Canada Assistance Plan allows prescription drug payment where tests of need, budget and family resources indicate inability or hardship in the purchase of necessary medication. It is sad to relate that not all persons in need are covered now. It is merely provincial inertia that prevents them receiving this assistance.
Broadly speaking, we must first define poverty. Second, we must know the nationwide cost of drugs, and third, we must determine the total cost of health care. It is imperative to designate also the levels of governmental responsibility, whether at the federal, provincial or municipal level. In the debate in the Senate on November 10, 1971, the question of poverty was discussed. A special Senate committee worked for three years and painstakingly examined every community in the country from St. John's to Vancouver. They found that the poverty rate in Canada amounted to 25 per cent of the population.
The causes of poverty should be understood. It is due to inadequate education, overcrowding in large cities, the fact that half of the poor are in the most densely populated provinces of Ontario and Quebec, that about two thirds of the poor are working people and over one million of the five and a half million people are over 65 years of age. It is this latter group which was referred to by the hon. member for Simcoe North (Mr. Rynard) in his question in
Health
the House of Commons on January 25, 1973, when he asked about drug costs for this group.
The Senate Committee recommended a guaranteed annual income for the main welfare agencies which could be conveyed to the provinces. This could be done without displacing Old Age Security, the Canada Pension Plan, Unemployment Insurance, War Veterans Allowances or the programs for Canada's native peoples.
Recently in this House veterans' pensions were stepped up, and will be increased yearly to parallel the general standard of living increment. So now veterans' pensions are almost in the category of guaranteed annual income. The Senate Committee also recommended inclusion in medicare of dental services and prescription drugs to all Canadians. So far this proposal has been rejected by all parties because the added cost would be prohibitive.
Provincial medicare schemes mainly cover hospital, diagnostic and treatment services as well as office and out-patient hospital care. Of course, convalescent and chronic care hospitals as well as many auxiliary services are included. The health bill for Canada is $31 billion annually. The federal government insists on four cardinal points in any provincial health scheme. They are, comprehensiveness, universality, portability and administration by a public, non-profit body. It is one of the most enlightened health programs in any western, democratic country. Recently, the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Lalonde) announced in this House that he envisaged changes to improve the present act after consultation with the provincial governments. It is hoped that all provinces will add drug costs to their medicare schemes for the low income group.
One should compare our plan with that of the United Kingdom and of the United States of America. The former is a 100 per cent state-supported health program. Though the level of specialized hospital care is excellent, hospital beds are at a premium. In addition, the general practitioner work load is unbearable, so that apart from the hospitals the health service is unsatisfactory both to the doctor and to the patient. In the second instance, the United States only has medicare for those people over 65 and for those on welfare. There is no inclusion of specialist care. The United States falls away behind both the United Kingdom and Canada in its health program.
To digress momentarily, Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Drugs of the Ontario Cancer Treatment and Research Foundation, of which I am a member, presents an interesting experience. Most drugs which are used to combat cancer are expensive, and in most cases are required for long periods of time. It is the policy of most hospitals, cancer clinics and private doctors to allow a majority of the people suffering from cancer to have access to free drugs. They do not use any elaborate means test to make this decision. For this one group alone in Ontario the Foundation spent $153,961 in 1972 for this service.
Our Department of National Health and Welfare, through its director general, Dr. Armstrong, informed me that in 1970 $14.12 was the average cost per person for prescription drugs at retail pharmacies throughout the country. When this figure is translated into total popula-

April 2, 1973
Health
tion costs it amounts to well over $300 million. In other words, the 25 per cent of the population designated as the poor would be spending over $80 million a year which they cannot afford.
The figures show that the Canada Assistance Plan even now provides $8 million to $10 million to provincial agencies for the cost of drugs, and this must be matched by the same amount from the provinces or municipalities. This leaves $50 million to $60 million still not underwritten by government agencies, even though there is provision in the Canada Assistance Plan to pick up that tab. Both the patient and the assistance agencies seem to be ignorant of the benefits that are possible to obtain. This $50 million to $60 million is a big sum, but we could accept it because even this amount could be divided between the federal government and the provincial governments. In the light of this fact, if this segment of society is to benefit from the proper interpretation of the Canada Assistance Plan Act, practically all people below the gray line of poverty would not have to pay for their drugs. It is suggestions like this which the Minister of National Health and Welfare has on his agenda to discuss with provincial premiers in the near future.


Mr. Bill Knight (Assiniboia):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to address myself to this motion with a considerable amount of sympathy for it, but with some reservations. The motion deals with payment for medically prescribed drugs provided for persons who are unable to pay for them themselves. My hesitation arises in the difficult area of a means test to discover those who are in the category of needing this kind of assistance. Otherwise, I think the hon. member has pointed out an area of real concern to us as Canadians, in terms of the kind of situation which we as members of parliament run into all the time, where elderly individuals find difficulty in paying medical bills, particularly drug bills. Where these people have to use drugs, such as insulin, they find it a particularly costly item.
I have encountered this situation on numerous occasions and this is the reason I rise to speak to this motion today. I want to quote from Senator Croll's report on poverty, the Special Senate Committee, which pointed out a number of relevant problems connected with the cost of drugs. A representative of the Canadian Medical Association pointed out the following facts to Senator Croll's committee:
It so happens that even in the most affluent nations like Canada and the United States, 20 per cent of the population are poor. There are forty million poor in the United States and 3,500,000 in Canada, and this 20 per cent of the population suffers something like 75 to 80 per cent of the major illnesses.
It bears repeating that 20 per cent of the population categorized as being below the poverty level suffers somewhere in the neighbourhood of 75 per cent to 80 per cent of the major illnesses in these two countries. This illustrates the kind of real tragedy there can be in our society for those people who cannot meet the cost of drugs.
Further on the report points out:
People "on welfare" receive doctors' services free of charge in all provinces. Five provinces include drugs. Five cover dental care. Four provide optical appliances, and various others provide
such items as prosthetic appliances, physiotherapy, home nursing, chiropractic, and transportation.
People who are not "on welfare" but are poor may have to dig very deep to find money for health services not included as yet in any plan, particularly the cost of drugs. High drug costs represent a real barrier to meeting health needs.
The words of the Royal Commission on Health Services are then quoted as follows:
We believe it is only fair to the drug industry to serve it notice that the nation expects that drug prices can be brought down over the next five years to levels more comparable to those prevailing in other industrialized nations of the world. The time has come for the drug industry in Canada to recognize that it is not just like any other industry operating for gain, but that it deals in products which are essential for health and indeed for life.
The report points out areas where there are problems relating to the cost of drugs for individual citizens. The costs bear especially heavily on those persons whose income is below the poverty line. The entire area of drug costs must be tackled by the government, in the public interest. I am sure hon. members realize that in Saskatchewan medical services are provided for citizens irrespective of income level. In that province the costs of such items as hospitalization and medical care premiums are covered. Senior citizens over age 65 in Saskatchewan pay no medical care or hospitalization premiums. This year chiropractic care costs have been added to the program and hearing aid costs are also to be reduced. I have spoken to senior citizens in small communities of Assiniboia who have paid incredibly high prices to shysters who have ripped them off by charging far too much for hearing aids. In addition to these programs we have in Saskatchewan other fairly comprehensive social assistance programs.
One cost, however, that is causing considerable concern across this nation is the increasing cost of prescription drugs. That cost is of concern particularly to the one out of every four Canadians who live below the poverty line. We must go beyond the measure brought forward by the hon. member. All Canada must involve itself in an over-all prepaid drug program which must cover the entire population of this country.
Although there is nothing new in the recommendations of the Croll report on poverty, I think some of the recommendations concerning a prepaid drug program and other ancillary programs relating to health as set out in "Highlights from the Report of the Special Senate Committee on Poverty in Canada" are worth mentioning. In particular, I am referring to four recommendations of substance that should be given serious consideration by any government in this country. Those recommendations say, and they are worth repeating:
1.	that hospital and medical services be financed entirely out of general revenues.
2.	that the Medical Care Act or similar legislation be the vehicle for bringing additional forms of necessary health care, including dental services and prescription drugs, to all Canadians.
3.	that comprehensive community-based neighbourhood health centres be encouraged and that more emphasis be placed upon preventive and rehabilitative aspects of health care.
4.	that family-life education and family-counselling and familyplanning programs be made available and easily accessible to the poor.

April 2, 1973

The main recommendation is the second one, that the Medical Care Act or similar legislation be the vehicle for bringing additional forms of necessary health care, including dental services and prescription drugs, to all Canadians. I believe that all governments in Canada should join together and institute a prepaid drug program across the board for all Canadians. We should make sure that those in need in this country are covered by proper programs of insurance that will enable them to meet the high costs of medical services. It is important that such a program be made available in lower income areas which also suffer from high food costs. This scheme ought to be made available nationally, in all provinces. I am sure that all three NDP governments in Canada would be interested in a national program involving prepaid drugs. Such program could be put into effect in each province to ensure that Canadians can properly meet high drug costs.


Mr. P. B. Rynard (Simcoe North):: Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the hon. member for Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt) for bringing this motion before the House. I also congratulate the hon. member for Welland (Mr. Railton) and the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Knight) for their comments.
I believe the program we are talking about is most important. The minister of national health and welfare in the previous parliament suggested that the establishment of such a program might be his next priority. I do not know what the priorities of this government are. Nevertheless, let us remember that the Hall commission report, on which the medicare program is based and which the government followed, recommends the establishment of such a program. It said definitely that drug care should be the first priority after the institution of the national health care plan. We must keep this in focus, because the bill setting up the medical care plan was introduced in 1967. The report said specifically that medical care must be available to all people, regardless of their ability to pay, and drug care was to be a priority. It is worth reminding hon. members of the recommendations in that report because I think people need to be reminded that drug costs in this country are almost equal to medical fees: we pay about as much for drugs as we pay for doctors' services. We must not forget that. Publicity says so much about the high cost of doctors' services; therefore, let us talk about the high cost of drugs.
It is true that since the federal government took over responsibility for medicare, costs jumped from $3.2 billion in 1967 to $4.5 billion in 1972. That is quite an increase. Naturally the government is concerned, particularly when its over-all spending this year will increase by 17 per cent. I should like to point out that if the measure introduced by the hon. member for Oxford were to be passed, we could bring down health care costs. Many health costs are borne at present under the national medicare plan. There are many reasons for increasing health costs in this country and I think we should consider some of them. As the hon. member for Welland pointed out, our life span is increasing. Let us not forget that. Although I do not want to burden hon. members with statistics, they should remember that in 1900 the average life span was 40 years; today it is over 70 years. One need not use much imagination to realize that there are a great many older people living today. In Canada, a higher percentage of the
Health
population is composed of the aged, as is the population of the entire world.
In 1900, the world population was 1.5 billion; in 1960 it was 3 billion, and by the end of the century there will probably be between 6 billion and 7 billion people in the world. Naturally, there will be an increasing number of older people in the population. Looking after all those people, keeping them well, keeping them active and keeping them out of hospitals and institutions will cost the taxpayers of this country many millions of dollars. Right now there are over 1,700,000 people over 65 in this country, about one quarter of whom do not have any taxable income. Most of these people are unable to work; and I need not tell you, Sir, what inflation has done to any savings they might have accumulated.
The old age security increase of April 1 will be an increase of only $13 and a few cents a month. We must not forget that. This in no way meets the escalating costs. I ask all members of this House to look at the record since 1965, using the inflationary factor. It will be seen that these people are still being denied what is their right.
In Canada, approximately one in four is living at or below the poverty line. Sure, we pay for the health care of many of these people. We see them in emergency departments or in our offices. We give them a prescription, and over and over again they ask what it is going to cost. This can be supported by every doctor in practice. Often they will have to wait until they get their pension cheque, pay day, or can borrow some money. What is the common sense in having a man come to an expensive emergency unit in a hospital, have the doctor see him and prescribe medicine that he cannot buy?
I was very interested in the figures quoted by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Knight). He stated that the sickness factor was much higher for those living below the poverty line, and the aged. This is very true. If we do not want to be sympathetic, let us do something for economic purposes. If we reduce the number of people in hospitals, keep them from suffering a long sickness and restore them to health as quickly as possible, we will find that this is also the cheapest way.
The fact that there is four times the amount of sickness among those below the poverty line needs no further explanation. This situation requires four times the amount of hospitalization. A hospital bed in Canada today runs anywhere from $50 to $80 a day. The Hall commission report has already been quoted. It states that one day in hospital costs the same as a month's supply of drugs. We should look at this not only from a humanitarian standpoint but from the standpoint of straight economics. If a prescription is not filled, the same patient may later be admitted to hospital at a cost of $60 to $80 a day. Anyone can see how "penny wise and pound foolish" that can be. The same argument applies to all those who are not covered by welfare and yet make up the people unfortunate enough to be in the one-to-four group. The government will say that the Canada Assistance Plan will buy their drugs. It does in some cases. However, let me remind the government, if indeed it needs reminding, that this is slow in operation and uncertain in its application.

