1977-10-17

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Mr. Joe Clark (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker, 1 rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43 on a matter of urgent and pressing necessity. Considering that unemployment in Canada continues to rise, the Canadian dollar continues to fall, business investment is leaving Canada, and the government was wrong in its targets for real growth, for inflation and regarding the budgetary deficit, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Joliette (Mr. La Salle):

That the government consider:
(a)	a new budget with tax reductions for all Canadians earning less than
$ 16,000 yearly;
(b)	a sales tax reduction in co-operation with provincial governments;
(c)	a tax reduction for corporations investing in the country and
(d)	an end to wage and price controls.


Mr. Speaker:: In accordance with the terms of Standing Order 43, the presentation of such a motion for debate requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):: Mr. Speaker, I too rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43. [Translation]
Considering the confidential report of the Department of Employment which forecasts an increased number of unemployed during the next two years and considering the forecasts of all experts to the effect that unemployment will reach a
record high this winter, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles):
That this House acknowledge that the Canadian people want jobs rather than welfare assistance and strongly urge the government to give priority to the implementation of a job creation program.


Mr. Speaker:: Order. The House has heard the motion of the hon. member. Under the provisions of Standing Order 43, this motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


MANPOWER
Mr. Eudore Allard (Rimouski):: Mr. Speaker, I ask for the
unanimous consent of the House to present a motion on a very urgent and important matter.
Considering that a very high increase in unemployment is prevailing in most regions of Canada, especially in Quebec, that this nationwide increase in the rate of unemployment particularly affects young people aged 15 to 24 years and that according to every forecast the rate of unemployment will be going up in the coming months, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Roberval (Mr. Gauthier):
That the House immediately make the necessary arrangements so that the federal government may reassess job creation programs now in force in order to give back confidence to Canadian workers, especially Quebec workers, and to give increased efficiency to this battle against unemployment.


Mr. Speaker:: Pursuant to Standing Order 43, this motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


FINANCE
Mr. Sinclair Stevens (York-Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, I too rise on a matter of urgent and pressing necessity. With the
80020-54'A

October 17, 1977
Veterans Pensions
Canadian dollar plunging to 90.4 cents U.S. this morning, and this in spite of the massive $500 million intervention by the Bank of Canada so far this month, I move, seconded by the hon. member for St. John's East (Mr. McGrath):
That there be an immediate reference to the Standing Committee on Finance, Trade and Economic Affairs so that that committee may hear evidence as to why there should be such deterioration in world confidence with respect to our dollar, as to the adequacy of our U.S. dollar reserves which have fallen 40 per cent this year, and what measures it is necessary to take to restore domestic and world confidence in our currency.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


PROPOSAL TO AID PRODUCERS AS RESULT OF ADVERSE WEATHER CONDITIONS-MOTION UNDER S.O. 43
Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prince Albert):: Mr. Speaker, I rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43 on a matter of urgent and pressing necessity, to move, provided it is accepted, seconded by the hon. member for Vegreville (Mr. Mazankowski):
That the government give immediate consideration, in view of the disastrous rainfall in recent weeks having resulted in the loss of many millions of dollars to prairie farmers whose grain is still in the fields, to making available drying equipment by transporting it to needed areas, freight free; as propane gas is necessary for grain drying equipment, and very costly, that the price be frozen until the new year against further increases; and as farmers whose wheat is unharvested are generally short of funds to carry on their needed autumn operation, that cash advances be provided for, based on the estimated amount of grain remaining in the fields to be harvested.


Mr. Speaker:: The provisions of Standing Order 43 require the unanimous consent of the House for the presentation of such a motion for debate. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


VETERANS AFFAIRS
Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):: Mr. Speaker, because November 11 is only three and a half weeks away, and because it is urgent that we do more for our veterans than just pay tribute to them with words, I move under Standing Order 43, seconded by the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mr. Peters):

That this House urges the government, between now and Remembrance Day, to bring in legislation to restore the basic amount of the war disability pension to the average level of the five designated categories of public servants, to provide pro-rata pension for the widows of veterans in those cases where the veteran's pension was less than 48 per cent and to provide prisoner of war pensions for the 200 surviving Canadian veterans who were prisoners of war during World War I.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: Under the provisions of Standing Order 43, such a motion can be presented for debate only with the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.


Mr. Speaker:: During the routine proceedings which will follow the oral question period, at the time of tabling of the fifth report of the special committee on implementation of the television resolution, I will seek the indulgence of the House to make a few explanatory remarks about the progress of that particular project and some of the new installations which are here. I will do that after three o'clock.


VACANCIES
Mr. Speaker:: At the moment I have the honour to inform the House that 1 have received a communication notifying me that a vacancy has occurred in the representation, namely, Gordon Fairweather, Esq., the member for the electoral district of Fundy-Royal, by resignation. Accordingly, I have addressed my warrant to the Chief Electoral Officer for the issue of a new writ of election for the said electoral district.
I have the honour also to inform the House that I have received a communication notifying me that a vacancy has occurred in the representation, namely, John Reynolds, Esq., the member for the electoral district of Burnaby-Richmond-Delta, by resignation. Accordingly, I have addressed my warrant to the Chief Electoral Officer for the issue of a new writ of election for that electoral district.
I have the honour to inform the House that I have received a communication notifying me that a vacancy has occurred in the representation, namely, Sean O'Sullivan, Esq., the member for the electoral district of Hamilton-Wentworth, by resignation. Accordingly, I have addressed my warrant to the Chief Electoral Officer for the issue of a new writ of election for that electoral district.


MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE
Mr. Speaker:: I have the honour to inform the House that a message has been received from the Senate informing this House that the Senate have passed Bill C-41, an Act to provide a maritime code for Canada and to amend the Canada
October 17, 1977_________________________________COMMONS DEBATES____________________________________________________8193
Oral Questions
Shipping Act and other acts in consequence thereof with acting alone. We believe that all governments acting together amendments to which the concurrence of this House is desired,	must tackle this problem. We believe particularly that since
jobs are created overwhelmingly by the private sector the private sector should join in the effort to stimulate the economy.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Charles Joseph Clark: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Prime Minister, and it is framed in the knowledge that on this day television is first reflecting the debates of the House of Commons. Among the Canadians who are watching us here today are a large number of the army of Canadian unemployed who, because of the policies of this government, have nothing else they can do with their time today.
Since the Prime Minister's and the government's forecasts in the last two budgets have been dead wrong concerning economic growth and job creation, will the Prime Minister tell the House right now what specific programs the government will introduce this month to bring jobs to the more than one million Canadians who are out of work today because of the policies of this government?


Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):: Mr. Speaker, it is the government's intention to address this question of high unemployment, which has given us great concern, immediately. We will be doing it tomorrow on the first day of the new session. We will make an announcement in the Speech from the Throne, and it will be followed up by more specific recommendations made by my colleague, the Minister of Finance, who will participate very early in the debate. Of course, we will also be anxious to hear from the opposition which always has such constructive measures to propose.


Charles Joseph Clark: Mr. Speaker, the country has been waiting for nearly a decade for some economic policy from this government. We will wait with interest one more day to see if in fact there will be a clear proposal in the speech tomorrow which will provide jobs for the more than one million Canadians put out of work by the policies of this government.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Charles Joseph Clark: But may I ask the Prime Minister now whether the Minister of Finance was expressing government policy when he said in Washington at a press conference that it was his view that the major responsibility for dealing with unemployment, particularly in the province of Quebec, lies with the provinces of Canada and not with the national government?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: It has never been the intention of this government or of the ministers to indicate that the problem of unemployment could be solved by any or each government


DATE OF TERMINATION OF CONTROLS
Charles Joseph Clark: I think it is clear to most Canadians that a disturbing number of job creators in the private sector, because of the policies of this government, have left this country with their investments and are creating jobs and promoting growth in other countries.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Charles Joseph Clark: Part of that is due to the determination of this government, despite the promises of one of the former ministers of Finance to announce an end to controls, to keep controls in. Will the Prime Minister tell the House of Commons now that the Minister of Finance this week or the throne speech tomorrow will give an explicit date for the termination of controls and will spell out the program by which the government of Canada intends to move this country out of controls?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I can give the undertaking that the Minister of Finance will address this question in his statement on Thursday of this week. I must say that there are some aspects of the question of the Leader of the Opposition with which I must disagree in that controls were brought in in order to make the Canadian cost and price structure more competitive. They have been successful in bringing inflation down from two digit inflation to something around 7.5 per cent.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: We do not think that inflation will continue to come down if the controls are lifted unless there is a general agreement among Canadians to do their utmost to continue pressing down on the rate of inflation, and this calls for more than just the bland statement by the Leader of the Opposition.


Charles Joseph Clark: Not wishing to compete with the Prime Minister for blandness-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Charles Joseph Clark: -may I ask him whether it is the intention of the government of Canada to announce this week a date and a process for the termination of controls?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I have just said that the Minister of Justice would address this question.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: If it pleases the opposition, I can have the Minister of Justice address this question.

October 17, 1977
Oral Questions


Mr. Baker (Grenville-Carleton):: God help us.


Mr. Hees:: That is just too much to expect.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I do not know if the hon. member for Prince Edward-Hastings thinks he is on camera, but he is not.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


FINANCE
Sinclair McKnight Stevens: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance, but first I would like to congratulate the minister-if that is the proper expression-on becoming the fourth Minister of Finance under the Prime Minister. In that connection I point out that they seem to be falling quicker and quicker, one after the other.
My question is based on our rising unemployment, coupled with rising inflation, having apparently intensified world concern with respect to the Canadian dollar, as evidenced by the decline of the Canadian dollar still further today under heavy pressure. Would the minister tell the House what instructions he has given to the Governor of the Bank of Canada with respect to stabilizing our dollar?


Hon. Jean Chretien (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank very sincerely the sixth critic of the Tories on financial affairs.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Sometimes they need two at a time. I do not know what kind of government they would form if the people were to make that mistake.
I have not given any instruction to the governor of the bank with regard to the Canadian dollar. The Canadian dollar is a floating dollar, and it is the market place which will decide where the Canadian dollar should be. That is the policy of the government, and I have not given any specific instruction to the governor of the bank. We are following the situation very carefully, but I think that the hon. member should be more moderate in his statement. He throws out figures, but everyone knows that we do not know exactly the amount of money that is used in that type of trading.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: If the Minister of Finance does not know what number of dollars are being used in trading, he is one of the few in the market place who does not.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: I do, you don't.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: As our United States dollar exchange reserves have declined $500 million or an estimated 20 per cent so far this month-all gone in defence of our dollar-will the minister explain how he reconciles such massive intervention on the

part of the Bank of Canada with what he has called today a floating dollar?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: I do not think I can agree with the statement made by the hon. member. The governor of the bank is not intervening with regard to the floating of the Canadian dollar. The Canadian dollar is floating in the market place.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: A final supplementary again to the Minister of Finance, Mr. Speaker. Surely, the Minister will not disagree with Dr. Hood, an official in his own department, who, based on evidence given by him before a committee of this House, has indicated that the 13-cent fall in our dollar so far will result in 4 per cent inflation in the next two years. Would the minister indicate if he is content to see still further devaluation of the Canadian dollar, bearing in mind that such devaluation will mean more inflation and ultimately more unemployment?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, there are some advantages to having a lower dollar. For example, I am very pleased to report to this House that we are improving our export performance very much and will have a major surplus on the export of Canadian goods abroad. In doing that we are creating more jobs.


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister referred to bland statements and as we all know, he is the expert. Considering that he said just a few days ago in London, Ontario, that "unemployment is not as bad as some people out there want to pretend it is," and said even more recently that the reason we have such a high level of unemployment is that Canadians have gone soft, and considering that we have more than one million people unemployed, and according to his government's figures only 43,000 jobs are listed as being available in the economy which means there are 15 people applying for every job out there, would he mind explaining for the edification of the House what he meant when he said in London that unemployment is not as bad as some people out there pretend it is?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I intend to do that in a speech in this House the day after tomorrow.


ACTION TO CREATE JOBS-REFERENCE TO PRODUCTIVITY OF CANADIAN WORKERS
John Edward Broadbent: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I should like to thank the Prime Minister for his smiling, bland answer to a very important question. More specifically, because part of the implication, presumably, of his assertion that he made about Canadians
October 17, 1977

being soft refers to other statements he has made in the past about not making enough effort to get jobs, I should like to ask if his government has looked at the situation in St. Lawrence, Newfoundland, where a mine is being shut down by Alcan? Apparently it made some $85 million profit in the first six months of this year, so it is not being closed because it is a losing operation but because they say they can make higher profits elsewhere. And according to a recent government study Canadian auto workers are more productive than American workers, not less, but they are not getting some 20,000 jobs that they ought to, because the government has, among other things, failed to implement Canadian tax laws. Specifically, I should like to ask if he or his ministers in these two very different parts of the country have taken steps in the last few days to insure that Canadians who want jobs, not handouts, will get them?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I refer to the remarks and the debate because I do not really think I could convince the leader of the New Democratic Party in a short answer of the rightness of his theories or the righteousness of mine.


An hon. Member:: They are very similar.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: It would take longer than we have during the question period. Perhaps a short statistic in answer to his question might indicate the course of my thinking on these things. It is that in manufacturing generally Canadian workers are productive but only 80 per cent as productive as the American worker in manufacturing. At the same time, the average wage rate for the Canadian worker in manufacturing is 7 per cent higher than that of the American. If the hon. leader of the New Democratic Party thinks about that he will understand that this means our costs are higher and that we cannot compete with our main competitors in the market, the United States. If we cannot compete, that means we cannot continue to invest and if we cannot continue to invest, it means we cannot continue to create jobs. Therefore, the productivity of the worker in the Canadian manufacturing sector is very important. It has progressed, I agree, but it is still only 80 per cent of that of the Americans.


John Edward Broadbent: A final supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. The Prime Minister knows that in Canada as well as elsewhere in industrial countries the main reason for low or higher productivity is whether management has introduced new capital equipment or not. Instead of blaming Canadian workers, he might blame Canadian management for not keeping Canadian industry as competitive and up-to-date as that of other countries. With reference to his general statement would the Prime Minister for once undertake to provide the House with specific examples from the sector after sector he named when referring to Canadian productivity, and we would be prepared to consider the relevance of the general proposal. I come back to the specific question about the auto industry, an industry in which, according to the government's own study, Canadian workers are more productive. When is the government to take action, to ensure that we shall get the jobs in
Oral Questions
Canada to which we are entitled, namely, 20,000 more jobs than we now have?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, of course, I agree in part with the leader of the New Democratic Party, when he says productivity is also a question of technology and entrepreneurship. I believe that we on this side have encouraged entrepreneurship more than the hon. member-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Charles Joseph Clark: Yes, you have encouraged them to leave.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I see groans in the opposition.


Walter David Baker: Canadians are all groaning.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, I see it on the hon. member's face. There is a groan written right there. It is obvious that productivity is a matter not only for workers but for the entrepreneurial sector, too. That is why in the last budget we made substantial concessions to the entrepreneurial sector-


John Edward Broadbent: They didn't work.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: -to create incentives to invest.


John Edward Broadbent: They have not worked.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I recall that the leader of the New Democratic Party opposed them at the time.


John Edward Broadbent: And they have not worked, have they?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the leader of the NDP must get his act together. If he wants-


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John Edward Broadbent: They have not worked.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: If he wants the private sector to increase its investment, to create more jobs, he must stop complaining when they make an honest profit.


REQUEST FOR REDUCTION OF INTEREST RATES FOR MUNICIPAL AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS
Mr. Gilles Caouette (Tfemiscamingue):: Mr. Speaker, I want to direct a question to the right hon. Prime Minister. He has been reported as telling Canadians to learn to tighten their belts otherwise the government would have to take the necessary steps to have them do so. Does the Prime Minister consider the financial sector in Canada as Canadians, and is he

October 17, 1977
Oral Questions
prepared to take steps in this area and demand reduced interest rates?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: The hon. member is not without knowing that for two years now, when we set up the controls system, we have been controlling not only incomes but profits as well. Those profits also applied of course to financial institutions. So I said that all sectors will have to tighten their belts, otherwise the government would feel compelled to exercise controls.


Gilles Caouette: May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker.
I was talking of interests and we have rather seen that the rates of interest have increased. But, on the same subject, following the statement made by the hon. member for Lapointe on September 20 that an interest-free loan has been granted in the municipality of Mistassini housing project, could the right hon. Prime Minister tell the House whether he is prepared to follow the same practice and apply it systematically to municipal and provincial governments?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: I was not made aware of the precise case the hon. member is referring to, Mr. Speaker. I will get more information on this point.


POSSIBILITY OF MAKING INTEREST-FREE LOANS
Gilles Caouette: Mr. Speaker, may 1 ask a further supplementary?
Considering that the municipality of Mistassini has already received a loan of $36,000, 1 hope the right hon. Prime Minister will take notice that the announcement was made by the hon. member for Lapointe. I ask him whether he is prepared to maintain this practice for any municipality which is as underdeveloped as this one, in other areas of the country, in the same manner as interest-free loans are given to other countries.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the leader of the Social Credit Party of Canada knows that there is no such thing as a loan without interest. When the government borrows money from citizens it has to pay interest. If the hon. member wants to buy savings bonds with his own savings, he will receive interest from the government, that is to say interest is paid when using somebody else's money. It occurs sometimes that the government helps municipalities or foreign countries by lending them money at a reduced interest rate but this means that someone must foot the bill. The difference is paid by the taxpayer. Therefore the hon. member has the choice between having the interest paid by the borrower or by the Canadian taxpayers in general. The interest must be paid some way or other.


POSSIBILITY OF FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE TO DEAL WITH JOB-CREATION
Mr. James A. McGrath (St. John's East):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. Given that unemployment nationally has now reached 8.3 per cent, 10.8 per cent in Quebec and 12.5 per cent in the Atlantic provinces, and given the potential that such figures hold for social unrest in the country, not to mention the potential for human suffering, I ask if it is the intention of the Prime Minister or the intention of one of his colleagues to convene a federal-provincial meeting, to deal with the various measures necessary for the reconstruction of the economy in order to produce jobs?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, a meeting was held last week between federal and provincial Ministers of Finance and they dealt with this very subject.


POSSIBILITY OF ACTION BY MINISTER OF FINANCE TO CREATE JOBS FOLLOWING SUGGESTIONS FROM PROVINCES
James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question, directed to the Minister of Finance, is based on the refusal of the Minister of Employment and Immigration to meet with his four Atlantic provinces counterparts next November, to discuss the serious unemployment in that region. What immediate initiatives can we expect from the government as a result of the minister's recent meeting with his provincial counterparts in Ottawa, and does he intend to act upon some of the suggestions he received from provincial ministers at that conference?
[ Translation]


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I intend to make a speech in the House on Thursday evening. I shall then tell hon. members about the decision made by the government following the meetings held last week where the provincial finance ministers and the ministers of industry, trade and commerce to study what could be done. The results will be known in Thursday evening in the House.


REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION
James Aloysius McGrath: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a final supplementary question to the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion? My question is again prompted by the refusal of the Minister of Employment and Immigration to meet with the four Atlantic ministers, to discuss the very grave unemployment situation in that region. I ask, given the minister's statutory responsibilities, what initiatives can we expect from his department? Also, does he intend to meet with the governments of the four Atlantic provinces, to avert what will be a serious disaster in the region this winter?

[ Translation]


Hon. Marcel Lessard (Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is well aware that, in my capacity as minister, I have regular meetings with my colleagues from the Atlantic provinces where we discuss the development programs we can launch together. We also exchange correspondence and suggestions. I therefore hope that in the next few weeks we shall be able to finalize some of the secondary agreements which are now under discussion and which might partly solve the problems you have mentioned.


FINANCE
Mr. James Gillies (Don Valley):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Finance and relates, again, to the plunge in the value of the dollar and the effect of that on unemployment and inflation. Has the Government of Canada, through the Bank of Canada, alerted the Federal Reserve system of the United States, as it must under international agreement, that Canada may well be calling on the line of credit we have with respect to foreign exchange in the Central Bank of the United States?
[ Translation]


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no.


REQUEST FOR ASSURANCE NO FOREIGN EXCHANGE CONTROLS OR TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS
James McPhail Gillies: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. As the government does not take defensive action in that sense, the dollar continues to plunge and we see no sign of anything being done about it, can the Minister of Finance assure the House and the people of Canada who are most concerned about this issue that this government will not introduce foreign exchange controls or restrictions on travel in the foreseeable future?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I am able to promise one thing to the House and to the hon. member. We have no intention of introducing controls over currency exchanges between Canada and other countries.
Oral Questions


SUGGESTION CERTAIN MEMBERS BE NAMED TO QUEEN'S PRIVY COUNCIL
John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I must say that the experience of today would indicate a tremendous improvement, in the House, since we have come to the conclusion that what we are doing is being listened to.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I do not want to raise any provocative question today, unaccustomed as 1 am to doing so.
I wish to bring a question to the Prime Minister's attention. In view of Her Majesty's presence here, as in 1967, when premiers across Canada were made members of Her Majesty's Privy Council, 1 wonder if the government would give consideration on this occasion to naming two or three members of the House of Commons to the Privy Council: First, in the person of the Leader of the Opposition.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John George Diefenbaker: He may well lead an alternative government. I also want to add two hon. members, one of whom came in to the House 42 years ago. One is the hon. member for Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands, who served with such distinction not only in this House but in the province of Saskatchewan.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John George Diefenbaker: The other is the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre who came to this House in 1942. These gentlemen should be given the distinction of being named members of the Privy Council. All three of these men have brought distinction to the House of Commons. I hope that on the occasion of Her Majesty's visit in this her jubilee year, the government will give serious consideration to a recommendation that these three hon. members be made members of her Canadian council.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, of course 1 will give consideration to this very generous suggestion by the right hon. member for Prince Albert. It is a suggestion which is generous in intent, I am sure, but possibly less optimistic than the proposed recipients are themselves about their possibility of acquiring the title by becoming members of the government some day. If the right hon. member is despairing of that possibility, I would consider discussing the matter with the proposed recipients. In the case of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, he has already been offered the title of honourable in the other place and he has repeatedly turned that down.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!

October 17, 1977
Oral Questions


Stanley Howard Knowles: Order!


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Perhaps the right hon. member's gesture, which was meant as an act of generosity, shows considerably less optimism than the proposed recipients themselves have about their future.


John George Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, an answer like that almost demands an equally frivolous one. Apparently the Prime Minister does not know that in past years a number of members have been made members of the Privy Council by reason of their long service in the House of Commons and the distinction of it. During my period in office, I can think of one hon. member for East York who had served here for a long while. There was widespread approval. I hope the Prime Minister will look back over the record. The Prime Minister turns to his seatmate and says, who was he? It was before the Prime Minister came here. His lack of knowledge on the subject is therefore understandable. I ask him to reconsider this. I pass it on not as a frivolous matter but to show the people of Canada that there can be people of distinction in the opposition. As far as the suggestion of not doing anything in line with this government continuing in office, I say without equivocation that I have been across Canada and I have been told everywhere-


Some hon. Members:: Order.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


INDUSTRY
Hon. Herb Gray (Windsor West):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Herbert Eser (Herb) Gray: Has he now obtained a commitment from the automobile manufacturers to increase their capital investment, research and development and purchases of auto parts in Canada to levels in line with the sales of their cars in this country, something I believe must be done. If so, what are these commitments? If they have not been obtained, exactly what is the government doing to ensure that activity in these areas will be suitably increased to deal with the current problems shown to exist by the government's own Arthur report?


Hon. Jack H. Horner (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, in answer to the hon. member's question, I want to first point out that we in Canada use about 8.9 per cent of the automotive parts manufactured on the North American continent.


John Edward Broadbent: Wrong, 12 per cent.


John (Jack) Henry Horner: No, 8.9 per cent and we produce about 7 per cent. Naturally we in this country would like to see that equal. We are having discussions with the major automotive manufacturers today to see whether that can be done. I would also to point out that while we have a surplus in trade with /egard to total car assembly, we also have an advantage in the employment sector of the automotive industry. This country has 11.2 per cent of the total automotive manufacturing employment on the North American continent. We would like to hold that figure and perhaps increase it.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


PROPOSED EXTENSION OF CASH ADVANCES AND SHARING COST OF DRYING PROGRAM
Mr. Lome Nystrom (Yorkton-Melville):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister in charge of the Canadian Wheat Board. As the minister knows, about half the crop in the northern part of the prairies has not yet been harvested because of the weather, the bad rain conditions. The prairie ministers of agriculture have appealed to the federal government for help for those who have not yet harvested. Will the minister extend the cash advances, which I point out are not a loans, to cover crops still in the field so that those farmers who need the money will have some cash this fall?


Hon. Otto E. Lang (Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, fortunately the weather in the prairies has turned very good these past five days or so. Harvesting is going on very rapidly with combines doubling up at every opportunity. Therefore, the end result is yet to be ascertained. As a result of legislation which I proposed on behalf of this government and passed in this House several years ago, there is a standing provision for cash advances on unharvested grain, should that be necessary. Because of the possibility of harvesting taking place very late in the year, the provision is that we cannot invoke that legislation until November 15. However, we will certainly be watching the situation very closely and use that provision if it is required.


Lorne Edmund Nystrom: Will the minister consider a cost-sharing program with the prairie provinces such as Saskatchewan which now has a program to aid farmers in custom drying of tough and damp grain and also combining of grain in the fields? Will he consider a cost-sharing program to aid these farmers?


Otto Emil Lang: Mr. Speaker, the government of Saskatchewan has come forward with that kind of program with relation to the moving of machinery. That is the kind of initiative provincial governments ought to take. Whether it is the kind of thing that requires federal sharing will depend upon the total amounts involved. I am sure if those governments feel it does, we will have discussions with them later.
.


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
Miss Flora MacDonald (Kingston and the Islands):: Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Prime Minister. I would like to ask him if he has taken the occasion in the past few days to discuss with the provincial premiers the immediate convening of a first ministers' conference to deal specifically with the critical unemployment situation and the joint governmental initiatives that could be taken to alleviate it?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: No, Mr. Speaker.


Miss MacDonald:: It is a disappointment to learn that the Prime Minister does not seize upon every opportunity to discuss this matter with his provincial counterparts. Since the Prime Minister has not taken the opportunity to speak with them, is it his intention to write to the first ministers about the convening of a first ministers' conference to deal specifically with unemployment?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Mr. Speaker, the hon. lady may have missed the earlier answers by the Minister of Finance who indicated that just last week he met with the provincial ministers of finance to discuss this very matter. The hon. lady might not realize that yesterday I met the premiers at a luncheon for Her Majesty. There was no question such as unemployment on the agenda.


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: May I ask the Prime Minister if he understands that the first ministers, including himself, have a very real responsibility in this crisis situation.


POSSIBLE MEETING WITH QUEBEC MINISTER CONCERNING ECONOMIC ORIENTATION
Mr. Roch La Salle (Joliette):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to put a question to the Minister of Finance to whom I would like to wish a lot more success than his predecessors have had. That cannot be difficult.
Since the newspapers were reporting last week that the Minister of Finance had met with those in charge of the economic orientation of the government of Quebec at this time could the minister say when he is to meet with a Quebec minister, Mr. Landry, and can he say whether he has concrete proposals to make to the Quebec government?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, this morning my colleague the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion and I met three Quebec ministers interested in economic problems. They told me about a program they want to put forward. We also discussed certain initiatives we intend to take and have already taken with respect to certain sectors of the Quebec economy. The results will be announced by each government at the appropriate time. The conversation was rather cordial.
Oral Questions


MEASURES TO ALLEVIATE UNEMPLOYMENT AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE IN QUEBEC
Roch La Salle: Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask a supplementary question. I am pleased to see that the minister has seemingly acknowledged the need to cooperate with his counterpart of the Quebec government. If one were to judge by some of his recent announcements, it would rather seem that it was just the continuation of a policy of confrontation. Given the fact that one-fifth of Quebec youths are presently unemployed, can the finance minister give assurance to this House that in his forthcoming speech of Thursday evening he will present concrete measures to correct a situation that is almost disastrous, taking into account the prevailing unemployment rate in the province of Quebec?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Well, Mr. Speaker, we have discussed today certain programs and I intend to make certain announcements this coming Thursday which will not directly be related to Quebec but will be directed toward all provinces of Canada, since we are responsible for the economic situation all across the country. Obviously, I made certain announcements in the past and I still intend to make others because there are particular problems in Quebec which are causing great worries to the rest of Canada and that is the political instability in that province.


SUGGESTED WARNING ON LOW CALORIE PRODUCTS CONTAINING SUGAR
Mrs. Simma Holt (Vancouver-Kingsway):: Mr. Speaker, my question refers to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. Bearing in mind that a ban on the use of saccharin was implemented on October 1 and that all the so-called low calorie products presently in the marketplace contain a product, sugar, known to be dangerous to at least 400,000 Canadians as well as to tens of thousands of visitors to Canada who suffer from diabetes, will the hon. lady take action to ensure that a proper and conspicuous warning is placed on the products wrongly called low calorie products to warn consumers of their sugar content?


Hon. Monique Begin (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Mr. Speaker, the point of my hon. colleague is well taken. I have been looking into the saccharin issue ever since I was appointed minister, but I have not yet had time to look into the sugar issue, including the health hazards which sugared food represents for diabetic patients. I shall certainly look into it. However, I suggest to my hon. colleague that no conspicuous warning about the dangers of sugared food for diabetic patients will change the situation, as long as this type of food is left on store counters, in refrigerators or in cupboards at home where children can easily reach them.

October 17, 1977
Oral Questions


ANTI-INFLATION PROGRAM REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION OF PRIME MINISTER'S REFERENCE TO DISCIPLINING PEOPLE
Mr. Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton West):: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister related to a story by Val Sears in last Sunday's Star. What methods or techniques did the Prime Minister have in mind in terms of diciplining Canadians when he indicated- and I am quoting, now-that "If they don't discipline themselves we shall discipline them as we did with the controls."


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: A very simple example, and one easy to understand, would be that of the controls themselves-controls which the Leader of the Opposition is asking be removed.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Can the Prime Minister be more definite and tell us where, in his opinion, the people of Canada have failed and in what areas they need discipline? Would he not agree that there is need for discipline to be applied to his own government, some members of which do not understand what discipline means-I have in mind flying on airplanes around the country, and so on.


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: Another simple example could be found in the first half of 1975 when there was double digit inflation and when the average increase in wage rates was some 21 per cent, much higher than the rate of growth of the economy. At that time we tried to get agreement on voluntary restraint; we did not get it and we brought in controls. That is an example of the kind of discipline the state must impose when the private decision-makers do not exercise restraint. As far as government spending is concerned, I would remind the hon. member that today, under Standing Order 43, we have heard two motions by important members of his party calling upon the government to spend more money.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. F. E. Oberle (Prince George-Peace River):: My question is for the Secretary of State for External Affairs, Mr. Speaker. Is it the intention of the government to develop and express a position in respect of the latest round of international terrorism involving kidnappings and hijackings? More particularly, is it the intention of the government to issue a statement with respect to the dilemma in which the Federal Republic of Germany now finds itself? Has it expressed sympathy with, and support for, that government's firm position against international terrorism and is the minister prepared to say something publicly on this aspect?


