1974-10-01

Hon. Mitchell Sharp (President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order concerning certain notices given by the government yesterday. There are four bills for which there are recommendations which appear at pages 21 to 23 of the notice paper. The recommendations all read: "His Excellency the Governor General recommends . .. ". In fact, these recommendations are from His Excellency the Administrator, and I would ask that the necessary alterations be made in the text that appears on the notice paper.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


FOOD PRICES REVIEW BOARD
Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, in view of widespread public indignation over the disclosure by the Canadian Egg Marketing Agency that 28 million eggs had to be destroyed and the need for complete public disclosure into this whole affair, I ask for unanimous consent under the provisions of Standing Order 43 to move the following motion, which perhaps will commend itself to the government, especially the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Whelan). Seconded by the hon. member for Peace River (Mr. Baldwin) I move:
That the first and second reports on egg prices by the Food Prices Review Board be referred to the Standing Committee on Health, Welfare and Social Affairs.


Mr. Speaker:: Hon. members have heard the motion moved pursuant to Standing Order 43, which requires the unanimous consent of hon. members. Is there unanimous consent to receive the motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Without unanimous consent the motion cannot be presented.


FISHERIES
Mr. Walter C. Carter (St. John's West):: Mr. Speaker, I ask the unanimous consent of the House to propose a motion in a case of urgent and pressing necessity. The urgency of this matter is recognized in the Speech from the Throne, which declares that the first objective of the government in dealing with inflation will include measures to increase food production, and to this end will provide incentives to our fishermen and ensure that Canada has a right to manage its coastal resources and conserve our fish stocks. I therefore move, seconded by the hon. member for South Shore (Mr. Crouse):
That this House, noting the failure of the recent Law of the Sea Conference to recognize and confirm Canada's right to protect and preserve its fisheries resources against reckless over-fishing by foreign nations, urges the government to take immediate steps by unilateral action to conserve our fish stocks, and thereby enable our fishermen to increase production and to assist the government in its fight against inflation.


Mr. Speaker:: Again hon. members have heard a motion proposed under the terms of Standing Order 43. Since the motion has been moved under the terms of Standing Order 43, it requires the unanimous consent of all hon. members. Is there unanimous consent to receive the motion?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: Without unanimous consent, the motion cannot be received.

e G410)


INDIAN AFFAIRS
Mr. Wally Firth (Northwest Territories):: Mr. Speaker, I seek the unanimous consent of the House under the provisions of Standing Order 43. This motion arises out of the demonstration that took place on Parliament Hill yesterday. I move, seconded by the hon. member for Brant (Mr. Blackburn):

October 1, 1974
Supply
That this House refers the economic and social problems of Canada's native peoples to the Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development for immediate consideration.


Mr. Speaker:: Hon. members have heard the motion which was presented under Standing Order 43 and, therefore, requires the unanimous consent of the House before it can be presented for debate. Is there unanimous consent to proceed with the motion at this time?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: There not being unanimous consent the motion cannot proceed at this time.


WAYS AND MEANS
Hon. C. M. Drury (Acting Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, at the conclusion of the last session the House had not completed consideration of the proposed tariff reductions provided for in Bill C-21. This bill was given first reading on April 8.
Pursuant to Standing Order 60(1), and on behalf of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Turner), I wish to table a notice of ways and means motion which reintroduces the tariff reductions provided for in Bill C-21.


Mr. Speaker:: Is that agreed?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.



Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 60, sub-section 2, I should like to request that an Order of the Day be designated for consideration of the notice of ways and means just tabled.


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 58(1) I move:
That this House at its next sitting consider the business of supply. Motion agreed to.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. In view of the report of the Food Prices Review Board of August relating to egg marketing and egg pricing, and the finding of that board that the pricing of a substantial proportion of production was high both in relation to consumer demand and the production of eggs, has the government accepted this finding and other recommendations by that Food Prices Review Board in the August report?


Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Agriculture and I have discussed this matter several times in Cabinet, and we find that the best way of getting the facts before the House is to refer the matter to a standing committee of the House. We will be prepared to do that.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I am sure it will please the House that the matter is to be referred to the committee. Now that he has referred to discussions with the Minister of Agriculture, I should like to ask the Prime Minister this question.
In view of the fact that the Speech from the Throne yesterday indicated that the mandate of the Food Prices Review Board would be renewed for a further year is it the intention of the government to support the board or to continue to have one minister supporting the board and another minister, the Minister of Agriculture, attacking the board just about as fiercely as he can?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Of course the government supports the board, Mr. Speaker. Otherwise it would not have renewed its mandate.


SUGGESTED INVESTIGATION UNDER PUBLIC INQUIRIES ACT-GOVERNMENT POSITION
Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary for the Prime Minister. I wish to ask the Prime Minister whether the government has given consideration to having this matter investigated under the terms of the Inquiries Act as opposed to having a parliamentary committee look into it?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Yes, we considered the alternative method of ensuring that parliament would get to the basis of this whole situation. We considered that parliament probably would want to look into it and that is why we decided on the reference.
October 1, 1974


AGRICULTURE
Hon. George Hees (Prince Edward-Hastings):: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Prime Minister. Would the Prime Minister take the first opportunity on motions to explain to the House why his government was unwilling to sell 50 million of Canada's surplus eggs to Austria recently at a good price rather than allow 28 million of them to rot here in Canada.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, we are quite accustomed to this type of allegation but I had forgotten about it over the summer. I hope the hon. gentleman will substantiate this particular story before the committee.


INDIAN AFFAIRS
Walter (Wally) Firth: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development arising out of yesterday's demonstration in front of the Parliament Buildings. In view of the deplorable housing conditions on many Indian reserves which prompted these people travelling to Ottawa in protest, what new measures does the minister propose to deal with this serious problem?


Hon. Judd Buchanan (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: Mr. Speaker, this is a question which is very much on my mind and one which I have asked my department to research to provide me with information. However, one point I should like to make is that this will have to be a co-operative endeavour. There simply will not be sufficient funds in the department to supply all the funds required under the housing program. There will have to be a greater willingness on the part of the Indian people to assume a greater responsibility under CMHC and so on.