April 2, 1973
Health
In Ontario there are two levels of assistance. First there is the basic requirement of food, shelter and clothing. The second requirement is listed as other items under health care, including drugs. We must remember that some provinces have no appeal board for health care services and drugs. The province in which I live does not. The Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Lalonde) and people working in this field know the hodgepodge area in which they are working. An overlapping bureaucracy costing millions of dollars serves no purpose for the person who needs help. In many cases it leaves untouched pockets of humanity in despair and needing help.
The economic cost of this program is tremendous, particularly when you consider that there is four times the amount of hospitalization and sickness with persons 65 years and over than there is with those in the 35 years of age group. This proportion holds true for those living below the poverty line. The reducing of this amount of sickness would cut down health costs materially.
Another point I would like to make is that many people who are on essential medicines are able to work. They do not become economic charges. Many of them are able to look after themselves in their own homes, rather than being in a hospital or a chronic care unit. The lives of many are maintained on life saving drugs that are necessary for the treatment of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and a long list of other diseases. Almost 50 per cent of our diseases have emotional overtones. Many people today would be in mental institutions or otherwise confined if it were not for the judicial use of tranquilizers. They are able to adjust, to look after themselves and to work.
Drug care was to be a part of medicare. It is a priority. If drugs were made available in many cases, as the hon. member for Oxford suggested, health care costs would be cut and we would be doing what we should be doing to avoid suffering, illness and increasing economic costs in our community. I do not think I need dwell at length on the life saving quality of drugs, but I want to say that many professional men in Canada today, many people in business and in the work force who work every day, and if it were not for drugs, many of them would not be working; many would have passed on; many would be in chronic care units. This would cost a lot more than we are paying today.
As I said at the beginning of my remarks, one day in hospital costs more than four weeks' supply of drugs and dressings. I wish to cite a simple example. Thirty years ago, the disease of pneumonia was very common. One in four died from it. Many of these people were husky, young, family men who left four, five or six children when they died, The death rate was one in four or one in five, depending on the type of pneumonia they had. Then penicillin was discovered. The story before penicillin was that one in four or five died of pneumonia and the others were away from work for a minimum of two months. Many had to be taken to hospital and operated on for empyema, or pus-forming in the lung. Today, by administering drugs properly, these people are able to return to work. Most of them are back at work in two weeks. This is a striking case of the economics of drugs.
I do not think I have to go any further than saying we should follow up the Hall commission report, not only for

the sake of humanity and decency but to stop spiralling health care costs. Let us treat these people adequately, keep them out of hospital and keep them working.


Norman Augustine Cafik: Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the comments of the hon. member for Oxford (Mr. Nesbitt), the hon. member for Welland (Mr. Railton), the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Knight) and the hon. member for Simcoe North (Mr. Rynard). I would like to deal with the questions raised by those hon. members and, more specifically, with the motion now before us.
Motion No. 6 in the name of the hon. member for Oxford deals with a very specific question. In effect, it recommends that the government give consideration to providing a form of care to those who are unable to care for themselves. In his speech, the hon. member paid particular attention to those over 65. I would like to say that as a federal government we do not have full and total jurisdiction in this particular case. Under the Canada Assistance Plan which was passed by parliament, the federal government has provided a vehicle in fact to achieve the objectives of this motion. Under the Canada Assistance Plan we pay 50 per cent and the province pays 50 per cent to look after those in need. That includes the elderly and those of any other age group which needs medicines or drugs.
The provinces have the responsibility of administering that program. This means that I, at this moment, cannot really see any point in passing the recommendation presently before the House. However, the comments of hon. members certainly lead me to believe there is need for further consideration to be given to the whole question of pharmacare and the approach toward the provision of free drugs to those in need.
I would like to comment now on some of the remarks of the hon. member for Assiniboia. He is really advocating a universal pharmacare program. This is something which I agree has to be considered by the provinces and by the federal government. As hon. members know, a federal-provincial conference of health ministers is to be held in the near future, at which the provincial health ministers, along with the federal Minister of National Health and Welfare, will be giving consideration to a whole new formula designed to look after health care costs. Hopefully, an agreement will be reached which will allow the provinces a full range of programs which they themselves can initiate without in any way jeopardizing the cost-sharing arrangements with the federal government. At present there is a 50-50 cost-sharing formula, depending on the kind of service which is provided. This means that in many cases provinces confine their medicare operations to areas which are more expensive than others because we share the costs with them.
Under the formula which is proposed, financing will be on a per capita basis and the provinces will have full and complete freedom to involve themselves in a whole broad range of medicare facilities. This will, it is hoped, cut down the rapid escalation in health care costs as well as provide better health care delivery systems in the prov-
April 2, 1973

inces. It is my opinion that such a conference is the kind of forum at which the question of pharmacare costs should be raised. I believe that many members of this House as well as many Canadians in general recognize the problems and the benefits which may result from a universal pharmacare program. I am hopeful that the conference of health ministers will take this question into consideration very seriously.
In addition to the forthcoming conference of health ministers, a further conference has been arranged to consider the Canada Assistance Plan and a whole series of welfare programs now operating in Canada, whether federally initiated or provincially applied and initiated. The one thing we have asked all the ministers to bear in mind during the initial discussions on welfare problems in Canada is that they should set aside for the time being questions of jurisdiction so that they can look at the whole problem and develop a formula which will benefit all Canadians. We could then zero in, determine who is responsible for what, and how the programs would be implemented. It is hoped that the result of such an approach would be to provide better welfare services in Canada, better programs which would reduce the amount of red tape, giving Canadians easier access to the kinds of assistance which are really necessary.
As has been mentioned many times in this House, the Speech from the Throne referred to the provision of a guaranteed annual income to those who are unable to work, and undertook to provide some other assistance to those who are able to work but who cannot find jobs. Certain of those who are in need in that group-and there are many of them; the handicapped, for example-could well be classified as unable to work, yet at the same time there may be many handicapped people who think it is in their interest to work, that it would be good for them if they did so. This is the kind of question which has to be resolved. I am hopeful that in the over-all review which will next take place during Easter week, the kinds of representations made here today will form part of that consideration.


An hon. Member:: If you are hopeful, sit down and vote.


Norman Augustine Cafik: The hon. member says that if I am hopeful I should sit down and vote. I have thought about that, Mr. Speaker, and it is my opinion that these are not questions which should receive consideration by the federal government alone. After all, we do live in a federal state, and in the cause of preserving national unity and co-operation with the provinces it is only fair and reasonable, and I believe it, is expected of us, that we negotiate these matters in a conciliatory way, allowing the provinces to participate with us, so that we will arrive at a position whereby a maximum number of people in Canada will derive benefit from the deliberations of the provincial governments and the federal government.
The resolution suggests, really, that we ought to give consideration to providing, at the federal level, assistance to those who are in need in respect of drug costs. That, Mr. Speaker, is already being done under the terms of the Canada Assistance Plan.
Bell Canada


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


Wallace Bickford (Wally) Nesbitt: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the parliamentary secretary has just indicated that in the resolution there is no reference to the provinces. I will not read the whole resolution, in consideration of the member, having only a few minutes left, but I refer to the resolution as follows
-the government should consider the advisability of taking steps, by itself for in co-operation with provincial authorities, to ensure that he is supplied with such drugs.


Norman Augustine Cafik: I have already pointed out in respect of this question that the Canada Assistance Plan passed by parliament does in fact provide the vehicle for the achievement of the objectives of this particular motion.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order, please. It being six o'clock, the hour appointed for the consideration of private members' business has expired. I do now leave the chair until eight o'clock tonight.
At six o'clock the House took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The House resumed at 8 p.m.

Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Leave having been granted to the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) to move the adjournment of the House pursuant to Standing Order 26 for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter requiring urgent consideration, namely, the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission to grant Bell Telephone almost all the rate increases it requested in its application A and the need for the government to suspend the application of the decision immediately, and to consider rescinding it as unacceptable and contrary to the public interest.
Accordingly, the motion is as follows: the hon. member for York South, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles), moves:
That this House do now adjourn.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Reid) on a point of order.


John Mercer Reid: Mr. Speaker, there have been discussions through the usual channels as to the procedure we might follow this evening. I believe it would be agreeable for the lead-off speakers from each party to have 15 minutes, for succeeding speakers to have 10 minutes and for the House

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
to adjourn at eleven o'clock. I think there might be agreement to make this a House order.


Gerald William Baldwin: That is quite all right, Mr. Speaker. Who knows; it might become a tradition of the House to have speeches of that length.


Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, what the parliamentary secretary has stated does represent the agreement of all of us, except that I would make this one modification, namely, that the adjournment is to take place not later than eleven o'clock. If words run out before then, we should rise at that point.


Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse):: Mr. Speaker, I suppose there have been some discussions and since we make it a practice to abide by agreements, we approve the proposals just made.
[Englishj


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Is it agreed, then, that the lead-off speaker for each of the four parties shall have 15 minutes, that thereafter each speaker shall have 10 minutes, and the debate shall continue until, but not later than, eleven o'clock this evening?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: It is agreed and so ordered.


David Lewis: Mr. Speaker, the motion was placed before the House, not as a gesture but because I believe it is important for the people of Canada, for the minister and for the government to have the views of Members of Parliament as it considers this important issue and tries to arrive at a decision. The first fact I want to underline-and I shall go from one point to another as quickly as I can-is that Bell Canada has been given four increases in three and a half years. They had an increase on September 25, 1969, another on December 1, 1970, a third on May 19, 1972, and a fourth on March 27, 1973. Each time, the Canadian Transport Commission gave Bell Canada not always all it requested, but almost all.
What disturbs me even more is that the increase approved last Friday by the Canadian Transport Commission is merely a prelude to application B which is already before the Canadian Transport Commission, and if that were granted the increases would make those approved last Friday pretty small potatoes. Obviously, Bell Canada is seeking more and more of its customers' money. I say, Mr. Speaker, it is time to call a halt to the monopolistic gouging by Bell Canada of the people of Canada.
The second point I make, Mr. Speaker, is that Bell Canada is not claiming that it needs these increases for profit or for its operations; Bell Canada is claiming it needs them in order to have capital for further investment. What it will do is get from its customers a pool of investment capital for which it does not have to pay, and I say that a company as powerful as Bell should not be allowed to tax its customers; and that is what its rate increases really mean.
Mr. Speaker, what is this poor, poverty stricken company about? What have its profits been? I received only

today the annual report of Bell Canada for the year 1972, and on one of the pages of that report there are financial figures for 1963 to 1972 inclusive, that is, over a period of ten years. During that period there was a steady and large increase in profits every year except one: in 1969, the profits were slightly below those of 1968. But to make up for it, in 1970 there was an increase of 17.2 per cent over 1969; in 1971 and increase of 10.5 per cent over 1970; in 1972 an increase of 11.9 per cent over 1971.
Mr. Speaker, when you look at the profit picture of Bell Canada in these ten years, you find that from $68.25 million of profit in 1963, this gouging company reached a profit of $164.75 million in 1972. How much more does Bell Canada want out of the people of this country? And I am not talking about gross profit before taxes; I am talking about profit after taxes that are currently paid, which include deferred taxes in large amount. In addition to these profits, according to this report which I have just studied, Bell Canada now controls ten other companies outright and has an interest, although not a controlling interest, in several others.
I say that the people of Canada have already made a sufficient investment in Bell Canada. Some hon. members may not know this, but I have been interested in the subject and as at the end of 1971, Bell Canada had total deferred taxes of $224 million. By the end of 1972, these deferred taxes amounted to $322 million. That represents an interest-free loan by the people of Canada to this huge corporation of $322 million at the end of 1972.
What is even more significant in respect of Bell Canada's request for an increase is that one of the ways it can add to its deferred tax position is to continue to invest and to change its machinery and equipment. The more it changes its equipment every year, the fancier the telephone, the more it is able to avoid paying taxes by deferring them. That is the only way a corporation can do this, by continuing to buy new equipment and machinery; only then can they take advantage of the deferred tax provisions of our unfair tax system. The amount of $322 million from the people of Canada is more than enough to give to this huge, powerful corporation.
It is for these reasons, and because these facts seem to be overwhelmingly persuasive, that I think Bell Canada ought not to be allowed any more increases at the expense of its customers, the majority of the people of this country. On this basis I placed this motion on the order paper.
I want now to turn the attention of the minister to the act and its relevant section. It is, of course, true that parliament gave, under the National Transportation Act- as it had previously given under the Railway Act-the first responsibility for regulating these prices, tariffs and charges to the Canadian Transport Commission. I have very grave doubt whether the Canadian Transport Commission is equipped to deal with this matter, whether it is equipped to understand the importance of the material that Bell Canada places before the commission every time it asks for a rate increase. Therefore, I have very grave doubt whether the commission is in fact protecting the public interest.
April 2, 1973

I note with sadness that the president of the commission which granted this increase to Bell Canada is the Hon. Edgar Benson, former minister of finance. Whatever one may say about the Canadian Transport Commission, I plead with the minister and members of the government to realize that the ultimate responsibility for protecting the public interest lies with them. The act places that responsibility upon them. Section 64(1) of the National Transportation Act reads in part as follows:
The governor in council may at any time, in his discretion-
Let me point out this is not in the discretion of the Canadian Transport Commission; it is in the discretion of the governor in council. It continues:
-either upon petition of any party, person or company interested, or of his own motion, and without any petition or application, vary or rescind any order, decision, rule or regulation of the commission, whether such order or decision is made inter partes or otherwise, and whether such regulation is general or limited in its scope and application; and any order that the governor in council may make with respect thereto is binding upon the commission and upon all parties.
There could not be more clear language. The act in fact says, I suggest, that the initial responsibility for regulating these rules lies with the Canadian Transport Commission, but that the ultimate responsibility for protecting the public interest is placed on the government of Canada by the section of the act to which I have just referred. I plead with the government not to abrogate its responsibility in this case. I plead with the minister and the government to carry out its duty under the section I have read, because there is no reason for this increase.
I appreciate, as I indicated by a question this afternoon and as I indicated to the minister in conversation on the subject this morning, that it would take time for the government to make a final decision. I hope it will be a decision to rescind this unconscionable increase in rates which the CTC has thoughtlessly given Bell Canada. I appreciate this will take time. The government cannot easily do something about a decision of a body given the power under the act. The government needs to have a full study made, not only of the decision but of all the material that was placed before the commission, so it can justify whatever decision it will make.
Because I appreciate that, I suggested to the minister in my question this afternoon and in my conversation with him this morning that the government ought to immediately suspend the application of the CTC decision pending a final decision of the government on the order made by the commission. If the government takes a week or two to make its decision, by that time the new tariffs will be in effect and I suggest at that point the government will be caught and will not able to act where it might easily want to act after studying the decision and all the relevant material.
It seems to me there is clearly a prima facie case to question the action of the CTC. It seems there is clearly an initial reason for wanting time to study the material, in order to act upon it in accordance with the authority given the governor in council by the section of the act I have read. In order to give itself the time necessary, I see no reason in the world why the governor in council could not, within the next week or so, make a decision to suspend
Bell Canada
the application of the order of the Canadian Transport Commission pending further study of the entire matter.
The CTC has obviously been intimidated by this large corporation I submit that the government must not permit itself to be intimidated by this huge, monopolistic corporation in Canada. I suggest, also, that it is time we served the interests of the people of Canada instead of the interests of Bell Canada. As I said earlier, the time has long passed when a halt should be called to this constant demand by Bell Canada for more and more from its customers, the people of this country. Now is the time for the government to act along the lines I have suggested.