Hon. Donald C. Jamieson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: I welcome the hon. member's question because it

does give me an opportunity to place on the record not only the position of the Government of Canada but, I am sure, of all members of this House. The Government of Canada condemns totally the use of terrorism and sympathizes with, and understands fully the attitude and approach of the government of West Germany. I wish to convey the sympathy of the Canadian government and people to those who are affected and to give a full undertaking that we shall seek, in all the international fora we can, to eliminate incidents of this kind. I fear there is nothing which Canada can do specifically in this case; it is one which highlights the necessity for an international agreement embracing all countries.


REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION
Mr. David MacDonald (Egmont):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. It arises from remarks made during the summer by the Secretary of State for External Affairs, the former Minister of Regional Economic Expansion describing the DREE program as having failed in combatting regional disparities. In view of that department's frozen budget and mounting unemployment in the four Atlantic provinces, will the Prime Minister clarify the nature of the "new initiatives" he has talked about? For example, has he given an assurance to the four premiers that there will be a major change in support for the DREE program and increased support from other departments so as to effectively combat the increasing unemployment rate in those provinces?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: The intention of the government to combat unemployment in those provinces was evident in the creation of the department to which he referred. The hundreds of millions spent in the Atlantic provinces is, of itself, an indication of the government's attempts to bring down unemployment and accelerate economic expansion. However, I cannot give the hon. member the assurance that the government will engage in vastly increased spending programs in that area. The government must show restraint itself as it is asking other Canadians to show restraint.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Has the Prime Minister been in contact with his colleagues or with the provincial premiers with a view to reversing the trend in those four provinces since, obviously, whatever money has been spent, it has not been successful in producing the desired effect?


Pierre Elliott Trudeau: The hon. gentleman would not, I am sure, expect me to try to make a commitment. This is an area where the government tries to encourage a greater growth in the economy but we cannot guarantee that the measures taken will work. Very much depends upon what is done by the private sector. There is, also, the question of confidence and the government is doing what it can to create confidence, in
October 17, 1977

investment in that area for example by making provision in the last budget for substantial tax incentives.


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Walter David Baker: Mr. Speaker, 1 have a question for the Secretary of State. In view of a statement that was made a few months ago by the Prime Minister in the question period to the effect that he intended to use the day after tomorrow to answer the questions raised by members of this House with respect to unemployment in the country and our economic situation, and in view of the fact that it is not the intention of the public broadcasting media, particularly the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, at this point in any event, to carry that very important speech and the speeches of the other party leaders with respect to the situation in the country, I wonder whether I could ask the Secretary of State if he would consult with the president of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and perhaps advise the House further with respect to the intention of that corporation in regard to that very important public occasion in this parliament?


Hon. John Roberts (Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I should be happy, as requested by the hon. member, to explore this matter with the president of the CBC when I meet with him later on today.



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. I have the honour to present the fifth report of the special committee appointed to supervise the implementation of radio and television broadcasting of the proceedings of the House and its committees. I do want to beg, as I indicated earlier, the indulgence of the House to take just a moment to make a remark or two about the changes in the House which have taken place over the intervening two months since we last sat.
With the tabling of this fifth report we complete a series of reports which cover in a rather comprehensive, although brief, way the work of that special committee which had a rather extraordinary mandate, that of implementing a decision of the House. This is a rather unusual mandate, and when we did meet as a committee to carry out this assigned task, our initial advice was that it would be at least 18 to 24 months before the
Broadcasting of House Proceedings task could be accomplished. The fact that we are all here today, with the work done, when in fact we not only did not have the chamber vacated on July 1 as we had hoped but, indeed, not until the middle of August, is really remarkable.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: I want to pay just a brief tribute to the people who I feel have given absolute devotion to their tasks, above and beyond the call of duty. We have, as hon. members will notice, relocated the desks in the chamber in order to add more. We have relocated the Chair in order to increase the seating to 300 members and accommodate those redistribution changes which the House provided for in recent legislation. We have upgraded the sound system, which in fact is an entire replacement of the sound system, and I think it has proven today to be a very worth-while addition to our facilities.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, Hear!


Mr. Speaker:: We have, incredibly, constructed over the south gallery an entire studio which was not there two months ago. I think it is a tribute to the Department of Public Works that this was done, and particularly to their architect in charge who has the specific assignment of heritage buildings, Mr. Robert Calvert, and who I think has done the job in such a way as to preserve the dignity of the chamber.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: The fact that these many steps were taken within that space of time reflects, I think, the serious and conscientious attitude of the members of the committee, those members of the House who sat on this rather special committee and who worked quite long hours during the very brief recess that other members enjoyed. I will not try to name the members; they are known to the parties in the House.
In that work we were aided immensely by a team of advisers from the CBC upon whom we relied constantly for advice and technical assistance. On the technical side, that team was headed by Mr. Jim Landsberg, and on the production quality side the whole operation was watchdogged, to ensure the highest quality, by Mr. Cameron Graham. I think the House owes both those gentlemen a great deal of appreciation.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: During the time this work was carried out, the staff of the House, particularly the Clerk of the House, Mr. Alistair Fraser, had really to be in the building almost 24 hours a day to supervise.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: In that work, Mr. Fraser was joined, on the technical side of the radio and television installations, by Mr. Alex Small, who has been in the service of the House of Commons now for many years, and particularly by the Sergeant-at-Arms who was responsible for safeguarding the sanctity of this chamber during all this intensive reconstruction.

October 17, 1977
Broadcasting of House Proceedings The Sergeant-at-Arms, Colonel Currie, really did yeoman service in that regard.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: Just a brief word about the concept that is involved. As members know, the concept under which we were operating, the mandate that we were given, was a specific one, and that was to proceed on the basis of an electronic Hansard. Therefore, the equipment which is in place is here, not out of an introduction of news coverage but out of the introduction of an addition to our Hansard reporting, the printed Hansard which has been here since the beginning of the sittings of this House. We are adding radio and television Hansard.
That concept is one by which we have been guided constantly and one which we feel sets up a fundamental relationship with the networks that may distribute this product. In other words, it has been our task to bring it into being here as a reporting device of the proceedings of the House and to make it available. This we have done, and we leave it to the networks and the publicity and media people to choose or leave alone what they wish, as has been the case in print media up to now. That seems to be a very satisfactory concept for this coverage.
There are, however, a number of questions that remain unresolved. We have temporary equipment in place now. The cameras which are to the left and right of the Chair are manually operated, as members can see. We have attempted to place them in such a way as to be as inobtrusive as possible to the proceedings of the House. Members know that in about six months' time, when the equipment is available, these cameras will be mounted underneath the galleries and operated remotely, so that there will not be even this much interference with the proceedings of the House.
During that time we will need to experiment with our capacity to use this very powerful medium to record our proceedings, for indeed there are many questions about the manner in which these cameras ought to be directed and controlled. The only way we can resolve these questions is to experiment with them, which, of course, was another very essential part of our mandate when this task was begun.
The lighting is a little higher than it absolutely needs to be, and we are hoping that it will be toned down both in temperature and intensity.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: The task generally has been a very great challenge. As I say, many questions remain unresolved, and therefore your committee will seek a mandate in the new session to be reconstituted in order to continue the assessment of this ongoing experience. We do have many questions. Many representations are being made to us about distribution and assistance by the House in distributing the film that we take. We have a number of questions about rights and immunities. In terms of hon. members, we did address ourselves to the question of the rights and immunities of members. Basically, since we are simply going on with the reporting of our own

proceedings, it was not felt that there was any fundamental change in the rights and immunities already enjoyed by members.
There is, however, a question or two about the position of broadcasters, and about the position of our interpreters, which we want to see resolved. The committee will be hearing further representations on that, and perhaps will even be considering the possibility or the advisability of attempting to draft some legislation-even though the opinion may be that legislation is not absolutely necessary-on the feeling that the House and the country would benefit from removing any uncertainties that might exist.
Again I say to all of those who have worked so tirelessly during this short recess, who have performed this work on behalf of the House, in keeping with the dignity of the chamber, the very important work here and this concept of recording our own proceedings with an increased awareness and service to the Canadian public, that I think the House owes them a great debt of gratitude, and I think we are fortunate that this work has been completed in time.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Charles Joseph Clark: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, you have, very properly, expressed the appreciation of the members of the House to everyone involved in the preparation of the transformation of this chamber, with one singular exception. That exception, sir, is yourself, who chaired the committee.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Charles Joseph Clark: We all appreciate that that was very arduous and demanding work which has only just begun. I am sure I speak on behalf of all your colleagues in the House of Commons in expressing our very real appreciation to Your Honour for the work you did through the summer.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT
Mr. Speaker:: Order! I have the honour to inform the House that a communication has been received on October 4, 1977 which is as follows:
Government House Ottawa
October 4, 1977 Sir:
I have the honour to inform you that the Right Honourable Bora Laskin, P.C., Chief Justice of Canada, in his capacity as Deputy Governor General, will proceed to the Senate Chamber at 3.15 p.m. approximately on Monday, October 17th, for the purpose of proroguing the Second Session of the Thirtieth Parliament of Canada.
October 17, 1977

I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your obedient servant, Edmond Joly de LotbiniSre Administrative Secretary to the Governor General



[Stage Direction]
[ Translation]

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
Mr. Yvon Pinard (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: To show my gratitude for such a warm welcome, I shall answer some five hundred questions today.
Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: 41, 44, 53, 159, 163, 174, 193, 358, 625, 630, 632, 699-


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. parliamentary secretary, in an assiduous task under his new responsibilities, has provided the House with a copy of the list of questions proposed to be answered today. Under the circumstances, because the list is rather extensive and is some 2'A pages in length, I wonder if the House might be of a disposition to file the list and consider it to have been read.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Stanley Howard Knowles: Agreed.
[Editor's Note: The numbers of the questions mentioned above are as follows:] 41, 44, 53, 159, 163, 174, 193, 358, 625, 630, 632, 699, 745, 862, 863, 865, 976, 1,141, 1,175, 1,179, 1,214, 1,216, 1,335, 1,336, 1,412, 1,413, 1,451, 1,479, 1,492, 1,534, 1,554, 1,574 to 1,602 incl., 1,638, 1,719, 1,743, 1,788, 1,869, 1,870,	1,882,	1,915,	1,930,	1,935,	1,945,	1,955,	1,997,1,998, 1,999,	2,008,	2,027,	2,028,	2,029,	2,044,	2,045,	2,053,2,067, 2,068, 2,081, 2,082, 2,085, 2,154, 2,155, 2,195 to 2,202 inch, 2,232, 2,233, 2,234, 2,260, 2,304, 2,316, 2,339, 2,356, 2,368, 2,394,	2,401,	2,404,	2,405,	2,428,	2,431,	2,433,	2,434,2,442, 2,451,	2,454,	2,456,	2,462,	2,538,	2,542,	2,547,	2,555,2,556, 2,557,	2,646,	2,725,	2,727,	2,728,	2,735,	2,737,	2,738,2,740, 2,741,	2,744,	2,746,	2,757,	2,762,	2,767,	2,771,	2,783,2 785, 2,787,	2,788,	2,789,	2,794,	2,798,	2,804,	2,807,	2,809,2,812, 2,814,	2,819,	2,820,	2,825,	2,827,	2,837,	2,842,	2,843,2,844, 2,847,	2,848,	2,849,	2,854,	2,856,	2,857,	2,858,	2,861,2,863, 2,864,	2,865,	2,867,	2,869,	2,870,	2,872,	2,873,	2,881,2,884, 2,885,	2,886,	2,887,	2,889,	2,895,	2,898,	2,900,	2,901,2,903, 2,904,	2,907,	2,909,	2,910,	2,911,	2,914,	2,915,	2,916,2,917, 2,918,	2,921,	2,922,	2,923,	2,924,	2,926,	2,929,	2,931,2,933, 2,936,	2,942,	2,945,	2,948,	2,949,	2,950,	2,951,	2,954,
Order Paper Questions
2,956 to 3,004 inch, 3,009 as well as questions Nos. 113, 117, 326, 506, 657, 722, 723, 727, 730, 1,014, 1,168, 1,180, 1,191, 1,206, 1,207,	1,209,	1,279,	1,294,	1,298,	1,337,	1,394,	1,397,1,409, 1,485,	1,627,	1,649,	1,829,	1,996,	2,032,	2,064,	2,065,2,066, 2,083,	2,251,	2,270,	2,277,	2,298,	2,314,	2,346,	2,389,2,432, 2,435, 2,460, 2,475, 2,539, 2,550, 2,675 (revised) 2,724, 2,729, 2,731,	2,750,	2,782,	2,790,	2,806,	2,833,	2,840,	2,841,2,850, 2,868,	2,874,	2,880,	2,894,	2,896,	2,897,	2,925,	2,946,
2,952 and 3,008.


Mr. Cossitt: With reference to the answer to Question No. 3,240 of the First Session of the 30th Parliament, that lists in part 32 trips by the Minister of Agriculture, his wife and members of his family by government aircraft at public expense since September 25, 1973 (a) what is the total cost of all the trips to the taxpayer (b) for what reason was this answer Tabled rather than printed in Hansard since answers of much greater length have been printed in Hansard?


Mr. Ralph E. Goodale (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: (a) See reply to question No. 2,881. (b) See Beauchesne's Citation 171 (a), (j) and (kk).


Mr. Cossitt: In a letter dated October 14, 1975 to Mr. Charles S. Pringle, 500 Ouellette Avenue, Windsor, Ontario did the Minister of Agriculture state in part "For flights undertaken on behalf of the government as a whole, the Minister s budget is charged double the first class rate fare that would be chargeable by commercial carriers for the same on similar flights and trajectory of $100, whichever is greater" and, if so (a) when was the policy established by the government (b) how was such an amount to be charged arrived at (c) what was (i) the actual cost to the government of the DOT aircraft used by the Minister on a trip to Vancouver on October 17 to 19, 1975 (ii) the amount charged to the Minister's budget if the basis for charges outlined by the Minister had been followed?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to question No. 2,881.


Mr. Cossitt: With reference to the answer to Question No. 5,307 of the First Session of the 30th Parliament, which stated in part that in all constituencies the name of the local contact for appointment of 1976 Census commissioners was provided to Statistics Canada by the office of the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce, in each case, what are the names and addresses of the persons, from whom the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce received such recom mendations?


Mr. Hugh Poulin (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: The office of the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce advises that it received the names of the local contact for the constituencies listed from the following:
Riding
1.	Abitibi
2.	Gatineau
3.	Hull
4.	Pontiac
5.	Temiscamingue
6.	Villeneuve
Name
Hon. Andre Ouellet Mr. Gaston Clermont Mr. Gaston Isabelle Mr. Thomas H. Lefebvre Hon. Andre Ouellet Hon. Andre Ouellet

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Riding	Name
7. Algoma	Mr. Maurice Foster
8. Cochrane	Mr. Ralph Stewart
9.	Frontenac, Lennox and Addington Hon. H. Faulkner
10.	Glengarry-Prescott-Russell
11.	Grenville-Carleton
12.	Kingston and the Islands
13.	Lanark-Renfrew-Carleton
14.	Leeds
15.	Nickel Belt
16.	Nipissing
17.	Ottawa-Carleton
18.	Ottawa Centre
19.	Ottawa Vanier
20.	Ottawa West
21.	Renfrew North-Nipissing East
22.	Sault Ste-Marie
23.	Stormont-Dundas
24.	Sudbury
25.	Timiskaming
26.	Timmins
Hon. H. Faulkner Hon. John Turner Hon. H. Faulkner Hon. John Turner Hon. John Turner Hon. R. Andras Mr. J. J. Blais Hon. John Turner Mr. Hugh Poulin Mr. Jean Robert Gauthier Mr. Lloyd Francis Mr. Leonard D. Hopkins Hon. R. Andras Mr. Ed Lumley Hon. J. Jerome Hon. R. Andras Mr. Jean Roy


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of the Prime Minister's visit to Prince Edward Island Curing September 1976, including the cost of (a) transportation (b) accommodation (c) accompanying staff?
2.	What are the names and job designations of all staff members accompanying him?
3.	What was the exact purpose of the trip and did it result in any way from the 29% standing of the Liberal Party in the gallup poll and, if so (a) was the trip an attempt to remedy such a situation on behalf of the Liberal Party (b) what was the justification for the use of public funds for such purposes?
4.	Were any government aircraft used for transportation and, if so (a) what type (b) how much flying time was involved in each case (c) what was the (i) total cost in each case (ii) overall cost?


Otto Emil Lang: Transport Canada advises as follows: 1. (a), (b) and (c)-See reply to question 2,881.
2.	See reply to question 2,881.
3.	See reply to question 2,881.
4.	(a) Transport Canada Lockheed Jetstar. (b) and (c) (i),
(ii)-See reply to question 2,881.


Mr. Cossitt: Did the Minister of Agriculture state on the CTV programme "Question Period" that the government had conducted a secret poll which showed that most Canadians agree with government agricultural policies and, if so (a) on what date was the poll conducted (b) was it paid for at public expense (c) what was the amount involved (d) what was the name and address of the polling organization (e) what were the reasons that the poll was taken and who authorized it (f) is it customary for the Department of Agriculture to use public funds to poll Canadians about the Department and its policies (g) will the Minister agree to make all details of the poll public, including questions actually asked, percentage replies thereto, and all other information involved and (i) if so, on what date (ii) if not, for what reason?


Hon. E. F. Whelan (Minister of Agriculture):: A transcript of the program in question reveals that the minister did not actually use the word secret relative to an awareness and

attitudes study conducted for the department. Any such implication referred to the point being made by the minister that the results of the survey had not, at that time, been made public, (a) Interviewing was conducted between November 22, 1975 and December 15, 1975. (b) Yes. (c) $29,700. (d) Goldfarb Consultants Limited, Toronto, Ontario, (e) The survey was designed to ascertain the awareness and attitudes of Canadians, both rural and urban, towards farming, agriculture, food and general government policy regarding agriculture. The project was approved by the Minister of Agriculture, (f) Yes. The department uses surveys, if circumstances indicate a desirability to obtain the type of information described in the answer to part (e). Surveys also provide an opportunity for the public to express views on agriculture policies, (g) Announcement has already been made that the report of the survey and the questionnaire are publicly available from the consulting firm. As the survey was conducted person-to-person, response was 100 per cent.


Mr. Reynolds: How many public servants presently on (a) French (b) English language training programmes have (i) five years (ii) four years (iii) three years (iv) two years (v) one year or less, remaining in their job before qualifying for a pension?


Ralph Goodale: Agriculture Canada: (a) (i) 2; (ii) 1; (iii) -; (iv) 1; (v) -. (b) -. Communications: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) 3; (iv) -; (v) 1. (b) -. Consumer and Corporate Affairs: (a) (i) 1; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) -. (b) -. Energy, Mines and Resources: (a) (i) -; (ii) 1; (iii) 2; (iv) 1; (v) 3. (b) -. Finance; (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) 1; (v) -. (b) -. Office of the Auditor General: (a) (i) -; (ii) 1; (iii) - ; (iv) -; (v) -. (b) -. Fisheries and Environment: (a) (i) 6;
(ii)	4; (iii) 4; (iv) 1; (v) 5. (b) -. Industry, Trade and Commerce: (a) (i) 1; (ii) 1; (iii) 1; (iv) -(v) 1. (b) -. Statistics Canada: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) 3; (iv) -; (v) 2. (b) -. Justice (a) (i) 1; (ii) -; (iii) 1; (iv) -; (v) -. (b) -; Labour (a) (i) 2; (ii) 1; (iii) -; (iv) 1; (v) 1. (b) -; Employment and Immigration; (a) (i) 1; (ii) 1; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) 1. (b) -. National Defence: (a) (i) 9; (ii) 5; (iii) 4; (iv) 4; (v) 4. (b) (i) 1; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) -. National Health and Welfare: (a) (i) 2; (ii) 2; (iii) 4; (iv) 3; (v). (b) -. Medical Research Council: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) 

; (v) 2. (b) -. National Revenue: (a) (i) 3; (ii) 5; (iii) 3; (iv) 1; (v) 2. (b) -. Post Office: (a) (i) -; (ii) 3; (iii) -; (9v) 1; (v)
1.	(b) -. Public Works: (a) (i) 2; (ii) 1; (iii) -; (iv) 1; (v) -. (b) -, Public Service Staff Relations Board: (a) (i) 1; (ii) -;
(iii) 1; (iv) -; (v) 2. (b) -. Regional Economic Expansion: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) 1; (iv) -; (v) -. (b) -. Science and Technology: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) 1. (b) -. National Research Council of Canada: (a) (i) 1; (ii) 3; (iii) 1;
(iv)	1; (v) 2. (b) -. Secretary of State: (a) (i) 3; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) 1. (b) -. Public Service Commission: (a) (i) 1; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) -. (b) -. National Museums of Canada: (a) -[DOT]. (b) (i) 1; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) 2. Public Archives: (a) (i) 1; (ii) -; (iii) 1; (iv) -; (v) -; (b) -.
October 1 7. 1977

Order Paper Questions
National Library: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) 1; (b) -. National Film Board: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -;
(v)	2; (b) -. External Affairs: (a) (i) -; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) 1; (v) -; (b) -. Royal Canadian Mounted Police: (a) (i) 1;
(ii) 1; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) -; (b) -. Canadian Penitentiary Service and National Parole Service: (a) (i) 2; (ii) -; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) -; (b) -. Supply and Services: (a) (i) -; (ii) 1;
(iii) -; (iv) -; (v); (b) -. Transport Canada: (a) (i) 4; (ii) 2; (iii) -; (iv) 1; (v) 2; (b) -. Treasury Board: (a) (i) -; (ii) 1; (iii) -; (iv) -; (v) 1; (b) -. National Capital Commission: (a) (i) -; (ii) 1; (iii) 1; (iv) 1; (v) -; (b) -. Other Departments and Agencies have no information on this subject.


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	How many international treaties, conventions, accords, etc., have been signed by Canada but have not been (a) ratified (b) implemented by either the (i) provinces (ii) Parliament of Canada or the executive of the government of Canada?
2.	What treaties are involved and on what date did Canada sign them?
3.	How many such arrangements has Canada ratified but have not implemented, if any?
4.	What consideration is Canada giving to implementing the recommendation of the Special Joint Committee of the Senate and House of Commons on the Constitution of Canada (1972) that international treaties be ratified by Parliament rather than the Executive and the Crown?


Mr. Fernand E. Leblanc (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State for External Affairs):: In so far as the
Department of External Affairs is concerned, the answer is as follows: An identical question was asked during the last session: No. 5,359. Our answer was given on July 13, 1976, see Hansard, page 15297. That answer remains the same.


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	What was the name, address and occupation of every person appointed through the office of the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce for the purpose of nominating potential 1976 Census Commissioners to Statistics Canada, for each constituency in Atlantic Canada?
2.	For each such constituency, how many Census Commissioners and Census Enumerators were appointed in total?
3.	What is the best estimate of the total salaries paid for Census Enumerators and Commissioners in Atlantic Canada for the 1976 Census?


Fabian Hugh Poulin: 1, 2 and 3, Statistics Canada reports that it does not have information on the occupations of those persons mentioned in Question 1. However, the names and addresses of contacts and all other details are as follows:
Newfoundland
Census	Census
Commis- Representa-sioners tives Number Number
Constituency	Name	Employed EmployedBonavista-T rinity-Conception	Mr. Richard Knapman	7	116
Lower Island Cove, Nfld.
Census	Census
Commis- Representa-sioners tives Number Number
Constituency	Name	Employed EmployedBurin-Burgeo	Mr. Bruce Buffett Grand Banks, Nfld.	6	86Gander-Twillingate	Mr. George Fowlow 17 Wilcokson Cres. Gander, Nfld.	8	113Grand Falls-WhiteBay-Labrador	Mr. Walter Fewer Grand Falls, Nfld.	7	107Humber-St. George's-St. Bar be	Mr. Ray Pollett c/o Pollett's Realty Cornerbrook, Nfld.	6	88St. John's East	Mr. Leonard Sterling c/o Johnson's Ltd. 95 Elizabeths Ave., St. John's, Nfld.	6	94St. John's West	Mr. Derek Lewis, 261 Douglas St. St. John's, Nfld.	5	93Prince Edward Island	Cardigan	Mr. John Brehaut, Hazelbrook, P.E.I.	3	50Egmont	Mr. George Olscamp 298 Duke St., Summerside, P.E.I.	3	51Hillsborough	Mrs. Muriel Burgoyne 25 Kensington Road, Charlottetown, P.E.I.	3	47Malpeque	Mr. Eric Robinson Albany, P.E.I.	3	49Nova Scotia	Annapolis Valley	Mr. John G. Brown, 422 Main St., Wolfville, N.S.	8	124Cape Breton-East Richmond	Mr. George Wilson, 7 MacVicar St., Glace Bay, N.S.	5	79Cape Breton-Canso	Mr. Ronald D. Maclsaac, Office of Secretary of State for External Affairs, 125 Sussex Drive, Ottawa, Ont.	7	103Cape Breton-The Sydneys	Mr. Russell MacLellan, 500 Kings Road, Sydney, N.S.	4	66Central Nova	Mr. Meritt Crawford, 111 Churchill Drive, New Glasgow, N.S.	7	100Cumberland-Colchester North	Mr. Sam Brushett, 357 Prince St., Truro, N.S.	7	99Dartmouth-Halifax East	Mr. Frank Forbes, 8 Landrace Drive, Dartmouth, N.S.	6	115Halifax	Mr. Brian Fleming, 5918 Rogers Drive, Halifax, N.S.	4	61Halifax-East Hants	Mr. Hans Burgers, 3474 St. Andrews Ave., Halifax, N.S.	7	139
October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Census	Census
Commis- Representa-sioners	tives
Number Number
Constituency	Name	Employed	EmployedSouth Shore	Mr. James J. Kinley, 80 Victoria Road, Lunenburg, N.S.	8	125South Western Nova	Miss Coline Campbell, M.P., Room 417, Confederation Bldg., Ottawa, Ontario	7	111New Brunswick	Carleton-Charlotte	Mr. Donald Beattie, C.A., Woodstock, N.B.	7	118Fundy-Royal	Mr. Gordon L. Phippen, Kiersteadville, N.B.	8	133Gloucester	Mrs. Clare Desserud, R.R. No. 2, Grovehill, Bathurst, N.B.	6	83Madawaska-Victoria	Mr. Albert J. Gagnon, 129 rue Bellevue, Edmunston, N.B.	6	82Moncton	Mr. Leonide H. Cyr, 880 Main St., Moncton, N.B.	6	98Northumberland-Mirami- chi	Mr. H. Graham Crocker, 503 King George Highway, Newcastle, N.B.	6	90Restigouche	Mr. M. Harquail, M.P., House of Commons	5	65Saint John-Lancaster	John D. MacCallum, Q.C., 50 Princess Street, Saint John, N.B.	4	66Westmorland-Kent	Mr. Berten Leblanc, 1136 rue Main, Shediac, N.B.	6	91York-Sunbury	Mr. John C. McNair, 92 Waterloo Row, Fredericton, N.B.	7	114Breakdown by Province	Census Commis- sioners Salaries Paid	Census Representa- tives Salaries PaidBreakdown by Province	Newfoundland P.E.I. Nova Scotia New Brunswick	$135,000 36,000 210,000 183,000	$400,314 82,504 469,904 393,680


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of the Prime Minister's trip to Southern Ontario on or about the end of September 1976 including, cost of (a) transportation (b) accommodation (c) accompanying staff?
2.	What are the names and job designations of all staff members accompanying him?
3.	(a) What was the purpose of the trip (b) did the trip result in any way from the 29 p. 100 standing of the Liberal Party in the Gallup Poll and, if so, was the trip an attempt to remedy such a situation on behalf of the Liberal Party (c) what justifies the use of public funds for such purposes?

4.	Were any government aircraft used for transportation and, if so (a) what type (b) how much flying time was involved in each case (c) what was the (i) total cost (ii) cost in each case?
5.	(a) What are the names of all Liberal Party Groups or Associations that the Prime Minister attended during the course of the trip (b) is the Liberal Party reimbursing the Public Treasury for their share of the trip and (i) if so, in what amount (ii) if not, for what reason?
6.	Did the Prime Minister or any member of his family make use of a pass on any commercial aircraft during the trip and, if so (a) did they travel first class or economy (b) what would have been the appropriate fare if a pass had not been used?


Ralph Goodale: 1 to 5. See reply to question 2,881 answered this day.
6.	Not applicable.


Mr. Orlikow: 1.	How many public servants received salaries of $30,000 or more in 1975?
2.	How many notified their employer that they were engaged in other financial activities as required by Privy Council Guideline of 1973 included in P.C. 1973-4065, 18 December, 1973, Part 7, "Public servants should hold no outside office or employment that could place on them demands inconsistent with their official duties in an objective manner."
3.	What steps, if any, have been taken to ensure that none of these outside activities are conducted during government office hours or using government facilities such as telephone, computers or secretarial staff?


Ralph Goodale: 1. 4,522 (December 31, 1975).
2.	Consumer and Corporate Affairs, 4; Statistics Canada, 5; Unemployment Insurance Commission, 3; National Health and Welfare, 2; National Revenue, 3; Privy Council Office and Federal-Provincial Relations Office, 3; Public Works, 9; Regional Economic Expansion, 1; Science Council of Canada, 1; Secretary of State for External Affairs, 18; Transport, 1; Ministry of State for Urban Affairs, 1; other departments and agencies did not receive notification of engagement in other financial activities.
3.	It is generally recognized that services, equipment and facilities provided to public servants are for use only in the conduct of official business. Any personal use, whether for financial gain or otherwise, can be the subject of disciplinary action. Observance is ensured by effective management supervision within departments and agencies.


Mr. Herbert: 1.	Is the Postmaster General aware that clearly marked first class mail sent by the Member for Vaudreuil from his residence or constituency office to his Ottawa office, a distance of less than 100 miles, averages five days delivery time?
2.	What steps are being taken to return first class mail delivery to an acceptable level and until these measures are in effect, will the present advertising on postal boxes be removed?

October 17, 1977


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. The Postmaster General has been made aware of the allegations through this question.
Canada Post is constantly striving to improve its service and to remedy any deficiencies that can be isolated. A major initiative has recently been implemented to identify delays and initiate appropriate action. Information on postal boxes is designed to advise customers of the service scheduled to specific destinations. Some cases involving misunderstanding of the information have occurred, and new notices that are simpler to understand will begin to appear on mail boxes within the next few months.