AGRICULTURE
Mr. Heward Grafftey (Brome-Missisquoi):: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is directed to the Minister of Agriculture. In view of the high price of eggs to the Canadian people can he assure the House that the wholesale disruption of egg production will cease forthwith.


Hon. E. F. Whelan (Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, we have stated there would be a public inquiry. I want it made known that I do not run CEMA. It is run by a group composed of people from provincial marketing boards across this country. They are honestly trying to do a good job. I hope when the hearings are held the hon.
Oral Questions
member will suggest to the Board that he wants wholesale destruction of eggs. No producer in this land wants the wholesale destruction of any product. He is a creator of things, so does not want to see them destroyed by anybody.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


EGGS-REQUEST FOR RELEASE OF REPORT OF FARM PRODUCTS MARKETING COUNCIL-DATE OF REFERENCE TO STANDING COMMITTEE
James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the Prime Minister has agreed to have this matter of egg marketing referred to a standing committee of the House I should like to ask the Minister of Agriculture in the interest of assisting that committee if he will now release the report of the Farm Products Marketing Council on egg marketing which he had commissioned last March. Secondly, would he tell the House exactly when he proposes to refer this matter to the standing committee?


Eugene Whelan: Mr. Speaker, so far as I am concerned an unfortunate incident caused this House to adjourn, and therefore I was not allowed to present that report to the House of Commons. It has been ready for several months and will be presented shortly. I have forgotten the other question the hon. member asked.
[DOT] (M20)


Mr. Speaker:: Would the hon. member repeat his question?


James Aloysius McGrath: May I ask the minister when he proposes to ask the government House leader to move the appropriate reference so the matter will be placed before the committee as soon as possible? Can he also tell the House when he will table the report of the Farm Products Marketing Council which he has had in his hands since early last April?


Eugene Whelan: I told the hon. member when the report will be tabled. The report of the Farm Products Marketing Council will be tabled in the House as soon as possible, possibly tomorrow. I hope that the committee made up of members of the House of Commons can be established as soon as possible, as I said earlier, so that all the facts will be made known. I am not scared of it because the real, honest facts will be presented to this committee, I hope, and it will be up to members of that committee to see that they are presented and presented to the public also.


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Mr. Real Caouette (Temiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the hon. Secretary of State.
There is unfortunately a dispute going on between the CBC newsmen and the Corporation, so that last night, for

October 1, 1974
Oral Questions
example, we did not get any national nor provincial news owing to this dispute; does the Secretary of State intend to intervene so that the dispute could be settled to the satisfaction of both the newsmen and the Corporation?


Hon. James Hugh Faulkner (Secretary of State):: No, Mr. Speaker, my intention is not to intervene at this point in time. If at a point in time it appears that an intervention will be useful, I will certainly consider it.


David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary.
I am informed that the union asks the CBC officials for a meeting which they refuse; in those circumstances, is the Secretary of State not entitled to force the Corporation to meet its newsmen?


James Hugh Faulkner: I will look into that particular allegation and decide what is best to do.


AGRICULTURE
John Edward Broadbent: I have a question for the Prime Minister which is supplementary to previous questions that have been asked. The Prime Minister has rejected an inquiry into the egg marketing agency under the provisions of the Inquiries Act. One of the advantages of that procedure would have been to guarantee impartiality. Given the government's decision to have a House committee investigate the matter, a committee on which Liberal members form a majority, would the Prime Minister assure the House that members conducting this inquiry will have the full right to call witnesses proposed not only by Liberal members on the committee but by members of the opposition?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, it was my honest understanding, and I may have been misinformed, that the leader of the NDP himself proposed an inquiry carried out by a House committee rather than a public inquiry. It seems to me that he is nodding in assent. I suppose that if we had proceeded by way of the Inquiries Act, the hon. member would now be asking why we did not proceed by way of a committee. We have tried to do exactly what he himself was suggesting-


An hon. Member:: Answer the question.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: -and it happens to coincide with what the government thought would be the best way to put the facts before the public.
The rest of the question appears rhetorical. The House leaders will discuss in the usual way what will go before the committee, when it will be set up, when it will be convened, what members will be on it, and so on.


John Edward Broadbent: I am pleased that the Prime Minister has decided to accept my advice. My question is whether he would assure the House that he will accept the procedure that we would follow if we were in the position in which he happens to be now, that is to make sure that his party's majority on the committee will provide true impartiality in the committee's proceedings by hearing witnesses proposed by members of the opposition parties.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, it will continue to be my policy to accept constructive suggestions from all corners of the opposition, but I think if they want the government to continue doing that they will have to live with the advice they give us. The electorate decided that there would be a majority on the government benches. If the hon. member is suspicious of proceedings in parliamentary committees, perhaps he should not ask for the referral of such subjects to parliamentary committees.


John Edward Broadbent: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister is suggesting that there is a suspicion of government motives. None was suggested. He was simply asked for an assurance. All he has to do is give us a clear assurance.


BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Mr. Baldwin:: Mr. Speaker, for the convenience of members with regard to the business of the House, and for the information of the new members who may not yet have been advised by the veterans about the benefits of being here on Fridays and Mondays, would the government House leader indicate if it is the intention of the government to proceed with the Throne Speech debate without any interruption or, as was indicated some time ago, does the government intend to interrupt that debate? If so, when and for what purpose?


Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, it is the government's intention to proceed to debate the Address in Reply to the Speech from the Throne without interruption, but I would have to qualify that by saying that if the government does decide to bring in legislation to deal with the western grain handlers' strike, probably the debate would be interrupted for that purpose. However, since we have not made such a decision, I am not in a position to announce that now.


LABOUR RELATIONS
Mr. Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a related question to the Minister of Labour. Now that management has refused the latest offer with respect to the grain handlers' dispute, can the minister advise whether he is still optimistic regarding a settlement between the two parties?


