1974-11-25

THE GREY CUP-SPORTS RESULT OF THE EAST-WEST CANADIAN FOOTBALL LEAGUE CHAMPIONSHIP

Mr. Steven E. Paproski (Edmonton Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the symbol of mourning for the Edmonton Eskimos that has been placed on my desk. I rise to pay tribute to the gridiron gladiators who yesterday gave more than 100 per cent effort and, like politicians, took nothing in return but a few bruises. Never has there been a greater display of national unity than there was yesterday in Vancouver. The Grey Cup game and its festivities have done much to bring together the east and the west. To the president of the Canadian Football League, Mr. Jim Hole, to the commissioner, Mr. Jake Gaudaur, and to both teams I pay tribute. I congratulate them for their spirit of sportsmanship.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, what I have to do is not related to the spirit of humility which was just shown by the hon. member for Edmonton Centre (Mr. Paproski). However, I am pleased to join in the tribute he paid to the players taking part in the Grey Cup game.
I wish to table correspondence between myself and premiers Lougheed and Blakeney concerning resource policy. I would do this under Standing Order 41(2), with the permission of the House. I obtained the permission of the premiers to table this correspondence only this morning, and for that reason translations have not yet been completed. I ask the indulgence of the House to table the English version only, and for permission to table the French translation a little later.


Mr. Speaker:: Is this agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


EMPLOYER-EMPLOYEE RELATIONS IN THE PUBLIC SERVICE CONCURRENCE IN FIRST REPORT
Mr.   J.-J. Blais@Nipissing: that the first report of the Special Joint Committee on Employer-Employee relations in the Public Service, presented to the House Thursday, November 14, 1974, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr.   J.-J. Blais@Nipissing: for leave to introduce Bill C-364, to amend the Canada Pension Plan.


An hon. Member:: Explain.


Mr. Blais:: Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the bill is to amend the Canada Pension Plan and remove certain existing inequities. Under the present law, in order to obtain a disability pension one has to show absolute incapacity for any substantially gainful employment. This bill would change that definition and allow one to receive a pension even though one can do something useful.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the first time and ordered to be printed.
Mr. Speaker:: I wonder whether the House might consent to momentarily revert to motions as I understand the Minister of the Environment (Mrs. Sauve) has a document she wishes to table pursuant to motions. Does the House agree?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
Hon. Jeanne Sauve (Minister of the Environment):: Mr. Speaker, I have a document I wish to table. It is the evaluation of the Department of the Environment on the Syncrude study.

Mason Jars


OCEAN DUMPING CONTROL ACT
[Stage Direction]
November 25, 1974

Jeanne Sauvé: for leave to introduce Bill C-37, to provide for the control of dumping of waste and other substances in the ocean.


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

Mr. G. H. Whittaker (Okanagan Boundary):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of urgent and pressing necessity in accordance with the provisions of Standing Order No. 43. This pressing matter concerns the plight of an unprecedented number of Canadians who this year planted unusually large gardens or purchased large quantities of fresh fruits and vegetables from producers with plans to preserve the food for economic relief. These people were confronted with a crucial lack of lids and rings for the wide mouth reusable Mason jars used in homes across Canada for the preserving of fruits and vegetables. As a result, consumers were forced to buy new jars, complete with lids and rings, at considerable expense and a considerable wastage.
This year the western Canadian market was the m-. adversely affected. Until recently, this market has been dominated by cheaper imports from the United States. However, a reported shortage of plate steel used in the manufacturing of these lids-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member, as I am sure he is aware, is entitled to a very brief introduction of the nature of the subject he proposes to deal with in his motion pursuant to Standing Order 43. Perhaps the hon. member might be good enough to put his motion.


George H. Whittaker: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Towers):
That in the opinion of the House the government should give immediate consideration to the undertaking of measures to alleviate the serious shortage of lids and rings for wide mouth Mason jars in an effort to protect Canadians struggling against inflation in this manner from this same frustrating obstacle next crop season.


Mr. Speaker:: Frankly, I have reservations about the immediacy of the matter. However, the terms of the motion are sufficiently mixed that there may be an element of immediate urgency to the hon. member's motion. Accordingly, I will ask for the consent of the House. A motion proposed pursuant to Standing Order 43 cannot be debated without the consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: There not being unanimous consent, the motion cannot be debated at this time.


EXPLOSIVES ACT
Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources) moved: the first reading of Bill S-17 (from the Senate), to amend the Explosives Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
Mr. John M. Reid (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: 2, 126, 131, 133, 141 (corrected), 145, 178, 195, 212, 225, 291, 328, 367, 384, 412, 419, 429, 431, 433, 434, 457, 458, 467, 509, 510, 520, 545, 575, 633, 639, 648, 649, 652, 654, 657, 661, 666, 667, 682, 772, 793, 799, 818 and 911.
If question Nos. 389 and 476 could be made orders for return, these returns would be tabled immediately.
Mr. Speaker, would you be so kind as to call starred questions Nos. 515 and 760?
I ask, that the remaining questions be allowed to stand. [Text]


Mr. Reynolds: 1.	Will the Minister of Justice advise if any charges against any person are still before the courts as a result of the seizure of 20 pounds of heroin on June 15, 1973 on Highway 401 near the Vancouver-Burna-by border?
2.	Will the Minister advise.for what reason the charges against Hing Poy Wong of 1009 Hamilton, New Westminster, British Columbia, were dropped&
3.	What did the government do with the 20 pounds of heroin seized?


Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister of Justice):: 1. Hing Pay Wong was charged with possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking and a stay of proceedings was entered in respect of that charge on February 20th, 1974.
2.	The charge against Hing Poy Wong was not dropped, but a stay of proceedings was entered, because evidence that would have come to light in the course of the prosecution would have seriously prejudiced a large international investigation into heroin trafficking which was then in progress. It was believed, therefore, that the public interest would best be served by entering a stay of proceedings in connection with the charge against Hing Poy Wong. The investigation has now been completed and arrests are
November 25, 1974

being made in various parts of the world including British Columbia. The charge against Hing Poy Wong is now being revived and will be proceeded with at the earliest possible opportunity.
3.	The 20 lbs. of heroin seized is in the custody of the R.C.M. Police.


Mr. Herbert: How many public servants in the Treasury Board Secretariat received T4 slips for 1973 showing gross remuneration in excess of (a) $20,000 (b) $30,000 (c) $40,000?


Hon. Jean Chretien (President of the Treasury Board):: In so far as the Treasury Board Secretariat is concerned: (a) 184; (b) 16; (c) two.


Mr. Herbert: How many public servants in the Department of Manpower and Immigration received T4 slips for 1973 showing gross remuneration in excess of (a) $20,000 (b) $30,000 (c) $40,000?


Hon. Robert K. Andras (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: (a) 207; (b) 15; (c) One.


Mr. Herbert: How many public servants in the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development received T4 slips for 1973 showing gross remuneration in excess of (a) $20,000 (b) $30,000 (c) $40,000?


Mrs. Iona Campagnolo (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: (a) Over $20,000, 282; (b) Over $30,000, 11; (c) Over $40,000, One.


[Stage Direction]
Question No. 141-Mr. Herbert: (Corrected)
How many public servants in the Department of Justice received T4 slips for 1973 showing gross remuneration in excess of (a) $20,000 (b) $30,000 (c) $40,000?
Otto Emil Lang: (a) 156; (b) 29; (c) Three.


Mr. Herbert: How many public servants in the Department of Communications received T4 slips for 1973 showing gross remuneration in excess of (a) $20,000 (b) $30,000 (c) $40,000?
Order Paper Questions


Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Minister of Communications):: (a) 130; (b) 16; (c) None.


Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How does the percentage of Indian students beginning secondary schools compare with the percentage of the whole population beginning secondary schools?
2.	How does the percentage of Indian students finishing and graduating from secondary schools compare with the percentage of the whole population finishing and graduating from secondary schools?


Iona Campagnolo: 1.	The Grade 9 enrolment of registered Indian students as a percentage of the Grade 1-13 enrolment of registered Indian students is 6.7 per cent. The Grade 9 enrolment of Canadian students as a percentage of the Grade 1-13 enrolment of Canadian students is 9.2 per cent.
2.	The enrolment of registered Indian students in the graduating classes of secondary schools as a percentage of the number of registered Indian students enrolled in Grades 9-13 is 11.51 per cent. The enrolment in the graduating classes of secondary schools in Canada as a percentage of the Canadian Grade 9-13 enrolment is 16.27 per cent.
Note: Statistics on secondary school graduates are not available.


Mr. Orlikow: 1.	In the past ten years, how much new office space, by square foot, have departments (department by department) increased their office space (a) in Ottawa (b) outside Ottawa?
2.	Of this space, how much is in (a) buildings owned by the government (b) privately owned buildings?
3.	Of the space in government owned buildings, what was the cost of building constructions per square foot, and what is the actual cost of maintenance per building per square foot?
4.	Of the space occupied in rented buildings, what is the actual rental per square foot and what is the cost to the government of maintenance per square foot?
5.	For what period is the government committed to remain and to pay rent in the buildings in which they have rented quarters?
6.	Does the government assume financial responsibility for structural and decorating costs of rented space?


Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Public Works):: The
information is not available to provide an accurate answer to this question. The costs in manpower and time to undertake the very large amount of work which would be required to gather such detailed data as is obtainable for the period covered by the question, would be prohibitive.


Mr. Howie: What assistance, if any, is (a) now offered (b) planned to aid the provinces in providing services to treat and rehabilitate those afflicted with alcoholism?


Hon. Marc Lalonde (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: The federal government offers various forms of
1606
November 25, 1974

Order Paper Questions
aid to the provinces in providing services to treat and rehabilitate those afflicted with alcoholism: (a) Through the Non-Medical Use of Drugs Directorate of the Department of National Health and Welfare, the federal government supports preventive, treatment and rehabilitation activities concerned with alcohol abuse. This support is available for research, for funding of demonstration projects, as well as for information and education. Under the Canada Assistance Plan, the federal government shares in the costs to the provinces of providing assistance and welfare services to persons afflicted with alcoholism who are in need or likely to become in need if they do not receive such assistance. The Vocational Rehabilitation of Disabled Persons Act also provides for federal cost-sharing in provincial programs. Those afflicted with alcoholism may be recognized as disabled persons and may benefit from the services provided by the provinces under this program. Rehabilitation services may include counselling, assessment services of restoration, training and employment placement. In addition, National Welfare Grants offer assistance to public and private welfare agencies for short-term research, demonstration or other kinds of projects designed to test innovative approaches to social welfare problems or to research problem areas of significance in the social welfare field. Finally, the necessary treatment provided to those afflicted with alcoholism by medical practitioners and hospital services are cost-shared by the federal government under the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act and the Medical Care Act. (b) The problems of persons afflicted with alcoholism are receiving on-going consideration. The federal and provincial governments are examining the whole question of rehabilitation in the context of the overall review of Canada's social security system. Services to alcoholics is one area of rehabilitation being studied. Preventive and treatment programs are likewise under study. It is anticipated that the review will be completed by the spring of 1975.


Mr. Howie: 1.	On what date will tenders be called for the planned post office in Northern Fredericton, New Brunswick?
2.	On what date will the new postal walks for door to door mail delivery be instituted in Fredericton, New Brunswick?


Hon. Mitchell Sharp (President of the Privy Council):: I am informed by the Departments of Public Works and Post Office as follows: 1. Subject to confirmation of Canada Post Office priorities, the Department of Public Works tentatively plans to call tenders for construction of a postal station in Northern Fredericton, N.B., in eary August 1975.
2.	No date has been set. New postal walks will be placed in operation in four to six weeks providing there is no appeal from pending competition for letter carriers.


Mr. Coates: 1.	On what date was a decision taken to determine rates of pay for various classifications of public servants on a regional basis?
2.	On what dates were zones established within the various regions?
3.	How often are determinations made by the Public Service as to the rates of pay for similar classifications of employees who are gainfully employed outside the Public Service?
4.	In each of the zones and regions which have regional pay rates, what is the rate presently available to a public servant in receipt of regional pay to a similar classification of employee outside the Public Service?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: 1. June 29, 1922. The Civil Service Act of 1918 provided the Governor in Council with authority to exempt positions in whole or in part from the Act and to prescribe regulations where the Civil Service Commission decided that it was not practical nor in the public interest for the act to apply. Order in Council, P.C. 1053 of June 29, 1922, exempted from the Civil Service Act 144 classes of trades, unskilled and semi-skilled labour, and domestic service occupations under this enabling provision. The employees so exempted were paid rates comparable with those prevailing in the locality in which they were employed.
2.	September 27, 1968. Pay zones were defined as such for the first time and established as part of the initial collective agreement for the General Labour and Trades Group which was signed by the Public Service Alliance of Canada and the Treasury Board on September 27, 1968. These pay zones replaced the prevailing rate pay system which had provided rates for more than 350 localities.
3.	The federal government, as employer, primarily utilizes Pay Research Bureau (Public Service Staff Relations Board) and Labour Canada data on rates paid outside the public service in the determination of rates of pay of public service employees. The PRB surveys are conducted periodically at the request of the parties to collective bargaining to meet their needs, and the Labour Canada survey is conducted annually.
4.	It is the policy of the federal government, as employer, to pay rates of pay which are comparable with those paid for similar work performed outside the public service. Through the process of collective bargaining the employer negotiates new public service rates of pay which are comparable to those prevailing in the region or zone at the time of negotiations together with a further pay adjustment for a later date based on expected rate changes for the classification or group.


Mr. Coates: 1.	What was the cost of entertainment provided Canadian Diplomat Missions and Embassies in each fiscal year 1973-74, 1968-69 and 1963-64?
2.	What sum is requested as a forecast expenditure for entertainment provided by Canadian Diplomat Missions and Embassies in the fiscal year 1974-75?


Mitchell William Sharp: In so far as the Department of External Affairs is concerned: 1. 1973-74, $1,010,000 (estimated); 1968-69, $764,940.36; 1963-64, in accordance with government policy on the destruction of public records, the files containing the requested information have been destroyed.
2. 1974-75 $1,070,000 (projected).

November 25, 1974

In so far as the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce is concerned: 1. During 1973/74 officers overseas were reimbursed for direct entertainment costs totalling $545,990. No figures are available for 1968/69 and 1963/64.
2. For 1974/75, the forecasted expenditure is $580,000.
In so far as the Department of Manpower and Immigration is concerned: 1. 1973-74, $117,517; 1968-69, $35,309; 196364, The historical records required to reply to this fiscal year have been destroyed under authority of T.B. Minute 615 320 of September 11, 1963 and Order in Council P.C. 1966-1749.
2. $94,000.


Mr. Dick: 1.	(a) How many persons have immigrated to Canada from Chile since September 11, 1973 (b) what is the name of each such immigrant and in what country did he or she live during 1969 and in what country was he or she born?
2.	(a) Other than the immigrants who have landed in Canada in answer to Part 1, how many persons presently in Chile have been granted visas to enter Canada as immigrants but have not as yet arrived (b) what are the names of each such persons and in what country did he or she live during 1969 and in what country was he or she born?
3.	Are there any security reasons, or otherwise, which would make it inapporpriate or improper to supply the names and, if so, will the government answer the questions by granting each person a number and supplying the appropriate information beside that number?


Robert Knight Andras: 1. (a) between September 11, 1973 and September 16, 1974, 1,098 persons whose country of last permanent residence was Chile have entered Canada; (b) it is not considered to be in the public interest to divulge the names of these persons. Particulars concerning their country of birth have not yet been tabulated. Particulars of their country of residence during 1969 can only be gathered by a physical search of their applications. These applications remain at the posts abroad and the Department does not have the resources available to make this search.
2.	(a) There are 1,599 visas that have been issued to persons whose country of last permanent residence was Chile that have not yet been used; (b) It is not considered to be in the public interest to divulge the names of these persons. Particulars of their country of birth and country of residence in 1969 can only be gathered by a physical search of their applications. These applications are at posts abroad and the Department does not have the resources available to make this search.
3.	As explained above, it is not considered to be in the public interest to divulge the names of these persons nor is information presently available as to countries of birth or of residence in 1969.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Elzinga: 1.	On what date is the construction of the Medium Security Correctional Institution, S.W. 21-54-23, W4, to begin in the Municipality of Sturgeon, Alberta?
2.	What is the proposed cost of the Correctional Institution?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: 1. The
present schedule calls for construction of the medium security institution in the municipality of Sturgeon, Alberta to begin in January 1975.
2. It is not customary to announce estimated costs until tenders have been called and contracts awarded.


Mr. Rodriguez: 1.	How many referees are attached to the Unemployment Insurance Commission?
2.	Has the per diem allowance for members of the Board of Referees of the UIC been raised recently and, if so (a) what was the per diem allowance prior to the increase (b) what is the present allowance?


Robert Knight Andras: 1. On October 24, 1974 there were: Chairmen, 219; Representatives of employers, 440; Representatives of employees, 426; total, 1,085. These figures are subject to fluctuation due to retirement, removal, etc.
2. The per diem allowance for members of Board of Referees is:
as of	before
August 1, 1974 August 1, 1974 $ $
Chairmen:	Full days	100	85Half days	60	50Members;	Full days	80	65Half days	50	40


Mr. Howie: Will the government issue a special postage stamp to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Presbyterian Church in Canada?


Mr. Raynald Guay (Parliamentary Secretary to Postmaster General):: On May 30, 1975, the Post Office will issue a stamp honouring Dr. John Cook, prime founder of the Presbyterian Church in Canada.


Mr. Schumacher: 1.	Did the Canada Council advance (a) a grant (b) a loan (c) any financial assistance towards the production and costs of a film called "Voodoo" made by Calgary film makers?
2.	In what amount and for what specific reasons was assistance given in this regard?
28543 - 3314

November 25, 1974
Order Paper Questions
3.	Did the Canada Council specify any standards or limitations to be observed in the making of this particular film and (a) if so, what were they (b) if not, for what reason?
4.	On what basis was the granting of assistance authorized?
5.	Who gave the authorization and to whom was assistance given?
6.	Has any follow-up observance on content and result been done on this particular film and, if so, by whom?
7.	Have any investigations into the (a) subject-matter (b) presentation (c) acceptance by the public been done and (i) if so, what are the results (ii) if not, are any proposed?
8.	Is it intended to continue to finance such ventures and, if so, what research is done on receipt of applications to justify authorization of funding?
9.	Is any censoring done by, or on behalf of, the Canada Council (a) during the making of such films (b) before the release of such films and (i) if so, by whom and of what nature (ii) if not, for what reason?


Hon. James Hugh Faulkner (Secretary of State):: 1.
Yes. A grant.
2.	$1,855 to complete the production of the film.
3.	(a) No. (b) The council accepted the film project as submitted.
4.	On the basis of the applicants' professionalism and artistic merit and of the value of their project, as assessed by a jury of five Canadian film experts: Chalmers Adams, producer, Clearwater Films, Toronto; Werner Aellen, producer, Image Flow Centre, Vancouver; Michael Snow, artist and filmmaker, Toronto; Robert Frank, independent filmmaker, Cape Breton; Roger Frappier, independent filmmaker, Montreal. The jury examined the scenario and shooting script of the film and was shown those parts of the film which were available at the time of application, as well as an earlier film by the same group.
9. (a) and (b) It is not the council's policy to censor works of art. However, all films which go into commercial distribution are subject to the censorship regulations of the provincial authorities.


Mr. Ellis: What was the number of (a) positions (b) staff employed in categories SX3, SX2, SX1, PM7, PM6, PM5, PM4, PM3, PM2 and PM1 in the Unemployment Insurance Commission on May 1, 1967, May 1, 1971 and May 1, 1974 and what positions in those categories are proposed for the balance of 1974?
Hon. Robert K. Andras (Minister of Manpower and
Immigration):	May 1, 1971 No. of Positions	May 1, 1974 No. of Positions	Group	Positions	Occupied	Positions	OccupiedSX-3	1	1	3	3SX-2	2	1	3	2SX-I	4	4	15	11PM-7	13	14	24	16PM-6	24	15	52	47PM-5	53	44	77	62PM-4	117	95	123	81PM-3	188	154	337	180PM-2	775	631	1,481	866PM-1	339	278	1,227	1,049
With regard to proposals for the balance of 1974, PM-2's may be reduced by approximately 40 and PM-3's will be increased by approximately 40 because of possible reclassifications.
5.	The jury's unanimous recommendation was approved by the Canada Council, and the grant was given to Andrew Jaremko, who made the film in collaboration with Gordon Geoffrey, David Fullerton and Roland Kieken.
6.	Yes. The Canada Council has received a detailed account of costs and will shortly receive a print of the film for viewing.
7.	(a) and (b) The subject matter and presentation were examined by the jury at the time of application, (c) No formal investigation is contemplated. However, in accordance with its usual practice, the Council will take note of public reactions to the film.
8.	Yes, the council intends to continue its support to film production. All applications are screened for eligibility by the council staff, then assessed by a jury of professional Canadian filmmakers and artists.
We do not have statistics which would enable us to answer the part of the question concerning May 1, 1967. Statistics Canada and Treasury Board were contacted but were unable to assist us in providing statistics for 1967.


Mr. Ellis: What was the number of (a) positions (b) staff employed in categories SX3, SX2, SX1, PM7, PM6, PM5, PM4, PM3, PM2 and PM1 in the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs on May 1, 1967, May 1, 1971 and May 1, 1974 and what positions in those categories are proposed for the balance of 1974?


Hon. Andre Ouellet (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: 
Mr. Ellis: As of May 1, 1974, what is the number of staff in the (a) Unemployment Insurance Commission (b) Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (c) Department of Manpower and Immigration responsible for the Canada Manpower Centre Program being paid at a rate higher than the position they are covering off?


Mitchell William Sharp: (a) Eight; (b) None; (c) Seven.


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	With respect to the Annual Report of the National Harbours Board for 1973, for what reason were no photographs included in this report that illustrate the container facilities in the Port of Halifax?
2.	Do NHB photographic sources or files contain any photographs of these container facilities and, if not, will they be up-dated to include developments achieved in the area of containerization made in the Port of Halifax in the past four years?


Hon. Jean Marchand (Minister of Transport):: 1. The
theme for its 1973 Annual Report was "people" as evidenced by the photographs. Inclusion of the Port of Halifax container facilities would, therefore, have been inappropriate.
2. Files containing photographs of port facilities are maintained and up-dated regularly. These files include photographs of the facilities at all ports under its jurisdiction including the Port of Halifax.


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	Did Newsprint Distribution Research retain a company in Atlanta, Georgia which conducted computer compilations which could have been done in Canada by governmental facilities and, if so (a) what did this service cost (b) for what reason was the work not done in Canada?
2.	Has the result of the investigation been negative?
3.	Has the consulting firm of Stevenson and Kellogg Ltd. been retained by the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce or private industry to go into the feasibility of the study undertaken by Newsprint Distribution Research with Department financing and, if so (a) what were their findings (b) on what date will copies of the report be made public?
4.	Will newsprint companies that participated in the investigation be asked to contribute to the outlay?


Mr. Gaston Clermont (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Newsprint Distribution Research contracted the services of one of the foremost United States rail transportation and warehousing research groups to assist in the identification of distribution alternatives for newsprint which would improve the Canadian industry's United States marketing efforts: (a) The consultants fee was included in the total cost of the Newsprint Distribution Research (NDR) sector of the
Order Paper Questions
newsprint distribution study undertaken jointly by NDR and the Canadian National Railways; (b) In the opinion of NDR the high degree of experience required in the field of rail transportation, warehousing and cartage, in the United States where much of the work was to be done, was not available in Canada at the time the study was undertaken.
2.	Yes, within the terms of reference of the study. Although line-haul benefits were uncovered, using the newsprint train concept, these were offset by increased costs for warehousing, truck delivery and inventory carrying charges at both producer's mill and United States warehouse.
3.	Stevenson and Kellogg Limited were engaged by NDR to provide an independent evaluation of NDR operational methods. It is understood that NDR and CN intend to make the report public by the end of November.
4.	The newsprint companies comprising NDR paid their share of the cost of the investigation through their contribution to NDR.


Mr. Forrestall: Is it the policy of the government to ensure that the portrait of the reigning monarch will always be employed on the low-value definitive used most frequently, namely the stamp representing the value of a first class domestic letter of one ounce or less?


Raynald Joseph Albert Guay: The government is not planning to alter the traditional practice of portraying the reigning monarch on the definitive stamp which represents the basic domestic letter rate.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	What were the grain demurrage charges for each year 1971 to October 15, 1974?
2.	For these years, what were the grain demurrage charges for (a) West Coast Ports (b) Great Lakes Ports?


Otto Emil Lang: 1. Demurrage charges paid (not incurred) by the Canadian Wheat Board are recorded only on a crop year basis ending July 31. The following demurrage charges were paid on wheat and barley: Crop year, 1971-72, $1,871,064.00; 1972-73, $2,397,636.00; 1973-74, $1,484,883.00; (to October 17, 1974), 1974-75 $1,593,639.00.
2. (a) West Coast Ports. Crop year, 1971-72, $1,834,768.00; 1972-73, $2,330,614.00; 1973-74, $1,464,639.00; (to October 17, 1974) 1974-75, $1,485,226.00; (b) Great Lakes Ports: Crop year, 1971-72, Nil; 1972-73, Nil; 1973-74, Nil; (to October 17, 1974), 1974-75, Nil.

November 25, 1974
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Masniuk: X. How many foreign ships were tied up in the Vancouver Harbour during the West Coast Grain Handlers strike?
2. What was the cost per ship, per day, to the Canadian Wheat Board while these ships were tied up?


Otto Emil Lang: 1. The Canadian Wheat Board advise the average number of vessels waiting per day during the recent Vancouver grain handlers work stoppage was 15.
2. The Wheat Board is unable to estimate the cost per ship per day. Charges vary per vessel and are related to the size of the vessel, the terms of the charter party, etc.


Mr. Forrestall: What is the real increase in total cost for goods and services to the Department of National Defence in the last measurable 12 month period over the corresponding previous 12 month period?


Hon. James Richardson (Minister of National Defence):: The real increase in the total cost of goods and services (exclusive of personnel costs and transfer payments) supplied to the Department of National Defence during the 12 months ending March 31, 1974, compared with the corresponding 12 months period ending March 31, 1973 was $40,876,000.


Mb. Kaplan: What is the average income tax paid by subsidiaries in Canada, engaged in the sale of Japanese-manufactured goods, wholly owned by Japanese interests, and in relation to what average gross sales is such tax payable?