Mr. Brisco: 1.	How many new design postage stamps were issued in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to date?
2.	What were the costs involved in the production of each new design?
3.	How much did each artist receive for his or her designs?
4.	In terms of stamp sales to foreign collectors and others, etc., is it more costly or less costly to produce several different stamp designs, rather than only one specific stamp design?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. (a) 35. (b) 23 as of 14 October.
2.	The design and production costs for each stamp.
3.	Issues are shown below.
4.	While it is more costly to produce several different stamp designs rather than only one specific stamp design, the sale of stamps to collectors is of secondary consideration in determining the number of stamp designs to be produced. The purpose of a stamp is to prepay postage, and stamps with different designs are issued to help focus attention on subjects of national and international interest and concern. The principal considerations which determine whether more than one design should be produced are the importance and complexity of a subject and whether the subject is of national or international interest, or a combination of the two. Revenues generated by philatelic sales are more than sufficient to cover all design and stamp production costs.
1975 Stamp Issues
Date of Issue	Description	Cost of Design	Cost of ProductionFebruary 5	Olympic Water Sports (3	$3,500	$108,954.83March 14	stamps) Olympic Sculptures (2 stamps)	2,000	81,379.39April 4	Subarctic Indians Artificats and	1,400	49,800.80Way of Life (2 stamps) Dress and Graphic Symbolism	2,900	73,650.75May 15	(2 stamps) Montgomery/H6mon (2	1,950	70,472.64May 30	stamps) Bourgeoys	1,500	44,649.36Desjardins	1,500	51,013.20Chown/Cook (2 stamps)	3,000	79,320.64June 11	Olympic Track and Field Sports	4,500	170,539.04July 3	(3 stamps) Calgary Centennial	1,000	47,952.62July 14	International Women's Year	2,000	64,736.00August 6	Olympic Combat Sports (3	3,500	96,623.24September 2	stamps) Supreme Court Centenary	1,500	51,211.30September 24	Coastal Ships (4 stamps)	5,000	108,346.56October 22	Christmas 1975 (6 stamps)	-	336,502.04November 10	Royal Canadian Legion	1,500	68,942.72Order Paper Questions	1976 Stamp Issues	Cost of Cost ofDate of Issue	Description	Design	ProductionJanuary 7	Olympic Team Sports and Gymnastics (3 stamps)	$4,000	$76,225.80February 6	Olympic Arts & Culture (3 stamps)	5,600	59,276.63Olympic Winter Games, Innsbruck	2,000	40,048.79March 12	Olympic Site (2 stamps)	3,500	98,957.60May 12	United Nations Settlements Conference "Habitat"	1,500	27,776.00June 1	Royal Military College Centenary (2 stamps)	3,000	68,362.72United States Bicentennial	-	69,518.40June 18	Olympic Ceremonies (3 stamps)	4,400	113,071.79August 3	Olympiad for the Physically Disabled	2,000	32,170.72August 17	Service/Guevremont (2 stamps)	3,500	48,569.92September 17	Iroquoian Indians Artifacts and Way of Life (2 stamps)	1,400	47,339.04Dress and Graphic Symbolism (2 stamps)	2,900	74,437.84POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT


Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	Could a clerk in the Post Office Department be promoted to a supervisory position after one year's experience and, if so, under what circumstances?
2.	Are there any instances where automated equipment has never operated since being installed in a post office and, if so, in what location has this occurred?
3.	(a) Have there been instances where staff had to be increased significantly because of breakdowns in automated equipment (b) what are the main causes of the breakdowns?
4.	Are postai employees relocated from one city to another and, if so (a) under what circumstances (b) could an employee be dismissed if he refused?
5.	Is an employee's place of work likely to be changed within a city and, if so (a) under what circumstances (b) are factors such as location of his home, transportation, schooling, etc. taken into consideration before such transfer is made (c) is he ever forced to transfer and threatened with dismissal if he refuses?
6.	Are late pay cheques and/or incorrect pay cheques considered a cause of serious dissatisfaction amongst postal employees?
7.	Has any survey been made to determine if thefts in post offices are made mainly by casual or permanent employees and, if so, what were the results?
8.	Between January 1 and December 31, 1975, what was the average percentage of staff turnover in post offices where automated equipment was installed?
9.	Was such percentage considered abnormally high and, if so, for what reason?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. A clerk in the Post Office Department can be promoted to a supervisory position after one year's experience. While this would not be common, it could occur when the clerk concerned was considered by a Rating Board to be the best qualified candidate in a competition from within the area of competition established by a responsible staffing officer.
2.	There have been numerous incidents where the Department has temporarily withheld processing live mail on newly

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
installed equipment pending final acceptance testing by the Department or pending the fulfillment of the 120-day period of notice that must be given to the Canadian Union of Postal Workers. There have also been situations where new equipment was not promptly used in new plants, while operations were being transferred in stages from another location.
3.	(a) No. (b) Not applicable.
4.	(a) and (b) Postal employees may be relocated from one city to another under any of the following circumstances: (i) As the result of a request submitted by the employee for a lateral transfer, normally based on medical, economic or compassionate grounds. As the request in this circumstance would be originated by the employee, the question of refusal is not applicable, (ii) As the result of a successful application for promotion to a position at another geographical location. Again, as the application would be originated by the employee, the question as to refusal does not apply, (iii) As the result of lack of work at the original location. Every effort would be made to find alternative employment at the original location. If this is not possible, every effort would be made to find a suitable position elsewhere. If suitable employment is located at another geographical location and the employee refused to relocate, the employee would not be dismissed. Instead he/she would become a lay-off and subject to the lay-off procedures which have been established for public servants.
5.	(a), (b) and (c) An employee's place of work may be changed within a city. The circumstances under which this could occur would include: (i) Phasing out of an existing facility, (ii) Decrease in the number of employees at a continuing facility, (iii) The bidding process wherein employees exercise their seniority rights in the filling of vacant positions. In (i) and (ii) above consideration would be given to such factors as home, transportation, schooling, etc. insofar as is practical. Employees are not forced to transfer and are not threatened with dismissal if they refuse to transfer. On the other hand, if there is no work for an employee at one location and that employee is not prepared to present himself at another location where there is suitable work, then that employee of necessity would become a lay-off.
6.	Late pay cheques cause dissatisfaction among postal employees. If this occurs, the Post Office Department and the Department of Supply and Services work to correct the problem and minimize the risk of recurrence.
7.	Although figures are available as to the number of employees involved each year in the commission of thefts or other offences in the Post Office, a breakdown is not available as to the category of employees involved.
8 and 9. The turnover rate for postal operations non-supervisory sub-groups for 1975 was approximately 7.24 percent nationally. Less than one percent (0.55 percent) of this turnover was from mechanized postal plants. Neither figure is considered abnormally high.
(Mr. Blais.]


Mr. Beatty: What was the cost to the taxpayer of telegrams sent by the government in
1975?


Ralph Goodale: For many departments and agencies, the cost of telegrams alone is not available, it includes amount spent on telegraph, cable and wireless communications. Agriculture Canada, $15,347.83; Communications, $5,091.28; Consumer and Corporate Affairs, $31,396.00*; Energy, Mines and Resources, $30,902'46; Atomic Energy Control Board, $182.02; National Energy Board, $20,540.98; Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, $36,694.00; Environment Canada, $191,474.00; Finance, $9,701.11; Anti-Inflation Board, $2,008.37; Auditor General, $142.04; Insurance, $38.00; Health and Welfare Canada, $101,585.00; Indian and Northern Affairs, $72,286.33*; Industry, Trade and Commerce, $89,966.10*; Foreign Investment Review Agency, $2,309.32*; Statistics Canada, $4,782.86; Justice (Including its agencies), $3,700.30*; Labour Canada, $1,630.30*; Canada Labour Relations Board, $1,763.46; Manpower and Immigration, $41,324.15; National Defence, $144,749.00*; Revenue Canada, $40,793.90; Post Office, $181,458.00*; Prime Minister's and Privy Council Offices, $12,644.00*; Public Service Staff Relations Board, $326.51; Public Works, $192,000.00*; Regional Economic Expansion, $6,190.85*; Science and Technology, $2,477.90; Canadian Patents and Development Limited, $160.34; National Research Council of Canada, $6,243.87; Science Council of Canada, $610.48*; Secretary of State, $17,395.22*; External Affairs, $4,462,100.00; Other government departments generate 50% of the telegrams transmitted over the facilities of the Department of External Affairs. The total cost of operating the network in 1975 was $8,924,200.00. This includes telegraphic costs, capital cost of equipment amortized over 10 years, salaries, allowances and overtime. Canadian International Development Agency, $5,881.50; Solicitor General, $886.00; Royal Canadin Mounted Police, $9,985.14; Canadian Penitentiary Service and National Parole Service, $4,864.22; National Parole Board, $1,041.93; Supply and Services, $132,474.59; Transport Canada, $200,714.82; Treasury Board, $5,477.24; Urban Affairs, $298.46*; National Capital Commission, $581.30; Veterans Affairs, $4,810.83; other departments and agencies have submitted a Nil reply.
*Fiscal year 1975/76


Mr. Beatty: 1.	Did the Secretary of State travel to London and Stratford on July 9, 1976, and, if so, what (a) are the details of the cost (b) was the total cost?
2.	What are the names of all passengers aboard the aircraft and what was their reason for travelling to London and Stratford?
3.	(a) How did the passengers travel between London and Stratford and return (b) what was the cost to the taxpayer, if any, of the ground transportation used?
October 17, 1977

4.	Was the Secretary of State aware that a regularly-scheduled Air Canada aircraft which could have carried the Minister's party to London landed shortly before the Minister's jet and, if so, for what reason did the Minister feel it was necessary to travel by government aircraft?
5.	At what time did the Secretary of State's aircraft leave London for the return trip and what was its destination?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the President of the Privy Council and the Minister of State for Science and Technology as follows: 1. (a), (b) and 2. See reply to question No. 2,881.
3.	(a) Rental car and private car. (b) $34.
4.	Please see reply to Part 4 of question No. 69 answered November 15, 1976.
5.	(a) July 10, 1976 at 1:00 p.m. (b) Ottawa with stops at Belleville and Trenton.


Mr. Lachance: Between the date of the presentation of the last budget May 25, 1976 and October 12, 1976, did the Post Office Department hire, dismiss or transfer employees to other departments and, if so, how many?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: (1) 5,146; (2) 1,024; (3) 145.


Mr. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich): 1.	(a) How many regional offices have been established across Canada staffed by Ministerial exempted staff or by other appointees (b) in what locations (c) what are the names of the officers staffing them (d) from what funds are rent and other office expenses paid (e) what is the cost for each such office?
2.	(a) To whose staff is each appointee attached (b) do regional officers report solely to the ministers appointing them or do they have other reporting responsibilities?
3.	(a) At what salary are appointments made and with what sort of allowances for travel, etc. (b) from what funds are such salaries and allowances paid?
4.	What fringe benefits are enjoyed by the officers in charge of the offices, e.g., use of services aircraft on priority or stand-by basis?
5.	What are the terms of reference of the officers exercising these duties and, in what manner are such terms of reference reconciled with the normal duties exercised by Members of Parliament?
6.	What are the relationships between these regional offices and Liberal Members of Parliament and their constituency offices?


Ralph Goodale: It has been the policy of numerous governments to provide an office and requisite staff for ministers of the Crown in their home communities so that they may continue to function as ministers when they are at home rather than in Ottawa. These are not regional offices-"Regional Office" being defined as one which administers all activities of the department in a particular region-but are supplementary offices intended to expedite the governing of the nation by ministers who reside normally in many different areas of the country. The Minister of Agriculture, as a result of the particularly great importance of agriculture to the western economy, maintains this type of supplementary office in
Order Paper Questions
Regina. In so far as that office is concerned, the answer is as follows: 1. (a) 1; (b) Regina; (c) Special Assistant-vacant; Mrs. I. Lamothe; (d) Departmental appropriations; (e) 1975-76-$34,572.00 (including salaries and expenses except for accommodation).
2.	(a) Minister's staff; (b) Report to minister.
3.	(a) In accordance with salary scales and ranges established for exempt staff and public servants with no allowances, (b) Departmental appropriations.
4.	None.
5.	Special assistant to the minister with specific responsibility for Western Canada.
6.	No formal relationship exists between the offices.


Mr. Coates: 1.	How many specific projects in Quebec has the Department of Regional Economic Expansion been financially involved in since its inception and, in each case, what was the financial involvement?
2.	Of the total number of projects, what was the estimated employment figure given at the time of the announced involvement of DREE and for those firms still operating, what is the employment figure actually attributable to the financial assistance in each case, as of this date?
3.	Of DREE's financial assistance to each project, what is the breakdown between outright grants and loans?
4.	How many of the projects have failed and, in each case (a) on what date was the grant and loan approved (b) on what date did it fail?
5.	How many employees lost employment as a result of the failure of the project at the date of the closure?


Marcel Lessard: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. As of October 31, 1976, 2,143 projects in the province of Quebec had accepted offers of financial assistance from DREE under the regional development incentives program. The total value of these incentives offers is estimated to be $246.0 million. The names of the firms and respective amounts of incentives are available from the reports on the program that are submitted monthly to Parliament.
2.	For the 2,143 projects, the estimated employment figure at the time of the announced involvement of DREE was 78,918. Of this total number of projects, 864 were completed as of October 31, 1976. The number of direct jobs actually created at the completion of the control period for these 864 projects, was 29,367 compared to the 31,612 jobs forecasted when the offers of financial assistance were announced. In this context, a "completed project" is one on which the full amount of the development incentive authorized by the minister under the statute has been paid to the applicant. This definition includes (a) a project which has successfully completed its control period, irrespective of any subsequent actions, and (b) a project involving a bankruptcy or total cessation of operations due to fire or other circumstances which requires the department to institute action to recover only part of the incentive paid to the applicant. With respect to this latter type of project, it is to be noted that the statute entitles the

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
applicant to payment of an incentive on the grounds that the project achieved some success.
3.	The Regional Development Incentives Act does not authorize the department to make loans, but does provide for offers of "loan guarantees" and "repayable incentives". As of October 31, 1976 DREE had approved $18,878,000 in loan guarantees to sixteen projects in the province of Quebec. As of October 31, 1976, two of the 2,143 projects referred to in Part 1 had been undertaken as a result of repayable grants estimated at $1,251,000.
4.	As of October 31, 1976, 84 of the 2,143 projects which had accepted inventives offers were discontinued before receiving their final grant payment. The dates of failure are not recorded since firms normally shut down and go through a period of attempted reorganization before announcing failure. The remaining 1,195 projects were still active at that time. In this context, a "discontinued project" is one on which the department has made a payment but in which there has subsequently been a bankruptcy, total cessation of operations, contravention of section 9 of the Regional Development Incentives Act, or other circumstance which requires the department to institute action to recover the full amount of the incentive paid to the applicant.
5.	The number of employees who lost employment at the time of closure is not known. Gradual shut down of the facility, normal seasonal employment fluctuations, and even rehiring of employees by a receiver after closure in order to complete unfinished inventories make it virtually impossible to provide accurate information of this kind.


Mr. Coates: 1.	How many specific projects in Atlantic Canada has the Department of Regional Economic Expansion been financially involved in since its inception and, in each case, what was the financial involvement?
2.	Of the total number of projects, what was the estimated employment figure given at the time of the announced involvement of DREE and for those firms still operating, what is the employment figure actually attributable to the financial assistance in each case, as of this date?
3.	Of DREE's financial assistance to each project, what is the breakdown between outright grants and loans?
4.	How many of the projects have failed and, in each case (a) on what date was the grant and loan approved (b) on what date did it fail?
5.	How many employees lost employment as a result of the failure of the project at the date of the closure?


Marcel Lessard: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. As of October 31, 1976, 780 projects in Atlantic Canada had accepted offers of financial assistance from DREE under the regional development incentives program. The total value of these incentives offers is estimated to be $151.7 million. The names of the firms and respective amounts of incentives are available from the reports on the program that are submitted monthly to parliament.
2.	For the 780 projects, the estimated employment figure at the time of the announced involvement of DREE was 25,889.

Of this total number of projects, 256 were completed as of October 31, 1976. The number of direct jobs actually created at the completion of the control period for these 256 projects, was 6,387 compared to the 7,572 jobs forecasted when the offers of financial assistance were announced. In this context, a "completed project" is one on which the full amount of the development incentive authorized by the minister under the statute has been paid to the applicant. This definition includes (a) a project which has successfully completed its control period, irrespective of any subsequent actions, and (b) a project involving a bankruptcy or total cessation of operations due to fire or other circumstance which requires the department to institute action to recover only part of the incentive paid to the applicant. With respect to this latter type of project, it is to be noted that the statute entitles the applicant to payment of an incentive on the grounds that the project achieved some success.
3.	The Regional Development Incentives Act does not authorize the department to make loans, but does provide for offers of "loan guarantees" and "repayable incentives". As of October 31, 1976, DREE had approved $4,555,000 in loan guarantees to five projects in Atlantic Canada. As of October 31, 1976, two of the 780 projects referred to in part I had been undertaken as a result of repayable grants estimated at $1,455,000.
4.	As of October 31, 1976, 37 of the 780 projects which had accepted incentives offers discontinued before receiving their final grant payment. The dates of failure are not recorded since firms normally shut down and go through a period of attempted reorganization before announcing failure. The remaining 487 projects were still active at that time. In this context, a "discontinued project" is one on which the department has made a payment but in which there has subsequently been a bankruptcy, total cessation of operations, contravention of section 9 of the Regional Development Incentives Act, or other circumstance which requires the department to institute action to recover the full amount of the incentive paid to the applicant.
5.	The number of employees who lost employment at the time of closure is not known. Gradual shut down of the facility, normal seasonal employment fluctuations, and even rehiring of employees by a receiver after closure in order to complete unfinished inventories makes it virtually impossible to provide accurate information of this kind.


Mr. Coates: 1.	How much, to date, has the AIB expended on advertising, in any form, and what is the breakdown?
2.	(a) What agencies are involved in the advertising (b) in what manner did the AIB make the selection of the agencies (c) were public tenders called before contracts were awarded?
3.	In each case, what have the agencies received in fees and commissions?
4.	By agency, what is the estimated cost for advertising for the fiscal year 1976-77 and, in each case, what will be the fees and commissions paid to each agency in the fiscal year?
October 17, 1977


Mr. Bob Kaplan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance):: 1. To date the board has spent $348,487.13. The breakdown is as follows: Fiscal 75/76, $230,705.38; Fiscal 76/77, $117,781.75. This was all print advertising done to inform Canadians about AIB requirements and programs.
2.	(a) MacLaren Advertising Limited, Canadian Advertising Agency Limited, (b) On the recommendation of the communications branch of the AIB. (c) No.
3.	MacLaren Advertising Ltd: Fiscal 75/76, $41,525.78; Fiscal 76/77, Nil. Canadian Advertising Agency Ltd: Fiscal 75/76, Nil; Fiscal 76/77, Nil.
4.	Fiscal year 76/77: MacLaren Advertising Ltd: $250,000, Canadian Advertising Agency: $50,000. The fees will be the normal 15 per cent paid by the media for advertising placed by agencies.


Mr. Coates: 1.	How many trips outside Canada has the Prime Minister taken since he assumed his present position in 1968?
2.	How many were for (a) business (b) business and pleasure (c) pleasure?
3.	How many were made by (a) government aircraft (b) commercial aircraft (c) using both types of aircraft?
4.	What were the specific trips when government aircraft were involved?
5.	In each case, what was the total period of time the Prime Minister was away from Canada?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


Mr. Muir: 1.	What is the present complement of employees in the Industrial Development Division of the Cape Breton Development Corporation?
2.	What (a) are the names of the chief officers of the division (b) are their specific responsibilities (c) is the salary of each?
3.	What was the complement of the Division in each fiscal year 1969-70 to date and how many projects did it have under consideration?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: For the Cape Breton Development Corporation the answer is as follows: 1. 34 (December 31, 1976).
2.	(a) David 1. Miller, Vice President, Industrial Development Division John L. Dodge, Vice President, Planning and Marketing, (b) Mr. Miller is responsible for the Industrial Development Division's operations in the Tourism, Primary and Secondary sectors. Mr. Dodge is responsible for the planning of activities for the Industrial Development Division and the marketing function of the Coal Division, (c) It is not the policy of the corporation to disclose individual salaries.
3.	The complement of the division in each fiscal year was: March 1970, 7; March 1971, 7; March 1972, 9; March 1973, 20; March 1974, 28; March 1975, 30; March 1976, 34. As of
Order Paper Questions
December 31, 1976, there were 99 projects under consideration. It is not possible to give precise numbers for particular dates in earlier years, but the volume has been markedly increasing, as has the work of implementing projects.


Mr. Herbert: What is the estimated cost of the relocation of the Canadian Pension Commission, the Pension Review Board, the War Veterans Allowance Board and the Bureau of Pension Advocates as well as veterans services, treatment services and administration services of the Department of Veterans Affairs to Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island?


Daniel Joseph MacDonald: Subject to more detailed studies the total estimated cost of the relocation of the Department of Veterans Affairs to Charlottetown, P.E.I. is 8.5 million dollars.


Mr. Herbert: What is the (a) estimated cost (b) approximate number of square feet of the new federal building which is to be constructed in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, to house the Canada Pension Commission, the Canadian Review Board, the Veterans Allowance Board and the Bureau of Pension Advocates as well as veterans services, treatment services and administration services of the Department of Veterans Affairs?


Mr. Alexandre Cyr (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Public Works):: (a) and (b) Not known at this time as detailed accommodation requirements have not yet been identified by Department of Veterans Affairs.


Mr. Herbert: Has land been purchased or has an option been taken on land in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island for the construction of the new building for the Canadian Pension Commission, the Pension Review Board, the War Veterans Allowance Board and the Bureau of Pension Advocates as well as veterans services, treatment services and administration services of the Department of Veterans Affairs?


Alexandre Cyr: No.


Mr. Beatty: How much money was spent by the government to purchase liquor in 1975?


Ralph Goodale: Agriculture Canada, $1,956.00. Communications, $1,717.54. Consumer and Corporate Affairs, $4,235.24. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, $2,200. Finance, $1,223.73. Anti-Inflation Board, $289.67. Office of the Auditor General, $412.35. Indian Affairs and Northern Development, $1,026.56. Statistics Canada, $197.00.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Canada Labour Relations Board, $87.55. Employment and Immigration, $4,399.07. Unemployment Insurance Commission, $999. National Defence, $5,978.88. (These costs represents the liquor purchases mainly for the treatment of geriatric veteran patients). National Revenue, $3,637. Post Office, $509.10. Prime Minister's Residence, $1,925.77. Public Works, $950. Regional Economic Expansion, $4,004.85. Science Council of Canada, $84.30. Secretary of State, $567.26. Public Archives, $1,624.95. National Library, $669.40. National Film Board, $7,326.15. External Affairs, $12,115.95. Transport Canada, $19,941.21. Treasury Board Secretariat, $46.70. Urban Affairs, $3,879.51. National Capital Commission, $251.60. Veterans Affairs, $17,205. (Treatment Services Program for medical purposes). Records are not kept for purchases of liquor perse. Such purchases, if made, would be included in the hospitality expenses claims of individual officers and not as a separate item. However, for the purpose of this question, we have given the costs of liquor for occasions such as conventions, receptions, official dinners, etc. Other departments and agencies have reported that their accounting systems do not provide a breakdown of expenditures on liquor alone. Therefore, the information requested is not readily available.


Mr. Howie: 1.	Is any financial assistance available or under consideration for a publicly-owned urban transportation system such as the bus system in Fredericton, New Brunswick?
2.	Is any such assistance available or under consideration for inter-city systems?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Ministry of State for Urban Affairs as follows: 1. No financial assistance is currently available from the federal government for a publicly-owned urban transportation system such as the bus system in Fredericton, New Brunswick. A proposed urban transit assistance program is being discussed with the provinces at the present time by officials of the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of State for Urban Affairs.
2. As far as inter-city bus systems are concerned, there is no financial assistance available from the federal government at the present time, nor is assistance being considered.


Mr. Baker (Grenville-Carleton): 1.	Which departments or agencies are designated to be moved, in whole or in part, to Hull and, in each case, what is the estimated cost?
2.	Has the government commissioned studies respecting the moving of departments or parts thereof to Hull and, if so, in each case (a) who prepared it (b) what were its terms of reference (c) is the study available for release to the public?
3.	By what amount will the total floor space, occupied in Ottawa, be reduced by (a) the move to Hull (b) decentralization of government operations from the National Capital Region?

4.	(a) What consultation has been undertaken with Hull to determine the best means of maximizing benefits and minimizing harmful effects on the City (b) what consultation has taken place with the City of Ottawa to minimize possible harmful effects on the City?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Department of Public Works and the National Capital Commision as follows: 1. Treasury Board has approved the relocation of the following departments to Hull: Department of Supply & Services Department of Indian & Northern Affairs Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission Canadian International Development Agency Department of Regional Economic Expansion Ministry of Solicitor General Manpower and Immigration Secretary of State Canadian Labour Relations Board Unemployment Insurance Commission Canadian Transport Commission. The estimated cost to move DSS is $250,000. Estimates for the other departments have not been finalized as yet.
2.	No. (a) No applicable (b) Not applicable (c) Not applicable.
3.	(a) Approximately 3.5 million sq. ft. (b) In the order of 1.2 million sq. ft. The Total amount of floor space occupied in Ottawa will not be proportionately reduced by the foregoing due to the growth of the public service, the 1.6 million sq. ft. of new Crown-owned office accommodation that will be coming on stream in Ottawa, the demolition of 2 million sq. ft. of obsolete and uneconomical temporary buildings over the period, and other interrelated factors.
4.	(a) Extensive consultation were held with the city of Hull and the provincial government. As a result a number of projects have been undertaken and are being funded in part or in whole by the federal government to maximize benefits and minimizearterial roads, a demonstration housing project in the "secteur Fournier", a major regional sewerage collection and treatment system. Joint Planning with the Hull, Outaouais Regional and provincial authorities is currently underway for the continued development of the centre town of Hull, for local industrial relocation, as for a number of other elements of urban development, (b) In addition to continuing consultation with city of Ottawa officials on a variety of development issues, the relocation of federal departments to Hull and its implications for the development of the city of Ottawa have been discussed on a number of occasions: for example, when the "Torontow's Capital" concept was being prepared (meeting with Ottawa Planning Board, in 1974). More recently the Hon. Jean Chretien, Minister for Industry, Trade and Commerce, and the Hon. J. Buchanan, Minister for Public Works, have held discussions with the mayor of Ottawa.


Mr. Forrestall: 1.	In each year since 1967, how many writs of assistance were issued and under what statutes?
2.	How many were issued to (a) RCMP members (b) employees of government departments and agencies (c) employees of provincial governments and agencies (d) employees of municipalities including municipal police forces?
October 17, 1977


Ralph Goodale: 1. The identification of the actual number of writs of assistance issued to RCMP members under each statute for each of the years in question is rendered impractical by the extensive research required; the average number of writs of assistance in use during each year follows and takes into consideration yearly issues, cancellations and those that are carried onward from one year to the next:
Customs Act		Excise Act	
Year	Number in use	Year	Number in use1968	Not available	1968	Not available1969	Not available	1969	Not available1970	296	1970	2931971	256	1971	2431972	258	1972	2401973	243	1973	2191974	251	1974	2301975	219	1975	2031976 November	221	1976 November	192Narcotic Control Act	Food and Drugs Act	Year	Number in use	Year	Number in use1968	135	1968	1341969	168	1969	1661970	242	1970	2421971	205	1971	2051972	163	1972	1631973	233	1973	2331974	271	1974	2711975	325	1975	3251976	268	1976	268Customs Act	Year	Number in use1967	581968	631969	691970	701971	721972	741973	72974	831975	801976	792. (a) See	Part 1. (b) In so far as the Department of
National Revenue is concerned:
In so far as the Department of National Health and Welfare is concerned: None, (c) Not applicable, (d) Not applicable.


Mr. Herbert: 1.	In the past five years, how many public servants have been dismissed for waste, extravagance or misuse of public funds?
2.	What are the salary ranges of the public servants dismissed for these reasons?


Ralph Goodale: Communications: 1 1.
2 $8,743-$9,608.
Energy, Mines and Resources 1-1
Order Paper Questions 2-$ 17,700-$22,100.
Indian Affairs and Northern Development: 1 4.
2,	$17,000-$20,000;	$15,000-$17,000;	$14,000-
$16,000; $16,000-$18,000.
Employment and Immigration: 1 4.
2 $9,363-$10,232; $10,394-$11,364; $15,459-$17,523; $16,516-$20,646.
National Defence: 1 1.
2 $2.80 per hour National Revenue: 1 9.
2 $9,000-$14,000.
Post Office: 1 489.
2 $7,905-$17,523.
Public Archives; 1 1.
2 %15,070-$17,080.
National Film Board; 1 1.


[Stage Direction]
Supply and Services: 1 1.
2 $7,777-$8,499.
Transport Canada; 1 3.
2 $18,137-$20,400.
Urban Affairs: 1 1.
2 $14,812-$16,836.
Veterans Affairs: 1 2.
2 $8,700-$12,500; $17,887-$20,291.
Other Departments and Agencies have no information on this subject.
Mr. Crouse: 1.	Have any retired public servants previously in the employ of the Department of Fisheries and of the Environment been rehired by the Department and, if so, what (a) are their names (b) are their duties (c) are their terms and period of employment (d) is the amount of their salary (e) is their retirement pension?
2.	Were the positions advertised to the public or were the appointments made by the Minister?


Mr. Jim Fleming (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Fisheries and the Environment):: 1. Yes; (a) to (d)-See table below, (e) Information personal.
8214		COMMONS DEBATES		October 17, 1977
	Order Paper Questions			
(a) Names	(b) Duties	(c) Terms and periods of employment	(d) Salary	2.L. A. Bradbury	Consultation on Program Development for the Atlantic Coast Saltfish Industry.	April 1, 1976 to March 31, 1977 39 days at $250. per day	$ 9,750.	The individual was employed under contract with the approval of the Minister of Fisheries and the Environment.P. Brunavs	Generalized algorithm to accurately predict the retardation of radio signals, etc.	June 22, to November 31, 1976 68 days at $125. per day	8,500.	The individual was employed under contract with the approval of the Minister of Fisheries and the Environment.S. W. Tibbo	Consulting services, Fisheries and Marine Service.	April 1, 1976 to January 7, 1977 33 days at $175. per day	5,775.	The individual was employed under contract with the approval of the Minister of Fisheries and the Environment.A. W. H. Needier	Consultation of Fisheries at Law of the Sea ICNAF.	April 1, 1976 to March 31, 1977 45 days at $210. per day	9,450.	The individual was employed under contract with the approval of the Minister of Fisheries and the Environment.T. H. Turner	Research and editing of History of Fisheries Management in Canada.	May 1, 1976 to December 31, 1977 40 days at $125. per day	5,000	The individual was employed under contract with the approval of the Minister of Fisheries and the Environment.A. Bickerstaff	Services "as and when required" to act as Executive Secretary of the Canadian Forestry Advisory Council.	June 17, 1976 to March 31, 1977 $150 per day not to exceed 75 days	1 1,250.	Negotiated through D.S.S. with referred supplier.To complete a draft manuscript on the growth and yield of Canadian forests in bibliography format, and to supervise preparation and submit statistics summary of areas of forest sections in Canada.	August 12, 1976 to September 30, 1976	1,500.	Negotiated through D.S.S. with referred supplier.J. E. McDonald	To obtain data on growth and bud production and related phenological forms with respect to Christmas tree production or growth.	April 1, 1976 to March 30, 1977	700.	Negotiated through D.S.S. with referred supplier.B. H. Phelps	Investigation & certification on conifer seeds for control of forest reproduction materials moving in international trade.	July 1, 1976 to March 31, 1977 23 days at $65. per day	1,495.	Negotiated through D.S.S. wich referred supplier.J. A. Turner	To carry out a study of the Canadian Forest Fire Danger Rating System and prepare a text under Fire Weather Section of the C.F.F. D.R.S.	October 14, 1976 to January 31,1977 32 days at $125. per day	4,000	Negotiated through D.S.S. with referred supplier.P. W. Strilaeff	Provide technical consultation in matters related to planning and management of Water Quantity Data Survey Program. The end result will be an annual tabulation of stream flow and water level data for B.C. Yukon Network of gaging stations.	September 13, 1976 to March 31, 1977 135 days at $150. per day	20,250.	Negotiated through D.S.S. with referred supplier.To review, evaluate and recommend organizational changes in I.W.D.	October 15, 1976 to December 31, 1976	5,300.	Negotiated through D.S.S. with referred supplier.D.Storr	Production of reports on wind and water balance data at Marmot Creek.	March 18, 1976 to February 28, 1977	4,800.	Appointed to the position by the Atmospheric Environment Service.A. Nurklik	Translation of scientific Paper from Russian to English.	October 1, 1976 to September 30, 1977	12,000.	Appointed to the position by the Atmospheric Environment Service.GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT	TAXI EXPENDITURES BY GOVERNMENT	
Question No. 1,180-Mr. Beatty:		Question No. 1,191	-Mr. Beatty:	
1.	How many times since he became a member of the Cabinet has the Minister of Agriculture personally made use of government aircraft and, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) point of departure and destination (c) type of aircraft (d) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	Which trips were for (a) personal (b) political business?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.
[Mr. Reining.1
What was the total amount paid by the government for taxis in (a) 1975 (b) the first ten months of (i) 1975 (ii) 1976?