Mr. I. R. Ellis (Hastings):: Mr. Speaker, in speaking to the motion of the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis), I do not intend to plead on behalf of this party for relief by the government. It has been our task, which has proved to be ineffective, to plead with the government in respect of other issues. Our efforts in this regard have proved that the government is insensitive, not only to the pleas of the opposition but to the pleas of the public.
The recent approval by the CTC of the application by Bell Canada for rate increases is yet another example of the contradictory and convoluted non-policy of the government with regard to combating inflation. In the February 19 budget address, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) adamantly claimed that the 1973 budget was designed to reduce inflationary pressures in Canada and to offset the effects of past inflation. He implored business, labour and the professions to "exercise price and income restraint". Yet the Liberal government has failed to offer any specific guidelines or policy proposals to implement and enforce their budget goodies. The increases allowed Bell Canada, and others under the CTC's jurisdiction, are so large and out of proportion that there can be no relationship whatsoever to any reasonable price guidelines as advocated in the February 19 budget speech.
I find it interesting that there was placed on our desks a short while ago a green document from which I should like to quote a small portion which I find very interesting. It reads:
The present federal regulatory body for telecommunications carriers is the Canadian Transport Commission (CTC) which derives its authority from the National Transportation Act, the Railway Act, and the special acts of incorporation of the undertakings subject to its authority. The CTC either does not have, or has not in the past exercised, authority over a number of matters that are dealt with in subsection C below.
The powers of the CTC are suitable only for the broad economic regulation of a particular corporate entity and are not related to any statutory national policy and objectives-
I repeat the words "are not related to any statutory national policy and objectives."
__such as the vital importance of east/west communications to the
sovereignty and economic prosperity of Canada, and to the preservation of its social and cultural identity.
It goes on to say that the recent criteria for the exercise of regulatory authority require the commission to ensure that questions in respect of tolls shall not subject any particular person or company or any particular description of traffic to any undue or unreasonable prejudice or

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
disadvantage in any respect whatever. I suggest that we are subjecting all the people of the area governed by this monopoly to a particularly discriminatory rate increase. The government obviously is unwilling and incapable of fighting rising inflation. Its persistent refusal to meet with business representatives or the provinces to outline policy guidelines shows a decided lack of forthrightness and iniative.
As recently as March 28 this year, in reply to a question asked by Mr. Stanfield about wholesale price increases and the government's intention to implement new measures-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. Would the hon. member please refer to hon. gentlemen who are members of this House by position or constituency rather than by name.


John Raymond Ellis: I stand corrected, Mr. Speaker. I was directing attention to a question asked by the Leader of the Opposition about wholesale price increases and the government's intention to implement new measures to control inflation. The Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) replied:
I have no policy statement to announce today on that matter.
We have had no policy statement since then having to do with the control of price increases. The day after the budget was presented, with the plea of the finance minister to business, the government's spending estimates were introduced for the fiscal year 1973-74. These showed an increase of almost 15 per cent over the previous fiscal year.
We would strongly recommend that the government take advantage of the power vested in it by law and review the decision of the CTC to increase rates for Bell Canada. One of the facts I find so interesting is that originally, as I understand it, the CTC was developed to protect the consumers' interest; in other words, to defend the public from increases by bodies which had powers unaffected by the normal question of competitive rates.
I recall an occasion many years ago, while I was mayor of a small city, when the Association of Mayors and Reeves decided to object to similar rate increases, however, the association did not have the financial base upon which to argue in respect of the decision of the CTC to give Bell Canada an increase. When the provinces object to such increases, frequently they have difficulty in finding sufficient money in their budgets to oppose an increase, simply because Bell Canada with its army of lawyers, economists, and so on, is extremely well prepared and well financed to fight such a battle.
I suggest that this applies not only to the CTC in respect of Bell Canada but also to freight rates, telecommunication and transmission rates which the CTC also controls. So far as that goes, we have the present government not using the authority it has to hold in check other regulatory bodies, such as the National Energy Board, the CRTC, and others. These bodies, seemingly, grant increases whenever asked and the government does not provide an opportunity for the public as a whole to object to the increases.
Corporate law is becoming very complex and the individual Canadian is not equipped to appear before the

CTC and present his views in a manner that could overcome the rhetoric of the legal staff of Bell Canada or other large bodies. So we find that the government has increased its spending and is allowing its own regulatory bodies to increase rates without any guidelines whatever. We feel the government must recognize the state of the economy for what it is and, furthermore, must introduce effective measures and guidelines to combat increasing inflation, particularly in areas under its jurisdiction.


Mr. Leonel Beaudoin (Richmond):: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to comment on the motion before us this evening requesting the immediate cancellation of the rate increases granted Bell Canada.
The matter is very serious because we are grappling with a company that has virtual monopoly, in Quebec and Ontario, on all that is called "telephone". People are therefore the slaves of any of the company's decision because they cannot switch over for service to another company when costs are too high.
I congratulate the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) for having introduced a motion on this matter this afternoon. The terms used are, to my mind, quite accurate; it reads in part as follows:
.. . the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission to grant Bell Canada almost all the rate increases it requested in its application A and the need for the government to suspend the application of the decision immediately and to consider rescinding it as unacceptable and contrary to the public interest.
Mr. Speaker, this motion is most important because it reflects, I think, what all Canadians believe. I am sure the hon. member for York South thought of all Canadians this afternoom and specially of those who have a hard time making ends meet. Through this motion, he appeals to all, and particularly to those who are responsible for this Commission and have the power to authorize or refuse the increases requested by Bell Canada.
Everyone in this House knows that for the last six years Bell Canada-


Jean-Jacques Blais: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member for Nipissing (Mr. Blais) wishes to rise on a point of order.


Jean-Jacques Blais: Mr. Speaker, I have obtained a copy of the French text of the resolution if I understand the hon. member addressing the House, he is referring to a resolution to rescind decisions relative to increases whereas the resolution does not mention rescinding but actually calls upon the government to suspend application of the decision immediately in order to consider rescinding it.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The dividing line is a little thin, as I read the resolution in both English and French, and I think the hon. member should be allowed to make his argument. So I recognize him again.

April 2, 1973


Léonel Beaudoin: I thank the hon. member for calling me to order. I believe it means practically the same thing, if we went to the same school. We probably did not, but I believe we both speak French. And the terms are very similar.
Mr. Speaker, I should like to quote now from an article published in the Friday, February 16 issue of Le Soleil, by Mr. Burtnick, a representative of the Ontario government, who says he is shocked that Bell Canada, over at least six or seven years, has been requesting rate increases every year or two. And Bell Canada never fails to indicate that the request for increased rates is motivated by increased salaries. The low-wage earner is always blamed for the poor management of those who are seeking excuses for their mismanagement.
I should like to quote the statistics supplied to me by the Corporation of Quebec teachers, in a brief addressed to each hon. member, to prove to the House that salaries are not the cause of Bell Canada's increased operation costs. In 1966, Bell Canada had 40,008 employees and total salaries were $225,400,000; salary increases were $25,200,000, i.e. 12.6 per cent.
In 1967 the number of employees at Bell Canada was 38,123, salaries $236,800,000 and the growth in salaries $11,400,000, a 5 per cent increase.
In 1968 employees numbered 37,489, salaries reached $250,700,000 and the growth in salaries $13,900,000, a 5.9 per cent increase.
In 1969 it was clear that it was certainly not the rise in salaries that was behind the tariff increases, for Bell Canada had 38,686 employees, paid $274 million in salaries and the growth in salaries was $23,300,000, a 9.3 per cent increase.
In 1971, the company had 39,136 employees, the payroll was $333,800,000 and the growth in salaries was $31,900,000, a 10.6 per cent increase.
In 1973 the number of employees is 41,000, salaries amount to $398,800,000 and the growth in salaries is $30,200,000, an 8.2 per cent rise.
Bell Canada stressed to the Commission the cause of its tariff increases. I believe that if this company is granted the increase that it is now requesting, this will be the equivalent of disguised taxation which, once again, will come from the pocket of the small taxpayer.
Bell Canada attributes the rise in its operating costs to the following elements: the rise in prices, $11 million; increased taxation $12,900,000-we see that it is again the "behind the door" taxation which is putting the tariffs up-and the new collective agreement, $33,400,000.
The figures I quoted earlier show that the cost of the collective agreement, $33,400,000, is not the correct figure. I have worked out the average of the figures I quoted earlier; it comes to $26,600,000 and not $33,400,000. Therefore, it is no excuse for Bell Canada to say that it is the small salary earners who are lining their pockets, and that that is what is putting up the cost of its services.
Bell Canada
To quote again from the same newspaper; Le Soleil, Mr. D. W. Burtnick stresses:
Last year the company installed 177,000 more telephones than expected-at an average cost of $17.50-but in its end-of-year statement, Bell said it had spent $500,000 less than expected.
And it claims it is forced to put up its tariffs. If it sets up more equipment than anticipated on the other hand, it incurs less expenditures.
The quotation goes on as follows:
The Ontario representative also blamed those who, testifying for Bell, stated that if the company could not increase its rates, the service would deteriorate.
In the past, one had to travel 2 or 3 miles to find a phone in a home of a remote rural area. On the other hand, we find one in almost every house and even sometimes 3 or 4. I think that it shows that Bell Canada does not have to raise its rates to finance itself. Moreover, in order to show what is going on in Quebec, I would like to quote again Le Soleil:
Calyle Gilmour from Covey Hill recalled that Quebecers already pay $24 million to Bell and that the company will pay $32 million in school and municipal taxes in Ontario, but only $7.4 million in Quebec.
Once more, the people of Quebec are those who will bear the cost. In Ontario, Bell Canada almost always purchases its equipment from a company which it owns outright. If this company increases the prices of the equipment it sells, the user who must pay cannot be held responsible for it.
Statistics show that 99 per cent of families have a telephone and that Canadians are the world leaders as regards the use of the telephone, with 6.2 calls a day.
Therefore, I believe that the telephone can no longer be considered as a luxury but rather as a vital service for all the Canadian people. Consequently, anyone should be able to afford it. Even the government of Quebec considers as essentiel the cost of telephone when calculating the amount of the benefits to be paid to the 300,000 people who live on welfare in Quebec. I suggest it is very important for the government to see to it that this vital service is not too expensive.
Mr. Speaker, I do not want to describe all the aspects of this rate increase, but I wish to emphasize the fact that Bell Canada is going much too far when establishing some rates which always go up every two or three years.
With this new application A there will be a 50 per cent increase for installing new telephones for anyone who is moving into a new house or who has no telephone. This is nonsense, Mr. Speaker.
Considering that there is a 50 per cent increase by set, if a homeowner has had 4 telephone sets installed, equipment charges for the four sets are increased by 50 per cent.
Moreover, if there are two or three telephones in a house, it makes no difference: so much is charged by set. Nor can I understand how it is costing to make a call from a Contempra phone than from a standard phone. There are a lot of anomalies in that rate increase and once again I congratulate the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) for having brought that motion in.

