1976-12-16

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Mr. Tom Cossitt (Leeds):: Mr. Speaker, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. McKenzie) I should like to move, under the provisions of Standing Order 43:
That the government give immediate explanation of the discrepancy between the answer to order paper question No. 50, stating the cost of the Minister of Transport's air travel at public expense to be $742,000 and the minister's subsequent claim that the actual expense was only $442,000; and that if the minister is incorrect he resign from the cabinet for gross misrepresentation.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Some hon. Members:: No!


CONGRATULATORY MESSAGES
Mr. A. D. Alkenbrack (Frontenac-Lennox and Addington):: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I humbly request the courtesy of the House as I rise at this time to recognize the birthday of Canada's oldest citizen, one of my constituents, Mr. David Trumble. Mr. Trumble resides in the Village of Northbrook, Township of Kaladar, Anglesea and Effingham in the County of Lennox and Addington and was born on this day in the year 1867.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Almonte Douglas Alkenbrack: He is 109 years old today, which makes him the same age as Canadian Confederation, and he is in good health. He lives in, and manages, his own home along with one of his sons and is the author of a recent book, a best-seller entitled "When I was Young". Talking by telephone at noon today, he and I renewed our mutual experiences during the 'forties in the logging industry which provided Mr. Trumble's occupation. This unique and remarkable man was very proud of the congratulatory message he received from Her Majesty the Queen. He asked me to convey his thanks to
the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition for their messages of congratulation. I join with all hon. members in wishing Dave Trumble a happy birthday and many more in the future.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):: On behalf of my colleagues in this party I should like to extend our best wishes to this distinguished Canadian. Members of the House will be pleased to know that he is even older than the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles).


An hon. Member:: Impossible!


ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED
John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister said in the House yesterday in reply to a question from me that Mr. Lome Gray, the former president of AECL "was not asking for authorization of cabinet" for the appointment of Mr. Shaul Eisenberg as an agent for AECL "because it is within his power as head of that corporation to make these decisions without cabinet record or an order in council".
This assertion by the Prime Minister is in flat contradiction of what Mr. Lome Gray wrote in a letter to Mr. Eisenberg dated November 28, 1972. In that letter, Mr. Gray wrote, with reference to the appointment and conditions of appointment of Mr. Eisenberg as an agent for AECL, the following:
The terms and conditions of such an agency agreement must, of course, be acceptable to AECL and to the Government of Canada.


Some hon. Members:: Order!


John Edward Broadbent: In the light of this serious contradiction, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles):
That this House request the Prime Minister to make a statement on motions explaining why he said what he did in the House yesterday on this matter and at the same time making it clear who actually authorized the appointment of Mr. Eisenberg.


Mr. Speaker:: Standing Order 43 requires unanimous consent. Is there unanimous consent for the presentation of such a motion?


Some hon. Members:: No!

December 16, 1976
Communications


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Mr. Benno Friesen (Surrey-White Rock):: Mr. Speaker, I rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43. In view of the CBC's mandate to bring a sense of national unity to our country; in view of its mandate to provide news to each of Canada's regions as well as to give a national scope to news, and in view of the fact that commercial TV is able and willing to provide a regional feed service for news to its regional stations, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Gander-Twillingate (Mr. Baker):
That the Secretary of State work out with the President of the CBC a method whereby that network provide a regional news feed from Ottawa to the relevant regional stations.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. Such a motion cannot be presented to the House pursuant to Standing Order 43 without its unanimous consent. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


CANADIAN RADIO-TELEVISION COMMISSION REFERENCE TO APPOINTMENT OF JEAN-LOUIS GAGNON AS MEMBER-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Mr. Dan McKenzie (Winnipeg South Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a matter of urgent and pressing necessity under the provisions of Standing Order 43. In view of the fact that this past summer when parliament was not in session the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) very quietly received approval through an order in council for the appointment of Jean-Louis Gagnon as a commissioner of the CRTC, and taking into consideration that Jean-Louis Gagnon, who has been appointed to a very sensitive position, has a long record of communist affiliation and activity-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the government recently requested a survey into public message traffic, and in view of the fact that CN-CP Telecommunications workers at Winnipeg, many with more than 20 years of service, have been given lay-off notices

before such a survey has been made, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Orlikow):
That the government call on CN-CP Telecommunications to establish a freeze on all lay-offs until the survey into public message traffic has been completed and its results have been studied by all concerned.


Mr. Speaker:: Such a motion pursuant to Standing Order 43 can be presented to the House only with its unanimous consent. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


PROPOSAL TO SUPPORT REDUCTION OF VIOLENCE IN HOCKEY-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Mr. Stuart Leggatt (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I too rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43. In view of the fact that the National Hockey League Board of Governors has now instructed their referees to stop calling penalties for what they term minor infractions, such as tripping, interference, elbowing, etc.-


Benno Friesen: And spearing.


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: And spearing-well, I do not think they said that-and in view of the fact that their decision can only lead to further violence in hockey and a decline in the quality of Canada's national game, I would move, seconded by the hon. member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Rodriguez):
That this House condemns this addition of more unnecessary violence to professional hockey, and further, that it go on record as supporting the efforts of the attorney general of Ontario and hockey players such as Bobby Hull in improving this game by reducing unnecessary violence.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The administrative competence of the government in this respect is not easily seen. However, such a motion can be put to the House only with its unanimous consent. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Mr. Joe Clark (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. I should interject that if we hear much more from
December 16, 1976

the hon. member for St. Boniface, we will direct another question inquiring what his responsibilities are.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Charles Joseph Clark: My question is to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources and arises out of the statement made by the' minister yesterday that he will bring the matter of the agents of AECL before the RCMP. In view of the fact that the chairman of AECL, Mr. Ross Campbell, said today that he was, and I quote, "distressed" by the minister's action because it implies illegal behaviour on the part of Canada or AECL's Italian partner, will the minister tell this House what information he has, information that is not apparently available to the chairman of AECL, which would lead him to lay this matter before the RCMP?


Mr. Trudeau:: What about all the innuendos we have been hearing for two weeks?


Hon. Alastair Gillespie (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: Mr. Speaker, I would have thought that the Leader of the Opposition had heard the innuendoes and insinuations. Indeed, I suspect that some of his colleagues have made some allegations with respect to improper behaviour, if not bribery. We have tried for some months to get the name of the agent involved in this deal. I can understand Mr. Campbell's concern and frustration when he said he was distressed, and that was his word, because he had been trying on my behalf to get that information, without success. I felt that the time had come when we could no longer wait for that information, and it was made very clear both over the telephone and in printed messages that we wanted the information. Therefore, I sought the advice of the law officers of the Crown, and on the basis of that advice I gave that answer yesterday.


Charles Joseph Clark: In other words, Mr. Speaker, the minister is asking the RCMP to conduct an investigation into the very narrow question of the identity and location of the agent, and nothing else? Is that the explicit and limited ambit of the investigation undertaken by the RCMP?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, I think the Leader of the Opposition ought to address questions in respect of the RCMP to the Solicitor General or the Minister of Justice.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Alastair William Gillespie: I have not talked to the Commissioner of the RCMP or to anybody in the RCMP. I made it very clear yesterday in my answer, and if the hon. member will read it he will see, that I sought the advice of the law officers of the Crown in the Department of Justice, and I indicated to the House that on the basis of that advice I expected there would very shortly be an investigation by the RCMP.


An hon. Member:: What took you so long?


Alastair William Gillespie: Any question in respect of the RCMP I think ought to be addressed to the minister responsible.
Oral Questions


ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE
Charles Joseph Clark: Mr. Speaker, I will direct the question to either the Solicitor General or the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. We are interested in knowing precisely what it is the government of Canada is asking the RCMP to inquire into. That is what we want to know, and I will accept an answer from the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, the Solicitor General or, if the Prime Minister wants to stand up, from the Prime Minister himself.


Hon. Ron Basford (Minister of Justice):: Mr. Speaker, I regret that the Leader of the Opposition did not include me in that question but, in that it was the advice of law officers of the Crown that was sought, I think it appropriate that I might provide the answer. The Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources sought the advice of my officers as to whether there was material in his possession which warranted referral to the RCMP for investigation to determine whether there were any wrongdoings involved. On the advice of the law officers of the Crown, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources was instructed to deliver the material in his possession to the law officers, who subsequently delivered it to the RCMP.


Charles Joseph Clark: As a final supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, now that we have identified the minister, and I apologize to the Minister of Justice for that oversight, will he tell us specifically what the RCMP is being asked to look into?


Stanley Ronald Basford: It has been asked to determine whether there were any wrongdoings.



ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED


Mr. James Gillies (Don Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources why he took this action of an investigation after talking to the law officers of the Crown without consulting the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member asks me why I took some action without consulting the Chairman of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, he seems to be implying that I should get his agreement before doing so.


An hon. Member:: Oh no, out of courtesy.


Alastair William Gillespie: I want to make it very clear to him that the Chairman of AECL was made aware that this was a possible course of action I might take. I did not seek his okay before I took the action.

December 16, 1976
Oral Questions



EXTERNAL AFFAIRS


James McPhail Gillies: Mr. Speaker, I take it from the answer of the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources that the government is taking full responsibility for the actions which occurred recently within AECL. May I direct a supplementary question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs? Has he instructed the Canadian ambassador to Italy to communicate with the proper authorities of the Italian government in order to find out why it has been impossible for the Government of Canada to obtain a reply to the legitimate question asked of the partner in Italy which is a subsidiary of the Italian government?


Hon. Donald C. Jamieson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member asked if I had done so. The answer is no, I have not personally done so. It may be possible that the department has been asked by one of the other ministers or other departments to do so, but not through me. I will gladly make inquiries. Of my own personal knowledge, I have not done so.



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Solicitor General. Over three weeks ago my colleague from Brant asked the Solicitor General if he would have the RCMP investigate this situation, to which the Solicitor General replied that he would have the matter looked into. Since more than three weeks have elapsed since the original question, I ask, has this matter already been investigated by the RCMP? If so, what has been determined; if not, why not?


Hon. Francis Fox (Solicitor General):: Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member would care to read further the answer I gave, as reported in Hansard, he would see that I undertook to discuss that particular matter with the Commissioner of the RCMP in order that action he deemed appropriate would be taken. Since that time we have had a reference through the law officers of the Crown or specific request for an inquiry and investigation of this matter. The RCMP at the moment is continuing its preparations of plans to investigate the matter. The hon. member will understand that it has never been the practice to disclose how the inquiry itself is being conducted.



ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, certainly, much time elapsed between the time of that answer and the special investigation. May I direct a question to the Prime Minister? The Prime Minister said in the House yesterday that it was within the powers of the head of AECL to appoint Mr. Eisenberg, "without cabinet record or an order in council", and that when he approached the cabinet on the matter that Mr. Gray .. was not asking for authorization of cabinet or a cabinet committee".
Considering that this position of the Prime Minister is flatly contradicted by Mr. Gray in his letter of November 28, 1972 to Mr. Eisenberg wherein he said that "the terms and conditions of such an agency agreement must, of course, be acceptable to AECL and the Government of Canada," would the Prime Minister explain to the House why he gave the answer he gave yesterday?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, there was no cabinet decision on this particular matter. As I indicated, the matter was brought to the attention of the cabinet committee by way of information. There is no record of a decision authorizing Mr. Gray to proceed. He proceeded under the authority he has under the law to proceed in such case, when he is authorized by his directors. Presumably he was authorized by his directors. He was not, in a strict sense, authorized by cabinet, because he was not required to be authorized by cabinet. That is my understanding of the law. If it is incorrect, I will gladly stand corrected. That is my understanding of the law as it was explained to me by the ministers. I do not want to quarrel with Mr. Gray. If he feels he needed cabinet authority, I would wonder why he did not demand a cabinet decision in order to proceed. I feel that he is probably in the position of not needing cabinet authority on that particular matter.
By the way, when the hon. member quoted me, he read all the words I had said in that phrase except the first word, which was "presumably". I imagine-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, that is the usual sort of casuistry the Prime Minister thinks he can get away with.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


An hon. Member:: Apologize.



POSSIBILITY FORMER ENERGY MINISTER APPROVED APPOINTMENT OF AGENT

John Edward Broadbent: We can wait, Mr. Speaker. The Prime Minister said "presumably" and then went on to make an assertion which is contrary to the facts as perceived by Mr. Gray. That is on the record, and Mr. Gray's letter is on the record.
December 16, 1976

I would like to ask the Prime Minister, since the Minister of Finance was then the minister responsible for AECL, whether the Prime Minister, since this whole matter became public as a result of the Auditor General's report, put to the Minister of Finance the explicit question: Did he discuss with the head of AECL the appointment of Mr. Eisenberg and did he approve of it, or did he in any sense give sanction to this decision?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: From the answers 1 gave yesterday and the previous week on this matter it was clear that I discussed the matter with the Minister of Finance in his capacity as former minister of energy, mines and resources. I made it clear that he is the one who has the specific memory of Mr. Gray having raised this question-


John Edward Broadbent: Did he approve of it?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: -in the cabinet. The other ministers do not remember, either because it was not central to the discussion or because it is so usual to act in this way through agents that even the recording secretaries of the cabinet did not find it worthwhile to put it down in their minutes. There is nothing unusual apparently about using agents to sell abroad.


John Edward Broadbent: I ask, did he approve of it?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I told the House that even though it was not apparent in the minutes, the minister did make an effort and remembered that that was raised at the cabinet committee. There was no need for a decision, and therefore no decision was taken.



CANADA COUNCIL


Mr. Eudore Allard (Rimouski):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the President of the Treasury Board.
Could the minister inform the House whether the Canada Council has put in a request for allocation of resources through his department? If so, would the minister be in a position to say whether the Canada Council's budget will be cut and to what extent in comparison with last year's budget?


Hon. Robert K. Andras (President of the Treasury Board):: Canada Council, as all agencies and departments of government, puts in requests for allocation of resources in the budgetary process, and that along with the others has been examined. As I recall at this moment, the Canada Council budget will be subject to restraint, as indeed will all departments of government, but I do not recall that we will make an absolute cut in its budget. It may have less of an increase than in previous years, but still there will be an allocation of resources that will enable it to do its job well, although perhaps in a more limited fashion than it might have hoped.
Oral Questions FINANCE



FLOW OF INVESTMENT CAPITAL FROM CANADA-GOVERNMENT ACTION TO COUNTERACT

Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):: Mr. Speaker, would the Minister of Finance care to comment on recently published figures indicating that, based on the first nine months of 1976, foreign investment in Canada is being reduced at an annual rate of $333 million while Canadians are investing directly abroad at an annual rate of $445 million, the net result showing a flight of direct investment capital from Canada at a rate of about $780 million a year? Can the minister say how long the Canadian economy can stand this trend and what does the minister propose to do about this problem which is a very serious one, possibly one of the most serious ones we are facing today?