Ralph Goodale: Agriculture Canada: (a) $18,894.83. (b)(i) $15,289.91; (ii) $10,381.05. Communications: (a) $26,772.05. (b)(i) $22,340.50; (ii) $15,117.62. Consumer and Corporate Affairs:	(a)	$38,126.83.	(b)(i)
$21,513.73; (ii) $12,126.25. Energy, Mines and Resources: (a) $37,182.00. (b)(i) $26,669.00; (ii) $36,443.00. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited: (a) $117,295.00. (b)(i) $96,467.00; (ii) $100,098.00. Atomic Energy Control Board: (a) $451.00.

October 17, 1977

(b)(i) $377.00; (ii) $628.00. National Energy Board: (a) $3,434.00. (b)(i) $2,670.00; (ii) $4,700.00. Environment: (a) $199,995.00. (b)(i) $165,701.00; (ii) $147,340.00. Finance: (a) $38,408.48. (b)(i) $30,768.92; (ii) $31,309.82. Anti-Inflation Board: (b)(i) Nil; (ii) $33,493.09. Office of the Auditor General: (a) $224.25. (b)(i) $193.70; (ii) $754.20. Insurance:
(a)	$988.00. (b)(i) $593.00; (ii) $541.00. Tariff Board: (a)
$78.75. (b)(i) $53.25; (ii) $61.35. Indian Affairs and Northern Development:	(a)	$80,165.00.	(b)(i)	$68,325.00; (ii)
$44,735.00. Industry, Trade and Commerce: (a) $154,892.31.
(b)	(i) $110,310.30; (ii) $125,018.13. Foreign Investment
Review Agency:	(a)	$4,604.74.	(b)(i)	$1,710.00; (ii)
$4,606.44. Statistics Canada: (a) A specific account for taxi costs was not maintained during that period. (b)(i) $52,019.00; (ii) $53,157.30. Justice: (a) $29,447.63. (b)(i) $23,749.68; (ii) $25,168.15. Law Reform Commission: (a) $6,575.37. (b)(i) $6,132.88; (ii) $3,075.15. Tax Review Board:
(a)	$126.35. (b)(i) $83.65; (ii) $113.50. Canadian Judicial
Council: (a) $15.60; (b)(i) $15.60; (ii) Nil. Labour: (a) $9,510.24. (b)(i) $7,288.85; (ii) $6,963.19. Canada Labour Relations Board:	(a)	$7,165.49.	(b)(i) $5,632.34; (ii)
$5,516.91. Employment and Immigration: (a) $52,613.44.
(b)	(i) $43,777.40; (ii) $29,642.71. Unemploymnt Insurance
Commission: (a) See reply to question No. 191 answered August 4, 1977. (b)(i) $27,168.00; (ii) Same as (a) above. National Defence: (a) $8,936.46. (b)(i) $7,744.65; (ii) $4,680.65. National Health and Welfare: (a) $157,095.00. (b)(i) $122,274.00; (ii) $135,095.00. Medical Research Council: (a) $1,292.00. (b)(i) $952.00; (ii) $809.00. Office of the Co-ordinator, Status of Women: (a) and (b)(i) Not applicable; (b)(ii) $110.00. National Revenue: (a) $77,499.72. (b)(i) $63,119.02; (ii) $73,151.92. Post Office: (a) $44,538.40. (b)(i) $39,037.80; (ii) $26,524.72. Prime Minister's office, the Privy Council office, the office of the President of the Privy Council and the office of the leader of the government in the Senate, (a) $28,219.93. (b)(i) $23,417.14; (ii) $11,771.18. April to October 1976. Public Works:	(a)	$32,736.00.	(b)(i)
$27,427.00; (ii) $21,901.00. Regional Economic Expansion:
(a)	$65,815.75. (b)(i) $53,786.21; (ii) $45,983.62. Science and Technology: (a) $7,768.52. (b)(i) $6,402.94; (ii) $6,014.66. Canadian Patents and Development Limited: (a) $245.50.
(b)	(i) $214.75; (ii) $174.70. National Research Council of
Canada: (a) $2,067.90. (b)(i) $1,533.40; (ii) $1,651.35. Science Council of Canada: (a) $3,543.29. (b)(i) $2,623.50; (ii) $3,712.73. Secretary of State: (a) $69,686.33. (b)(i) $56,711.21; (ii) $57,423.73. External Affairs: (a) $22,811.11. (b)(i) $18,729.95; (ii) $22,160.91. Canadian International Development Agency: (a) $48,008.56. (b)(i) $36,839.99; (ii) $34,922.52. Solicitor General:	(a)	$23,807.23.	(b)(i)
$18,648.29; (ii) $19,715.50. Royal Canadian Mounted Police: (a) $47,410.97. (b)(i) $39,916.10; (ii) $47,916.43. National Parole Board: (a) $6,500.00. (b)(i) $5,410.00; (ii) $1,570.00. Supply and Services: (a) $131,764.24. (b)(i) $102,743.28; (ii) $117,786.19. Transport Canada: (a) $119,372.00. (b)(i) $97,757.00; (ii) $106,759.00. Treasury Board Secretariat: (a) $42,686.37. (b)(i) $35,516.49; (ii) $28,924.08. Urban Affairs: (a) $91,032.00. (b)(i) $63,886.00; (ii) $40,491.00. National
Order Paper Questions
Capital Commission: (a) $909.60. (b)(i) $829.90; (ii) $802.55. Veterans Affairs: (a) $37,529.97. (b)(i) $31,845.55; (ii) $21,504.10. These amounts do not include the transportation of veterans for treatment purposes. All of the expenditures exclude charges for taxis included on employee travel claims. The cost to search travel claims would be prohibitive.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	How many times since he became a member of the Cabinet has the Minister of Justice personally made use of government aircraft and, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) point of departure and destination (c) type of aircraft (d) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	Which trips were for (a) personal (b) political (c) government business?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	How many times since he became a member of the Cabinet has the Minister of Health and Welfare personally made use of government aircraft and, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) point of departure and destination (c) type of aircraft (d) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	Which trips were for (a) personal (b) political (c) government business?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


Mr. Beatty: 1.	How many departments or agencies have printed material on conflict of interest similar to the booklet published by Statistics Canada entitled "Guidelines on Conflict of Interest and Standard of Conduct"?
2.	In each case, on what date was the material printed and what is the government's policy concerning its distribution to employees?
3.	In each case, from whom may a copy of the material be obtained?


Hon. Robert K. Andras (President of the Treasury Board):: P.C. 1973-4065, December 18, 1973, contained guidelines to be observed by public servants concerning conflict of interest situations. Following promulgation of the guidelines, the Treasury Board issued a circular (No. 1973-183) drawing them to the attention of deputy heads and instructing deputy heads to apply the guidelines to their departmental operations. The guidelines were re-issued as part of the Personnel Management Manual in June, 1975. The guidelines may be obtained from the directors of personnel of government departments or from the personnel policy branch of the Treasury Board secretariat.
80020 -55V2

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions USE OF GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT


Mr. Skoreyko: 1.	From 1972 to October 31, 1976, what are the names of the Members of Parliament who have travelled on DND aircraft and, in each case, what was the
(a)	point of departure and destination (b) purpose of the flight?
2.	For the same period, what are the names of the family members of Members of Parliament who have travelled on DND aircraft, either with the Member or separately and, in each case, what was the (a) point of departure and destination (b) purpose of the flight?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to question No. 2,881.


Mr. Cossitt: With reference to the answer to Question No. 50 which stated in part, that the Minister of Transport made use of DOT aircraft 133 times since April 1973, of the specific trips listed (a) on which ones was the Minister accompanied by other than DOT employees (b) what were the names, addresses and job designations of all such persons and what were the reasons that they were on board?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to question No. 2,881.


Mr. Leggatt: 1.	Have any chlor-alkali plants in Canada been out of compliance with chlor-alkali mercury effluent regulations brought into effect in June 1972 and, if so, in each case, on how many days?
2.	How many prosecutions have been launched against Canadian chlor-alkali plants for non-compliance with the regulations?
3.	What are the (a) companies charged (b) specific violations for which charges were laid (c) results of the prosecutions to date?


James Sydney Clark Fleming: 1. Compliance data regarding individual plants are not provided herein, as requested. Plants subject to the Chlor-Alkali Mercury Regulations must submit monthly compliance reports. Information contained in these reports is statutorily compellable, but only for the purpose of enabling the minister and the officials charged with the administration and enforcement of the Fisheries Act and Regulations to determine whether the plant is in compliance with the effluent regulations. It may only be released as required for court proceedings or when the originating chlor-alkali plant consents to its being released. In total, however, from May 1972 through December 1975, there were 972 plant-days of what is considered to be actual non-compliance; 516 plant-days of theoretical non-compliance resulting from small amounts of mercury being discharged during days of no, or very low, production; and 12,820 plant-days of compliance. (Non-compliance results when daily mercury discharges to liquid effluents exceed 0.005 pounds per ton of chlorine produced.) The annual frequency of "actual" violations has been decreasing; during 1975 there were 122. As an additional, general observation, total mercury discharges to liquid effluents from chlor-alkali plants were reduced from an estimated 148,000 pounds per year prior to 1970, to approximately 2,200 pounds from May through December 1972, 900 pounds during

1973 and 1974, and 600 pounds during 1975. Also, for each plant during 1975, the ratio of total mercury discharged (in pounds) to liquid effluents, to total chlorine produced (in tons), was less than 0.005; the overall ratio, averaging those for all plants, was 0.002.
2.	Two.
3.	(a) Standard Chemicals Ltd. and American Can of Canada Ltd. (b) Charges were laid for the following discharges which are given in pounds of mercury per ton of chlorine produced on the day specified (i) Standard Chemicals Ltd.: 0.030 on September 2, 1972; 0.038 on September 3, 1972; 0.032 on September 4, 1972; 0.027 on September 5, 1972; 0.016 on September 24, 1972; 0.018 on September 25, 1972; 0.120 on September 26, 1972; 0.205 on September 27, 1972; 0.205 on September 28, 1972; 0.219 on September 29, 1972; 0.078 on September 30, 1972; 0.045 on October 1, 1972;
0.048 on October 2, 1972; 0.081 on October 3, 1972; 0.214 on October 4, 1972; 0.099 on October 5, 1972; 0.091 on October 6, 1972; 0.045 on October 7, 1972; 0.154 on October 8, 1972; 0.058 on October 9, 1972. (ii) American Can of Canada Ltd.: 0.013 on August 1, 1975; 0.011 on August 30, 1975; 0.020 on October 24, 1975; 0.066 on October 28, 1975; 0.012 on December 14, 1975; 0.011 on April 26, 1976; 0.031 on May 5, 976; 0.032 on May 14, 1976; 0.014 on May 15, 1976; 0.093 on May 17, 1976; 0.012 on May 31, 1976; 0.143 on June 4, 1976; 0.052 on June 27, 1976; 0.013 on June 30, 1976; 0.010 on July 18, 1976; and 0.012 on July 21, 1976. (c) Standard Chemicals Ltd. pleaded guilty and was fined $3,000; the case involving American Can of Canada Ltd. is currently before the courts.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	How many times since he became a member of the Cabinet has the Minister of State for Science and Technology personally made use of government aircraft and, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) point of departure and destination (c) type of aircraft (d) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	What was the number of times an aircraft was used to or from the Peterborough area?
4.	Does the government own a King Air aircraft and, if so, how many times was it used by the Minister?
5.	Which trips were for (a) personal (b) political (c) government business?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to Questions No. 29 and 30 answered this day.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	How many times since he became a member of the Cabinet has the Minister of Labour personally made use of government aircraft and, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) point of departure and destination (c) type of aircraft (d) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	Which trips were for (a) personal (b) political (c) government business?
October 17, 1977


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


Mr. McCain: 1.	By province, how many intra-provincial ferries receive federal subsidies and what is the name of each such company?
2.	What are the ports of call for each intra-provincial ferry?
3.	For each of the past ten years, by province, what was the amount of federal subsidy paid to each intra-provincial ferry?
4.	For each of the next ten years, by province, what is the projected amount of subsidy to be given to each intra-provincial ferry?
5.	On what basis is a decision made with respect to whether or not an intra-provincial ferry will receive federal assistance and on what basis is the amount determined?
6.	Have any alterations been made to the amounts of federal subsidies paid to intra-provincial ferries in each province as a result of inflation in the past ten years and, if so, what (a) was the amount of the alteration for each intra-provincial ferry (b) are the ports of call for each intra-provincial ferry where alteration in subsidy amount was made?
7.	Do any intra-provincial ferries which receive federal subsidies also receive supplementary assistance from any provincial authority or from any other source and, if so (a) from what other sources are subsidies paid (b) what are the ports of call for each intra-provincial ferry receiving supplementary assistance (c) what was the amount of subsidy from other sources other than the government for each intra-provincial ferry for each of the past ten years?
8.	What is the amount of deficit or profit from each intra-provincial ferry operated by a department or agency of the government?


Otto Emil Lang: The Canadian Transport Commission advises as follows: Ferries under C.T.C. jurisdiction: Newfoundland: Carmanville, Nfld.-Fogo Island, Nfld. Fogo Transport (1973) Limited; Cobb's Arm, Nfld.-Change Islands, Nfld. Chaffey's Shipping Limited; Greenspond, Nfld.-Badger's Quay, Nfld. Beothic Fish Processors Limited; Portugal Cove, Nfld.-Bell Island, Nfld. The Newfoundland Transportation Company Limited; Burnside, Nfld.-St. Brendan's, Nfld. Saunders Shipping Limited; St. Patrick's, Nfld.-Little Bay Island, Nfld. GreenBay Transport Lmited; New Brunswick: Grand Manan, N.B.-Black's Harbour, N.B. Coastal Transport Limited; Ontario: Pelee Island, Ont.-The Mainland, Ont. The Pelee Shipping Company Limited.
2.	See answer to Question 1.
3.	Newfoundland Carmanville-Fogo Island 1976-77, 173,081; 1975-76, 155,251; 1974-75, 144,500; 1973-74, 78,334; 1972-73, 45,000; 1971-72, 37,057; 1970-71, 41,269; 1969-70, 45,000; 1968-69, 27,674; 1967-68, 27,500. Cobb's Arm-Change Islands: 1976-77, 86,100; 1975-76, 58,000; 1974-75, 26,500; 1973-74, 19,000; 1972-73, 17,000; 1971-72, 15,000; 1970-71, 13,750; 1969-70, 10,750; 1968-69, 10,750; 1967-68, 17,500. Greenspond-Badger's Quay: 1976-77, 55,750; 197576, 53,522; 1974-75, 40,000; 1973-74, 36,000; 1972-73, 32,000; 1971-72, 32,000; 1970-71, 29,875; 1969-70, 27,000;
1968-69, 27,000; 1967-68,. 53,750. Portugal Cove-Bell Island: 1976-77, 1,000,000; 1975-76, 993,424; 1974-75, 704,366; 1973-74, 387,000; 1972-73, 354,000; 1971-72, 339,000; 1970-71, 298,683; 1969-70, 262,543; 1968-69, 265,234; 1967-
Order Paper Questions
68, 267,925. Burnside-St. Brendan's: 1976-77, 82,475; 197576, 69,307; 1974-75, 47,000; 1973-74, 28,776; 1972-73, 23,130; 1971-72, 17,500; 1970-71, 17,500; 1969-70, 15,000;
1968-	69, 15,000; 1967-68, 14,500. St Patrick's-Little Bay Islands: 1976-77, 209,886; 1975-76, 160,000; 1974-75, 113,000; 1973-74, 22,916; 1972-73, -; 1971-72, -; 1970-71, -;
1969- 70, -; 1968-69, -; 1967-68, -; Grand Manan- Black's Harbour: 1976-77, 259,000; 1975-76, 259,000; 197475, 259,000; 1973-74, 259,000; 1972-73, 259,000; 1971-72, 259,000; 1970-71, 259,000; 1969-70, 259,000; 1968-69, 259,000; 1967-68, 259,000. Ontario: Pelee Island-The Mainland: 1976-77, 142,265; 1975-76, 142,265; 1974-75, 126,368; 197374, 98,695; 1972-73, 88,695; 1971-72, 88,432; 1970-71, 88,695; 1969-70, 86,817; 1968-69, 87,550; 1967-68, 87,342.
4.	The terms of the recently developed Federal Government's Water Transportation Assistance Policy have not yet been Finalized and, as a result, it is not possible at this time to project, for the next ten years, the amount of subsidy to be given to each intra-provincial ferry service.
5.	For the same reason as given in answer to Question No. 4, the first part of this question cannot be answered. The amount of subsidy is calculated as the difference between the estimated operating costs and revenues, as agreed following secrutiny by officials, and making allowance for an appropriate level of management fee/profit.
6.	The answer to this question (a) and (b) can be readily seen in the answer given to Question No. 3.
7.	Grand Manan, N.B.-Black's Harbour, N.B.; (a) Provincial Government; (b) Grand Manan, N.B.-Black's Harbour, N.B. (c) 1976-77, 320,000*; 1975-76, 301,953; 1974-75, 265,578; 1973-74, 168,498; 1972-73, 136,723; 1971-72, 100,277;
1970-	71, 95,692; 1969-70, 95,100; 1968-69, 87,465; 1967-68, 50,000. *Estimated.
8.	No intra-provincial ferries are operated by departments or agencies of the Federal government.


Mr. McCain: 1.	By province, how many interprovincial ferries receive federal subsidies and what is the name of each such company?
2.	What are the ports of call for each interprovincial ferry?
3.	For each of the past ten years, by province, what was the amount of federal subsidy paid to each interprovincial ferry?
4.	For each of the next ten years, by province, what is the projected amount of subsidy to be given to each interprovincial ferry?
5.	On what basis is a decision made with respect to whether or not an interprovincial ferry will receive federal assistance and on what basis is the amount determined?
6.	Have any alterations been made to the amounts of federal subsidies paid to interprovincial ferries in each province as a result of inflation in the past ten years and, if so, what (a) was the amount of the alteration for each interprovincial ferry (b) are the ports of call for each interprovincial ferry where alteration in subsidy amount was made?
7.	Do any interprovincial ferries which receive federal subsidies also receive supplementary assistance from any provincial authority or from any other source and, if so (a) from what other sources are subsidies paid (b) what are the ports of call for each interprovincial ferry receiving supplementary assistance (c) what

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
was the amount of subsidy from other sources other than the government for each interprovincial ferry for each of the past ten years?
8.	What is the amount of deficit or profit from each interprovincial ferry operated by a department or agency of the government?


Otto Emil Lang: Transport Canada advises as follows: 1. No interprovincial ferries are in receipt of subsidies.
2.	Prince Edward Island: Borden; Cape Tormentine. Newfoundland: North Sydney; Port aux Basques; Argentia.
3.	See No. 1.
4.	The terms of the recently developed Federal Government's Water Transportation Assistance Policy have not yet been finalised and, as a result, it is not possible at this time to project, for the next ten years the amount of subsidy, if any, to be given to each interprovincial ferry service.
5.	Interprovincial Ferry Services are operated by the Canadian National Railway Company under "Entrustment Order" on behalf of the Government of Canada. These services are a federal responsibility under the Terms of Confederation with Prince Edward Island and the Terms of Union with Newfoundland.
6.	See No. 1.
7.	Not applicable.
8.	The deficits by service for the year ending December 31, 1976 are: Newfoundland Gulf Service, $48,914,611; Prince Edward Island Service, $13,047,315.


Mr. McCain: 1.	By province, how many international ferries receive federal subsidies and what is the name of each such company?
2.	What are the ports of call for each international ferry?
3.	For each of the past ten years, by province, what was the amount of federal subsidy paid to each international ferry?
4.	For each of the next ten years, by province, what is the projected amount of subsidy to be given to each international ferry?
5.	On what basis is a decision made with respect to whether or not an international ferry will receive federal assistance and on what basis is the amount determined?
6.	Have any alterations been made to the amounts of federal subsidies paid to international ferries in each province as a result of inflation in the past ten years and, if so, what (a) was the amount of the alteration for each international ferry
(b)	are the ports of call for each international ferry where alteration in subsidy amount was made?
7.	Do any international ferries which receive federal subsidies also receive supplementary assistance from any provincial authority or from any other source and, if so (a) from what other sources are subsidies paid (b) what are the ports of call for each international ferry receiving supplementary assistance (c) what was the amount of subsidy from other sources other than the government for each international ferry for each of the past ten years?
8.	What is the amount of deficit or profit from each international ferry operated by a department or agency of the government?


Otto Emil Lang: Transport Canada advises as follows: 1. None.
2. Yarmouth-Bar Harbor, Maine. Yarmouth-Portland, Maine. The Yarmouth-Bar Harbor service was a year round

service until the fall of 1976 at which time it was terminated and a service from Yarmouth to Portland was inaugurated replacing a foreign carrier who withdrew for the winter months. The Bar Harbor service will recommence May 1, 1977.
3.	No subsidies are paid.
4.	See answer to part 4, question 1336 answered this day.
5.	The Yarmouth services are deficit funded. The decision to operate this service was made in the early 1950's on the basis of developmental prospects for the maritime provinces. A service was operated by an American company in the prewar years but was terminated when the vessels were commandeered for military service and was not reactivated following the war.
6.	Not applicable.
7.	(a) No (b) N/A (c) N/A.
8. Yarmouth-Bar Harbor ferry service-(deficit): 1967, 426,262; 1968, 260,718; 1969, 381,910; 1970, 472,832; 1971, 586,141; 1972, 572,205; 1973, 774,030; 1974, 1,336,954; 1975, 1,503,220; 1976, 1,415,419-(11 months). Yarmouth to Portland figures are not available at this time for the period operated to December 31, 1976.


Mr. Murta: 1.	Was an amount of money awarded to the Thunder Bird Lodge of Northern Manitoba and, if so (a) on what date (b) which department awarded the money
(c)	was it in the form of a grant or a loan?
2.	Did Mr. Courchene or his son put up any money for the Lodge?
3.	Who is the owner of the Lodge?
4.	What was the number of jobs created?
5.	What is the relationship of the employees to Mr. Courch&ne?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Regional Economic Expansion as follows:
I.	Yes, as follows:
(c)	(a)	I.E.D.FLoans	April 1975 May 1975 March 1976	Total	$87,439 15,000 98,482 $200,921Contributions	May 1975 June 1975 May 1976	Total	10,000 4,000 55,000 $69,000Grants	March 1976	Total	50,000 $319,921
(b) The above funding was awarded by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development under the Indian Economic Development Fund. Yes. The Department of Regional Economic Expansion entered into a contract with Thunderbird Lodge Ltd. under the Canada-Manitoba ARDA Agreement, (a) An offer of financial assistance was made on
October 17, 1977

February 28, 1975 and amended on December 18, 1975 and July 5, 1976 (b) The total amount of the offer from DREE is $148,797.00 (c) The assistance offered is in the form of a grant.
2.	Mr. Courchene put in a cash equity of $25,000 plus an approximate additional $15,000 from cut logs and equipment for a total equity of approximately $40,000.
3.	The Directors are: David Courchene, Gerald Courchene, Brian Courchene, D. W. Gallager. The Officers are: David Courchene, President, Gerald Courchene, Vice-President, Brian Courchene, Secretary-Treasurer.
4.	In the construction phase, there were 20 jobs created. In season, there will be 15-22 jobs created, depending on the number of guests.
5.	The lodge is a family business. Five employees are immediate family.


Mr. Crosbie: 1.	During the period August 1, 1976 to October 18, 1976, on how many occasions did the Secretary of State for External Affairs visit the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador and, in each case (a) what was the date (b) the duration of the visit (c) what was the (i) purpose (ii) point of departure and return (iii) mode of transportation used (iv) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	On each trip, did the Minister use a (a) government helicopter or other aircraft (b) helicopter or aircraft not owned by the government, to travel from the airport at which he landed to Swift Current or Sound Island, Placentia Bay and, in each case, what was the cost to the taxpayer of the transportation?
4.	In each case, was the visit for (a) personal (b) political (c) government business and, if it was on government business, what was the nature of the business?


Fernand-E. Leblanc: 1 (a) (b) and (c), 2, 3 (a), and 4. (a) (b) and (c) See replies to questions 29 and 30.
3. (b) Ministerial use of Provincial helicopters: August 2, 1976: Gander to Swift Current; August 13, 1976: Swift Current to St. John's; St. John's to Swift Current; October 3, 1976: Swift Current to St. John's.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	How many times since he became a member of the Cabinet has the Minister of Supply and Services personally made use of government aircraft and, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) point of departure and destination (c) type of aircraft (d) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	Which trips were for (a) personal (b) political (c) government business?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Cossitt: With reference to questions presently on the Order Paper concerning the use of government aircraft by certain Cabinet Ministers, will the government present answers compiled and calculated on the (a) same basis as the answer to Question No. 50 concerning the Minister of Transport's expenses (b) basis of the system outlined by the Minister of Transport in his letter to certain Members of Parliament and, if so, what are the reasons for such a change?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to question No. 2,881.


Mr. Cossitt: Do Ministers reply to Order Paper questions in the House in one way and subsequently issue a completely different answer in a confidential letter to members of the government caucus and, if so (a) is this government policy and on what date was it adopted (b) what is the identity of any Cabinet Minister who has done this including the date and subject involved?


Ralph Goodale: See Beauchesne's Citation 171 (a), (b), (f), (h) and (i).


Mr. Epp: Was Lance Corporal Mathew Charles Lamb, killed while serving in the security forces of Southern Rhodesia, a Canadian citizen and, if so, was he (a) issued a valid Canadian passport and, if so, on what date and in what location was it issued (b) at any time committed to a mental institution in Canada (c) tried and acquitted of murder by reason of insanity in a Canadian Court?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of External Affairs and the Solicitor General as follows: (a) Mathew Charles Lamb was issued a valid Canadian passport on April 26, 1976, from the Passport Office, Department of External Affairs, Ottawa, Ontario, (b) This information is not within the administrative responsibility to the Government of Canada. As mental institutions come under provincial jurisdiction, it would therefore be necessary to contact all provincial governments, (c) The RCMP cannot confirm a criminal record based on a name check.


Mr. Howie: October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
levels requested for all years. A system change was introduced in the fiscal year 1974/75 that changed the highest dollar level of reporting from over $100,000 to over $25,000. Also, statistical computations are completed on a fiscal rather than calendar year base; therefore available information is supplied as of a March 31 date for the years in question.
		Number of	
Over $100,000	Date	Accounts	
	31 March/71	184	
	31 March/72	220	
	31 March/73	233	
	31 March/74	251	
Over $25,000	3! March/75	856	
	31 March/76	1093	
		Number of	
3.	Date	Accounts	
	31 March/71	1368	
	31 March/72	1926	
	31 March/73	2806	
	31 March/74	3336	
	31 March/75	4058	
	31 March/76	5449	
		Number of	
4. (a)	Fiscal Year	Accounts	Dollars1971/72	2315	$7,788,962.491972/73	2161	7,098,392.531973/74	1841	7,162,120.361974/75	1593	5,607,882.611975/76	1874	8,072,739.53Number of	(b)	Fiscal Year	Accounts	Dollars1971/72	4342	$4,915,181.901972/73	6481	8,840,210.741973/74	6796	5,146,596.881974/75	4540	5,100,804.381975/76	4014	3,648,130.48


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	On how many occasions have Department of National Defence and/or Department of Transport aircraft been used by the Government Leader in the Senate and, in each case, what was the (a) purpose (b) point of departure and destination (c) type of aircraft (d) cost to the taxpayer?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
3.	Which trips were for (a) personal (b) political (c) government business?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


Mr. Dick: 1.	Was a Department of Regional Economic Expansion grant made on January 3, 1974 to Qualicon Concrete of Arnprior, within the specially designated Renfrew-Pembroke area and, if so (a) prior to the grant, how many persons were employed by the company (b) how many persons are presently employed (c) who are the directors of the company (d) who owns the majority of shares in the company?
2.	Is there any relationship between Qualicon Concrete and Permacon Limited of Hull, Quebec and, if so, what is the relationship?