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada


Gérard Pelletier: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend in this debate to stand up for Bell Canada and its claims. Nor is it my intention to stand up for the decision made by CTC nor the commission itself, the very simple reason being that the decision was made exactly three and a half days ago and out of those three and a half days two were non-working days. I think that the opposition and my own colleagues would have every reason to find me extremely presumptuous and question the soundness of my remarks if I ventured to stand up for or condemn the decision when all hon. members of this House barely had time to peruse the document.
This is why I am somewhat surprised to see the opposition express its views in such a firm and categorical way when it is a document, as I say, that nobody has had time to examine in depth; if somebody did have time to do so in the period of time available to us the analytical faculties of that man would have to be proclaimed as those of a genius.
What I would like to deal with, Mr. Speaker, is the resolution addressed to the government urging it to act immediately by way of the exceptional powers which are found in the statutes and whose existence nobody in this House will deny, of course.
It is to this subject that I would like to devote most of my time tonight because this haste to tell the government: Cancel, suspend, rescind or modify this decision which you hardly had time to read, seems most suspect to say the least.
In this House and in this Parliament we have a tradition of which I would like to remind hon. members. The opposition has unduly often reminded us of this tradition over the few years I have been there. This tradition, which is the expression of Parliament's will, consists in requiring from the executive power that it respect the independance of constituted bodies, especially quasi-judicial bodies.
I say "especially" because the opposition has always been extremely touchy in the area of executive power interference even with bodies not of quasi-judicial nature. For instance, I am thinking about the charges or suspicions which have been expressed more than once when someone feared or pretended to fear that the government had tried to interfere with the decisions of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, for instance, of the Canadian Radio-Television Commission or even of the Art Council.
The opposition has always shown paradoxical positions. On the one hand, they ask questions and urge the government to act, as the hon. member for Lanark-Renfrew-Carleton (Mr. Dick) just did. They blame the government for its lack of action one and a half working days after the decision has been published and, on the other hand, with this splendid paradoxical position, if the government is so unfortunate as to voice one single critic against quasijudicial bodies, similar clamours arise from the opposition but this time in a reverse direction. They then tell the executive: Hands off; those are bodies whose freedom is extremely dear to this Parliament, whose independance has been established by Parliament and the government should not tamper with it. fMr. Beaudoin.]
I am surprised to hear shouting from that corner-I do not know where it came from exactly-because when I think, for example, about the protests at the slightest suspicion or at the least indication of governmental intervention in the administration of the Canada Council or the CBC, it is certainly, and I congratulate them, our friends from the New Democratic Party who tried the hardest to prevent an action of this type.


An hon. Member:: You are throwing in a lot of red herrings.


Gérard Pelletier: I do not know what the hon. member wants with his red herrings, Mr. Speaker, but if he only came back from fishing, we might go on with the discussion.
Actually, at the CRTC, for example-and I want to make it very clear-even though the government is authorized to issue guidelines to that agency, within certain limits set out in the act, to my knowledge, in four years and a half to five years it has done so only four times and those guidelines were all likely to gain the support of all members.
The first guideline, it will be remembered, was designed to bring back to Canada certain radio and television stations, and cablevision companies.
The purpose of the second was to force cablevision companies to reserve a channel for educational television and another for community television.
The third as applied to educational television, gave the provinces authority, if they themselves were creating independent corporations for this purpose, to hold broadcasting licences.
I am convinced that this tradition, this respect for the independence of commissions having quasi-legal status, for independent agencies created by this Parliament, is one from which Parliament has no intention to depart.
I shall now come to the second part of my argument to show hon. members how irregular it would be to force the government, and for the government to accept this constraint, to suspend, alter or reverse, a day and a half after its release, a decision following almost a month of public hearings and a month of deliberation by the Commission itself. And apparently we are being asked tonight to take, in two or three days, a decision which is per se, and I emphasize this point, an exceptional one. Because of course, upon reading the Act which contains the section which the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) read out a little while ago, it can be seen that this Act provides for very general acceptance, without amendment, of the Commission's decisions.
This power of the executive to suspend, amend or rescind decisions is obviously exceptional.
As I said this afternoon, when answering a question by the hon. member for York South, it would be quite unusual for the executive to use these powers unless such an intervention is justified by a very serious reason. I gave two examples which to me would be reasons-
April 2, 1973


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Give us some examples.


Gérard Pelletier: I gave some today during the question period. I will repeat them for the hon. member, as it seems they need repeating.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Thank you.


Mr. Benjamin:: The minister is chicken.


Gérard Pelletier: First I gave the example of a decision which would mainly be based on an obviously false principle and, second that of a decision which would obviously be based on inaccurate facts or serious falsehoods.
Those are but two examples among many others. There might be other reasons as I said this afternoon during the oral questions period. I do not reject a government intervention, but I want to stress the point that it would not be made without very serious reasons. According to a practice in the Communications Department that has been going on ever since the department itself has been established, as soon as a decision is published, it is submitted to the high officials and advisors of the department so that it can be considered at length. They report to the minister who, although he may accept or reject their advice, must hear from them before rendering his decision: he must be aware of the pros and cons which could make the executive power, the governor in council act directly, use its reserved powers. This is a matter of routine.
Such a practice, I repeat, was resorted to as soon as the department was established and this is the first thing I did myself as soon as the ruling being considered tonight was published.
It would be irregular, I think, to expect such a study to be completed within a day and a half, within two, three or maybe five days, in view of the long process which enabled the Commission itself to reach the ruling that is the subject-matter of this resolution.
Such interference, as I said, constitutes an exceptional measure and there should be serious reasons for invoking powers reserved to the cabinet.
The hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) said in his statement that the CTC "was not equipped" to discharge the responsibilities entrusted to it. Mr. Speaker, the truth is-and the government probably knew it before being told by the opposition-that the circumstances have changed faster than the Commission could transform itself. And I should like to refer the hon. members who did not read it, to page 26 of the Green Book I had the honour of tabling recently in the House. The hon. members will realize that the government is quite aware of the problem to which the hon. member for York South referred, and that it is now clearly considering in that Green Book a reorganization of the Telecommunications Section of the CTC.
Incidentally, I should also like to tell the hon. member for Egmont (Mr. MacDonald) who, during the question period today, proposed that consumers should get help from the government, under some form or other, to
Bell Canada
submit their claims and make their case before the CTC, that if he refers to page 14 of the Green Book, he will see that this possibility is actually being considered. In fact, we are saying, and I quote:
The Government is accordingly considering a number of suggestions with regard to the representation of consumer interests when licensing and regulatory matters are being dealt with by the Minister of Communications and the federal regulatory bodies.
Therefore, in the government, we are quite aware of the fact that some changes are urgently needed in that respect, and Mr. Speaker, I should like to give the House the assurance that after having conducting the consultations called for by the Green Book, we intend to act and to act with determination and haste, in order to take the corrective measures required in a situation that we have fully looked into.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, here is the last point that I want to deal with. A short while ago when I talked of cancelling or changing a decision I heard someone: It is only a matter of suspension. So I think that the suspension-again I do not exclude the possibility of the government eventually taking this decision or of being myself compelled, once an analysis has been made by my department, to recommend to the government such a measure-of a decision by the Canadian Transport Commission already constitutes a kind of judgment made on the validity of the decision itself. And I was concerned, for instance, when I heard the hon. member for York South state positively that "the Board has been intimidated". He was certainly not making it easy for us to accept a suggestion that is his own, because after this charge has been made in such a positive manner, if we were going to suspend the decision we would now seem to admit that the Commission has been intimidated.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. This completes the round of 15-minute speakers. There are 14 members on the list who are to speak for the next 120 minutes, each of whom shall not speak for more than 10 minutes.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, as I suggested in my supplementary question to the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) earlier today, the motion before the House raises the ghosts of the past. This evening's debate has been held before. What is being said in the present debate is almost a repetition of what was said in the debates of 1966 and 1967 on the setting up of the Canadian Transport Commission. At that time, members of all parties worked together in this House as members of all parties have never before worked to produce the national transportation bill and to remove from the control of Parliament over 40 per cent of the economy of this nation. The House put that power into the hands of a commission, known as the Canadian Transport Commission, in the interests of efficiency in the running of this country.
In that debate those of us who were concerned about this tremendous transfer of power to the board issued warning after warning, as can be found in the speech of the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Baldwin) of December 12, 1966, and again in the speech of the hon. member for Peace River as well as in my own speech delivered on

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
January 12, 1967. All the things I want to say tonight can be found in Hansard for those two days. What warning did we issue? We warned that one of the great dangers in turning all this tremendous power over to a board would be the risk of the acceptance of a principle of infallibility by this board that we had seen demonstrated in the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, other boards, commissions and Crown corporations in this country. Those warnings of 1966-67 have come home to roost in this debate on the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission on the Bell rates.
It is absolutely impossible for the ordinary layman to be able to comprehend the technical aspects of a rate hearing and make his views known before the board on such matters. If you think there is difficulty in connection with Bell rate applications, think how difficult it is to understand the applications that will come from the railways in the years ahead.
Let me tell the House a little story based on the experience of 10 years ago in the MacPherson Royal Commission. One of the railway companies, Canadian Pacific Railways, has a study prepared on moving grain out of western Canada into the export market. Since there were no experts in Canada able to do this, they went to New York and got a reputable group of accountants to produce this study. The study showed that the railway operated at a tremendous loss in 1958 in the hauling of western grain to market. This alarmed the Western governments and wheat selling organizations in the west. They hired another group of experts from New York, equally reputable, to study the same figures. They proved conclusively, with the same figures, that this railway had made money carrying this grain to market. The royal commission had two reports before it, so they hired another group of experts, also from New York, to study the two reports. The third group published a volume three and one half inches in depth called the Third Volume of the MacPherson Report analysing these reports. They finally concluded there was a slight profit in the moving of grain.
This story is told for a purpose, mainly that the technical aspects of rate setting are beyond the comprehension of an ordinary person. Realizing this is 1966 and 1967, the hon. member for Peace River moved an amendment. This amendment laid down the best structure we could suggest for setting up a statutory committee, not under the control of the cabinet or the Prime Minister, but under the control of this House. The minute the House met, the statutory committee was to meet. This committee would have had at its disposal competent advisers who could cope with and examine the reports, provide us with a window on these hearings and translate them into language the laymen in the House of Commons could understand.
That amendment was turned down in 1967 and turned down in a committee vote. Every member of the Liberal government of that day voted against the amendment. Every member of the New Democratic Party also voted against it on the grounds that we should turn over complete power to these boards or Crown corporations and give them the power of infallibility. The first chairman was the Hon. Mr. Pickersgill, "Slick Pick". The next chairman is a Buddha called Benson. Do we have to get down

on our knees and say that this board is infallible? I have known these men for 25 years. They are just as awkward and stupid as I am, and they make just as many mistakes. When the Prime Minister stood up in this House today and said that this board was set up to handle all these things, he not only let down the power of parliament to have some say over such an important segment of our community and our economy, he abdicated his right as the head of a government to have some say.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: My seat-mate, the right hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Die-fenbaker), pressed home the point this afternoon. I wish to quote from the act which was quoted by the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath). The act in question which guides this group called the Canadian Transport Commission states:
The Governor in Council may at any time, in his discretion, either upon petition of any party, person or company interested, or of his own motion, and without any petition or application, vary or rescind any order, decision, rule or regulation of the Commission.
It is bad enough having parliament removed from the scene with no sophisticated committee able to handle these technical matters, but just imagine the position of the ordinary citizen of Canada appearing before a board on technical matters which are beyond the comprehension of almost every person in Canada, except the technically qualified men in accounting at this level. He has no chance at all. When I heard the Prime Minister today abdicating the right of parliament, I realized this was a complete acceptance of the principle of infallibility of government boards.
In my speech of 1967, I stated that I did not blame people who are socialistically oriented and believe in this sort of nonsense; that is their right. However, I believe that a government which calls itself Liberal should know better. A Tory who knows something about the defence of the human race should certainly know better. Our party voted to give and maintain some power for this House of Commons.
Infallibility of government boards? The Prime Minister is as bad as the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lang), who last Friday over a television station in Regina and Saskatoon enunciated the same principle about the Canadian Wheat Board. Once you appoint these men to the board, they achieve infallibility. Even Pope John gave up the notion of infallibility 20 years ago. Here we have a government that accepts no responsibility.
I close my remarks by saying that what we are hearing here is a doctrine of elitism. We have in power a government, supported by a party on this side of the House, that believes it is perfectly right and proper for the representatives of the people to turn their power over to boards and give them complete power and right over our fortunes ever after. Elitism, infallibility or whatever you call it, it is not democracy. It is not democratic government in a modern corporate state like the one in which we live.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!

April 2, 1973


Mark R. MacGuigan: Mr. Speaker, while I do not agree with all the rhetoric of the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis), I do find myself in substantial agreement with the general thrust of his argument. It must be said the proposal that the federal cabinet should reconsider and perhaps over-rule the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission is not an easy one to make. It may be argued, for example, that it is an independent tribunal set up specifically to make the kind of decision it has made. It has the staff, expertise and jurisdiction to do just what it has done.
The hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton) has just given us a very good demonstration of why boards such as this need independence. They need protection from the rantings of Members of Parliament who would interfere with these boards every time they disagree with a decision.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Let the public suffer.


Mark R. MacGuigan: It is not a question of infallibility. It is a question of independence. I must say that after hearing the previous speaker I should hate to entrust any of our agencies or our courts to the hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton). We must jealously guard the independence of federal agencies.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: While they are shafting the people.


Mark R. MacGuigan: At the same time, we must bear in mind, of course, that the government has the ability to reverse the ruling of such a Commission. Provision for this is made in the legislation and it is open to the cabinet to act in such a case. In my view this is a case in which the cabinet should assume its responsibility and reconsider the matter.
If I understand the resolution correctly, it asks that the cabinet suspend the decision of the CTC while it is reconsidering the question. But the resolution does not prejudge the decision which the cabinet might make in its consideration of the matter in accordance with the resolution. In those terms, I completely agree with the resolution.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Well, that's one. Now, what about the other?