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (Minister of Finance):: I think it is an important question, but I really wonder whether the response to a question of that kind does not go way beyond any answers that can be given in the oral question period.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert: Can the minister tell us whether he intends to take positive action in his next budget by both fiscal and monetary incentives to create in Canada a better investment climate, especially for Canadians?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: We always hope to be positive.



TOURISM


Mr. Stan Darling (Parry Sound-Muskoka):: I wish to direct my question to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. Seasonally adjusted figures for the third quarter show a tourism deficit of $304 million. Despite increased revenues from the Olympics, the figure is no improvement over the first two quarters of the year. The tourism deficit is running at an annual rate of about $1.25 billion based on the first three quarters which, if achieved, would be 76 per cent higher than in 1975.
Since the minister's predecessor claimed that the high deficit on tourism was due to the poor economic situation in other countries, and now that the economies of other countries are recovering, does the minister expect the tourist trade to show a significant improvement in 1977?


Hon. Jean Chretien (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, two weeks ago I had the privilege of meeting all the ministers of tourism in Canada and we all agreed that the current deficit in the tourist industry was too high, that joint efforts had to be made by the federal as well as the provincial governments in an attempt to reduce it. It is still

December 16, 1976
Oral Questions
too soon to predict what the situation will be next year, but I hope the deficit will be reduced.



WEIGHTS AND MEASURES


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet, yesterday the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre asked me if it was true that we are going to impose the metric time system as of January 3, 1977. I would like to inform the hon. member that that is a joke. I think that could only happen if his own party were to form a government one day.



INDUSTRY


Hon. George Hees (Prince Edward-Hastings):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. As this country's share of world trade has slipped from 8 per cent to 6 per cent in the last five years, as we have a $10 billion trade deficit in manufactured goods per year and as industrial production in this country is falling while that of the United States is rising, is it the intention of the minister in the near future to bring principal buyers from the important markets of the world to Canada to inspect our manufactured goods at giant trade shows in Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto, Montreal and Halifax and our heavy machinery in the factories where they are produced across the country as a means of trying to get our industrial production up to where it should be and on the move once again?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to learn that the hon. member has become aware of my announcement. I have said already that I intend to have a big export drive in the spring, and if he wants to, I would like him to join me.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Horner:: Why wait for spring?


George Harris Hees: As the kind of export drives which have been put into effect by the minister's predecessors and the kind which I am told by his department he is planning now simply add to our trade deficit, particularly in manufactured goods, I ask the minister this: will he consider the plan I have suggested to him? Such a plan, when it was employed in this country, did a great deal to produce a long succession of trade surpluses after ten straight years of trade deficits. Will the minister not do that and get the economy of this country moving?


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!
(Mr. Chriticn.]


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. After the double answer given by the minister I overlooked a supplementary question by the hon. member for Parry Sound-Muskoka.



TOURISM


Stan Darling: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to direct a further question to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. Is the minister concerned that Canada has lost its ability to compete for the tourist tax dollar? As a substantial portion of travellers' costs originates from higher hotel and restaurant costs, has the minister discussed with his provincial counterparts the influence of taxes on the willingness of tourists to come to Canada now that U.S. tax laws severely limit the deductibility from income of convention expenses if the conventions are held abroad?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I take good note of the hon. member's question. It is obvious that several factors explain that deficit, particularly in the United States, where they celebrated the bicentennial this year. Many Canadians went to that country and fewer Americans came to Canada. In any case, that problem greatly concerns me and any valid suggestion will be examined according to its merit.



ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE


Mr. Eldon M. Woolliams (Calgary North):: Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister of Justice a supplementary question following on the answers which were given to the Leader of the Opposition in reference to the AECL scandal.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: But you don't want the police in it.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: What alleged wrongdoing was revealed in the material which was referred to the officers of the Crown for their opinion, and what kind of wrongdoing did the minister mean, except probably the rape of the taxpayers of Canada?


Stanley Ronald Basford: Mr. Speaker, I think the hon. member must know from past answers in this House by all ministers that when a matter is referred to the RCMP by the law officers of the Crown, it is not proper to go into the details of what is being referred to them or what the precise nature of the wrongdoing is. I must admit that I find the question most peculiar coming from an opposition which

December 16, 1976

now seems to want to resist getting to the bottom of this whole matter.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I do not accept for one moment the glib answer of the Minister of Justice. There is nothing in the rules of this House to suggest that he cannot say to the House of Commons-


Mr. Goodale:: Oh, oh!


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: I hear the hon. member for Assiniboia. He always speaks while remaining seated, and he will be defeated in the next election.


Ralph Goodale: You are wrong again, Eldon.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: There is nothing in the rules which suggests that the Minister of Justice cannot tell us what kind of wrongdoing the police were instructed to look into. That is the question.


Stanley Ronald Basford: Under the criminal law of Canada, where there is any wrongdoing, the RCMP would of course be involved. That is the nature of the wrongdoing.


Eldon Mattison Woolliams: That is no answer at all.


An hon. Member:: There was no question.



POST OFFICE


Mr. John Rodriguez (Nickel Belt):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Postmaster General. In view of the fact that officials of the Post Office Department have refused a request from the Canadian Union of Postal Workers for an early opening of negotiations for the next contract, and in view of the fact that opening negotiations early would allow many problems to be dealt with before the last minute, thus helping to avoid any further disruption of mail service in Canada, will the minister tell this House if he is prepared to overrule the decision of his officials refusing the CUPW request for an early opening of contract negotiations?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: Mr. Speaker, I would like to indicate first to the hon. gentleman that that was my decision, and that decision was made in accordance with the provisions of the Public Service Staff Relations Act, which prohibits the re-opening of contracts for any period longer than two months prior to the end of a contract, and I bring to the attention of the hon. member that that particular contract ends on June 30.
Oral Questions
However, having said that, I indicated throughout the negotiations with CUPW that we would be ready to commence on an unofficial basis discussions relating to all the matters which would be contemplated during the negotiation of a collective agreement in order to achieve the end which the hon. member seems to espouse in his question.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John R. Rodriguez: My question did not concern a re-opening of the present contract; it concerned the opening of negotiations for the next contract. That is not unknown in the postal service because I am holding in my hand a copy of the 1974 contract on which negotiations were begun 120 days before. In view of the fact that discussions are not the same as negotiations, and in view of the fact that the minister's officials have said-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member for Lafontaine-Rosemont.



PUBLIC WORKS


Mr. Claude-Andrfe Lachance (Lafontaine-Rosemont):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Public Works.
Following the many delays in the government building construction project known as Place Guy-Favreau in Montreal and the representations made by many members from the Montreal region, particularly by the hon. member for Saint-Jacques, can the minister tell the House whether the executive council of the City of Montreal has finally approved the Place Guy-Favreau project? If so, when is the construction work scheduled to begin and, secondly, will the church, the presbytery and the Chinese school that occupied the original site be preserved as a cultural heritage?


Hon. Judd Buchanan (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, the buildings to which the hon. member made reference will be preserved. We have an agreement to that effect.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


J. Judd Buchanan: The council of the city of Montreal has approved the project but we have not yet taken a decision on when it will commence.
Oral Questions ENERGY

December 16, 1976



MINISTER'S KNOWLEDGE OF INVESTIGATION OF OVERSEAS NUCLEAR REACTOR SALES PROGRAM BY FORCES OTHER THAN MOUNTED POLICE

Mr. Allan Lawrence (Northumberland-Durham):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. In view of the impression he left with the House yesterday that he was taking the initiative in referring the matters which have been mentioned, to the RCMP, I should like to ask him whether he was given any information at all that the RCMP and/or another major Canadian law enforcement agency was conducting an investigation into the matter relating to the overseas CANDU sales before he made that reference in the House?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, it is always very difficult to account for the impressions that the hon. member takes from an answer given from this side of the House. He should read yesterday's Hansard. I will read it to him because I do not think there is any question about a mistaken impression here. I said, as reported at page 2027 of Hansard:
Accordingly, I have contacted the Department of Justice and sought their advice on how we might deal with this matter. I want to tell the House that I think within a very short period of time this matter will be placed in the hands of the RCMP.
I do not see how even the hon. member could misconstrue that wording, Mr. Speaker.


Allan Frederick Lawrence: Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister asked whether, before he made that statement in the House yesterday, he knew that at least one other major law enforcement agency and/or the RCMP was already conducting an investigation into matters relating to the Canadian overseas nuclear reactor sales program?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, I was quite unaware and I am still quite unaware of any other agency investigating this particular matter referred to yesterday.



POSSIBILITY OF REVISION OF TEXTILE IMPORT QUOTA POLICY-EFFECT OF POLICY ON EMPLOYMENT WITH IMPORT RETAILERS

Mr. John A. Fraser (Vancouver South):: Mr. Speaker, my question to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce refers to import quotas, but first I want to thank his parliamentary secretary for his assistance during the past week. On December 14, the minister said in the House in answer to a question as reported at page 1983 of Hansard:
... Canadian importers must understand that in the future they will have to go back to 1975 import levels ...
Can the minister advise whether, despite his statement, he intends to modify that position, especially in view of the departmental official statement issued on December 14 to the

effect that revision should bring some relief to high fashion and specialty retailers as well as those retailers who established business during 1976?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to acknowledge that my parliamentary secretary is a good man.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: I intend to make a statement along those lines either later this afternoon or tomorrow in a press release.


John Allen Fraser: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. In view of the fact that the textile and clothing board reports it has had recent evidence that difficulties in the textile manufacturing side were costing jobs and has also received evidence that displacement has already occurred, the jobs have already been lost, can the minister advise whether his department has been informed what jobs will be lost among import retailers if the provisions announced on November 29 are not amended?
[ Translation]


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, of course some positions may have disappeared in the textile industry, and I said in my November 29 statement that I wanted to restore the employment level in the textile industry to 200,000 jobs, which was the 1975 level. I think the difference in imports will not be very great between 1975 and today, and in the employment situation as a whole, I believe it is better to guarantee jobs to textile employees. I am confident that this will not unduly affect the employment level on the importers' side.



POST OFFICE


Hon. W. G. Dinsdale (Brandon-Souris):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Postmaster General and I should like to take this opportunity to express the appreciation of all members for the CUPW announcement that there will be no strike during the holiday season.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


An hon. Member:: No thanks to him.


Mr. Alexander:: He gets no credit, poor guy.


Walter Gilbert Dinsdale: In view of the impression that Conservative members of parliament received in recent visits to metropolitan automated postal plants across Canada from both management and labour to the effect that they want a return to an efficient and reliable postal service; in view of the fact that the CUPW president, Joe Davidson, has stated that there is a chance for a new era in the post office with the appointment of a new Postmaster General and an assistant deputy for person-

December 16, 1976

nel, will the minister be contacting CUPW officials directly to indicate that the door to reconciliation is still open to continue the prevailing Christmas spirit well into the new year?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: Mr. Speaker, let me thank the hon. member for that very welcome expression of Christmas cheer. I should like to indicate that our door is always open and we are ready to commence discussions at any time and will continue discussion until all problems in the post office have been solved.



REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION


Mr.   Jean-R. Roy@Timmins: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion.
Following the announcement made in the Ontario legislature yesterday by the Hon. Darcy McKeough, can the minister indicate whether the negotiations required to give some substance to this announcement were held with the federal department? If not, when will they take place? If yes, what are the consequences of this announcement for the federal government?


Hon. Marcel Lessard (Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: Mr. Speaker, as a matter of fact the Minister of Finance of Ontario announced yesterday in the legislature a series of development projects for several municipalities in this province.
Until now our department has received representations for specific projects from the Hon. Darcy McKeough. Most of these projects-which, by the way, have already been announced-are interesting from different points of view for our department, but I have to tell the House that no final commitment was taken about any of these projects and that we shall go on studying them. While on this subject, I might point out that we are also studying other projects which have been referred to us and which are not necessarily included in that list.



IMMIGRATION


Mr. Jake Epp (Provencher):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Manpower and Immigration. In view of the press statement the minister released when Bill C-24 received first reading in the House to the effect that regulations would be developed regarding the selection of immigrants, would the minister now give an undertaking that not only the essence of the regulations but the very regulations
Oral Questions
governing family class, the selection criteria and the conduct of inquiries, among other things, will be tabled in the House for discussion during second reading debate?


Hon. Jack Cullen (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to give that particular undertaking. However, at committee stage I am prepared to discuss in detail the essence of the regulations which I think will bring sufficient information to the hon. member so that the bill can be adequately debated.



GOVERNMENT POLICY ON PASSING LEGISLATION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF REGULATIONS

Arthur Jacob (Jake) Epp: Mr. Speaker, may I put my
supplementary question to the Prime Minister? In view of the fact that the Department of Immigration's own top secret critical path study for passage and implementation of Bill C-24 indicates that the regulations will be completed by January 17, 1977, and in view of the fact that the former minister implied that the regulations should be discussed by the committee, will the Prime Minister indicate whether it is government policy to pass legislation such as this immigration legislation without disclosing how that legislation will be implemented or administered? This is legislation which will affect the entire future of this country.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I understand that the responsible minister indicated he would be answering this question to the House. It is not a matter of government policy. If there is some aspect of it that I am not aware of I will look into it and attempt to supplement the answer tomorrow.
Talking about supplementary answers, Mr. Speaker, it has been drawn to my attention by the Minister of Finance that I did not quite answer the second part of the question put earlier by the New Democratic Party. I do not know if I have the permission of the House to attempt-


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

[DOT] (N50)



CANADA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION


Mr. Sinclair Stevens (York-Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Finance. Further to my question yesterday with respect to a CDC proposed $7 million investment in a venture promoted by Mr. Israel Asper of Winnipeg, would the minister who, on behalf of the people of Canada holds the majority of the shares in CDC, now indicate if he has confirmed that such a transaction is being considered by CDC? Is it likely the matter will be consummated, and if so when?

December 16, 1976
Oral Questions


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, there is a transaction before the board. I cannot confirm whether the hon. member has accurately described it. I have to comment, however, that because of the manner in which the Canada Development Corporation was created and set up by this House, I do not feel I should respond with regard to specific commercial transactions which it is entering into, rather that the participation of the government of Canada should be through the general shareholders' meeting, as is the case with the other 20,000 shareholders.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: At this proposed deal has been under negotiations with CDC officials for over a year and a half, including a period when Mr. Asper was still the Liberal leader in Manitoba, will the minister indicate if he was ever informed of the matter, including the $100,000 annual management fee for Mr. Asper, bearing in mind at all relevant times the minister's deputy minister and the previous deputy minister of finance Mr. Riesman sat on the board of CDC.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: No, Mr. Speaker.