Hon. John C. Munro (Minister of Labour):: Mr. Speaker, the proposal made yesterday for consideration by the union and the grain companies set out the fact that there
October 1, 1974

were two remaining unresolved issues. One was interpretation of the COLA clause, and the other was union pensions.
The union has accepted this proposal, but I must say the hon. member is quite right since it would now appear that several of the companies have rejected it. But not all have done so as yet, and I would have to wait for a reply from them all before I could absolutely confirm, without doubt, the hon. member's interpretation. If that is the case and the proposal is rejected then, as the House leader has indicated, the government might consider introducing legislation.


REQUEST FOR GOVERNMENT ACTION TO ASSURE MOVEMENT
Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Prime Minister. As the grain handlers' strike has cost the producers millions of dollars in demurrage charges and we have now lost a large part of our grain markets, will the government assure the House and the country that upon settlement of this strike, either by agreement or by legislation, the government will take reasonable remedies to avoid a railway strike or any other strike that would impede and stop the movement of grain, something which is not only of importance to western Canada but to the whole economy of the country?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the government certainly would be prepared to take reasonable remedies. It would be interesting for us to hear what the hon. member has in mind. Perhaps he might want to give us his views.


An hon. Member:: You are in the hot seat now.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: Mr. Speaker, I did not think I would have to rise so soon on a point of privilege, but with that wishy-washy answer of the Prime Minister's I can readily foresee his answer when the grain does not move to the ports this winter. He will blame it on the snow, just as he did last year.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Les Benjamin (Regina-Lake Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. While doing so may I congratulate him on his appointment.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Leslie Gordon Benjamin: In view of the fact that according to my information a Saskatchewan resident, a Canadian citizen, after landing his aircraft on a Canadian airstrip south of Estevan, Saskatchewan, adjacent to the Canada-U.S. border, was accosted by the U.S. border patrol, escorted
Oral Questions
across the U.S. border, threatened with confiscation of his aircraft, and had to leave a $25 deposit on an alleged $1,000 fine, may I ask the minister if he is making inquiries into this matter, and whether or not he can advise the House what he has found out for us?


Hon. Allan J. MacEachen (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, may I begin by thanking the hon. member for his good wishes and also for sending me notice of his question. I have not got the information at hand but I have asked that the matter be investigated and that information be sought from the United States authorities. Just as soon as that has been done I shall be happy to provide it to my good friend.


POSSIBLE AGREEMENT PERMITING UNITED STATES BORDER PATROL TO EXERCISE AUTHORITY IN CANADA
Leslie Gordon Benjamin: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I take it from the minister's answer that he has requested the United States authorities to make inquiries there. May I ask whether he is aware or can find out from the Minister of Transport if there was any arrangement, agreement, understanding, regulation or law pertaining to air strips adjacent to the Canada-U.S. border which would permit U.S. border officials to exercise their authority on Canadian soil?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: We both shake our heads, Mr. Speaker.


BILINGUALISM
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Justice and concerns Bill 22 passed by the legislature of the province of Quebec which is now admitted across the country to be a knockout blow to national unity and to be unconstitutional. Can the minister say whether the law officers of the Crown have looked into this question and if so, what view they have expressed. In the alternative, what is the minister's view, having examined what the law officers say, concerning the constitutionality of the bill?


Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, the law officers and I have looked at the bill for the purpose, as is usual, of supplying advice on the subject to the government of Canada.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, that answer, of course, is in keeping with the minister's general evasions. May I ask him this supplementary question? Has the government given consideration to disallowing this legislation because of its nature and the danger it represents to the unity of Canada?

October 1, 1974
Oral Questions


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, the government has certainly taken no decision in connection with the bill or questions arising out of it. If it does so, of course, it will let that decision be known to the House in the usual way.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for South Shore.


John George Diefenbaker: Does the minister say that this legislation, so disruptive of Canada, has not been considered by the cabinet yet or by him? What kind of nonsense is this?


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


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the hon. Secretary of State for External Affairs, but first I should like to congratulate him on his appointment to his new post.
My question comes close to home. In view of the destruction caused by the Russian fishing fleet on July 11, 1974 to the deep sea lobster traps which are valued by their owner, McLeod Fisheries Limited, in excess of $170,000, what steps have been taken by the Canadian government to secure compensation from the Russians for these and other staggering losses? Also, what steps, if any, have been taken to prevent a recurrence of these losses which are destroying the livelihood of our east coast fishermen and fishing companies?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I also thank my hon. friend for his good wishes. Replying directly to his question, I would advise him that statutory declarations have been taken from the fishermen who have suffered losses. These have been transmitted to the Soviet authorities through diplomatic channels and compensation has been requested. We expect that the Soviet authorities will take a reasonable attitude.


Lloyd Roseville Crouse: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if the hon. minister would answer the latter part of my question, namely, what steps are being taken by the government to prevent a recurrence of these losses which are literally destroying our industry?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, subject to further investigation I understand that arrangements have been worked out between the Department of Fisheries and the Soviet fleet in an effort to avoid these destructive forays, especially with respect to the lobster fishermen. These are continuing arrangements and the department keeps in touch with the fleet in an effort to avoid further incidents. I believe the most recent incident was the subject of discussion between the department and the fleet commander in an effort to avoid further incidents.


CONSUMER AFFAIRS
Mr. Roger Young (Niagara Falls):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. In view of the widespread concern regarding the regulations published in the Canada Gazette last July concerning the Canadian wine industry, may I ask if the minister now intends to abandon these proposed regulations?


Hon. Andre Ouellet (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, all interested parties had 60 days to present their observations. In light of the interest shown in the matter, I extended the period to November 24 next. I appreciate the interest of the hon. member and I know that he and some of his colleagues from that area of the country have already made representations. I can assure them, as well as the other hon. members, that no final decision will be reached before all points of view have been looked into.


ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
Mr. Armand Caouette (Villeneuve):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Solicitor General of Canada.
In view of the numerous resolutions the minister has received from municipal councils requesting the federal government to review the financing of the Quebec police force with a view to granting them financial assistance, does the minister intend to discuss the matter in the near future with the Quebec Minister of Justice or does he consider the matter closed?


Hon. Warren Allmand (Solicitor General of Canada):: Mr. Speaker, I have already discussed the matter with the Quebec Minister of Justice. I sent him a letter a few days ago advising him that we have no program providing for assistance to Quebec or any of the other provinces with their police force.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Claude Wagner (Saint-Hyacinthe):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs as well as offer him my good wishes.
Has the minister, through his discussions with U.S.S.R. delegates at the United Nations raised the matter of the death sentence pronounced against the Canadian citizen, David Geldiaschivilli?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I can advise my hon. friend that I did not raise that particular case with the Soviet foreign minister. I did raise another case but not that particular one for a number of reasons, primarily because at the moment the case is still before the Soviet courts. I understand that the lawyer acting on behalf of the gentleman in question intends to make a further appeal. The Canadian Embassy in Moscow has been following the case very closely from the beginning.


Claude Wagner: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a supplementary question.
Further to the minister's answer, would he agree to make a statement on motions, in the coming days, to inform the House of the facts of this case and thus answer the many questions raised by the public with respect notably to the protection given to persons with Canadian passports, the extradition of alleged war criminals living in Canada requested in the past and the apparent easiness of getting a passport even when the government is aware of the questionable background of an applicant, as is the case now?
'


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, a good deal of information has been made available about this case. I will consider whether it will be possible, by a statement or other method, to add to that information. The case is complex because the person in question is a Canadian citizen and also a citizen of the Soviet Union under the law of that country. He is being tried under that law as a Soviet citizen.


PARLIAMENT HILL
Mr. Allan Lawrence (Northumberland-Durham):: Mr. Speaker, my question is supplementary to those asked earlier of the Solicitor General, whom I congratulate for being able to retain his portfolio. I am surprised that the minister did not make a statement on motions today about the ugly occurrences which took place on the grounds of Parliament Hill yesterday. As this is the second time in the last six months that such violence has occurred on Parliament Hill, will the minister tell the House what steps the government is taking to prevent its recurrence?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, considerable measures were taken yesterday. In addition to the RCMP constables who were on guard on Parliament Hill, there was the guard of the Armed Forces. We had in reserve the RCMP riot squad which acted with restraint and which came into action at the last minute late in the afternoon. As you know, Mr. Speaker, the RCMP, in conjunction with the authorities of this House, are in charge of security on Parliament Hill. We wish to
Oral Questions
keep Parliament Hill as open as possible to members of the public who wish to come here. We do not want to deter peaceful demonstrations. On the other hand, we want to intervene when violence occurs, as happened yesterday.


Allan Frederick Lawrence: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. As I understand the law, before members of the Armed Forces can be called out in cases of civil disorder, either the provincial attorney general of the province concerned or the Attorney General of Canada must give permission. Was that permission granted yesterday?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, I am not aware that such permission was granted. Since members of the Armed Forces were on the hill for the opening of parliament, they were ready to assist the police, if necessary. I think some of them did assist.


POSSIBILITY OF GOVERNMENT ASSUMING DEMURRAGE COSTS CAUSED BY GRAIN HANDLERS' STRIKE
Mr. J. H. Horner (Crowfoot):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister in charge of the Canadian Wheat Board. Since the government intervened, I think as early as May, in the grain handlers' strike on the west coast and since it seems reluctant to bring in legislation which will end the strike, is it prepared to pick up the shipping demurrage charges which are increasing every day to millions of dollars?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, the government, particularly through the Minister of Labour, has worked diligently in attempting to bring the parties together to settle the dispute. If, in the end, the attempt to settle proves a failure the government has made clear its willingness to legislate. The government does not intend to pick up any of the costs associated with the strike, anymore than it would pick up those associated with other strikes. It was always within the power of the grain companies, many of them owned by the farmers, to avoid such costs by accepting the recommendations of the Perry report.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Is the minister in a position to report to the House on steps the government has taken, since we were last in session, to try to persuade the Soviet authorities to release the scholar Valentyn Moroz.


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, I raised the question of the condition of this scholar with the Soviet foreign minister. There was a good deal of interest in the country about

October 1, 1974
Oral Questions
his condition. Representations had been made by the Prime Minister and my predecessor to the Soviet authorities, particularly concerning his state of health. Obviously, the requests for information were taken seriously and Mr. Gromyko was able to advise that Mr. Moroz was in normal health. A physical examination had been undertaken, and his condition was satisfactory; he was taking regular exercise and was under normal medical care.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has the minister made representations to the government of the Soviet Union to the effect that, regardless of Mr. Moroz's health, justice calls for his release?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Mr. Speaker, that raises a different question. My purpose at that particular meeting, in conformity with representations which had been made all during the summer, was to seek some assurances about the condition of this particular person. My representations at that stage did not go beyond that point.


AGRICULTURE
Mr. Perrin Beatty (Wellington-Grey-Dufferin-Water-loo):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of "Eggriculture". It concerns eggs. When his department learned that 28 million eggs might go bad, did it investigate the possibility of salvaging most of them and using them as a protein food supplement to reduce the high cost of protein feed for animals?


Eugene Whelan: Mr. Speaker, the public hearing which will take place will bring out all the facts.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Eugene Whelan: It will show that everything humanly and physically possible was done with resources inside and outside Canada to process these eggs as quickly as possible. I point out to the hon. member that egg powder is one of the most expensive proteins one can use for food.


MANPOWER
Hon. Stanley Haidasz (Parkdale):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. Did he consult with provincial governments, especially those of Alberta and Ontario, about certain manpower shortages and other factors relating to the selection of immigrants. Also, would he dispel fears and doubts created by yesterday's front page story in the Globe and Mail by making any necessary clarifications?