Mark R. MacGuigan: The resolution is not a criticism of the CTC. I believe all members of the House would like to repudiate some of the remarks made by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain. The question here is the possibility of reconsideration on broader grounds of the decision the CTC has made. It is precisely because the CTC is limited by its statute in terms of what it can do that the problem to which the motion addresses itself has arisen.
The problem is in fact larger than the problem immediately at hand. First, there is the unfortunate inadequacy of the structure, inasmuch as jurisdiction over both transportation and communications has been joined in one regulatory body.
Bell Canada
At the time Canada came into being, the distinction between communications and transportation was scarcely realized. Certainly, it was not clearly realized.


An hon. Member:: There is no difference.


Mark R. MacGuigan: The only reference to communications as a distinct subject in the British North America Act is in section 92(10)(a) in the mention of telegraphs. The other words in that subsection refer to "works and undertakings connecting a province with other provinces or extending beyond the limits of a province." It was to bring it under this category of "works and undertakings" that the act incorporating the Bell Telephone Company in 1880 was amended by a statute of 1882. In section 4 of that statute it was stated:
The said act of incorporation is hereby amended and the works thereunder authorized are hereby declared to be for the general advantage of Canada.
It was only under this type of provision in our constitution that federal regulatory jurisdiction over what we now consider to be distinctively communications began to emerge. Subsequently, with the decision of the Privy Council in the radio reference of 1932, it was recognized that here was a new field of regulation, and not long after that radio, and then television, began to be separately regulated. Telegraphs and telephones were left where they had begun, in the field of transportation, and I suggest this is no longer satisfactory in the year 1973.
The second inadequacy is a consequence of the first, and is an inadequacy in the terms of reference. The Railway Act stipulates that the Transport Commission regulate federally-chartered telecommunications common carriers and approve all rates for public and private wire communications. The type of regulation envisaged by this act is set out in section 321 (1):
All tolls shall be just and reasonable and shall always, under substantially similar circumstances and conditions with respect to all traffic of the same description carried over the same route, be charged equally to all persons at the same rate.
Mr. Speaker, these are not sufficient grounds of consideration today when we must respond to the type of request which is continually being placed before the Commission by Bell Canada. I should like again to draw the attention of the House to the fact that the minister, in a green paper, has himself suggested that a new body should be set up, one which we migh call a Canadian Communications Commission. This would separate, once and for all, the regulation of communications from the regulation of transportation.


An hon. Member:: And how would that help?


Mark R. MacGuigan: It would have authority over all matters involving communication. This would leave us in a much better situation because all issues affecting communications would be dealt with together, and the regulatory body would be able to develop expertise in that particular field. The terms of reference drawn up for that Commission should, of course, be sufficiently broad as to enable it to take into account much wider considerations, when considering applications for rate increases, than is now permitted.

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
The third inadequacy is the lack of procedures for opposition. I have among my constituents some who would have liked to oppose the application made by the Bell Telephone Company. But the fact that the hearings were being held in Ottawa would have made their appearance very inconvenient and expensive. I understand, also, that the proceedings at pre-hearing conferences were not made available free to intervenors, and this, too, would constitute a financial hardship. In this respect, there is a proposal in the green paper which should be adopted as soon as possible. It reads, and I quote from page 14:
The complexity of the subject and the contingent requirement for highly specialized legal and economic skills have inhibited individuals and groups from appearing before the regulatory board to press their views. The government is accordingly considering a number of suggestions with regard to the representation of consumer interests when licensing and regulatory matters are being dealt with by the Minister of Communications and the federal regulatory bodies.
There is surely a need in this area which must be met speedily by the government. Such a body could also act as an appeal board to consider representations from aggrieved users of the telecommunications system.
In sum, the point is not so much that the decision of the CTC is wrong as that it does not appear to the public that the decision has been made by the most appropriate body, nor does it appear that it has been made in accordance with procedures which allow for sufficient public participation. Just or not, the decision has not been seen to be just.
Perhaps the present problem will force us speedily to adopt the proposals which the minister has placed before us in the green paper.


Mr. Terry Grier (Toronto-Lakeshore):: Mr. Speaker, in the past several weeks the Minister of Communications (Mr. Pelletier) has on several occasions been asked to intervene in the Bell Canada rate hearings on behalf of the public interest and the minister has consistently refused to do so on the ground that the cabinet had the power to disallow a decision of the CTC. It is on this basis that our party is asking the government not to permit the rate increase to be proceeded with pending a thorough review by the cabinet, a review which the minister has already acknowledged lies within the power of the administration.
The minister laid considerable stress this evening upon the fact that the Bell judgment had only been made public at the end of last week. Mr. Speaker, it does not take more than a few moments to recognize that there is considerable public dissatisfaction with the judgment, and it does not need much imagination to undertake to suspend the effects of that judgment until a review can be carried out.
I submit that the arguments put forward by the minister do not detract in any way from the force of the representations and requests made by members of this party.
I was more impressed by some of the arguments put forward by the parliamentary secretary. Extracts have been quoted from the green paper on communications policy. I, too, wish to quote from this document. On page nine we find the following:
Equally important is the fact that efficient low-cost telephone service has come to be looked on as a necessity of life for individual members of the public.

I suggest that this paragraph might well serve as a theme for the debate tonight. What we are concerned with tonight is trying to debate whether such an efficient, low cost service is being provided to the public by Bell Canada; and if there is any doubt about the matter, we say that the cabinet should intervene, make an assessment on behalf of the public and arrive at an objective judgment which, in the words of the parliamentary secretary, may be seen to be just.
If one compares the rates of Bell Canada with those of, say, telephone companies in other provinces-I refer particularly to the western provinces-one will discover in virtually every case Bell rates are substantially higher at the present time despite the fact, one might assume, that Bell enjoys economies of scales which other telephone companies do not. For that reason I suggest there is serious doubt as to whether Bell is offering the kind of low cost, efficient telephone service which the government itself recognizes as a necessity for individual Canadians.
I think what is at issue in this debate, Mr. Speaker, is the ability, or the willingness, of the transport commission to represent the public interest in the hearings which have taken place over a number of years. I think it is instructive to recall that Bell Canada has frequently made application for rate increases down through the years, and the fact is that on no occasion, in all its appearances before the Canadian Transport Commission, has Bell Canada been refused an over-all increase in the rates it charges the public; this in spite of the fact that in its early years Bell exceeded the permissive level of earnings set by the board. I suggest that because of this, in very real measure the transport commission has lost the confidence of the public to act in what it believes to be its best interests.
Moreover, it was frequently recorded during past months that the complexity of the argument which only Bell, I submit, really understood, which Bell designed and which took place on Bell's terms, prevented most if not all of the intervenors being able to make their case satisfactorily. I submit that even the governments of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec publicly conceded that they were unable to present the kind of evidence and to marshall the kind of resources, with the time at their disposal, that would enable them to counter the deep and complex financial rationalizations being put forward by Bell Canada.
Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, the methods of proceeding under which the commission conducts the hearings into Bell Canada applications appear to be designed, as the parliamentary secretary admits, to encourage non-participation on the part of individuals and organized groups alike. What was intended as a quasi-judicial regulatory agency has become, in reality, the playground of the legal profession.
Mr. Speaker, on a number of occasions, through the minister and directly to the commission, requests were made for the commission to facilitate intervention and an expression of opinion by the public. But the commission would not undertake to hold hearings outside the city of
April 2, 1973

Ottawa and, as has already been admitted, many individuals and groups simply were unable to afford the time or the financial resources to appear to present their case.
I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the public interest was, in large measure, not represented by any agency of this government or this parliament before the hearings of the CTC. It was left-I think this is a matter of regret for members to note-to the governments of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, with such resources and time as they had at their disposal, to represent the public interest.
There have been a number of quotations from the green paper to the effect that the government will be proposing a new regulatory agency to deal with these applications in the future. I submit to this House that the fact that such proposals are being made underlines the weakness of the kind of scrutiny which the CTC has in the past been able to bring to bear upon these applications. If, in fact, the CTC was doing the job properly there would be no need for the minister to stand before us and say, "We are making some changes in the near future." I submit those changes cannot be allowed to take place some months hence. The reasons which gave rise to the need for changes should be brought to bear upon the current applications, for the same reasons as those for which the government now concedes reform is necessary in regulating rate increases of public utilities. For those reasons the cabinet should now undertake to bring scrutiny to bear upon the Bell rate increases. Therefore, I submit that the government's own arguments, couched in its proposals for a new communications policy, in themselves cast doubt upon the commission's ability to adjudicate fairly, objectively and in the public interest the application presented by Bell.
Mr. Speaker, this is, I concede, a complicated subject. One could for some time quote figures in support of one's case. But this is not the time nor the place to repeat all the technical arguments. The point is this: however successfully Bell may have mesmerized the transport commission, its case before the Canadian public has not been proven. Putting it charitably, there exists serious doubt that the rate increases are justified.
I hope that the government takes seriously its responsibility to represent and defend the public interest, as I submit the commission has failed to do. This is a time of mounting and justifiable anxiety about price increases in Canada. In the circumstances, the government is surely obliged to suspend, at least, the implementation of these rate increases pending a thorough review. That review, Mr. Speaker, must place the public interest ahead of Bell Canada's interests. If this happens, I am confident that the government can come to no conclusion other than that the rate increases must not and shall not be proceeded with.


Mr. Claude Wagner (Saint-Hyacinthe):: Mr. Speaker, due to the exclusive monopoly exercised by Bell Canada in Quebec, that province is particularly and severely affected by the rate increase as a result of the fourth application since 1969. This increase soon gave rise to a reaction among Quebecers followed by general dissatisfaction, especially in certain groups affected such as senior citizens, disabled persons, the poor and the tenants.
Bell Canada
Consequently, I feel it is my duty to speak during a few minutes on the motion of the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis).
I admit that I am convinced that the cause we are pleading is justified, but when I realized that I was supporting the hon. member for York South, I was somewhat reluctant. I wondered whether I actually was on the right side. But when I found out, after reading his motion, that this would not result in a blame or a non-confidence motion, then, I understood why the hon. member for York South could criticize Bell Canada cheerfully and bravely, with honour and vigour, casually chide the government, because the latter will not be defeated as a result of this debate.
Mr. Speaker, I have no intention of using the same language as the hon. member for York South as regards Bell Canada. First of all I would like to clear up a few jurisdictional points and take up again some of the arguments put forward by the Minister of Communications (Mr. Pelletier).
The minister indicated that it was impossible for the government to take action at this time and meet our demand that the judgment made by the CTC be suspended, because the autonomy of these quasi-judicial bodies has to be respected. The minister seemed to be sad and unhappy that we called upon him to intervene. He said: Do not call upon me to interfere.
May I say, Mr. Speaker, that we do not ask the government to intervene in the course of a hearing by a body. We are only urging the government to take action, to prove its leadership and simply suspend a judgment which has already been made. For what purpose? Because it is a matter of common knowledge that all parties must be heard before a court. Well, before this very decision was made, Bell Canada was one of the only parties to be heard. The public at large never had any opportunity of coming before the court, of setting forth their viewpoint, and of stating that in view of the rising cost of living, for instance, it is impossible for them to agree with the increase that the CTC has just approved.
Consequently, it would only be the most elementary justice to suspend this decision for a moment in order to enable the government, the governor in council, to review the case to ensure that justice has really been done, that all aspects have indeed been weighed in the light of the social context because it is clear to everyone that this fourth or fifth increase in rates is socially unacceptable.
This is why the government would not make an error by interpreting with generosity its jurisdiction under the law, to fulfill the wish of all hon. members and to suspend the decision of the commission. Moreover, it is natural that in the final stage the government become the superior court before which the Canadian people can plead their case through hon. members.
Before ordinary courts, one can be assured that justice will be done because there is always a court of appeal and above it the Supreme Court. But here there is no court beyond the decision of the commission except the one of the Governor general in council that Parliament has wanted to establish under the law. I say to the hon. minister that the first argument does not seem to be very

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
valuable and I answered with the explanations I have just given.
The second argument used by the minister, and without too much conviction, I must admit, nor too much persuasion, was that they would have to make within two or three days an exceptional decision that an independent board or body could have made in two months. But what is extraordinary about that? Courts do that every day. Courts make decisions within 15 minutes whenever injunctions, for instance are required from the Superior Court and are turned down afterwards. An appeal can be lodged immediately with the appeal Court and immediately the judges for the sake of justice, agree to suspend, to stay the ease, until they have had enough time to make a judgment upon the merits in order to prevent any injustice. Here again, I believe the example applies in the case of the government and it would probably be wise for the government to accept at this time to stay the decision pending further consideration. That is not to prejudge in any way the final decision and neither to criticizing the one that was made. It is simply to show broad-mindedness and wait so that better justice be done to Canadian citizens.
Concluding his speech, the minister said: but there should be a serious reason for me to act. That serious reason, Mr. Speaker, I suggest that it lies in that request for an increase in rates that was granted, which is socially unacceptable and comes as a coicidence-which is quite revealing-at a time when a House committee on the cost of living had to make public a majority report in which they recommended the setting up of a commission to control the cost of living. And in the minority report, we told the government to go further and to implement, among other things an immediate price and wage freeze.
That is an indication that it is not a mere coincidence that this motion is being debated in this House; it is because at the present time the great concern is about the cost of living which has gone beyond bounds, and that concern cannot be allowed to continue. The government must bring in measures and show it is capable of making decisions. That is what we are asking of the government now, and we take the opportunity offered by this debate to say to the government: Set the minds of the people of Canada at rest and as far as this decision is concerned, which must necessarily be of an inflationary nature, postpone it for a while. When you have examined it in depth, when you have allowed the people of Canada to express their views, you may decide as you see fit. But take a decision right now.
Mr. Speaker, now that I have answered some of the arguments made by the Minister of Communications I would like to conclude by saying first of all that Bell Canada deserves to be congratulated. That company undoubtedly deserves it. For years it has succeeded in developing its means of research, showed a sound administration practice made progress in marketing and other fields and that is why that company is recognized throughout the world as a model. We must congratulate Bell for that. But congratulating it does not mean that it is always right. And we submit that in this case it is not right. We submit that the record indicates very clearly that its need for expansion and its quest for reinvestment

are not warranted in the present economic and social context and if that company is not right in this regard we urge the government to be logical and decide on the basis of the general context of the Canadian economy. That increase in rates granted to Bell Canada will become more and more generalized in other fields and will thus become dramatic. The cost of living will become too heavy a burden for the underpriviledged and for middle class people who are too often forgotten.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order. I am sorry to have to interrupt the hon. member but his time has now expired.