3.	Is Qualicon Ltd. in the process of closing down or has it closed down and, if so (a) what is happening to the equipment (b) has any of the equipment been transferred to Permacon Ltd.?
4.	To the knowledge of the government, does Qualicon Ltd. consider Permacon to be a continuing business?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Yes, an offer of incentive assistance was made to the company on January 2, 1974. (a) The facility was not operating at the time the grant was made and therefore there were no employees, (b) As the plant is presently closed there are no employees. On March 6, 1975 there were 12 employees, (c) As at June 7, 1974 the directors of the company were J. R. Coone, P. Blaikie and Y. Laurin. (d) Details on the company's corporate ownership are supplied to DREE for evaluation purposes only, based on an understanding with the company that they will be treated as confidential information.
2.	The company is related to Permacon Limited through common ownership.
3.	The company is not operating at this time, (a) The department is advised that all equipment is on-site, (b) The department has been advised that no equipment has been transferred to Permacon Limited.
4.	The government does not know whether Qualicon Limited considers Permacon Limited to be a continuing business. However, to the extent that the offer of incentive assistance to Qualicon is affected, operation of the Permacon facility in Hull, Quebec does not constitute continuance of operation of the Qualicon facility.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	Has the Post Office Department obtained (a) part-time (b) full-time employees from private employment agencies in (i) British Columbia (ii) Alberta (iii) Saskatchewan (iv) Manitoba (v) Ontario (vi) Quebec (vii) New Brunswick (viii) Nova Scotia (ix) Prince Edward Island (x) Newfoundland and, if so, in each case, how many?
2.	Are such employees paid from supplementary estimates and, if not, from what estimates are they paid?
3.	By province, what was the (a) average hourly rate paid to employment agencies (b) average hourly rate paid to employees (c) total amount paid by the Department in (i) 1975 (ii) 1976?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. Yes, the Post Office Department has obtained both part-time and full-time employees from private employment agencies. Permanent employees are not recruited through such agencies. (Full-time means a full working day for the period of hire. Part-time means less than a full day).
Part-time	Full-time
FY 74-75	FY 75-76	FY 74-75	FY 75-76(i)	British Columbia	1	5	Nil	Nil(ii)	Alberta	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil(iii)	Saskatchewan	Nil	Nil	Nil	Nil(iv)	Manitoba	Nil	Nil	Nil	10
*

(v) Ontario	i	1	10 17(vi) Quebec	14	10	Nil 16(vii) New Brunswick	Nil	Nil	Nil Nil(viii) Nova Scotia	1	2	18 33(ix) Prince Edward Island	Nil	Nil	Nil Nil(x) Newfoundland	Nil	Nil	Nil Nil2. All such employees	are paid out of the regular budget.	3.	Hourly Rate	TotalsProvince	Year	Paid Agency	PaidBritish Columbia	1975	6.00	3,096.831976	8.78	100.73Alberta	1975	0	01976	4.65	1,230.41Saskatchewan	1975	0	01976	0	0Manitoba	1975	0	01976	5.67	5,513.37Ontario	1975	5.80	2,579.361976	5.80	6,083.95Quebec	1975	4.50	11,853.001976	4.50	11,577.52New Brunswick	1975	0	01976	0	0Nova Scotia	1975	5.10	6,824.001976	5.70	9,743.00Prince Edward Island	1975	0	01976	0	0Newfoundland	1975	0	01976	0	0


Mr. Marshall: 1.	What are the names of individual lawyers who are employed by (a) CMHC (b) the Federal Business Development Bank in the Constituency of Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe and how was each selected?
2.	How much did each lawyer or law firm receive in fees and expenses each fiscal year 1970-71 to date?
3.	Do individuals or corporations who secure financing through (a) CMHC (b) the Federal Business Development Bank have to use law firms determined by the agencies in the legal work associated with the loans in question and, if so, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: 1 am informed by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Federal Business Development Branch as follows: 1 and 2. The following lawyers were retained by CMHC to process mortgage documentation for direct loans approved by CMHC in Census Divisions 5 and 9, Newfoundland, between 1970 and 1976: 1970, Corner Brook: Kevin J. Barry; Gordon G. Easton, Q.C. 1971, Corner Brook: Gordon G. Easton, Q.C. 1972, Corner Brook: Gordon G. Easton, Q.C.;	Clyde	K. Wells.	1973,	Corner	Brook: GordonG. Easton, Q.C.	Clyde	K. Wells.	1974,	Corner	Brook: GordonG. Easton, Q.C.;	Clyde	K. Wells.	1975,	Corner	Brook: GordonG. Easton, Q.C.;	Clyde	K. Wells.	1976,	Corner	Brook: Gordon
G. Easton, Q.C.; Clyde K. Wells. Legal fees in connection with CMHC direct loans are paid by the borrower, and CMHC, therefore, has no record of the amounts paid to these lawyers.
Order Paper Questions
Note: Data on activities under the NHA are compiled by CMHC on the basis of municipalities and Census Divisions in Newfoundland, and not on federal electoral constituencies. Census Divisions 5 and 9 correspond approximately to the constituency of Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe.
For the method of selection of lawyers, see the answer to question 736 (3), Hansard, January 24, 1977, page 2285. The following lawyers were retained by CMHC to handle legal action arising from arrears on direct loans approved in Census Divisions 5 and 9 in Newfoundland: Legal Costs and Fees: 1970-71-72-73-74, nil, nil, nil. 1975-76, Corner Brook, Martin, Easton, Woodridge and Poole, nil. Where actions are settled prior to trial, the costs are paid by the borrower and CMHC has no record of the amounts.
3.	See answer to question 716 (3), Hansard, January 25, 1977, page 2350.
1,	2 and 3. The Federal Business Development Bank makes use of the services of lawyers to act for it in the taking of security for loans and to undertake litigation on its behalf. In certain cases the lawyer is selected by the bank, in other cases the lawyer may have been chosen by the borrower. In either event, the legal fees and expenses for security preparation and registration are paid by the borrower rather than by the bank. The selection of lawyers is regarded by the FBDB as a matter of internal administration, the responsibility for which rests with the board of directors, according to the FBDB Act. For this reason, the names of solicitors employed are not made public.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Agriculture?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: 1 (a), 2. (a) and (b) (i) See reply to Question No. 725 answered this day.
Agriculture Canada: 1. (b) 615.
2.	(a) (ii) $2,087,516.80; (b) (ii) $1,187,545.81.
Communications: 1. (b) 8.
2.	(a) (ii) $643,345.30; (b) (ii) $160,722.47.
Consumer and Corporate Affairs: 1. (b) 40.
2.	(a) (ii) $518,688.46; (b) (ii) $528,406.89.
Energy, Mines and Resources: 1. (b) 50.
2.	(a) (ii) $282,346; (b) (ii) $308,402.13.
Finance: 1. (b) 12.
2.	(a) (ii) $287,339; (b) (ii) $447,712.
Office of the Auditor General: 1. (b) 15.
2.	(a) (ii) $31,108.10; (b) (ii) $136,596.46.
Fisheries and the Environment: 1. (b) 439.
8222

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions 2. (a) (ii) $1,773,110; (b) (ii) $2,097,826.
Indian Affairs and Northern Development: 1. (b) 562.
2. (a) (ii) $9,1 15,008.73; (b) (ii) $6,581,587.92.
Industry, Trade and Commerce: 1. (b) 6.
2. (a) (ii) Nil; (b) (ii) $18,657.50.
Justice: 1. (b) 34.
2. (a) (ii) $251,351.08; (b) (ii) $362,777.20.
Labour: 1. (b) 7.
2. (a) (ii) $479,754.20; (b) (ii) $296,970.65.
Employment and Immigration: 1. (b) 234.
2. (a) (ii) $1,653,478.85; (b) (ii) $1,206,295.64.
National Defence: 1. (b) 12.
2. (a) (ii) $243,077; (b) (ii) $238,672.
National Health and Welfare: 1. (b) 198.
2. (a) (ii) $1,143,493; (b) (ii) $1,195,526.
National Revenue: 1. (b) 230.
2. (a) (ii) $257,392.75; (b) (ii) $127,258.59.
Post Office: 1. (b) 32.
2. (a) (ii) $137,445; (b) (ii) $385,042.
Public Works: 1. (b) 56.
2. (a) (ii) $854,700; (b) (ii) $670,565.
Regional Economic Expansion: 1. (b) 21.
2. (a) (ii) $313,518; (b) (ii) $250,921.
Science and Technology: 1. (b) 6.
2. (a) (ii) $44,549.39; (b) (ii) $35,585.30.
Secretary of State: 1. (b) 28 (excluding translation services). 2. (a) (ii) $3,355,530 (including translation services); (b) (ii) $3,076,813 (including translation services).
Secretary of State for External Affairs: 1. (b) 24.
2. (a) (ii) $199,598; (b) (ii) $301,662.
Canadian International Development Agency: 1. (b) 738.
2. (a) (ii) $38,637,228; (b) (ii) $42,250,144.
Solicitor General: 1. (b) 31.
2. (a) (ii) $185,313; (b) (ii) $149,450.
Supply and Services: 1. (b) 22.
2. (a) (ii) $227,730; (b) (ii) $731,625.
Transport Canada: 1. (b) 185.
2. (a) (ii) $542,736; (b) (ii) $460,003.
Air Canada: 1. (b) None.
2. (a) (ii) Not applicable; (b) (ii) Not applicable.
Canadian National Railways: 1. (b) 45.
2. (a) (ii) $503,000; (b) (ii) $501,000.
Urban Affairs: 1. (b) 36.
2. (a) (ii) $1,117,110; (b) (ii) $441,045.
Veterans Affairs: 1. (b) 4.
(Mr. Goodale.]
2. (a) (ii) $9,294.88; (b) (ii) $16,965.
Note: 1. (b) Interpreted as "Personal Services Contracts". For other contracts such as agency personnel, professional and consultant services, please refer to Question No. 207 tabled August 5, 1977, Questions Nos. 127 to 154, 286 to 296 answered separately in 1976 and 1977 and Question No. 715 tabled this day.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Auditor General's Office?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Auditor General's Office?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Communications?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of National Defence?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of the Environment?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?
October 17, 1977


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of External Affairs?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Finance?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of National Health and Welfare?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Justice?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Labour?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?
Order Paper Questions


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Manpower and Immigration?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Post Office Department?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Public Works?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Regional Economic Expansion?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of National Revenue?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Ministry of State for Science and Technology?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Ministry?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of the Secretrary of State?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.
80020-56V5

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of the Solicitor General?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of the Supply and Services?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Transport?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Ministry of State for Urban Affairs?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Ministry?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Department of Veterans Affairs?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to the Department?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many 4a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to Air Canada?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to Air Canada?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to Canadian National Railways?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to Canadian National Railways?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.
[Mr. Goodale.)


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	How many (a) retired public servants (b) others are under contract to the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)?
2.	What was the total amount paid in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 to (i) retired public servants (ii) others, under contract to CIDA?


Ralph Goodale: See Question No. 1,574.


Mr. Coates: 1.	What is the total number of employees of the Post Office Department in the Province of Quebec and what is the estimated payroll for the fiscal year 1976-77?
2.	What is the estimated value of property and equipment owned by the Department in the Province?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Post Office and Public Works as follows: 1. Total number of employees, 16,223; Estimated payroll for 1976-77, $228.4 million.
2.	Value of property-See answer to Part 2 of Question No. 1,620 answered April 1, 1977. Total cost of mechanization equipment installed for letters and flats processing and owned by Canada Post is as follows: Installed, $3,493,300; In process of installation, $14,060,000; Total, $17,553,300.


Mr. Jelinek: 1.	How many Soviet diplomats restricted to the confines of the National Capital Region have asked for special permits to travel in other parts of Canada in the past (a) six months (b) year (c) two years (d) three years (e) five years?
2.	What are their names and what was their position?
3.	How many (a) times did each apply (b) applications were (i) approved (ii) rejected?


Ralph Goodale: 1. In so far as can be determined by the Department of External Affairs, the number of Soviet diplomats restricted to the confines of the National Capital Region who asked for special permits to travel in other parts of Canada in the past (a) six months (b) year (c) two years (d) three years (e) five years are as follows: (a) 345; (b) 692; (c) Records not retained; (d) Records not retained; (e) Records not retained.
2 and 3. See Annex A.
In so far as the Department of National Defence is concerned: 1. Soviet Military Attaches must file a "Notice of Intent to Travel" forty-eight hours in advance of any journeys outside the National Capital area except for trips to Montreal where only twenty-four hours advance notice is required. The number of Soviet Military Attaches who have filed notices in the periods specified is: (a) Five; (b) Five; (c) Five; (d) Seven; (e) Eight.
2 and 3. See Annex B.
October 17, 1977

The listing below shows the name of the applicant (a) the number of times each applied (b) the number of times applications were (1) approved and (2) rejected. As each application was counted singly each time, the numbers shown represent the number of applications and approvals.
As all applications were approved there were no rejections.
Name	Position	February-August 1976	August 1976-January 1977N. A. Makarov	Minister-Counsellor	16	14A. V. Enguibarov	Counsellor	28	20G. Beliaev	(Commercial) Counsellor	4	11V. I. Gavriouchkine	Counsellor	19	8D. I. Ivanov	Counsellor	9	13I. F. Kovalenko	Counsellor	8	8V. I. Mikheev	Counsellor	19	25N. M. Talanov	Counsellor	15	13M. S. Reva	First Secretary	10	7G. I. Zolotov	First Secretary	14	17V. Skofenko	First Secretary	11	13A. I. Soubekhin	First Secretary	15	19L. N. Zaitsev	First Secretary	9	7B. A. Soukharev	First Secretary	12	17V. N. Maiorov	Second Secretary	11	25I. P. Vartanian	Second Secretary	26	15V. P. Veber	Second Secretary	44	40I. V. Zakharov	Second Secretary	4	12A. A. Medvedev	Second Secretary	2	4M. Khavatov	Second Secretary	2	4V. Souvorov	Second Secretary	5	S. V. Ivanov	Third Secretary	10	8E. Krioukov	Third Secretary	3	5G. V. Ivashkevitch	Third Secretary	3	V. Borichpolets	Attache	11	9S. Y. Gritchouk	Attache	12	11O. Reztsov	Attache	24	17G. Zaberejyni	Attache	1	3Totals	347	345
Name
Position
2. Colonel N. I. Neborachko Captain E. A. Smirnov
Captain I. A. Bardeev Commander V. N. Smirnov Major S. S. Ignatov Lieutenant-Colonel V. A. Povetiev Major A. G. Kovalev Major V. M. Vassiliev
Mil, Nav & Air Attache Asst Nav Attache & Mil, Nav, & Air Attache Mil, Nav, & Air Attache Asst Nav Attache Asst Mil Attache Asst Mil Attache Asst Air Attache Asst Air Attache
The number of notices filed by	each attache over the	past five years	is:(a)	(b) (i)	(b) (iii)Applied	Approved	RejectedColonel Neborachko	19	19	NilCaptain Smirnov	55	54	1 NilCaptain Bardeev	4	4	Major Ignatov	47	45	2Lieutenant Colonel Povetiev	20	18	2Commander Smirnov	29	28	1Major Kovalev	31	30	1Major Vassiliev	21	18	3
Order Paper Questions


Mr. Herbert: 1.	Has the present Government of Quebec terminated, before its expiration date and without prior discussion or notification, any agreement with the government?
2.	Will the government consider terminating that part of its language instruction programme which pays monies to the Government of Quebec for the teaching of English to children attending English language schools?
3.	Will the government introduce in the Province of Quebec at an early date, a programme to assist the instruction of the French language to English language students?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Finance and the Secretary of State as follows: 1. On March 16, the Government of the Province of Quebec terminated the Memorandum of Agreement with the Government of Canada relating to the Anti-Inflation Program pursuant to Section 9 of that Agreement. The Government of Quebec on that date terminated the provincial act respecting anti-inflation measures (Chapter 30 of the Statutes of Quebec, 1975) by Order-in-Council, this being sufficient grounds to cause the Memorandum of Agreement to expire. This action followed a decision of the Government of Quebec, on January 14, 1977, to accept the resignation of the administrator of the provincial anti-inflation administration thereby eliminating the mandatory provisions of this administration. This action unilaterally altered the application of the Memorandum of Agreement between the governments of Canada and Quebec.
2.	No.
3.	Under the present federal-provincial agreement for Bilingualism in Education, the Federal Government makes financial contributions to all provinces towards the costs of minority official language education and second official language instruction. Under the terms of the agreement signed with the province of Quebec, that province may, at its discretion, use these funds for the teaching of either official language as a second language. Also under this federal-provincial agreement, several projects have been cost-shared by the Quebec and Federal Governments relative to the teaching of either official language as a second language. Other Departments and Agencies are not aware that a formal federal-provincial agreement was terminated.


Mr. Howie: 1.	For the fiscal year 1975-76, how many strikes occurring within the federal jurisdiction were illegal or represented a breach of contract on the part of one of the parties to a collective agreement?
2.	As a result of such strikes (a) how many man-days of employment were lost by (i) the strikers (ii) other workers (b) what were the financial damages suffered by the government?
3.	In how many of the strikes did the government initiate legal action against the strikers and, in each case, what was the outcome?


Hon. John C. Munro (Minister of Labour):: 1. 17 (Strikes occurring during the term of the agreements and presumed illegal).

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
2.	(a)(i) 21,850 man-days lost; (ii) Not known, (b) Not known.
3.	None. Includes workers under the Public Service Staff Relations Act and under the Canada Labour Code Part V.


Mr. Allard: What was the total amount paid to the government by the Province of Quebec in (a) 1973-74 (b) 1974-75 (c) 1975-76 (d) 1976 to date?


Mr. Bernard Loiselle (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: The only available published information on the subject of amount paid to the federal government by the province of Quebec can be extracted from Statistics Canada's Provincial Economic Accounts, 1961-1974-Experimental Data*. Estimations are on a calendar rather than fiscal year basis and the most recent year for which these figures are available is 1974. In line with the general concepts of national accounting, federal revenues have been allocated to provinces according to where production that can be associated with such revenues takes place. For example, indirect taxes-such as federal sales and excise taxes and customs duties-have been allocated on the basis of where goods subject to tax are deemed to have been produced rather than on the basis of where they were consumed.
'Subject to methodological and data revisions.
Federal Government Revenues Province of Quebec
	1972	1973	1974
	(millions of dollars)		
Direct Taxes on Persons	1789	2035	2562Direct Taxes on Corporate and Government Enterprises*1*	650	763	1037Direct Taxes on Non-Residents	65	65	93Indirect Taxes	1667	1805	2139Other Current Transfers from Persons	1	1	2Investment Income	387	401	460Total Revenue	4559	5070	6293(1) Direct corporate taxes are tabulated according	to accrual	
rather than collection basis.
Source: Statistics Canada, Provincial Economic Accounts 1961-1974, pp. 44-45.


Mr. Herbert: 1.	Is it the intention of the President of the Privy Council to refer to a standing or special committee, the public report which is to be prepared by the review body which will examine staffing, appointments and training in the public service?
2.	What mechanism is envisaged to request and receive comments and suggestions from individuals and groups who have good reason to be interested in any proposed revisions to the Public Service Employment Act?
3.	Has any date been set for the introduction in the House of legislative changes considered necessary as a result of the reports on the review of the Public Service Employment Act?


Ralph Goodale: 1. 2. and 3. This question cannot be answered until the report of the review body is received.


Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse): 1.	On December 31, 1976, by province, how many judges had been appointed by the government and what was the amount of their (a) remuneration (b) fringe benefits, if any, and what were they?
2.	By province, during the last fiscal year, what amount did the government spend on the judiciary?


Hon. Ron Basford (Minister of Justice):: Fringe Benefits-1975/76
Province
Number	of	MedicalJudges as	of	and Hospi-December Salaries	tal Institu-Court or Province	31/76	1975/76	Annuities	Gsmip* tion	Supreme Court of	Canada	9	$649,977.04	$77,282.64	$119.79	$998.47Federal Court of	Canada	16	$974,942.91	$137,391.36	$212.96	$1,757.28Alberta	51	$2,437,265.10	$437,934.96	$678.81	$5,601.33British Columbia	71	$3,477,443.89	$609,674.16	$945.01	$7,797.93Manitoba	26	$1,398,582.89	$223,260.96	$346.06	$2,855.58New Brunswick	17	$1,017,775.81	$145,978.32	$226.27	$1,867.11Newfoundland	14	$532,1 15.29	$120,217.44	$186.34	$1,537.62Nova Scotia	18	$1,044,498.72	$154,565.28	$239.58	$1,976.94Northwest Territories	1	$64,499.92	$8,586.96	$13.31	$109.83Ontario	166	$7,847,775.54	$1,425,435.52	$2,209.72 $18,221.96	Prince Edward Island	6	$395,666.64	$51,521.76	$79.86	$658.98Quebec	129	$7,352,397.20	$1,107,717.84	$1,716.99 $14,168.07	Saskatchewan	29	$1,547,109.74	$249,021.84	$385.99	$3,185.07Yukon	1	$64,499.92	$8,586.96	$13.31	$109.83
Group Surgical Medical Insurance Plan
2.
Court or Province	1975/76
Supreme Court of Canada	$736,313.63
Federal Court of Canada	$1,255,737.19
Alberta	$3,073,892.00
British Columbia	$4,295,472.42
Manitoba	$1,719,656.41
New Brunswick	$1,241,148.81
Newfoundland	$665,409.62
Nova Scotia	$1,276,234.68
Northwest Territories	$109,740.97
Ontario	$9,820,370.12
Prince Edward Island	$458,531.59
Quebec	$8,758,217.20
Saskatchewan	$1,882,156.19
Yukon	$83,035.62


Mr. Allard: Since 1968, how many official trips did the Prime Minister make abroad and, in each case, what was the cost?


Ralph Goodale: The information requested is not readily available. To provide an accurate reply would entail a lengthy and costly examination of the accounts of the department, which cost in manpower and time would be exorbitant or prohibitive.
October 17, 1977


Mr. Allard: Since 1974, how much did each minister spend on each official trip?


Ralph Goodale: The information requested it not readily available. To provide an accurate reply would entail a lengthy and costly examination of the accounts of every department, which cost in manpower and time would be exorbitant or prohibitive.


Mr. Jones: 1.	Did the then Postmaster General reply "soon" to an oral question in the House on October 7, 1974 about the establishment of postal facilities in Riverview, New Brunswick and, if so, on what date will a postal station be erected in Riverview?
2.	What has been the real cause of the delay in the erection of a postal station in Riverview?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. A new mail-processing plant is to be constructed which will serve the city of Moncton, the town of Riverview and the town of Dieppe. It is to be located in the Dieppe Industrial Park and is scheduled for completion late in 1979. Future plans call for construction of postal station in the Riverview area in 1980. This is subject to change depending on further investigation once the new mail-processing plant in Dieppe becomes operational.
2. As stated above, further investigation of postal facility requirements will be necessary following the introduction of the Dieppe mail-processing plant.


Mr. McKinnon: What is the target date for closing or disposing of 1107 Avenue Road, Toronto, Ontario?


Hon. Barney Danson (Minister of National Defence):: The
target date for closing is Sept., 1979.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: Is the government aware of reports that a recent research mission to eastern and western Europe found a definite market for Canadian flax because of its high oil and iodine content and, if so (a) is the government prepared to assist western Canadian flax growers ship their flax directly to these European markets (b) is the government considering offering encouragement for greater flax production and use in Canada?


Otto Emil Lang: In so far as the
Canadian Wheat Board is concerned: The Government is aware that a recent flaxseed mission to Eastern and Western Europe reported definite market opportunities for Canadian flaxseed. This is not a new development; the European Economic Community has been our primary flaxseed market in recent years, (a) Flaxseed exports are handled by private grain exporting companies who have the necessary facilities to
Order Paper Questions
assemble and clean large quantities for export shipment. The Government is prepared to offer normal assistance to flax growers in serving available export markets, (b) The government is not considering incentives to promote flaxseed production and use in Canada. Production in recent years has been adequate to meet domestic and export demand and excess production would depress prices to growers.


Mr. Clarke: 1.	Does the government intend to support plans of the Red Cross to build a fractional plant in Canada?
2.	Are blood components donated by Canadians being sold overseas by the CDC controlled Connaught Laboratories of Toronto and, if so (a) which components (b) is there a surplus in Canada at the present time?
3.	What is the total value of payments Connaught Laboratories received for blood components sold overseas since the Company began its relationship with the Red Cross and over how many years does this relationship extend?
4.	Is any percentage of the payments received given to the Red Cross and, if so, what (a) was it at the beginning of the relationship (b) is it at the present time?
5.	Is the CDC under orders to make a profit from its operation of Connaught Laboratories in all areas including negotiations with the Canadian Red Cross?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Industry, Trade and Commerce, National Health and Welfare and Finance as follows: 1. At the present time Connaught Laboratories is the only Canadian fractionator of blood and undertakes this work in cooperation with the Red Cross. While a Red-Cross-Sponsored feasibility study to determine the cost involved in building its own fractionation plant is being undertaken, no decision by government concerning support for it will be made until this study is completed and a full analysis of the Canadian blood products situation is made, particularly as it relates to Canadian needs, to the activities of the Red Cross, Connaught Laboratories and others involved in the blood biologies field. It is expected to be at least 18 months before any such analysis would be complete.
2 to 5. The CDC operates under a management which was expressly set up in an independent capacity. In these circumstances, it is not considered appropriate to provide details on its internal administration.


Mr. O'Sullivan: Has the government or any of its agencies ever paid for educational expenses incurred by Daniel Coates and, if so, in each case (a) what was the amount (b) to whom, or what institution was payment made (c) what was the purpose of any such instruction (d) where and on what date were such expenses incurred (e) under whose prior authorization were the charges incurred (0 under whose authorization were the expenses reimbursed?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Department of Employment and Immigration as follows: Yes (a) $12,660. (b) Algonquin College, Ottawa, (c) French language instruction. (d) Ottawa, July 7, 1975 to January 31, 1976. (e)

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Executive Director, Administration (through DSS Contract 65-25001-5-0814 Serial No. OGS5-0051). (f) See part (e). Several other departments, i.e. Consumer and Corporate Affairs, Prime Minister's and Privy Council offices and Urban Affairs, have no information regarding this question.


Mr. Clarke: 1.	Has the Department of National Revenue (Taxation) in Vancouver consolidated all of its offices at 1166 West Pender Street?
2.	Does the government own the property and, if not (a) what is the name and address of the owner (b) what are the terms of the lease including length, rental, renewal, etc. (c) is the whole building leased to the Department (d) how many square feet are leased (e) were any leasing fees or commissions paid on the leasing transaction and, if so (i) on what basis was the commission calculated (ii) how much was paid (iii) what is the name, address and occupation of the payee?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of National Revenue and Public Works as follows: 1. At the present time the operations of the District Office are located in the Montreal Trust Building, 789 West Pender Street, the Pacific Palisades Building, 747 Bute Street and 1166 West Pender Street. It is expected that the new Processing Centre to be located in Surrey, British Columbia, will enable the operations of the District Office to be consolidated in the one building at 1166 West Pender Street.
2. No. (a) Daon Development Corporation, 1050 West Pender Street, Vancouver, B.C. (b) Five years from December 1, 1975 to November 30, 1980 with one option for three years and one option for a further two years; at rental of $ 1,348,898.20 per annum; all services included (gross lease) plus normal escalations for operation and taxes, (c) The whole building is leased to the Department of Public Works with the exception of the Building Service areas, (d) 150,372 sq. ft. rentable area plus 28 covered parking stalls, (e) No; this was a public tender call, (i) (ii) (iii) Not applicable.


Mr. Cossitt: I. For the fiscal year (a) 1972-73 (b) 1973-74 (c) 1974-75 (d) 1975-76 (e) 1976-77 to the date the answer to this question is prepared, how many Cabinet Ministers have travelled to the Constituency of Matane, Quebec and, in each case, what was the (i) nature and'purpose of the trip (ii) date of the trip (iii) name of the Minister (iv) method of transportation used and the total cost (v) name and address of all persons accompanying the Minister and their job
designation, if any, with the government (vi) entire cost of the trip including transportation and all expenses incurred by the Minister and any persons accompanying him/her?
2. What has been the total cost to the taxpayer for all the years and items mentioned in Part 1 ?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	During the fiscal year (a) 1972-73 (b) 1973-74 (c) 1974-75 (d) 1975-76 (e) 1976-77 to the date the answer to this question is prepared (i) what was the total amount paid by the Department of Supply and Services for trips to and from Ottawa to the Constituency of Matane by the honourable Member for Matane (ii) what was the total number of trips involved and, in each case, what were the dates and the amount of each cheque paid?
2.	What was the total spent by the Department for all the years and trips mentioned in Part 1 ?


Hon. Jean-Pierre Goyer (Minister of Supply and Services):: 1. Nil.
2. Not applicable.


Mr. Cossitt: Order Paper Questions
(c) Cost ana means of
(a) Purpose and nature of trip	(b) Point of departure and destination transportation	(d) Other costs	(e) DatesTo meet with Mayor Drapeau	Ottawa	Montreal	$44.00-Plane	Hotel	60.00	Feb. 16-17/75Ministry meeting at L'Esterel	Ottawa	L'Esterel	$64.00-Private vehicle	Hospitality Hotel	80.25 44.00	May 6-8/75Inauguration of Centre Bois de Boulogne	Ottawa	Montreal	$52.00-Plane	Hotel and Taxi	65.00	May 29/75To attend "Colloque sur les affaires urbaines" at Laval University	Ottawa	Quebec	$70.00-Plane	Hotel	132.00	June 3-4/75To attend meetings of Habitat Canadian National Committee	Ottawa	Quebec and Montreal	$46.25-Private vehicle	Hotel and meals	197.31	Oct. 7-9/75


EXPENSES OF P. DE BANfc WHILE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY TO SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Did the Department of Supply and Services, the Department of External Affairs or any other department of government pay from public funds any costs whatsoever pertaining to travel by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State for External Affairs between December 22, 1972 and December 21, 1973 and, if so, what was (a) the purpose and nature of each trip paid for (b) point of departure and point of destination (c) cost to the taxpayer of transportation and the means of transportation used (d) all costs incurred on each trip along with the exact cost of any entertainment, official or otherwise to the taxpayers (e) the date of the commencement and conclusion of each trip?
2.	Were any costs charged to the taxpayers for any person accompanying the honourable Member and, if so, in each case, what was the name, address and job designation of such persons?
3.	What was the total cost of all items mentioned in Parts 1 and 2?


Fernand-E. Leblanc: 1. (a)(i) Attended meeting of the Organization of American States, (ii) Attended funeral of Captain Laviolette. (iii) Participated in Radio program. (iv) Participated in T.V. program, (v) Greeted Canadian mission from Vietnam, (vi) Official visit to Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria, (vii) Attended United Nations General Assembly, (viii) Participated in seminar at Laval University.
(ix)	Attended Conference of Ministers on Youth and Sports.
(x)	Speaker at meeting of Middle East Association. (b)(i) Ottawa-Washington, (ii) Ottawa-Quebec, (iii) Ottawa- Montreal, (iv) Ottawa-Montreal, (v) Ottawa-Vancouver.
(vi)	Ottawa-Morocco-Tunisia-Algeria, (vii) Ottawa- New York, (viii) Ottawa-Quebec, (ix) Ottawa-Abidjan, (x) Ottawa-Montreal. (c)(i) $215 Commercial, (ii) - (iii) 28 Commercial, (iv) 38 Commercial, (v) - (vi) - (vii) 120 Commercial, (viii) 48 Commercial, (ix) 1,481 Commercial, (x) 28 Commercial. No expense claims were submitted for transportation costs in respect of items (ii), (v) and (vi). (d)(i) $567 including $50 for entertainment, (ii) 25. (iii) 70 including 6 for entertainment, (iv) 92. (v) 63. (vi) 318 including 32 for entertainment, (vii) 30 including 18 for entertainment, (viii) 90.80. (ix) 490 including 130 for entertainment, (x) 87. (e)(i) April 5-13, 1973. (ii) April 14, 1973. (iii) July 7, 1973. (iv) July 13, 1973. (v) July 30, 1973. (vi) September 6-22, 1973.
(vii)	October 2-10, 1973. (viii) October 13-14, 1973. (ix) November 3-11, 1973. (x) November 28-29, 1973.
2.	There is no indication that costs were incurred for other persons accompanying the Parliamentary Secretary.
3.	$3,790.80.