REQUEST FOR TABLING OF MINUTES OF MEETINGS DEALING WITH NEGOTIATIONS WITH CANADIAN INVESTMENT PARTNERS

Sinclair McKnight Stevens: Would the minister table all CDC executive committee minutes and director minutes touching on the Asper proposal and in particular minutes of the executive committee meeting of July 8 this year which authorized CDC management to proceed with negotiations to enter the proposed partnership?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, parliament created CDC to act as a commercial corporation and to bring into participation in that corporation members of the general public as investors. The questions, and indeed the actions, proposed by the hon. member for York-Simcoe would only frustrate the objectives for which parliament set up the corporation.



PUBLIC SERVICE


Mr. Donald W. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Prime Minister. In light of the reply given by the Prime Minister to a question last week put to him by the Leader of the Opposition in connection with the merit principle in the public service, will the Prime Minister advise whether he has yet decided on the particular mechanism that he considers would be appropriate for an investigation of this sort and whether an inquiry into the Public Service Commission would be included in such an investigation?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the question I answered last week indicated that I was concerned about some allegations, that I considered them to be

serious and that I was looking into the matter. I asked my officials to explore these allegations in greater depth and to have discussions with Mr. Gallant. I am informed he made a statement yesterday which in part met these allegations. I believe he suggested that a certain review proposed by the parliamentary committee was under way. I cannot give any further answer at this time. If I am satisfied that the inquiry is not being conducted in a proper way, I will extend the scope of it.


Donald W. Munro: In extending the scope of any such committee, will the Prime Minister undertake to ensure that the investigation will include promotion as well as hiring, transfer and appeal practices?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I will consider that suggestion. I must repeat that the Chairman of the Public Service Commission, Mr. Edgar Gallant, released a statement dated yesterday wherein he certainly gives another point of view to that put forward by certain members on both sides of the House. I want to have his views examined at the same time as the allegations made in the House.



ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS


Mr. Bill Jarvis (Perth-Wilmot):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Fisheries and the Environment. It relates to the report he tabled yesterday from the Atmospheric Environment Services Branch. Will the minister confirm that the 50 per cent reduction in aerosol sprays containing specified flurocarbons during 1977 will be purely voluntary on the part of industry? Also, has he secured their specific agreement to that 50 per cent reduction over the next year?


Hon. Romeo LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries and the Environment):: Yes, Mr. Speaker. The industry has indicated that the removal of F-ll will in fact bring about a 50 per cent reduction. I have asked that there be a report every three months on the progress with regard to finding a substitute for F-12 which is the real villain. I will continue to consult with industry. I made it clear that by the end of 1978, substitute or not, non-essential use will be phased out.


William Herbert Jarvis: The Atmospheric Environment Services strongest recommendation is that there be an increased research and monitoring effort because of Canada's unique geographic location and ability to conduct such research. In his press conference yesterday, the minister did not respond to that specific recommendation. Is he able to undertake to the House now that he adopts the recommendation by Atmospheric Environment Services and that there will indeed be an increased research and monitoring effort on behalf of that branch?


Roméo LeBlanc: Mr. Speaker, every sector of the department has competing demands and compet-
December 16, 1976

ing interests. We try to allocate our resources as wisely as possible.



ATOMIC ENERGY CONTROL BOARD


Mr. Maurice Foster (Algoma):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. In view of a report that the radiation levels in the Serpent River watershed are twice the permissible level in Ontario and the apparent health hazard posed by this, can the minister assure the House that the licensing of the expansion programs of uranium mines by the Atomic Energy Control Board will be approved only on a basis that will not increase the radiation levels in the river system? Also, will programs for the management of mine tailing beds be implemented to bring these radiation levels in the river system within the limitation permitted by the ministry of health?


Alastair William Gillespie: Mr. Speaker, the general answer is yes. AECB will be able to provide, through its licensing arrangements, the kind of control the hon. member and in fact all members would wish for the residents of that area. I should go on to point out that when we get into the whole question of mine tailings and radiation rates, we have to depend on certain provincial agencies. I am pleased to tell the House that because of the degree of co-operation between some provincial agencies involved and the federal agencies, the system is working very well now.



COMMUNICATIONS


Mr. Cyril Symes (Sault Ste. Marie):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Communications. In view of the fact that Telesat Canada, which is half owned by the federal government, has announced it intends to join the Trans-Canada Telephone system which is 70 per cent controlled by Bell Canada, thereby effectively turning over the use of our satellite communications system to Bell, a private monopoly, I would like to ask the minister why she has rejected the option of Telesat merging with Teleglobe and CN Telecommunications thereby creating a publicly owned communications system with obvious advantages in funding and policy making.


Hon. Jeanne Sauve (Minister of Communications):: Mr. Speaker, that option really was not ever made in a serious manner. Teleglobe and CN/CP did not offer to guarantee to occupy the space on the satellite in the way that TCTS did.
Oral Questions


Reginald Cyril Symes: Mr. Speaker, there is obviously some disagreement between the minister's department and the CRTC on this matter. In view of the likelihood that telephone rates will increase if the merger of Telesat and TCTS is allowed, since Bell will have another capital cost to justify rate increases, can the minister assure the House that the CRTC will hold full public hearings on this matter so that alternatives may be studied and the public interest protected?


Jeanne Sauvé: Mr. Speaker, this option has the proviso that the CRTC prerogatives under the law will not be placed in jeopardy. They are protected. Whenever an application is made for rates increases, the CRTC will retain its right to look into all of the transactions and decide on the rates for telephones.



FISHERIES


Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct my question to the Minister of Fisheries. In a release dated December 13, he stated that Canadian scientists believed that big catches in bottom trawl fisheries have been a major reason for the decline of cod stocks in recent years. Since federal action is necessary to control the depredations of foreign trawlers which are catching spawning fish off Nova Scotia, as well as on the Hamilton Bank off the coast of Labrador, will the minister take steps to install facilities this winter and during the coming spring to ensure the foreign trawlers are inspected? And if the fish caught are found to be in a spawning condition, will the hon. gentleman endeavour to prohibit further fishing?


Hon. Rom6o LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries and the Environment):: We have made it very clear that the regulations for 1977 will be those Canada will impose and violaters will be brought before Canadians courts. I would point out to the hon. member that the reduction in quotas will mean that the foreign fishing fleet will be practically absent off the coast of Nova Scotia.



TRANSPORT


Thomas Charles Cossitt: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the President of the Privy Council. Since the matter was first raised in the House a few days ago by the hon. member for Crowfoot, has the hon. gentleman had time to review the letter of the Minister of Transport to members of the Liberal caucus in which he stated that the real cost of his jetstar flights was $442,000 rather than $742,000 as stated to me in an answer to

December 16, 1976
Business of the House
a question on the order paper? If so, will the minister tell the House which answer represents the real cost of these flights and, more important, which answer represents the figure the government will stand by?


Mr. Speaker:: With respect, that is a precise repetition of a question that has already been asked.



BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE


Mr. Baker (Grenville-Carleton):: Mr. Speaker, it has come around to that time of week and to a particular time of the year-


Some hon. Members:: Ho, ho, ho!


Walter David Baker: -and I wonder whether the government House leader has anything of which he would wish to inform us with respect to the balance of the session, bearing in mind that we are to have a vote this afternoon on Bill C-19. Does he have any news for us today which will warm the cockles of our hearts?


Mr. MacEachen:: I would advise the hon. member that warming the cockles of our hearts is Mr. Speaker's department, not mine. I hope that you, sir, will have an opportunity very soon to perform that function. I know the hon. member is concerned about the business of the House. It is the intention to call Bill C-19, with a division later in the day. Following that, we shall continue with the Income Tax Act, Bill C-22, tonight and tomorrow, and probably on Monday. I have suggested we might be dealing with the television resolution on Monday, but I think now I will put that over until Tuesday. In conclusion, I may say there are some proposals under discussion which could bear results before the end of today, or else tomorrow. If progress is made there, then the cockles could be warmed.


Walter David Baker: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, to reassure hon. members that I know when not to ask a supplementary question.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Mr. Speaker, in view of the general interest which seems to obtain on the subject of holidays, may I direct my almost daily question to the President of the Privy Council? Several times, now, he has told me that the bill respecting Heritage Day and other holidays would be "filed that day". When is it going to be filed?


Allan Joseph MacEachen: Notice will be given this week.


A. Daniel McKenzie: I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. Today when I presented my motion under Standing Order

43, Your Honour did not allow me to complete my motion. You gave me no explanation whatsoever, and I should like a ruling from you explaining why a member of parliament cannot question the appointment of an individual-


Mr. Speaker:: Order. There is really no provision for reviewing decisions of the Chair respecting proposed motions under Standing Order 43. The preamble to the hon. member's motion was argumentative. I have several times in the past said that the only preamble permitted is one which gives a brief description of the motion in terms of its urgency so as to justify pre-empting other business of the House. When the preamble, as in this case, is argumentative, I put it aside.


Thomas Charles Cossitt: Mr. Speaker, a few moments ago I directed a question to the President of the Privy Council. I do not question the ruling of the Chair for one moment. Rather, I ask for clarification or for an explanation for the benefit of myself and other members. When this question was asked in the House a few days ago, the President of the Privy Council said he was not aware of the letter. I am sure he is aware of it by now. My question today was only a follow-up asking what was the government's attitude. In other words, although my question was the same as the previous question, it was a follow-up. Why was it ruled out of order?


Mr. Speaker:: Had the hon. member made reference to the earlier question and indicate it was a follow-up, that the answer had not been forthcoming previously but that the minister was now in a position to answer the question he did not answer the other day, the attitude of the Chair might have been different.



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, we are all aware that an increasingly competitive atmosphere in international trade has led in the post-war period to trading arrangements and business practices which are not always in keeping with the legal and ethical standards of Canada and other countries. In recent years, both the private and public sectors in several countries have been working toward an improved code of conduct governing the promotion of international trade. Accordingly, I wish to state today the policy of the government of Canada on the conduct which is expected of Canadian Crown corporations and, more particularly, on the commercial practices of these corporations.
To put the issue in perspective, we must recognize as a fact of life the constant tension between the twin goals of promot-
December 16, 1976

ing foreign trade and, at the same time, maintaining standards of conduct on the part of Canadians and their agents which can stand up to the closest public scrutiny. This is not a new problem, nor is it restricted, in its broader dimensions, to the field of international trade. Each of us is familiar, in our own lives, with the way in which our ethical judgments define acceptable and unacceptable methods of pursuing personal goals. In the process of making such judgments, both governments and individuals discern that some actions are clearly unacceptable because they are obviously in conflict either with the law of the land or with fundamental principles of behaviour which individuals or societies have adopted as their own. Other actions are just as clearly discerned to be perfectly consistent with both the law and ethical principles.
But there is a middle area, a grey area, where difficulties can, and do, arise. In this middle area fall those practices about which people who consider themselves to be of equal integrity can make differing judgments, practices whose ethical quality can be perceived differently in different societies, and even within the same society at different stages of its development. The existence of this grey area demands that those responsible for the conduct of others provide guidance. It demands, as well, that such guidance be re-examined periodically to keep it relevant to changing circumstances, maturing values, and newly developed practices. For an exporting country like Canada, whose economic health is largely determined by its success in selling its goods and services abroad, the way in which that trade is carried out is of major importance to the country as a whole. That is why the government of Canada is heavily involved, and properly so, in promoting our products and helping private Canadian companies to sell their goods and services to foreign customers. In the case of Crown corporations involved in the export trade, the level of government involvement in sales promotion and trade is even more pronounced.
To appreciate how vital these efforts are to the economy of the country, one need only note that 25 per cent of all jobs in Canada are related to our export trade, as is some 23 per cent of the income of Canadians and about 56 per cent of the goods produced in this country. Because international trade is a matter of economic life or death for Canada, the government and the people of this country are naturally concerned about any development which might jeopardize our trading activity or damage our external and trade relations. In the recent past, we have had reason for concern.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. There seem to be several other conversations or meetings going on at this time. If members are interested in pursuing them, I wonder whether they would pursue them outside the chamber.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Robert Knight Andras: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First among these concerns there have been, over the past few years, revelations about unacceptable business practices, including bribery,
Guidelines for Crown Corporations which involved corporations and governments in other parts of the world. These revelations have shocked the international community, disrupted governments and cast a disturbing shadow over the international trading environment. In response, the governments of Canada and other countries have taken remedial action. The international community, within the United Nations and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, is making a determined effort to establish a code of conduct suited to the problems which have come to our attention. Canada has supported, and will continue to support, such efforts.
The second reason for concern is that here at home questions have recently been raised about the business and accounting practices of certain Crown corporations involved in the export trade, such as Polysar and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. In response, the government has referred these questions to the public accounts committee of the House. The government is giving the committee its full co-operation, in the confidence that we will receive sound and helpful advice at the conclusion of its deliberations. As a further response, the government has formalized the guidelines governing the commercial practices of federal Crown corporations. With a view to providing both protection and guidance, I will now state those guidelines: (1) in the process of doing business, officials of federal Crown corporations shall not, directly or indirectly, firstly, take any action in Canada that is not in accordance with the laws of Canada, or take any action outside Canada that violates the laws of the place where the transaction occurs, or that if taken in Canada would be in violation of the Criminal Code of Canada; secondly, render or accept any bribe or other improper benefit; or thirdly, apply improper influence.
Then (2) in retaining sales and procurement agents, Crown corporations shall adhere to the following principles: first, the matter of selection of those agents. Crown corporations must adopt an established selection process to ensure that the agent's qualifications for the work are clearly established and evaluated. Second, the process of contracting: (a) agency agreements shall be formally written and shall include specific undertakings by the agents to act in accordance with the laws of the place where the transaction occurs; (b) remuneration under the agreements shall be based on justifiable and sound business practice; (c) payments shall be strictly in accordance with the formal written agreement.
In terms of approval of those contracts: (a) the board of directors or other governing body of each corporation shall establish a procedure for approval of agency agreements; (b) the board of directors or other governing body may approve any exception from the administrative aspects of this policy where it is satisfied such exception is warranted. On the matter of disclosure: (a) corporations will disclose in their annual reports the names of their agents, as well as the aggregate of all remuneration paid to such agents; (b) any approved administrative exception from the policy and the reasons therefor shall be disclosed in the annual report of the corporation.