Hon. Robert K. Andras (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: Mr. Speaker, the question of manpower shortages has been a matter of constant and considerable discussion in depth with all provinces, particularly those to which the hon. member referred. With regard to the speculative story in the Globe and Mail of yesterday, I can confirm that we are examining the implications of the dramatic increase in applications for immigration to Canada from abroad. These are related to our comparatively better economic situation and the constraints on immigration by other countries which traditionally receive immigrants. We will make a statement on what we seek to do in response to this as quickly as possible.


BILINGUALISM
David Réal Caouette: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Prince Albert a moment ago asked the hon. Minister of Justice a question about Bill 22 which was adopted by the Quebec Legislature. I wish therefore to direct my question to the right hon. Prime Minister.
Has the Prime Minister had discussions with the Quebec premier concerning Bill 22 which I feel is a disgrace for the Province of Quebec within the federal context, and can he advise the House whether there has been an exchange of correspondence with him concerning this?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, when I met the Quebec premier about the middle of August, we discussed various topics and Bill 22 was on the agenda.


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
Mr. J. P. Nowlan (Annapolis Valley):: Mr. Speaker, my question is supplementary to others asked earlier today, most recently by the hon. member for Crowfoot. It is directed to the Prime Minister. Only yesterday we heard in the Speech from the Throne that there is such a thing as cost-push pressures and we should exercise restraint. Does the government have a policy related to the scale and scope of wage settlements, bearing in mind the potential settlements in the Thunder Bay area as well as those on the west coast affecting wheat? If so, what is the policy?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the subject of the discussions that are taking place with representatives of labour is along the lines about which the hon. member is asking. I suppose the best way to answer is to indicate to the House and the hon. member that we do not expect labour to be the only group in the community to bear the burden of inflation.
October 1, 1974


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John Patrick (Pat) Nowlan: I thank the Prime Minister for answering my question in part. In view of the statements of the resurrected minister in charge of the post office on the program "Question Period" on Sunday to the effect that he did not think a 60 per cent increase was inflationary, is this 60 per cent going to be government policy in relation to government contracts and wage negotiations with which the Post Office and other departments will become involved?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I did not hear the program to which the hon. member alludes. It would obviously depend on the particular settlement and what period of time it covered. I must remind the House we gave ourselves a 50 per cent increase not too many years ago. That, of course, covered several years. It was a catch-up operation.
* + *


HOUSING
Mr. Jack Marshall (Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of State for Urban Affairs. I congratulate him on his elevation to that portfolio.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Jack Marshall: People on low incomes who are trying to keep their homes up to standard are suffering because of inflation. The Neighbourhood Improvement Program, the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program and the rural housing program are moving forward at a very slow pace. What progress is being made with the provinces to expand the programs and direct more funds into this very worthwhile effort?


Hon. Barnett J. Danson (Minister of State for Urban Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his kind words and the goodwill he has expressed. I hope this will remain with him. I am very much concerned about the NIP, RRAP and other programs which the hon. member mentioned. I am actively meeting with the provinces. I have met with the premiers of several and will be meeting with others as well as my counterpart ministers in the provinces to speed up implementation of these programs which are urgently needed to regenerate some of the deteriorating housing stock in our cities.


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
Robert Lorne Stanfield: In view of the importance stressed in the Speech from the Throne about all levels of government working together to deal with inflation, is the Prime Minister now prepared to
The Address-Mr. Duclos
meet the request of the provincial premiers, which was recently renewed by the four western premiers, to have a meeting with the federal government prior to the presentation of a budget in this House?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I wish to point out there have been meetings between myself and some of my ministers with provincial premiers and ministers. Some of these meetings have already taken place. Discussions concerning the budget, particularly with regard to the western provinces, have been going on between myself and Premier Lougheed and Premier Blakeney through correspondence. There have been meetings of officials and at other levels. I may be incorrect in suggesting that I wrote Premier Blakeney. I did write Premier Lougheed. I will have to check on the other case. However, these meetings are taking place and I think the consultations are fruitful.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I ask the Prime Minister to state quite frankly whether he is too busy to meet the urgent request put forward by or on behalf of all provincial premiers for an informal meeting prior to presentation of the budget. Why can the government of Canada not meet this very simple request in view of the urgent state of inflation in this country, which even the government belatedly seems to recognize?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, it is not because I am too busy, as the Leader of the Opposition put it. I am prepared to meet these gentlemen at any time. I would not want them to believe, as the Leader of the Opposition seems to suggest, I would discuss with them the federal budget in any detail any more than they would discuss their budgets with the federal government. With regard to constructive proposals they might have in mind with regard to ways of combatting inflation, I feel they are able to make them just as easily on a one-to-one basis as on a ten-to-one basis.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: Orders of the day.


SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
[Stage Direction]
The House proceeded to the consideration of the speech delivered by His Excellency the Administrator of the Government of Canada.
Mr. Louis Duclos (Montmorency):: Mr. Speaker, my first words will be words of thanks addressed to the right hon. Prime Minister and the members of the cabinet for having entrusted me with the pleasant task of moving the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne. Not only is it a mark of confidence which I appreciate greatly, but it is as well an honour of which I am very proud and which is shared by my family and the population of my