Hon. Ron Basford (Minister of National Revenue):: In
so far as the Department of National Revenue, Taxation, is concerned: Information is not, available because our administrative computer system for corporations does not contain the necessary information to provide an answer to this question.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	Will the schematic drawings and related documents used by DOT electronic technicians and maintenance workers on the Joint Enroute and Terminal System (JETS equipment) at the Mirabel Airport in Quebec be translated into the French language and, if so, what will be the total cost to translate?
2.	Will any instrument or control switches on the JETS equipment have to have designations in both French and English?
3.	What will be the total cost if controls are also to have French markings, such as off and on in both languages on a control switch?
4.	Is there room on all the control switches for both languages and, if not, how will this problem be overcome?

5.	How many DOT airport control towers across Canada will have to have their technical or instructional documents or schematic drawings translated into French and what will be the total cost?


Jean Marchand: 1. The JETS installation is planned specifically for Montreal Area Control Centre at Dorval. However, all manufacturer's manuals for the JETS installation for Montreal will be translated into French at an estimated cost of $1,529,625.
2.	No.
3.	Not applicable.
4.	No. Any such problems will be handled by cross-referencing in the manuals of switch designators.
5.	The final number of control towers requiring their technical documents used by electronic maintenance personnel translated into French will depend on the application of the Official Languages Act at these locations. The total cost has not been estimated.


Mr. Marshall: 1.	Has the Minister of Justice in the Province of Newfoundland requested the federal Minister to introduce the required amendment to the Judges Act to provide for the appointment of three additional Judges to the Court of Appeal?
2.	Will legislation be introduced during the 30th Parliament and, if not, for what reason?


Otto Emil Lang: 1. yes.
2. Yes.


Mr. Forrestall: What is the nature of the federal subsidy of $1 million in 1973 and $.5 million in 1974 extended to the Port of Halifax, in precise terms?


Jean Marchand: I am
informed by the National Harbours Board that amounts of $1 million in respect of 1973 and $.5 million for 1974 were included in the estimates for the Port of Halifax in accordance with section 27 of the National Harbours Board Act. These were actual cash requirements to pay salaries, operation, maintenance and grants in lieu of taxes to the municipality.


Mr. Reynolds: 1.	What was the total amount of Canada Council grants for the year 1973?
2 How much of this money was received by (a) British Columbia (b) Alberta (c) Saskatchewan (d) Manitoba (e) Ontario (f) Quebec (g) New Brunswick (h) Nova Scotia (i) Newfoundland (j) Prince Edward Island (k) Yukon (1) Northwest Territories?


James Hugh Faulkner: I am
informed by the Canada Council as follows: 1. $39,762,000.
2 (a) $3,801,000; (b) $2,056,000; (c) $557,000; (d) $1,653,000- (e) $14,356,000; (f) $10,185,000; (g) $562,000; (h) $1,180,000! (i) $276,000; (j) $255,000; (k) and (1) $40,000. In addi-
November 25, 1974

tion, $4,821,000 have been awarded to organizations whose activities are national in scope.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Department of Communications to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industrial Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?


Gérard Pelletier: 1. None.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industriel Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?


André Ouellet: 1. None.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Post Office Department to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industriel Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?


Raynald Joseph Albert Guay: 1. None.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industriel Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Maurice Foster (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: 1. None.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Department of Justice to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industriel Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?


Otto Emil Lang: 1. None.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industriel Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?


Gaston Clermont: 1. None.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Treasury Board to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industriel Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: 1. None.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.


Mr. Grafftey: 1.	What transport contracts have been awarded by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to Lapointe Transport Ltd., 105 Industriel Blvd., Longueuil, Quebec, since January 1, 1972?
2.	What was the amount of the contract in each case?

November 25, 1974
Order Paper Questions
3.	Were public tenders called in each case and, if not, for what reason?


Iona Campagnolo: This Department has not entered into any contracts with Lapointe Transport Limited.


Mr. Mitges: 1.	What is the total number of subscriptions to Hansard and, of this number, how many are printed in (a) English (b) French?
2.	What is the breakdown, by province, of the total number of subscriptions?
3.	How many subscriptions are (a) paid for (b) complimentary?


Hon. John C. Munro (Minister of Labour):: In so far as
Information Canada is concerned, the answers are as follows: 1. 8136 (a) 7,062; (b) 1,074.
2.	Alberta, 461; British Columbia, 581; Manitoba, 355; New Brunswick, 189; Nova Scotia, 306; Prince Edward Island, 51; Saskatchewan, 245; Ontario, 4565; Quebec, 1132; Newfoundland, 65; Others, 186; total 8,136.
3.	(a) 6,188; (b) 1,948.


Mr. Diefenbaker: 1.	What is the total strength of the Armed Forces?
2.	How many are engaged in office or administrative duties?
3.	How many hold the rank of corporal?


James Armstrong Richardson: The answer is as follows: 1. The strength of the Canadian Armed Forces as of October 31, 1974 was 78,204.
2,	Approximately 60 per cent of the Armed Forces are engaged either full time or part time in office or administrative duties in such functions as training, maintenance, administration and supply. Some of these personnel, however, also perform operational duties.
3.	As of October 31, 1974 there were 10,528 members of the Armed Forces holding the rank of Master Corporal, which is a command and supervisory rank. As of the same date there were 21,592 personnel holding the rank of corporal. Since 1966 promotion to the rank of corporal has reflected competence in a trade and length of service, and this rank does not carry command or supervisory responsibilities.


Mr. McKinnon: What were the names and addresses of all lawyers and law firms in the constituency of Victoria, British Columbia, who performed services for the government in 1973 and what was the total amount of money paid to each?


Otto Emil Lang: In so far as
the Department of Justice is concerned: Branson, C.O.D., $41,093.93; Cox, Kenneth B., $5,295.47; Hutchison, J.M., $128.50; Hutchison, R.B., $1,167.01; Pearlman & Lind-holm, *; Stewart, Ian H., $1,862.47; Sullivan, Smith & Bigelow, $1,645.70; Taylor, Rodney, $17,630.25.
Work assigned during the period in question but no accounts received during this period.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: Is the government giving any consideration to preparing a short, easy-to-understand paper on "How Parliament Works" which can be used by Members of all parties to distribute in response to requests from students?


Mitchell William Sharp: Booklets called "Canada's Parliament", written by George Bain, and "Le Parlement du Canada", written by Jean-Charles Bonenfant, were published by Information Canada in 1972 and are available both from ordinary bookstores and from Information Canada. These publications were intended to meet the need for simple, readable introductory accounts of the workings of Parliament.


Mr. Stevens: 1.	As of March 31 in each year 1968, 1970, 1972 and 1974 (a) how many were employed by the National Research Council (b) what would have been their aggregate salaries and if all were employed for a full year (c) how many had salary levels of (i) $20,000 or more (ii) $35,000 or more (iii) $50,000 or more?
2.	What was the salary or the salary range for each of the five highest paid employees of the Council?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: 1- $42,000-49,500 4-$30,250-38,250

[Mr. Grafftey.)
November 25, 1974


Mr. Stevens: 1. As of March 31 in each year 1968, 1970, 1972 and 1974 (a) how many were employed by Canadian Patents and Development Ltd. (b) what would have been their aggregate salaries if all were employed for a full
Oral Questions
year (c) how many had salary levels of (i) $20,000 or more (ii) $35,000 or more (iii) $50,000 or more?
2. What was the salary or the salary range for each of the five highest paid employees of the Company?


Charles Mills (Bud) Drury: In so far as Canadian Patents & Development Limited is concerned:
1.	1968	1970	1972	1974(a)	21	24	25	24(b)	$190,892	$245,623	$293,584	$324,086(c) (i)	1	2	2	4(ii)	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil(iii)	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil2.	1968	1970	1972	1974$	*	$	$1.	22,850-25,100	25,000-28,500	27,500-31,500	30,500-34,5002.	15,870-19,470	16,750-20,950	18,470-23.090	21,750-26,8603.	12,600-15,600	13,300-16,300	14,800-18,160	17,300-21,2004.	12,600-15,600	13,300-16,300	14,800-18,160	17,300-21,2005.	12,600-15,600	13,300-16,300	14,800-18,160	17,300-21,200All employees of Canadian Patents and Development	5. Is the contract on a cost plus basis or a firm bid and if a firm bid,Limited are on the staff of the National Research Council how much is for equipment and how much is for labour? of Canada and seconded to the company.	Return tabled.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the reason that the answer to Question No. 67 asking for certain details about the use of the National Conference Centre by the Liberal Party was suddenly withdrawn on Wednesday, November 20, 1974 after the answer had been prepared and after the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council had announced in the House that the Question would be answered as of that date?
2.	What is the identity of all persons who asked for withdrawal, gave instructions for withdrawal or had anything whatsoever to do with withdrawal of the answer to this question?
3.	Will Question No. 67 be answered and on what date?


John Mercer Reid: 1. The answer was withdrawn because it appeared to be incorrect as was question No. 389, at the same time for the same reason.
2.	Mr. John Reid, M.P., Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council.
3.	As soon as the answer is satisfactory.



QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS


Mr. Broadbent: 1.	Is the Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation currently installing, or has it recently installed, switching equipment for overseas calls in the Bell Canada building at 865 Pharmacy Avenue in Scarborough, Ontario?
2.	What companies bid for the contract?
3.	To what company was the contract awarded?
4.	What are the terms of the contract?



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT-EASTERN ARTIC RESUPPLY OPERATIONS

Mr. Forrestall: For each year since 1963 with respect to the Eastern Arctic annual Department of Transport resupply operations what was (a) the number of vessels involved in each year (b) the port of origin in each year (c) the percentage of cargo moved in vessels registered in (i) Canada (ii) the Commonwealth (iii) other countries (d) the percentage of cargo moved in vessels constructed in (i) Canada (ii) the Commonwealth (iii) other countries?
Return tabled.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Hon. Robert Li. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. It arises from the forecast made by the National Energy Board with regard to the producibility of oil in Canada in the next eight to ten years in relation to the projected demand. I should like to ask whether government policies in relation to oil and the positions the government has taken during the past year have been based upon similar forecasts; in other words, whether, for these purposes, the predictions made by the
1614

November 25, 1974
Oral Questions
department are substantially the same as those of the National Energy Board.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Subject to confirmation, I think I can say that the department's estimates with respect to reserves have been the same as those of the National Energy Board, both in the orange report prepared prior to December, 1972, and the report tabled on Friday night. The difference has arisen with respect to the question of producibility the rate at which those reserves can be made available. After a year of full production in the major producing areas, the conclusion has been reached that the anticipated rate of producibility was overstated. That is the reason for the rather more pessimistic view taken recently.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Since the department has been somewhat more optimistic than the National Energy Board in its forecasts of producibility in the next few years, does the minister contemplate abandoning the stated policy designed to guarantee security of supply to the eastern provinces having regard to the fact that the National Energy Board envisages only 250,000 barrels a day going to the east-scarcely a quarter of the present market there?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, that statement is, of course, always made within the context of Canadian supplies being available, and in particular additional supplies being developed in Canada on the frontier, either offshore or in the Arctic. It does, of course, remain our objective to move towards self-sufficiency, although the difficulties in this, given the environment in which we are operating both in the north and on the east coast, should not be underrated.


OIL-JUSTIFICATION FOR PRIME MINISTER'S STATEMENT CONCERNING ABANDONMENT OF OTTAWA VALLEY LINE
Robert Lorne Stanfield: final supplementary question for the Prime Minister, who on December 6, 1973 made a statement which seemed to be in no way conditional. As reported at page 8478 of Hansard the Prime Minister said:
The new policy will abolish the "Ottawa Valley Line". The Canadian market for oil will no longer be divided in two, one for domestically produced oil and another for imported oil. It will thus be a "one-Canada", not a "two-Canada" oil policy. The western provinces will have guaranteed outlet for increased production; and the eastern provinces will be guaranteed security of supply.
May I ask the Prime Minister how he justifies such a statement as that in view of the answers the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources has just given to the two preceding questions?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources has just indicated in his reply that the policy was subject to the oil being there. The policy remains the same. If, of course, in a certain number of years there is less oil, we shall have to share it differently.


FINANCE
Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain):: Mr. Speaker, still on the subject of the importance of guaranteeing supply of oil, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Finance based on the report of the National Energy Board put out last Friday in which it was stated-I am quoting-that "the rate of oil sands plant construction will be clearly influenced" by points inclusive of "incentives offered by provincial and federal governments in terms of taxation".
In view of the fact that Bill C-32, which is before parliament at the present time, relates to development of the oil sands and provides for price controls in the regulations, would the minister make a public statement to reassure the oil companies who are willing to put their millions into this type of proposal that he will withdraw the oil sands provisions from Bill C-32 and restore his original undertaking to these companies to provide the export price to oil sands oil?


Hon. John N. Turner (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, my undertaking to the Syncrude operation was that the tax arrangement made between the companies and the province of Alberta and the federal government would not be affected by the budgetary provisions. That was the limit of that undertaking.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain may put a final supplementary.


Francis Alvin George Hamilton: Mr. Speaker, in view of what the minister has just said, that the budgetary undertakings will not interfere with the understanding to the Syncrude group, I should now like to ask the Minister of Finance whether it is not a fact that Bill C-32, which in effect puts price controls on oil from the oil sands, interferes with the agreement that he undertook?


John Napier Turner: That would not be my interpretation of it, Mr. Speaker.


OIL-SUGGESTED REDUCTION IN PERIOD FOR PHASING OUT EXPORTS-REQUEST FOR ASSURANCE FOUR PLANTS OPERATING FROM OIL SANDS BY 1983
Mr. T. C. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. In view of the fact that the National Energy Board report tabled on Friday estimates that Canada's self-sufficiency in oil will probably end in 1982 and that it recommends that our exports should be continued on a declining scale until 1982, is there any reason why this seven-year phase out period could not be reduced to three years, with appropriate compensation for shut in oil, in order to give Canada additional time to bring alternative sources of oil on stream?
November 25, 1974


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I think the critical element in the hon. member's question is the reference to appropriate compensation for shut-in oil. Of course, the general taxpayer would be the one to make this kind of compensation payment. The government's conclusion is that, both from the standpoint of our relationships with the United States and of sustaining the levels of income of the two producing provinces, it is preferable to phase it out over a longer time frame than doing as the hon. member suggested on Friday evening, shutting it down in two or three years time.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: In
view of the fact that the National Energy Board's estimate of having alternative oil supplies on stream coincides very closely with the end of our self-sufficiency, and is based on the assumption that there will be three oil producing plants in the Athabasca tar sands by 1982, and four plants in 1983, I should like to ask whether the minister can give the House a firm assurance that these plants will be in operation, or is this merely an optimistic assumption? I would ask the minister specifically whether he can assure the House that the Shell Oil Company plant and the Mining No. 4 plant will be in operation in 1983 when we have gone beyond the point of self-sufficiency?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, the institution and operation of oil sands plants fall entirely within the jurisdiction of the government of Alberta, and there is no way the government of Canada can be assured that that government will direct its policy in such a way that these plants will be on stream within any time frame. I would have to say that what the board was doing in exercising its judgment was giving its best estimate, given the desire of certain of these companies to bring these plants into operation when they would be able to do so, and taking into account the regulatory delays that may occur in Alberta, as well as the cost and other factors they would have to face.


SARNIA-MONTREAL PIPELINE-ALTERNATIVE IF INTERPROVINCIAL DOES NOT CONSTRUCT-DATE OF COMPLETION
Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, in view of that uncertainty, it would seem to be rather wise to telescope the phasing out period. In view of the fact that the Interprovincial Pipeline Company asked for an adjournment until the National Energy Board Report was tabled, and also until it got some assurance of a $25 million a year return from that pipeline, and in view of the fact the minister has stated that the company has now got cold feet, may I ask the Minister what assurance he can now give the House in respect of the construction of that pipeline, the approximate date of completion and whether he has any alternative proposal to make in the event the company does not proceed with the construction of this line?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, the company and the National Energy Board have had extensive discussions and correspondence with regard to the financial impact in the
Oral Questions
1980's if such a line ceased to be producing revenue at any point. My understanding is that these discussions have now stalemated. It would be my intention to put to my colleagues a suggestion as to how we might act at the government level, as opposed to the National Energy Board level, to try to overcome this last obstacle to the Montreal pipeline.


FINANCE
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, in light of the fact that the Minister of Finance said on Sunday on the TV program "Question Period" that the compromise door was always open between the federal and provincial governments, was the minister suggesting as a result of that statement that he is prepared to compromise the terms and conditions of the bill referred to by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain, and also to compromise the harsh tax measures brought in by the budget?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I would think, in view of the fact that in the budget we backed off from the May 6 proposal by about 25 per cent, $100 million this year and $170 million in the year 1975, and more thereafter, and in restoring the 100 per cent immediate writeoff for exploration expenses, compromise might be looked at now from the provincial side.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Speaker, I take it from what the minister has said that the compromise is laid out in the budget and he does not intend to take one step further in compromising the other matter so as to assure a greater supply for Canada and maybe fulfil the export commitment just made by the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, that he is now standing firm and there will be no further compromise with the provinces in that regard? Is that his harsh position?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. gentleman would read the budget speech again, it would be indicated to him that I took account of the problem of declining reserves of petroleum in this country and the need for new exploration and development which is why the 100 per cent immediate write-off was restored, why the abatement was raised from 20 per cent to 25 per cent and why the federal tax was reduced from 30 per cent to 25 per cent. I would now hope that the government of the province of Alberta, sharing my concern for the future of the health of that industry, would also react.
1616

November 25, 1974
Oral Questions


AGRICULTURE
Mr. Adrien Lambert (Bellechasse):: Mr. Speaker, in th absence of the Minister of Agriculture, I should like to put my question to the right hon. Prime Minister.
In view of the spectacular price increase for farm machinery, which leads to heavier production costs, could the Prime Minister tell the House whether the government will follow the recommendations of the Barber report by enforcing antitrust legislation in that area?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture is right now meeting with his provincial colleagues and I believe that he dealt several times with the subject raised by the hon. member.


PUBLIC SERVICE
Mr. Don Mazankowski (Vegreville):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the President of the Treasury Board. In view of the fact that Canadian grain shipments have once again ground to a halt, this time as a result of the grain inspectors strike, could the minister bring the House up to date on the current status of negotiations and advise the House what steps the government is taking to ensure that grain shipments will be returned to normal as quickly as possible.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry there is a strike in that sector. The officials of my department and the representatives of the Public Service Alliance met Saturday afternoon; they also spent part of Sunday holding a meeting and are still holding one at this very moment. I believe some progress has been made and I trust they will soon come to an agreement. I understand the strike is legal. The civil servants had the right to take that attitude. We do hope that in the course of those meetings a solution to the problem can be found quickly.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: I have a supplementary for the President of the Treasury Board, Mr. Speaker. Since this dispute arises largely from the government's mishandling of the grainhandlers' strike which saw a 61 per cent or 54 per cent settlement imposed upon the grain elevator companies-and I say 61 per cent or 54 per cent because of the calculation which could be made-could he explain to the House and this country how the government could possibly justify an original offer of 11 Vi per cent over a 27-month period to the grain inspectors at a time when the bench mark of 61 per cent has been established which now clearly becomes the basis for future negotiations in labour.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, we made initial offers but as a result of conciliation, a majority report was submitted to the government, which the latter endorsed. There was also a minority report and we followed normal procedures during negotiations. We hope present negotiations will give results. The Parliament of Canada gave the civil servants the right to strike and we must follow standard procedures. I fail to see why we should not respect their right to strike at this time.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Vegreville on a final supplementary.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Mr. Speaker, since the strike seems to be far from being settled, I wonder whether the minister would consult the Minister of Labour and the Minister of Justice who seem to be more liberal in respect of labour negotiations?


POSITION OF GRAINHANDLERS AT PRINCE RUPERT- ASSURANCE OF ROLE FOR PORT IN EXPORT OF GRAIN
Mr. F. Oberle (Prince George-Peace River):: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary is for the President of the Treasury Board as well. While the officials are holding discussions with the Public Service Alliance in respect of the problems with regard to the grain inspectors at Vancouver has the minister or any of his officials discussed the matter of the port of Prince Rupert where the grain handlers are much behind their counterparts at the port of Vancouver and will he ensure that the port of Prince Rupert will play the role it could play in western Canada in respect of the transport of grain to other countries.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, this means all inspectors of primary products and not only wheat inspectors working in the ports. A much greater number of public servants are therefore involved and we are dealing with the problem. As for grain carriers in Prince Rupert, their problem is different and we are trying to solve it if necessary.


OIL-GOVERNMENT POSITION ON MAINTAINING AND FINANCING ONE-CANADA PRICING POLICY
Miss Flora MacDonald (Kingston and the Islands):: Mr. Speaker, my question is supplementary to earlier questions asked of the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. In light of the fact that the export reductions proposed by the minister will make Canada a net importer of oil next fall, that is, prior to the time the new extension is completed of the Montreal-Sarnia pipeline, is the government still committed to maintain a one-Canada oil pricing policy and, if so, how does the government propose to finance the price subsidy when we get into a new-import position?
November 25, 1974


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, this of course is a question we will look forward to discussing with the provinces in the context of discussions taking place about the future of the on-going prices from July 1.


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Mr. Cecil Smith (Churchill):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State. As notice of hearing has been published in Flin Flon and The Pas indicating that CRTC hearings will be held on December 10 in Montreal concerning an application by the CBC to bring French television and FM to The Pas and Flin Flon, would the minister advise what the amount of the tower rental will be from the province of Manitoba for these facilities?


James Hugh Faulkner: Mr. Speaker, I will find out that information for the hon. member.


INDUSTRY
Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. On Friday I asked the minister a question concerning automotive lay-offs in Windsor, St. Thomas, Ajax and Oshawa and what steps he was about to take to deal with the increasingly serious situation. The minister in reply said two things: first, that he did not expect a large number of lay-offs and, second, that those which would occur would be of a short and periodic nature. In light of the fact that, either while he was speaking in the House on Friday answering the question or the previous evening, the Ford Motor Company was announcing further lay-offs in Oakville and Talbotville, almost one-fifth of which were of permanent duration, I should like to ask the minister if this new information has caused him to alter his judgment at all concerning whether or not we can expect further significant long-range lay-offs in the automotive industry and if so what he intends to do about it?


Hon. Alastair Gillespie (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, the Ford Motor Company advised me that 145 hourly and 50 salaried employees will be laid off indefinitely at Oakville at the end of the month.


John Edward Broadbent: How about Talbotville?


Alastair William Gillespie: Some of the lay-offs result from steps taken following the completion of the new model launch and others I am told are due to a cost-cutting program due to declining sales. With regard to the Talbotville plant I
Oral Questions
have been told that what had been planned as a one-week lay-off has been extended to two weeks.


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, I would add the information that this has been extended beyond the period the minister has indicated. I should like to ask the minister whether his department has consulted at the directorship level of the automotive companies concerning some of their expectations about further lay-offs in the assembly plant operations in the coming weeks and related to that has he or his officials consulted with the parts industry which accounts for about half the employment in the industry to find out what are their expectations? If so, is he prepared to tell us what the government plans to do about this?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, I have had a number of conversations with the presidents of automotive manufacturing companies and representatives of the auto parts industry. They are concerned, as I am concerned and as I know hon. members in this House are concerned, about the prospects in the automotive industry particularly as a result of decline in the United States market. I think that this situation would underline the interdependence of our two markets. Notwithstanding that, the words that I received from the senior officials of the Canadian automobile manufacturers is that they are cautiously optimistic about this year and the coming year as well. That is not to say that there are not dangers; I have clearly indicated that there are but I think the situation is best put in those terms, that there is still a cautious optimism about the coming months.


AUTOMOBILES-SUGGESTED REDUCTION OF DIFFERENTIAL IN PRICE BETWEEN CANADA AND UNITED STATES
John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, may I address my last supplementary question to the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the minister has progressed from "optimism" on Friday to "cautious optimism today about the fate of the industry when everybody else who knows anything about it is extremely pessimistic, can the Prime Minister tell the House if the minister was stating government policy last week when he said that the government would do nothing more about bringing down the price of cars sold in Canada to the same level as those sold in the United States, for which there is ample economic justification and, since that is the best means of increasing sales and hence employment, does the government intend to do anything about narrowing the price gap in the next few weeks?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: No, Mr. Speaker.

November 25, 1974
Oral Questions FINANCE


EFFECT OF EXCISE TAX ON PLEASURE CRAFT ON SMALL BOAT BUILDING INDUSTRY-GOVERNMENT ACTION TO ALLEVIATE RESULTANT UNEMPLOYMENT
Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. The proposal for a special excise tax of 10 per cent on all pleasure craft will strike a detrimental blow to the small boat industry in Nova Scotia, and especially to the builders in my constituency who are already struggling in the grip of inflationary costs. In view of the increased unemployment that this tax will create in the small boat industry, may I ask the minister if he consulted with the minister of Regional Economic Expansion before proposing this levy and what steps will be taken to assist those who become unemployed as a result of it?


John Napier Turner: Mr. Speaker, I will take the hon. gentleman's remarks as a representation on the potential effects of the budgetary measures.


CRIMINAL CODE
Mr. Otto Jelinek (High Park-Humber Valley):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Justice. In light of the recent pilot survey carried out in British Columbia on implementation of the 1969 abortion amendment which showed that hospitals were critical of the difficulties inherent in interpreting the abortion law, does the government have any intention of forming a committee to thoroughly investigate the question of the law as it now stands at the same time giving organizations the opportunity to present their views on a matter so important to all Canadians?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, we do not have any present intention of forming a committee as a means of inquiry into the operation of the law but we have the matter in hand otherwise.


Otto John Jelinek: Mr. Speaker, may I put a supplementary question to the Prime Minister. In view of the dilemma of not only hospital boards but thousands of Canadians which is caused by the uncertainties in interpreting present abortion laws, can the Prime Minister advise the House whether the government intends to clarify the situation by announcing in the near future a clear government policy either pro or antiabortion and could he let us know which direction the government intends to take?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the clear government policy is to abide by the law as it now stands on the book and to make sure it is respected everywhere. I hope the Tories have as clear a policy.


ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
Mr. John A. Fraser (Vancouver South):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of the Environment. In light of public reports earlier this month on the future employment of the Deputy Minister of the Environment, could the minister tell the House whether she has inquired into this matter and whether the deputy minister will be employed by a northern pipeline consulting group which will be working on a project which should eventually involve the National Energy Board, the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and the Department of the Environment?


Jeanne Sauvé: could not say, Mr. Speaker, if the departments to which the hon. member referred would be involved in the future of the Deputy Minister of the Environment but it is true that from February 19, he will be in the employ of the company mentioned.