December 16, 1976
Guidelines for Crovm Corporations
Such is the government's policy and such are the guidelines governing the commercial practices of Crown corporations. I shall communicate them, in my capacity as President of the Treasury Board, to all departments and agencies listed in schedules A and B of the Financial Administration Act. The responsible ministers will likewise communicate them to all Crown corporations and agencies listed in schedules C and D of that act. These corporations will also be notified that the government will, if necessary, contemplate further action, including legislation, to ensure compliance with the policy I have just enunciated. Furthermore, the government will use its shareholder's prerogative, in other corporations where it has some degree of ownership or control, to ensure that they conform to the spirit of this policy.
The problems faced by Crown corporations are in many respects shared by departmental officials, such as diplomats and trade commissioners who assist in the promotion of Canadian exports. The principles that have governed in the past the activities of these public servants have been that, while these officials must do all they can to inform Canadian businessmen of all factors that could influence their sales prospects, they must, of course, limit their assistance to providing information of a general and factual nature, and must under no circumstances counsel or advise the businessman to engage in any corrupt or illegal practice.
I wish to inform the House that the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) has instructed the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Jamieson) and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce (Mr. Chretien) to ensure that procedures and practices in their departments continue to be consistent with the policy I have stated for Crown corporations. Needless to say, the government will welcome advice from the public accounts committee, other members of this House, the private sector and the general public on the ways in which guidelines for federal Crown corporations might be further improved and give even greater assurance of adherence to the rules I have just stated. Ministers responsible for the various aspects of our international trade have also been asked to review this matter and to recommend, as required, further improvement to the guidelines.
In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I wish to emphasize that rigorous ethical standards and dedication to propriety-whether on the part of individuals, corporations, governments or nations- carry with them acceptance of certain practical limitations on action and performance. In other words, what I am really saying today is that, while we Canadians need and want to expand our foreign trade, we are not prepared to sell our goods and services on any terms or under any conditions. Principles, just as commodities, can be expensive. We Canadians must be fully aware of the price we must pay to live by our principles, to be the kind of people we want to be and to maintain the kind of society we want to have. We do not claim that the Canadian way of doing things and doing business makes us any better than other peoples or other countries. But it is the Canadian way-the way we have chosen for ourselves.


Mr. Don Mazankowski (Vegreville):: Mr. Speaker, we in our party welcome the announcement just made by the President of the Treasury Board (Mr. Andras). I think it is fair to say that the revelations in the past few weeks in particular clearly demand action on the part of the government. While the action has been delayed, particularly when we realize that many of these incidents were drawn to the attention of the government some time ago, with a clear indication of impropriety in terms of the operations of Crown corporations having been in the hands of the government for more than three years, we welcome it.


Walter David Baker: It is an admission.


Donald Frank Mazankowski: As the hon. member for Grenville-Carleton (Mr. Baker) says, it is a clear admission. This action which is contemplated as a result of the announcement today can be likened to closing the barn door after the horse has run away. There is no question but that Canada's business and political reputation has been damaged at home and abroad. The guidelines the minister has enunciated today are very elementary and fundamental and are surely part of any effort to conduct business in an orderly and ethical fashion. While there are some cosmetics attached to the announcement today, I suppose to that extent we could also suggest the minister has painted the barn door after the horse has escaped.


An hon. Member:: Whitewashed!


Donald Frank Mazankowski: The report of the Auditor General and the testimony we have received before the public accounts committee clearly plead for action to bring about some orderly financial management and control systems for government departments, agencies and, in particular, Crown corporations. We had evidence presented to us in the committee this morning, and at previous committee proceedings, of multimillion dollar transactions being conducted without board resolutions, with inadequate or no documentation, without minutes, without adequate authorization for the payment of funds, and inadequate requisitions for the funding of various projects. It is no wonder the Auditor General was so condemning in his report tabled some two or three weeks ago in the House of Commons. I think those remarks are so fundamental and important to this institution that they should be repeated. The Auditor General said:
No central government agency recognizes the need to identify all corporations owned or controlled by the government of Canada.
Commercial enterprises in the private sector are subject to a greater degree of financial accountability than Crown corporations.
Financial management and control is not a priority within Crown corporations.
The annual deficits and net debt of the Government of Canada are substantially understated due to the manner of accounting for Crown corporations.
Parliament is presented with incomplete and fragmented financial plans and inadequate financial reports.
Financing practices would preclude evaluating management performance even if central agencies had the responsibility to do so.
December 16, 1976

There is no question, then, that in summary the Auditor General has pointed out that financial management and control is weak, ineffective and grossly inadequate. It is an admission on the part of the minister today in presenting this announcement to the House.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Donald Frank Mazankowski: The government today expresses its concern because over the past few years there have been revelations of unacceptable business practices, including bribery. We do not know whether there was a bribe involved in the Argentinian transaction, but I can assure you that an increasing number of members of the public accounts committee are of the opinion that if there was no bribe involved, there was certainly something very underhanded about that transaction.
The second reason for government concern is that here, at home, questions have recently been raised about the business and accounting practices of certain Crown corporations involved in export trade, such as Polysar and Atomic Energy of Canada. This is not recent: we have filed in this House a letter dated March 22, 1973, directed to the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) of this country from the former auditor general drawing attention to the fact that something less than normal was happening in respect of the business practices of Polymer, and I quote:
-my examination of Polymer's accounts this year disclosed existence of a serious contingent liability of indeterminable proportions arising out of certain transactions of its Swiss subsidiary, Polysar International S.A. Briefly, this arises from the subsidiary's practice of invoicing certain European customers, by agreement, at inflated prices, with the difference being remitted to the customers or their representatives in cash in Switzerland or placed in numbered Swiss bank accounts as directed.
This was drawn to the attention of the Prime Minister in 1973. What action has the government taken? It has done nothing to this date, Mr. Speaker. I can assure you that the inflated prices which have been interpreted as volume discounts are certainly not supermarket discounts in this connection. If this is not a bribe, it is very close to it. The fact of the matter is that the former president of the treasury board simply sat on his hands and did nothing; at least, he sat on his hands when he wasn't using them to dial a judge!


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Donald Frank Mazankowski: Let me now make a comment on some of these specific guidelines. First of all, in dealing with guideline number one, it would appear that this represents a complete shift from the position taken by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce (Mr. Chretien) in the House last week when he compared our business practices to the matter of the morality of adults in the bedrooms of the nation, and it was not our business to condemn the morals of anybody . I am not going to quote from that speech, but I am sure the minister wishes now he had never made it because it certainly put a different interpretation on our ethical, moral and business standards as compared to what this minister has tried to outline to the House today. This seems to demonstrate very
Guidelines for Crown Corporations clearly the kind of shilly-shally approach this government has taken toward the conduct of Crown corporations.
Dealing with the question of agencies, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the guidelines outlined in respect of the use of agencies are pretty clear and fundamental. It might be well for the minister to add a guideline to ensure that these Crown corporations find out who are the agents, and if in fact they are employing real agents. We have had trouble identifying the agent in this particular fiasco, and whether the agent really exists or is simply an improvised company or an arm's length operation for the purpose of tax evasion. We had clear evidence of this in the Argentinian transaction. No one knew who the agent was, nobody cared, and the government did nothing to try to find out. No one cared, Mr. Speaker.
Speaking of agents, I am sure I speak for many members of the House when I express concern about our not using facilities at our disposal, facilities such as the Canadian Commercial Corporation, embassies, or trade missions. Many of us feel that instead of employing on a wide scale agents for furthering our export endeavours, we should utilize Crown corporations such as the Canadians Commercial Corporation, trade missions and embassies.
I now come to the question of disclosure. Surely this matter is at the root of our problem. The question of Crown corporations' accountability to parliament has long been an outstanding one. Year after year Crown corporations present annual reports which are not referred to an appropriate parliamentary committee. I cite Air Canada as an example. The annual report of Air Canada was last submitted to the appropriate standing committee of this House in November, 1973. That is too long ago. Surely we should scrutinize the operations of that $1 billion enterprise which touches the lives of almost all Canadians in this country. But that corporation was not given the opportunity to appear before a parliamentary committee. We, as parliamentarians, are not given the opportunity regularly to question the operation of such Crown corporations. Surely we, the representatives of the shareholders of this Crown corporation, and others, are entitled to examine such operations regularly.
In my view, there ought to be provision for automatic reference to an appropriate standing committee. That, surely, is a minimum requirement. It should be up to the committee to decide if it wants to call members of the Crown corporation to appear, to give evidence or other testimony. Second, I suggest that this House should seriously consider establishing a permanent standing committee on Crown corporations, a committee with terms of reference broader than those applying to any other standing committee of the House of Commons. It would need such terms of reference in order to probe in depth and detail the conduct and operations of Crown corporations. Such a committee also must be given power to initiate studies on its own behalf.
I have suggested two or three steps which, if taken, would make Crown corporations more readily accountable to parlia-

December 16, 1976
Guidelines for Crown Corporations
ment and, thereby, to the people of Canada. I say with sadness that while this government has been in office, day by day the requirement with regard to accountability has been diminished. If Crown corporations are to be accountable to parliament and to respective committees, the process must begin with the restoration of parliamentary control over spending. The government must be held accountable to parliament, since that is at present where the difficulty lies. We must immediately begin reversing the present process, the process which has allowed the government to chip away the powers of parliament. That process has been escalated under the present regime. We must act immediately if we are to bring under control and impose a semblance of financial management on not only Crown corporations but on all departments and agencies of government.
Last, I say that this government must immediately implement all recommendations of the Auditor General because they are part and parcel of the question of accountability. Not until we restore the powers of parliament will we restore the confidence of Canadians in our institutions, management and control systems and Crown corporations.


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, in responding to the guidelines announcement 1 wish to make three points. First, there was in the minister's statement of today the clearest possible admission of the serious likelihood of wrongdoing on the part of one or more Crown corporations which are operated indirectly at least by the government of Canada. Second, the statement amounted to the clearest repudiation of statements made earlier on this issue by senior ministers of the Crown; indeed, it repudiates the attitude of the last two weeks taken by the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) himself.
Third, and now I deal with the substance of the statement and how it will affect future conduct, 1 argue that what we heard today amounts to nothing more than a series of paltry, pious platitudes. I suggest that there is not one provision for ensuring that the guidelines which have now been spelled out formally and existed earlier informally will be enforced. That point is fundamental. If, as the Prime Minister assured us, there were in existence informal guidelines, and if, as the minister himself said, the government is now presenting formal guidelines, manifestly the minister was simply expressing formally that which had existed informally previously. But he talked not at all of how we are to enforce such guidelines. I shall return to this subject in a minute.
I mentioned three points, Mr. Speaker. First, there was the admission of wrongdoing. I will not go back over what has been raised by way of debate and questions in this House in the last three weeks. That has already been referred to adequately by the spokesman of the Conservative party. A fundamental issue is at stake, for we are concerned about the conduct of Canadian businesses abroad, particularly of Crown corporations for which all members of the House of all parties bear some responsibility. We should take the attitude that the Crown corporations of Canada should set high standards of behaviour, both moral and economic. We have now heard

enunciated guidelines of the kind one would hope would have been enforced some time ago. That was a serious matter. I will not trot out again all the facts as we know them and which have been made known in the last few weeks. But I will say that the position adopted earlier by the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources (Mr. Gillespie) and the Minister of Industry Trade and Commerce (Mr. Chretien) has been clearly repudiated by the statement which was made today.


Robert Knight Andras: No.


John Edward Broadbent: The minister says "No". I could go back to Hansard and quote the two ministers.


Alastair William Gillespie: Why doesn't the hon. member do that?


John Edward Broadbent: I will do that later. I am referring to the statement or comment made by the minister and his colleagues to the effect that we had no business imposing the moral standards of Canadians on other countries. That attitude has been repudiated in this House by the opposition and by the people of Canada. I say that we would not have had these guidelines announced if it had not been for the good institutions of the House of Commons-and I am not referring to the government. We would not have had them announced if the Auditor General had not done his job and reported to the House, and if the opposition parties-and I do not intend to pat myself on the back when I speak of the role of all opposition members in this House-and public opinion together had not forced the government to do what it should have done instinctively 3'/2 years ago when the former auditor general sent the letter to the Prime Minister, who ought to have acted. The former president of the treasury board should have done something more than make a mere telephone call and then leave the matter in abeyance for 3!6 years.
I repeat, the moral behaviour of the government has been good only after hell has been raised in the House of Commons or among the people of the country. They never respond until they are caught. As I said, we welcome the belated enunciation of the guidelines which pertain not only strictly to legal behaviour of corporations abroad but also to their moral behaviour. That clear statement is long overdue from the government, and we welcome it.
However, I now come to what I regard as the substance of my criticism in response to these guidelines, and it is as follows. We have a nice description, a good, careful outline of procedures that Crown corporations should follow in their direct and indirect dealings abroad, and we support what is in the statement. But what is absent is the control mechanism. We have run into the problem which we have with our existing Crown corporations, with AECL and with Polysar, as the Auditor General reported, because this government has lost control over the financial operations of the country.
The government, in statements made by the Prime Minister in reply to questions in the House, has said that they have informal rules already, that Crown corporations and depart-

December 16, 1976

merits have been aware of these regulations for some time. If they already have these guidelines, then how have we got into the mess in which we now find ourselves? Is the production of this paper by the minister, this nice enunciation in formal form, to use his phrase, going to prevent what seems clearly to have occurred in the past? Not at all. We should have no confidence in that, nor does the Auditor General, or we would not have had the report we have that the government has lost control of the financial operations of this country for which they are responsible.
I say, then, on behalf of the NDP, by all means let us have these guidelines-we are not going to quibble about them-it is a reasonable statement, but they will mean nothing but pious platitudes unless the government moves to correct and improve the enforcement procedures. What does this mean? It seems to me that they should accept the central recommendation in the Auditor General's report to bring in a comptroller general. One of his specific functions should be the mandate to enforce these guidelines. That would put some teeth in the guidelines; it might make them operative. As has been suggested by the minister who introduced the guidelines today, they have no teeth. Secondly, we suggest, as we did in a motion that was put before the House two weeks ago, that all these annual reports of Crown corporations be submitted automatically to one of the standing committees of the House.
The Conservative Party has spoken in favour of this idea as well. The opposition is making what seems to be a reasonable case here. Let us exercise our responsibility on this side of the House by having these reports come automatically to a standing committee of the House so that we can ex post facto look at the operations of the Crown corporations. But in expressing this, I must underscore the first point. We do not want to catch the damage only after it has been done. We want to set up a procedure in advance to stop improper behaviour. Therefore, the first point is the key one; that is, to appoint a comptroller general, a man or woman who would be responsible for enforcing these good guidelines which otherwise will be just pious platitudes.
[ Translation]


Mr. Adrien Lambert (Bellechasse):: Mr. Speaker, the Canadian people are now going through moments of reflections which, to my mind, are priceless. The statement of the President of the Treasury Board (Mr. Andras) really impressed me because it contains observations that are extremely valuable and stands of which not only the heads of Crown companies should be made aware but also all Canadians, whether they be in the public or the private sectors.
That statement deserves to be read and reread and, later on, implemented. The first paragraph, Mr. Speaker, reads as follows, and I quote:
We are all aware that an increasingly competitive atmosphere in international trade has led in the post-war period to trading arrangements and business practices which are not always in keeping with the legal and ethical standards of Canada and other countries.
To my mind, what should first hold our attention in that paragraph is the fact that it has been noticed that since the
Guidelines for Crown Corporations war, Canada, like other countries, has become better known throughout the world, and that this is one of the positive results of the war of 1939-45.
After the war, which the Allies won, and which Germany lost, the defeated country outdid us. The Germans did not stop to complain about their defeat: they applied themselves to achieving results in their country, to rebuilding and reconquering international markets to the extent where today it lends money to the winning countries, including Canada. There is a lesson we should learn from the period that followed the Second World War. But we must not stop there. Our country benefitted from it, in that many countries discovered Canada and found out that they could obtain products made in Canada to meet their needs.
Since international trade is done through the private sector and Crown corporations, competition between both sectors is normal, and I think that it is even beneficial. Still, both must consider the quality of goods available and also fair dealings in transactions so that countries dealing with Canada through the private sector or Crown corporations will not feel-I almost had the intention of using a Canadian colloquialism-that they have been had . . . Well, that is honesty!