Miss Monique Begin (Saint-Michel):: Mr. Speaker, may I first of all be permitted to correct at least one point of the remarks of the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe (Mr. Wagner). To tell the truth, I was somewhat at a loss to understand whether he was for or against but I noticed that he based his first argument on an assertion which I believe to be wrong. He mentioned the lack of participation of ordinary citizens, of intermediary bodies, of anyone other than Bell Canada representatives, at the public hearings held from January 10 to February 16 last whereas, to my knowledge, the number of representations made at that public hearing is the greatest the company has ever received.
Having said that, I was most interested in some of the problems outlined by my colleagues, without going into details, and for good reasons. I believe, for instance, that there are highly specialized technical problems involved. I am thinking of the legal problems, notably the precise nature of the CTC's relations with the cabinet and with Parliament, and the problems of taxation, such as the reviewing of the concept of deferred taxation and its implementation. I am also thinking of administrative problems, such as the quality and quantity of personnel in the Canadian Transport Commission or the administrative plan for the running of the Commission.
For my part, I do not mean to speak on these points, which have already been commented on in outline. I intend to give voice to some more general considerations, for the good reason that since the Commission's decision was only published on Friday, I have not been able to study the decision, or the complete file, for that matter.
Besides that, it seems clear to me that our role as parliamentarians is rather to suggest ideas or basic principles. Here again, I differ from the previous speaker, the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe, for if I understand correctly, we are soon going to be controlling and reviewing all personal and corporative decisions that are made in Canada. This is really not the role I see myself in, or ourselves. My role is to put forth basic principles, and to enlighten the matter to the best of my knowledge, rather than to get carried away from reading press clippings or extracts taken out of context from just one of the briefs submitted at the public hearing last January and February.
I am not concerned, therefore, with reducing the scope of the debate until we are arguing about dotting the i's and crossing the t's, but rather with reflecting in the name
April 2, 1973

of my constituents on some of the wider aspects of this discussion that affects every family in Canada.

To my way of thinking, it is much too easy to choose a big public corporation such as Bell Canada and make it the villain. That attitude, to me, is by analogy very similar to the one adopted last week by another opposition party which for hours and hours deliberately exploited human misery.

Indeed, Mr. Speaker, except for its shareholders, who likes big corporations? Unless I am mistaken, it is not very profitable these days to be a Bell Canada shareholder. Personally, I do not like paying bills any more than you all.
I have many other reasons however, for complaining about Bell Canada. In my riding, and here I refer to a situation in the metropolis of Canada and not in the Arctic, there still are party lines, and not because people have chosen to use them: there are so many other kinds of entertainment in Montreal.
It seems to me that the fundamental problem of maintaining service rates and facing increased costs of corporation debts, versus an increase in subscribers' rates and the cost of equity should be studied exhaustively.
This being said, the fact remains that as far as I know the quality and the variety of the services offered to Canadians by Bell Canada are outstanding.
A little while ago, as I was listening to the honourable member for York South (Mr. Lewis), I wanted to ask him if he remembered the time when he was a student in Paris. Of course I am a generation remote from him, but nevertheless we have certainly encountered the same problems. He must certainly recall the telephone slugs that you have to buy in each restaurant and that cannot even be used in another telephone booth. I am also thinking about the calls you have to make three or four hours before you can get the connection. As to residents, I think about the months and years they must remain on a waiting list before getting a telephone, without mentioning the basic installation cost of some $500 that the ordinary citizen must pay, and all the rest.
It remains that Bell Canada offers one of the best services in the world, at one of the most reasonable and controlled prices in the world. What can we do?
I imagine that a certain party will answer: Nationalize Bell Canada! and I would understand to some extent! Everybody would want the increases that are paid Bell Canada, the increases which I pay, that is the investments that I offer the company would allow us to be come shareholders at least. Perhaps but would that guarantee a better service at lower cost? Certainly hon. members will allow me to doubt it!
In fact, what is the price of something all about? It seems to me that it is the actual number of hours during which the consumer has to work in order to be in a position to obtain goods or services. Certainly, at the present time, I am not sufficiently briefed to supply figures; no one among us really is.
Bell Canada
However, I think that we should think about that and see that, all things being equal, the portion of the family budget devoted each month to payment of Bell Canada bills has noticeably diminished as compared with what it was 10 or 15 years ago.
However, some questions remain unanswered. One can wonder whether the parallel is fair between the increases in rates obtained by Bell Canada through last Friday's decision and the increase in the cost of living, whether both are commensurate, if I may say so. One may wonder whether the commission is in a position to study the expansion priorities that Bell Canada has set forth itself.
One can wonder whether the act and regulations governing the Canadian Transport Commission can really allow a clear interpretation of the notion of public interest.
All of those questions appear to me much larger than the sole decision of Friday last, that is, rate increases that are not at all agreeable to us; last night I wrote my cheques to the order of Bell Canada.


Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):: Mr. Speaker, it is surprising to find one of our members so young and attractive, yet so endowed with the principles of "Mother Bell" and tradition that she can see fault in the minor resolution that the leader of the New Democratic Party (Mr. Lewis) brought forward today. Obviously, the Canadian people are thinking about nationalization and government control not only of Bell but of all the other telephone companies and communications media in Canada.
It is no longer an advantage to have a telephone; it is a downright necessity, an essential part of life. I would suggest to some of those who question whether the CTC has made the proper judgment to consider the fact that an announcement will be made of the payment in April of a quarterly dividend which will be increased to 71 cents a share. The annual rate will be $2.85 cents a share. Previously, Bell telephone paid three quarterly dividends of 66 cents and one dividend of 67 cents, for an annual rate of $2.65 a share.
What they asked for when they came before the CTC was the right to raise enough money to make an expenditure of $590 million. Leaving aside the fact that they paid this dividend, their shareholders were not too enthusiastic about the stock. As I said, last year they paid a dividend of $2.65. However, the interesting thing is that all they are going to ask for in the financial markets is an additional $200 million in order to raise the $590 million they say is necessary for construction.
Do the members of this House not know what Bell Canada is? Do they not know that they own many subsidiaries in other fields which are also involved in the decision to allow an increase in rates for the service so the corporation can continue to build an empire which is not only in the telephone field? To the best of my knowledge, Northern Electric is still a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bell. It is interesting to note that at no time was the Canadian Transport Commission able to separate what

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
Bell telephone was making from its own operations, and what they were making from Northern Electric; what they were bleeding off into Northern and how they were making their sales. The CTC spent years trying to find that out, but to my knowledge they have never been able to do so.
I am sure that the CTC is much less competent than was the old board of transport commissioners. It is interesting, however, that Bell telephone also owns other subsidiaries, such as Microsystems International, Nevron Industries Company, Northern Electric Distribution, Northern Electric tele-something, which is in Turkey-even the bilingual members of the House would not able to pronounce that name-and Northern Telecom Inc., in Boston, Massachusetts. It also owns 49 per cent of Bell Northern Research and it owns Northern Telephone in northern Ontario and Northern Telephone in northern Quebec. It owns a vast network of telephone systems.
It may be true that Bell telephone has done an excellent job in the telecommunications field, and I would be the first to admit it. But I suggest that this field is important enough to the people so that even the minister, inept as he may be, has suggested that the government proposes to merge the functions of the Canadian Radio-Television Commission with those of the Canadian Transport Commission which apply to telecommunications carriers, subject to federal regulatory authority. Why is that? Obviously, he has suddenly come to the conclusion that the money people pay for telephone service is not all going into producing telephones or bringing the service up to date; much of it is going into non-allied fields.
We should be interested in looking at some of the figures in relation to the rates paid for telephone service. The figures which I can quote were provided in a Canadian Press survey published in the Gazette on February 15 of this year. They indicate the monthly basic rates for privately-owned telephones in communities with 5,000 to
10,000	telephones. In Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, the rate is $5.60; in Caraquet, New Brunswick, it is $5.10; in Exeter, Ontario, it is $4.50; in Powell River, British Columbia, it is $4.70. But the government-owned telephone system in Flin Flon, Manitoba, is $3.25. This is only about half the cost in some other communities. In North Battleford, Saskatchewan, unlike Glace Bay where it is $5.60, the rate is $3.45- over $2 less. In Lloydminster, Alberta, it is $3.80. This is the rate for government-owned telephones in Alberta, where I have not heard anybody sound remotely as if they would want to nationalize or socialize any kind of public utility.


Gerald William Baldwin: Don't be so sure about that.


William Arnold Peters: I am sure that the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Baldwin) was progressive when he was 30 years younger, and so were the people in that area and they probably did nationalize the service. But I am suggesting it is time we did something about the whole communications system in Canada, and did it now. Every time Bell telephone goes before the government, they present this kind of document. So does Canadian National. Nobody is able to argue against their tariff structure, because nobody understands it. I disagree violently with the parliamentary secretary who says that what we need

is another regulatory body to regulate the body which we have set up to regulate the company. Let us quit playing around, take over this company and operate it in the interests of the public.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


William Arnold Peters: Few people in Canada today, except for the dinosaurs in political thought, believe that in a monopolistic, public utility company there should be no government ownership or no government control. Our telephone systems now are satellites and are connected through microwave systems to people in every part of the world. It seems to me that this is a sufficiently important segment of our economy to be brought under the control of the people.
It may be that if we are to maintain the standard that we have maintained in telephone communications, not only in Bell telephone but in other telephone systems in Canada-and there are 30 to 40 such systems-we will have to pay more. As the hon. member for Saint-Hyacin-the (Mr. Wagner) said, the cost of living is going up and therefore it is reasonable to expect telephone rates to go up also. But if that is so, at least let us ensure, on behalf of the individual who is paying the bill, that he is getting the most for his money and that he knows to what other uses his money is being put.
Therefore, I suggest that we do not need another "senate" to look after the "senate" that we have created in the CTC, where we put tired, worn-out or defeated politicians.
We need to establish a Crown corporation which will operate our public utility from coast to coast to ensure that not only is it the best possible but that service can be provided to every part of the country through our communications media whether radio, television, telephone or any new developments that take place. That will happen at a cost the people can afford only if we do it publicly, and if we do it all across the country by uniting Bell telephone with all the other systems in Canada, making it a government-operated Crown corporation in the monopoly, public utility field.


Jean-Jacques Blais: Mr. Speaker, will the hon. member allow me a question?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: Order, please. I must point out to the hon. member that the time of the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters) having expired, he cannot be asked questions unless there is unanimous consent, and I would be surprised if the House agreed.
[English)


Gerald William Baldwin: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me we could sum up the very excellent speech of the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters) by saying that the essence of it was that the bell tolls for Bell, if he could have his way. It is fascinating, however, to recall that the President of the Canadian Transport Commission, who actually sat on this particular hearing, is the same distinguished gentleman who, as minister of finance, started the inflationary spiral in this country, or at least did more than any other minister of finance to keep it going. How-
April 2, 1973