BARLEY GRADED AS FEED BARLEY
Mr. Malone: 1.	For each of the past eight years, what was the number of bushels of barley graded as "feed barley" and sold by the Canadian Wheat Board as "malting barley"?
2.	For the same years, what was the average price for (a) feed barley (b) malting barley?
3.	In cases where malting barley sold for a higher amount than feed barley, was the value of the additional price received by the Canadian Wheat Board or the farmer?
Bushels (No. 1 Feed, Selected for 1. Crop Year	Malting, Pot or Pearling)
1970-	71
1971-	72
1972-	73
1973-	74
1974-	75
1975-	76
7,449,769.2
6,123,064.7
10,445,451.6
7,748,619.5
14,949,082.0
18,625,250.4
Data for crop years prior to 1970-71 are not available.
(a) Crop Year	Grade	Average Price	Basis1972-73	1 Feed	$2.04 l/2 per bushel	Instore St. Lawrence1973-74	1 Feed	$2.85 per bushel	Instore St. Lawrence1974-75	1 Feed	$2.68 Vi per bushel	Instore St. Lawrence1975-76	1 Feed	$2.79 per bushel	Instore St. Lawrence(b) Crop Year	Grade	Average Price	Basis (Thunder Bay)1972-73	3-2Row	$1.66 Vi per bushel	Winnipeg Commodity Exchange Barley Futures Market3-6Row	$ 1.66 Vi per bushel	Winnipeg Commodity Exchange Barley Futures Market1973-74	2-2Row	$3.22 Zi per bushel	Flat2-6Row	$3.13 Vi per bushel	Flat1974-75	2-2Row	$3.59 per bushel	Winnipeg Commodity Exchange Barley Futures Market2-6Row	$3.59 per bushel	Winnipeg Commodity Exchange Barley Futures Market1975-76	2-2Row	$3.36 Vi per bushel	Flat2-6Row	$3.27 V* per bushel	Flat
The above prices are simple unweighted averages and do not account for volumes traded at different price levels. Price data for crop years prior to 1972-73 are not available.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


Otto Emil Lang: In so far as the
Canadian Wheat Board is concerned:
3.	In cases where malting barley was sold by the Canadian Wheat Board for a higher amount than feed barley, the additional money received went into the CWB pool accounts and was distributed to producers as part of the final payment.


EXPENSES PAID TO THE HON. MEMBER FOR SASKATOON-HUMBOLDT
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services and any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for Saskatoon-Humboldt while (a) Minister of Manpower and Immigration (b) Minister of Justice (c) Minister of Transportation?
2.	What is the total of all expenses paid for the Minister while serving in the three portfolios?


Ralph Goodale: See Public Accounts of Canada (Volume II, Sections 35 and 36).


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR BURIN-BURGEO
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services and any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for Burin-Burgeo while (a) Minister of Transport (b) Minister of Regional Economic Expansion (c) Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce (d) Secretary of State for External Affairs?
2.	What is the total of all expenses paid for the Minister while serving in the four portfolios?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR DOLLARD
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services or any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable' Member of Dollard while (a) Solicitor General of Canada (b) Minister of Supply and Services?
2.	What is the total of all expenses paid for the Minister while serving in the two portfolios?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


POSTAL DEFICITS
Mr. Herbert: 1.	Has the Postmaster General in the US reported that postal revenues have exceeded expenditures in each of the last two quarters?
2.	Is it intended to work toward elimination of the government subsidy for postal service in Canada and, if so, by what date is it estimated that revenues will equal expenditures in the Canadian postal system?
3.	What has been the amount of the loss in the postal system in each of the past ten years?
4.	What is the estimated amount of the loss in the current fiscal year and in the next fiscal year?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. Yes.
2.	The objective for the Post Office as published in the main estimates is to provide postal service without incurring subsidization from general taxation. Although this has not been achieved for a number of years, it continues to represent a long term objective. No date can be forecast for an equalization of postal revenues and expenditures.
3.
	Deficit $000's
1966-67	47,764
1967-68	67,191
1968-69	88,187
1969-70	52,948
1970-71	100,592
1971-72	76,993
1972-73	90,897
1973-74	177,172
1974-75	320,939
1975-76	546,202
1976-77	671,582
1977-78	567,622
4.	The Blue Book of estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1978 forecast deficits as follows: 1976-77, 671,582; 1977-78, 567,622.


STUDIES RELATING TO CAPITAL GAINS TAX
Mr. Howie: Have there been studies relating to the upward adjustment of real property where V-day coincided with a demonstrable period of abnormally depressed values in the region?


Robert Phillip Kaplan: It would be extremely difficult to adjust the 1971 values of certain properties to what may be considered by some to be more realistic levels. Any modification to 1971 values would require careful consideration to ensure that all taxpayers are treated similarly. Readjusting valuation day values for one particular type of property would create a dangerous precedent and perhaps a bias by treating such property more favourably than others. Such a change might not be acceptable to a majority of Canadians.



Mr. Howie: Have financial studies been done concerning deferral of capital gains on transfer or inheritance of assets of family farm incorporations or partnerships?


Robert Phillip Kaplan: Less than 2 percent of all farms in Canada are held in corporate form. Therefore incorporated farms are a small part of the total family farm picture. In terms of policy, there

October 17, 1977

would have to be clear and compelling reasons to justify special rollover treatment for farm corporations and partnerships, and not for other family businesses or perhaps the whole range of capital properties passing between generations on death. The deferral of capital gains tax on individually-owned farms is a very special exception to the general framework of income tax legislation. It was introduced only for very compelling reasons which stem for the continuing importance of the small family farm to our country and the disruptive effect which this feature of the income tax system could have where the family was not organized to deal with it.


DEMURRAGE PAID FOR GRAIN SHIPS
Mr. Schellenberger: 1.	For the crop year (a) 1974-75 (b) 1975-76, what was the total number of grain ships delayed in (a) Vancouver (b) Thunder Bay (c) Prince Rupert?
2.	Since August 1, 1975 to date (a) what demurrage was paid for grain ships (b) what was the total number of grain ships delayed in each harbour?


Otto Emil Lang: In so far as the
Canadian Wheat Board is concerned: 1. The Canadian Wheat Board has information only on the amount of demurrage claimed and cannot provide statistics on the actual number of ships delayed in Vancouver, Thunder Bay and Prince Rupert, for the crop years 1974-75 and 1975-76.
2. (a) In the period August 1st 1975 to March 15th, 1977, the amount of demurrage paid by the Canadian Wheat Board was $12,606,048.67. (b) The actual number of ships delayed is not available.


MINISTER OF MANPOWER AND IMMIGRATION-PROPOSED VISIT TO LEEDS
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Did the Minister of Manpower and Immigration visit the proposed Constituency of Leeds-Grenville under redistribution this year and, if so (a) on what date (b) for what purpose?
2.	Is the Minister aware of press reports attributing to the Minister a statement that the Prime Minister has personally asked him to look after electing a member of the Liberal Party to represent the proposed Constituency of Leeds-Grenville in the next Parliament and, if so (a) on what date did the Prime Minister make such a request (b) what was the purpose of the request?
3.	Is it the policy of the government, in certain cases, to assign a Cabinet Minister to direct the Liberal Party election campaign on behalf of the government in a specific constituency presently represented by members of the Progressive Conservative Party and, if so (a) on what date and for what reason did this become a government policy (b) does this constitute a new government policy of extending specific honours to certain constituencies by giving them specific Prime Ministerial attention?


Ralph Goodale: In so far as the Department of Employment and Immigration and the President of the Privy Council are concerned: 1. Yes-(a) January 26, 1977; (b) To address the founding meeting of the Leeds-Grenville Liberal Association.
2.	No-(a) N/A; (b) N/A.
3.	See Beauchesne, fourth edition, citation 171 (a), (b), (f), (g), (h), (i) and (dd).
Order Paper Questions GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Since the preparation of the answer to Question No. 50, have there been further occasions where the Minister of Transport has used government owned aircraft and, if so (a) what was the (i) point of departure and destination (ii) cost to the taxpayer (iii) purpose of the flight (b) what is the name, address and job designation of all persons who accompanied the Minister?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such flights?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


AIRCRAFT IN STORAGE AT SASKATOON
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	With reference to the answer to Question No. 47, concerning government aircraft in storage at Saskatoon Municipal Airport, has any change occurred in the status of any of the aircraft including, in each case (a) transfer and, if so, to what location (b) sale and, if so, what is the name, address and price involved and all other pertinent details of the sale (c) negotiations or agreements for sale and, if so, with whom, at what address and all other pertinent details?
2.	Are any of the hangars presently empty or about to become empty as a result of the disposal of the aircraft?
3.	Have any of the hangars been rented or sold and, if so (a) to whom (b) at what address (c) at what price?
4.	Is it the intention of the government to open a larger recruiting depot in Saskatoon and, if so, what are the details?
5.	Will a larger military presence be established in Saskatoon and, if so, what are the details?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of National Defence, Transport and Supply and Services as follows:
1. Yes. (a) The following aircraft have been transferred:
Type of Aircraft
Tracker CP 121 Patrol Tracker CP 121 Patrol T33 Jet Trainer Dakota CC 129 Transport Dakota CC 129 Transport
Otter CF 123 Transport
Quantity Transferred to
3 Dartmouth, N.S.
9	Mountain View,	Ont.8	Mountain View,	Ont.2	CFB Winnipeg,	Man.8	Crown AssetsDisposal Corporation 7	Crown Assets
Disposal Corporation
(c) All aircraft that have been declared surplus have been sold.
2.	Yes. Three buildings are now empty and the fourth building will be empty by the end of October, 1977.
3.	The Department of National Defence hangars known as No. 3, 4, 5, and 6 and building No. 86 at Saskatoon Airport will be transferred to the Department of Transport as soon as vacated by the Department of National Defence. Transport Canada intends to declare the hangars surplus to its requirements. Transport Canada is prepared to enter into a 10 year lease with any purchaser of hangar No. 3 after which time the building is to be removed from the site. Hangars Nos. 4 and 5 will also be sold but are required to be removed from the site. Transport Canada is prepared to offer to the purchaser of

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
hangar No. 6, a 5 year lease renewable for three further periods of 5 years each. Building 86 will be used by Transport Canada for operational purposes at the airport.
4.	Yes. The staff of the recruiting centre at Saskatoon will be increased slightly as of 1 August, 1977.
5.	No.


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR ESSEX-WINDSOR
Mr. Cossitt: What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services or any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for Essex-Windsor while serving as Minister of Agriculture?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR HAMILTON EAST
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services or any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for Hamilton East while (a) Minister of National Health and Welfare (b) Minister of Labour?
2.	What is the total of all expenses paid for the Minister while serving in the two portfolios?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


COST OF RUNNING EACH MAXIMUM SECURITY PRISON
Mr. Howie: 1.	What was the cost of running each maximum security prison for (a) 1974 (b) 1975 (c) 1976?
2.	For the year 1976, in each such prison (a) how many guards were employed (b) what was the total of guard's salaries and what proportion of the amount was overtime?


Hon. Francis Fox (Solicitor General):: 1. (a), (b) and (c) See Annex A.
2. (a) and (b) See Annex B.
Operating and Maintenance Costs			Annex A
Maximum Security Institutions			
Institution	(a) 1974-75	(b) 1975-76	(c) 1976-77Dorchester Penitentiary	$5,800,320	$6,593,180	$6,422,809Regional Psychiatric Centre- Quebec	2,879,700	3,822,734	3,871,917Laval Institution	2,796,389	3,882,526	6,129,633Archambault Institution	5,680,395	4,669,193	5,140,313Regional Reception Centre- Quebec	2,616,869	3,368,083	4,193,527Correctional Development Centre-Quebec	127,863	1,212,487	296,432Regional Psychiatric Centre- Ontario	1,610,917	1,974,247	1,790,618IMr. Goodale.]	Institution	(a) 1974-75	(b) 1975-76	(c) 1976-77Regional Reception Centre- Kingston	3,948,595	4,789,784	5,636,324Millhaven Institution	4,339,389	6,773,608	8,435,074Stony Mountain Institution	4,837,782	5,821,104	6,749,667Saskatchewan Penitentiary	5,410,863	5,984,169	6,887,460British Columbia Penitentiary	5,243,725	6,593,294	7,932,604Regional Psychiatric Centre-Pacific	2,905,695	3,153,324	3,697,935Total	$48,198,502	$58,637,733	$67,184,313Number of Guards	in Maximum Security Institutions	Annex BInstitution	Correctional Officers	Total Salaries	OvertimeDorchester Penitentiary	160	$2,124,160	$165,036Regional Psychiatric Centre- Quebec	58	770,008	319,965Laval Institution	179	2,376,404	559,509Archambault Institution	175	2,323,300	566,019Regional Reception Centre- Quebec	122	1,619,672	256,189Correctional Development Centre-Quebec	Nil	N/A	N/ARegional Psychiatric Centre- Ontario	12	159,312	Regional Reception Centre- Ontario	165	2,190,540	453,884Millhaven Institution	188	2,495,888	1,263,051Stony Mountain Institution	120	1,593,120	313,089Saskatchewan Penitentiary	139	1,845,364	689,979British Columbia Penitentiary	175	2,323,300	773,822Regional Psychiatric Centre- Pacific	75	995,700	58,017Total:	$20,816,768	$5,418,560
*note: The facilities of the Correctional Development Centre (Quebec) were used in 1976, on an interim basis, as a Regional Psychiatric Centre and after the Laval Institution incidents of October as a temporary maximum facility.
While used as a Psychiatric Centre the salary and overtime cost for guards was accounted for by the Regional Psychiatric Centre.
Guards employed since October 1976 had been on loan from the Leclerc Institution (Medium) and the Federal Training Centre (Medium) and their salary and overtime cost was accounted for by their respective institutions.
1977 CANADA POST CALENDAR


Mr. Johnston: 1.	What was the cost of printing the 1977 Canada Post Calendar?
2.	How many were printed?
3.	To whom and by what means are they distributed?
4.	What is the justification for this type of advertising for a government service that has a captive market?
October 17, 1977


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. $ 112,000.
2. 800,000
3.	The calendars were made available to the general public at post office counters. A small number of recipients such as members of parliament, senators and large volume mailers received calendars through the mail.
4.	Canada Post's calendar is not a type of advertising. Rather it is a customer service-a mailer's guide that gives postal rates, mailing deadlines, and provides information on codes and standards and proper addressing packaged in a form that is retained and displayed by over 90 per cent of the recipients.


MINISTER'S TRAVEL
Mr. Wise: 1.	Did the Minister of Agriculture travel to Columbus, Ohio in the past six months and, if so (a) on what date (b) for what purpose (c) what group, association or organization did the Minister meet with (d) in what manner did the Minister travel?
2.	What was the cost of travel for the trip and, how was it paid?
3.	What are the names, addresses and responsibilities of all persons accompanying the Minister?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to Questions No. 29 and 30 answered this day.


TAX STATUS OF CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS
Mr. Whiteway: 1.	Is it the policy of the government to deny or evoke or threaten to evoke the tax status enjoyed by charitable organizations to those organizations who use receipted funds for the purpose of lobbying or bringing pressure to bear upon the government?
2.	Is it the policy of the government to deny or evoke or threaten to evoke the tax status enjoyed by charitable organizations who encourage or direct its members or patrons to write to Members of Parliament for the purpose of lobbying or bringing pressure to bear upon the government?
3.	Has the Minister of National Revenue or any member of the Department denied, evoked or threatened to evoke the tax status of a charitable organization to any organization which used its receipted funds or encouraged its membership to oppose either by petition to the government or by writing Members of Parliament for the purpose of lobbying or bringing pressure to bear upon the government with reference to the hunting of baby harp seals?


Monique Bégin: 1.
and 2. The legal interpretation of charity provided by common law judicial decisions does not recognize lobbying and bringing pressure to bear upon the government, by any means, as a charitable purpose or a charitable activity. However, the presentation of briefs to the government is an accepted activity of a charity. Under the Income Tax Act, a registered charity subjects itself to possible revocation of its registration, and thus its tax exemption, whenever non-charitable activities are undertaken, because it would be failing to comply with the basic requirement that all its activities be charitable. Lobbying and pressure activities do not necessarily result in revocation. Where such activities were a relatively minor part of a charity's activities, the charity was not aware that such activities
Order Paper Questions
would prejudice their registered status and the charity agrees not to participate in such activities in future, registration would usually not be revoked.
3. My officials, in applying the provisions of the Income Tax Act, in line with the relevant judicial decisions, have written to one registered charity which involved itself in non-charitable activities with reference to animal welfare. The charity was informed that such activities were contrary to the common law interpretation of charitable activities and that continued involvement in such an activity could result in the loss of its registration number and tax exempt status. Subsequently the charity voluntarily requested revocation and the Department was not obliged to decide upon the imposition of revocation.


LANGEVIN BUILDING-CARPET FOR PRIME MINISTER AND STAFF
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	With reference to the answer to Question No. 2, which stated in part that $89,000 was the cost of carpet installed in the Langevin Building with no portion of this applying to the area occupied by the Prime Minister and his staff, is there carpet on the floor in the area occupied by the Prime Minister and his staff and (a) if not, for what reason (b) if so (i) where did it come from (ii) what was the total cost (iii) what was the cost per square yard?
2.	Did the Prime Minister and his staff bring their own old carpet from the East Block for reuse or did anyone do it on their behalf and, if so, is this a new policy by the Prime Minister and the government to save money for the taxpayer by implementing restraint in government purchases for the Prime Minister and members of the Cabinet?


Hon. Judd Buchanan (Minister of Public Works):: The
answer to Question 2 (a) and 2 (b) stated that the total cost of carpeting installed in the Langevin Building was $89,000 which included the carpeting of space occupied by the Prime Minister and his staff. 1 (a), (b)(i), (b)(ii), (b)(iii) and 2 are not applicable.


LANGEVIN BUILDING-AREA OCCUPIED BY PRIME MINISTER AND STAFF
Mr. Cossitt: With reference to the answer to Question No. 2, which stated in part that $4,336,489.16 was spent on renovations to the Langevin Building, with no portion of this applying to the area occupied by the Prime Minister and his staff
(a)	is the Prime Minister and his staff occupying a section of the building that was not renovated and, if so, what is the area (b) was a portion of this amount spent on the area occupied by the Prime Minister and his staff and, if so, what was the amount?


J. Judd Buchanan: See reply to Question No. 2,154 answered this day.


NUMBER OF INMATES ADMITTED TO INSTITUTIONS IN QUEBEC REGION, 1970-1976
Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to the Quebec Federal Training Centre?
2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time
(b)	at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


Francis Fox: 1. Normally, all admissions in the Quebec Region have been through the Regional Reception Centre. The population movement data on Annex A illustrates total entries into the above institutions,
i.e., admissions from outside and institutional transfers.
2.	(a) With reference to inmates admitted to a federal institution with no previous penitentiary incarceration, this information is available on a regional basis only for the years 1975 and 1976. 1975-756; 1976-783; (b) This information is not available from the Inmate Record System, but part of the information requested can be found in Statistics Canada Publication (Catalogue No. 85-207) entitled "Correctional Institution Statistics" under the heading "Previous Commitments by previous institutional history".
Admissions Quebec Region-1970-1976
1970	1971	1972	1973	1974	1975	1976Federal Training Centre	365	367	424	371	345	452	380Regional Psychiatric Centre	273	216	318	278St. Vincent de Paul Institution	1453	Regional Reception Centre	1035	941	1270	1350Archambault Institution	624	481	559	475	314	427	574Cowansville Institution	443	411	433	300	240	295	285Leclerc Institution	546	504	459	503	424	435	452Ste-Anne-des-Plaines Institution	145	250	254	260	224	288	265
These figures include the Industrial Annex
note: The above figures do not include temporary detainees.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to the Quebec Regional Psychiatric Centre?
2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time (b) at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?


Francis Fox: See Question No.
2,195.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to the Quebec Regional Medical Centre?
2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time (b) at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?


Francis Fox: See Question No.
2,195.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1. For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to the Quebec Regional Reception Centre?

2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time (b) at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?


Francis Fox: See Question No.
2.195.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to Archambault Institution?
2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time (b) at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?


Francis Fox: See Question No.
2.195.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to Cowansville Institution?
2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time (b) at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?


Francis Fox: See Question No.
2.195.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to Leclerc Institution?
2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time (b) at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?


Francis Fox: See Question No.
2.195.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: 1.	For the years 1970 to 1976, what was the number of inmates admitted to Ste. Annes des Plaines Institution?
2.	How many had (a) been admitted to a federal institution for the first time (b) at one time been convicted under the Juvenile Delinquents Act?


Francis Fox: See Question No.
2,195.


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR OUTREMONT
Mr. Cossitt: What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services or any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for Outremont while serving as Minister of National Health and Welfare?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR VANCOUVER CENTRE
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services or any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for Vancouver Centre while Minister of (a) Consumer and Corporate Affairs (b) Urban Affairs (c) National Revenue (d) Justice and Attorney General?
2.	What is the total of all expenses paid for the Minister while serving in the four portfolios?
October 17, 1977


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR ST. BONIFACE
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services or any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for St. Boniface while (a) Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion (b) Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport (c) Minister without Portfolio?
2.	What is the total of all expenses paid for the Minister while serving in the three positions?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION
Mr. Fortin: Can a Regional Director of the Unemployment Insurance Commission (a) rent (b) lend computer services and personnel to private companies and, if not, are civil servants willing to testify in this regard, bound by an oath of office?


Hon. Bud Cullen (Minister of Manpower and Immigration):: (a) and (b) Yes.


GROUND TRANSPORTATION POLICY FOR AIRPORTS
Mr. Mazankowski: 1.	Do the regulations respecting ground transportation fees at airports state that "The annual fee for a permit to operate a taxicab or limousine at Toronto International Airport is $875," and, if so, has the Department of Transport collected such moneys or parts thereof and, if not, for what reason?
2.	Have any legal questions of a discriminatory basis or otherwise been raised with regard to the collection of such fees and, if so (a) what are the details (b) which group, person or individual made such representation (c) what specific action is being taken or will be taken to respond?
3.	- Do the government airport concession operations regulations state in part, that any person may pick up or transport passengers in a commercial passenger vehicle from a place outside the airport to a destination at the airport and, if so, does Blue Line Taxi adhere to the regulation at the Ottawa International Airport and, if not, for what reason?
4.	Are*Gloucester Township taxis, under city regulations, allowed to pick-up a fare in Ottawa and transport the passenger to the Airport and, if so, has Mr. Montgomery, President of Blue Line Taxis Limited, on occasion fined the Carleton Taxi Association members for doing so and is this in contradiction of section 7(1 )(a) of the government airport concession operations regulations?
5.	Does the license (file no. 5156-464-6 Vol.3) between the Department of Transport and Blue Line Taxis Limited (formerly Red Line Taxis Limited) state at section 5 "that the Licensee shall in all respects abide by and comply with all lawful rules, regulations and by-laws of municipalities and other governing bodies, in any manner affecting the operations conducted by the Licensee hereunder" and, if so, has Blue Line Taxis Limited complied faithfully to this section and, if not, for what reason?
6.	Does the Department collect 5 per cent of the gross revenue derived by Blue Line Taxis Limited from the operation of the bus and limousine service to and from Ottawa International Airport and such other special ground transportation services from the Airport, and fifteen cents for each taxicab from the Airport, all as established to the satisfaction of the Minister, payable in monthly installments on or before the fifteenth day of each succeeding month?
Order Paper Questions
7.	For each year since Blue Line Taxis has been operating out of the Airport, what is the amount of gross revenue the Department received from the (a) taxicab (b) bus (c) limousine service?
8.	With reference to Part 7, is there any cross subsidy among the taxicab, bus and limousine service at the Airport and, if so (a) which modes are being cross subsidized (b) what is the specific amount of the cross subsidy for each year that Blue Line Taxis has been operating?
9.	Does Appendix B of the August 1976 Ground Transportation Policy for Airports state "where a bus service operator also provides limousine service the limousine service must be on a self-supporting basis and not subsidized by revenue from the bus operator" and, if so (a) is the (i) limousine service (ii) bus service at Ottawa International Airport on a self-supporting basis (b) does the bus service at Ottawa International Airport subsidize the limousine service and, if so, to what extent?
10.	What is the last date that public tenders were called on the taxi, bus and limousine service at Ottawa International Airport?


Otto Emil Lang: 1. The airport ground transportation regulations state that the annual fee for a permit to operate a taxicab or limousine at Toronto International Airport is $875. The regulations were promulgated to stipulate this fee in anticipation of the proclamation of Toronto International Airport as a designated airport pursuant to section 4 of the Airport Concession Operations Regulations. No moneys have been collected since the airport has not yet been designated and the $875 fee is therefore not applicable. The implementation of the designation system is still under consideration.
2.	No legal questions of any nature have been raised with the Department of Transport by any person or group regarding the collection of such fees.
3.	The Government Airport Concession Operations Regulations state, in part, that any person may pick up or transport passengers in a commercial passenger vehicle from a place outside the airport to a destination at the airport. Blue Line Taxi adheres to this regulation at the Ottawa International Airport, and is accorded the right to pick up passengers at the airport for carrying off the airport pursuant to the terms of its agreement with the Department of Transport.
4.	Any taxi operating in a municipality in a manner that is in accord with the regulations of that municipality and such other municipalities as it operates in can transport a passenger to the airport and not be in conflict with Section 7(1 )(a) of the Government Airport Concession Operations Regulations. The Department does not have privity of contract with any arrangements Blue Line Taxi Limited may have with the Carleton Taxi Association members.
5.	Yes, Blue Line Taxi Limited complies fully with Section 5 of its Licence as far as the Department is aware.
6.	Yes, Blue Line Taxi Limited pays the fees as is stated.
7.	The amount of gross revenue paid by Blue Line Taxi Limited or any other concession operator is confidential to the parties involved, unless the licence between Blue Line Taxi Limited and the Department does not contain such a provision.
8.	The financial statements filed by Blue Line Taxi Limited in accordance with the terms of its licence do not indicate any cross subsidization among the taxicab, bus and limousine service.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
9.	While Blue Line Taxi Limited has the right to do so, it has not operated a limousine service for a number of years. The bus service is on a self-supporting basis.
10.	While public tenders are called at regular intervals at Transport Canada airports in respect to most concession activities in order to provide prospective concessionaires with the opportunity to bid on airport concessions and to permit Transport Canada to optimize its revenues, the optimization of revenues is however a secondary consideration when choosing a ground transportation operator. The Department's policy is to invite proposals from the ground transportation industry to respond to specific ground transportation service requirements. The successful operator is chosen by a committee comprised of Transport Canada representatives and representatives of the airlines serving the airport. The company judged to be the most capable of providing the level of service specified in the invitation is selected. Red Line Taxi Limited acquired the ground transportation concession in accordance with this general policy at a time when no other company was capable of providing the service. Blue Line Taxi Limited subsequently acquired the interests of Red Line Taxi and in so doing acquired the airport transportation licence. Proposals have not been invited from the industry as it is considered that Blue Line Taxi is providing an adequate level of service.


SPORT AND RECREATION FACILITIES FOR SENIOR CITIZENS
Mr. Patterson: 1.	For the 1975-76 Fiscal year, what was the cost to taxpayers of construction, maintenance and repairs to federal penal institutions?
2.	For the same year, what was the average cost to the taxpayer for maintaining one inmate in an institution?
3.	For the same year, what was the total cost to the taxpayer for maintenance of all inmates in institutions?
4.	For the same year, what was the total cost to the taxpayer for (a) education of inmates (b) sport and recreation facilities in institutions?
5.	For the same year, what was the total cost to the taxpayer for sport and recreation facilities for senior citizens?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Canadian Penitentiary Service and Health and Welfare Canada as follows:
1.	Cost of construction: $23,173,654. Repair and upkeep: $2,242,089.
2.	$17,438.
3.	$150,374,365.
4.	(a) $1,292,248. (b) $303,334.
5.	An amount of $1 1,338,188 was spent in 1975-76 for projects funded by the New Horizons Program. These funds were used to enable senior citizens to participate in a wide variety of meaningful activities of their own choice. New Horizons does not fund capital construction, however, some part of project grants may be used for minor renovations to existing activity centres.


ORDER PAPER QUESTION
Mr. Cossitt: Was Question No. 41 placed on the Order Paper on October 12, 1976 and previously placed on the Order Paper in the 1st Session of the 30th Parliament on May II, 1976 forwarded by the Privy Council Office to the department for answer and, if so (a) on what date (b) what persons forwarded it (c) who received it (d) who was assigned and what was his/her job designation to answer the question and on what date (e) is the answer ready and (i) if so, for how long and for what reason has it not been forthcoming (ii) if not, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: The government takes responsibility for the answers it provides to questions and for the process involved in replying to such questions. It is not appropriate therefore to provide information about internal administrative arrangements.


PORT OF HALIFAX-ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
Mr. Forrestall: 1.	Will the government table the Final copy of the Task Force Report on the requirements for a second container terminal at the Port of Halifax?
2.	(a) Will the government table the economic impact study undertaken for the Port of Halifax and Financed partly by the National Harbours Board (b) what consulting company undertook the study (c) on what date was it completed (d) what was the total cost of the study?
3.	On what date was a copy made available to (a) NHB Halifax staff (b) staff of the Halifax Dartmouth Port Commission (c) the Halifax Port Authority?


Otto Emil Lang: The National Harbours Board advises as follows: 1. A Task Force on the requirements for a second container terminal at the Port of Halifax was a co-operative venture between the National Harbours Board and the Province of Nova Scotia. Although the complete report contains certain confidential data, the co-chairmen of the task force have agreed to release an executive summary of the report.
2.	(a) Distribution of a study of the Economic Evaluation of the Halifax Containerport Expansion Project commissioned by the Province of Nova Scotia or any related information would require consent of the Province, (b) Same as 2(a). (c) Same as 2(a).
3.	(a) As party to the Task Force, a copy of the report referred to in 2(a) above was provided to the National Harbours Board. Further distribution would have been made by the Province of Nova Scotia, (b) Same as 3(a). (c) Same as 3(a).


TELECOMMUNICATIONS
Mr. O'Sullivan: 1.	With reference to the answer to Question No. 1,943 which stated in part that the total costs of charges on other than local communications in the Department of Manpower and Immigration included in the Estimates for 1975-76 was $2,307,052, of this stated cost, how is the amount divided between (a) communications within Canada (b) overseas communications and, in each case (i) what communications methods were used (ii) what were the percentage costs of each method (iii) what amount and percentage of these costs was paid to communications companies other than Canadian?
2.	With reference to the answer to Question No. 1,943 which stated in part that the total estimated costs of charges on other than local communications in
October 17, 1977

the Department of Manpower and Immigration included in the Estimates for 1976-77 is $2,092,197, of this stated cost, how is the amount divided between (a) communications within Canada (b) overseas communications and, in each case (i) what are the anticipated modes of communication (ii) what are the estimated percentage costs of each method (iii) what is the estimated amount and percentage of these costs to be paid to communications companies other than Canadian?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: 1. (a) and (b) Our departmental records do not differentiate between communications within Canada and Overseas communication. (i) Long distance-telegrams-cables; (ii) Long distance-$2,277,051-98.7 per cent; Telegrams-cables- $30,001-1.3 per cent; (iii) Nil.
2. (a) and (b) Our departmental records do not differentiate between communications within Canada and Overseas communication. (i) Long distance-telegrams-cables; (ii) Long distance-$2,070,883-99 per cent; Telegrams-cables- $21,314-1 per cent; (iii) Nil.