Mr. Roy (Laval):: This is out of order!


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: It is typically Canadian! Surely, Mr. Speaker, at the national and domestic trade level you will find unscrupulous people who want to make money by any means. Any means is fine, nothing is overlooked, everything is done to exploit someone, provided it pays, but this is not always good for a country.


Mr. Parent:: How do you translate that in French?


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: Well, you will have to try to find the translation, my friend. I am talking in my own words and, what's more, I think I am being understood.
Mr. Speaker, international trade requires the same honesty as domestic trade. It is not normal for kickbacks to be used, and eventually this will have very sad and disastrous effects on our country. It is time we realize this. This is why I believe that the minister made a timely statement today. This will cause the government to reflect, and it will also cause it to supervise what is going on so that we may avoid scandals such as those that have been uncovered concerning the transactions with Argentina and India, and so on. There is no need to go into details; all hon. members are aware of them.


Marcel-Claude Roy: That has not been proven.


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: Mr. Speaker, it is terrible! How is it that those on the government side, not all of them, but three or four loudmouths understand nothing about reality and are shocked because we discuss objectively and honestly the problems of our country? When we put a finger on the problem, they are shocked. Mr. Speaker, I believe that we must face facts if we are to try to find solutions.
2074

December 16, 1976
Guidelines for Crown Corporations
It is an insult to the President of Treasury Board for his colleagues to laugh at his statement, because he indeed wants to make corrections. When someone wants to make corrections, it is because something needs to be corrected.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to be a Canadian. I have had the opportunity to travel across the world like many other members, and I can say that Canada has an excellent reputation throughout the world. When we go to Asia, Africa or Latin America, and say that we are Canadians, people want to shake hands with us because Canada has an excellent reputation.
Well, Mr. Speaker, that excellent reputation must be maintained, enhanced, protected, and in that respect it is normal that the government should take steps to protect that reputation on the international market. That is why I think today the President of the Treasury Board made that statement which I welcome, because they want to do something.
Mr. Speaker, I had an opportunity in recent days to introduce a motion under Standing Order 43 to ask for the unanimous consent of the House to have all Crown corporations audited by the Auditor General of Canada. I felt there was near unanimity in the House for the government to introduce amendments to the legislation regulating Crown corporations so the Auditor General could proceed with an auditing, and the government or Parliament could benefit from the recommendations in the comments of the Auditor General, as in other areas. I hope indeed that before too long the government will be introducing the necessary amendments to allow the Auditor General to do a truly essential and even necessary job with respect to Crown corporations.
In concluding, Mr. Speaker, I would like to say that the government will never be too vigilant in protecting Canada's reputation and banning as much as possible-I know it is not 100 per cent possible, I am not that naive-but ban as much as possible corruption and kickbacks not only at the international level but also at the national level. And, Mr. Speaker, we are no longer talking about kickbacks of 25 cents, but kickbacks in the millions. So that is not very much to Canada's advantage.
As an exporting country, we have to take greater advantage of the opportunities made available to Canada on world markets, and in that respect we must all work together hand in hand, whether it be on the government side or the opposition side, we must work hand in hand to try and make Canada a country that will be known as providing better quality products and presenting honest contract opportunities so those people will not feel robbed by agents who want at all cost to use transactions to make money.


An hon. Member:: Hurrah! Talk louder.


Joseph Adrien Henri Lambert: Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to hear the hon. member on the other side who is always shooting his mouth off instead of listening. God, it seems to me it should be possible to listen and speak in turn. That is what I usually do. I listen to the others, and when my time comes I say what I have to say. That is not a hard thing to do, Mr. Speaker, and I would graciously ask that good order be maintained in the House.

[DOT]	(1550)


James McPhail Gillies: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the President of the Treasury Board a three-part question. When are the guidelines expected to come into play? Second, is there going to be an audit procedure put into effect immediately to see what the practice has been in existing Crown corporations and to see if these guidelines apply? Third, following on the statement made by the leader of the New Democratic Party, what are the enforcement provisions? What is different about this set of guidelines as opposed to the guidelines most of us presumed corporations had been operating under in the past?


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, as I tried to indicate, this is a codification and a formalization of practices and policies which should have been operating for a long time and which have been applied somewhat informally at times. Quite understandably, this does reflect a changing of attitudes, as a result of changing conditions in the world, in a really practical way. That is the grey area to which I referred. In so far as the timing of their application, the formalization of this means that, as I indicated, I will be writing to the Crown corporations under schedules A and B forthwith and the responsible ministers will be reviewing this with their departments where there are not Crown corporation employees but public servants involved, and the emphasis stemming from this statement will be brought to bear on all our Crown corporations and the departments involved, particularly those involved with overseas trade.
The audit provision is already there for this. There is argument about the level and the facilities available to the financial administration branch and the secretary of the Treasury Board but indeed, that provision is there and we are looking very carefully at whether the facilities are sufficient now or need to be beefed-up. In terms of the sanctions for public servants, which the leader of the New Democratic Party and the hon. member for Don Valley raised, they refer to the public service as apposed to Crown corporations, and I think hon. members will recognize that in some cases there is a distinction between people working for Crown corporations per se where the Crown corporation is the direct employer as opposed to public servants, and there are grades in between. The Criminal Code of Canada already establishes certain aspects of this, and the violation of it would not only bring administrative sanctions but in certain circumstances could also bring criminal sanctions.
[DOT]	(1600)
The extraterritorial potential of an act committed in some other country, if committed in Canada, could bring to bear certain vigorous responses. In the wording of the Criminal Code, however, that did not apply to Crown corporations or employees of Crown corporations-at least in their totality. This is not legislation; this is a statement of guidelines. The administrative sanctions will unquestionably flow. Let me say, and I hope hon. members will join me in this, that we are talking about the rare exception of an employee of a Crown
December 16, 1976

corporation, the rare exception of a public servant who might, inadvertently or otherwise, have acted improperly in terms of the procedures and standards we have established.
In the case I am describing, administrative sanctions would follow. I indicated in my statement that if there is any doubt about that in the future, legal legislative action could be taken which would make this more specific. I would prefer, and hope hon. members would join me, with the clear definition that is formalized now, that we will not go on the assumption that there will be exceptions. I think we have a very honest public service and honest people working with the Crown corporations. There are grey areas that have existed all around the world; we are not the only country in the world with this problem. I think this is going to clarify that.


James McPhail Gillies: Mr. Speaker, perhaps I misused the word "audit". What I was concerned about was so apparent from the hearing of the public accounts committee this morning- there is absolute chaos in the administrative practices and procedures of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. in respect of the board of directors not approving resolutions, etc. When I used the word "audit", I meant to inquire if the government has the intention now of reviewing the present practices of Crown corporations with respect to these guidelines, not in terms of financial administration but just in terms of what Canadian Crown corporations have been doing with respect to violations and what the guideline would be right now. How are we going to find out what will be done about investigating what has been happening?


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, as we step up the financial control mechanisms to which we subscribe, to which the Auditor General has referred and to which hon. members have referred, I think it is inevitable that there will be an examination of these matters. We are not going on a witch-hunt, but if anything should turn up, unquestionably, if it seems to be sour or to bear further investigation, that will be done.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Chair, of course, has to exercise discretion under the Standing Orders in respect of these particular statements. Bearing in mind the length of the statement, the replies and the other constraints we are under this afternoon, I wonder if hon. members would bear with the Chair in allowing the questioning to be restricted to the hon. member for Capilano, the hon. member for Vancouver Quadra, and the hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands.


Mr. Huntington:: Mr. Speaker, one thing in the minister's statement troubles me. I appreciate the progress and the intention of the statement, but why do we as a country want to pay, or have to pay, or get involved in paying agents and commissions when we are using CIDA money and EDC money for financing under our soft money and credit terms for aid in other countries? As one example, with the CANDU reactor in the Argentine, where we had a $100 million loss and are proud of the fact that we reduced it to a $25 million loss, we have these fees involved in creating the deal. What benefit does this
Guidelines for Crown Corporations have for Canada, and what residual does it leave? I can understand agents' fees and commission where we have a transaction that goes on world market prices for credit and leaves a residual in Canada or some benefit or profit in Canada, but the statement does not cover this matter at all. I simply ask why we have to pay or consider fees and CIDA credit and long-term EDC credit.


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, I am informed that this rather detailed kind of questioning has been going on in the public accounts committee. I do not think it would be very likely in the various transactions in which Crown corporations or this government is involved with many countries and the many more in which we hope to promote foreign trade that the use of agents would be at all peculiar. The hon. member describes certain conditions-CIDA, soft loans, and that sort of thing; and he may well have a point. I will look into that matter. There are many other areas of endeavour where agents will obviously be required, such as some of our transportation arrangements out of different countries where we would have foreign agents making booking arrangements, and all that sort of thing. I am not an expert, but I can visualize that this might even be required under foreign law in order legitimately to operate in a country. There may be a whole range of requirements that are both practical and absolutely essential, and there may be areas where we should be examining not just the proprieties of it but the practicalities of it.


Mr. Clarke:: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the minister if his statement is in any way an acknowledgement that the actions of AECL, which we have been considering very carefully in the last few days, were outside those guidelines. May I also ask if his statement is a contradiction of the remarks made in the House by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce, on December 1 concerning commercial practices in other countries, which he said, in essence, were outside the purview of this government?


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, I will attempt to answer the question, but if the hon. member wishes to paint what my colleague said in some colour or other, I am not going to join him. My understanding of what my colleague implied, and it was not disregarded in my statement, was the recognition- and we had all better recognize it-that 25 per cent of Canadian jobs depend on foreign trade, 23 per cent of income depends on foreign trade, and 56 per cent of goods produced depend on foreign trade. We are staking out high moral ground but that is a very important economic fact of life for this country. In our extension of this and the extraterritorial potential aspect of it, there may be limitations ahead on what we can impose on other countries. I have said there is probably a price to pay for this. I think it is the kind of price Canadians are prepared to pay, and I take it from the hon. member's comment that he would agree.
As for the suggestion that this is a confirmation of the kind of action described and the way in which it was described by AECL, this is absolutely not the case, Mr. Speaker. The AECL situation arose from the legitimate concern of the
80005-631/2

December 16, 1976
Guidelines for Crown Corporations
Auditor General that there was not proper accounting. The matter is now before the public accounts committee and the facts will come out. I, for one, am not joining the game of assuming guilt until the guilt is proven.


Mr. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Oshawa-Whitby has said that what concerns us about the statement of the minister is that there does not seem to be any enforcing mechanism. I want to ask a question about the section under the heading "Approval" and subsections (a) and (b). First, it gives to the board of directors the power to decide and establish a procedure for the approval of agency agreements, and it allows them to set even their own procedures aside, providing they put it into their annual report. That appears to be allowing Crown corporations to police themselves.
Surely the government has a responsibility to lay down the procedures. We had an experience with Crown corporations laying down their own procedures for dealing with this matter. We found out this morning in the public accounts committee that the president of AECL hired an agent and committed the Crown corporation to an expenditure of $20 million. There was not a word about this matter in the minutes of the board of directors until three months after the event, and no resolution authorizing the payment of $20 million. If a private company did that, the shareholders would sue the president.
I do not want to make capital out of something that is past, but surely we have to learn something from the past. If the minister is proposing to leave to the boards of directors the full authority to lay down their own procedures, and even the authority to set aside those procedures providing they put it into the annual report, it is too late; the commitment has been made and the money spent.
Will the minister accept the principle that the government should lay down the procedures, and at any time a board of directors or a Crown corporation wants to depart from them, it must either get the approval of the minister to whom it reports or follow the suggestion we have been making, namely, that there ought to be a comptroller general who would have to give his consent to such a setting aside of the procedures that have been established by the government?


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, in a statement in the House a detailed elaboration of all procedures intended is not possible. The selection procedure is dealt with in my statement and certainly there will be a very interested look at the procedure that is established. I am not absolutely sure at this moment that we could establish a single selection procedure for an infinite variety of Crown corporations, and so forth.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: Mr. Speaker, I want the minister to clarify that point. Surely it is not too much to ask that the board of directors of each Crown coporation would have it specifically spelled out to them that no contract could be entered into, of any size, and no agent hired without a resolution of the board of directors, which is

common business practice. Surely the minister would not think that to be an unreasonable proposition.


Robert Knight Andras: Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what is intended under the heading "Approval", namely, that the board of directors or other governing body of each corporation shall establish a procedure for approval of agency agreements. They are going to have to be approved by the board of directors. If there is any doubt about that, I am saying it now. I know, Mr. Speaker, there is a limitation as to the time. However, there is genuine concern that if you have to seek the approval of the minister in each case, you might as well not have a board of directors. In the end, you might as well not have a Crown corporation, and you might as well revert a lot of Crown corporations back to the status of departments.


Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas: No.


Robert Knight Andras: I hope the hon. member and I get an opportunity to talk about this further. I am sure we will. This is not a specious argument; there may be disagreement, and the matter is very important. The hon. member did refer to the fact that the board of directors may approve any administrative exception from the policy. I want to underline that we will make clear in any elaboration that this is not going to be a loophole for any departure from the policy we enunciate here.
I and my colleagues have been advised of certain possible exceptions. Probably a good example might be in our transportation operations where a Crown corporation such as Air Canada might have an agreement with a booking agent for packaged tours. There might be a formal agreement of a type we talked about here approved by the board of directors. Beyond that, the booking agent in an indirect way may have to make dozens of arrangements with taxi companies, hotels and bus companies for tours. The hon. member can imagine that sort of thing. There is an area somewhere where it becomes so administratively overburdened that it would fall over its own weight. It is not to be used as any evasion or avoidance of the fundamental principle of the policy.
That is the kind of exception we had in mind. Even there, we feel there is fail-safe because it is to be reported in the annual report of the corporation, and so on. The board of directors will be the first line of responsibility. The final line of responsibility in this is through ordinary accountability, the Financial Administration Act and, in some cases, through ministers.