ever, we now find him, as president of this commission, still pouring oil to fuel the fires of inflation. We are concerned about this. We are very concerned about it. We have shown our concern in our discussions, speeches and questions.
Just today I asked the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) what I thought was a very reasonable question. I asked him if he would make a statement on motions as to whether or not the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Whelan) was stating government policy when he indicated that in his view only the provincial governments had the authority and the jurisdiction to do anything about instituting a freeze or controls on prices. I asked the Prime Minister also if in his statement on motions he would say what, in his opinion, would be an emergency which would prompt the government to act. All we got was a smart-aleck reply, saying that this was asking for a legal opinion. I was not asking him for a legal opinion. If I wanted a legal opinion I would go to a man who knows the law. I would not go to the Prime Minister. I would not go to anybody over there on the other side. In fact I would call them, as we used to call a judge in our county, Judge Necessity. He was called that because we all know how much law necessity knows.
What worries me is the futility of this proceeding today. Here we are with a serious problem facing millions of people in this country and we cannot do anything about it. I give credit to the hon. member for York South (Mr. Lewis) for instituting this proceeding so that we can at least do a little talking about it. But this is the House of Commons, this is parliament, and we should have the right to come here and indicate by a recorded vote what we think about the situation.
We are deprived of that opportunity. Why are we deprived of it? It is because hon. gentlemen opposite, or their predecessors, combined with my hon. friends to my left and voted against the amendment to which the hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton) referred, by means of which we attempted to reserve to the House of Commons some overseeing role with regard to issues of this kind. I can recall that when speaking on behalf of that motion I said, as reported on page 11392 of Hansard for December 20, 1966:
The scope of this act-
That is the National Transportation Act.
-is enormous, and equally vast will be the overriding supervisory authority of the transport commission. Let there be no doubt that if this bill is passed without any material change we shall have surrendered to those men who will compose the commission almost complete authority over a variety of subject matters in the field of transportation which so deeply affects every Canadian and every part of Canada.
It was on that basis that we pursued our course in this debate. The motion was put. The hon. Mr. Pickersgill, at that time the minister in charge of the bill, said the motion had some merit, but, that there were reasons why he did not want to vote for it. The then hon. member for Selkirk, now the Premier of Manitoba, spoke in that debate before the supper hour and said he would support the motion. But obviously, as a young member, he was called by his party leader and told the facts of life. He came back to the chamber after supper and said he would not support the motion. When it was put to a vote members of the party
Bell Canada
opposite and the socialists to my left voted against it, and it was not passed.
If it had been passed there would now be in existence a committee in this parliament charged with the responsibility of scrutinizing the decisions of boards of this kind, and more specifically a decision of this kind. I do not expect, I do not want and I do not believe, that parliament can get into the detail of the decision making process, but when parliament does as it has been doing, to my sadness over the years, gradually divesting itself of all authority to check, challenge and scrutinize the actions of these boards, then, Sir, when motions of this kind come before the House I must recall the sad mistake in judgment made by my hon. friends to my left.
The hon. member for Timiskaming finished his speech by saying, let us create another Crown corporation. That is the only solution the socialists have-create more bureaucracy, more Crown corporations. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain said something about infallibility. The semi-socialists opposite and the socialists to my left seem to believe that all Crown corporations are, in fact, an immaculate conception. I do not believe that. I think they are composed of men and women, dedicated, serious men and women, but that in the final analysis only parliament, and particularly this House, really can deal with the public interest. We may be slow. We may talk too much. You, Mr. Speaker, will probably accept that. We may be clumsy and awkward, but in the final analysis only the House of Commons, elected as it is, has the interests of the people of Canada at heart, and it is for us to make the final decision. That is the problem we face now.
If this motion which I had proposed, and which was referred to by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain, had been passed, this committee would now be in existence. We would have been able, by a simple order of the House, to have had the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission referred to that committee for consideration, not in the sense that we would go into all of the technical details but that we, representing the public interest, would have had an opportunity to examine the decision, to call witnesses, and to test the validity, the accuracy and the rightness of the decision. After that, we could have made a report to the House, and the House could have voted on it. The decision of the House would then have been supreme and nobody else, not the CTC and not the government-which isn't a government, which is a Prime Minister surrounded by yes-men-


Claude Wagner: Not even a Prime Minister.


Gerald William Baldwin: As my hon. friend from Saint-Hyacinthe (Mr. Wagner) says-and not too much of a Prime Minister-only the House of Commons would make the final decision. When I see my hon. friends opposite collaborating with the NDP, with the socialists, I know why. They believe in the same thing. They are suspicious of parliament. They are suspicious of the opportunities of the members of this House to express themselves. That is the situation.
I do not like to say this but it is true that all too often, almost weekly, we find this House almost like a bawdy
house with the New Democratic Party trying to offer for

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
sale their virtues and principles. I think this is a sad situation, Mr. Speaker. I suggest that this motion in effect should provide an opportunity for members of the House to express their opinions, not in debate of this kind, but by means of a vote.


Mr. lacques Guilbault (Saint-Jacques):: Mr. Speaker, I am glad of the chance to say a few words on this motion. Unlike some opposition members, I am going to try and tell the House clearly whether I am for or against this motion, rather than just making the government bear the brunt of a decision with which they had nothing to do.
I think that the purpose of the motion introduced by the member for York South (Mr. Lewis) is in itself quite praiseworthy, inasmuch as he would like the government to look into the Canadian Transport Commission's decision on the matter of Bell Canada's application "A". I agree in principle, and so, I think, do most Canadians.
I think everyone here will agree that this decision came as a surprise to everyone, and to me more then anyone.
No one expected the Canadian Transport Commission to give their approval to over 80 per cent of the contents of application "A" as presented to them by Bell Canada.
And so it is quite understandable that telephone users are concerned-and rightly so, you have to admit-about this decision and about the rate increases which they will have to put up with.
Now, although I agree with the general principle of the motion, I cannot agree with the way it has been drawn up, because it calls for the implementation of the decision to be suspended immediately; that is where I differ from the member for York South. The same member who was telling us just now that the government cannot act now, that the government will need time to consider thoroughly the CTC's decision, is asking us in the same breath, in his motion, to suspend immediately, and therefore blindly, this same decision. This is where I no longer agree with the motion.
The government will surely need several weeks, if not a month-judging by the discussion I had this afternoon with an official-to consider this decision seriously and give a sound ruling. The CTC took two months to give birth to this baby: a month for the hearings and a review of the briefs submitted, and another month in camera to study and reach the decision it then announced.
Let us not ask the government, after three days, to rule immediately and to suspend, blindly, without knowing whether they are justified in doing so, the decision of the CTC. To my mind, the government would need at least a month to reach a final decision; and at least a week or a week and a half will be required before the Minister of Communications, (Mr. Pelletier) can advise the House of whatever he intends to do.
Why a month's delay? Because one month will be required if the points under dispute and the heart of the matter are to be dealt with, if a rational decision is to be reached. It is not enough to say, "Costs have gone up, leading to inflation". The points under dispute must be clearly identified and to my mind, there are three of them: the first and most important, is the quality of the service.

We probably have in North America the best telephone communications service in the whole world.
I shall not repeat what the hon. member for Saint-Mich-el (Miss Begin) said when she spoke about telephone service in Europe. All those who travel know the low quality of service in continental Europe; they know the waiting periods of an hour or even two hours to put citizens in communication in the same urban center and they know it is sometimes necessary to wait several hours or even till the next day to communicate with someone who lives IOC miles away.
In Canada, we enjoy a service which is far superior to what people have in the other countries. In fact, we can say that there are two kinds of telephone service on earth: the service we have in North America and the one we encounter everywhere else. It is as simple as that.
I think that Canadians have a right to enjoy this service, particularly when one considers that they now get it at a rate which is far cheaper than what European consumers and users pay for a much inferior service. The first disputable point is the quality of service.
The second point, which goes along with the quality of service, is the study of the costs of this service, namely, to see whether the costs are normal for the service the users get. There lies the whole question. It is not simply a matter of saying: prices have increased but of seeing if the increase is warranted, keeping in mind the excellent service we enjoy.
Finally, another point worth studying is the financial situation of Bell Canada. Several hon. members, as a rule those of the New Democratic Party, are always ready to raise a hue and cry on corporations, to say they make too many profits. However, I think that before talking like that, it would be a good thing if the government would seriously examine the financial situation of Bell Canada in order to know if its request for a rate increase is really justified. The government will be able to take realistic and considered measures because if they acted this evening, probably pleasing opposition members, these people would be the first to criticize us in a month or two if it appeared, after a serious study, that the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission was justifiable.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Are you for it, or against it?


Mr. Morgan:: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the hon. member who has the floor would permit a question? Does he not think that if the price increase is not stopped now, Bell will ultimately have to pay much higher costs? Bell would put the increase through its computers. Would it not be more fair to the company and to the government if these increases were suspended until the whole subject had been inquired into? Obviously, the cost to Bell, if this matter is suspended and the increase is rolled back, will be much greater after the increase is processed through the computer.


Jacques Guilbault: Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that the hon. member is taking so much interest in the company. If the company processes the increase in its computer, and if the
April 2, 1973

government decides that the company must undo what it has done, that is the company's problem. It is asking for the increase. If that increase is not justified, it should suffer for its decision in asking for an increase.

Now, Mr. Speaker, may I continue my remarks.
What is wrong with the resolution, in my opinion, is the request for immediate suspension, as I said, of the Canadian Transport Commission decision. I am in favour of suspension after some time, when it is definitely deemed advisable but a suspension based on clearly unsubstantiated representations of the opposition would seem absurd and unrealistic.
No opposition speaker has mentioned quality or cost of services; none mentioned the various points in support of Bell Canada's application "A". Of course,' the case has just become public, and opposition members know no more about it than the government does at this time. Actually, what is the opposition trying to achieve tonight? The purpose is to bring up the subject of inflation in an effort to convince citizens that the government will be responsible for price increases. The hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Baldwin) told us earlier that Mr. Benson, the present Chairman of the Canadian Transport Commission, started spiraling inflation and is attempting to perpetuate it through this decision rendered by the Commission. As for the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe (Mr. Wagner), he was dissatisfied because the New Democratic Party did not word the motion to blame the government. Come on now! To condemn this government for a decision rendered not by. it but by an independent body is not reasonable.
What they are trying to do tonight is to accuse the government and blame it for this increase, while everybody realizes that this does not make sense. In fact, they seem to be playing political games with this and finally, all that they manage to do, on either side of the House, is to express doubts as to the merits of a decision made by the Canadian Transport Commission. In fact, I understand that doubts may be felt, but let them not ask the government to act immediately on the basis of a doubt. They must realize that this government must take a few days or weeks in order to make a serious decision. I do not think that the people expect a responsible government to show less seriousness. And any government that would act on the basis of a doubt would not enjoy the confidence of the people.
This is why I recommend to this government to take all the time required in order to review the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission.


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


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the motion before us is most appropriate. I agree however with the remarks made by the minister a moment ago, because I feel that they are very reasonable. It is true that a very short time has elapsed since the decision was announced. But I realize also that the 26087-37
Bell Canada
decision must be brought to the attention of the government.
I am satisfied that the government will take the necessary steps to examine the reasons which have incited an hon; member to introduce this motion and the points which have been made in support of it. I will merely quote two excerpts of briefs presented by two very representative bodies to the Canadian Transport Commission. First, here are the views of the Canadian Labour Congress:
The Canadian Labour Congress welcomes this opportunity to submit its objections to the last request made by Bell Canada in its application "A" for the approval of its proposed adjustments in its rates related to services, equipment and facilities. Such application, if it were agreed to, would bring to this company, as estimated by itself, additional revenues amounting to $36 million for 1973 . .. We wish however to point out from the outset that the Congress is speaking on behalf of a much wider sector of the population since its concern is not limited to the narrow scope of the union movement. Rather our brief is expressing the frustration and the discontent caused by Bell's off-hand attitude towards individuals and groups, and which have been conveyed to the Congress through letters and private communications. In brief, we are not only the spokesmen of the Congress members in these regions, but we are also quite concerned that the proposed increases will cause additional hardships for the aged, the disabled, the unemployed, pensioners on fixed income and low income people ...
I for one am convinced that the CLC officials did not try to exploit human misery, no more than the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe earlier when he suggested that those people will suffer as a consequence of the increases authorized by the Canadian Transport Commission.
When we mention the serious situation of underprivileged people, I am a little tired of hearing some hon. members accusing us of trying to make cheap political gains and of politicking. I hope this will be taken into account in the future.
At any rate, this is what the CLC thinks-and here I call the attention of the minister upon this so that the government can see whether there was abuse or not and I quote:
During the period from 1958 to the mid-sixties, Bell Canada exceeded the level of earnings allowed by the former Transport Commission. Expressed in actual money earnings, the excess of profits that Bell Canada illegally drew out, in contravention of the commission's order, was approximately $37 million. And as the corporate tax reached an average of 50 per cent at that time, one can say that the Bell succeeded in drawing out $75 million from telephone users through a direct violation of the commission's decision.
That is why I invite the government to watch closely the decisions made by the Canadian Transport Commission and even in the case of an independent body, I think it is up to the government to see that the corporations abide by the decisions that are made and that they do not go beyond the decisions, as was reported in the CLC brief.
Moreover, I am convinced of one thing: a member said a while ago-and I agree with him-that Canada has one of the best telephone services. I admit that Bell Canada had a great part in it, but I also recognize that the company is mainly doing business in the most profitable and advantageous centres. That is why they can make profits.
I can also recall the days when areas had no telephone service and Bell Canada would not provide them with the

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
necessary service on the grounds that it was not financially sound. Therefore with the help of a few of my fellow-citizens, I worked on setting up a cooperative telephone network and for 20 years I have been the manager of this business. Therefore, I am in a position to speak with some knowledge and state that a telephone company is one of the most profitable things to operate.
Therefore, I feel no pity at all for Bell Canada because they do make profits, and I understand that they have developed into a corporation for this purpose. But there are also limits, and I do believe that because of abuses, the confidence that the public may have in private enterprise is falling short.
The capitalistic system, in my opinion, is good in itself. It is good when it is reasonable. When it becomes faulty and that we try only to recognize and develop the financial capital without taking into account the rights of the human capital, I suggest that the government must interfere in order to set a limit so that the rights of the population are not encroached upon.
A moment ago an honourable member was mentioning the rising cost of living. It is a fact that prices are increasing in almost all areas. We will have to take a decision sometime! We should not allow big, powerful and strong people to increase their prices according to their fancy, and ask the small fellow to be reasonable, to refrain from asking for any increase in wages, to try and be satisfied with whatever he has.
A responsible government must look after the welfare of the people, and I agree that in the case before us, they must be given the necessary time to analyse the whole situation and take a decision without delay in accordance with the common good.
At any rate, my deep thought is the following: Bell Canada is in such a financial position, as I understand, that it may proceed at present with intended developments without having to increase its rates.
These are not paltry increases when you are talking of 50 percent in the case of installation of equipment. I should have been happy to benefit by such increases when I was the manager of the cooperative telephone network I referred to a short while ago. At that time, we were controlled by the Quebec public services Board and when we applied for small increases this resulted in quite a number of hearings, and only after we had demonstrated the necessity for an increase was a decision made to grant it by order.
In the present circumstances, as I said-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order. I regret to interrupt the hon. member, but the time allotted to him by the order of the House made earlier today has expired.