CONFLICT OF INTEREST
John Allen Fraser: Mr. Speaker, may I put a supplementary question to the right hon. Prime Minister? Is the right hon. gentleman satisfied that the oath of secrecy covers the question of conflict of interest and public interest regarding this practice or is his intention to prepare guidelines on the appointment of deputy ministers and other officials in sensitive positions that would remove, for a period of time, after leaving the government, their freedom to work for companies or institutions that may have a direct and immediate interest in the areas that involve responsibilities of deputy ministers and those officials?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I apologize but I missed the previous exchange. In so far as the question itself is concerned, the government did consider this alternative and it was rejected. I think if it were to apply to civil servants it would have to apply to all members of the House and we do not think that members of the House would want to apply that rule to themselves. However, we will see, when the matter comes before the House on the conflict of interest guidelines.


John Allen Fraser: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that the right hon. Prime Minister missed part of the question. I wonder if I could ask if he is satisfied that in such case the oath of secrecy is a sufficient protection to the public interest for those who are employed in such areas subsequent to their employment in sensitive government areas. I say that, Mr. Speaker, because the hon. Minister of the Environment
November 25, 1974

said in answer to my question on November 15 that she felt the oath of secrecy was sufficient.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I repeat, I missed the previous exchange and when the hon. member talked about "in such case", I do not know what case he is talking about.


John Allen Fraser: I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, I respect what the right hon. gentleman has said. The case is that of a deputy minister or other official in a very sensitive position being employed afterwards by the private sector or corporations or individuals that may have a very, very direct interest in the information which those particular people acquired in the course of their responsibilities with the government.


Mr. Fairweather:: Insiders.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, frankly I have no further solution to this difficulty and I see it as a real one. I do not think it is a practical alternative to suggest that when officials or ministers or for that matter civil servants or members of parliament, have departed from their particular employment that they be in some way restricted as to the use of their freedom. I would hope that their oath of secrecy and their innate honesty would guide them in the circumstances that the hon. member suggests.


POST OFFICE
Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, may I put a question to the Postmaster General and may I say we welcome him safely back from his sojourn in the land of his fathers where he was attending the funeral of a very distinguished president. May I ask the Postmaster General, since the decertification of the Council of Postal Unions if he or his officials have circulated a memorandum to all postal employees informing them that they can now opt out of the checkoff for union dues?


Hon. Bryce Mackasey (Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, the question raised by the hon. gentleman is one that is rather contentious and has created a certain amount of controversy within the postal ranks. To be precise, under the law we have no right to deduct dues from members for unions that have been decertified. What we have is an alternative suggestion, one which was discussed with the heads of the various unions, that we would continue to make the appropriate deduction from the payroll unless notified in writing by individuals working in the post office that they no longer wished to pay union dues to the union with which they are associated.


Mr. Lambert (Edmonton West):: What gives you legal authority to do that?


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question. In view of the sensitivity of this issue and the necessity of good labour relations in restoring the efficiency of the post office, could the Postmaster General circulate a memo assuring all employees that, notwithstanding
Oral Questions
decertification, the government is honouring the terms of the collective agreement?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. What is the question- "could"the minister have done that as a suggestion or "has" the minister done it? I did not understand the question. One is hypothetical and the other is argument.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: Could he, Mr. Speaker.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Speaker, when the Postal Council applied for and was granted decertification by the Public Service Staff Relations Board it was suggested by the chairman that although the collective agreement is null and void, as many features of it as possible be recognized on an official basis. We have done so. The only part of the question looked into by the Department of Justice officers concerned the propriety of deducting payroll union dues of those members who were theoretically no longer covered by a collective agreement. In effect and in summary, we are enforcing all features of the collective agreement, including the deduction of union dues which are turned over to the appropriate union, unless otherwise notified by postal employees who no longer want these union dues deducted from their pay.


FINANCE
Mr. Sinclair Stevens (York-Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Is the minister aware that it is present government policy to allow resource royalties payable by Canadian corporations to foreign jurisdictions such as Guatemala to be deductible from their income before federal taxation, while it is proposed to deny this privilege to such companies with respect to provincial royalties. If the minister is aware of this, will he explain why a provincial royalty is not an expense of doing business, while a foreign royalty is considered as an expense of doing business?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre.


POST OFFICE
Mr. Dan McKenzie (Winnipeg South Centre):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Postmaster General. In view of the startling revelation by Mr. D. S. McConnell, president of the McConnell Nursery Company of Port Burwell, Ontario, that the postal strike of April, 1974, cost his firm more than half a million dollars, and that he can no longer chance issuing his seed catalogue for 1975 because of the threat of postal strikes and poor mail

November 25, 1974
Oral Questions
delivery, will the minister now consider implementing the recommendations contained in the $.25 million Samson, Belair, Riddel and Stead study which recommended that mail delivery be left in the hands of private contractors who deliver mail more efficiently and economically.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Speaker, that report, I think, was published in 1969. My hon. friend may or may not have been here then, but I remind him that the question of the efficiency of private enterprise arose in connection with the Lapalme dispute.


A. Daniel McKenzie: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.
I think I am as familiar with the document as the Postmaster General is. Will he consider reviewing the recommendations of the report and report back to the House, as the firm making the report goes into extensive detail on the advantages of private contractors handling mail delivery.


Bryce Stuart Mackasey: Mr. Speaker, this involves a question of philosophy, really. Last April the gentleman to whom the hon. member referred suffered financial hardship and, if he is not prepared to take a chance again, it means that people will have to turn to some other firm for their seed catalogues. As to whether private enterprise can handle more efficiently than the post office the delivery of mail by truck, let me remind the hon. member that the matter was faced by the department. It decided one year or so ago to phase into the post office various contracts which had expired in the private sector.


MANPOWER
Mr. Gerard Laprise (Abitibi):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration.
Considering the appreciable reduction of employment in forestry work, especially in saw mills-and this problem has occurred after the allotments of grants under LIP- would the minister reconsider the distribution of those funds or recommend to the cabinet the provision of supplementary estimates for local initiatives projects for the next season?


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, I will give full consideration to the representations of the hon. member and give them full thought.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, I think the minister was prepared to answer my question, which I certainly intended to be a question on policy. Is it government policy to allow royalties payable to foreign governments to be deductible, whereas royalties paid to provinces may not be deductible?


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Perhaps the hon. member's memory is not keen on the point, but that form of question
[Mr. McKenzie.)
directed to a minister is not acceptable under the terms of reference of the question period, which have been discussed recently. In addition, the request for a minister to interpret a statute concerning legal liability under the statute is not acceptable, according to precedent. This is distinct from the sort of question put to the Prime Minister as to whether a minister was pronouncing government policy when he made a certain statement at a certain time. That would be different, in order and quite acceptable. The request that a minister of the Crown interpret a statute and legal liability under that statute is not proper in the question period, according to my understanding of the rules. The hon. member for Greenwood.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a further point of order. Could I direct my question to the Prime Minister?


Mr. Speaker:: In due course. The hon. member for Greenwood.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Did the Canadian representative at the October 17 meeting of the World Bank or its associates at Paris support, tacitly or explicitly, an American proposal for a $50 million advance to the Saigon regime, apart altogether from making any actual commitment.


Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that we did not support the proposal in fact, in principle, or in any way at all.


Francis Andrew Brewin: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the Secretary of State for External Affairs undertake to inform parliament before any such commitment is made to bolster the Saigon regime, whose disregard for fundamental human rights is notorious.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, the whole issue seems to be somewhat hypothetical. At the moment I am inclined to doubt whether that eventuality will take place at all, whether we will subscribe to that kind of participation.


ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Bob Wenman (Fraser Valley West):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of the Environment. In view of alarming allegations in the United States that drinking water taken from the Mississippi and other rivers is being severely contaminated by materials which were formerly considered to be non-contaminants, is the government of Canada planning to undertake studies
November 25, 1974	COMMONS DEBATES	1621
similar to those initiated in the United States, to ensure the quality of water consumed by Canadians.


Jeanne Sauvé: Mr. Speaker, the quality of our water is constantly being tested by Canadian authorities. I should like to know to what precise problem the hon. member is referring in connection with the Mississippi River. If difficulties arise in other parts of the world of which we did not know before, we immediately take measures to look into the situation, to see if the same conditions exist in our own country.


Robert Lloyd Wenman: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The minister suggested that studies are being undertaken. Can she tell the House under whose authority those studies are undertaken, in order to assure Canadian people that Canadian water supplies are safe and uncontaminated. To which studies was the minister referring?


Jeanne Sauvé: Mr. Speaker, numerous studies are undertaken. Water quality and possible hazardous effects on health are looked after by the Department of National Health and Welfare. We rely on the information given to us by that department. If new difficulties arise, we initiate studies in order to find out if there is a problem.


STATISTICS CANADA
Mr. Stan Darling (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. Regardless of the supposed, and I stress "supposed", confidentiality of data collected from surveyed individuals by Statistics Canada for surveys such as the one on food expenditure presently being undertaken by the ministry, does not the minister feel that information on topics such as family mortgages held, stocks and bonds held, land interests, cigarettes, personal care articles and alcohol purchased, as sought by Statistics Canada, is a serious invasion of privacy; and, regardless of the supposed necessity for this information, does not the minister believe that being forced to answer questions of a private concern under threat of prosecution is an unreasonable and unjust intimidation of personal freedom?


An hon. Member:: Snoop!


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, the act governing the operations of Statistics Canada is very precise with respect to protecting the privacy and confidentiality of the information.


Stan Darling: Mr. Speaker, it is still mandatory and the result is a police state.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Does the hon. member have a supplementary question?
Oral Questions


Stan Darling: I want the minister to answer the question. What he is doing is making a demand on the privacy of an individual as compared to a commercial request or something of that nature.


ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Mr. Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Solicitor General in light of the fact he is now working with the Minister of Labour in order to determine some of the facts regarding the Seafarers International Union. Does the minister intend to meet with the solicitor general of the province of Ontario and the attorney general of the province of Ontario in order to gather all the facts that are available and which I think will assist the Minister of Labour when he returns from the ILO Conference in Mexico to call for an inquiry into the whole matter involving the Seafarers International Union?


Hon. Warren Allmand (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, at the request of the Minister of Labour, I have asked the RCMP to look into the allegations made against officials of the Department of Labour. The RCMP are doing that and I expect a report from them shortly.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Mr. Speaker, I do not know whether the minister deliberately did not hear my question. In the absence of the Minister of Labour, I asked the Solicitor General when he will be meeting with the solicitor general of the province of Ontario and the attorney general of the province of Ontario in order to gather all the facts, thereby putting the Minister of Labour in a position when he returns from Mexico in another five or six days to determine whether an inquiry should be brought about immediately. I want to know whether the minister is going to see these provincial ministers.


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, I have no intention at the present time to meet with the solicitor general or attorney general of Ontario. When we ask the police to investigate something, they do it free from political interference.


AIR TRANSPORT
Mr. Fred McCain (Carleton-Charlotte):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Transport, I will direct my question to the Prime Minister. Since the government in its wisdom chose to try to recover some of the cost of security checks at airports and has imposed a tax on airline tickets to defray these expenses, will the government correct the inequity which has been created by virtue of the fact that taxes collected from Canadian travel agents, whether the ticket be for a trip within

November 25, 1974
Oral Questions
Canada or a trip with the point of origin and destination both outside Canada, is causing a severe hardship for travel agents within our borders?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I will be glad to refer the question to the minister.


NATIONAL DEFENCE
Mr. J. P. Nowlan (Annapolis Valley):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of National Defence. Last week the minister announced the resumption of two flights in a six-month period in the Arctic. Was he aware at that time that the necessary maintenance base at Frobisher Bay had been closed; the doors locked, telephones disconnected and the communications centre run down? Does the minister intend to service these two flights with existing resources or with additional help?


James Armstrong Richardson: Mr. Speaker, I am glad to tell the hon. member that Canada has two coasts and that we can fly to the high Arctic from Comox without going near Frobisher Bay.


John Patrick (Pat) Nowlan: Mr. Speaker, I am fully aware that Canada has two coasts. I am concerned about this Minister of National Defence. What I am most apprehensive about is that this minister does not know anything about the armed services. He does not know we have three coasts, not two.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Patrick (Pat) Nowlan: My question was not answered. I know the minister does not have to answer it. My supplementary question is to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Because of our reduced operational activity in the Pacific and the Atlantic and thus our reduced presence, particularly in the Atlantic, has the minister been advised by any country, and I am thinking of three European countries, that they are sending additional ships to patrol in our pollution zone areas off our coasts next year?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: No, Mr. Speaker.


John Patrick (Pat) Nowlan: Will the minister check with his department and advise this House. Britain said it would send seven destroyers here next year. Germany has already notified this country that at least one, if not two, destroyers are coming here. These European countries will be establishing some presence in our fishing grounds. England was kicked off the fishing grounds of Iceland.


Mr. Speaker:: Order of the day.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed, from Friday, November 22, consideration of the motion of Mr. Turner (Ottawa-Carleton) that this House approves in general the budgetary policy of the government, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Stanfield (p. 1502).
Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: Mr. Speaker, when the debate was adjourned last Friday, I was saying that young people who want to go into business have great difficulty in obtaining the necessary loans to realize their projects. That is regrettable since most of them now have a trade and an excellent training, and if they cannot use this knowledge, these talents, the entire Canadian society loses because these young people are not contributing to increase production or provide services. This certainly does not help to reduce inflation as these young people are still consumers even though they are not producers at the same time.
In my opinion, Mr. Speaker, in view of the present cost of education, this is too much to pay for training the unemployed.
In his speech, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) talked a great deal about the inflation problem without suggesting any new formulas to solve it. He only repeated well known measures. The government tries such or such a measure, and if this does not work, it recommends starting over again by using the same recipe in case some ingredients were omitted. Here is what the minister said in his speech, and I quote:
We cannot expect to eliminate inflation overnight. It will be a prolonged and tough fight. But we are striving to get the rate of inflation down below the two-digit level next year. It will take a determined effort on the part of all sectors of our society. Self-discipline and a good measure of political courage to get it down to 5 per cent over the next few years.
In another part of his speech, the minister said, and I quote:
We are confronted by the twin problems of inflation and slower growth. They are very closely related, since inflation-if allowed to get out of hand-threatens the continued growth of real income, production and employment.
Really, Mr. Speaker, one would have to be blind or of bad faith not to recognize that our economic system is unsatisfactory and needs reforms.
Those who benefit from the present system, trusts, monopolies and even some politicians, prefer the status quo. But the working classes, low income families and individuals, are this system's victims, therefore they are not delighted with it. It is on behalf of these classes of people that I now speak in this House, to ask Parliament to bring in reforms before it is too late. To cure an illness, one must first of all know its cause. The same holds true for inflation, to cure it, one must first know its major causes.
November 25, 1974

In my opinion, these major causes are: First, interest rates which are too high; second, the increase in debts and the cost of their financing, both in the public and private sectors; third, excessively high tax rates which are eating up progressively larger and larger portions of the salary of human labour.
If there is no change soon in the present policy in respect of the credit which is necessary to finance the public sector, in respect of interests and taxation, our system and economy might very well collapse under the pyramid of our debts and taxes. One needs only look at statistics for confirmation of this statement.
We must remedy this situation. When the Minister of Finance stated that a strong dose of political courage would be necessary, he was right. The government will have to be strong also against the powerful and the monopolies, so that they will no longer destroy through their abuses the gains we expect from social legislation and job-creating programs such as LIP, in which this government certainly did not invest enough money this year, because of the increase in unemployment.
"We shall have to take the bull by the horns", as the Chairman of the Board of directors of the Bank of Montreal said in a speech which appeared in the annual report of this bank for 1973.
Dealing with the inflation problem, he stated that indexation will solve nothing. This is my opinion too. It's a plaster on a wooden leg. The only efficient action, he said, is to take the bull by the horns in grappling with the very essentials of inflation. In another part of this same speech, the minister said the following: "But this question is beyond the interest of each of the social groups, and neither investors nor labour nor any interest group, in spite of the quality of its organization, has the skill and the responsibility to rise to that global understanding. Only the state can. It alone is responsible for that." And he goes on to say: "It's time to make the essential choices. Will our elected representatives understand it?" This is, Mr. Speaker, another banker who speaks like a Social Crediter. Will the Minister of Finance believe this one?
As a solution to the problem of inflation, we Social Crediters are suggesting something. We are sometimes told: "You are always criticizing, but you never suggest any solution!" Today, Mr. Speaker, I will make very concrete suggestions and put them on very solid basis. First, immediate adoption by Parliament of a law guaranteeing each Canadian a minimum income. This income would be added to revenues provided by each person's efforts and would not be part of prices. Second, passage of legislation authorizing old age security pension payments as early as age 60 for those who wish to retire and also for those who are unemployed but also need income to live. Third, a discount on Canadian products sold at retail. I will say more on that later on if possible. Fourth, financing in the public sector using credits from the Bank of Canada and on which carrying charges would not be higher than administration costs.
This new method of financing would put an end to the competition that the Canadian and provincial governments are now providing for the private sector on the money market. This would lower interest rates on the capital necessary to industry in general. It would also
The Budget-Mr. A. Lambert
contribute to a decrease in production costs and therefore, in prices.
In his 1975-76 budget, the Minister of Finance provides an amount of $3 billion and a half for interest on the public debt. That is exactly one billion more than for 1973-74. If that is not a real cancer gnawing at the vitals of society, Mr. Speaker, I wonder what cancer is? The way things are going, more than 10 per cent of the budget will soon be used just to pay interest on the public debt.
It is not normal that a sovereign government should be forced to finance the country's expenses by kowtowing to those who have the privilege of making money with the country's credit by plucking out of the blue the money they lend government. That is no more and no less than slavery and it is therefore vain to speak of democracy.
A sovereign government must realize that it has the power and the duty to create and monitor the instrument of exchange the people of this country need for their exchanges of products and services.
It may be argued that if that formula were good other countries would have tried it before today. To those people I say that President Lincoln used it successfully in the United States from 1860 to 1864. It is true that he paid with his life the courage and the guts of having dared put money at the service of his fellow man.
Another American by the name of Goldsborough introduced a bill in the U.S. House of Representatives on August 22, 1935. The purpose of that bill was to restore to the American government its supreme role of creating the money necessary for financing the expenditures of the American people and liberating it from the slavery of money comptrollers. I obtained a copy of that bill and had it translated in excellent French. Of course, I do not intend to read the whole thing in this House but I am quite prepared to hand a copy to the Minister of Finance so he can have a look at it and use it in due time.
What was the purpose of that bill? The purpose of that bill was as stated in clause 1, and I quote:
To restore to Congress its constitutional power to issue currency and control its value; to provide a monetary income for the people of the United States with a dollar whose purchasing power will be stable and equitable, adequate at all times to allow people to purchase the goods and services that industries and business services in the United States can provide at full capacity; to abolish the practice of creating bank deposits by private groups on fractional reserves and for other purposes.
Indeed, the purpose of that act is quite clear. Furthermore, the sponsor of that bill suggested that U.S. consumers be given a retail discount to fight, as we are still doing today, inadequate incomes of low income consumers to help them to further benefit from production at prices they can afford. I continue quoting from the same bill: Application of Retail Discount Rate-Upon and following the passing of this act the retail discount rate will be applicable on purchases of goods and services from retailers as described in this act by bona fide consumers, provided such purchases are for the personal use of the consumer or his family and not for resale, exchange or manufacturing.
However, we have been proposing this to Parliament for several years, Mr. Speaker. When we hear that this was never done anywhere else, it is not because nobody thought of it but because, here like elsewhere, we have

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. A. Lambert
captive governments, which are unable to take their responsibilities and which are at the service of big business.
In another part, section 305 says, and I quote:
Policy statement: The purpose of this Act is to maintain at all times a rough balance in the national credit account in all banks. The intent of this Act is to control the volume of the means of payment for the goods and services according to the capacity of the entire nation to produce and to consume in an upward standard of living, in order not to have an excessive monetary expansion and consequently an undue progression of prices and so that the present system of issuing currency through private initiative for profit, which causes disastrous inflation and deflation periods does not recur.
Here is an advised legislator, Mr. Speaker. A few weeks ago, the leader of the Social Credit of Canada introduced a bill in this House and he explained its nature. It is a bill to amend the Bank of Canada Act so that the latter can give long term loans to the federal government and the provinces for financing the public sector at an interest rate not exceeding the administration expenses. This is why a Liberal member killed the bill, and I am very sorry to see that the government chose a physician for this murder. I had always thought that physicians were rather in favour of life.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, if this Parliament has failed up to now to pass a legislation that would straighten up our financial situation so that the money used by Canadians would be created by our government as a sovereign government, it is not because that was not mentioned, but because we have a government that is not free; our Parliament should be free and do something before it is too late.
Some people may say: Under the influence of Social Credit, the value of money is going to drop. There is no Social Credit for the time being, and we still have inflation. Social Credit is not ruling the country, and money has been losing much of its worth.


Mr. Boulanger:: We deal with other countries.


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: I know that. But the hon. member will make his own speech and explain. They say, and I quote:
Inflation has eroded wage increases by 60 per cent.
There is your system! They say that 60 per cent of wage increases are eroded by inflation, which is created by the system the hon. member upholds so vigorously.
An economist quoted in an article of the January 31, 1974 edition of La Presse said, and I quote:
The value of the dollar will go down by 50 per cent within ten years
This is only a partial truth, for we know that the situation will be even worse, considering the present trend of changes.
The former chief of the hon. member knows that. Even though the hon. member comes from the Mercier constituency in Montreal, he has not yet been blessed.
At all events, Mr. Mackenzie King, in 1935, at the time of the great battle to free Canada from US financial domination, uttered some truths that can be verified, but did not act accordingly afterwards. I quote:
[Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse).J
Once a nation loses control over its currency and its credit, it does not matter much who in that nation makes laws. Once in control, money lenders will ruin any country.
We too, in Canada, are in the process of being ruined.
Mr. Speaker, I refer to an authority, the late Pope Piux XI who said-and I wish everyone enslaved by finance people would hear this:
Those who hold the money and have absolute control over it regulate credit and dispense it as they see fit. In so doing, they direct blood to the economic system, which they hold in their hands. Consequently, nobody can breathe without their assent.
This is why we have ill-breathing governments, Mr. Speaker; they have good intentions, but lack the means to fulfill the people's legitimate desires.
I would therefore hope the few suggestions I just made be kept in mind. I repeat that if the Minister of Finance wishes to see it, I will give him a copy of the American bill I just referred to.


Hon. Barney Danson (Minister of State for Urban Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, as minister responsible for housing through the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, I welcome many elements in the budget which both directly and indirectly deal with the very real challenges which face us in maintaining the high quality of housing we enjoy in Canada and the availability of housing at prices people can afford at a time of high inflation. In the housing field, inflation manifests itself primarily in very high interest rates as well as in the high cost of building materials and labour.
By continuing to direct his policies toward achieving an even-handed approach to inflation and economic growth, the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) assures us of the fundamental stability and strength which makes Canada the envy of virtually all western industrial nations. While no one would suggest that we do not have serious problems, it is evident to everyone that we are coping with these with greater success than others, more particularly than our principal trading partners most of whom have higher rates of inflation and who predict zero or minus growth rates in their real gross national product while ours is projected to grow by some 4 per cent in the coming year.
This basic strength gives hope for 1975. Without it we could not realistically begin to cope with the disturbing drop in housing starts which has plagued us, along with other nations, in the latter part of this year. Over the past six years we have consistently and significantly surpassed the required 200,000 starts per year. By the end of this year we expect to see final figures of 220,000 to 230,000 starts and about 250,000 completions. This would be cause for satisfaction were it not for the fact that these figures reflect an exceptionally high level of starts in the first part of the year, which level declined dramatically to an annual rate of 173,000 starts in October.
Of further concern to me has been the consequence of high interest rates, high construction costs and high ser-viced-lot costs which have made it extremely difficult for Canadians, especially young families, to get their stake in the housing market. While home ownership is presenting problems which we are tackling vigorously, the lack of



November 25, 1974

rental accommodation has reached critical proportions in many cities across Canada. While rents, on the whole, have not increased at nearly the rate of other costs, continuing vacancy rates of less than 2 per cent will put pressure on rents that will be unacceptable to Canadians and their government. Rent controls are not the answer in this market. Indeed, in the provinces where they have been applied they have tended to exacerbate the problem, and I reject controls as a solution or even as a palliative. A major portion of our efforts in 1975 will be directed to the rental field.
The government's over-all approach of increasing supply is one which I shall apply in coping with both home ownership and rental accommodation. It is for this reason that we shall use government resources and taxpayers' dollars to achieve the maximum effect in making it possible for builders and developers to deliver good accommodation to Canadians at high levels and affordable prices. This can only be done if provinces and municipalities accelerate the rate at which they approve building plans. The concern being shown for good planning is welcome. The very real problems of municipalities are well understood. On the other hand, most people acknowledge that administrative delays and, in some cases, prolonged resistance to any reasonable development are major factors in increasing development costs and aggravating problems of supply.
I therefore urge provinces and municipalities to look carefully but urgently at all plans before them, with a view to accelerating the flow of residential building permits in areas of shortage or high cost. This might mean a lot of night and weekend work for planning bodies. However, it is essential in dealing with our current and anticipated situation and should not detract from good planning practices: it concerns just the administration time of such practices.
Now, Mr. Speaker, let us look at the specific measures in the budget which will help us reach the minimum target of 200,000 starts which we have set for 1975. The most dramatic is the decrease in sales tax on building materials from 11 per cent to 5 per cent. This, on the average, will reduce the cost of a home by approximately $650. For first-time buyers of new, moderately priced homes we must add the $500 grant which I announced on November 1, making a reduction of $1,150. This is a significant incentive to bring this type of new housing on to the market at prices Canadians can afford and which the housing industry can provide, as proven to us by them, with the Assisted Home Ownership Program.
Demand pressures have relaxed to the point that the marketplace is beginning to work. I want to see homes sell at prices related to their cost, rather than what the traffic will bear. While I am hopeful that this will be the case, I do not intend to leave it to pure chance. For this reason I am implementing a monitoring procedure to make certain that sales tax reductions are passed on to the builders by the suppliers and by the builders to the home'buyers. I have invited representatives of the supply and building industries to meet with me and with my officials in Ottawa to seek their co-operation and to develop and explain procedures which will best achieve the reduction
The Budget-Mr. Danson
in costs and increase in supply which the measure is designed to achieve. My colleague, the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Ouellet), is co-operating fully with me in this effort.
Another factor in the budget is the disallowance of the carrying cost on land until it is brought into use. This should accelerate the supply of land. Combined with the action of some provinces, our federal programs for land assembly and servicing and the reintroduction of Bill C-34 to assist municipalities and provinces in providing sanitary and storm sewer services, plus the co-operation of planning authorities, will help substantially in shaking out a distorted land market that has been under pressures which have added inexcusably and even unconscionably to serviced-lot prices and thus to housing prices.
The registered home ownership savings plan gives considerable incentive to families to save for the down payment on their first home. The sum of $1,000 can be deducted from taxable income each year for up to ten years. This means that if both partners are working they can save up to $2,000 yearly or $20,000 in ten years if that is their priority. Invested at even 8 per cent interest, this would add up to about $14,450 total in ten years for one income earner, or $28,900 for both. It should also add significantly to the flow of investment money which will find its way into the mortgage market which, in turn, will help provide the homes which these couples are saving to buy. Add to this the $1,000 in deductions from interest earnings for all taxpayers, and we have a major infusion of money into the mortgage market.
In addition, I am urging the significantly growing pension funds to allocate a greater proportion of their investment to the residential mortgage market. Mortgage investment corporations being formed under legislation from the last parliament, and the establishment of the Federal Mortgage Exchange Corporation, are further incentives for residential mortgage investment. Combined, all of these measures should assure supply of mortgage funds and act as a stabilizing factor on mortgage interest rates.
What I like best of all about the registered home ownership savings plan, Mr. Speaker, is the incentive to savings-an almost forgotten word in these times of almost insatiable demand for all the good things available to us in an abundant society. I have said in the past that every Canadian has a right to good housing and it is my responsibility to see that it is provided. I have also said that every Canadian family has the right to the option of their own home. This measure gives them the means to set their priorities. If a home rates high on their list of priorities, they now have one of the most generous and effective vehicles for achieving this goal. It is now my job to deliver programs to make certain that enough homes are built, at moderate prices, to meet the demand, and also enough rental accommodation for those saving toward ownership as well as those who choose rental rather than ownership.
A growing number of Canadians are seeking rental accommodation, particularly in or near the centres of our major cities. It must be apparent that living in our growing urban centres must be relatively high density and the dream of a single-family dwelling on its own separate lot is only achievable at economic cost, for most, away from the central areas of our cities. The choice for many thus