Mr. Speaker:: Introduction of bills.


Donald W. Munro: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order, with all due respect, fully recognizing Your Honour's discretion to decide how many members can ask questions. I have been on my feet since the original replies were made to the statement. I have two short questions I want to put to the President of the Treasury Board. Your Honour recognized me at first, and then changed your mind. I had hoped there might be some way-
December 16, 1976


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The same situation applies to the hon. member for Surrey-White Rock. 1 have to exercise some discretion on the time limit, and I have exercised it.


POST OFFICE ACT
Mr. Perrin Beatty (Wellington-Grey-Dufferin-Waterloo) moved: for leave to introduce Bill C-388, to amend the Post Office Act (direct mail advertising).


Some hon. Members:: Explain.


Henry Perrin Beatty: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to accede to my colleagues' request to explain. The bill arises from the increasing concern among Canadians over the growing use of direct mail advertising campaigns. It would create two registries run by the Post Office which would list people who wanted to receive no consolidated commercial direct mail or who object to receiving consolidated commercial mail that exploits sex, and it would require that these names be dropped from any relevant mailing lists.


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

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
Ralph Goodale: Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: 80, 127, 298, 334, 336, 348, 351, 365, 593, 609, 614, 795, 802, 819, 842, 879, 899, 900, 919, 922, 923, 959, 968, 985, 991, 1028, 1030, 1066, 1095 and 1194.


Mr. Cossitt: Did Mr. Paul Akehurst have a contract with the government in connection with the Habitat Conference in Vancouver and, if so (a) for how long (b) what was the total sum of money he received including expenses (c) what were his duties (d) what were his qualifications?


Hon. Andre Ouellet (Minister of State for Urban Affairs):: For the Ministry of State for Urban Affairs The Canadian Habitat Secretariat entered into three contracts with Intertask Limited for the services of Mr. Paul Akehurst before and during Habitat, the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements. No contract was entered into with Mr. Akehurst personally, (a) The first contract was for ten days in the period from November 25 to December 8, 1975. The second was for the period January 1 to May 31, 1976 and the third was from
Order Paper Questions
June 1 to June 30, 1976. (b) The total fees and expenses paid to Intertask Limited for the three contracts amounted to $37,568.86. (c) Under the first contract, Mr. Akehurst reported to the Commissioner-General on requirements for media facilities. Under the second contract, the duties of Mr. Akehurst were to advise the Director-General, Hosting, on all matters relating to the provision of media facilities and arrangements for the Habitat Conference; to liaise with the Host Broadcaster and the United Nations Office of Public Information (UNOPI) and co-ordinate plans with their requirements; to liaise with the Commissioner-General and other senior personnel concerning media arrangements; and to be responsible for the recruitment and training of management and supervisory personnel for the media facilities and arrangements. Under the third contract, Mr. Akehurst was responsible for the direction and management of the media facilities and arrangements for the Conference; for liaison and co-ordination with the UNOPI and the Host Broadcaster, and for advising the Director-General, Hosting on media facilities and arrangements. (d) The services of Mr. Akehurst were employed because of his considerable experience and proven abilities in the preparation of media facilities and arrangements for other major conferences such as the August 1973 meeting of Commonwealth Heads of Government.


Mr. Orlikow: 1.	For the Fiscal year 1975-1976, what contracts for professional services were let (a) for studies, surveys and analyses into present or future policies, programmes or information analysis, and their efficiency and effectiveness (b) into the examination of the administration or internal operation of the Department of Veterans Affairs?
2.	How much was committed on each contract and to whom?
3.	What were the comparable figures for the fiscal year 1973-1974?


Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: 1.	(a) Systems analysis of the Returned Soldiers Insurance and Veterans Insurance programmes, (b) None.
2.	$10,000 to the Bureau of Management Consulting, DSS.
3.	Nil.


Mr. Marshall: 1.	How many applications have been received from veterans since the inception of the Special Housing Assistance Programme, through additional benefits under AHOP?
2.	Have veterans been advised that they may receive grants from the Department of Veterans Affairs up to $600 annually to assist them to construct or purchase homes priced within the limits established by CMHC, and particularly that this grant is in addition to benefits from CMHC under AHOP?
3.	Have veterans been made aware that under Low Rental Housing projects, DVA will provide a grant of 10% of capital costs in addition to CMHC similar benefits for non-profit corporations who obtain NHA loans to develop low rental projects intended primarily for veterans?
4.	(a) What are the details of the advertising directed to veterans (b) what manner of advertising is used (c) how are pamphlets distributed?

December 16, 1976
Order Paper Questions


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: 1.	To date, there have been 127 applications for which financial assistance has been approved.
2.	In 1975 the Department of Veterans Affairs in conjunction with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation undertook an information program to make the veteran public aware of the Special Housing Assistance Program. Advertisements appeared in various newspapers, weekend newspaper supplements and in periodicals of special interest to veterans. Information leaflets have been and are available at CMHC and DVA offices throughout Canada, and supplies were made available for distribution at the convention in August, 1975 of the Newfoundland and Labrador Provincial Command of the Royal Canadian Legion, at the National Convention of the War Amputations of Canada in September, 1975, at the National Covention of the Royal Canadian Legion in June, 1976, and at the National Convention of the Army, Navy and Air Force Veterans in Canada in August, 1976.
3.	Yes. In addition to the measures described in 2, officials of the Department have brought the grant provisions for low-rental projects to the attention of veterans' organizations personally and by correspondence.
4.	See 2 above.


Mr. Herbert: Has the Minister of Finance considered the payment of a subsidy to private homeowners who heat their residences with domestically produced hydro-electric power, with the amount of the subsidy being equal to the subsidy presently enjoyed by homeowners heating their homes with imported oil?


Mr. Bob Kaplan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance):: As the hon. member knows, the subsidy on imported oil was introduced by the government as a transitional measure to enable Canadian oil consumers to adjust gradually to a four-fold increase in the world price of oil and to produce a single national price for oil. The unit subsidy will decrease as domestic oil prices rise toward international levels. In the case of domestically produced hydro-electric power, there have been no comparable external shocks to the price structure, and sales of electricity at less than its true cost would undermine the government's conservation objectives.


Mr. Herbert: 1.	Are there any continuing or projected discussions between the Minister or officials of the Department of Transport and a minister or officials of the Quebec government with a view to co-operating in the early improvement of bus and rail public transportation systems, particularly in and around Montreal Island?
2.	What financial assistance is contemplated, if any, and what would be the time schedule for the provision of such assistance?


Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister of Transport):: 1. Since urban transportation is a provincial responsibility Transport Canada is not currently represented on the Montreal Region Transpor-

tation Committee. However, I understand that CN and CP Rail are members of the working group charged with examining and coordinating the transportation system in and around Montreal. As announced by the Minister of State for Urban Affairs and myself on August 27, 1976, discussions with all provincial governments are in progress. These discussions, which include Quebec, are intended to seek federal/provincial agreement on a comprehensive urban transportation assistance program.
2.	On July 30, 1975 the federal government announced a $100 million Capital Assistance Program for Commuter Services. The possibility of integrating this program with the urban transportation assistance program is included in the discussions with the provinces. Subject to federal/provincial agreement, I hope to be in a position to fund projects sponsored by provinces and municipalities in the next fiscal year.


Mr. Nystrom: 1.	What proportion of total sales were the sales of the four largest firms in the manufacturers of mixed fertilizers in (a) 1960 (b) 1965 (c) 1970 (d) 1975 (or the most recent year statistics are available)?
2.	What proportion of total sales did the eight largest firms in the industry earn in (a) 1960 (b) 1965 (c) 1970 (d) 1975 (or the most recent year statistics are available)?


Mr. Hugh Poulin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Statistics Canada reports: 1. The proportion of total sales earned by the four largest manufacturers of mixed fertilizers was 62.2 percent in 1965, 70.9 percent in 1970 and 75.1 percent in 1972. (Data for 1960 are not available)
2. The proportion of total sales earned by the eight largest manufacturers of mixed fertilizers was 81.8 percent in 1965, 86.7 percent in 1970 and 89.4 percent in 1972. (Data for 1960 are not available).


Mr. Nystrom: 1.	What proportion of total sales were the sales of the four largest firms in the bakery products industry in (a) 1960 (b) 1965 (c) 1970 (d) 1975 (or the most recent year statistics are available)?
2.	What proportion of total sales did the eight largest firms in the industry earn in (a) 1960 (b) 1965 (c) 1970 (d) 1975 (or the most recent year statistics are available)?


Fabian Hugh Poulin: Bakeries: 1. The proportion of total sales earned by the four largest bakeries was 25.9 percent in 1958*, 32.2 percent in 1965, 31.6 percent in 1970 and 33.4 percent in 1972.
2. The proportion of total sales earned by the eight largest bakeries was 39.5 percent in 1958*, 43.8 percent in 1965, 44.7 percent in 1970 and 47.7 percent in 1972.

Biscuit Manufacturers: 1. The proportion of total sales earned by the four largest biscuit manufacturers was 68.3 percent in 1958*, 67.2 percent in 1965, 68.0 percent in 1970 and 73.4 percent in 1972.
2. The proportion of total sales earned by the eight largest biscuit manufacturers was 83.7 percent in 1958*, 83.6 percent in 1965, 83.8 percent in 1970 and 86.8 percent in 1972.
*Data are not available for 1960. However, for certain industries, data are available for 1958 as a result of a recent historical study of selected industries.


Mr. Masniuk: 1.	Does the government intend to begin construction of the new medium security penitentiary at Stony Mountain, Manitoba and, if so, on what date?
2.	What is the projected cost of the new penitentiary?
3.	On what date is it expected that the new institution will be completed and ready for occupancy?


Francis Fox: 1. The date for the beginning of construction for the new medium security institution, scheduled for Stony Mountain, Manitoba, has not been determined yet. The siting of this institution at Stony Mountain is not confirmed as a possibility exists that the site may not be completely satisfactory. This possibility is presently under investigation by Regional authorities of the Canadian Penitentiary Service.
2.	$11,500,000.
3.	Mid-1981.


Mr. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich): 1.	(a) How many regional offices are maintained by the Department of Communications (b) where is each located (c) for what area is each responsible?
2.	On what date was each established and with how many personnel?
3.	What is the present personnel strength of each office?
4.	In addition to regional offices, are district or other sub-offices maintained and, if so (a) in what locations (b) how many?
5.	Are the duties performed by those manning the regional and/or district offices line functions, in the chain of command from Ottawa to the operator in the field, or do they have other functions to perform and, if so, what are such functions?


Mr. Ross Milne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Communications):: In so far as the Department of Communications is concerned: 1. (a) Five; (b) Moncton, New Brunswick; Montreal, Quebec; Toronto, Ontario; Winnipeg, Manitoba; Vancouver, B.C. (c) The Moncton regional office is responsible for the four Atlantic Provinces. The Montreal regional office is responsible for the Province of Quebec. The Toronto regional office is responsible for the Province of Ontario. The Winnipeg regional office is responsible for the Western Provinces and the Northwest Territories. The Van-
Order Paper Questions
couver regional office is responsible for the Province of British Columbia and the Yukon.
2.	All five regional offices were transferred from the Department of Transport to the Department of Communications in 1969. The personnel strength for each region, including district offices, was as follows: Atlantic region, 41 employees; Quebec region, 75 employees; Ontario region, 100 employees; Central region, 65 employees; Pacific region, 46 employees.
3.	The present strength of each region, including district offices, is as follows: Atlantic region, 120 employees; Quebec region, 185 employees; Ontario region, 210 employees; Central region, 184 employees; Pacific region, 142 employees.
4.	Atlantic Region: (a) Halifax, N.S. (b) one district office.
(a)	Sydney, N.S. (b) one district office, (a) Saint John, N.B.
(b)	one district office, (a) Moncton, N.B. (b) one district office, (a) Bathurst, N.B. (b) one district office, (a) St. John's, NFLD. (b) one district office and one ionospheric station, (a) Corner Brook, NFLD. (b) one district office, (a) Charlottetown, P.E.I. (b) one district office, (a) Montague, P.E.I. (b) one monitoring station. Quebec Region: (a) Montreal, Que. (b) one district office, (a) Rouyn Noranda, Que. (b) one district office, (a) Chicoutimi, Que. (b) one district office, (a) Quebec, Que. (b) one district office, (a) Sept-Iles, Que. (b) one district office, (a) Sherbrooke, Que. (b) one district office, (a) Trois-Rivieres, Que. (b) one district office, (a) St-Lam-bert, Levis County (b) one monitoring station, (a) Senneterre, Napierreville County (b) one monitoring station, (a) Saint Remi, Napierreville County (b) one monitoring station. Ontario Region: (a) Hamilton, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Kenora, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Kingston, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Kitchener, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) London, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) North Bay, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Ottawa, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Sault-Ste-Marie, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Thunder Bay, Ont. (b) one district office and one monitoring station, (a) Toronto, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Windsor, Ont. (b) one district office, (a) Acton, Ont. (b) one monitoring station, (a) Almonte, Ont. (b) one monitoring station. Central Region: (a) Fort Churchill, Man. (b) one district office and one ionospheric station, (a) Thompson, Man. (b) one district office, (a) Winnipeg, Man. (b) one district office, (a) Regina, Sask. (b) one district office, (a) Saskatoon, Sask. (b) one district office.
(a)	Calgary, Alta, (b) one district office, (a) Edmonton, Alta.
(b)	one district office, (a) Grande Prairie, Alta, (b) one district office, (a) Fort Smith, N.W.T. (b) one district office, (a) Yellowknife, N.W.T. (b) one district office. Pacific Region: (a) Cranbrook, B.C. (b) one district office, (a) Kelowna, B.C. (b) one district office, (a) Prince George, B.C. (b) one district office, (a) Prince Rupert, B.C. (b) one district office.
(a)	Vancouver, B.C. (b) one district office, (a) Victoria, B.C.
(b)	one district office, (a) Whitehorse, Yukon (b) one district office, (a) Cloverdale, B.C. (b) one monitoring station.
5.	The duties performed by those manning the regional and/or district offices are line functions in the chain of command from Ottawa to the operator in the field.

December 16, 1976
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich): 1.	(a) How many regional offices are maintained by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion (b) where is each located (c) for what area is each responsible?
2.	On what date was each established and with how many personnel?
3.	What is the present personnel strength of each office?
4.	In addition to regional offices, are district or other sub-offices maintained and, if so (a) in what locations (b) how many?
5.	Are the duties performed by those manning the regional and/or district offices line functions, in the chain of command from Ottawa to the operator in the field, or do they have other functions to perform and, if so, what are such functions?