Mr. Gilles Marceau (Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak briefly and unpretentiously during this debate but with the intention of expressing a rather deep conviction.

The debate held this evening is extremely interesting since it gives to all the members the opportunity to take a stand on this matter of public interest. We learned a few days ago that Bell Canada was authorized to increase its rates. I think that all members recognize as I do that the services provided by Bell Canada are comparable to any other offered throughout the world.
Bell Canada is reputed-and I think that such a claim is valid-to be providing services which do credit to all Canadian people. The question raised today is to determine whether the requested increase not only meets the corporation's needs, but if it can provide the necessary funds.
This debate gives me the first opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to take a stand on a basic question, namely that of the action of a political power on a judicial or quasi-judicial body.
Mr. Speaker, ever since 1968 when I had the honour of sitting in this House, I have always been-and there is no secret about it-a stubbornly argued for the division between the judicial or quasi-judicial power and the political power.
This evening I should like to suggest to my colleagues that it is extremely important, as hon. members, to be able to respect the decision of an independent authority which, in this case, is the Canadian Transport Commission which exercises powers that we have freely conferred upon it.
Far be it from me to pretend that this decision which we are discussing meets all the criteria of justice that we would have liked to see in a decision made by an authority in which we vested powers. But I remain convinced, Mr. Speaker, that in the final analysis that decision which was made in good faith by the Commission after an in depth examination of the applications or the arguments submitted to it represents the opinion of a good number of experts who submitted to this House an opinion which I consider undoubtedly as debatable.
I think that if we look at that decision, first of all we are surprised that it authorizes a rather substantial increase in the rates Bell Canada can charge the public. Right off the bat I would be inclined to make a general criticism. It seems to me that the Commission, with all due respect, did not take into consideration the capacity of the public to provide an additional income to that company. With regard to the powers of the Canadian Transport Commission I have to admit that it acted according to its prerogatives and the powers that we, as members of this House, have given it.
However, I am somewhat disappointed that the Commission restricted its action to the powers it had been given. It seems to me that it would have been not only possible but even easy for the Commission to wonder about the capacity of the public to meet those increases in rates.
I think that while recognizing that Bell Canada offers services which are generally better than those provided by other companies of the same size it must be recognized that the public is now grappling with the problems of inflation and the cost of living that is going up at an alarming rate. And if we accept that Bell Canada should consider giving improved services, I think it would have
April 2, 1973

been preferable, under the circumstances, for the CTC, bearing in mind the cost of living as I said before,-


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


Mr. Don Blenkarn (Peel South):: Mr. Speaker, recently we had the decision of the Canadian Transport Commission in connection with the application by Bell Canada to increase its rates. That decision was made without even the benefit of a white paper. The president of the Canadian Transport Commission gave us, when he was minister of finance, the "glories" of our present Income Tax Act. Now the commission has authorized Bell Canada rate increases which are really suspect. I hope in the few minutes allotted to me to outline some of the suspicions many of us have in connection with these increases. I should like to repeat the promise given to this country by the leader of our party, namely, that he would make sure the present commissioner was returned to his accounting practice so he could enjoy the benefits of the act that he foisted upon the people. As time goes on we will have to develop a proper board system for reviewing prices, not only of companies like Bell Canada but rail rates as well. Prices of other monopolies or quasi-monopolies will have to be reviewed, in the public interest. It is important that a tribunal system be organized so as properly to administer this kind of review.
Our judicial procedures are based upon the adversary system of justice, where an independent tribunal listens to argument presented on one side by a litigant or proposer and to argument presented by those on the other side, and thus arrives at a decision. In matters as complicated as telephone rates, indeed in matters as complicated as freight rates, the public interest cannot be protected by ad hoc representations, even by authorities as powerful as the province of Ontario or the province of Quebec. These matters are so complicated that the public interest must be protected by independent action which presents the public's case to the inquiry, so that the public can draw out, under the light of proper cross-examination and the presentation of relevant facts, what is the true position of the person or corporation that is applying for a rate or price increase. This is a matter the government will have to consider. This is one of the reasons the suggestion that this particular rate increase must be suspended, at least for the present, is valid.
At this point I want to deal with several questions that were raised during the Bell Canada hearing which indicate to me and to others in this House that there is something seriously wrong with the increase awarded. A great deal has been said about modernization of equipment, the cost of expansion of service, the necessity that shareholders receive a fair return on their money, and that investors are induced to lend money to this corporation on the basis that the corporation's charges will justify such investment. I appreciate those remarks, and I think that even the members of the party to my left can understand that obviously this corporation must earn a sufficient return in order to pay its debts and to pay for the use of 26087-371
Bell Canada
money at its command. However, I should like to present some matters and questions that occur to me in connection with the decision made by the Canadian Transport Commission.
First of all, this corporation has a quasi-monopoly on television cable distribution in many of our communities. This television cable service is rented to a TV company or cable company for a limited period of time and then the contract can easily be terminated. There is no requirement that the use of Bell facilities can go on and on. Speaking to television cable companies, I am informed that the monopoly aspect of Bell in regard to this service causes serious concern. Secondly, Bell has spent a great deal of money through its many subsidiaries on research and development. This research seems to have been charged to Northern or to one of the other subsidiaries, but really it is charged against the regular telephone cost to every user. There is no question that this research should increase the share value of Bell, and increase it dramatically. Is there any reason why Bell stock is selling for 10, 11 or even 12 times book value? If this company is going to do that through its subsidiary, the research company, then the market should appreciate that research and the value of it, in the long term, should be considered when rate charges are made against regular telephone subscribers of Bell.
It is doubtful whether the commission has looked properly into the relationships that exist between Microsystems International Limited, Nevion Industries Limited, Bell Northern Research Limited, and Bell Northern Telecommunications Inc. Indeed, one columnist suggested that the reason for the increase is Bell's ownership of Anik.
We should also have inquired whether Bell is borrowing its money at the cheapest possible rate in order to conduct the expansion necessary in telecommunications in this country. Perhaps there are other methods by which this corporation could obtain something on a longer term basis or on a lower interest basis, so that the need for increased charges to consumers would not arise.
Thirdly, many of us question how Bell gets away with its fancy Princess phones, its coloured units, its inordinate charges for yellow page advertisements and all sorts of other gimmicks that the company is able to dream up. The real question is whether this company is acting in the national interest.
I am glad the minister is in the chamber, because I want to mention another matter. Last December, Bell-and I wonder how closely the minister has got into bed with Bell-was given a licence in my riding for one of these Bellboy transmission systems. I checked into that system and was told that Bell was supposed to have a 100-watt transmitter. Some of our investigations indicated that Bell was actually transmitting at 400 to 700 watts. When I asked the minister for a copy of Bell's licence, he said, "Oh no; licences are privileged." Members of Parliament are not entitled to look at a Bell transmission licence. So I am given cause to wonder how deeply the minister is in bed with Bell Canada.
During the election campaign the New Democratic Party made great play of capital cost allowances. Did this commission look into the depletion and depreciation rates

April 2, 1973
Bell Canada
charged by Bell, and did it regard these rates as proper in view of the ability of the equipment used to last certainly longer than the quick write-offs allowed under our Income Tax Act? While speaking to a Bell representative, I asked him this question but really he could not give me an answer. Many members of this House were lobbied by Bell representatives in connection with this hearing. Let my speech tonight be an answer to some of their lobbying.
Basically speaking, Bell Canada has done a good job for us in Canada. It has provided good service. It has provided perhaps the best telephone service of any country in the world. I am told that Canadians use the telephone more than people in any other country. The telephone is pretty important to us. Indeed, as Members of Parliament we sometimes feel that we have telephones on our ears. The whole review process of corporations-


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


Mr. John Rodriguez (Nichel Belt):: Mr. Speaker, I listened this evening to the speech of the hon. member for Saint-Michel (Miss Begin) and it sounded much like a speech written by the recently elected president of Bell Canada, Monsieur Grandpre. One of the things that concerned me very much was the statement earlier today that the CTC is an independent body, yet the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) suggested he wanted to get this commission free of political interference and pressure. This seems like a strange position for one to take, considering that the commission was appointed by the government and that its president is a former cabinet member.
In view of the fact that this government does have authority to roll back the rate increases awarded to Bell Canada by the CTC, I think morally the government should do so. After all, which is the most important: the commission appointed by this government, or the elected representatives of the people of Canada? Surely we should decide which is to make the decisions in the public interest.
Bell Canada went before the Canadian Transport Commission to receive approval of its application for rate increases in 1973 and 1974. The CTC should not have granted these rate increases, when we consider the kind of complex questions raised regarding monopolies, profits, service, communications, corporate responsibility and the cost of living.
In the first instance, Bell Canada sought rate increases on the plea of poverty. Their argument was something like this: Profits have risen but they have not risen high enough to satisfy the investors; therefore, the company is encountering increasing difficulties in raising in the money market funds it needs for the capital expansion that must be undertaken.
The figures show that Bell Canada's profit for 1971 was $147 million, up from $108.5 million in 1967. In the last ten years, total profits were $1,021,135,000. Between 1962 and 1971, profits increased by 125.6 percent. It should be noted that Bell Canada has $233.6 million in deferred taxes owing to the Canadian people. According to the publication "Corporations" with a directory of Canada's top 100

companies excluding government-owned corporations, Bell Canada is number one in rank by assets, number one in rank by net income and third in rank by sales.
If the investor is not satisfied with Bell Canada's financial position, what precisely does it take to satisfy him? Should it be the role of the older citizen to pay through the nose for an ordinary telephone service, a public utility, in profit terms, thereby increasing its justification for an over-all telephone rate increase in order to satisfy the investor? I do not think that is right.
This brings me to the issue of what price we should pay for our telephone service. A comparison of telephone rates in other provinces shoes that while people in Ontario and Quebec pay an $11 service charge for the installation of an ordinary, black telephone, Albertans and British Columbians pay $10. In Saskatchewan and Manitoba, where the telephone companies are government-owned, the same service costs $2 to $3. At the same time, the average monthly rate for a phone in Ontario and Quebec is $6.10 but B.C. residents pay $5.55 per month, Albertans pay $3.35, while Saskatchewan subscribers pay $4.15, and Manitobans $3.90.
Keeping in mind these figures, consider that among the many increases Bell has been awarded by the CTC is an increase in the installation charge from $11 to $22, as well as increases in monthly rates and long distance calls, pay phone calls will be doubled to 20 cents and operator assistance will cost 25 cents per call if the number is in the directory.
In theory, the rates of Bell Canada are governed by the people of Canada. But Bell Canada, being a public utility monopoly, is required by law to present an application for rate increases for approval by the CTC, which is a government agency. The public, then, has the right to object to or support the application. Citizen interventions should bear weight with the CTC, yet in 1973 the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities, the Association of Ontario Mayors and Reeves, the Ontario Municipal Association, the governments of the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and some 200 municipalities in the provinces of Ontario and Quebec, among others, made representations against Bell's rate application; and still Bell Canada has had its application approved by the CTC.
The same was true in 1969. For those most severely affected by rate increases-that is, those on fixed incomes, pensioners, the unemployed, low income earners and small businessmen-the difficulties of being adequately represented at rate hearings are virtually insurmountable. It is also intriguing to note that prior to 1969, Bell had made application for a reduction in rates of certain long distance calls. By 1969, however, the figures show that 99 per cent of all households in Ontario and Quebec had acquired telephone service. Then Bell applied for rate increases in 1969, 1970 and 1971, as well as for 1973 and for 1974. Bell is, consequently, now in the position which enables it to make exorbitant demands, secure in the knowledge that few subscribers will give up their telephone and that there is no competing company to whom those in disagreement with rates and service can turn for a telephone.
Although Bell has gone to great pains to justify its application for rate increases, it strains both the public
April 2, 1973

good will and credibility when we look at some of Bell's operations. For instance, the rates we pay for telephones are governed by the rate group in which we live. That rate group is determined by the number of telephones in the area, the number of main phones plus extensions. In other words, the more phones and extensions in the area, the higher the rates. Consider, then, that Bell, in an apparently unprecedented burst of Christmas spirit, offered last November the installation of an extension phone free of charge. Many took advantage, not realizing the cost implications.
Let us consider, as an example, Northern Electric, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bell Canada. It has received $26 million in government grants, plus an effective tax rate of 9.8 per cent, and $14.1 million in deferred taxes; yet that company managed to lay off 5,000 employees in one
Bell Canada
and a half years. In addition, Microsystems International, a Northern Electric subsidiary, received an interest-free loan of $12 million from the federal treasury in July, 1969. In May, 1972, Microsystems announced it had built a new assembly plant in Malaysia and practically at the same time 50 persons were laid off in Ottawa. We must also consider the situation in respect of Tele-Direct, a subsidiary of the same company.
My time is running out. I should like to conclude this speech by saying that I feel the government ought to refute the decision by the CTC, and roll back the increase granted to Bell Canada. Indeed, many people in Nickel Belt would far rather see added to the words on the sign outside the Bell Canada office here in Ottawa, "Place Bell Canada"-"Under public ownership".
At 11 p.m. the House adjourned, pursuant to special order.

Tuesday. April 3. 1973