LUBRICATING OILS REPROCESSING
Mr. O'Sullivan: 1.	Was it government policy during wartime (1939 to 1945) to encourage the re-use, after a degree of reprocessing and purification, of automotive lubricating oils as fuels for home heating in an attempt to conserve scarce fossil fuel reserves?
2.	Is the government (a) aware of (b) currently commissioning studies into the efficacy of this type of policy and, if so (i) on what date were such studies instituted (ii) have they been completed and, if not, on what date are they expected to be completed?
3.	What have been the findings and recommendations of the studies?
4.	Has official notice been taken of the studies, their findings and recommendations and, if so, in what form?
5.	Has any action been taken on the recommendations and, if so, what specific action?
6.	Will the studies be Tabled in the House of Commons or referred to a committee of the House and, if so, on what date?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Energy, Mines and Resources and Fisheries and the Environment as follows: 1. During the 1939 to 1945 war, the reprocessing of used lubricating oil for re-use as lubricating oils was Canadian government policy, but not for use as home heating fuels.
2.	Studies of the reprocessing of automotive lubricating oil for re-use were initiated in 73. Much of the work has been completed but it still being evaluated by EMR and Environment Canada. The latter department published two reports in June 1975 entitled "Experimental burning of waste oil as a fuel in cement manufacture" as well as "A preliminary review of used lubricant oils in Canada".
3.	It was found that the reprocessing of lubricating oils was feasible but in many cases had to be done by processes which were liable to cause pollution. It was recommended by Environment Canada that an optimum use of the reclaimed lubricating oil would be for use as a fuel in cement manufacture. In this use it would replace heavy fuel oil or other fuels and would not result in environmental pollution. Reclamation for use as lubricating oil was also recommended provided that
Order Paper Questions
proper environmental precautions were taken by the reprocessor. Several Canadian companies are presently reprocessing oil in this manner. Since a shortage of new lubricating oil is not envisaged, it was found that there is no specific incentive to reprocess the used lubricating oil to make new lubricating oil, provided that the used oil was used in some way to conserve energy. A major problem was the difficulty of collecting the used lubricating oil from many dispersed points. The use of reprocessed lubricating oil as home heating fuel was not recommended due to environmental hazards and to the fact that reprocessing for this purpose would be completely uneconomic.
4.	Official notice has been taken of the studies by way of publication and wide dissemination of the results and recommendations in the Department of Fisheries and the Environment technical information series.
5.	Tests have been run on cement manufacture using reclaimed lubricating oil and have been found successful. These result have been passed on to the cement industry which has been encouraged to use reclaimed oil in this manner. Further work is being planned by the Department of Fisheries and Environment in cooperation with industry and the provinces to encourage the establishment of systems for the collection and use of waste oil.
6.	The reports mentioned in part 2 are available on request.


CUBAN USE OF CANADIAN AIRSPACE
Mr. Coates: 1.	Since January 1, 1975, have Cuban aircraft, other than those using airspace for commercial purposes into either Dorval, Mirabel or Toronto, used Canadian airspace and, if so (a) on how many occasions (b) in each case (i) what airport or airports were used (ii) were the planes commercial or military (iii) what was the origin and destination (iv) was prior approval sought and secured from the government by the Cuban Government (v) was approval granted and, if so, by what agency of the government (vi) what are the specific dates?
2.	In each case (a) were government officials from the Departments of National Revenue and Manpower and Immigration or the Canadian Armed Forces used to check out the aircraft (b) is information available to the government that each met all national and international regulations associated with such landings and (i) if so, who has this information at this time (ii) if not, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of External Affairs, Transport, National Revenue, Employment and Immigration and National Defence as follows: 1. Since January 1, 1975, two Cuban aircraft, other than those using airspace for commercial purposes into either Dorval, Mirabel or Toronto, have used Canadian airspace, (a) Two flights, although technically classed as commercial and approved by the Air Transport Committee, were more of state or diplomatic nature, (b) (i) Ottawa, September 23/Septem-ber 28/75-State visit Vancouver, May 30/June 13/76 Cuban Committee on Human Settlements-("Habitat" Conference in Vancouver) (ii) Civil commercial aircraft of "Cubana". (iii) Havana-Ottawa-Havana-(State Visit)	Havana-Vancouver-Havana-Habitat Conference, (iv) Yes. (v) External affairs, in consultation with Canadian Transport Commission,

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Department of National Defence and Transport Canada, (vi) September 23 return September 28, 1975 (Ottawa) May 30 return June 13, 1976 (Vancouver).
2. (a) National Defence: No; National Revenue: Yes; Employment and Immigration: Yes. As a rule, the Immigration Division does not check aircraft. It is done by customs. If passengers need to be examined for immigration purposes, they are directed to an immigration officer. Since January 1975, two flights from Cuba, both of a state or diplomatic nature arrived in Canada. Immigration officials examined 43 passengers who arrived from Cuba on September 23, 1975 in Ottawa on a state visit and also examined 31 passengers who arrived from Cuba on May 30, 1976 in Vancouver for the "Habitat Conference", (b) Yes. (i) This information is on file at Gander and Halifax International airports, (ii) N/A.


PREPARATION OF POST OFFICE REPORTS
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	With reference to the answer to Question No. 1,301, who prepared the report under (a) Item 1-Organization (b) Item 2-Environmental Forecast (c) Item 3-Management Practices (d) Item 5-Management Information Systems (e) Item 6-Summary Report (Blueprint for change) and, in each case, what was the cost?
2.	What was the cost of the report under Item 13-Presorting mail, Sortation and Distribution?
3.	For what reasons were reports involving Hay Associates Limited of Toronto in 1975 not included in the answer?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e). The individual reports as mentioned were prepared by Kates, Peat, Marwick & Co. Cost for each study is not available. The total cost as mentioned in question 1,301 for the six reports was $258,627.
2.	Cost of report under item 13 not available. The total cost as mentioned in question 1,301 for reports under items 12 and 13 was $35,051.
3.	In the context of my speech, I was referring only to the 15 reports mentioned in the reply to question 1,301.


GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	(a) What was the entire cost to the taxpayer of Prime Minister Trudeau's Easter visit to the Western United States including all costs of any persons accompanying him at any time (b) was the sole official purpose of the visit to make a speech at a university in the San Francisco area?
2.	What is a full description of any government-owned aircraft used at any time including the entire cost, number of flying hours and the cost per hour of flying time and waiting time, dates and times of all points of departure and arrival including any aircraft flying to or from Canada with the names and job designations of any persons on board whether or not the Prime Minister was on board?
3.	What are the names and job designations of government personnel who accompanied the Prime Minister at any time during the visit?
4.	What was the total cost of accommodation and food paid by the taxpayer for the Prime Minister and any persons at any time accompanying him, including aircraft crews?
[Mr. Goodale.)
5.	What was the entire cost of accommodation, food, etc. paid by the taxpayer on behalf of the Prime Minister and what is a breakdown of this total showing locations, to whom the money was paid, etc.?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to Questions Nos. 29 and 30 answered this day.


COST OF MAINTENANCE DREDGING
Mr. Forrestall: 1.	What was the cost of maintenance dredging at the Port of (a) Montreal (b) Trois Rivieres (c) Quebec for the year (i) 1970 (ii) 1971 (iii) 1972 (iv) 1973 (v) 1974 (vi) 1975 (vii) 1976 and, in each case, what department or agency paid for such dredging?
2.	For the year 1976, what amount was spent on dredging at (a) Cap Sante
(b)	Cap a la Roche (c) Cap Charles (d) Curve No. 1 (e) the Yamachiche bend in the St. Lawrence River and, in each case, what department or agency paid for such dredging?


Otto Emil Lang: The National Harbours Boards advises as follows: 1. (a) Montreal: (i) 1970-$241,676; (ii) 1971-$263,675; (iii) 1972-$297,006; (iv) 1973-$374,247; (v) 1974-$423,091; (vi) 1975-$510,-912; (vii) 1976-$522,552. (b) Trois Rivieres: (i) 1970- $45,885; (ii) 1971-$27,000; (iii) 1972-Nil; (iv) 1973-$107,-440; (v) 1974-$22,000; (vi) 1975-$60,500; (vii) 1976- $26,145. (c) Quebec: (i) 1970-$8,544; (ii) 1971-Nil; (iii) 1972-$48,640; (iv) 1973-Nil; (v) 1974-$49,920; (vi) 1975-$164,175; (vii) 1976-Nil.
Transport Canada advises as follows: 2. (a) Cap Sante- $190,000 paid by Transport Canada, (b) Cap a la Roche and
(c)	Cap Charles carried out jointly-$200,000-paid by Transport Canada, (d) Nil. (e) Nil. (Some dredging was done downstream of Yamachiche Bend in 1976-$552,000-paid by Transport Canada).


O CANADA KIT
Mr. Diefenbaker: 1.	How many copies of the Oh! "Canada" kit and the accompanying cassettes and posters have been issued by or for the Commissioner of Official Languages for distribution in schools?
2.	What is the total cost?
3.	How many have been distributed (a) in Quebec schools (b) elsewhere in Canada, by province?
4.	Are they no longer being distributed in Quebec and, if so, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: The Commissioner of Official Languages reports directly to parliament and not through minister. Questions can be put directly to him.


UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE COMMISSION-INQUIRY INTO THE USE MADE OF A FUND IN THE QUEBEC REGION
Mr. Fortin: 1. When Mr. Gabriel Beland was Director General of the Unemployment Insurance Commission for the Quebec Region, was a Commission set up to discover what use was made of a fund constituted by the sale of waste paper,
October 17, 1977

particularly for the year 1973 and, if so, what were the findings of the Commission?
2.	What the Commission set up following a complaint made by the union that this fund was not being used to ensure the welfare of the workers as was intended?
3.	In 1974, did one of Mr. Beland's colleagues sell bay windows, which were delivered by UIC employees to individuals, namely to one reporter from La Presse and another from The Gazette, among others, whose cheques were made out in his name and, if so (a) how many (b) how many windows were sold for $25.00 each (c) was there an enquiry and (i) if so, what were the findings (ii) if not, for what reason?
4.	During the fiscal year 1974-75, the last year under Mr. Beland's direction, was $3 million missing and, if so (a) is that a common occurrence at the UIC (b) what became of (i) Mr. Beland and what is his current salary (ii) the comptroller, Mr. A1 Belliveau, who was also responsible for drafting the fmacial statement in question?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: 1.	Yes, an administrative inquiry was held in 1973 upon the decision of the Director General, Gabriel Beland, who had been appointed to that position at the end of 1972. The findings of the inquiry were basically as follows: For some years it had been a practice at the UIC regional office to collect waste paper and sell it to a buyer or buyers for recyling purposes. The revenue from these sales constituted a fund known as the employees social fund, administered by volunteer officers. The fund was used for the benefit of all employees at the regional office, for activities of social, sporting, recreational or charitable nature. The practice, though applied in good faith for commendable ends, was open to misinterpretation. It was therefore advisable to put an end to it, and Director General Beland did so on December 21, 1973.
2.	No.
3.	Not in 1974. However, on October 1, 1973, Mr. Beland, Director General of the UIC, was informed by two people who identified themselves as journalists that the same day a UIC employee had sold them used windows left over after recent renovations to the UIC regional office building, for the sum of $25 each. They had picked up the windows at the building's service entrance, (a) About thirty-five, (b) Unknown, (c) Yes. Director General Beland immediately set up an administrative inquiry on October 1, 1973. (i) The inquiry's findings were basically as follows:-The Canada Department of Public Works, owner of the building occupied by the UIC regional office at 1441 St-Urbain, Montreal, had ordered renovation work on the building during the summer of 1973, consisting mainly in replacing windows.-The contract, which had been given to a contracting firm, stipulated that the removed or replaced windows became the property of that firm, which could dispose of them as it saw fit.-A UIC employee, without the Director General's permission and without informing him, had authorized the contractor to store about fifty of the old windows temporarily in the basement of the building.-This employee was authorized by the contractor to sell the windows to prospective buyers and to collect the money for the contractor.-This employee did in fact sell various people about thirty-five used windows for $20 to $25 each, including two which were sold on October 1, 1973 to unidentified persons for $25 each, paid directly to this employee, partly in legal Canadian tender, partly in the form of a Royal Bank of
Order Paper Questions
Canada money order in his name.-The buyers themselves picked up the windows at the building's service entrance, and no outside delivery was made by UIC employees.-To prevent any minsunderstanding as to the employee's actions, it was advisable to put an end to this situation and to have the fifteen or so remaining windows removed from the basement; an order to that effect was made on October 2, 1973 by Director General Beland and was carried out the same day. (ii) Not applicable.
4.	No. (a) Not applicable, (b) Not applicable.


NATIONAL HARBOURS BOARD PORT AND GRAIN HANDLING FACILITIES AT CHURCHILL
Mr. Benjamin: 1.	(a) On April 20, 1977, what were the cumulative improvements made to the National Harbours Board port and grain handling elevator at Churchill, Manitoba (b) at what cost was each such improvement (c) what was the completion date in each case?
2.	If such improvements are ongoing in nature, what will be the total cost and completion date in each case?
3.	(a) On April 20, 1977, what was the cumulative extent of changeover at the National Harbours Board elevator at Churchill to upgrade the grain handling facilities to handle hopper cars (b) what was the total cost of any such changeover project to date?
4.	If not initiated by April 20, 1977, on what date can it be expected that the project will be (a) commenced (b) completed and at what cost?


Otto Emil Lang: The National Harbours Board advises as follows: 1.
(a)	(b)	(c)Wharf rehabilitation	$213,000	1975Dredge repairs	422,000	1974New staff quarters Tug modifications and	619,000	1975servicing	398,000	1976Model studies	72,000	1975Dredging Miscellaneous small	$1,771,000	Program ongoingprojects	191,000	Various times2.	It is estimated that the dredging will be completed in the fall of 1978 or 1979 at a further cost of $5,900,000.3.	(a) Nil. (b) Not applicable.4.	(a) Subject to obtaining necessary Treasury Board approval of the expenditure the project will commence in sufficient time to allow work to be completed when the rail track is upgraded by C.N. permitting access of hopper cars to Churchill, (b) Construction times vary according to the time of year but could be completed in no less than four months from start at an estimated cost of $825,000.
October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


MAKING PUBLIC MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING GRAIN HANDLING BETWEEN CANADIAN NATIONAL AND CANADIAN PACIFIC
Mr. Hnatyshyn: Will the government make public the memorandum of understanding concerning the sharing of grain handling between CPR and CNR, signed August 19, 1976 and, if not, for what reason?


Otto Emil Lang: The agreement in question is one which has been made between two companies operating in the commercial area, Canadian National Railways and Canadian Pacific Limited. The contents of such private documents are not normally disclosed by Government.


WORKERS EXPOSED TO GRAIN DUST
Mr. Hnatyshyn: Is the government aware of reports that the Gage Research Institute study shows that respiratory problems may occur in up to 75 percent of workers exposed to grain dust and, if so, is the government giving consideration to assisting in the financing of the five year study which the Institute will begin in May 1977?


Ralph Goodale: In so far as Agriculture Canada is concerned: The Department is aware that the Gage Research Institute has released results of a study and that the Institute plans to conduct further studies relating to workers exposed to grain dust. This department is not considering the question of financial assistance.
In so far as Labour Canada is concerned: Labour Canada is participating in the Gage Institute research project by undertaking the environmental monitoring part of the study.
tute and has pledged technical assistance in furthering their study through the loan of technical equipment.
In so far as the Medical Research Council is concerned: Although the Medical Research Council provides significant support for a number of investigators working in the Gage Research Institute, the Council has received no applications from them for funds for research specifically related to respiratory problems of those exposed to grain dust.


PILOT BASES
Mr. Forrestall: 1.	Where are Air Canada's pilot bases located in Canada and how many pilots are assigned to each base?
2.	Is the government aware of any studies which have been done, either in the United States or Canada, to determine the optimal and most economical number of pilots assigned to a base and, if so, what is the most economical number?
3.	Has Air Canada considered making (a) Halifax-Dartmouth (b) Calgary (c) Edmonton as pilot bases and, if not, for what reason?


Otto Emil Lang: The management of Air Canada advises as follows: 1. Total pilots and supervisory pilots: Montreal 566; Toronto 728; Winnipeg 126; Vancouver 148.
Transport Canada advises as follows: 2. The government is not aware of any studies which have been done, either in the United States or Canada, to determine the optimal and most economical number of pilots assigned to a base.
The management of Air Canada advises as follows: 3. (a) Yes. (b) Yes. (c) No. Because with relatively low flight frequencies it has not been economically feasible to domicile pilots at Edmonton.


PROJECTS ACCEPTED IN ROBERVAL CONSTITUENCY
[Stage Direction]
In so far as the Department of National Health and Welfare is concerned: The Department of National Health and Welfare is aware of a study of 68 grain elevator agents in Southern Manitoba, of whom 75 per cent were found to have respiratory symptoms. The Gage Institute has applied to the National Health Research and Development Program for financial sup-
Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): Order Paper Questions
Association Cooperative Laitiere du Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean	Milk powder and butter	329,160	Chambord	1974Hydromec Inc.	Machine parts, hydraulic and other	30,250	Dolbeau	1975Julac Inc.	Blueberry wine	22,000	Dolbeau	1976Abattoir St-Felicien Inc.	Slaughterhouse	55,000	St-Felicien	1976Les Aliments Congeles Q.B.	Food processing and freezing	80,000	St-Felicien	1976Ateliers de Meubles F.C.	Kitchen furniture (including cupboards)	16,250	Dolbeau	1976Albert Perron Inc.	Cheese and butter	77,000	St-Prime	1976Les Armoires Mido Inc.	Kitchen cupboards	23,550	Mistassini	1977La Scierie Normandin Inc.	Wood seasoning and planing	112,435	Normandin	1972La Scierie Normandin Inc.	Sawmill	278,944	Girardville	1972Murdock Lumber Inc.	Undressed lumber	61,180	Girardville	1972Chibougamau	Lumber	51,000	Riviere Chicoubiche	1972Les Industries de St-Andre	Sawmill	12,400	St-Andre	1972Le Laboratoire Chez-Nous	Sanitary Products	36,430	St-Felicien	1972Albert Perron Inc.	Cheese	25,088	St-Prime	1972Les Produits Forestiers M.P. Inc.	Timber	260,660	St-Thomas-Didyme	1972Laiterie Dolbeau Ltee	Cheese and cheese powder	64,860	Dolbeau	1973Audehou Inc.	Hardwood sawing	345,422	Lac Bouchette	1973Les Industries Tanguay Ltee	Trees harvesters	591,400	St-Prime	1973Dolbeau Oxygene Inc.	Pressure tanks	35,860	Dolbeau	1974Julac Inc.	Wine and food products	56,500	Dolbeau	1974Laiterie Dolbeau Inc.	Whey powder	143,088	Dolbeau	1974


O CANADA KIT
Mr. Stewart (Marquette): 1.	How many copies of the Oh! "Canada" kit were purchased by the Commissioner of Official Languages?
2.	To how many schools and what other types of organizations were the kits distributed?
3.	What was the total cost of preparation, publication and distribution of the kit and was the cost shared by any other levels of government?


Ralph Goodale: The Commissioner of Official Languages reports directly to parliamentary and not through a minister. Questions can be made directly to him.


UIC-MR. ROBERT KINGSLEY
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	(a) Is Mr. Robert Kingsley, Canada Manpower Regional Manager of Operations, working out of Ottawa and, if not, what is his exact title and duties (b) on what date was he appointed to this position?
2.	What are all former positions held by Mr. Kingsley in government service and the dates and specifically did these include Manager of the Ottawa Office of the Unemployment Insurance Commission and Regional Manager of the Unemployment Insurance Commission Pay Centre in Montreal?
3.	Is Mr. Dennis Kingsley, brother of Mr. Robert Kingsley, presently employed by the Unemployment Insurance Commission and is he stationed at the Head Office of UIC at 222 Nepean St., Ottawa and, if so, in what capacity?
4.	Has an investigation been taking place of alleged defrauding of the Unemployment Insurance Commission by Mrs. Robert Kingsley and does this investigation include looking into completed UIC reporting cards sent in by Mrs. Kingsley making claims against the Unemployment Insurance Commission while Mrs. Kingsley was absent from the country on a vacation or trip and, if so (a) how many weeks of benefits were paid to Mrs. Kingsley that should not have been paid (b) what was the total sum of money involved?
5.	Has an investigation been taking place of alleged defrauding of the UIC by a son of Mr. and Mrs. Robert Kingsley and does this investigation include looking into completed UIC reporting cards sent in by this individual making claims against UIC while he was a student, unavailable for work and, if so (a) how many weeks of benefits were paid to him that should not have been paid (b) what was the total sum of money involved?
6.	Has this entire matter been referred to senior officials of UIC in Belleville or elsewhere with a recommendation that charges be laid and, if so (a) what are the names and job designations of all those recommending such charges (b) what are the names and job designations of all those considering such a recommendation (c) will charges be laid and, if so (i) on what date (iij against whom (iii) what is the nature of the charges?
7.	Has the investigation in any way whatsoever involved either Mr. Robert Kingsley or Mr. Dennis Kingsley and, if so, what part did either play in the matter?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: In so far as the Unemployment Insurance Commission and the Department of Manpower and Immigration are concerned: 1.
(a)	No. He is District Director, Manpower Division, Ottawa District Office. Under general direction of the Assistant Director General Manpower of the Ontario Region, Canada Man-

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
power Service, Department of Manpower and Immigration, directs the operations and programs of the Canada Manpower Centres in the district, including the employment service and other programs of the Canada Manpower Service, (b) July 19, 1976.
2.	Claims Officer (level 1) Sudbury, July 27, 1959-April 1, 1960; Claims Officer (level 2) Sudbury, April 1, 1960-July 1, 1961; Claims Officer (level 3) Sudbury, July 1, 1961-August 27, 1962; Claims Officer (level 3) Sudbury, August 27, 1962-March 12, 1963; Claims Officer (level 4) Welland, March 12, 1963-February 1, 1965; Enforcement Officer (PM2) Cornwall, February 1, 1965-August 5, 1969; Benefit Control Monitor/Officer (PM 3) Belleville Region Office, August 5, 1969-July 1, 1970; Insurance Supervisor (PM 3) Kingston, July 1, 1970-October 1, 1970; Senior Benefit Control Officer (A/PM 4) Ottawa Head Office, October 1, 1970; Operations Officer (A/PM 5) Ottawa Head Office, October 1, 1970-July 14, 1971; Operations Officer (PM 5) Ottawa Head Office, July 14, 1971-September 13, 1971; District Manager (PM 5) Ottawa District Office, September 13, 1971-March 27, 1972; Operations Officer (PM 5) Ottawa Head Office, March 27, 1972-July 1, 1972; A/ Regional Manager Pay Centre (A/PM 6) Montreal, July 1, 1972-August 27, 1973; Regional Manager Pay Centre (PM 6) Montreal, August 27, 1973-April 1, 1975; A/Chief, Metro Area Operations (A/PM 7) Montreal, April 1, 1975- July 2, 1975; Chief, Metro Area Operations (PM 7) Montreal, July 2, 1975-July 19, 1976; District Director Manpower & Immigration (PM 7) Ottawa District, July 19, 1976-present.
3.	Yes and he is stationed at 305 Rideau Street, Ottawa, as Official Languages Program Officer.
4.	Yes; (a) Four weeks; (b) $440.
5.	Yes; (a) Eight weeks; (b) $544.
6.	Yes; (a) The investigator and District Manager, Ottawa,
(b)	Director General, Ontario, U.I.C. (c) Yes. (i) Date to be determined based on processing of charges and court availability. (ii) Mrs. Janel Kingsley and Ronald Kingsley, (iii) Both will be charged under Section 121.1(a) of the Unemployment Insurance Act. Mrs. Janel Kingsley for false statements concerning availability while outside the country; Mr. Ronald Kingsley for false statement concerning availability while attending a school or other educational institute.
7.	The investigation is continuing and therefore the Commission is not in a position to provide information at this time.


USE OF GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT
Mr. Cossitt: Is the Minister of Agriculture aware that Question No. 41, requesting the cost of the 32 trips by himself and family members on government aircraft is still unanswered and will the Minister take steps to expedite the answer and (a) if so, on what date can an answer be expected (b) if not, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: See Beauchesne's Citation 171(a).
[Mr. Cullen.l



Mr. Cossitt: Is the Minister of Transport aware that Question No. 1,208 requesting information on the use of a DOT Jet Star by five (5) female passengers at Saskatoon Airport remains unanswered and will the Minister take steps to expedite an answer and (a) if so, on what date can an answer be expected (b) if not, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: See Beauchesne's Citation 171(a).


GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Since the answer to Question Number 3,240 of the 1st Session of the 30th Parliament which lists thirty-two trips on government aircraft by the Minister of Agriculture with his wife and members of his family, how many similar trips have been made?
2.	What was the place of origin and the destination of each trip?
3.	What was the total cost of each trip and total cost of all such trips combined?
4.	What are the names of all persons on board the aircraft on each flight?
5.	What type of aircraft was used on each trip?


Ralph Goodale: See replies to Questions No. 29 and 30 answered this day.
PAYMENTS TO FRANCISCO KR1PACZ AND/OR FRANCISCO LTD.


FOR SERVICES PERFORMED AT PRIME MINISTER'S RESIDENCES
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What was the total amount of public funds paid to Mr. Francisco Kripacz and/or Francisco Limited of 550 Sherbrooke Street West, Montreal, between April 20, 1968 and the date the answer to this question is prepared, for services performed at the Prime Minister's official residence, 24 Sussex Drive or the summer residence at Harrington Lake and, in each case, what is a full description of the services performed, work done and the cost?
2.	Since April 20, 1968, and the date the answer to this question is prepared were any services, work etc. performed for the Prime Minister at any government office occupied by him, his staff or the Privy Council by Mr. Kripacz and/or Francisco Limited and, if so, in each case, what is a full description of the services performed, work done and the cost?
3.	What was the total cost of all such services, work etc?


J. Judd Buchanan: (1)
During the period April 1, 1971 through May 2, 1977 a total of $21,969 was paid by the Department of Public Works to Mr. Francisco Kripacz and/or Francisco Limited for services performed at the Prime Minister's official residence, 24 Sussex Drive, or the summer residence at Harrington Lake. Details follow, (a) 24 Sussex Drive; (i) Selection and purchase of furniture and furnishings $1,311; (ii) Design services for alterations and furnishings $20,658; (b) Harrington Lake: None Total: $21,969.
October 17, 1977

(2)	During the period April 1, 1971 through May 2, 1977 a total of $310 was paid by the Department of Public Works to Mr. Francisco Kripacz and/or Francisco Limited for office furniture for the Prime Minister's office.
(3)	Total costs of services performed by Mr. Francisco Kripacz and/or Francisco Limited amount to $22,279.
Note: Information for the period prior to April 1, 1971 is unavailable as the Government's Record Disposal Policy requires financial information to be retained for a period of six years only.


USE OF GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT
Mr. Cossitt: Is the Prime Minister aware that Question No. 29, requesting information on Department of Transport aircraft used by Cabinet Ministers, remains unanswered and will the Prime Minister take steps to expedite the answer and (a) if so, on what date can an answer be expected (b) if not, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: See Beauchesne's Citation 171 (a) &(b).



Mr. Cossitt: Is the Prime Minister aware that Question No. 30, requesting information on Department of National Defence aircraft used by Cabinet Ministers, remains unanswered and will the Prime Minister take steps to expedite the answer and (a) if so, on what date can an answer be expected (b) if not, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: See Beauchesne's Citation 171 (a) and (b).


CEREMONIALS-BATTLE OF ATLANTIC SUNDAY, HALIFAX
Mr. McCleave: 1.	Was a decision taken not to have a political representative on behalf of the government lay a wreath on May 1, 1977, at the ceremonies commemorating Battle of Atlantic Sunday, in Halifax and, if so, who made the decision?
2.	Were federal politicians invited to pay such respects by laying a federal wreath and (a) if so, what are their names (b) if not, for what reason?


Barnett Jerome Danson: 1.
No.
2. (a) and (b) The following federal politicians were invited to attend: The Hon. R. L. Stanfield, M.P.; Mr. J. M. Forre-stall, M.P.; Mr. R. J. McCleave, M.P.
note: Wreaths were layed by the Commander Maritime Command, and the Commanding Officer of HMCS Ottawa, on behalf of the Canadian government, the Department of National Defence, and the Canadian Forces individually and collectively. Representatives of organizations, and individuals, wishing to do so, may lay wreaths during the ceremony at Halifax, on request to the Base Commander.
Order Paper Questions UIC-COMPUTER RENTAL


Mr. Fortin: 1.	During the time that Mr. Gabriel Beland was General Director of the Unemployment Insurance Commission for the Quebec Region, Mr. Robert Kingsley was Director of the Regional Payments Centre and Mr. Dorval Mainville was in charge of the computer, was the Unemployment Insurance Commission computer rented to a private company and, if so (a) for what amount (b) to whom (c) on what dates?
2.	Did they obtain the employees' complicity and, if so, in what way?
3.	What was the cost in employees' wages to the Unemployment Insurance Commission in (a) straight time (b) double time?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: The matter has been referred to the RCMP for investigation. Upon completion of the investigation the question will be answered.


AIR CANADA CARGO FLOWN TO FREDERICTON
Mr. Howie: 1.	On (a) April 20 (b) April 27, 1977, what was the total weight of cargo flown by Air Canada to Fredericton, New Brunswick directly from (i) Montreal (ii) Quebec City (iii) Toronto?
2.	How many pieces of cargo were on each flight and what formula was used by Air Canada to determine the amount of cargo?


Otto Emil Lang: The management of Air Canada advises as follows: 1. (a)(i) 3,148 pounds; (b)(i) 1,242 pounds; (a)(ii) 8 pounds; (b)(ii) 10 pounds; (a)(iii) 965 pounds; (b)(iii) 499 pounds.
2. To Fredericton
From Montreal:
From Quebec: From Toronto:
April 20, 1977
AC 640-93 pieces AC 660-6 pieces AC 674-19 pieces
AC 674-1 piece AC 642-31 pieces
April 27, 1977
AC 660-55 pieces AC 674-10 pieces
AC 674-1 piece AC 642-22 pieces
Following is the formula used to establish an aircraft's uplift capability for cargo:
1.	Establish the maximum take-off weight.
2.	Subtract the minimum fuel, aircraft weight, passengers and baggage.
3.	Having carried out the above transactions, the weight space available for cargo is established.
4.	It is at this point and time that priority of load enters the picture, eg., Air Mail takes priority over express and express over air-freight.


PRACTICE OF GRANTING OF KNIGHTHOODS AND PEERAGES DURING THIS CENTURY
Mr. Jones: 1. How many Canadians have received knighthoods and peerages during this century and, in each case, who received such honours and on what date?

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
2.	Was the practice of granting knighthoods and peerages abolished and, if so, on what date?
3.	Does the government intend to revert to this practice and, if not, for what reason?


John (Moody) Roberts: 1. Comprehensive records have not been kept concerning the number of Canadians which have received knighthoods and peerages during this century.
2.	The practice of granting knighthoods and peerages to Canadians was abolished in 1919 when the House of Commons adopted the Nickel resolution requesting King George V to cease the practice of conferring upon Canadians honours to which titles were attached. This policy has been adhered to by successive government since 1919, with the exception of the Bennett administration, which recommended 17 Canadians for knighthoods during 1934 and 1935.
3.	No. The government does not intend to revert to the practice of conferring knighthoods and peerages because to do so would not be in accord with long-standing custom and policy.