Mr. Ed Lumley (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. (a) Four, (b), c) Moncton, New Brunswick, for the Atlantic Provinces; Montreal for Quebec; Toronto for Ontario; and Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, for the Western Provinces.
2.	Atlantic Region, January, 1974, 6 Employees; Quebec Region, April, 1974, 69 Employees; Ontario Region, January, 1974, 10 Employees; Western Region, November, 1973, 6 Employees.
3.	Atlantic Region, 90 Employees as of October 1, 1976; Quebec Region, 99 Employees as of October 1, 1976; Ontario Region, 47 Employees as of October 1, 1976; Western Region, 97 Employees as of October 1, 1976.
4.	Besides its regional offices, DREE maintains one main office to be responsible for its activities in each of the 10 provinces. These provincial offices are located in the provincial capital in all cases except Ontario where Thunder Bay was chosen as an alternative to Toronto which is already the site of the regional office. In addition to the regional and provincial offices, three sub-offices are maintained to be responsible for departmental activities in specific areas. These are at Bathurst, New Brunswick, Rimouski, Quebec, and Thompson, Manitoba. The Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Administration (PFRA), which forms part of the Department's Western Region, also maintains a headquarters in Regina and has staff in approximately 90 locations across the three Prairie Provinces.
5.	Each DREE regional office is in charge of an Assistant Deputy Minister who is responsible directly to the Deputy Minister and has been delegated full authority to oversee the planning, implementation and administration of all departmental activities in his region. The staff of each regional office therefore comprises the full range of personnel required to assist him in this role and to provide region-wide support services to the provincial offices which report directly to the Assistant Deputy Minister.


Mr. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich): 1. (a) How many regional offices are maintained by the Treasury Board (b) where is each located (c) for what area is each responsible?

2.	On what date was each established and with how many personnel?
3.	What is the present personnel strength of each office?
4.	In addition to regional offices, are district or other sub-offices maintained and, if so (a) in what locations (b) how many?
5.	Are the duties performed by those manning the regional and/or district offices line functions, in the chain of command from Ottawa to the operator in the field, or do they have other functions to perform and, if so, what are such functions?


Robert Knight Andras: 1. (a) Nil; (b) Not applicable; (c) Not applicable.
2.	Not applicable.
3.	Not applicable.
4.	No.
5.	Not applicable.


Mr. McKenzie: What was the total cost to the government for the report entitled Report of the Independent Review) Committee on the Office of the Auditor General of Canada completed in March 1975?


Robert Phillip Kaplan: The total cost to the Office of the Auditor General for the report entitled "Report of the Independant Review Committee on the Office of the Auditor General of Canada" amounted to $340,876, including direct out-of-pocket costs of $246,311 and allocated costs for support staff and services of $94,565.


Mr. Epp: Are any monies available from the government for the provinces or affected individuals for flood prevention or flood compensation?


Robert Phillip Kaplan: Federal cost-sharing assistance is available to the provinces to help them meet costs of major disasters, including floods. Generally speaking, shareable costs are those incurred by a province in restoring the essential personal property of private citizens, and farmsteads and small businesses to habitable or workable condition and to restore public works to their pre-flood conditions. The amount of federal assistance payable is based upon a formula. From time to time, the federal government also shares with provinces the costs of construction of major flood preventive works, such as the Winnipeg flood way.


Mr. Epp: Does the government keep a list of lobby groups in Canada and, if so (a) what are the addresses (b) who are the principle lobbyists for each group?


Ralph Goodale: No.
December 16, 1976


Mr. Horner: For each year since 1950, how much in subsidies or grants was paid to the port of Westminster, British Columbia?


Marcel-Claude Roy: Grants paid to Fraser River Harbour Commission (New Westminster) 1971, $379,000.00. 1963, $284,637.24.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Is the Postmaster General aware that there is no letter carrier service to the Comstock Crescent area in Brockville, Ontario and that the residents involved are upset?
2.	Are steps being taken to extend letter carrier service and (a) if so, on what date will service begin (b) if not (i) for what reason (ii) will the government take such steps?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. Yes, the Postmaster General is aware that there is no letter carrier service to the Comstock Crescent area in Brockville, Ontario.
2. (a) Yes. A fill-in of letter carrier delivery service for residents concerned is planned for January 1977. (b) (i) Not applicable; (ii) Not applicable.


Mr. Howie: From January 1, 1975 to date, has the Department of Public Works made any agreement for the rental of space in Fredericton, New Brunswick and, if so, in what locations?


J. Judd Buchanan: Yes, lease agreements were negotiated during the period January 3, 1975, to November 15, 1976, at the following locations: 590 Brunswick Street, Occupant: D.R.E.E., 3,400 square feet. 759 Brunswick Street, Occupant: R.C.M.P., 3,105 square feet, First option exercised. Eastern Canada Building, Queen and Northumberland Streets, Occupant: D.P.W. and D.N.R., 1,658 square feet, First option exercised. Federal Hardware Building, Regent and Queen Streets, Occupant: Environment Canada, 1,777 square feet. Federal Hardware Building, Regent and Queen Streets, Occupant: C.C.A., 1,831 square feet. 212 Queen Street, Occupant: D.N.D., 708 square feet, First option exercised. 212 Queen Street, Occupant: I.T. & C., 1,438 square feet, First option exercised. 212 Queen Street, Occupant: I.A. & N.D., 1,879 square feet, First option exercised. King's Place, King Street, Occupant: D.S.S., 10,208 square feet. King's Place, King Street, Occupant: M. & I., 2,686 square feet. King's Place, King Street, Occupant: I.T. & C., 3,240 square feet. King's Place, King Street, Occupant: M. & I., 16,142 square feet. 108 Prospect Street, Occupant: M. & I., 3,471 square feet. 108 Prospect Street, Occupant: M. & I., 2,513 square feet. Turner Building, 358 King Street, Occupant: M. & I., 1,040 square feet. 582 Queen Street, Occupant: M. & I., 990 square feet. 357 Brunswick Street, Occupant: M. & I., 1,074 square feet.
Order Paper Questions MONEY BORROWED FOR MARGIN ACCOUNTS


Mr. Herbert: What is the estimated total of monies borrowed in Canada for margin accounts against which the security is stock in non-Canadian chartered companies?


Robert Phillip Kaplan: This information is not maintained by the federal government.


Mr. Howie: Does CIDA participate in a matching grant system or a similar type programme with the provinces where individual donations to foreign aid is matched by a provincial government and the provincial government donation matched by CIDA and, if so, with which provinces?


Mr. Fernand E. Leblanc (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State for External Affairs):: CIDA does participate in a program whereby matching contributions are made by some provincial governments to non-governmental organizations within their respective provinces for the purpose of carrying out mutually agreed upon projects in developing countries. CIDA will match the total funds put in by the NGO and the provincial government. This arrangement obtains in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. In Manitoba and Saskatchewan, the arrangement provides for the provincial government to give matching funds to NGO's for approved projects, provided that CIDA also agrees to contribute to the project. The formula is CIDA 50 per cent; private funds 25 per cent; provincial government 25 per cent. Alberta will match NGO's contributions for projects whether or not CIDA contributes. If any project falls within CIDA guidelines, a CIDA contribution may be made to the project, in which case the formula is the same as with Manitoba and Saskatchewan, i.e. CIDA 50 per cent; private funds 25 per cent; provincial government 25 per cent. In British Columbia, the provincial government has no maximum percentage of contribution to a project and therefore CIDA agrees to match provincial funds in each project only up to the amount of the NGO's contribution.


Mr. Howie: Is Canada committed to food aid of one million tons of grain per year for the three-year period 1975-78 and, if so, is such commitment being met?


Fernand-E. Leblanc: At the Rome Food Conference in November 1974, the government of Canada promised to supply one million tons of grain per year as food aid for the three fiscal years, 1975/76, 1976/77 and 1977/78. In the fiscal year 1975/76, Canada sent 1,018,479 tons of grain as food aid. During the current fiscal year the rate of delivery indicates that the target of one million tons will most likely be reached.
2082

December 16, 1976
Order Paper Questions FORMER MEMBER FOR LANGELIER


Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): On what date did the former Member for Langelier resign as Transport Minister?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: The former member for Langelier did not resign as Minister of Transport. However, on September 26, 1975, he was appointed Minister without Portfolio.


Mr. Howie: 1.	What are the CBC plans for improved services in radio and TV in central New Brunswick?
2.	Do plans exist for a TV production studio in Fredericton, New Brunswick and, if so, what are they?
3.	Do plans exist for improved services in radio and TV in northern New Brunswick and, if so, what are they?


Hon. John Roberts (Secretary of State):: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: 1. CBC has plans for new radio and television services in the York-Sunbury constituency under its accelerated coverage plan. The ACP is a large, complex and highly integrated undertaking which now involves 300 locations and 650 engineering projects. Names of the locations and the nature of the service to be provided are made public, step by step, as applications for licences are made to the CRTC. An application for non-ACP English FM stereo radio service has been submitted to the CRTC.
2.	No.
3.	Yes. Regarding ACP, see 1. Above re making locations public. Improved non-ACP services are planned for Edmund-ston and Neguac (both French television), Edmundston, Grand Falls and Plaster Rock (all English radio), and Kedge-wick (French radio). An affiliated station in New Carlisle, Que., now provides CBC French radio coverage to the Camp-bellton, Caraquet and Dalhousie areas. Under the CBC's radio Affiliates replacement plan, these areas will be served intra-provincially through CBC-owned facilities. A CBC-owned French radio station will also be established under the RARP at Edmundston, where CBC service has been available through an affiliate at that location.


Mr. Marshall: How many veterans, by province, are receiving (a) disability pensions (b) war veterans allowances (c) civilian war allowances?


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: At September 30, 1976	(a)	(b)	(c)Newfoundland	1,385	1,309	2,082Prince Edward Island	1,363	907	23Nova Scotia	7,258	4,733	358New Brunswick	5,088	3,648	52Quebec	13,389	6,253	128Ontario	39,202	15,723	172Manitoba	8,696	2,796	14Saskatchewan	4,897	2,114	5Alberta	8,915	3,710	17British Columbia	18,416	7,695	207Outside Canada	6,131	390	7Total	114,740	49,278	3,065
The above data is based on departmental district boundaries which may not always agree with the provincial boundaries.


Mr. Howie: 1.	Does the government currently recognize the present Government of Uganda?
2.	Is any reconsideration being given to this recognition?


Fernand-E. Leblanc: 1. Yes.
2. No. As a matter of policy Canada attempts to follow consistently the practice of recognizing and dealing with governments which have effective control of the countries they represent, whether or not we agree with their internal policies.


Mr. Howie: 1.	On November 1, 1976, how many positions in the Public Service were designated as (a) bilingual (b) anglophone (c) francophone (d) other?
2.	How many positions existed in the Public Service on November 1, 1976?


Robert Knight Andras: 
Mir. Marshall: Has the Department of Veterans Affairs directed District Offices to reduce the number of visits by Veterans Services Officers, and, if so, for what reason?


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: No, not in the fiscal year 1976-77. However, it was necessary to impose some restraint on travel by area counsellors in the final quarter of 1975-76 to reduce the risk of a budgetary overrun.


Mr. Herbert: How many post offices are there in the Constituency of Vaudreuil (a) where are they located (b) what is the respective classification and group or grade of each?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: Name of Office	Location	Classification Group or Grade	St. Zotique	1165 Principale, St. Zotique	Semi Staff	2Coteau Station	106 Rue Lippe, Coteau Station	Revenue	5Ste. Marthe	618 Principale, Ste. Marthe	Revenue	5Pointe Fortune	698 Boul. des Outaouais, Pointe Fortune	Revenue	3Les Cddres	52 rue Principale, Les Cedres	Semi Staff	1Coteau Landing	189 ave Principale, Coteau Landing	revenue	6Coteau du Lac	Chemin de la Reine, Coteau du Lac	Semi Staff	3Pointe des Cascades	121 Chemin du Fleuve, Pointe des Cascades	Revenue	5Dorion Vaudreuil	700 Boulevard Perrot, Ville lie Perrot	Sub	5Ste. Justine de Newton	Ste. Justine de Newton	Semi Staff	!St. Telesphore	1401 Route 340, St. Telesphore	Revenue	3St. Lazare de Vaudreuil	St. Lazare de Vaudreuil	Semi Staff	3Dorion Vaudreuil	18 St. Michel, Vaudreuil	Sub	1Rividre Beaudette	267 rue principale. Riviere Beaudette	Revenue	4Hudson	99 Cameron, Hudson	Semi Staff	5Hudson Heights	Ave. Oakland, Hudson Heights	Semi Staff	4Rigaud	33 St. Viateur, Rigaud	Semi Staff	5Dorion Vaudreuil	101 Grand Boulevard, Dorion, Vaudreuil	Sub	4lie Perrot Sud	2265 Boul. Perrot, lie Perrot	Revenue	2Dorion Vaudreuil	Coin 5e Ave. et Cardinal, Dorion, Vaudreuil	Sub	3Dorion Vaudreuil	35 St. Charles St., Dorion, Vaudreuil	Staff	8St. Olet	234 Principale, St. Olet	Revenue	5St. Polycarpe	82 rue Elie Auclair, St. Polycarpe	Semi Staff	3Dalhousie Station	Dalhousie Station	Revenue	5Roxboro	17055 Chemin Ste. Marie, Kirkland, Roxboro	Sub	12Ste. Anne de Bellevue	49 rue Ste. Anne, Ste. Anne de Bellevue	Staff	8Ste. Anne de Bellevue	540 Boul. Beaconsfield, Ste. Anne	Sub	1Ste. Anne de Bellevue- MacDonald College	MacDonald College	Sub	3Gardenvale	1 Pacific, Ste. Anne de Bellevue	Sub	Ste. Anne de Bellevue	50 St. Charles Road, Ste. Anne de Bellevue	Sub	2
Order Paper Questions
Name of Office	Location	Classification Group or GradeSte. Anne de Bellevue	186 Sutton Place, Beaconsfield	PostalRoxboro Postal Station,	Roxboro	Station PostalPierrefonds	StationSte. Anne de Bellevue	90 Morgan Road, Ste. Anne de	SubRoxboro	Bellevue 15700 Gouin Quest, Roxboro	Sub


Mr. Howie: What financial assistance, and in what amounts, has been given to fruit farmers in the Counties of York and Sunbury, New Brunswick?


Hon. E. F. Whelan (Minister of Agriculture):: Agricultural Stabilization Board programs:	1975 Apple program
$16,650.29 (York)-Nil (Sunbury). 1971-72 Blueberry program $49,232.67 (provincial total). Individual detail of the 1971-72 program for the counties of York and Sunbury is not available.