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Danson
becomes achievable single-family ownership in suburban or smaller communities, town house, condominium type ownership or rental within the city.
The increase in demand for rental accommodation is outstripping supply and investment in multiple-family units, especially apartment buildings, is lagging. In many parts of the country this investment has traditionally come from private investors who have invested in such real estate at its inception or as a secondary market to provide funds for builders to engage in further new construction and as a good investment for themselves. Until tax reform they could write off the depreciation or capital cost allowance against this other income. This tax shelter was withdrawn on the grounds of equity as a result of tax reform. The consequence has been a serious cutback in new construction in some areas. To give impetus to this critical area we are encouraging this investment for those who build multiple-family rental accommodation in 1975 by allowing the application of capital cost allowance against other income.
These measures, combined with substantial funds to be applied to existing programs and the new measures I plan to place before the House in December, will add to the total matrix of policies necessary to increase momentum in the housing industry. There is no single magic, or simplistic, solution: needs vary from family to family, from city to city and from region to region. We do know, however, what has worked well in the current situation and now we can make it work even better. The Assisted Home Ownership Program has brought some 20,000 new homes on to the market at a cost of $450 million in loans. I have allocated a further $50 million in loans and subsidies for increased limited dividend, voluntarily controlled rental accommodation for the last two months of this year-enough for about 2,000 units. CMHC has received applications for over 6,600 units under this plan and is selecting those which give the best value. These programs will be expanded in the coming year in response to the need and the demonstrated interest of the builders.
Because our resources are not unlimited I will be introducing legislation which will make it possible to tap the capital resources of the private mortgage markets to do much the same job. There are still areas where government, through CMHC, will have to be the lender and provide the subsidy to make it possible for low-income families to buy or rent new, moderately priced housing and not spend more than a reasonable proportion of their income whether buying or renting. The family income ceilings for this assistance range up to $8,000 and even $18,000 in high-cost areas.
We want to make it possible for even more people to be helped; but, as we have seen, even over half a billion dollars in federal funds in these two programs alone, assisted home ownership and limited dividend housing, in 1974 is not enough. To untap the major sources of private mortgage funds we intend to bridge the gap in interest rates between the minimum rate at which private lenders can economically lend and the maximum rate at which lower and medium-income Canadians can afford to borrow. This will apply to more areas of Canada and to a broader income range. As the objective is to increase the

supply of new, moderately priced housing, this measure will be specifically directed at this moderate price range of new housing. I will also be proposing legislation to provide warranties to home buyers to protect them from unscrupulous or negligent builders.
Mr. Speaker, the world economic situation is largely beyond our direct control. That which we can affect will be pursued with vigour, responsibility and sensitivity. We are determined that the continuing goal of good housing at affordable prices is achievable for all Canadians even under present difficult circumstances. We intend to continue support to a productive housing industry working toward government objectives.
We are, further, determined to maintain high levels of employment and productivity in this vital segment of our economy which employs 200,000 Canadians directly on site, a further 30,000 off site and two or three times that number who supply the appliances, furniture, rugs, drapes and other furnishings that go into a home. We have done so consistently over the years and have increased our budgets in the life of this government from about $716 million in 1967 to $900 million in 1974. I do not intend to lessen now this momentum in such a critical area of our society and economy. Indeed, the emphasis, resources and impact will be greater still, not only in homes for Canadians but in homes in cities and towns which are increasingly well planned and in an environment in which we can live richly.
To summarize, Mr. Speaker, the government has a multipronged and aggressive approach to deal with what otherwise would be an unacceptable housing picture. In the budget there is a reduction in sales tax on building materials to 5 per cent, the elimination of sales tax on construction equipment, the registered home ownership savings plan, the encouragement of private investment in rental accommodation, and other measures to encourage savings and mortgage investments.
The existing programs include a $500 home owner's grant, assisted home ownership for moderate and lower income Canadians, limited dividend rental accommodation, rural and native housing, non-profit housing, cooperative housing, student housing, senior citizens' housing, land assembly programs, land servicing programs, municipal sewer programs, the Neighbourhood Improvement Program, the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program, programs for innovative housing, the Federal Mortgage Exchange Corporation, mortgage investment corporations, and others which complement these. Those are the existing programs.
In the near future we will have the Assisted Home Onwership Program with private sector participation for moderately priced homes, which I just briefly outlined, the limited dividend rental program with private sector participation to increase the leverage for low rental accommodation in Broadview and all the other great places across this country, and new legislation to provide land at economic cost for low-income housing in high land cost areas. This is extremely important in major cities such as Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto and Peterborough. Also, there is the expansion and extension of our municipal sewer system assistance program which is extremely important for municipalities in bringing more housing lots
November 25, 1974

on to the market, and the warranty protection program for home buyers which I have mentioned.
Other measures might be necessary to meet new problems or opportunities as they arise. I urge, Mr. Speaker, that our home building industry and the lending institutions gear up for a year of sustained activity in 1975, a year in which housing starts can well exceed, and comfortably exceed, the minimum 200,000 units if Canada's economy continues to perform as it has and in a way which this budget is designed to sustain. I am not suggesting that it will be easy, but I am saying that every effort of the government will be expended to make it possible.


Mr. Heath Macquarrie (Hillsborough):: Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to follow the urban affairs minister and to note how pleased he is about all the things that are going on. He says we have a multipronged approach to the housing problem. If you will pardon the terrible pun, I would say it has been devilishly ineffective, whether multipronged or not. I have been reading with great interest the new red book-we used to have Redbook in the United States, another called True Romances, and I would call this one "New Romances"-in which the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) tells us how good things are. In it he says:
With the benefit of measures in this budget, and with no unforeseen deterioration of the economic environment abroad or unforeseen shocks at home, the Canadian economy is expected to grow at a rate of about 4 per cent in 1975.
It is projected that about a quarter of a million new jobs will be created in 1975, on top of some 870,000 jobs created in Canada in the past two years.
A determined effort will be required by al! sectors of our society to get inflation down over the next few years. We are striving to get the rate below the two-digit level next year.
The Man from Glad could not have been any more soporific than that at a time of great crisis and challenging economic deterioration in this country. It is nothing more than, as a distinguished author said last week, saccharine solutions for a marshmallow world. We are going to have a bad situation in respect of employment. We received information from Statistics Canada the other day. Thanks to information received from one of my colleagues with a constituency of four different names-I refer to the hon. member for Wellington-Grey-Dufferin-Waterloo (Mr. Beatty)-it is indicated that for Hillsborough it is expected there will be an unemployment rate of 14.7 per cent for this winter. This follows immediately after statistics which show that in one year food costs at home have risen 20 points. This is not only in that province, in that constituency, but in all of Canada there will be a winter of discontent.
The other day we heard that many people in this country, a quarter of them living at the poverty line-and that is not gracious living-are reduced to eating pet food, some of which is highly unwholesome. It is alleged that Marie Antoinette once told the peasants of France that if they did not have bread to eat, they could eat cake. What the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) told the Lapalme drivers to eat was neither bread nor cake. However, I do not think pet food is a very good suggestion. We are living today, not in a just society but in a rendezvous with stagflation. That is an outrageous word but it is a much more outrageous condition.
The Budget-Mr. Macquarrie
The Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Lalonde) confessed the other day that his family was using powdered milk, but months ago he prescribed to old age pensioners a more complete diet than that-a diet of powdered skim milk, peanut butter and day-old bread. What a glorious old age for our senior citizens-stale bread, peanut butter and powdered skim milk! That was the message given to each of them with their old age security pension.


Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: No sugar.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: No sugar, and no wine, which was recommended as so nutritive by the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Whelan). So we have just stale bread at 65 years of age, after a lifetime of service.


Otto Emil Lang: It is not stale at a day old.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: One of the unfortunate developments in a political system wherein one party remains too long in power is that opportunism rises and the capacity to accept a challenge is diminished. One would like to have seen this government which was re-elected with its cherished majority on July 8 come in with a sense of direction, a sense of purpose, grateful that the people of Canada had given it a four-year mandate, instead of coming in with outrageous displays of incompetence or worse. I have heard all the arguments about who is responsible for the loss of 28 million eggs. I am not really concerned about jurisdiction or about who knew and who did not know. In a world of starvation it is an outrage that people should be so casual and blase as to try to explain it away. It is a crime, and nothing short of a crime. I wonder what has happened to the old Calvinist sense of sin.
To suggest there may not be things in the world that require exceptionally urgent action by the Canadian government is the worst kind of myopic nonsense. We are facing very, very grave situations. I am just old enough to have some lingering recollections of the depression. I feel there is a very great danger that we may be heading into the same sort of situation. I have that uneasy feeling of deja vu.
I think sometimes people seem to be cast in familiar roles. In Britain we have Harold Wilson, who might have been a Ramsay Macdonald, suddenly becoming garrulous. In Washington we have a Herbert Hoover without Hoover's fine intellect, great rectitude and proven internationalism. Everywhere there is a directionless sense and directionless people. In Canada we have Mackenzie King-ism; a little more stylish but a recycled laissez faire. This was the way it was viewed in 1929; that things would somehow work out and we would just sit here. We know what happened.
The only time ministers across the floor make any real reference to the international situation is when they invoke it to cover up their domestic blunders. The Minister of Transport (Mr. Marchand) is famous with his mess; that is a unique thing and he gets special credit for it. The Minister of Finance is especially good at bringing in everything from the weather to the full moon when things go wrong with his calculations.

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Macquarrie
We experienced a series of disturbances on the international scene. I do not think there is any thoughtful person who is not disquieted by the conference in Bucharest. I was not at all proud of the Canadian role there. The Law of the Sea Conference was a matter of great dissatisfaction. The recent food conference at Rome was a grievous disappointment, and the failure of our own government to deal with the matter forthrightly and fully in this House added nothing to the grim story of what went on when the gathering finally convened.
We have been making mistakes and not even trying to delineate them, much less make recompense for them. Not long ago I went with some colleagues to a part of the world where starvation was not a dictionary word but a daily occurrence. Life there was really precarious. I came back to this chamber and found this government, the same one that is here now, paying for non-production of food in this country. That is another crime, Mr. Speaker. No man, no government, no organization in a world where food has become a constant and vital reality should ever encourage the non-production of foodstuffs. But we did just that. The same people who piloted that bill through the House were quite capable of rationalizing their subsequent failure in other realms by referring to the shortage of food in the world.
Another very significant food product is fish, yet this government has allowed our fisheries to be ravaged and raped with impunity. It is well that the Arctic is not a good fishing ground, because it would be even easier for anyone to go in there and take what they liked.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: They fly over it twice a year.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: Yes, they fly over it twice a year and might catch them between seasons. Daily, food is being wasted on our coasts.


Robert Gordon Lee Fairweather: Sovereignty on the instalment plan.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: Food is thrown away; it is wasted by the ships of other nations. Seemingly, we have no capacity of leadership to bring about correction of these problems. There are problems which should shake the complacency of a government that cares; problems of our own that are grave enough, without trying also to fortify ourselves, as we must, against the buttresses which will come from a deterioration in the international economy. That is as clear as can be, with fluttering currencies, faltering economies and lack of confidence all around. Of course we are heading for tough days, and we have to recognize and fight them in order to sustain our own economy and look after our people. We do not do that by tepid conferences, rotten eggs and the jerks and starts so apparent in our relationship with the United States.


An hon. Member:: And the jerks in government.


Heath Nelson Macquarrie: One of my colleagues says it is the jerks in government, but as you know, Mr. Speaker, I am too polite to call them that. I would not call them anything worse than insensitive incompetents; I would not think of calling them jerks.
There have been some fine speeches in this debate, and I commend hon. members who have taken part. I am a great

believer in general debate in which representatives deal with the issues affecting all people. I was much attracted by the excellent address delivered by the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe (Mr. Wagner) and that of the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Orlikow) who pointed out something very significant in this budget, namely, that at a time of inflation and because of the way this economy is handled, the people who suffer most are those who can least afford to suffer at all; that is, the poor people. That is the problem. The rich are doing quite well and the government is doing quite well out of inflation. It is not a bad time for those two groups. But it is hard on the middle-class, and unbearable for the poor.
The hon. member for Winnipeg North was dead-on when he pointed out that the taxpayer earning $6,000 will, according to 1975 schedules save $183 and the fellow earning $30,000 will save $622. If I may be scriptural, let me ask for whom, then, should the government show greater concern; for those who most need care, or for those who do not? I submit that a good government cares most for those who most need care. Experts have for years studied our income tax structure, yet for 1975, when the poor will suffer greatly, the taxation system will be regressive and will injure most those who are at the bottom of the scale. The lot of those at the bottom of the income scale, those close to the poverty line, will become worse, day in, day out, as inflation rages. Their difficulties will become more acute until they become unbearable. Yet we are told that the world looks on us as an example of how to deal with people and manage an economy.
I associate myself completely with the motion moved by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stanfield). As my political ambitions are limited, and as my transition from a slowly aging politician to a mature, elder statesman will be accomplished only by the passage of time, I am able to say exactly what I like. As the present crew of our ship of state is more interested in the design of the cabin and the colour of the hull than in the direction in which we are travelling, I wonder if the Leader of the Opposition, who has displayed more knowledge of the economic structure and problems of this country, and more genuine compassion for the plight of our people than anyone else in this House, will reconsider his announced intention to leave the public life of this country.
There were times in ancient Rome when they had to ask people like Cincinnatus to return and help guide the ship of state. As Rome was only about 50 miles long, that journey was not too difficult. But I am wondering if the hon. gentleman should settle in Halifax because I am convinced, fearfully and painfully, that we shall need him in this country. The present crew in charge of the ship has lost control. Although the people of Canada expressed themselves in their vote-and we accept their view and the ancient saying vox populi vox dei-yet I think they will find the next four years exceedingly long, and in the next election we shall not hear very much about minority governments not being as good as majority governments. So I hope that the mover of this motion will still be available to our country in the future because I am sure the need for him will be painfully apparent.
November 25, 1974


Maurice Brydon Foster: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to participate in the debate on the budget because in such debates one may talk about the budget and about special difficulties in one's own constituency. This opportunity is especially welcome if one represents a constituency in the north of Ontario. I congratulate the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) on preparing this budget. I am told that his parliamentary secretary had a major role in its preparation.


Stanley Howard Knowles: At least we know whom to blame.


Maurice Brydon Foster: The difficulties facing the world are unprecedented. They are a reflection of the instability which exists in the international sphere, which is partly the result of terrific balance of payment difficulties faced especially by oil importing nations.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Among those numbers Canada may now be counted.


Maurice Brydon Foster: We are witnessing the most serious world inflation of 20 years, accompanied by a serious downturn in the economy of North America, especially that of the United States. May I draw attention to what the United States president of the United Auto Workers told a meeting in Canada which he addressed recently. Leonard Woodcock was speaking to 500 delegates from the union's General Motors Corporation council at a meeting in Toronto. The United States economy was under consideration, and Mr. Woodcock said that at least the Canadian budget proposes income tax cuts for individuals but increased corporation taxes. Clearly, the good points of our budget are being recognized at home and abroad.
The budget takes into account threats to our economy posed by inflation, recession and unemployment. The Minister of Finance has chosen to counteract inflation by restraining government spending and by encouraging increased production of goods and services. At the same time, budget measures will increase take-home pay, especially of those in low income brackets. The budget also deals with unemployment. It proposes to increase personal tax cuts in 1975. It will lead to a turnaround in our economy. The present budgetary surplus of $250 million for this year is to become a deficit next year of $1.50 billion. This will present a total budget turnaround of $1.75 billion. The government will incur this deficit because it will implement reductions which were announced first in the May 6 budget. The original 5 per cent proposed tax reduction is to be increased to 8 per cent, the minimum saving is to be increased from $150 to $200 and the maximum to $750.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: There was no 5 per cent cut.


Maurice Brydon Foster: In addition, personal income taxes will automatically be reduced as a result of the 1971 tax reform bill because the rates are reduced by this bill. As well, indexing provisions will lead to higher deductions for those paying income tax. For instance, a married taxpayer earning $10,000 a year will increase his take-home pay by about $250 per year as a result of the proposed tax cuts. The budget also contains provisions which will bring
The Budget-Mr. Foster
important improvements in the position of senior citizens. There is provision for a deduction of up to $1,000 from a personal pension. Of course, senior citizens and others will be able to claim up to $1,000 derived from interest or dividends, as tax-free income.
This provision is important because I have always thought it unfair that the person who has saved money, bought savings bonds or made other investments should pay tax on the proceeds of that investment. The provision of which I speak will allow a certain portion of such returns-that is, up to $1,000-to be free of tax. This budget moves to remove the inequity that existed in this area. It is also proposed that any deduction which is not claimed by a senior citizen may, if it is advantageous, be claimed by his or her spouse.
I wish to refer to the items in the budget which are designed to stimulate housing starts in this country. The Minister of State for Urban Affairs (Mr. Danson) indicated that the number of units being started this year has dropped back from the record high level of 1973. The minister recently announced a $500 cash grant for each new house of moderate value. In his budget, the Minister of Finance followed this up by an immediate reduction of the 11 per cent sales tax on building materials to 5 per cent. It is estimated that this will save $650 on the price of a new house.
The budget also proposed special capital cost allowances on new, multiple-unit residential buildings for rent, which may be claimed against any source of income. This will channel a great deal of new money into the housing industry. The sales tax on construction equipment and materials used in municipal water distribution systems will be eliminated. A new registered home ownership program is in the budget. This will allow young couples to save for a new home, tax free, up to $10,000. It will encourage young people to save for a new home. I am glad these measures are in the budget because they will stimulate housing starts and provide new jobs in a North American economy that has turned downward this year.
However, and even more important in my constituency, these housing starts will increase the demand for forest products, especially lumber. Perhaps no industry in the Algoma district has seen such a dramatic turn around in the past year as the lumber industry. A year ago, prices were at record high levels. In many cases these prices have been cut in half in the short time span of one year. Some one-industry towns, such as Blind River, have had their only industry shut down due to lack of demand and low prices for their products. Several other mills throughout the Algoma area have also had to shut down or curtail their operations.
I believe that these budget items will increase the demand for lumber and building materials. However, at the same time I realize that much of our lumber is sold into United States markets. Their housing starts are down by 50 per cent from last year. Until the U.S. market improves, the industry will not return to a fully healthy state.
Within the past few days the Minister of Manpower and Immigration (Mr. Andras) announced Local Initiatives

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Foster
Program approvals for this coming winter. They will provide temporary help during this time of seasonally high unemployment, especially this winter when the lumber industry is depressed. Some 24 projects have been approved for the Algoma-Manitoulin area which will create 100 jobs this winter and cost some $320,000. There are also several projects under way in the constituency under the winter capital project fund, worth over three quarters of a million dollars, which will create more jobs this winter. This program will make improvements to community arenas in several communities throughout the constituency. Likewise, it will construct new township and community buildings and medical clinics. Several smaller projects have been approved, such as the improvement of libraries and other buildings. This past weekend I attended the official opening of a new arena at West Bay in my constituency. It was built largely with winter works funds from previous years.
The nearly $1 million dollars in winter works programs will be most beneficial due to the serious turnaround in employment caused by cut-backs in the lumber business. There is a strong feeling throughout the Algoma district that this kind of program, funded by the federal government, is much to be preferred to the payment of welfare and UIC benefits. At the same time, many worth-while community projects are being carried out to provide winter employment which would ultimately have to be paid for by the municipalities whose budgets are already stretched to breaking point.
I would also like to mention the problems facing the beef industry in this country. In some ways the problems are similar to those of the lumber industry, in that prices were at record high levels a year and a half ago, and although the price of top quality, finished cattle is at a reasonable level today, input costs have risen dramatically over this period of time. Items like feed grain for fattening, fuel costs and baler twine have risen in price to levels that remove all profits. However, the real disaster in beef farming is in the cow-calf operation. Most of the beef industry in northern Ontario is cow-calf operation. The two fall sales in the Algoma riding, at Thessalon and Manitoulin, saw a drop in price this year from last year that can only be termed disastrous.
Let me quote from a letter written by the president of the Manitoulin Livestock Cooperative. This letter expresses the deep concern of the board of directors at the depressed prices of feeder cattle and the whole future of the cow-calf farmer. No other business has been forced to take a 30 per cent drop in wages in the past year. The board of directors indicate that unless action is taken many of the cow-calf operators will be forced out of business. The price at the September sale this year was 34 per cent below the 1973 price and 7 per cent below the 1972 price. At the same time, these farmers indicate the following price increases: gasoline up 29 per cent; diesel fuel up 51 per cent; baler twine up 238 per cent; fertilizer up 66 per cent. The letter goes on to indicate that there was a reduction in this one fall sale of returns to the farmers of Manitoulin of $300,000.
The Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Whelan) announced a stabilization program for beef cattle in August of this year. It is difficult to assess the full impact of this pro-

gram, but certainly finished beef cattle prices have been better in Canada than they have in the United States. However, the program seems to have had little effect on calf prices, and this is where the main problem lies today. The minister has indicated that stabilization legislation will be brought forward during this parliament to ensure that beef producers receive adequate prices for their cattle. The problems of beef supplies and prices have been further complicated by the recently announced U.S. quotas on Canadian beef exports. Over the long haul it is desirable for us to have an open border between Canada and the U.S.A., although the present system of quotas imposed by both countries is probably less harmful to Canada.
The problem facing the beef industry must be of very serious concern to parliament and to the government. It will take every bit of our ingenuity and skill to design programs to ensure the long-term stability of this industry. Only with such stability can we ensure the provision of adequate supplies, at reasonable prices, for the consumers of this country.
I want now to refer to the uranium mining industry because of the importance of the mines located at Elliot Lake in the Algoma riding. In the past year or so there has been a great deal of concern expressed by these miners concerning problems of health in the mines, especially silicosis and lung cancer. The problem of silicosis was first raised by Dr. Charles Stewart of the Workmen's Compensation Board of Ontario, who is responsible for chest x-rays and studies of this nature. It has been indicated that over 120 miners now are receiving Workmen's Compensation Board pensions due to some degree of disability, and others have symptoms of dust affecting their health.
Likewise, a recent paper by Dr. Jan Muller of the Ontario department of health which studied the incidence of lung cancer indicated that 41 people had died from the disease between 1955 and 1972. This figure was obtained from a survey of some 8,500 who had worked in the uranium mines during this period. Dr. Muller's paper indicated that this rate was about three times that which would have been expected in the general population. This is surely a matter of serious concern.
What is not known is whether these health threats are mainly the result of working conditions in the early days of uranium mining in Elliot Lake, when there were many mines in operation with a strong orientation toward production and lower standards of ventilation and less protection from exposure to radioactive substances, or whether there are still conditions in these mines which make them less safe than other mines in the province. To try to discover these facts the Ontario government established two health studies this year and a royal commission concerned with the health and safety of mine workers.
One health study has been directed to the examination of the miners themselves, using x-rays, pulmonary function tests and sputum tests. This study was carried out last spring, but as yet no report has been released. The other study to which I referred is designed to test and assess the mine environment. A test of dust levels would determine the amount of free silica in various parts of the
November 25, 1974

mines. Examination will also be made of the levels of radon gas, which is harmful because it is radioactive. The study will also determine whether there are harmful levels of gases from the diesel equipment used in the mines. Hopefully, it will also be determined whether these three factors have a multiplying harmful effect when all are present.
The royal commission has broad terms of reference to look into matters of safety and health in mines in Ontario, as well as compensation programs for disabled miners. I believe the royal commission's role is most important because it will be able to bring a balanced judgment to these matters and make recommendations should the medical and technical studies not reveal all the details of the difficulties involved, either in the health of the miners or the dangers of the mine environment.
With the results of the studies and the testimony given at the hearings, it will be possible to assess the adequacy of the present system of maintaining a healthy environment in the mines. If it is inadequate, the commission will recommend improvements. At the same time, the commission will make recommendations on the safety of affected miners to continue working, and adequate compensation programs for those who are disabled.
I had the opportunity to attend an international symposium, in September of this year, in Bordeaux, France, on the dangers of radiation in the mining and milling of uranium and thorium. Three representatives from the United Steel Workers of America in Elliot Lake, as well as representatives of the Department of National Health and Welfare and the Ontario department of health were in attendance. Great emphasis was placed on the dangers of radon gas as a cause of cancer. Considerable stress was given to the necessity of more frequent testing of the mine environment for this gas to ensure that there is adequate ventilation. It was also stressed that the testing should be done by an independent agency.
The Department of National Health and Welfare is planning to launch an experimental study this winter to develop a testing procedure which will show the cumulative amount of radioactive gases to which miners have been exposed in uranium mines. There is real urgency to see these health matters resolved, Mr. Speaker, both to correct any inadequacy in the mine environment which may be discovered and in the health and compensation programs for affected miners. Equally important in these studies is the need to ensure trust and confidence in mine safety and health programs in both present employees and in new people who will be coming to work in the mines in the future. It is estimated that last year's production of some 4,100 tons of U308 will be increased to 8,000 to 9,000 tons by the early 1980s at the two operating mines of Rio Algom and Denison. The labour force will grow from some 1,500 today to 4,500 in the next ten years. Service industry people will add another 1,200 workers to the Elliot Lake community.
At a recent meeting I attended with officials from the municipality, the province of Ontario and the mining companies, we discussed the question of housing and community services for a township which is expected to grow from a population of 9,000 today to nearly 26,000 which is projected over the next ten years. There can be little doubt
The Budget-Mr. La Salle
about the importance of Elliot Lake to Canada and to the world, a world which is starved of energy and which will be more and more dependent upon uranium as a source of energy in the future.