October 1, 1974
The Address-Mr. Duclos
riding of Montmorency which was kind enough to trust me in the last general election.
Mr. Speaker, I should also like to congratulate you on the important task that has been entrusted to you. I wish you every success and satisfaction in the performance of your duties as Speaker of this House.
In another vein, I am sorry the absence of our Governor General has cast a shadow over the opening session of this 30th Parliament. I am sure that I speak for all hon. members in this House in wishing him prompt recovery and return to the performance of his high duties. It is however reassuring, Mr. Speaker, to see that he is replaced, in the circumstances, by a person of the calibre of the Right Hon. Justice Bora Laskin.
Mr. Speaker, as is the tradition, I would like to begin by saying some words about the riding I have the privilege of representing since the election of last July. The constituency of Montmorency was created for the election of 1965. Located northeast of Quebec City, it stretches from the towns of Charlesbourg and Orsainville, directly north of Quebec City, whose northeastern limits it follows, then along the St. Lawrence River, down to the town of Saint-Joachim, located some 30 miles east of Quebec City. In short, there are approximately 21 towns and cities in my riding.
Mr. Speaker, most members would better understand if I told them that in the constituency of Montmorency we find this natural jewel that is tie d'Orleans, also Montmorency Falls, the well-known sanctuary of Sainte Anne de Beaupre as well as Mont Sainte Anne ski centre.
A large part of the riding of Montmorency covers what used to be an agricultural area, the lie d'Orleans on the one hand and the stretch of land bordering the St. Lawrence between Ange-Gardien and the municipality of Saint-Joachim, on the other hand.
It is said that today hardly 2 per cent of the labour force in the riding of Montmorency are working in agriculture. Indeed, most of the people are employed in the manufacturing and construction industries, in government and related services, in business and the public service in general.
An integral part of the greater Quebec City area, the riding of Montmorency experiences a progress that is closely dependent on and related to the development of the area as a whole. Some of the investments the federal government contributed these last few years to the substructure in the greater Quebec City area directly benefit-ted the population of the riding of Montmorency. I would like to list a few of these investments. For instance, there is the $18 million granted for the construction of Capital Boulevard, the circular road around Greater Quebec City which allows the people of the Montmorency constituency to gain quick access to the western part of the Quebec City area. There are also the facilities at Mont Sainte-Anne to which the Department of Regional Economic Expansion has earmarked $13 million. Finally, there is the widening of Henri-Bourassa Boulevard, for which the Department has spent $9 million to link Capital Boulevard to the sand banks of Beauport so that, eventually, and as soon as possible, they may be converted into a port.

I have mentioned all these investments, Mr. Speaker, but, in my opinion, they must be only a beginning. Indeed, the economic development needs of my constituency are great, especially since it has an unemployment rate of approximately 8 per cent. It is therefore important that policies be implemented to create in Greater Quebec City a centre of economic development which will allow it to back up the area of Montreal, which now contains the whole Quebec manufacturing industry. In my opinion, any strategy aiming at creating such a development centre must be based upon the development of the port of Quebec City. But, as shown in a report prepared for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion, it would be only natural for the port of Quebec City, where activity has more than doubled during the last five years, to be expanded eastwards, in other words, towards the Montmorency constituency. This would mean a gradual conversion of the sand banks, that is, of the part of the constituency which includes the land between the properties of the Anglo Canadian Pulp and Paper Mills Limited and the bridge of Orleans Island.
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, several factors would make such a government initiative desirable. First, the fact that the channel to the south of Orleans Island is now being dredged to a depth of 41 feet, which would allow access to 125,000-tonners, ships with a 54-foot draught. For example, because of the river's configuration, only ships of 40,000 tons can reach the Montreal harbour.
One must also take into account the quantity of space available; there is a five mile long zone, which is about 500 feet deep, that could be used for a port.
There is also additional space available behind port facilities that could be used for an industrial harbour sector.
Finally, the sandbanks are linked by the Henri-Bourassa boulevard I just mentioned and boulevard de la Capitale with the main roads of the Quebec and Canada network.
Such a development of the port of Quebec, Mr. Speaker, would undoubtedly attract advanced technology industries that would create well paid jobs for this group of technologists and skilled workers formed of many young people entering the labour market.
Those industries can pay attractive wages more especially owing to their extremely high productivity rate.
I also wish to point out the importance of a direct air service between New York and Quebec City. Such a connection would promote the development of tourism which is centered in my constituency on the sports activities at Mont Sainte-Anne. Indeed, it would give rise to a greater influx of American tourists who would come to ski during winter. I therefore hope that the government will take the necessary steps in order that the difficult negotiations undertaken with the American government be successfully completed.
Mr. Speaker, I mentioned a while ago that the Orleans Island appeared to me to be a natural gem. For this reason, I would like to express my appreciation to the federal government for its financial contribution for carrying out a protection and development plan of the Orleans Island.
It seems essential to me that we avoid that economic development, without being against it, should be tan-
October 1, 1974

tamount to the destruction of this peaceful green oasis. The agricultural character of the Island of Orleans must also be protected.
Concerning this, Mr. Speaker, I would like to stress the government's interest, as it was set out in the Speech from the Throne, in encouraging farmers-because, on the Island of Orleans, there are still many farms-to increase their production thanks to policies concerning the stabilization of income and markets.
I am therefore inviting all hon. members to come visit the Montmorency constituency to know it better. They will soon see that the people are hospitable and that it is a good place to live.
I would, however, like to address this invitation more particularly to the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau). I can assure him that the population of Montmorency will make him forget the comportment of the loudmouths that he met in the Quebec region at the opening of the "Superfrancofete", and who tried to violate his rights of liberty of expression in our democratic country. The great majority of the population of Montmorency disapproves of such actions and I wanted to tell this to the Prime Minister in the House.
Mr. Speaker, Paul Valery has said: If the state is too strong, it crushes us; if it is weak, we perish.
In 1967, he who is now head of the Canadian government today, wrote, on somewhat the same lines:
The oldest problem in political philosophy and almost its only one, is to justify authority without, for that, destroying the human person's independence. How can we reconcile the individual and society? The wish to be alone and the need to live in a group? The love of liberty and the necessity for order? ... Now, the most useful thing that philosophy has been able to tell us concerning this problem is that one must stay at equal distance from both ends of the alternative. Too much authority, or too little, and that is the end of liberty.
This is the political philosophy on which are based all the legislative measures which the government intends to take within the next few months to ensure Canada's social and economic progress in these difficult times, measures which are fully described in the Speech from the Throne. No doubt the present situation demands a positive and strong action on the part of the government, but an action which nevertheless shows respect for the individual and his initiative.
Mr. Speaker, the problem of inflation will indeed be at the focus of the government's preoccupations within the next few months. Nearly everybody will agree that, if we want to attack the root of inflation, this is a problem whose solution must be of world wide dimension.
In that respect, Mr. Speaker, one must welcome the intention of the government, as outlined in the Speech from the Throne, to participate actively in bilateral and multilateral discussions with a view to ensuring that the present economic difficulties of the world be gradually ironed out and a recession avoided. Under the present circumstances, the state of the world's economy must be the main field of interest of our foreign policy.
I am convinced, Mr. Speaker, that Canada is in a position to play a decisive and vital role in bringing together
The Address-Mr. Duclos
the nations of the world in view of the enormous prestige, respect and moral authority enjoyed by its Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) in the international arena. As of now, all our efforts must be geared toward bringing as many countries as possible to a better understanding of the urgency of genuine international co-operation in the field of monetary and trade policies.
The Speech from the Throne also refers to the government's concern with respect to the spreading of nuclear technology and materials. This is, in my view, a problem of utmost importance in view of the always increasing number of countries which have developed, or appear on the verge of developing, nuclear capability. I would hope that Conrad Adenauer, the late father of West Germany, was mistaken when he said: "God made a great mistake when he limited the intelligence of man but did not limit his stupidity". The American novelist, John Steinbeck, once wrote on the same subject: "Our civil war has been called the last of the gentlemen's wars". The so-called Second World War was surely the last of the long, global wars. The next war, if we are so stupid as to let it happen, will be the last of any kind; there will be no one left to remember anything-and if that is how stupid we are, we do not, in a biological sense, deserve survival.