Mr. Howie: 1.	On November 1, 1976, what research programmes were underway at the Agriculture Research Station at Fredericton, New Brunswick?
2.	What is the current budget for this station?
3.	(a) What is the number of persons employed as of November 1, 1976 (b) how many positions are designated as bilingual?
4.	(a) How many buildings on the station are vacant or shortly about to be vacated (b) what future is planned for these buildings?
5.	Have any buildings been demolished and, if so, who recommended the demolition?


Eugene Whelan: 1. The
research programs were: Animal Feeding, Potato production, Environmental quality, and Horticulture.
2.	The current budget is: Operating: Pay, $1,879,252; nonpay, $468,100; total: $2,347,352. Capital: Equipment, $65,000; Construction, $65,000; total: $130,000. Grand total: $2,477,352.
3.	(a) One hundred and nine, (b) Eighteen.
4.	(a) Two. (b) One building has been declared surplus and will be disposed of by the Department of Public Works. The plan for the other building is to transform a residence into an information center with minimal changes. The New Brunswick department of agriculture has been invited to join Agriculture Canada in this center.
5.	No buildings were demolished. Two were sold in the fall of 1976 and moved by the buyers outside of the station property.
80005 - 64/4

December 16, 1976
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Fairweather: Are any Canadian trade commissioners located in Argentina and South Korea and, if not, are there any employees of the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce in other countries whose responsibilities include Argentina and South Korea?


Fabian Hugh Poulin: In so far, as the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce is concerned: there are two Canadian TTrade Commissioners stationed in Buenos Aires responsible for coverage of Argentina; and two Trade Commissioners located in Seoul responsible for the Republic of South Korea.


Ralph Goodale: Mr. Speaker, if questions Nos. 596 and 873 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately. I would point out that the answers in both cases are detailed and voluminous, and that is why we have requested to answer in this way.


Mr. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich): 1.	(a) How many regional offices are maintained by the Department of the Environment (b) where is each located (c) for what area is each responsible?
2.	On what date was each established and with how many personnel?
3.	What is the present personnel strength of each office?
4.	In addition to regional offices, are district or other sub-offices maintained and, if so (a) in what locations (b) how many?
5.	Are the duties performed by those manning the regional and/or district offices line functions, in the chain of command from Ottawa to the operator in the field, or do they have other functions to perform and, if so, what are such functions?
Return tabled.


Mr. Loiselle (Chambly): Does Canada (a) import (b) export dehydrated products and, if so, what are the products and what is the annual volume in each case?
Return tabled.


Ralph Goodale: I ask, Mr. Speaker, that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.


Mr. Speaker:: Shall the remaining questions be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Orlikow:: Mr. Speaker, on October 12, more than two months ago, I placed a series of questions on the order paper, starting with question No. 206. These questions asked for information with regard to the number of professional people working for the government. There is a whole series of questions and I do not think it should be difficult to answer them. In view of the questions which have been asked and the articles written about the large increase in the number of civil servants and the manner in which they have been appointed recently, I hope the parliamentary secretary can get some action to ensure that these questions are answered.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House proceeded to the consideration of Bill C-19, to amend or repeal certain statutes to enable restraint of government expenditures, as reported (with amendments) from the Standing Committee on Miscellaneous Estimates.
Alastair William Gillespie: That Bill C-19, an act to amend or repeal certain statutes to enable restraint of government expenditures, as amended, be concurred in.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Alastair William Gillespie: that the bill be read the third time and do pass.


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my party, I intend to take the time of the House now to explain once again why we are basically opposed to this bill proceeding further at the present time. What is the essence of the so-called restraint bill we are considering? What it amounts to is a demonstration by the government, along with its controls package, that it has decided to fight inflation on the back of the ordinary people of Canada. Where are the cutbacks in this restraint bill? First, in the area of family allowances, millions of dollars will be cut from the resources of the average family during the last 12 months as a result of this legislation. As the minister knows, and as he knew when he introduced the bill, the majority of those families are, by definition, average income or low income families. So that is the group most affected. The central aspect of the bill is that it cuts out the escalation which would automatically have been forthcoming in connection with family allowances and which would have enabled ordinary families better to cope with inflation in the last 12 months.
What else was cut? We closed down the Company of Young Canadians, a group which was doing some exceptional work in isolated or distant parts of the country-distant, that is, in the main from urban centres.
December 16, 1976


An hon. Member:: In urban centres, too.


John Edward Broadbent: I said, "in the main outside the urban centres". But I agree that good work has been done in the cities too. The bill also removed the LIP program: I note it is now coming back. The manpower training program was modified in a significant way. I could list other aspects of the restraints imposed by the bill, but I have done enough to make my central point: the cutbacks were precisely in areas which affected those who needed assistance, rather than a restraint program imposed upon them by the federal government. The other side of the coin concerns that part of the federal government's operations which are not affected. There was no curtailment of the excessive use of office space so well documented in the recent report of the Auditor General. There was no commitment to cut back on appointments of civil servants earning $20,000 and more which have mushroomed so significantly in the past half-dozen years in Ottawa. In other words, no attention was paid to introducing restrictions in areas of government outlay where such programs would have been justified, or where such restraints would have affected upper income groups more markedly than those in lower income groups.
Therefore, in stressing our opposition to this bill we connect it with the generally inequitable nature of the government's anti-inflation program as a whole. I would remind Your Honour that connected with this legislation were other measures; for example, a measure cutting back medical research, work which has a profound impact upon the lives of Canadians, if not immediately then in the years or decades ahead. From the government's point of view, cutting down research is, of course, an easy thing to do politically because most people do not consider themselves directly affected. It is a cheap kind of cutback, the sort which is done with safety from a political point of view, but it does harm in the long run, particularly to a country which already has a bad reputation as an industrial society in terms of percentage of gross national product going into medical or scientific research.
Related to this package was the surtax bill introduced last year. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Macdonald) told us almost a year ago, if I remember correctly, that he was imposing a surtax on the rich to make sure they assumed their share of the burden of the war against inflation. Well, it was not much of a burden as a component of the war fought by other Canadians. But even so, this party believes it to be a disgraceful act on the part of the government to have declared its intention, now, to abolish that surtax for the coming fiscal year. The minister and his friends are not abolishing other aspects of the restraint program. The most significant anti-inflation device put in place by the government is, of course, the wage control program, and this is to remain indefinitely. But the small tax which was imposed on upper income Canadians, presumably for the duration of the restraint program, comes to an end this fiscal year. We find this totally inexcusable.
I also believe it is proper at this time, the government having maintained a control program which is effective in holding down increases in the wages and salaries of ordinary Canadi-
Restraint of Government Expenditures
ans, to say something about our own salaries as members of parliament. The hon. member for Hamilton West (Mr. Alexander) has just got up to leave, I notice. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) has already asked the minister whether anything is to be done about the salaries of members of parliament, in general, for the coming year. The answer was no, they would be permitted the normal increase. However, the point I want to make is that there are a lot of members in this House. I am not referring to ordinary members; I am referring to party leaders, to parliamentary secretaries, to members of the cabinet, to the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau)-they would get increases in excess of the $2,400 ceiling.


Some hon. Members:: Shame!


John Edward Broadbent: I now have the support of all members of the House, having made that comment.


An hon. Member:: You want it for yourself, though.


John Edward Broadbent: The point I want to make is that if there is a $2,400 ceiling for ordinary workers, then contrary to what a Liberal member opposite says, the members of my party believe that the $2,400 ceiling should hold for the members of the House of Commons as well. The Minister of Finance is talking to another cabinet colleague, but if I may have his attention for a moment I appeal to him to exercise whatever influence he might have in the cabinet to ensure that his cabinet colleagues and parliamentary secretaries, who are sitting in the House today, as well as the party leaders, get no increase in excess of the $2,400. If it is fair outside the House, then, as I have said, it is fair inside the House.
To underscore our opposition to the restraints bill as strongly as I can, if the Prime Minister will not listen to suggestions made by the New Democratic Party, then I appeal to Liberals to yield for once to their normal impulse to follow everything that goes on in the United States. Normally we do not like to suggest this, but there is one thing now going on as a matter of political orientation with which we agree, and that is that the President elect of the United States, Mr. Carter, has recognized that the central economic problem in North America today is not inflation; that the central problem we have to face in our society is not increases in prices but it is that we have almost one million people out of work.
The President elect of the United States has said he is going to set unemployment targets in his country. Two months ago the New Democratic Party proposed that this government set targets for unemployment-not pie in the sky-which would bring unemployment down 2 per cent over the next two years and another 2 per cent over the following two years, which would mean that over a four-year period we would have a commitment to full employment. The President elect of the United States has recognized that this is the problem and he is taking it on.


An hon. Member:: And he is right.

December 16, 1976
Restraint of Government Expenditures


John Edward Broadbent: A Liberal says that he is right. I hope he can influence his cabinet friends. The President elect has said that there will be a tax cut in the United States; he has said that he will allocate special funds to federal programs from one end of the United States to the other in order to create jobs. That is what this government should be doing, Mr. Speaker. The people of Canada want jobs-they are tired of hand-outs-and that is what this party stands for. The present level of unemployment in Canada is costing us $6 billion a year in lost production of goods and services. We are losing almost $1 billion in tax revenue which men and women would be paying into the treasury to provide services for the people of Canada. We are also losing about $2 billion which is spent on welfare payments and on unemployment insurance, directly attributable to the unemployment level. The cost of unemployment is profound. Every man and woman in this country who wants to work ought to be able to work. There is no excuse in an advanced industrial society which has any guts or any serious commitment to economic planning for the present level of unemployment.


An hon. Member:: Rubbish.


John Edward Broadbent: A Liberal says "Rubbish." That is so typical, Mr. Speaker. I invite the member who says "Rubbish" to go to Sweden or to West Germany and find out how they have managed to achieve virtually full employment. In fact, I would invite him to go anywhere, because he provides no service here at all.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier):: Order, please. I think, in all fairness, we should hear the hon. member for Oshawa-Whitby (Mr. Broadbent).


Mr. Corbin:: We have heard enough.


John Edward Broadbent: A Liberal says he has heard enough. It is very difficult for the Liberal mind, Mr. Speaker, to try to absorb anything for more than 30 seconds. With anything of substance it takes only 15 seconds before their attention wanes. I think it is instructive to note that the backbenchers of the Liberal party agree that we need to do something about unemployment, but the closer they get to the front benches, to become parliamentary secretaries or cabinet members, they begin to say that we need not be concerned. I know which group over there is in touch with the people of Canada, and they are not those who sit in the front row, Mr. Speaker.
We in the New Democratic Party say that the time for restraint, as a preoccupation of government, adopting the attitude that we have cut back right across the line, is over. What we need now is some imagination and leadership which will produce jobs in this country. In concluding my observations on this absurd bill, I want to remind the House that we have been here for two months. Do hon. members on the other side know how many bills the House of Commons has passed in two months? Two, Mr. Speaker. One bill had to do with the harbour in Halifax, a minor bill but dealing with a serious
situation which, I recall, had the support of all members of the House. One other bill has been passed. We are going to be away, within three or five days, for a month. We have a government which is still preoccupied with restraint and has had nothing but housekeeping measures to bring before parliament this session. It has shown the dramatic leadership that is required to achieve passage of two bills in two months. In the meantime-


Eymard G. Corbin: It is your party that wants another holiday.


John Edward Broadbent: If the noisy jackals on the other side would listen, they might learn something. While the government has done nothing, almost one million Canadians have been unemployed. If you count the number of people indirectly affected, be they wives or in some cases husbands and children, a minimum of 2.5 million Canadians this Christmas will be in not so merry a condition. These people can be found in every town, village and province as well as the territories of this country. While President elect Carter has recognized the need for leadership, the cabinet we have in Ottawa sits and wallows in its own, shall I say, contentment, its own colossal indifference. We have an indifferent government on the other side, and I have not the slightest doubt about the political impact of this indifference, not only over the Christmas season but in the months beyond. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles):
That Bill C-19 be not now read the third time but that it be read a third time this day six months hence.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier):: Order, please. It has been moved by the hon. member for Oshawa-Whitby (Mr. Broadbent), seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles):
That Bill C-19 be not now read a third time, but that it be read a third time this day six months' hence.


Eymard G. Corbin: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. I should like to inform the leader of the NDP that I am a citizen of the republic of Madawaska and I think the leader of the NDP should withdraw his diminutive remark when he referred to me as a jackal.


Mr. Gilbert:: Mr. Speaker, he might have called him a jackass.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, I really want to apologize to the hon. member. I might have done something worse. I could have called him a Liberal.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier):: Order, please. Is the House ready for the question?


Some hon. Members:: Question.

December 16, 1976


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier):: The question is on the amendment. All those in favour will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


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


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier):: Before 1 announce whether the yeas or the nays have it, I should like to refer to tonight's adjournment debate.



PROCEEDINGS ON ADJOURNMENT MOTION


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier):: It is my duty, pursuant to Standing Order 40, to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: The hon. member for Medicine Hat (Mr. Hargrave)- Agriculture-Minister's remarks concerning effects of eating beef-Request for substantiation; the hon. member for Halifax-East Hants (Mr. McCleave)-Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-Request for action to protect public from effects of excavation in Quaker Crescent area of Lower Sackville; the hon. member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Rodriguez)- Post Office-Reason for refusal to open early negotiations for new contracts.



GOVERNMENT ORDERS


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed consideration of Bill C-19, to amend or repeal certain statutes to enable restraint of government expenditures, as reported (with amendments) from the standing Committee on Miscellaneous Estimates.
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier):: Reverting to the vote on Bill C-19, in my opinion the nays have it.
And more than five members having risen:


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


Mr. Speaker:: 1 declare the amendment lost.


Mr. Speaker:: I declare the motion carried.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to, bill read the third time and passed.
Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I understand that there is a disposition to call it six o'clock.


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: It being six o'clock, I do now leave the chair until eight o'clock this evening.
At 5.20 p.m. the House took recess.


[Stage Direction]
AFTER RECESS

The House resumed at 8 p.m.

Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council (Mr. Goodale) on a point of order.
[ I he Acting Speaker (Mr. Ethier).]
December 16, 1976


Ralph Goodale: Mr. Speaker, as a gesture of respect for the late and most distinguished Mr. Real Caouette, the former hon. member for Temiscamingue, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Grenville-Carleton (Mr. Baker):
That this House do now adjourn.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The House, of course, was saddened to learn during the supper hour of the death of the former hon. member for Temiscamingue (Mr. Caouette). I am
The Late Real Caouette
sure the House would want to assemble as usual tomorrow morning to pay its tributes to his memory, after members have had an opportunity to reflect upon this very sad occurrence. Presumably the House gives its agreement to the motion proposed by the hon. parliamentary secretary and seconded by the hon. member for Grenville-Carleton (Mr. Baker) that this House do now adjourn.


Stanley Howard Knowles: Agreed.
Motion agreed to and the House adjourned at 8.04 p.m.

Friday, December 17, 1976