Mr. Roch La Salle (Joliette):: Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure for me to participate in the debate on the budget and I also congratulate all those who have taken part in it.
Mr. Speaker, the budget makes worthy recommendations but when one speaks of checking inflation, as the government has been doing for so long, and ensuring Canadians economic stability, I have serious doubt that those objectives can be achieved.
Of course some Canadians will benefit from some of the measures proposed by the budget. On the other hand, in view of the present situation, I feel it is important, and we can do so very objectively, not only to blame the government but also to insist that it give much more serious attention to some measures which unfortunately are not contained in the budget.
With regard to what it now proposes, I should like to say how we can have citizens benefit from it directly in some cases. But I shall come back to that later.
I deplore especially the lack of agricultural initiatives. I should have thought, Mr. Speaker, that this government would have given some priority to agriculture in view of its present difficulties and the present situation. I am sure the government and all hon. members now in the House know very well what I am alluding to. They know what the situation is. This is a bad situation, and a disastrous one for the farmers and it could have regrettable consequences in view of the government's inaction in the field of agriculture. The budget speech therefore contains no farming measures, when action should be taken so urgently.
During the last election campaign, our party had committed itself to grant old age security at 60. I do not think I am mistaken in saying that the Prime Minister did what we wished him to do when he suggested to Canadians that he would seriously consider this possibility. I am not saying that the Prime Minister had committed himself to grant old age pensions to people 60 years old. But, in support of our argument, which was valid and interested many people because of the advantages it would provide for Canadians, the Prime Minister had suggested that he was ready to consider this possibility. However, the budget speech contains no mention of the possibility of lowering the eligibility age for old age security from 65 to 64 over a five year period. I believe that this would have been very useful for our society and the Canadian public.
Unfortunately, these omissions are justifiably disappointing for many Canadians and I especially regret them. However, this will not prevent me from asking the minister responsible and the government to reconsider these measures because they are of vital interest for all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, I had also hoped that special votes would be announced for the establishment of basic recreational facilities in our communities. Some may say that this

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. La Salle
would go against provincial jurisdictions. I believe it is possible to establish-


Mr. Bechard:: It is sad to say such things.


Roch La Salle: If the hon. member for Bonaventure-Iles-de-la-Madeleine (Mr. Bechard) will listen to me, I shall make him a suggestion that he will certainly accept.
I believe it is possible to propose a measure or votes within a policy of tripartite financing.


Albert Béchard: What the hon. member is saying does not make sense.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: The government has destroyed the provinces.


Roch La Salle: If the hon. member for Bonaventure-IIes-de-la-Madeleine will just listen to me, he will realize that a three-level financing policy could be established in cooperation with municipalities and provinces. The municipality which could share 25 per cent in a leisure-connected project could make an application to the province concerned which, in turn and within the limits of its own planning, would accept or refuse to participate as a province for 25 per cent of the cost, which would entail, following the province's decision, the undertaking of the federal government to share 50 per cent of the expenses.
I feel this three-level policy is financially sound and would not limit provincial jurisdiction in any way. I feel also that the provinces would be eager indeed to participate in such a policy. As the hon. member for Bonaven-ture-Iles-de-la-Madeleine indicated, people will not stop until they have told us that it is illegal. This formula has never been put to the test, and I think that provinces as well as municipalities would be very happy to participate in such three-level financing policy.
I think that we would abide by provincial jurisdictions to the letter if ever the minister responsible suggested to the provinces and municipalities such a policy which would enable the latter to establish basic recreational organizations rather more interesting that any amateur sport policy now existing.
Mr. Speaker, as all other members, I am told that the estimates for the New Horizons Program are inadequate. It is a really fine initiative which I applauded. I was quite pleased to see that the government had introduced such a policy. Unfortunately, many clubs of the golden age in our constituencies have to wait one or two years before obtaining their grant. We know perfectly well that those grants are extremely useful since they allow a group of individuals to meet in the proper premises and keep their zest for life. I urge that supplementary funds be made available to those groups, in order to carry on adequately-an interesting government initiative.
Such is not the case at the present time. I think all hon. members will agree with me that a lot of golden age clubs have to wait too long before they reach their very legitimate objectives.


An hon. Member:: Where will the funds come from?


Roch La Salle: They will have to come from elsewhere! Mr. Speaker, I should also like to draw the government's
(Mr. La Salle.]
attention to the fact that, in my constituency, the matter of protecting properties situated along the river, particularly in the communities of Lanoraie, Lavaltrie and Saint-Sulpice, has been outstanding for a long time. I made several representations to the Department of Public Works. I always got the same answer. My proposals on behalf of those individuals are all fine, but there are no funds. I think it is time to lift the concern of those riverside residents whose properties are shrinking because of erosion caused by ships or tides. I recently heard that if the Treasury Board agreed to make the necessary funds available, the building of a 15,000 foot protection wall would finally be agreed to. I believe the Department of Public Works could find the necessary funds to carry out that project which would put an end to that unfair situation of those residents. I think requests to that effect were made as early as 1958. Therefore, I have not been the first member of Parliament who made recommendations and representations respecting that most important project.
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, some of the budget speech measures are quite commendable. And yet I was wondering how we could apply them so that they would benefit the consumer. Let me take for instance the 12 per cent tax on building materials which will be reduced to 5 per cent. We have learned from past experiences in the area of sweets as well as clothing and footwear that the removal of the 10 per cent tax did not benefit the consumers. For instance, we now pay 22 cents for a chocolate bar that was priced 10 cents. Soft drinks were 15 cents, but today they cost 25 cents. Mothers know very well that the removal of taxes on clothing and footwear did not benefit them too much, except that it was a way fo subsidizing industries and intermediaries. Since the minister lacks control over building materials, I wonder how he will manage to enforce this tax reduction which he thinks will directly help new house owners, that is consumers. I do hope the minister will take the necessary measures in that regard and will create a review board or whatever so that in the end the tax cut will really be passed on to consumers or new house owners. But today, in view of the experiences I mentioned and which we have lived, we must unfortunately question seriously the efficiency of such measures.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, as our time is quite limited, I would also like to raise the matter of the extraordinary powers which the government intends to avail itself regarding natural resources within the provinces. In view of the Minister's statement and of Bill C-32 now under consideration it seems that the whole confederative system is questioned and that these extraordinary powers relating to natural resources are defined simply and purely by the word centralization.
This brings us to a confrontation between the provinces and the federal government. Alberta is a perfect example of the marked differences in this country. I understand that Albertans are anxious to keep their provincial rights and jurisdiction. We do recognize at the outset that, con-stitutionnally, such powers belong to the provinces. The interference of the federal government on the basis of those intentions should concern us as MPs, and especially those of us who want to see the provincial rights respected.
November 25, 1974

May I take this opportunity to congratulate our leader, the Leader of the Official Opposition (Mr. Stanfield) for the respect he has shown ever since he has been the head of this party, for the vested interests of the provinces. I also entirely agree with the statements he made and the views he expressed.
Today, it is the province of Alberta which is confronted with the measures this government intends to take. But if we consider the extended powers they contain, when speaking about natural resources and control of our energy resources, we must understand that, as Quebecers, we should also be concerned because, tomorrow, our mines and water resources might be involved.
I am also concerned by Quebec Premier's stubborn silence, for in the next two years, he is likely to want to sell his electricity to the United States.
The right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) and the federal government will be able to apply restrictions as easily as they did or intend to do. I am also concerned by the silence of little Robert in Quebec and when mentioning little Robert I do not mean the dictionary, but his silence worries me.
As members from Quebec I think we should ask ourselves some questions because I believe it is our responsibility to compel the Quebec premier to publicly tell if he endorses the intentions of the federal government.
When the minister, Mr. St-Pierre was attacking, last week, the encroaching of the federal government I found surprising the muteness of the Quebec premier. It is not the first time that Quebec ministers make representations to the federal government, in the telecommunication or immigration field or another area. Recently, Mr. Cho-quette was claiming a few million dollars as did the Ontario Government. Today, Mr. St-Pierre is attacking the federal government and worries about the extraordinary powers it intends to take. He invites the provinces to get together to fight against interference by Ottawa. Most surprising is that the Bourassa government did not say anything about it yet.
I think that as members from the province of Quebec we should oppose a categorical refusal to these centralizing powers if we are to maintain the objective of national unity that is mentioned at every electoral campaign.
Today, Mr. Speaker, we recognize obvious disparities and not only at the regional level. The ten provinces have differences, different needs and this for different reasons. I think it is normal and it might be more logical to talk about national harmony. It is urgent to reach this national harmony objective as national unity is not for tomorrow. But I think possible to harmonize differences. To recognize that we are different and coordinate measures with the provinces at the federal level and not to centralize, that is the final objective we must aim at.
It is important that members of the House understand what makes us different and what prevents us from attenuating many of our problems. So long as we do not respond to that wish on the part of the provinces to invite the federal government to play the role of a coordinator and not that of a centralizer, we are going towards a failure, and the results will be deplorable.
The Budget-Mr. Daudlin
I for one believe that it is our duty to engage a pitched battle against federal government infringement upon the jurisdictions of the provinces. For us, Progressive Conservatives, it is a decision that we will not be long in announcing. We are going to engage, for the respect of the provinces, precisely for their survival, what we think is a perfectly legitimate battle. In this way, we are assuming our responsibilities.
I hope that the members from Quebec will respond in the same manner to defend the interests of their province.
I congratulate the people from Alberta for eagerly defending their rights to the natural resources of their province. And let no one tell me that in the interest of the national good these powers have to be taken away from the provinces. It is unthinkable that a federal-provincial meeting cannot produce interesting results for the whole country's welfare.
I suggest that these meetings are not enough. There is no need for confrontation but we should get together again with the provinces as often as necessary. I believe that negotiations between provinces should be carried out by people who understand the interests of the country and of the province itself.
Therefore, Mr. Speaker, we are mistaken if we believe that these powers should be handed over to the federal government. It is quite an easy thing for the federal government, during wartime for example, to take over those powers which belong to the provinces and then later to refuse to give them back. Today we are being asked to believe that these powers must be taken over and away from the provinces once again in the national interest.
But the national interest would be to have the provinces satisfied in order to bring about the kind of national harmony where differences are being acknowledged and where we are still being asked to participate in the meaningful building of this country.
We do not ask those who are different to build the country with the same tools as we are using. What is important is to build a wonderful country, of course, but with certain differences. This could be acceptable. The differences would be justified, taking individual differences into account.
That is a fact, let us acknowledge it and I think that we would be taking a step towards that much needed harmony but not through centralized powers such as is being recommended in the budget before us.


Mr. Robert Daudlin (Kent-Essex):: Mr. Speaker, I rise to take part in this debate as the proud representative of the counties and riding of Kent-Essex, the constituents of which collectively decided at the recent election that their voices and opinions should be expressed once again, after some considerable time, from this side of the House.
Kent-Essex is a balanced rural-urban riding located in what must be viewed as probably the most productive and arable agricultural soil in this nation. The north edge of the riding is bounded by the winding Thames on whose shores is located the city of Chatham. That city owes much of its productivity to the auto pact. The residents of Chatham look forward to the continuation of that pact

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Daudlin
and, contrary to much of what I have heard here, they feel it will continue for some considerable time in the future. In addition, Chatham is famous for its food production and owes, as does the town of Leamington with its processing of tomatoes and corn, a great deal to agriculture. I would hasten to indicate, when speaking of Leamington, that it is very widely known as the tomato capital of the world.
Moving to the west and then southerly, we go through a number of small towns and villages such as Tilbury, Cottam and Merlin which have sprung from the rich soil and its food production, the residents of which continue to give strong support to the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Whelan). Many of the constituents of my riding have told me over and over again of the good work the Minister of Agriculture has done. Many of them have said that never has a man so well and so frequently protected, supported and nourished the rights of farmers.
At the southern edge of the riding, bounded by the ever cleaner waters of Lake Erie, exist a number of fishing ports and harbours stretching from Kingsville to Wheatley, each of which proves that in fact the fisheries of this nation do not exist only on the coastline but that we indeed have a substantial fishing industry inland which is doing its part in the production of food for the world. I would be remiss if I did not point out to the House, as well, the acres of greenhouses that exist in the riding, producing tons of cucumbers, lettuce and tomatoes, the latter having justifiably earned for the town of Leamington the designation of being the tomato capital of the world, as I said just a few minutes ago.
I also have the honour to represent the southernmost part of Canada, Pelee Island, just off Point Pelee National Park. Its inhabitants are linked to the mainland by ferry and a recently upgraded airport. It is interesting to note that when I visit Pelee Island in my riding I am substantially further south than the most northerly part of California.
I should now like to speak briefly about a few of the things I have learned since coming to Ottawa. It appeared initially to me that certain superlative adjectives seemed only to belong to members of the opposition. It seems that whenever anything is terrible, whenever anything is cowardly, inconsistent or dishonest, these are adjectives which can only be used by the opposition to describe something which has happened on this side of the House. I have scurried to the dictionary to see whether in fact this is true. I am pleased to be able to announce to the House that these words are totally non-partisan and are not the sole prerogative of the opposition; rather, I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, my friends on the opposite side of the House are dealing in excess.
I am pleased to say that I have learned, when I go back to my riding, that my constituents have also discovered this fact. It appears they are not concerned whether in fact the government is cowardly or is guilty of conduct described by the other adjectives I have used. They are content that this government is living up to what it said it would do if it were elected on July 8. I should like to advise the House as well, Mr. Speaker, that it seems to me

the new members who have come to this House are following a respectable, good trend in respect of the speeches they have made here. I think we are attempting-and I claim this for myself since I do not intend to speak for very long-to keep our speeches to a minimum, to be direct in our approach and not to deal in verbiage and excess. In this small way we will get on with the business of government. I think this is a healthy sign and I hope it continues.
I should like now to refer to the amendment on which we will be voting this evening. It reads in part:
-failing to mount a concerted attack on domestic inflation while at the same time proposing measures which contribute to national disunity.
I confess that, faced with such a strong and negative statement, I returned to the budget statement to reread it lest I had somehow failed to appreciate the full significance of what I had heard last Monday evening or had completely misunderstood it. I found, among the budgets other provisions, that people in my riding and the citizens of Canada generally will receive the 5 per cent tax reduction brought down in 1973, and that the minimum tax cut is to be increased to $150 from $100. My mental arithmetic interprets this as an increase of 50 per cent, which I confess I am unable to describe as insignificant or as no effort to curb inflation.
I find, further, that for 1975 the basic income tax reduction is increased from 5 per cent to 8 per cent. This is an increase of 60 per cent, which I also find difficult to describe as an insignificant effort to curb inflation. In addition, I find that by reason of the increase in the minimum income tax cut to $200 and the increase in the maximum cut to $750, federal taxes will be reduced by $615 million in 1975-76 and two-thirds of that amount will be enjoyed by people earning less than $12,000 a year. If that be so-and I cannot but accept that it is-then the people in my riding, and I am sure all Canadians, will not read this provision as being insignificant and will not accept that it does not, in fact, deal very effectively with inflation.
I see, as well, that a wage earner with two children who in 1975 earns $10,000 will increase his take-home pay by $300 as a result of these deductions. While my colleagues on the other side of the House may have difficulty describing $300 as significant, my constituents do not. I can only conclude that if my constituents view all these things of which I have spoken as significant, and I and my colleagues view them as significant, then my colleagues on the other side must be either misguided or misinformed and I invite them to read again the budget speech of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) on Monday last in order to arrive at some new conclusions.
Earlier I spoke of the greenhouses in my riding. I should like to refer to them again in order to emphasize the interest my constituents must, of necessity, have in our energy policies. These greenhouses, of necessity, consume a large amount of natural gas, oil and-not so much now, but of late-coal. The cost of these forms of energy has risen tremendously in the last few years, to the extent that we have now reached a point where the production of lettuce, cucumbers and tomatoes is reaching a marginal position. If, in fact, something is not done to protect the
November 25, 1974

producers against these rapidly rising costs, these products will of necessity be removed from the market. I suggest it would be a disservice to this country if these three crops were removed form the market, because then we would become reliant upon importations from California, Mexico and the southern United States in order to fulfil the demand of the consumers of this country.
I suggest that a possible answer to the problem with which the growers in my area are faced would be, in fact, to allocate a certain portion of the available energy to the production of food; and coupled with the portion of energy which would be allocated to food production, the price would in some manner be stabilized so there would not be a continuing price spiral in this type of food. I suggest that we cannot do without the three crops of which I speak. I think tomatoes, cucumbers and lettuce form a large part of the diet of Canadians and are not items which consumers are prepared to leave out of their diets.
Dealing further with energy and related products, I should also like to refer briefly to fertilizer. The constituents of my riding are concerned about the cost input of fertilizer. I understand that the nitrate fertilizers are increasing in price in a spiral of 100 per cent to 200 per cent. I am glad that the government has announced it is prepared to examine this industry to determine whether the profits are acceptable and, if they are not, to do something about it. I suggest that my constituents, as late as last weekend, are tremendously pleased with the budget as it has been described to them. If nothing else, they see that in fact the government has been honest with them in that it ran an election campaign based on a budget, and since the opening of parliament they have seen brought forward a number of measures which were promised in the election campaign. They see in the budget measures they were told about last May. They see these measures repeated. I suggest that they see not measures of cowardice but, rather, of bravery.
It seems that the amendment to the budget, and the subamendment voted on last week, are examples of what I have come to expect from the opposite side of this House: it is a repetition of what I believe to be formalized in the phrase, used over and over again, "too little, too late." It seems to me it has become much too easy to say this. Perhaps it is viewed as the role of the opposition-though I cannot accept this-to criticize without coming up with any constructive suggestions.
I feel constrained to say that we on this side of the House have learned something and have lived up to our promise to return the budget voted on by the people. With regard to those on the other side of the chamber, it appears they have failed to learn the lessons of July and have come back with a position rejected by the people of Canada. For this reason, Mr. Speaker, I speak against the amendment and in favour of the motion. The budget, in all its terms, does in fact deal with the problem of inflation, although perhaps not in the same manner as my friends opposite would have dealt with it. But I am mindful that their proposals were rejected by an even greater voice than ours. I am prepared, therefore, to vote for the motion and against the amendment.
The Budget-Mr. Gilbert


Mr. John Gilbert (Broadview):: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to see the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) and the Minister of State for Urban Affairs (Mr. Danson) in the House this afternoon. The more speeches I hear from the Minister of State for Urban Affairs, the more displeased I become with his policies and those of the government. I have never seen a more startling array of deceptions and disappointment for the people of Canada than are set forth in this budget, Mr. Speaker; and I shall mention only four areas: first, the attitude of the federal government toward the resources of the western provinces is a blatant attempt to shake the bonds of unity within Canada; second, the federal government's charging of the equalization formula concerning tax revenues on resources, without consultation or agreement with the provinces, is shocking; third, the $50 tax allowance to taxpayers, and the attempt by the government to indicate that it is $150 when in fact $100 was in the 1973 budget and $50 in the May, 1974, budget, is a clear deception.
The $50 allowance for 1974 amounts to 96 cents per week for the average wage earner. In a recent statement, John Deutsch, former head of the Economic Council of Canada and now principal of Queen's University, said that the workingman has lost $5.95 a week in purchasing power as a result of inflation. Now the Minister of Finance comes forth with an allowance of 96 cents per week for taxpayers and asks them to apply restraint in future wage demands. That is a disappointment, Mr. Speaker.
The fourth area, and the one to which I shall devote most of my speech, is the wrong and feeble approach of the government to the serious housing problem in Canada. In his budget speech, the Minister of Finance referred to the short-term prospects for construction of new housing and said it threatened, first, to reduce employment; second, to raise production costs; third, to increase housing prices and rents; and, fourth, to reduce the supply of new housing. He said these things would lead to a lower standard of accommodation than Canadians deserve. Mr. Speaker, he is right on all counts. With regard to reduced employment, the 25 per cent reduction in housing starts from 269,000 in 1973 to 173,000 in 1974, means on a seasonally adjusted basis, the loss of nearly 100,000 full-time jobs in the construction industry alone, in addition to thousands of jobs in manufacturing, in the saw-mills and forest operations.
In regard to the statement that it would raise production costs, already inflation has caused building products to soar in price and be in short supply. The minister's prediction of two-figure inflation in 1975 is not an encouraging sign. With regard to increased housing prices and rents, we already have the highest home prices, the highest land prices, the highest mortgage rates and the highest rents ever experienced in Canada, with little or no hope of experiencing any reduction in these areas. The result will be what the minister has predicted, a shortage of housing starts and a lower standard of housing in Canada.
Where has the government failed in the budget with regard to its measures for housing? First, it has failed to take measures to implement the philososphy on housing, namely, that every person is entitled to adequate housing, at reasonable cost. This was the impact of the Hellyer report on housing, the Canadian Council on Social Development, the New Democratic Party, and even the pred-

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Gilbert
ecessor of the present minister who said in the early part of this year that adequate housing, at reasonable cost, was the goal of the Liberal government. This afternoon the same philosophy was repeated by this minister.
Mr. Speaker, the minister and the government have decided to treat housing as a commodity from which financial institutions and rich people can gouge the highest possible profits for themselves. In fact, in a speech made at the Inn on the park in Toronto on Wednesday, November 20, before Property Forum '74, the minister set forth his philosophy on housing when he said that financial measures set forth in the budget and other government programs would achieve "more bang for the buck" for builders, developers and entrepreneurs. Mr. Speaker, this is the most crude and cruel statement I have ever heard from any minister of housing. When he talked about "more bang for the buck" he issued an open invitation to speculators, builders, developers and financial institutions to gouge as much profit as they can from land prices, house prices, interest rates and rents.


Barnett Jerome Danson: Read the whole speech.


John Gilbert: He does this at the expense of middle and low income people on the pretence that it will give all Canadians the kind of housing they need. The measures set forth in the budget will do exactly what he claims; they will give these people "more bang for the buck". That is the theme of this minister. The government has failed to provide measures to create an increase in housing starts and an increase in land banking of serviced land. It has failed to deal with land speculators and to give direction to financial institutions to set aside part of their portfolios for housing at an interest rate of 6 per cent for middle and low income people. Housing is a social right and financial institutions have a social responsibility to respond to housing problems in this way. None of the measures in the budget will remedy the high cost of land, the high cost of homes, the high cost of interest and the high rents experienced in Canada today.
What has the government done in the budget, Mr. Speaker? First of all, the government reduced the sales tax on building and construction materials to 5 per cent. This afternoon the minister said this would mean a saving of approximately $650 to a home purchaser. I would point out to him what was stated in the Globe and Mail of November 20 by James Purdie:
The reduction of federal sales tax on lumber and building materials will produce almost no benefits for retail purchasers for at least three months, and even then the savings will be small, industry officials warned.
[DOT] <1710)
Howard Perkins, president of the Lumber and Building Materials Association of Ontario, said in an interview that the full sales taxes of 11 per cent on lumber and 12 per cent on construction materials have already been paid on inventories. By the time these stocks are sold-in three to four months-inflation and labour demands at the producing levels will erode the cost savings the federal government said should be passed to consumers ... industry officials said that by the time the tax filters through to house buyers it will represent a saving of only about $450 on a $45,000 house.
There is no guarantee that any tax saving will be passed on to the purchaser. The minister said that he will set up a monitoring process to make sure these savings are passed

on to the purchaser, but that does not persuade me it will happen. I have in mind what happened to sales tax reductions on drugs. The drug companies absorbed the savings themselves and never passed them on to the buyer. I am sure this will happen in the case of building materials' sales tax reductions; the builders and developers will absorb any savings and that will be the end of it.
The minister this afternoon also spoke of the registered home ownership savings plan under which people will be able to deduct up to $1,000 per year, for a maximum of $10,000, of money which is to apply to the purchase of a home and essential furnishings. The minister's statement, that this will be a new source of mortgage money, was incredible. How is this saving by prospective home buyers to become a source of money? What guarantees are there? What assurances has the minister that financial institutions which will handle this money will apply it to housing? There is no guarantee. The minister said that financial institutions will not be compelled to use this money for housing.
How generous is the government being in introducing the registered home ownership savings plan? Suppose a couple that is 25 years old saves $1,000 for ten years and at age 35 is prepared to buy a home. The couple finds that applying $10,000 to the purchase of a $50,000 home, it must take a $40,000 mortgage. Present mortgage interest rates are about 12 per cent. So over 25 years the couple must pay $412.76 per month, and in 25 years $123,828, in order to repay this loan. Probably that is what the minister had in mind when he spoke of people getting more bang for their buck. It will be a bang at whose expense? At the purchaser's expense; at the expense of the working and middle-classes of this country.
If the government adopted NDP policy, moderate and low income people would pay no more than 6 per cent interest and that couple would pay about $82,000 in repaying the same $40,000 mortgage over 25 years. But the minister wants some people to have more bang for their buck, so the couple must repay $123,000 in 25 years. Further, the couple which began paying the mortgage at age 35 will end paying it at age 60. What a great achievement the ministeer has brought down! Is this the way to solve the housing crisis in Canada? The minister also said that certain capital costs on new residential buildings built for rent, begun after budget day but before December 31, 1975, may be claimed against any source of income by building owners. I am positive that when developers and their rich friends read that statement they will laugh all the way to the bank and plan to take an extra month's holiday in Florida or California.
When the big developers in Toronto, such as Greenwin, Cadillac and Markborough, take advantage of this measure they will think Santa Claus has come early this year- Santa Claus being the minister in charge of urban affairs. His idea, apparently, is to give the big developers who control development in the large cities of Canada more bang for their buck.