Mr. Speaker, as regards the inflation problem I mentioned a while ago, one may be sure that if international concertation is necessary to really tackle this problem, we should not for all that minimize the importance of the measures proposed by the government, measures that follow those taken in the past and which permitted Canada, in the circumstances, to show a lower price increase rate than that shown in other industrialized countries.
Mr. Speaker, therefore I should like to suggest a serious examination of the part played by credit cards in the inflation problem. Indeed, one can wonder if their extensive use nowadays could not destroy the measures that the government might put into effect to restrict the demand for goods and services.
Housing is another sector of our economy where inflation is causing havoc. All were able to notice the abnormal rise in housing during these last years, especially in the great urban centres of this country. There are obviously various causes, but it seems to me that we should examine the part played by land speculation and, if need be, the possibility of introducing a special tax on profits derived from speculative transactions.
Mr. Speaker, it is all the more necessary for our economy to keep and increase its strength since that is the essential condition to the improvement of our social security program. For it is basically the increase in the strength of our economy that will allow this government to be even more generous in the case of the small and the underprivileged in our society. I always thought, Mr. Speaker, that the role of the government in a country as affluent as Canada is basically to be with the small, the underprivileged, and to stand for them.
I am also pleased to note in the Speech from the Throne the government project with respect to allowances for the

October 1, 1974
The Address-Mr. Duclos
spouses of old age security recipients between the ages of 60 and 65. I hope this will be a first step toward the eventual payment of old age security to those reaching 60 and wishing to withdraw from the labour force. Of course, one must be fully aware of the costs inherent in such social legislation but it will be through the expansion of our economy that we will be able to help the truly needy.
The Speech from the Throne is also quite comforting as far as housing goes, particularly as it relates to making it easier for young people to buy a first home. I refer particularly to the $500 grant on buying a first home, and in the case of a new house. Finally, I refer to a measure contained in the budget-the housing savings plan-to allow at last young people to prepare through the years for the purchase of a home. I also point out a proposal quite popular and welcomed in my riding. I am talking about the federal rebate which allows the government and the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation to reimburse part of the monthly mortgage payments actually beyond what Canadian families can afford to pay.
Those proposals are quite welcomed in my riding where there is a large proportion of young households anxious to settle down in their own homes after a few years of married life.
Mr. Speaker, at the opening of the first session of the 29th Parliament, the hon. member for Lachine-Lakeshore (Mr. Blaker) who seconded the Address in reply to the Speech from the Throne, stated:
There are those who claim that the bilingualization of the public service has gone too far too fast. May I say with great respect to the members of this House that it has proceeded not too quickly, but altogether too slowly.
I would like to tell, Mr. Speaker, how much these comments seemed right to me then. I know that there is constant progress in that field but I also know that there is still much to be done.
However, being forever concerned about the rights of the people in office the government must nevertheless increase its efforts so that French-speaking Canadians may carve out a career in the Public Service of Canada while keeping their culture. It is imperative that the experts trained by Quebec at the cost of huge sacrifices on the part of the Quebec population find outlets in the Public Service of Canada and contribute to increase further its quality.
It is regrettable that due to the nationalist wave which has invaded many Quebec sectors too many young French Quebecers give up in such a way quite interesting careers and deprive society of valuable services.
Mr. Speaker, to conclude, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Lee), that an Address be presented to His Excellency the Governor General of Canada, the text of which is as follows:
To His Excellency the Right Hon. Bora Laskin, Chief Justice of Canada and Administrator of the Government of Canada.
May it please Your Excellency:
We, Her Majesty's most loyal and dutiful subjects, the House of Commons of Canada, in Parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Excellency

for the gracious speech which Your Excellency has addressed to both Houses of Parliament.


Mr. Art Lee (Vancouver East):: Mr. Speaker, it is an honour and a privilege for me to be accorded this opportunity to second the motion of the hon. member for Montmorency (Mr. Duclos). It is an honour for the people of my constituency of Vancouver East and a recognition of my province and the west.
I am deeply appreciative that I have been chosen to represent one of the most interesting and challenging constituencies in Canada, an area made up of hard working and talented people many of whom have come from other countries to make this their home. There are thousands of native born as well, and together we represent a great range of ethnic backgrounds and many political parties. We have Canadians who have come from Italy, Germany, Yugoslavia, The Netherlands, from other European and Asiatic countries and, of course, from Great Britain. We are glad they chose Canada, and I shall represent them with pride.
Then there are the Canadians of Chinese descent. If you will forgive a personal note, Mr. Speaker and hon. members, my election to parliament as the first Canadian of Chinese descent from my party tells something about this great country of Canada. My family had its beginning in Canada when my great grandfather came here in 1883 to work on the Canadian Pacific Railway as a labourer. It may be said that in a very real and tangible way Canadians of Chinese descent helped unite Canada in the first place with bands of steel. My grandfather ran a grocery store and restaurant in the Cranbrook and Kimberley area from 1902 to 1937. His son, my father, continued my grandfather's business until World War II, when he served as a pilot in the Royal Canadian Air Force. My father later co-founded an independent retailer-owned wholesale business in Edmonton, Alberta, which services northern Alberta, the Northwest Territories and the Arctic.
Within four generations this great country of ours has provided the chance for our family-yes, and to many other families of many other backgrounds-to build our lives and careers and to take advantage of the great range of opportunities available to all Canadians.
Of course, together with certain other groups in society, the efforts of Canadians of Chinese descent to achieve the full privileges of citizenship have not been without problems. Many of my ancestors have known hardships born from misunderstanding and language barriers. But, through perseverence and patience and by drawing on their strength and cultural upbringing, they have now achieved full and equal participation in Canadian life. Many of us have entered the professions but, more important, we as an ethnic community have become more actively involved in our society and will continue to do so.
I stand before you, Mr. Speaker, as a member of a new generation of Canadians and I consider it my task as a member of parliament to represent and serve all the people of my riding of Vancouver East, my province, British Columbia, and my country, Canada. I consider myself privileged to be a member of the post-Second

World War generation. We are fortunate that our grandfathers and fathers defended this nation in two world wars and overcame the very real hardships of the depression years. I think I speak for all young Canadians when I say that we have had opportunities like no one before us. At times, admittedly, some of our actions and expressions would not appear to express this gratitude, but many of our critical attitudes and actions have been inspired by a sincere desire to better what we believe to be basically a good society. I am young in years, but my cultural heritage has taught me to draw on the wisdom that comes with age. I look forward to drawing upon the wisdom of my new colleagues be they on this side or the other side of the aisle.
My great constituency, Vancouver East, is an urban riding. The eastern half of the port of Vancouver is its northern boundary. Another notable landmark, the Pacific National Exhibition-the largest exhibition on the west coast and the second largest in Canada-is held yearly in Vancouver East. Vancouver city hall and the Vancouver General hospital are situated in my riding. The second largest Italian community in Canada is also in Vancouver East. Because of these special attributes and, if I may say this in all modesty, Mr. Speaker, because my riding is in Vancouver, one of the most beautiful cities in the whole of Canada, I believe I have been afforded the opportunity to serve and represent the most interesting and unique riding in the country.
Because Vancouver East has been, and still is, the staging ground for many new Canadians, the general question of assimilation is of special concern and importance to many of the people I represent. I trust that the measures outlined in the throne speech will give some of the answers to this question. Housing in general is also of great concern to the people of Vancouver East. I welcome the measures outlined in the Speech from the Throne. Hopefully, they will assist greatly in alleviating the need for improving accommodations.
Furthermore, my riding, being an integral part of the greater Vancouver area, is faced with the problems of an urban environment. The quality of the environment in physical, economic and social terms is of great concern to the people of Vancouver East. I trust the measures outlined in the throne speech will help to alleviate this problem of urbanization.
Many senior citizens live in my riding. My cultural heritage has taught me to respect my elders and to be responsible for them. In exercising our responsibility for our senior citizens, we should do so with dignity and honour; not out of a sense of charity but because our senior citizens have earned it.
Of great concern to the people of Vancouver East is the state of the nation's economy, particularly in these times of inflation. I have the fullest confidence that the measures outlined in the Speech from the Throne will help to control and curb the problem of inflation. Most gratifying is the policy that inflation shall not be combated by the government's deliberately causing slack in the economy.
The Address-Mr. Lee
Mr. Speaker, because of my family's roots and because I represent British Columbia, one of the western provinces,
I feel that I should speak briefly as a westerner. It is true that Canada is made up of many diversified regions and economies. It is equally true that western Canada in its make-up is not homogeneous but is, in reality, very heterogeneous. There are, however, some regional traits common to British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. First, industries in western Canada are predominately resource-oriented. Second, westerners are individualists; each of us has a feeling that we can make our own way and direct our own life. Third, westerners judge a person for what he or she is, and not so much on the basis of where he or sheeomes from. Fourth, westerners take great pride in our earnest hopes for a unified Canada based on the diversity of our ethnic origins. Because of these regional traits, we feel that the west is unique and we earnestly hope that this thirtieth parliament, as have parliaments in the past, will give more recognition to the problems of the west.
We are gratified to see that the throne speech for this session is working toward a long-term program in transportation. Our concern is based upon the fact that western Canada's economic position depends heavily on transportation, and any attempt to strengthen western economy will necessarily involve improvements to the transportation system. In addition to our concern over transportation, we earnestly hope that more recognition will be given to the fact that western Canada needs to develop a viable secondary industry. To accomplish this goal there is further need for more decentralization of industrial activity in the west, both in the private and government sectors.
Mr. Speaker, I mentioned earlier that the northern boundary of my riding is the eastern half of the port of Vancouver. Being also an integral part of the west's economic structure, we earnestly hope that more recognition will be given to that port's need for future development. Our concern is based upon the fact that unless further recognition is forthcoming, the hopes and aspirations that western Canada, and Canada in general, will become an integral part of the Pacific rim will be frustrated.
I should like at this time to thank the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) for giving me the opportunity to second the motion of the hon. member for Montmorency. I should also like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, and hon. members present, for your courteous patience with a freshman member of parliament. I take pleasure in seconding the address in reply to the Speech from the Throne.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I move the adjournment of the debate, I am sure with great disappointment to all.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mitchell William Sharp: Mr. Speaker, I move the adjournment of the House.


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


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker:: This House stands adjourned until tomorrow at 2 p.m., pursuant to Standing Order 2.


[Stage Direction]
The House adjourned at 3.40 p.m.
[Stage Direction]
Wednesday, October 2, 1974