Mr. Peters:: They were his campaign supporters.


John Gilbert: Next, the minister announced that firsttime buyers of new houses costing less than a certain price set by CMHC will be eligible for a $500 grant. If ever fraud
November 25, 1974

or deception was perpetrated on the Canadian people, this proposal fits the bill. I remind the minister that the person receiving the grant will need to pay only $123,328 instead of $123,828 over 25 years in repaying a mortgage of $40,000 at 12 per cent. What a saving! We are assuming, of course, that the purchaser can find a house which comes within the price levels set by CMHC. What housing, then, are we talking about? The minister referred to condominium and row housing. Does he want the average married couple to raise children in a condominium? Apparently, the $500 grant is not to apply to co-op housing. Why is the minister refusing to give the $500 grant to purchasers involved in continuing co-op developments? Why will the grant be made available to those buying condominium and row houses and not to those buying co-op housing? I submit that such a grant would help those involved with co-operative housing.


Barnett Jerome Danson: They get 100 per cent financing and a 10 per cent grant.


John Gilbert: The minister is willing to provide money to builders of residential housing at 8 per cent, but is charging provincial governments 103/s per cent for money applied to rental houses. That shows how the minister thinks. Carrying costs incurred in connection with land awaiting development are not to be chargeable against other income, on the basis that land will be released. CMHC reports clearly indicate that residential land required in the next ten years is controlled by major developers in the large cities of this country. This means that a small number of private companies control most of the land we shall need for future housing. House building will remain concentrated in the hands of a few companies and it is easy to predict that housing supplies will remain tight and land prices will continue to rise. All interest payments, taxes and other related charges will eventually be passed on to the purchaser. Yet the minister says, "I will allow land developers to deduct land carrying charges from income for income tax purposes."
The Minister of Finance expressed fear that short-term measures applied to housing will not reduce unemployment. He is also afraid that house building will decrease in volume and that house prices will increase. He is afraid that the reduced supply of housing will lead to lower housing standards across the country. I suggest that the fears of the Minister of Finance will become fact in 1975. I remind the minister that these fears are being expressed not only by members of the New Democratic Party but by an economist employed by the Toronto-Dominion Bank. Dr. Douglas Peters, vice-president and chief economist for the Toronto-Dominion Bank, said:
The government policy is going to have to be changed to bring on more housing starts than the minister suggested.
Dr. Ralph Sultan, chief economist for the Royal Bank of Canada, said the number of housing starts would not have much of an impact in the short run. It is for these reasons that we in the New Democratic Party are so displeased and disappointed with the measures the Minister of Finance has brought forward, greeted with pleasure and glee by the Minister of State for Urban Affairs. He has
28543 - 35
The Budget-Mr. McKenzie
missed the point that housing is a social right of Canadians and they are entitled to housing at a reasonable cost.


A. Daniel McKenzie: Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in the budget debate I wish to refer to the personal taxation proposals brought forward by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner). For 1974, the May 6 budget measure of increasing the minimum tax credit to $150 was reintroduced. For the $6,000 wage earner who receives an additional $50 under the scheme, the amount is not sufficient to compensate for the loss in purchasing power experienced by the earner in 1974 to date, let alone the further price increases that can be expected in the remaining weeks of the year. In 1975, the minimum tax credit will be raised a further $50 to $200. Again, the price increases expected during 1975 will more than cancel this income gain, resulting in a further loss of real purchasing power to the lower income bracket individual. The maximum tax credit payable will be increased to $750, a gain of $250.
On a $10,000 income, using the minister's example, the $250 increase may, as the minister suggests, cover the food cost increases for a family during 1974, but it will not cover the cost increases in other areas of essential consumer expenditures for 1974, and it will do nothing to halt the erosion of real purchasing power of the earner in this income bracket during 1975. The other two existing, nonbudgetary taxation measures referred to by the minister in his November 18 presentation were the lowering of the tax rate on the first taxable income bracket for 1975 from 12 to 9 per cent, and the indexing measures. It is worth pointing out that these two measures do not raise the real purchasing power of individuals but only partially compensate for the loss in real purchasing power that has already occurred. The minister asks that income earners bear his taxation proposals in mind when making their demands for wage increases. Since the proposals do not even maintain existing real income levels, one can hardly expect dutiful labour restraint in the coming year.
Concerning the finance minister's proposals establishing tax exemptions to encourage savings, as has been said before these measures only lessen the rate at which savings are eroded. The broadening of the $1,000 exemption to include stock market earnings as well as interest income is a useful addition-but an addition to a proposal which is inadequate to start with. Additional, new personal taxation measures proposed by the minister are offered as assistance to those aged 65 and over. The $1,000 exemption from pension income, the indexing of the 65-year old and over basic exemption, and the transfer to spouse capability of the 65 and over exemption are indeed efforts to tax older persons on fixed incomes at less than wage earners. But the fact that, in the minister's example at page 1428 of Hansard, a person could receive up to $8,258 in annual income before paying federal taxes presupposes that a person 65 years old could achieve such an annual income level. No federal taxes for low income pensioners is a step forward: it does not, however, solve the problem of those who have an inadequate income to start with. The reintroduced proposals of May 6, and the new proposals of November 18, regarding personal taxation do not provide much real comfort to the taxpayer. They were necessary, but insufficient. The life of the minister's "tax relief to

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. McKenzie
all" thesis is best shown by the continuing rapid escalation of personal tax revenues.
I would also like to comment on the housing crisis in Canada. It appears highly unlikely and improbable that consumers will benefit from the reduction of the sales tax on building materials to 5 per cent. This measure is specifically designed to provide incentives to builders in an effort to aid the ailing construction industry. Consumers and potential home buyers are naive if they are fooled by the $650 savings figure mentioned by the finance minister in the budget. It should be recognized that this saving, if there is to be one, will be beneficial only to the builder in the long run.
This reduction and the undertone of savings it appears to present will do little but further confuse the construction industry when it is considered in the context of other federal housing policies. This measure is a purely psychological device, intended to soothe the fears of the potential home buyer by creating an atmosphere which gives the illusion that the future is not all that bad. The problem in passing on this saving to the consumer arises from the fact that most builders, due to the recent slowdown in construction activity caused by excessively high interest rates, have abnormally high stocks of inventory on which the sales tax has already been paid. Building industry spokesmen maintain that the government is expecting them to now absorb the loss on these inventory stocks. Industry's mark-up on these building materials is too low at present to allow the construction industry to pay the tab.
Furthermore, the total value of dealer inventory is now estimated at approximately $100 million and will take at least three or four months to deplete. By the time these stocks are depleted, inflation and labour demands, if both persist increasing at present rates will have virtually wiped out any potential savings to the consumer. The best saving hoped for would be approximately 3 per cent on an estimated $15,000 value of building materials per unit. The government appears to ignore the fact that the entire housing and construction problem has been caused by high interest rates, the factor which can be blamed for slackening the demand for building units. Yet there are no measures contained in the budget which would ease this problem. Had the reduction been included in the May budget, perhaps it would have represented some benefit to consumers. However, as the slow season for construction activity approaches, it appears that builders will have little chance to deplete their already taxed stocks.
Furthermore, many secondary industries dependent on housing construction, such as the forestry sector, will continue for the most part to be plagued with unemployment due to the percentage of their activity that is dependent on the U.S. housing market which has declined to an annual rate of less than half the previous year's production.
This government has been accused of many, many things, but it has never been accused of being responsive to the public need except in cases where necessary actions would also meet its political ends. This budget is, of course, another example of this. But since that fact is obvious enough for even members of the government to recognize, I wish to deal primarily with another monetary

matter of which the government has shown a distinct inability to grasp the hard realities. I refer to the decision of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Richardson) to build an aircraft overhaul hangar in Winnipeg under the management of CAE Industries Limited of Montreal, to overhaul his department's five Boeing 707s. This is an impractical, short-sighted move necessitated by irresponsible promises and previous poor decisions made by the government.
It is impractical because an operation this size cannot be made viable on the overhaul work needed by five airplanes and some artificial make-work projects dreamed up by the government. The minister admits to having no firm contracts yet from any regional air carriers for their overhaul business and, even if received, there are still not enough planes to make the operation practical on the scale envisaged. It is a short-sighted decision because it ignores and is probably meant to pre-empt the filling of Winnipeg's real need for and right to a proper second Air Canada overhaul base.
I would urge the government to contract out the overhaul work on the Boeing 707s if necessary, stop construction on the makeshift hangar that is proposed, and instead begin now on the thorough planning, designing, construction and training necessary for a facility capable of properly servicing Air Canada's entire fleet, with the accent on the new tooling necessary to service the Boeing 727 aircraft which are now coming into service. These planes will become due for overhaul shortly after the base I propose would be ready for them. By that time they will number close to 30, and with other aircraft from the Air Canada fleet will supply sufficient work for this hangar without taking jobs away from the present base in Dorval.
There are many reasons why this move would be a wise one, both for Air Canada and for the country. Historically, Winnipeg's climate and terrain have made it the most desirable location in Canada for an aerospace industry. In the past a substantial portion of our national airline's maintenance work has been repeatedly promised to the Manitoba capital. Eleven years ago last Friday, on November 22, 1963, the late Lester B. Pearson, then prime minister, told the Commons that the Trans-Canada Airlines maintenance base would remain in operation in Winnipeg for at least ten years. Yet the final decision was made anyway on December 6, 1968, in Prime Minister Trudeau's office to move the base to Dorval. I do not think these facts jive with the Prime Minister's statements at a Winnipeg press conference, on May 23 of this year which suggest to hold Liberal governments blameless for the move.
In the past I have made charges about inefficiency, low morale, labour unrest-and the resulting threat to passenger safety-at the Dorval maintenance base. These and other charges were of course pooh-poohed by the government and by Air Canada, notwithstanding that a number of employees from Dorval backed the claims I made. But I am very gratified to note that, after exhaustive investigation into my charges, the Winnipeg Free Press has published a series of articles on the situation clearly substantiating what I have said. A reporter was sent to Dorval to interview employees and personnel at the base, and his
November 25, 1974

conclusions are very close to what I have been saying for more than a year.
The maintenance base at Dorval is neither more economical nor more efficient than it was in Winnipeg. In fact the opposite is the case, and this cost difference will be multiplied many times when Mirabel International Airport becomes operational in a year's time. With ferrying costs between Dorval and Mirabel likely to amount to as much as $4 million a year while both airports are functioning, the timeliness of the Winnipeg alternative cannot be ignored.
Air Canada at Dorval is overstaffed in some departments, grossly understaffed in others. Basic training in M.O.T. standards, requirements and general procedures is almost non-existent. Tremendous unnecessary costs are being incurred because of duplication, out of date methods and equipment, and low employee production.
Highly-trained workers are being lost every day as they retire early at ages of 55 and even younger. I have talked with a number of these men. They tell me the constant union demands, friction between employees and working conditions have been too much. They have been made so unhappy they have had to quit. Morale at the base is at an incredibly low level. This results not only in low speed and low quality work, but is also driving away skilled, senior employees.
New people cannot be trained overnight, nor can they gain 20 years' experience in a hurry. This is a frightening situation, and one which could have even more severe implications if allowed to continue. Air Canada is the most strike-prone employer in the public sector. Almost all of its unionized employee groups have struck the airline at least once since 1968, some have struck two or three times. It should be noted that there was not a single strike at the overhaul base when it was located in Winnipeg.
Right now there is too much Air Canada maintenance work for one base to handle effectively. This is evidenced by the vastness of the Dorval operation and the huge amounts of overtime pay being handed out there. In addition to Air Canada, work is being done for Nordair, Ward-air and CP Air at the base. In the words of one senior employee, it has become an almost uncontrollable situation in which quality will inevitably be jeopardized.
I quote the words of another employee at the base, speaking about the shift of the base from Winnipeg to Dorval, "The transfer was a monumental blunder resulting in excessive costs beyond our imaginations. Any fair, unbiased comparison of the former Winnipeg operation with the existing Dorval operation would reveal not only that Winnipeg was robbed, but that all Canada is paying a costly penalty."
This senior employee went on to say that at Dorval efficiency was an ignored quality.
Even if the Dorval base was efficient and was not beset by criminally low morale, substandard quality, and severe friction between employees, there would still be many reasons for splitting up the overhaul work. As I have shown, Air Canada has too much overhaul work for its present base, and enough to make two bases viable operations. Air Canada has maintained that a centralized operation is more economical and efficient. This thinking must
The Budget-Mr. McKenzie
be questioned. Indeed, it has already been questioned and refuted by experts.
In the Journal of Air Law and Commerce last year, an article by Samuel R. Reid and James W. Mohrfeld concluded that there is no basis for the support of this argument, which holds that profits increase as growth progresses. This study suggests that "a program of periodic and orderly spin-offs of components of the larger airlines appears to be in the best interests of the airlines as well as the public". Throughout the world most airlines have taken this advice and moved to decentralize their operations. But Air Canada, while growing at a rate of 15 per cent a year, and despite the government's supposed regional policies, insists on the opposite. In case anyone thinks that there is perhaps something unique about Air Canada which exempts it from such a rule, let me refer to a confidential transportation study done here in Canada. The McKinley Report was submitted to the government in 1971 recommending that Air Canada operations be decentralized. The opposite has continued to happen.
Facts such as these must make many Canadians wonder not only about the quality of Air Canada management but also about the political factors which have seen the airline moving steadily to centralize huge facets of its operations in Montreal. Even if Air Canada clings to the belief that its maintenance work should be consolidated in one location, it still has no solid argument against a move to Winnipeg. With flight operations being moved to Mirabel, the airline is going into a split situation anyway, considering the immense additional ferrying costs that will be necessary.
The overhaul work could be carried out at Winnipeg International Airport efficiently and quickly. Schedules could be worked out for the new Boeing 727s which would result in no deadheading whatsoever. The economics of the situation insist on this course of action. With the expected saving in ferrying costs, up to $4 million a year, the Winnipeg base would be more than paid for by this saving alone within four years.
Again one must wonder who is playing politics when Air Canada resists this obvious course of action. It is about time that both the government and Air Canada started listening to what the opposition has to say, and started heeding some of the advice given them. With the immediate past record of Air Canada in mind, many Canadians are seriously worried about the decline in services and quality of their national airline. Still others mourn the passing of an airline they were once proud to call theirs.
As one example of reasons for these feelings I refer to the mess at the opening of Toronto's terminal 2, a disaster which senior administrators foresaw but were unable to prevent; the emergence of labour unrest and strikes as a way of life in Air Canada; the deterioration in food, services and reservations; the unnotified cancellations, foul-ups, bumping of passengers, constant busy signals from A.C. phones; and the unobliging, uncaring attitude of many employees who have lost the pride they once had in their jobs and who have apparently given up hope concerning the management of the corporation-and with good reason, Mr. Speaker.
28543 - 3514

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. McKenzie
When an Air Canada deficit of $5 million was announced recently, the chief executive officer's only reply was that the air line would have to raise its fares. Apparently no thought was being given to streamlining management procedures or to implementing recommendations resulting from critical analyses commissioned by the air line and the government. Nor was any thought given to the validity of Air Canada's decentralization policy.
Many government decisions regarding air line operations must also be questioned at this time. The Minister of National Defence has called the maintenance base transfer from Manitoba to Quebec one of the worst decisions in the history of Canada. Many respected experts agreed with this criticism, yet the decision was made.
Air Canada recently had a number of obsolete Viscount aircraft overhauled, even though the aircraft has been phased out of service-a program which Mr. Pratte admitted "probably cost us money". The unnecessary work was done as an attempt by the government to fulfil irresponsible commitments to Winnipeg for overhaul work. These Viscounts have since been sold for an undisclosed amount, but as a spokesman for the buyer said after the deal, "We didn't pay too much for them".
The government has made no progress on the matter of improving international air route agreements, especially in regard to Winnipeg. This city has two direct air routes to the United States serviced exclusively by two American air lines. For more than 25 years Manitoba has been handed line after line, denials and deception about its aerospace industry's future by successive TCA and Air Canada officials, as well as successive governments. I have a file an inch thick-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. I regret I must interrupt the hon. member as the time allotted to him has expired.


A. Daniel McKenzie: Mr. Speaker, may I have a few short minutes?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member can only complete his remarks or finish his sentence with unanimous consent. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Another hon. member is seeking the floor so I would have to recognize him unless he yields.


A. Daniel McKenzie: Mr. Speaker, may I thank my colleague who indicates I may continue. In my maiden speech in this House in February, 1973, I said that we in Manitoba believed that if Mr. Richardson could not convince his government to fulfil its previous promises, then he should be prepared to resign from the cabinet and move to the backbenches to challenge the sincerity of the Prime Minister.
In light of the countless promises, later broken, made by this government to the people of Manitoba and western Canada since that time,I must strongly reiterate this
belief. If Mr. Richardson is a man of principle, then he must give us-


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: Order, please. I regret to interrupt the hon. member but all through his speech he has been referring to ministers by name. At the conclusion of his speech I think he should read citation 146 of Beauchesne, where he will find the instruction not to use family names or the name of a minister, but rather refer to him by his portfolio. The same is the case with hon. members; they must be referred to by their constituency. I have hesitated a little in singling out the hon. member because this practice has been going on, not only all through this debate but through the Speech from the Throne debate as well. The Chair always feels uneasy in pointing to one member who makes this mistake because he does not know it is not permitted by the rules, or because he has forgotten the rules. However, may I take this opportunity of pointing this out, at the same time excusing myself to the hon. member but hoping it will benefit all members of the House.


A. Daniel McKenzie: My apologies, Mr. Speaker, and I shall conclude my speech momentarily. If the Minister of National Defence is a man of principle then he must give us some immediate proof that Winnipeg's Air Canada overhaul base is being built or he must register his public disapproval of the government's tactics. If this were to happen then one would also have to expect the hon. member for St. Boniface (Mr. Guay) to illustrate his honesty by a similar act of courage, in view of his constant and unfailing support of the Minister of National Defence, most recently in his budget remarks of Friday last.


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member for Ottawa West.


Mr. Jean-Robert Gauthier (Ottawa-Vanier):: Mr. Speaker, if I am not mistaken, is it not the member for Ottawa-V anier?


Mr. Deputy Speaker:: The hon. member for
Ottawa-Vanier.


Jean-Robert Gauthier: Mr. Speaker, I am taking part in this debate with special interest. I have read the budget speech very thoroughly and I am pleased to note that it is progressive and meets present needs.
I wish to join my many colleagues, Mr. Speaker, in congratulating you on your appointment to your new office. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank my constituents for having re-elected me.
Some people think that the present depression experienced by developed countries is only a fortuitous factor and that minimum efforts or a short period of austerity would be sufficient to restore normal conditions. But this is not so. The prosperity of developed countries mostly rests upon the processing of raw materials bought from developing countries often at ridiculously low prices. These same countries are just beginning to realize that they were being exploited and that on top of it all their raw materials, being their only resources, are not inexhaustible. People tend easily to believe that the oil crisis

November 25, 1974

was brought about by the war in the Middle East, and is the only cause of inflation that we experience. Really, the increase in oil prices is only one of the causes of inflation at this time and we should keep in mind that the costs of raw materials had already been rising since the middle of 1972.
The situation will never be as it was before and it becomes clearer every day that we are living in a system based essentially on lack of foresight and wastage. Inflation as we know it now should incite us not to regret the situation that was before but rather to review our way of life.
The United States are a good example of this. It is no use having a gross national product increase year in and year out, if this growth is due to the manufacturing of absolutely useless products that, in addition, do not bring any deep satisfaction to individuals who contribute, finally, to deteriorate the environment. What is the use of sending a few men on the moon if, on this earth, millions of people live in inhuman cities where it is impossible to take a walk in the street at night without taking the risk of being assassinated.
Canada is fortunate in having abundant resources, with an environment that is generally not deteriorated beyond repair. We must therefore take this opportunity to avoid errors made elsewhere, and to create our own lifestyle where individuals may thrive. We should emphasize the improvement public equipment, because the percentage of our resources used to improve our public services is definitely inadequate, as compared to the consumption of often unnecessary products.
For this reason, we must contain excessive individualism to the extent it goes contrary to common interest, and use our limited resources in a more logical way. The liberal government has been working in that direction in a number of important areas, namely, urban development, housing, public transit and pollution control.
In the area of urban development in particular, the federal government has made considerable efforts in the National capital area to show other cities in the country that an urban centre can very well expand while keeping human prospective. May I refer to the preservation of historical buildings, such as Academie-de-la-Salle which, once renovated, will be occupied by Urban Affairs offices. Negotiations are also under way to preserve the Ottawa Archdiocese building. These are but a few examples of well planned modernization.
Another urban planning measure also deserving mention is Rideau Square, which is designed to renovate, preserve and animate a commercial and tourist centre right in the downtown area of our National Capital, in keeping with the wishes of the communities involved.
But as often happens, even the best of things generate new problems. Indeed, fast population growth, high family formation rate, and the attraction of a pleasant National Capital all helped increase housing demand. In the Ottawa-Vanier constituency in particular, catching up had to be done in the area of social housing.
The Budget-Mr. J.-R. Gauthier
In order to correct this social situation, the federal government has allocated important sums for the construction of new housing. The accent is being put on so-called social housing, as I said before, to provide housing for senior citizens and middle-income earners. Through provincial agencies, many of these buildings were built in my riding over the last three years.
It follows from that experience that the funds loaned by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to provincial housing authorities must be under a much stricter control than it has been the case up to date. The federal government at present has no direct qualitative or quantitative control over those buildings. Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation lends up to 90 per cent of the cost of those buildings. Since the federal government has no control whatsoever over the planning and management of those buildings, it is not sure that the loans granted always produce the planned benefits.
I suggest that in my riding of Ottawa-Vanier, the situation in this respect is alarming. The Ontario Housing Corporation has apparently become an aid agency for speculators rather than the population. It seems impossible to me that a provincial corporation has accepted to pay prices as high as those which were paid for land located in my riding or elsewhere without there being any negligence and maybe even collusion involved between certain speculators and certain civil servants.
Such assumptions are most certainly in order, Mr. Speaker, if we take into account the proceedings brought against certain officials of this agency in Ontario.
I would now like to quote an example which I am very familiar with. In May of 1971, when I was trustee for the Ottawa School Board, there were discussions for the purchase of one and a half acre of land belonging to the Ottawa Episcopal Corporation and located on Donald street. The asking price for that land was then $35,000 approximately. In September of 1971, the planning committee of the School Board, having examined the question, recommended the purchase of this land and started the necessary negotiations through their legal counsel. Needless to say, I was quite surprised when I learned that, in the meantime, one of our own trustees had taken out an option on that same land and finally bought it through his company for $105,000. A little later, on March 22, 1973, he sold in to the Ontario Housing Corporation for the sum of $273,000, therefore turning, in less than nine months, a profit of 155 per cent or $168,000. It seems to me that provincial or other organizations entitled to it should use the tool that is expropriation to prevent that kind of profiteering. Since that time the province of Ontario legislated against speculators by passing an act entitled the Land Speculation Tax Act. Needless to recall that that act does not apply to sales to government agencies. I also suspect, Mr. Speaker, that several other transactions of this kind took place in my riding. However, I leave it up to the provincial MLA to raise that whole question at the Ontario legislature and determine whether those allegations have any base.
I think the example I just quoted proves that the province of Ontario and its agency-the Ontario Housing Corporation-are thwarting all the efforts of the federal government in the field of social housing in Ottawa, and in

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. J.-R. Gauthier part in my riding. But, as always, it is the people who will pay for it and the community who will be impoverished because that profiteering increases the price of all land in the city, in the riding where I live. How is it that for land of equal value the municipality of Vanier, for example, pays $5 a square foot when the Ontario Housing Corporation pays two and three times that price for nearby land?
Such action on the part of the provincial corporation contributes to increased prices for land. But speculation is only one cause of the housing crisis. Provincial and municipal governments, in addition to stopping real estate speculation, will have to try and discover new solutions to that problem. They will have, on a much larger scale than now, to create land banks that they will resell themselves. In proceeding in that way, using their powers of expropriation, governments will pay the fair market value for land and sell them in turn at a reasonable price, because there will not have been any speculators to make exaggerated profits between the time of the purchase and that of the sale. It will be necessary to make experiences in the area of city planning. It may also be necessary to generalize the creation of satellite towns situated some distance from existing major urban centers. Let me remind the House that such a satellite town with a projected population of 100,000 will be created in Carlsbad Springs, on the outskirts of Ottawa.
As far as the present urban-oriented architecture is concerned, it is completely outdated and will not allow an increase in population density without a possible deterioration of the quality of life. It is in fact as an incentive to innovate in this area that the federal government has invested $100 million in a program entitled "Urban Demonstration Program".
I pointed out that the opposition, because of its usual lack of imagination, criticized this program as soon as it was proposed. The members on the other side of the House probably have not the necessary intelligence to realize its full significance. However, in the meantime, because it felt it to be an urgent matter, in the budget speech, the federal government presented or adopted various measures which might help and bring a fast and immediate improvement in the housing field. First, the carrying costs on land awaiting development should not be charged against other income but be taken into account only as land is sold. I suggest that this measure should assist in bringing land for housing onto the market more quickly. Then the sales tax on building materials is reduced and the sales tax on materials purchased by local governments for use in the construction of water distribution system is abolished. Moreover, to help young people accumulate the savings required for buying a home, a new savings plan is being established: a registered home ownership plan. Finally, the main credit institutions are invited not to confine high ratio loans to middle- and lower-priced housing.
As for public transport, in the budget the government shows undoubtedly that they are doing what they have pledged themselves to do in the last election campaign, by proposing the removal of the sales tax on any transportation equipment, which includes railway cars heavy trucks, buses and commercial planes. The removal of that tax will deprive the federal government of about $100 million of income. As for the protection of environment, Mr. Speaker,

the government has reintroduced for two more years the fast paying off of the equipment used to fight pollution, a measure which was to come to an end within the current year.
But while the government is taking care of the material comfort of the people, it cannot be said that it is neglecting intellectual matters. In that field, the government has shown interest in some undertakings which, if they succeed, will contribute a lot to the development of a typically Canadian culture. May I be allowed to mention more specifically the case of the CBC which has now undertaken to set up an organization to be entrusted with the distribution, for educational purposes, of audio and visual tapings of the broadcasts of the corporation. Mr. Speaker, may I call it six o'clock?


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):: It being six o'clock I do now leave the chair until eight o'clock this evening.
At six o'clock, the House took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The House resumed at eight p.m.
Jean-Robert Gauthier: Madam' Speaker, I should like to continue the speech I was delivering before dinner by reminding hon. members that I was dealing with all the audio-visual material and the huge library that belong to the CBC and that should be made available to the public at large, I think, since after all, it is the Canadian taxpayers who paid the broadcasts that may be useful in education or in other fields.
It seems to me the National Film Board could very well take the responsibility of distributing that audio-visual material. Recordings are often a source of information of an unparalleled richness and they could be used for educational purposes throughout this country instead of being left to deteriorate in warehouses as happens at the present time.
An organization such as this one would be especially useful to all francophone minorities outside Quebec for which it is extremely difficult to obtain French culture instruments.
Besides it is to help the French-speaking minorities outside Quebec and even the province of Quebec in particular that the federal government concerns itself with the problem related to textbooks. As a matter of fact, a conference convened by the Secretary of State is being held in Ottawa today to examine all that question. It is almost impossible for the francophone minorities to obtain those textbooks they so greatly need. Purely Canadian textbooks written in French are almost non-existent, and the people concerned have to resort either to textbooks imported from France, which do not reflect the Canadian situation, or to English textbooks.
Madam Speaker, I should like also to deal with a very important question, namely bilingualism.
I shall not deal with the programs now under way in the public service, nor with the policy of institutional bilingualism, but rather with a linguistic centre, in the private
November 25, 1974

sector, which would be located in the national capital of our country. At the present time, 35 per cent of all workers in the national capital area are public servants, and 65 per cent are employed in other sectors.
That private linguistic centre would allow more than two-thirds of the workers in the national capital area to learn a second language and perfect their knowledge of their mother tongue.
I am talking about setting up, in the national capital, a service considered essential by several people, if ever we are to achieve the objective of a Canadian national capital that truly reflects the bilingual character of Canada. That centre would be supported by the expertise of the Language Training Centre of the public service and Algonquin College, and would be designed according to a centralized administrative formula with a qualified teaching staff, grouped in teams; they would, in fact, belong to an academic centre, and be composed of mobile teams that would go to the private sector to dispense their instruction.
The National Capital Commission now has a budget of $250,000 earmarked for the development of bilingualism in the national capital. Numerous public, municipal, and regional organizations as well as several industries and businesses are asking for financial assistance from the NCC to enable them to adopt bilingualism in fact.
In the public sector, at the municipal and regional levels, the need for bilingualism is felt very strongly, whether it be in the police forces of Hull or Ottawa, in the fire departments, in the hospitals and in other fields of public administration generally. I think that it would be possible to establish that language centre for public and private affairs with the co-operation of the National Capital Commission, the provinces concerned and the private sector.
My discussions with several organizations have shown the interest and merits of such an undertaking. I hope, Madam Speaker, that Algonquin College, the National Capital Commission, the Quebec and Ontario governments will take an active interest in the matter.
In conclusion, Madam Speaker, I wish to say that this budget, which can be qualified as expansionist, helps to promote economic activity in Canada.
Reducing taxes, while increasing the purchasing power of Canadians, it copes adequately with the threats of depression by which we are all concerned.


Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Madam Speaker, first of all let me say that I am very pleased to be participating in this debate with you in the chair. At the risk of being accused of being a male chauvinist I will say that you bring to the chair a charm and dignity which is all too apparent tonight-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


James Aloysius McGrath: -and which we always admire in you.


Stanley Howard Knowles: But you are still not going to get more than 20 minutes!
The Budget-Mr. McGrath


James Aloysius McGrath: Of course I have a certain advantage since I happen to be closer to the chair than most members. I am sure, however, that your qualities are apparent to all.
Just one day after the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) brought down the budget, Statistics Canada released the regional cities index. This is a breakdown of the consumer price index according to the principal cities in the country. It showed some very interesting things. For instance, my own city of St. John's, Newfoundland, had by far the highest over-all increase in the cost of living of any city in the country, although Winnipeg and Edmonton were not too far behind.
Of particular significance was the fact that the food component of the index for the month of October in St. John's showed a startling 3.8 per cent increase. That represented a 20.8 per cent over-all increase in one year.
It was also interesting to note that the figures showed that, while St. John's, Newfoundland had by far the highest rate of increase in the cost of food, Ottawa had by far the lowest increase in the cost of food, .4 per cent. I say that is significant because Ottawa usually has one of the highest rates of increase of any city that is surveyed.
I believe the reason for the change was due in no small part to the fact that the Food Prices Review Board selected Ottawa as the site of a pilot study. It surveyed food prices on a comparative basis in the city of Ottawa, in all of the major supermarket chains operating in the Ottawa-Hull area. The results of the surveys were made public and, as a consequence, there followed real competition between the various supermarket chains to lower food prices.
I raised this question at the time and I ask it again tonight; when can we expect similar surveys in other cities in Canada? After all, the Food Prices Review Board is a national board with national responsibilities. One of the interesting things to come out of the survey was the fact that food prices in Ottawa did go down as a consequence of publishing the findings of the survey.
Another interesting thing to come out of the survey was that supermarkets in the lower income areas, where consumers are virtually locked into dealing with a particular supermarket in their neighbourhoods because of their not being as mobile as consumers in the other areas, perhaps through lack of a family car, charged higher prices for food. I am told the same thing applies in Montreal. I certainly hope that aspect of the study will receive more attention from the Food Prices Review Board, and also from the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs and the Department of National Health and Welfare.
The increase in food prices in the city of St. John's by 3.8 per cent in the month of October compares with the national monthly increase of 1.4 per cent. This obviously means that food prices are rising at a more striking and rapid rate in St. John's than in other cities of the country. We have also a substantially higher rate of increase in unemployment in my city. It too is growing there at a faster rate than in other cities.
It is easy to deal in statistics, Madam Speaker, but I believe that they tell only part of the story. In order to translate these statistics into real practical terms I did a survey of my own. I picked out a national supermarket

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. McGrath
chain in the city of Ottawa and a similar chain store in the city of St. John's just at random, and I picked out a number of essential food items.
Here is what I found: in St. John's, one dozen Grade A eggs, 99 cents-in Ottawa, 75 cents; in St. John's, a quart of milk, 57 cents-in Ottawa, 49 cents; a 24-ounce loaf of white broad in St. John's, 47 cents-Ottawa, 36 cents; 10 pounds of potatoes, in St. John's, 98 cents-in Ottawa, 69 cents, hamburger in St. John's, 98 cents a pound-in Ottawa, 75 cents a pound; ground chuck, in St. John's $1.38 a pound-the same in Ottawa, 95 cents a pound.
How could there be such a differential, Madam Speaker? Obviously transportation is a factor, but is it that much of a factor? I doubt it. Earlier this month the Food Prices Review Board released a special study of food prices in the province of Newfoundland compared with food prices prevailing elsewhere in Canada. The board thought this disparity was great enough to warrant a special study, and that in itself is significant.
While the findings of the board were by no means conclusive, it did make some very worth-while recommendations to both levels of government. These recommendations are significant. First of all, Newfoundland has to import most of what it consumes from the mainland, so transportation is a significant factor. And if the board's recommendations were accepted, the distribution system within the province would be improved.
I hope that the study and its recommendations receive immediate and serious consideration from both the federal and provincial governments.
One area where the federal government could take immediate and unilateral action is in regard to the recommendation that the consumer subsidy on powdered milk also be applied to evaporated milk. The per capita consumption of evaporated milk in Newfoundland is considerably higher than the per capita consumption of powdered skim milk in the rest of Canada. I have already asked the government to take immediate action on this recommendation in the report.
There is no doubt in my mind that there must be fundamental changes in business practices in the province. The board has telling and meaningful things to say on this aspect, and I hope the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Ouellet) and his provincial counterpart will take into account the board's conclusions and recommendations.
In October another study was undertaken on Newfoundland transportation. That study was commissioned by the Canadian Transport Commission into all phases of ground transport in Newfoundland. That study, which was prepared by professional consultants, is in 11 volumes. Since the commission has invited the public to make submissions on the report no later than the end of January, 1975, I will reserve my comments, except to say that I hope the study will receive the immediate consideration of the government, so that when the period for public submission has ended we can expect some direction from the government as to what course it intends to follow in implementing the principles, conclusions and recommendations of the report. The Minister of Regional Economic Expansion

(Mr. Jamieson) carries great responsibilities in this field, by virtue of the responsibilities of his portfolio, and because he is the province's representative in the government of Canada. As the months go on we shall watch the minister's reactions to the public submissions and to the final disposition of the study by the government.
Transportation is the key to closing the gap between food prices in Newfoundland and food prices in the rest of the country. A substantial proportion of what we consume must be brought in from the mainland and distributed over an area covering 156,000 square miles. Therefore an adequate transport system is both vital and essential. It is not enough for the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion to say in this House that we are spending $50 million on the gulf service. I submit that we are not getting full value for that money because of the archaic thinking which the Department of Transport has adhered to in matters of transportation affecting Newfoundland, and because of the archaic thinking of the CNR. We live in a day of modern transportation technology, when modern developments have made possible modern transport systems, yet we still operate in the steamship era in providing service to Newfoundland.
Food prices in Canada accounted for over half of the increase in the consumer price index during the past two years. That is an astounding fact. Food prices in the past 24 months in Canada have risen by almost 40 per cent, leaving low income earners and those on fixed incomes to shoulder a particularly heavy burden. Because of high unemployment and a per capita income that lags 35 per cent below the national average, Newfoundland has been harder hit by this wave of inflation than the rest of the country. This places a particularly unfair burden on "the people of my province. For that reason, although we look to the government of Canada for immediate relief-I am sorry to say that such relief is not evident in the measures proposed in the budget-we look forward to realizing the potential of our own natural resources over the long term. That is why I regret particularly the decision of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) to tax resource development in Canada, and I emphasize the decision to tax oil and gas.
This brings me to my next point. Newfoundland has just completed its first 25 years as a province of Canada. We became part of Canada 25 years ago after a referendum in which less than 52 per cent of the people of Newfoundland voted to confederate with Canada. I do not think it is unreasonable to say that if we had known, when Newfoundland was about to enter Confederation, that one day the government of Canada would unilaterally and arbitrarily abdicate its position vis-a-vis the British North America Act, if we had known that the ownership of natural resources would be called into question, that fact alone, I submit, would have been enough to keep us, the people of Newfoundland, out of Confederation.
The people of Newfoundland would never have voted to confederate with Canada if they had known in 1949 that they would lose their right to exploit their own natural resources. Let me point out that we entered confederation with Canada as a full-fledged dominion, with full sovereignty over our resources. We are not a big province. Our population is small and we are represented in this House
November 25, 1974

by only seven seats. The province contains only a small percentage of the population of Canada, but we will fight any attempt by the government to take over control of our resources or to change in any way the pact of Confederation. I support what my leader said in this House. And I support the position adopted by the Premier of Alberta. I can sum up our position in no finer way than by repeating what the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Stanfield) said, "The provinces of Canada may not be sovereign states, but neither are they colonies".


Miss Aideen Nicholson (Trinity):: Madam Speaker, as a newly elected member I rise to speak in this House, over which Your Honour presides with such fairness and competence, feeling very much aware of the responsibilities of an elected representative taking part in this debate. No matter how long or how deeply one has considered beforehand, the actual moment of speaking in this House, following the mandate solemnly given in a democratic election, is one that makes one think anew of one's commitment to the democratic process and of one's duty to listen to constituents, to evaluate their needs and expectations, and to strive to have these reflected in legislation.
The riding which I have the honour to represent is an urban one with a high concentration of new Canadians. It is a riding where many people work hard, and struggle to buy homes and educate their children on modest incomes. The 1971 census figures showed the average income of heads of families as $6,347; the average family income was $8,658. In 1971 only 7.6 per cent of families had incomes of over $15,000.
The measures announced by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) to maintain a good level of production and employment are welcomed by my constituents who are particularly vulnerable in times of low employment. The measures to stimulate housing construction are of special interest in a riding where 10.1 per cent of those in the labour force are employed in the construction industry. The more prosperous families in Trinity are very socially aware and will, I know, support the measures taken to increase the purchasing power of those on low incomes.
According to the 1971 census figures, 8.6 per cent of Trinity's population was over the age of 65 years; of these, 61 per cent were women. The recent amendments to the Canada Pension Plan and the reductions in personal income tax announced in the budget ease the current difficulties of senior citizens but, Madam Speaker, many of the retired women contributed during their working years to private pension plans which have not served them well; still others worked for many years in jobs where they were excluded from all fringe benefits.
Women who are employed in the service, trade and manufacturing industries are often doubly disadvantaged by low wages, which allow little or no margin for saving, and by discriminatory pension plans. Minimum wage legislation appears to have narrowed the male-female wage differential in low-wage occupations, but differentials still exist, particularly in non-unionized establishments. A recent Ontario study estimated the average differential as high as 22 percentage points.
The Budget-Miss Nicholson
In May, 1972, legislation was introduced in this House to amend the Canada Labour Code to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex and marital status. That bill, which did not receive third reading before dissolution of the twenty-eighth parliament, contained a limitation clause excluding pensions and life insurance plans from the amendments.
The province of Ontario in 1971 enacted a human rights code which prohibited discrimination in employment on the grounds of sex or marital status, but the section on fringe benefits has not yet been proclaimed. Since fringe benefits are generally considered part of pay, women are increasingly asking why a country and a province which advocate equal pay can at the same time tolerate inequality of fringe benefits.
Among the many discriminatory practices to be found in employees' group insurance plans are, first, eligibility requirements. Length of service for eligibility varies for men and women, for example, five years service or 25 years of age for women, before entry into the plan. Vesting of the plan, continuous service stipulation, is sometimes longer for women than for men.
Second, take the case of death benefits to spouse. Most plans provide for reduced benefits to the spouse of a deceased male contributor, but nothing for the spouse of a deceased female contributor. There are many variants relating to dependent children of a deceased contributor. For example, the children of a deceased woman contributor must prove a situation of hardship and/or receive lesser amounts that those provided for the dependent children of a man contributor. Most plans have fewer joint and survivorship options available for women contributors.
Third, many firms have an earlier compulsory retirement age for women resulting in lower contributions from both employee and management and, therefore, lower pension benefits. This practice is now changing. However, there are still almost a quarter, some 23.2 per cent, of those women who are now enrolled in pension plans who are required to retire at an earlier age than men under the same plans. When the earlier retirement age is combined with the delayed entry I mentioned earlier, a woman's pension is doubly depressed.
Fourth, there are amounts of life insurance. Many plans offer lower amounts of life insurance coverage to women. The group life insurance plan of one Crown corporation provides single women with exactly half the amount of insurance protection which a single man buys for the same premium.
Fifth, there is the example of health insurance plans. Management generally contributes to these plans but does not allow the married female employee to participate unless legally separated, divorced or widowed. In situations where the wife is the permanent worker, the husband must pay the premiums on a private basis and the couple lose the management contribution normally extended to married men.
Sixth, look at part-time employees. Some firms have no plans-pensions, medical, life, disability-for a part-time and/or temporary workers. Since many women are in this category because of family responsibilities they are par-
1646

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Miss Nicholson
ticularly discriminated against in loss of benefits and in loss of management contributions.
Eighty-four years ago, in 1890, Canadian women were told they did not need the vote for they could accomplish as much by loving persuasion of their men. The argument failed to take into consideration the growing number, even at that time, of unmarried women wage earners who had no husbands to persuade, lovingly or otherwise.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Aideen Nicholson: In 1974, women's pension plans are still based on the assumption that women employees are all supported by men who will provide well for all contingencies, and that women have no financial responsibilities for dependents and no need to plan for their own economic well-being or that of their dependents.
However, the fact of the matter is that over a quarter of a million working women, 266,000, or almost one-tenth, of the female working force, are separated, deserted, divorced or widowed. Add to these over a million single women, 1,006,000, who make up more than a third, in fact 34.1 per cent of the female labour force, and the assumption of no female employee need becomes hard to support.
In this day of early marriage, the fact that only one-third of the female labour force, 33.3 per cent, is under the age of 25 is also a meaningful statistic.
Another consideration which must not be overlooked concerns those women in the labour force who are married, and that is the level of earnings of the male breadwinner. Many women who work do so in order to maintain a decent standard of living which the husband's wage alone would not permit. Pensions are generally assessed on the basis of average earnings over a period of time. Where those average earnings are low, the earned pension will also be low. If the wife's earnings are needed to establish a healthy life-style for the family during her working years, her pension is also needed to allow the couple a decent standard of living when they retire, and income replacement is needed if she becomes unable to work because of illness.
Disability insurance for women is limited in availability, and higher premiums are charged to women than men, as much as 61 per cent higher. The annual premium differential is said to be based on actuarial tables. However, insurance companies are quite coy about releasing the data on which they base their discriminatory premium rates for disability insurance. This is particularly strange because they freely publish the life tables on which they base their justification for discriminating between men and women in connection with retirement pensions and annuities. Perhaps they fear being embarrassed by discovery that this discrimination is due to emotional bias and myth and cannot be supported by fact.
Statistics Canada labour force survey indicates that the pattern of absences from work because of illness for the last number of years has been fairly consistent. The rate of absences because of short-term illness is somewhat higher for women than for men, but the rate for long-term illness, and it is this type of illness for which disability insurance is made available, is higher for men than for women. In 1973, 1.82 per cent of all full-time working women were

absent from employment because of illness lasting for a period in excess of one week; during the same year 1.97 per cent of all full-time working men were absent because of illness lasting over one week.
Canadian suffragists at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of this century were part of a more general reform movement that was concerned to remove a wide range of injustices and evils that afflicted the country at that time. Contemporary Canadian women, too, usually see women's rights in the broad context of human rights and social betterment.
Situations which are unfair to women are usually closed situations where some persons are able to make and implement decisions which they do not have to explain or account for and, therefore, are situations which are unfair to some men also, especially those from minority groups. Opening up situations for discussion and requiring reasons for decisions normally results in increased representation not only of women but of men from minority groups.
As long as discrimination against women in pension plans and life insurance continues, and insurance companies are not required to account fully for their practices, one must wonder what other forms of discrimination may be practised on the grounds of secret actuarial tables, and what the cost is to the economy as well as to the individuals concerned.
Human rights codes generally stress public education, and research into attitudinal change and cultural conditioning. But people who are discriminated against, whether on the grounds of sex, colour or race, are increasingly interested in changing behaviour rather than attitudes. Changing attitudes is a slow and nebulous business. Changing differential treatment in existing benefit schemes is much more susceptible to clear definition and practical solutions.
It is my hope that the human rights legislation which is due to come before this House will deal firmly and fairly with this matter. It is surely in the interest of the Canadian economy, as well as in the interest of justice, that there should be fairness and equity in every phase of employment.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Eudore Allard (Rimouski):: Madam Speaker, I am sure you are well aware of the fact that it is with a surplus budget of some $250 million that this Liberal administration intends to carry out its operation which, by the way, has been rendered twice as difficult, when we considered the budget speech the hon. Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) made last Monday night, which aims at reducing the inflation rate and prevent the Canadian economy from entering into a long-lasting recession period.
If I remember correctly, in the first budget speech for the year 1974-75 which he made in May of this year, the minister had announced that he would fight inflation with a deficit budget of some $450 million.
November 25, 1974

In spite of this, Madam Speaker, I consider that he is not offering any valid solution to fight inflation, and that the measures proposed by the minister are clearly not enough for our people in the low-income bracket. At best, as far as I can judge, the minister is about to invite provincial governments to reduce their public expenses and incite Canadian workers and corporations to exert a minimum of discipline.
As the hon. Minister of Finance said: "Canada is confronted by two major challenges-dealing with persistent, deep-seated inflation and at the same time maintaining a good level of production and employment". I do not feel that the minister's budget speech can solve those two problems because, first of all, they are contrary and they require different solutions. The budget is only grappling with the effects of inflation while hoping the price increase for 1975 will be lower by about 1 per cent compared to the increase for this year.
But what about the causes, Madam Speaker? We keep claiming from all sides that this plague we call inflation is imported, but it does not seem that Ottawa has decided to come to grips with it. On the contrary, we find rather easily that some measures are clearly inflationist and that the said inflationary thrusts for 1975 come from inside.
While all great nations in the whole world are trying to innovate and find new ways to deal with this problem, Ottawa is at the same time doing its utmost to convince Canadian people that there is not much possibility to check inflation and that meanwhile we have to bear our pain patiently.
On the other hand, I am happy to see that Ottawa has finally understood-even though not entirely in my opinion, but it still is a first step towards understanding- considering that the federal government has decided to lower the sales tax on building materials from 12 to 5 per cent. However, I do not think that the government and its building speculator friends will suffer much, since the government used to keep this tax for itself and the big builders still increased their annual profits in unimaginable proportions.
Madam Speaker, in this budget which applies exceptionally to an eighteen month period rather than a normal year, it is surprising and even disappointing to note that Ottawa has not considered lowering the old age pensions admissibility age to 60 over a period of five years, in view of the fact that the government of the Prime Minister talked a lot about senior citizens during the last election campaign.
Moreover, the budget contains nothing to get agriculture out of its present stagnant situation, and according to the predictions of the hon. Minister of Finance, there will be in fact an increase in unemployment in the next few months, a decrease in production before the end of the year, and a rate of inflation of about 10 per cent in 1975.
Madam Speaker, I believe that it is not by granting income tax deductions of about $650 million for 1974 that the government can support the demand of the Canadian people and maintain at the same time Canadian production. This will only reduce somewhat the burden of Canadian taxpayers. In other words, the only true measure implemented by Ottawa to maintain the rate of
The Budget-Mr. Allard
growth of our economy consists in reducing the taxes for manufacturing industries and small companies, as well as mining and oil industries, which measure aims at increasing the offer and preventing shortages.
Madam Speaker, there is a very simple and well known way to shirk one's duty and present commitments and to forget current problems. It consists in trying to make predictions, in talking, in discussing, in argumenting about future problems. One thus seems knowledgeable, worried and concerned, while on the whole washing one's hands of problems that should be solved today.
Being unable to face the present wisely, coldly and objectively, one withdraws into the past, dreams about or fears the future. And problems take roots, remain and develop mostly because those responsible for solutions are caught in the machinery of conditioning or routine, following the well beaten path of their predecessors. However, Madam Speaker, the present requires an administration that can no longer follow patterns of the past. As can be seen we are courting disaster. Time has come for the federal government to make sure it takes the required steps to give all Canadians the purchasing power they need to do credit to Canadian production, thus spurring demand.
Several times, government members voted against proposals calling for the implementation of a guaranteed minimum income, which would allow each and every Canadian to live decently, according to the Canadian productive potential. Yet, I read in Le Devoir of November 21, 1974, that in about a year Canada could equip itself with a new federal-provincial guaranteed income system.
We, of the Social Credit, will not hesitate to apply such measures, because families must be assured of a decent income. We have been advocating the solution for years.
According to the rules and traditions of times past, and of the wonderful progressive capitalism of those past few decades in Europe and North America, the budget speech that was read out last Monday by the hon. Minister of Finance is undoubtedly a masterpiece of accuracy, status quo and stability of the present situation which protracts for a few months the very same problems of inflation, unemployment and poverty, without the flimsiest hope for national economic balance which every citizen in Canada has been expecting from our government.
And yet I shall accuse no one for their reluctance or even their carelessness. I find, Madam Speaker, that the officials at the head of most departments are doing everything they can. They are not to be blamed nor replaced they should simply be asked to alter their consistently retrospective mental attitude, their frame of thinking, and direct it to the present, which would benefit each and everyone of us, as soon as we would become conscious of our present capabilities.
If we go rapidly over our national economy since 1934, when the Bank of Canada was created, as a result of far reaching royal inquiries into our financial situation, our industry, our trade and banking system, we realize the huge progress made in every respect with the production and capitalization of huge supplies in the hands of prosperous citizens and great corporations private or public, millionaire or billionaire, national or multinational.
28543-36%

The Budget-Mr. Gillies
Production and capitalization have been in constant progress as opposed to the constant slowdown of consumption. If we admit that broad fact far and wide, Madam Speaker, then solutions will immediately arise which we shall behold with astonishment. We will just have to apply them easily and plainly in our usual work, in Parliament, without having to change people or monetary, economic or political systems.
All the monetary, economic and political systems and mechanisms which were used to build up a fantastic production and an extravagant surplus capitalization may well be used at the same time to regulate a more complete system of personal, family and social consumption under the leadership of the same ministers and members of Parliament elected last July 8 by the people of Canada who produce, consume and capitalize. We merely have to change a few percentage points in incomes and taxes between different places without harming anyone and by doing so much good to all with concrete results in both the national and world mentality almost desperately seeking a better economic national and world balance, and we can assure better distribution for all we can produce.
Madam Speaker, having reached a point where in 1974 we are boarding for the future as much as 42 per cent of our annual production and consuming the other 58 per cent, judging by the budget that is before us, where we Canadians are consuming in 1974 only $80 billion out of a production of $139 billion, thus capitalizing $59 billion for the future, I can clearly see, madam Speaker, that we should immediately transfer $15 billion of our exaggerated capitalization to make for the deficiency in our consumption. This would at once reduce or drive out inflation, unemployment and poverty and effect an immediate return to a national economic balance between individuals, families and companies in all parts of Canada, to start with, and this condition would soon spread to all parts of the world following our convincing experience.


Mr. James Gillies (Don Valley):: Madam Speaker, the budget presented in this House a week ago tonight by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) dealt with three problems-inflation, unemployment and leadership. While it is true that these are the three problems faced by all Canadians, I suspect that they have a meaning for Canadians that is somewhat different from the meaning they have for the Minister of Finance.
The impact of inflation on the average Canadian today gives rise to a real fear about his ability to be able to cope with the rapidly increasing cost of living, indeed his ability to obtain even the basic necessities of life. I suspect that the impact of inflation on the Minister of Finance does not appear to concern his standard of living, though it may have some relationship to his advancement within the political spectrum.
The fear created by unemployment for the average Canadian is again the fear of the economic consequences of his loss of income. I expect that the fear created by unemployment for the Minister of Finance is the fear that if there is massive unemployment across Canada he will

not be employed in the position that he would like to have in the not too distant future.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


James McPhail Gillies: When the Minister of Finance talks about leadership, the leadership that he has in mind is different from the leadership that Canadians had hoped would be given them in the budget that came down recently. Otherwise, why would we have had this budget? I suggest we would have had a totally different budget from the minister.
Actually the budget brought down last Monday was a particularly irresponsible one in light of the international situation within which it was introduced. Every member of this House knows that we are probably facing and living in the most unsettled economic climate we have experienced for over a quarter of a century. From the end of world war II until 1972 the United States was willing to finance measures to meet international problems around the world. Today it cannot do this. The fact that it is no longer able to do so has been exacerbated by the fact that there has been an increase in the price of oil of over 400 per cent in the past year, creating an economic situation that is almost insoluble.
We in the industrial countries of the world have to find a way to settle a $40 billion balance of payments problem and to recycle $60 billion worth of petro dollars, and this still in the first year of this new situation. There is absolutely no way in which the existing central banking system and international monetary program can handle this particular problem. And here we have the Minister of Finance bringing down a budget that offers no solutions to these problems, and that makes no suggestion as to what Canada can do to alleviate the situation.
As Dr. Henry Kissinger, Secretary of State for the United States, said in Chicago on November 14, "collaboration among the industrialized countries of the world will be an inescapable necessity". The first part of this co-operation must be to bring down the rate of domestic inflation. In this era of economic tension and uncertainty, it seems to me almost inconceivable that the Minister of Finance would bring down one of the most divisive budgets ever brought down in the history of Canada. Why at this time, when we are teetering on the edge of international problems the like of which we have never before seen, would the Minister of Finance decide this is a good time for the federal government to interfere unilaterally with constitutional powers that were settled years and years ago?
What can be the thinking of the government in this regard? The federal government does not need the money; it has been collecting more money than it knows how to spend intelligently. Perhaps the government did this because it believes fundamentally in the centralization of authority in Ottawa, thus going against the trend to decentralization that most countries of the world think is the right one. It may be-though I would hate to credit this to the party opposite-that the government believes that for purely political purposes it benefits much more from confrontation than it does from conciliation. If this is the reason, Madam Speaker, what a dreadful situation in which to place the people of Canada at the present time.

I do not believe that the party opposite is quite as Machiavellian as that, though it is possible that it is, Madam Speaker. I think the reason the budget was brought down at this time, and the reason for this confrontation with the provinces constituted an attempt to try to divert attention from the way in which the government has been managing the economy in the last couple of years. What other reason is there for a budget of the sort we have at the present time?
The fact is that the Minister of Finance has brought down four budgets. Every single one of these budgets started out in the same way. They stated that the nation was facing unemployment and inflation, and through the process of all these four budgets no progress whatsoever has been made to deal with those twin problems. It seems to me that the terrifying thing about this budget is that the minister shows no comprehension of why we have unemployment at the present time.
The reason for unemployment in this country today is simply that the government has done nothing about inflation for the last couple of years. All of the forces bringing about unemployment today result from inflation. For example, look at the decline in housing starts, which show a 25 per cent drop. This rate will probably go higher. Why have we had this drop in housing starts? It was simply because of the interest rate policy that the government was following, a policy designed to do something to curb inflation but which just did not work.
Why are retail sales down 3 per cent? If these policies of the Trudeau government are continued Mr. Bennett will look like one of the most enlightened men of all times. Retail sales were down 3 per cent in the month of September because in spite of what the government says its policies are not keeping up the real standard of living of most Canadians.
Why do we have a decline in sales of manufactured products? I suggest it is partially because of a slowdown in other economies. However, the major reason is that we have become one of the highest cost producers in the world, with no increase in productivity but with an increase in cost and an increase in unemployment.
Why do we have the unenviable record of having more days lost through strikes and industrial unrest than any other industrial country in the world? I suggest the reason is because we have done nothing about inflation, and people have to use this device to try to maintain their standard of living high. We are in the middle of declining economic activity because of the inability of the government to do anything about the inflationary process, and in the middle of that situation what is so frightening is to have a budget that obviously does not perceive this as the major problem of the country at the present time.
The Minister of Finance forecast at the start of the year that we would have an increase in gross national product of 5 per cent. Some six months later it was 4 per cent-in six months time a decline of 20 per cent. There was little economic growth in the third quarter of this year and we will probably have none in the fourth quarter, and that is all because of the policies followed by the government. The one thing that was clear during the last parliament,
The Budget-Mr. Gillies
and is now clear during this parliament so far is that the foundation stone on which the Minister of Finance has built his policies to fight inflation has crumbled.
The way in which the Liberal government said it was going to fight inflation was by increasing supply, but where is that increased supply? Our gross national product is down, there is no increase in supply, and this policy of the government has been a total failure. That sort of a solution cannot work. The last person who tried this particular policy was Lyndon Johnson in the United States. He argued in the United States that they could have both guns and butter. I suggest you cannot have both-you cannot have both in this country just as they could not have both in the United States. You cannot expect the government and the private sector combined to take more out of the economy than the economy is producing, and if you try to do so you will end up with nothing but inflation, and that is precisely what we have today.
To say that after a year in which you have a 25 per cent or 30 per cent increase in government expenditure, in the midst of double-digit inflation, that you have really accomplished something, the next year by bringing expenditure down 15 per cent is simply nonsense, because that policy simply will not work. That policy is doomed to failure. It is a real disaster to have a Minister of Finance who came in with a budget a week ago saying that he is trying to cure the economic sicknesses in this country by giving it more of the same medicine-more government expenditure. That simply will not work.
The Minister of Finance and his government are talking now about a budgetary deficit for next year. I suggest that this will produce more inflation. The Minister of Finance obviously does not understand the problems under which the economy is operating at the present time. If there was ever such a thing as a tradeoff between inflation and unemployment, it is quite clear that does not exist now. We have both at the present time, and it is quite clear that the government's policies are not working. To think that you can deal with the unemployment problem in that way is obviously a great mistake.
The Minister of Finance must understand these things and the problems we are faced with, but the great question is why does he not do something about it? The only reason I can think of why the government and the Minister of Finance are not moving strongly is that they are afraid to provide the leadership necessary to deal with the problems. It is absolutely essential that we do have leadership now, but the Minister of Finance will not give it. He will not give it because it would be really unpopular, and no government and no politician ever made any yards fighting inflation. This is a very unhappy thing to have to do today, but let me tell you that if we cannot find people in this democratic system with sufficient courage to deal with these problems, we will have a very difficult time keeping our democratic institution viable.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


James McPhail Gillies: History repeats itself, and it is very clear that if you do not control inflation, or at least keep inflationary expectations down, there is no way you can maintain a prosperous economy. If you cannot maintain a prosperous economy, then you cannot maintain a demo-

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Gillies
cratic institution. We had an over 10 per cent inflation rate last year, we have an over 10 per cent inflation rate this year, and the way things are going we will have even more next year. That is no way to maintain the fabric of our society. If we are not willing to use our democratic institutions to fight inflation then we are indeed in terrible trouble.
The Minister of Einance says that this is all an international problem. That has to be the greatest cop-out that has ever taken place in this House of Commons. How can anybody suggest that our inflation is all the result of an international problem? Can anybody really believe that the drop in housing starts and the increase in unemployment are the result of something that has happened in Spain or Portugal? Does anybody really believe that the decline in retail sales is the result of something that has happened someplace else in the world? Can anyone believe that the inflation we have here is the result of anything but the policies that we are following in this country?
I find it really quite astonishing that the Minister of Finance, who prides himself on travelling all around the world talking to other ministers of finance, would not take a look at the budgets other countries are bringing down. Regardless of where you look or of what ideology is involved, whether it be a socialist government such as that in England, a capitalist society such as that in Japan, or a society such as that in the United States, you do not find them following the policies advocated by this government. There is not a chancellor of an exchequer or a minister of finance who has brought down a budget recently that has not told the people that they will really have to work to solve the inflationary problems.
In this country, which has an inflationary rate of over 10 Vi per cent, we do not have to absorb any of the impacts of the increase in world oil costs with which other countries have to contend. With that sort of situation, the problems with which we are now faced seem to me to be unacceptable. I really believe that had the present Minister of Finance been a father of confederation there likely would never have been a birth, but there certainly would have been a lot of heavy breathing.
The fact is that we will not solve inflation unless we are ready to go after it with strong measures. Some people may feel that the situation we face in this country is not particularly serious. I suggest that it is very serious, and we will not long have the things that keep a private entreprise system going with a continuing rate of 10 per cent or 12 per cent inflation. We are going to require something far less, perhaps an inflation rate of 5 per cent, 6 per cent or 7 per cent.
Let us consider the record of Germany. It has an inflation rate of 6.8 per cent and a 3 per cent rate of unemployment, but that country is worried. If the Minister of Finance wants to make comparisons with other countries around the world he ought to be making comparisons with the OPEC countries at the present time.
Since I have been in this House of Commons I have tried to analyse what is taking place in our economy in terms of budgetary expenditure, tax and monetary policy, and I wonder why in a great country like Canada we cannot use our resources more effectively. I wonder why we have
anything like the inflation we have today. We have so many resources, and an agricultural community that is strong and productive. I can only conclude that while we have two real problems in this country, unemployment and inflation, the greatest economic problem we have is the Minister of Finance.


Mr. Pierre Bussieres (Portneuf):: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to participate in the budget debate. The budget speech, somewhat like the speech from the throne, brings the new member face to face, and rather brutally, with his role as a newly elected representative of the people.
I should like to attempt to be as faithful as possible a spokesman for the concerns of the constituents of Portneuf. Still, as it is always very difficult to speak on behalf of another person, I wonder if it is possible to speak for over 80,000 constituents, that is the population of the riding of Portneuf.
Be that as it may, I have tried to regroup as best I can my own reflections on what the electors pointed out to me during the few weeks of the election campaign, as well as on the comments I heard during my numerous meetings with various groups in my riding since the election on July 8.
I would like to emphasize, Mr. Speaker, how much I respect my constituents and my predecessor in this House, Mr. Godin. I take this opportunity to announce to you, Mr. Speaker, and to all hon. members, that Mr. Godin has been elected alderman of an industrial town in Portneuf riding, called Donnacona. I want to congratulate him and wish him every success in his new duties.
Portneuf is a beautiful and large riding, a third of which is a rural community and two thirds are highly urbanized. I am very happy to find that the measures announced in the budget speech will affect all groups of these citizens.
The first point that holds my attention in this budget speech has to do with housing. From all corners of Portneuf riding, my constituents will benefit from these measures. The urban area is in full development in terms of low cost and average cost of private residences.
The reduction to 5 per cent of the sales tax on building materials, plus the $500 subsidy will make it possible to save approximately $1,100 on the purchase of a new house.
The registered home ownership savings plan will certainly help a large number of young people in my constituency who had hardly any hope of becoming home owners.
These measures plus the elimination of sales tax on municipal transit systems and water distribution equipments will certainly improve the lot of municipalities.
Mr. Speaker, I should like to give some indications of the way these measures will favour the voters of the Portneuf riding.
The first group concerned will be affected in an indirect way. In both the Eastern and Western ends of my constituency, there are a number of saw-mills as well as producers of building materials of various types, including insulation panels, acoustic tiles, bricks and cement blocks.

November 25, 1974

It is obvious that the renewal of activities in the construction of new housing will be an incentive for those firms and clear the unemployment threat which haunted the numerous employees in this industry.
In the urban part of my riding, we will also witness a renewal in the construction sector. In addition to provide many jobs to the workers in this sector, that renewal will favour home ownership and better housing.
Many young people, in particular, will avail themselves of the new Registered Home Ownership Savings Plan, and the day will come faster for them to become owner of their own house. Whether in Riviere-a-Pierre, in Saint-Raymond, in Pont-Rouge, in the district of Les Saules or in Loretteville, many citizens will take advantage of those measures announced in the budget speech, measures dealing with housing policy.
Still in that field, it seems to me that we should take steps so that the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, which is our national housing corporation, upgrade its clauses for the protection of the new house buyer.
In the Des Saules district, for instance, numerous buyers have been wronged as a result of the financial difficulties of some builders. This situation should be provided for, mechanisms should be set up to protect the consumer. As an example, there could be an insurance plan under which an owner, as soon as he takes possession of his house, would deal directly with the Central Housing and Mortgage Corporation, so that he could complain and recriminate if there is anything wrong with the house.
It also happens that in those circumstances the sub-contractors suffer losses. We should change the terms under which loans are granted so that sub-contractors are assured of payment for work they have done on a particular house.
Agriculture is the second matter I should like to deal with. A large part of my riding of Portneuf consists of beautiful farm lands and many farmers are engaged in either dairy production, horticulture, or cattle breeding. All members have heard either through the media or during the special debate we had in the House, about the situation of farm producers in the province of Quebec.
During the election campaign, as well as since July 8, I have had the opportunity of discussing matters with many farmers in my riding. Today, being a farmer is really running a business. Investments are considerable, labour is hard to find, salaries are very high, and production costs vary from one season to another. As for the farmer, his income is subjected to the vagaries of very volatile markets. Which brings us to the problems such as the one we witnessed in Quebec with regard to certain grades of beef cattle sent to the slaughterhouse.
The media show us regularly cases of people who suffer from starvation or malnutrition throughout the world. In the meantime, the owners of beautiful farms, real gardens, whether it be at Neuville, at Cap-Sante or elsewhere, are thinking of quitting the land because they can no longer cope with the job, because their children do not want to take a gamble in a field they consider much too uncertain. Mr. Speaker, we must get our agriculture out of its insecurity, we must support our minister of Agriculture (Mr. Whelan) when he is brought face to face with the
The Budget-Mr. Bussieres
disparagers of marketing boards and other measures aimed at stabilizing the income of farm producers.
The tax reduction for small wage-earners contained in the budget will also be helpful to most of my constituents of Portneuf. They will thus recover the purchasing power which they had lost due to price increases. This provision as well as the possibility of deducting the first $1,000 of interest income will be beneficial to the budgets of Canadian taxpayers.
The constituents of Portneuf are aware that inflation means profits for some people. They realize that it helps increase government revenue but they are pleased to see that the minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) has given up a certain amount of revenue to help them make both ends meet. The budgetary measures are correcting the situation and the government is in a way refunding this inflationary revenue.
They are also aware that inflation benefits certain companies. And I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, that the last letter I received on that subject came from a businessman of Ancienne-Lorette. He pointed out that fact to me and stated his interest in a legislation that would provide a ceiling for profits or that would control company profiteering. This businessman's concern is the same as that of most of the people of Portneuf. They are anxious to see the minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Ouellet) introduce legislation in this respect and they are assured that the minister is highly qualified to administer such a legislation in the best interest of all Canadians.
Mr. Speaker, if some companies lack social conscience to the point of using inflation to expand their profits in an exaggerated way, it is the duty of this government to take action and bring them to reason.
The constituency of Portneuf is also proud, Mr. Speaker, of having within its limits one of the most beautiful, the most modern and the biggest Canadian Forces base, the Valcartier base. The action of Canadian servicemen and their efficiency as peacekeepers is known throughout the world. Our servicemen are peace professionals. This may sound contradictory, but it is a contradiction that an old saying has recognized from time immemorial.
We used to hear when we were young, "If you want peace prepare for war". For us, Canadians, the need or even the usefulness of armed forces is not so obvious. Public opinion is strongly divided in that respect, and government decisions must take into account Canadian public opinion. However, we must not for that matter lose sight of the need to increasingly qualify the staff of our armed forces and provide them with the best equipment available to ensure quality of service and also guarantee the viability of this career they chose to enter. Young people are still being recruited. Those young people must feel that they are entering an open road into the future and not a dead end street that would make them regret their decision after a few years. Last summer, Mr. Speaker, an unfortunate accident occurred at the Valcartier base. This accident is much more regrettable because it has stricken young cadets in training. Some quarters have taken this opportunity to make a quick trial to the Armed Forces and the cadets corps. However, I want to express my appreciation to the cadet corps. I also want to express

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Bussieres
it to the militia groups who devoted their time and experience to the training of young cadets.
When I was a student I had the opportunity to belong to a cadet corps for five years. I highly appreciated the qualities of discipline and other aspects of the manly education that is given there. These days, when everything encourages free-and-easiness and inaction, when more and more people are asking themselves questions on the quality of discipline in our schools, we should increase our efforts in favour of the renewal of these cadet corps.
I would also like to mention that the many people who work at the Valcartier military base have great difficulty with highway traffic. It must also be mentioned that Ville Belair is the place where all military and civilian personnel pass through on their way to Camp Valcartier. The citizens of this residential community are gradually being chocked up by a volume of traffic that is becoming quite a hindrance. The Citizens' Committee who favours the expansion of Henri IV Blvd. should get all our attention.
The leather industry is another interesting sector in the industry of Portneuf riding. Whether in Saint-Emile, the Huron Village in Loretteville or l'Ancienne Lorette, there are many manufacturers of moccassins, shoes, slippers and gloves. This industry uses very qualified local manpower and in spite of fleeting difficulties, the management of these establishments show dynamism and imagination in improving the quality of their products and finding new markets for them. However, there is always a menace hovering over this type of business and that is meeting import competition. These manufacturers are counting on the clearsightedness of the hon. Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce (Mr. Gillespie) to help their products keep their place on our markets and thus keep employment high in places where unemployment is a sore that too often must be patched up.
I would find myself wanting if, in conclusion, I did not point out the interest shown by the citizens of Portneuf riding for the budget of May last. That budget quickly became one of the main topics for discussion during the election campaign. I must also add that there has been some apprehension since the election of last July 8. Some doubts were being shown about the new budget as it was feared that the majority government might go back on the good intentions that were set out in last May's budget. I am pleased that the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) and the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) kept the same approach, making it possible for the Canadian people to breathe better in spite of the suffocating atmosphere around the world economy.
Some hon. members reproached the government for having thrown all the blame for the present state of our economy on the situation in other countries. Others said the measures were good but came in too late.
Mr. Speaker, the budget of the hon. Minister of Finance is marked with carefulness, not the carefulness of the pusillanimous but of the realistic, the carefulness of a government which is open to the world, which knows the volume of its exports and imports and does not want to retire within itself.
As to those who think the measures are good but come in too late, they will be the first, Mr. Speaker, to claim that

the government acted this way because of them. They will be the first to boast that they recommended these measures and that the government listened to them at last. But they will make these remarks when it brings them political dividends.
May I be allowed, Mr. Speaker, to congratulate again the Minister of Finance for the interest expressed in his budget speech towards everything which is of concern to all Canadians.


George H. Whittaker: Mr. Speaker, we are now in another budget debate, another budget which is really failing to deal with inflation, another budget out of a shotgun with shotgun measures trying to deal with inflation. In the few minutes I have I should like to deal with some of the shortcomings in the budget.
Any provisions to provide aid for farmers are noticeably absent from the budget.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


George H. Whittaker: There was no further mention of incentives for farmers, including the stabilization of incomes and markets, as promised in the Speech from the Throne. It would seem apparent that to curb inflation and relieve the international food crisis the Canadian farmer requires massive assistance to expand his production to meet Canadian and world needs. This assistance could have been made available by special interest rates and relaxed loan conditions on the farm improvement loans plan; easier financing for clearing unused arable land; the upgrading of existing land and investments in machinery, agrichemicals and modern techniques; and government investment in research development assistance.
Indeed no effort was made to aid the agricultural sector through financial stimultation of co-operation between production and transportation toward alleviating the often critical distribution problem. I might say in this connection that the fruit industry in British Columbia is again having trouble with the transportation of its fruit.
One last remedy available to the government to cure the current inflation and hunger ills was financially to encourage Canadian farmers to adopt more efficient agricultural techniques to increase crop outputs. A generous new investment in agriculture would increase the potential of increased food surpluses, thereby satisfying one objective of the budget, that is, to increase supply and would also represent a step toward alleviating the world food and hunger crisis.
If the government were really sincere in its intent to combat inflation it would devise programs for using some of the money now being used for LIP programs and UIC benefits to construct canneries and granaries to take care of agriculture surpluses. Such a program would put a lot of unemployed to work, cutting down on high unemployment and on taxes required for UIC benefits and LIP programs.
The lack of any concrete programs to use agricultural surpluses to bolster our economy and decrease unemploy-
November 25, 1974

ment clearly indicates that the government is unable to identify with the critical areas within the Canadian economy; it is unable to initiate appropriate operative programs for effective relief.
For many Canadians the reduction in personal income tax will be welcome news, but Canadians will realize in due course that this reduction in their income tax is really, in fact, further depreciating the value of their spending dollar. As long as the cost of living prices remain as they are, these personal income tax reductions will benefit Canadians, but the budget does not get to the heart of attacking inflation or finding ways to curb it, and inflation and the cost of living will go up considerably in the months ahead.
Any benefits Canadians will receive because of the reduction in their personal income tax will soon be eroded by the increase in the cost of living and inflation. What the government has attempted to do is to lull Canadians into thinking it is being a big brother to them by reducing their personal income tax. Canadians will soon realize they have been duped when they find prices of their goods going up and their spending dollar being further reduced in value. Whatever benefits they are going to receive now will be taken away from them in due course, simply because the government has done nothing to check inflation and the increase in the cost of living.
In the budget speech the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner) stated that he would hold the increase in government expenditures at 15 per cent next year, compared with the 24 per cent increase in the current year's expenditure over last year's. The President of the Treasury Board (Mr. Chretien) recently tabled in the House supplementary estimates totalling $25,951 million for the fiscal year 1974-75.
In a recent CTV interview the Minister of Finance stated that it was "intensely difficult in the political process to hold these expenditures down. You've got the legitimate ambitions of ministers of departments." It seems to me that some of those legitimate ambitions of ministers have greatly increased the financial burdens of the Canadian people. I am especially recalling the $510 million deficit in the UIC program, brought about by a previous minister's inability to manage his department properly. The ones who were forced to pay in the end for that deficit were the Canadian people.
It would seem to me that ministerial ambitions, especially at a time when we have high unemployment, inflation running rampant and the cost of living constantly going up, should rank second, and ministers should be finding ways to curb wasteful spending in their departments. They have an obligation to the Canadian people, who elected them to the positions they are now holding, to do so. There is no justification for the increase in government spending and waste when the people of this nation are experiencing high unemployment, increases in the cost of living, and depreciation of their spending dollar.
Any reduction or help in reducing the cost of homes is certainly welcome, but sales tax on building materials should be entirely abolished. The reduction to 5 per cent is a step in the right direction, but the government should
The Budget-Mr. Whittaker
have totally abolished the sales tax. The 5 per cent sales tax will leave intact the existing bureaucracy for collecting the building material tax; it will be just as complicated a set-up as the one which collected the 11 per cent tax. Another bureaucracy must now be set up to administer the new program under which each purchaser of a new home is to get $500. If this is a key to the job creation program which this government has in mind for next year, it's a great way of fighting inflation.
Under the present set-up we are not providing an incentive for young Canadian families who want to build and own a home. Our present structure alienates young people from building and owning a home. They find building, costs, land costs, etcetera, more than they can handle. If we completely abolish the sales tax on building materials, the bureaucracy created for collecting the sales tax can be eliminated and materials would be available at prices most Canadians could afford. The long-term effect of this would be a substantial decrease in our housing shortage.
News of benefits granted to our old age pensioners is welcome; but if in the months ahead these benefits are to be swallowed up by the spiralling rate of inflation and increase in the cost of living, our pensioners will be no further ahead. Pensioners fortunate enough to receive an income from a registered savings plan or from a deferred profit-sharing plan will much appreciate the exemptions provided for those. Pensioners with $30,000 invested and old age pension supplements do not now pay any tax, or very little, so that many of the proposed new benefits will apply only to those fortunate enough to be in higher income brackets.
For those pensioners who are not so fortunate, who are only receiving old age security, the news is not so good. The budget has failed to provide them with added protection against inflation and increases in the cost of living. Single pensioners who are receiving only the basic minimum of about $2,700 will feel the ravages of inflation and increases in the cost of living. Present conditions make it almost impossible for them to enjoy a decent existence. The government has failed those pensioners whose only source of income is their old age security pension, because it has not provided for any pension increases. The government must stop dishing out piecemeal benefits to these hard-pressed pensioners. The government has an obligation to provide this segment of our population with adequate protection in order that these people can cope effectively with inflation and the high cost of living which is constantly eroding the purchasing power of their pensions. Something more substantial must be done for pensioners who are receiving only the old age security pension. This budget has done nothing for them. It has left them more vulnerable to the further ravages of inflation and increases in the cost of living.
The government proposals in the budget to provide incentives for incorporated small businesses by increasing the annual limit on profits taxed at the 25 per cent special rate to $100,000 from $50,000, and the cumulative limit to $500,000 from $400,000 may benefit our small business owners, although I do not think the benefits are substantial enough to encourage more Canadians to own small businesses. These incentives, however, will enable some to capitalize on their expansion.

November 25, 1974
The Budget-Mr. Whittaker
The Liberal government has never seemed to realize that the backbone of the economy of this nation centres on small business. Small businesses account for over 50 per cent of Canada's gross national product, and they pay 50 per cent of the taxes collected by the government.
The small business is also the breeding ground for new industries. What may be a small business today can become a leading industry tomorrow. Unfortunately, the government does not see it this way, and as other segments of our country receive more and more benefits the small business segment of our population receives less and less. The government's policies on small business have been such that many have been allowed to go into bankruptcy because they have not been provided with adequate financial means or incentives to enable them to survive and compete.
The government is willing to make substantial loans to foreign governments for the benefit of the relatively large corporations in Canada, but when it comes to making loans available to small Canadian businesses from Canadian banks, it turns a deaf ear. The budget incentives for small businesses in Canada are not good enough.
It is time the government took its head out of the sand and took a good look at the present system which favours foreign-owned companies over Canadian owned companies which for years have formed the backbone of the economy of this country.
There are a few really depressed areas in my constituency of Okanagan-Boundary. One is the beef industry. The ranchers in the area pioneered this country. They were one of the backbones of the economy. Because of the policies of the government they are in one of the worst situations they have ever faced in history.
There is a large lumber industry in British Columbia. Today it is very hard pressed. I realize that as far as this government is concerned, a lot of the input into the lumber industry comes from the provincial government. However, the federal government still has an obligation toward this industry.
There is an extensive mining industry in my constituency. This industry has also been a pioneer in my constituency. It has been going on for many, many years. However, the way the industry is being treated by governments today, it will not be around much longer. It is well-known that there should be more exploration. More mines could be in the area. It was only a few short years ago that one of the leading copper mines was discovered and developed. With this kind of situation in those three leading industries, it will be very hard for the people in my area, and for Canadians in general.
May I call it ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Penner):: Order, please. It being 9:45 p.m. it is my duty, pursuant to Section 7 of Standing Order 60, to interrupt these proceedings and put forth with the question on the amendment now before the House. All those in favour of the amendment will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Penner):: All those opposed will please say nay.


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Penner):: In my opinion the nays have it.
And more than five members having risen:


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Penner):: Call in the members.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. It being after ten o'clock, this House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow afternoon, according to Standing Order.
At 10.15 p.m. the House adjourned, without question put, pursuant to Standing Order.

Tuesday, November 26, 1974