TRAVEL-TRANSPORTATION FOR MINISTER OF STATE FOR FITNESS AND AMATEUR SPORT
Mr. McKinnon: 1.	Was a government Falcon aircraft despatched to Europe for the main purpose of supplying transportation for the Minister of State for Fitness and Amateur Sport from April 20 to May 1 1, 1977?
2.	What was the total cost to the public of Falcon flight 3013, which left Canada, Uplands Airport on April 20 until the time when the Minister finished using the plane and returned to Canada?
3.	What were all the flights and the destinations of and passengers carried on Falcon number 503, between the period April 20 and May 11, 1977?


Barnett Jerome Danson: 1.
Yes.
2. See reply to Question No. 2,881.
3. See Annex A.		
Date and Place	Date and Place	No. ofof Departure	of Arrival	PassengersApr 20, 1977 Ottawa	Apr 21, 1977 Lahr	NilApr 24, 1977 Lahr	Apr 24, 1977 Zurich	NilApr 25, 1977 Zurich	Apr 25, 1977 Vienna	4Apr 27, 1977 Vienna	Apr 27, 1977 Rome	7May 2, 1977 Rome	May 2, 1977 Frankfurt	Main	6May 2, 1977 Frankfurt	May 2, 1977 Schonefeld	Main	(East Berlin)	6May 4, 1977 Schonefeld	May 4, 1977 Warsaw	5(East Berlin)	May 7, 1977 Warsaw	May 7, 1977 Vienna	5May 9, 1977 Vienna	May 9, 1977 Budapest	5May 11, 1977 Budapest	May 11, 1977 Zurich	5May 11, 1977 Zurich	May 11, 1977 Lahr	NilUIC-	MRS. ROBERT KINGSLEY


Mr. Cossitt: 1. Was Mrs. Robert Kingsley called in for an interview by the Unemployment Insurance Commission and, if so (a) did the interview take place in Rockland,

Ontario and, if not, in what location did it take place (b) on what date and at what time (c) which of the following benefit control officers from the Ottawa office of the UIC were present or conducting the interview (i) Mr. Jim Miles (ii) Mr. Andre Ethier (iii) Mr. Paul Labelle (iv) Mr. Jim MacDonald (v) Mr. Claude Charron (vi) Mr. Stan Wells (vii) Mr. Jim Harkness (viii) Mr. Brent Scarfe (ix) Mr. Archie Gauthier (x) Mr. Jim Bristol (xi) Mr. John Newfeld (d) was the purpose of the interview to interrogate Mrs. Kingsley on the question of her drawing UIC benefits while supposedly available for work whereas in actual fact she was in the United States on a vacation?
2.	Was Mrs. Kingsley accompanied at any time during the interview by her husband, Mr. Robert Kingsley, presently Canada Manpower Regional Manager of Operations working out of Ottawa and, if so (a) did Mr. Kingsley state to the UIC personnel present: "Do you know who I am?" (b) is Mr. Kingsley the same person formerly employed by the UIC as Manager of its Ottawa office, Regional Manager of the UIC Pay Centre in Montreal, etc.?
3.	Did Mr. Kingsley in any way attempt to use influence in regard to the manner in which UIC personnel dealt with his wife and, if so, what is being done about this matter?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: 1. Mrs. Kingsley was directed to attend a routine interview as a result of normal computer selection process and her claim was found in order, (a) Yes; (b) February 28, 1977 at 11:30 a.m.; (c) None; (d) No.
2.	Yes; (a) Yes; (b) yes.
3.	The investigation is continuing and therefore the commission is not in a position to provide information at this time.


WASTE CYCLING
Mr. Clarke: 1.	Has the government taken any measurements to implement the recommendation of the Gamma report that an externality tax be levied against industries as a means of controlling pollution?
2.	Has the government taken any action to encourage communities to develop their own waste system and, if so, in what manner?
3.	Has the government provided any incentives to reduce waste at the production level or has the government taken any measures to promote production of goods that create minimum environmental problems?
4.	Has the government considered increasing the number of subsidies to recycle companies?
5.	Is the government presently providing any research and development grants to recycling industries and, if so (a) to whom (b) in what amounts?
6.	Do the same tax advantages exist for recycling industries as those which exist for industries classified as engaged in a manufacturing, mining or processing function and (a) if so, what are they (b) if not, what differences exist?
7.	Are freight rates applied to virgin materials less than those applied to recycled materials and, if so, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Finance, Fisheries and the Environment, Industry, Trade and Commerce, National Revenue and Transport as follows; 1. An externality tax would impose a levy on the output of pollution. In order to be effective and equitable, such a tax would have to be graduated according to the harm done by various pollutants, which varies by type, quantity, geographical location, and presence or absence of other substances in the atmosphere or water. Of course, continuous monitoring of the output of pollution at the plant, apartment and household level would be necessary in order to determine the tax base. Any implementation of such a tax would have to await detailed knowledge of the harm done by various pollutants and
October 17, 1977

the setting up of a complex and undoubtedly costly apparatus for administration. It is not clear that this is the most cost-effective approach to pollution problems.
2.	The operation of municipal solid waste management systems in Canada is a municipal or local government responsibility under provincial jurisdiction, and to date there has been no direct Federal Government involvement in such matters, other than at Federal establishments or where federal government wastes are involved. Fisheries and Environment Canada do provide indirect assistance in the form of technology transfers, seminars on waste management and on request acting as an exchange for information and advice on the subject.
3.	The Department of Fisheries and the Environment in co-operation with other Departments is actively studying waste reduction at the production level but to date has not provided incentives in this regard.
4.	The Department of Fisheries and the Environment has considered subsidies for recycling industries. At this time there is no assurance that subsidies would substantially increase the quantities of material recycled. Other aids to recycling are being considered.
5.	As far as the Department of Fisheries and the Environment is concerned, no grants are being provided specifically to recycling industries at present; however, studies are being conducted to provide information which will greatly aid these industries. As far as the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, recycling industries are eligible to receive contributions for research and development projects under the Enterprise Development Program. No applications have been received from recycling industries for assistance under the Program at the present time.
6.	Certain recycling operations have been classified as manufacturing or producing under the Excise Tax Act. So far, they include recycling of scrap metals, glass, and scrap or reclaimed paper. Recyclers of these goods may acquire production equipment exempt from sales tax to the same extent as other manufacturers or producers.
7.	There is no railway policy concerning rate levels on recycled material versus those on raw materials. Generally railways assess rates on the basis of cost, value of service, and market conditions. As an example, rates per ton of scrap iron are normally higher than rates for iron ore. Scrap iron is more valuable than iron ore in the market place and therefore can bear a larger transportation charge. Railways take advantage of cost savings from the large volume movements normally associated with iron ore, and these savings are reflected in rates. Unit or solid trains, reduced switching times, dedicated equipment and other such efficiencies created through economies of scale can reduce costs and can therefore allow a lower level of rates on these movements compared to commodities which cannot take advantage of these cost saving practices.
Order Paper Questions


EXPENSES PAID TO HON. MEMBER FOR PORT ARTHUR
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the total of all expenses paid by the Department of Supply and Services or any other branch of the government, directly or indirectly, for the honourable Member for Port Arthur while (a) Minister without Portfolio (b) Minister of State for Urban Affairs (c) Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (d) Minister of Manpower and Immigration (e) President of the Treasury Board?
2.	What is the total of all expenses paid for the Minister while serving in the five positions?


Ralph Goodale: See reply to Question No. 2,027 answered this day.


BAIL GRANTED ON DRUG OFFENCES
Mr. Johnston: How many times has bail been granted on a drug offence since the proclamation of the most recent law relating to bail and drug offences?


Stanley Ronald Basford: Statistics of the scope sought by this question are not available. However, the Department of Justice did undertake a selective monitoring of the effects of amendments made to the Criminal Code in 1976 (see Chapter 93, Statutes of Canada, 23-24-25 Elizabeth II) with respect to bail procedures. In four Canadian cities, two matched samples of approximately 3,550 pre-change and 3,550 post-change cases were collected: Montreal (2,000), Ottawa (900), Toronto (2,200), and Vancouver (2,000). These were cases of persons charged with offences under the Criminal Code (excluding traffic offences) or under the Narcotic Control Act who were in custody when they made their first appearance on the charge before a court and who were not in custody for any other matter at the time. Persons who pleaded guilty at their first appearance or at a Show Cause hearing were also excluded as no decision on pre-trial release had to be made with respect to them. The following table indicates the results in relation to persons charged with drug offences covered by the amendments in the four cities in the time frame of the survey:
Pre-trial Release of Persons Charged with Drug Offences
Number	Number	Percentagein Sample	Released	ReleasedOttawa	1975	10	7	701976	38	31	82Montreal	1975	87	84	971976	63	48	76Toronto	1975	47	42	891976	68	64	94Vancouver	1975	75	69	921976	29	23	79


PRIME MINISTER'S TRIP TO ANTICOSTI ISLAND
Mr. Cossitt: I. With reference to the answer to Question No. 69 of the 1st Session of the 30th Parliament which stated in part, that the Prime Minister made a private trip to Anticosti Island from August 14 to 17, 1974 and with further reference to
8246

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
the answer to Question No. 5,342 of the same Session that the cost to the taxpayer was $4,927., did the Prime Minister spend any or all of his visit with Mr. Paul Desmarais, President of the Power Corporation and, if so (a) for what purpose (b) what were the reasons justifying such use of public funds (c) did the discussions include matters concerning government policy or the Liberal Party of Canada or donations to the Liberal Party of Canada?
2.	What are the names of all those on board the aircraft flying to and from Anticosti Island and does the list include Mr. Simon Reisman, Deputy Minister of Finance at that time and, if not, did Mr. Reisman visit Mr. Paul Desmarais at the same time as the Prime Minister?
3.	Did Mr. James Coutts, principal secretary to the Prime Minister, at any time visit Anticosti Island and meet with Mr. Desmarais, and, if so, on what date and for what purpose?


Ralph Goodale: 1 and 2, See reply to question 2,881 answered today.
3. No.


TRAVEL-TRIP TO SANDSPIT AIRPORT IN QUEEN CHARLOTTE ISLANDS
Mr. Firth: Did a Falcon Fan Jet No. 502 from Squadron 412 in Ottawa make a trip to Sandspit Airport in the Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia on the weekend of April 29 to May 1, 1977 and, if so (a) who were the passengers on the flight (b) what was the purpose of the visit?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of National Defence and the Secretary of State as follows: Yes. The aircraft was assigned to the Secretary of State for Canada who was using it on official government business. See answer to Question No. 2,881.


THE BOOKCELLAR, HAMILTON, ONTARIO
Mr. O'Sullivan: 
Ralph Goodale: (a) Department of Employment and Immigration-$533.25; (b)(i) 1972-73-Nil; (ii) 1973-74-Manpower Training Program ($516.00); (iii) 1974-75-Purchase of Books ($17.25); (iv) 1975-76-Nil; (v) 1976-77-Nil; Other departments have no information on this subject.


WAREHOUSE SPACE OWNED OR LEASED BY DSS
Mr. Bawden: 1.	Does the Department of Supply and Services own or lease warehouse space and, if so, in each case, what is the location?
2.	For each location, what was the number of square feet of warehousing space available for the years 1971 to 1977?
3.	What projected number of square feet of warehousing space will be required by the Department for the years 1977 to 1979?
4.	Does the Department anticipate a consolidation of warehouse space and, if so (a) what are the details (b) is any study presently being done on the feasibility of consolidation or reduction of such space?

5.	Is there a mark-up for items sold from the DSS warehouses to other government departments and, if so, what is it?
6.	Is there a mark-up for goods that are not stored in DSS warehouses but which are purchased directly from manufacturers for customers by DSS and, if so, what is it?
7.	Do other government departments maintain warehouses for their own use as opposed to keeping their goods or equipment in the DSS warehouses and, if so, which departments?
8.	Does the Department maintain warehouses outside of Canada and, if so (a) in what locations (b) is the Department giving consideration to closing them down?
9.	Is there a mark-up and charge for providing the service of warehousing to other government departments and, if so, what is it?


Ralph Goodale: was leased through DPW in November 1974 to provide a warehouse service for the Canadian Dairy Commission.
Note 3: The Capital Region Supply Centre's prime storage facility is a permanent warehouse of 274,500 sq. ft. in the Plouffe Park warehouse, Ottawa, which is Government owned and leased from DPW. It also occupies semi-permanent warehouse space at 45 Sacre-Coeur Blvd., Hull. Year to year space requirements within this building vary from a high of 188,000 sq. ft. in 1975 to its present low of approximately 150,000 sq. ft. Additionally, varying amounts of warehousing space have been and continue to be leased through DPW from the private sector primarily as a warehouse service to meet storage needs of other government departments. Currently 81,000 sq. ft. of such space is being leased in the O'Keefe building in Ottawa. Note 4: Ontario Region Supply Centre opened in April 1972. The facility is Government owned.
Note 5: Western Region Supply Centre opened in April 1973 in accommodations shared with MOT in a Government owned facility of 30,000 sq. ft. In January 1976 a privately owned facility of 76,000 sq. ft. was leased through DPW. DSS continued to operate a warehouse service for MOT in the 30,000 ft. facility.
Note 6: Pacific Region Supply Centre opened in November 1974. The facility is privately owned and leased through DPW.
3 and 4. There are ongoing studies relating to warehouse space utilized by DSS and other departments with a view to reduction through consolidation.
5.	Yes. Varying mark-ups are applied to different commodities, designed to produce an overall gross margin of 32 per cent.
6.	No, but a service charge is levied at Treasury Board approved rates.
7.	The Department of Public Works does not maintain a listing of other government departments who maintain warehouses for their own use; however, it is known that many do for their own operational requirements such as Public Works, Transport, National Revenue, Post Office.
8.	No. (a) Not applicable (b) Not applicable.
9.	Yes. 1. 40 cents/sq. ft. for storage space; 2. Small van with driver, $ 15/hr; 3. Large vehicle with driver and helper, $23.50/hr; 4. Export packaging, $3.50/cubic ft.


EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENTS AND CATEGORIES
[Stage Direction]
Question No. 2,675-Mr. Orlikow: (Revised)
On April 30 (a) 1976 (b) 1974, how many persons were employed by each department at the CO-4 level?
Robert Knight Andras: The number of persons employed at the CO-4 level on April 30 (a) 1976 (b) 1974 by each department is shown on the following list.
Order Paper Questions CO-4*
Department or Agency	(a) 1976	(b)1974CCA	9	13CDC	1	COM	2	3CSM	3	DND	1	1DOE	2	1DPW	1	DSS	1	FIN	1	FIR	5	IAN	6	3INS	3	3ITC	119	107MID	1	REA	5	2REE	45	33RTC	2	2
Because of a transcription error, the answer previoulsy provided was applicable to the number of incumbents at the CS-5 level.


NEW LOGO FOR TELEGLOBE CANADA
Mr. Crouse: 1.	Who designed the new logo for Teleglobe Canada?
2.	Was the design contract put out to tender and, if not, in what manner was it obtained?
3.	(a) What was the cost of the new logo (b) what was the estimated cost of converting from the old to the new design?


Hon. Jeanne Sauv6 (Minister of Communications):: 1.
Foster Advertising Company Ltd., 3 Place Ville Marie, Montreal.
2.	The design work was requested of Foster Advertising within the framework of an existing global contract between Teleglobe Canada and Foster Advertising for the provision of advertising and publicity services. Foster Advertising was awarded this contract by Teleglobe following submissions by a number of advertising agencies.
3.	(a) Total payments to Foster Advertising for the Corporate identification program amounted to $20,791.55 (authorizations of expenditures Nos. 13376, 13377 and 14268). Of this amount, $8,310.19 was charged for development of the logo itself and the balance of typewetting, mechanical revision, applications on letterheads, buildings, trucks, etc. (b) The cost of conversion resulted, not from the design of a new logo, but from the change of the Corporation's name from Canadian Overseas Telecommunication Corporation to Teleglobe Canada. The new logo was designed to integrate the existing symbol with the new name which was approved by Parliament in an amendment to the Teleglobe Canada Act. There were no additional costs involved in conversion to the new logo as far as forms and stationery are concerned. Identification of buildings and vehicles under the new logo is just underway and estimated costs are not yet available. The approximate cost of producing the graphics manual is $10,000.
80020-57'/2

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions NATIONAL FILM BOARD


Mr. Friesen: 1.	In 1976, how many original motion pictures were produced by the National Film Board and, in each case (a) how many minutes long was it (b) what was the average cost?
2.	In 1976, how many original motion pictures were contracted out by the National Film Board to the private sector and, in each case (a) for how long (b) what was the average cost?


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the National Film Board as follows: 1. (a) In 1976-77 there were 104 original motion pictures produced by the National Film Board; the running time of each film is listed below:
Running Time Title(minutes)
*A Very Important Place	7
The Canadian Air Connection	8
*Nouvelles conceptions	17
*1 Cag Story	16
*ToMakeaMap	21
*Du coeur a l'ouvrage	19
*A Working Chance	22
Citizen Sailor	23
*D'une mer a 1'autre	23
Engineering With a Difference	20
The Land, a New Priority	28
People Like You	26
The First Year	37
Operation Gamescan	58
What Do You Do	7
Summary Trial	23
Drinking	21
New Reserves Role 2	13
The Wings of Time	28
River (Planet Earth)	28
Schefferville, 4th Arctic Winter Games	27
I'll Go Again	41
The World Is Round	53
Henry Ford's America	57
The Great Clean-Up	52
A Sense of Place	57
Passage West-A Dream of Freedom	52
Passage West-The Awakening	54
The Great White Bird	52
The Mad Canadian	10
Runing Time	80
Sail Away	18
For Gentlemen Only	28
Striker	25
Bargain Basement	27
Porter's Magic Dream	14
Earthware	10
Metal Workers	10
Threads	10
Wax and Wool	10
Maud Lewis	10
First Born	10
The Art of Eating	11
Mac's Mill	12
Christ Is Risen	13
Augusta	17
Tara's Mulch Garden	21
No Big Money	15
A Simpler Life	17
Salmon People	25
The Other World	19
Blackwood	28
Log House	25
Potatoes	27
A Sense of Humus	28
Waterloo Farmers	28
The Whales Are Waiting	28
Child, Part IV-Kathy and Ian	29
No Way They Want to Slow Down	29
Path of The Paddle-Solo Flatwater	28
Path of The Paddle-Solo Whitewater	28
Path of The Paddle-Doubles Flatwater	28
Path of the Paddle-Doubles Whitewater	28
Bekavar Jubilee	27
Some People Have to Suffer	43
Have I Ever Lied to You Before	57
His Worship Mr. Montreal	58
High Grass Circus	57
Moses Coady	58
Volcano	99
Temiscaming	64
Listen, Listen, Listen	83
The Lion and The Mouse	4
Lady Fishbourne's Complete Guide to Better Manners	6
No Apple for Johnny	9
*3 Genies associes	24
Surtout 1'hiver	68
Wamba "Entre l'eau et le feu"	91
Etmocidio Ethnocide	131
Blanche et Claire	20
La difference	15
Le gout de la farine	108
L'heure bleue	39
L'interdit	88
L'invasion (1775-1975)	11
Les jardins d'hiver	86
J. A. Martin photographe	101
Monsieur journault	65
La nuit du 8	28
On s'pratique... C'est pour les Olympiques	59
Les petits inventeurs	59
Puzzle	7
Le retour a la terre	57
Rien qu'en passant	38
Rose et Monsieur Charbonneau	71
Shakti	56
Une simple journee	12
Ti-Dre	56
Ti-Mine, Bernie pis la gang	124
La veillee des veillees	95
Les vieux amis	52
24 heures ou plus	113
Le paysagiste/mindscape	7
Trouvailles ou bizarreries thingumajigs	6
1(b) The average cost per Film was $99,640.
2(a) In 1976-77 there were 41 original motion pictures contracted out by the National Film Board to the private sector; the running time of each Film is listed below:
Running Time
Title	(minutes)
The Good Land	15
Safety Procedures Aboard Commercial Aircraft	5
Garden of The Great Spirit	12
Systems Approach to Training	20
October 17, 1977

Guatemala	30
Fitness Trails	5
Customs and Excise	25
What's In It For Me	10
Identity Film	15
About Canadian Citizenship	15
The Beauty of My People	27
Winter in Canada	27
David Steinberg and Metric	30
The Snowbirds	14
Militia: Twice The Citizen	20
Wings Across	20
The Eagle	15
Doiem	15
Defense-Energy Conservation	10
Oniniki	12
Metric T.V. Special	60
National Highway Metric Commission	10
You're Hired	30
Saddle Your Own Bronc	22
"Community Education"-7 films	85
Construction Engineering	15
Grain Sector Metric Conversion	8
Lowering and Hoisting and Seaberer	22
Towing at Sea	12
Coming To and Slipping From A Buoy	16
Canadian Forces Officer School	20
The Campus and The Sea	20
Signs of Suicide	30
Security on Post Office	7
Parc de l'artillerie	10
2(b) The average cost per film was $28,124.
Additional information
Of the 104 original productions by NFB, 19 films (*) were produced for sponsoring federal government departments.
The average length of each film was 21 minutes and the average cost per film was $59,954.


RELIGIOUS SECTS
Mr. Friesen: 1.	In (a) 1974 (b) 1975 (c) 1976 was the government approached by diplomatic representatives of foreign countries in Canada on behalf of their nationals requesting assistance in their removal and/or their dependants from orders such as (i) the Apostles of Infinite Love (ii) the Church of Scientology (iii) Hari Krishna (iv) similar groups and, if so, how many times and what were the names of the Embassies and High Commissions?
2.	In each case (a) how many individuals and what sects were involved (b) what action was taken by the Departments of External Affairs and Manpower and Immigration?
3.	How many of the individuals concerned are in the country on a (a) visa (b) student visa and, in each case, how many times has the visa been renewed and for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of External Affairs and Employment and Immigration as follows: 1. Only the Embassy of Belgium approached the Department of External Affairs in September 1976 to request assistance for the return of one of its nationals. The Embassy had been asked for help by the parents of the individual.
Order Paper Questions
2.	(a) One, the Order of the Apostles of Infinite Love; (b) On being informed by the Department of Manpower and Immigration that the status in Canada of the Belgian person concerned was in accordance with the Immigration requirements and since the individual was of legal age, the Department of External Affairs notified the Belgian Embassy that no intervention was possible to return the person to Belgium.
3.	(a) and (b) Citizens of Belgium do not require visas to visit Canada.


PRIME MINISTER'S TRIPS
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is a list of all flights taken by the Prime Minister on government aircraft in the recent by-election campaigns, including points of departure and arrival, dates and times, the exact cost of each flight including flying time, waiting time, fuel and wages of the crew?
2.	What was the total of all expenses incurred for such flights?
3.	Was the Liberal Party billed for such flights and, if so (a) on what date (b) in what amount and to whom was the bill sent (c) on what date was it paid and who was the cheque made payable to and who signed the cheque?
4.	Did the Prime Minister decide to have the Liberal Party pay for such flights and, if so, was the decision made before or immediately after the Honourable Member for Leeds raised the matter in the House on May 31, 1977?


Ralph Goodale: 1. See replies to questions 29 and 30 answered today.
2 to 4. See reply to question 2,881 answered today.


MR. ROBERT KINGSLEY
Mr. Cossitt: Has Mr. Robert Kingsley, Canada Manpower Regional Manager of Operations, stationed in Ottawa, in any way whatsoever been relieved of his title, duties etc. and, if so (a) was he suspended or transferred to another position or dismissed on or about the end of May, 1977 (b) what are the reasons for any changes made in connection with his employment and dit they have anything to do with claims made by his wife and son for unemployment insurance to which they were not entitled (c) was any change made in his status as a result of UIC or RCMP investigations into any misuse of the UIC computer in Montreal at the time Mr. Kingsley was Regional Manager of the UIC Pay Centre in that city?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: Mr. Kingsley has assumed a temporary assignment as a member of a project group responsible for developing a plan for the relocation of the national headquarters offices of the Unemployment Insurance Commission and the Department of Manpower and Immigration, (a) No. (b) Mr. Kingsley was selected as a member of the project group on the basis of his experience and knowledge of the operations and programs of both the Unemployment Insurance Commission and the Department of Manpower and Immigration, and of the logistical factors affecting a major relocation of staff, (c) No.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions COST OF TROPICAL PLANTS


Mr. Jones: 1.	What is the cost per year for the upkeep of tropical plants in the various government offices in the City of Moncton?
2.	(a) How many government offices across the country are provided with tropical plants (b) what is the total cost of maintaining them (c) what was the cost in 1976 (d) what is the estimated cost for 1977?
3.	What (a) was the cost for 1976 (b) is the estimated cost for 1977 of maintaining the plants in the Province of New Brunswick?


J. Judd Buchanan: 1.
$3,607.20 for 1977-by contract.
2.	(a) In the National Capital Region, there were 120 buildings which had tropical plants in July 1977. This total figure is presently fluid as moves to buildings in Hull and elsewhere are being made. However, in the rest of Canada, where accommodation changes are smaller in number and where the concentration is lower, there were 401 offices with tropical plants, (b) See (c) and (d); (c) $357,554.60 for 1976;
(d)	$413,612.06 (estimated) for 1977.
3.	(a) Nil; (b) $5,000.00 (estimated).


STUDIES MADE BY GOVERNMENT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF OIL SPILLS
Mr. Friesen: 1.	Were studies made by the government on the environmental impact of an oil spill in the Semiahmoo Bay and Mud Bay areas and, if so, how many have been completed?
2.	(a) What was the length of time taken to complete each (b) on what date were they completed (c) what was the cost of each?
3.	Does the government intend to use the White Rock Federal Building as a Pollution Alert Centre?
4.	In the event of an oil spill in the Surrey-White Rock area as a result of oil tankers using the Cherry Point facility is there oil pollution clean-up equipment available and, if so (a) what is the nearest location (c) what is the nature of the equipment (c) what is the estimated time it would take for the equipment to reach the White Rock area (d) how many personnel are permanently assigned to operate the equipment?
5.	Does the government have any plans to locate oil clean-up equipment in the City of White Rock?
6.	(a) What is the estimated value of any government installation, i.e. piers, wharfs, DOT facilities etc., on the Semiahmoo Bay, Mud Bay, Boundary Bay shoreline (b) what is a description of each of these facilities?
7.	How much money has the government contributed through LIP, Canada Works and Young Canada Works to environmental projects in the Boundary Bay, Mud Bay, Semiahmoo Bay, Serpentine Fen area of the lower mainland of B.C. in (a) 1974 (b) 1975 (c) 1976 (d) 1977?
8.	Does the government have any training programme in place in B.C. for the purpose of instructing its employees and/or interested citizens in oil spill clean-up procedures and, if not, is it the intention to establish such a programme?
9.	Has the government held any discussions with the local city and municipal governments of Surrey, White Rock, Richmond and Delta with respect to clean-up procedures, their financing and implementation and, if so, on what date and what was their conclusion?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Fisheries and the Environment, Employment and Immigration and Transport Canada as follows: 1. Yes, two by the Department of Fisheries and the Environment.

2.	The first study was a joint Headquarters/Regional effort. It resulted in the report entitled "The Environmental Consequences of the Proposed Oil Transport between Valdez and Cherry Point Refinery" and was dated August 5, 1971. Costing is indeterminate as internal staff time was involved. The second study was carried out by the firm of consultants Howard Paish and Associates Ltd. It resulted in the report entitled "West Coast Oil Threat in Perspective". The three volume report was six months under preparation and is dated April 1, 1972. Cost of the report was $50,000.
3.	No. The Canadian Coast Guard Pollution Emergency Centre is established at its VTM Centre, Kapilano 100, West, Vancouver.
4.	(a) Equipment is based at Richmond, Vancouver and Victoria, B.C. and also, Bellingham, Wash, (b) Equipment is used for the containment and removal of spilled oil both on the water and the shore, as well as pumping out damaged vessels, (c) Minimum two hours deployment time, (d) None dedicated, but Canadian Coast Guard ship and base personnel are trained and available for this task.
5.	Not at this time.
6.	Government Wharf, Float and Breakwater, White Rock, B.C. Administered by Fisheries and Environment Canada. Estimated replacement value 1970: Float, $9,000; Breakwater, $280,000; Wharf, $186,000; Total, $475,000. Government Wharf and Float, Crescent Beach, B.C. Administered by Fisheries and Environment Canada. Float, $5,000; Wharf, $26,000; Total, $31,000. 1977 replacement value considered to be approximately three times those of 1970. 7. (a) 1974-75 LIP, $56,569; (b) 1975-76 LIP, $60,060; (c) 1976-77 LIP, $433,160; (d) 1977-78 Canada Works Program $279,384.
8.	Both the Canadian Coast Guard of the Ministry of Transport, and the Environmental Protection Service of the Department of Fisheries and the Environment ensure the training of its employees in oil spill cleanup procedures through attendance at in-house, and out of house training programmes, seminars and conferences. In-house exercises are carried out at intervals with attendance by Port Authority, industry personnel and employees of other government departments. The private sector and other levels of government are encouraged to develop and sponsor similar training programmes for the benefit of their respective staff to enable them to better deal with and direct on-scene oil spill containment and cleanup countermeasures. Already several major industries, groups and agencies within the province of B.C. have done so. This includes the B.C. Petroleum Association, Provincial Emergency Program, MacMillan Bloedel Limited and the Burrard Inlet Working Group to name four. In all instances both the Ministry of Transport and the Department of Fisheries and the Environment have actively supported the programmes through an advisory and/or participatory capacity.
9.	A seminar covering these subjects was held on May 29 and 30, 1975 at U.B.C. Surrey, Richmond, Delta and White Rock representatives were among the participants. The expla-
October 17, 1977

nation of government resources plans and techniques was well received.


UIC-MR. ROBERT VANTANGERLOO
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Was Mr. Robert Vantangerloo appointed District Manager of the Unemployment Insurance Commission office in Ottawa to succeed Mr. F. Leblanc and, if so (a) on what date (b) at what salary (c) what were the reasons for his appointment?
2.	Since the date of his appointment, how many working days has he actually been present in his office and what are the reasons for all absences?
3.	Was Mr. Vantangerloo formerly stationed with the Commission in Belleville and has he moved to Ottawa since his appointment and (a) if so, on what date did he move (b) if not, what is the total amount of money involved to the taxpayer for all trips he has made to or from the Ottawa office and in each case, where has he been and for what purpose?
4.	Is he on full expenses and, if so, what is the amount of all expenses paid on his behalf from the date of his appointment in Ottawa to date the answer to this questions is prepared?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: 1.	No. Mr. Vantangerloo is currently on assignment as acting District Manager, Ottawa, (a) April 18, 1977. (b) His salary scale is $24,200 to $34,800. (c) Mr. Vantangerloo's assignment is for career development purposes.
2.	From April 18 to June 10 he was present for 27 days and absent for 12 days: Five days to serve as a member of a competition board; two days to attend Regional Management Conference; five days of annual leave.
3.	Yes, he was stationed in Belleville from September 10, 1974 until April 19, 1976, and he was then in London, Ontario, until assignment to Ottawa. He has not moved to Ottawa as his assignment is only on a temporary basis, (a) Not applicable, (b) Nil. April 18, London to Ottawa to report for assignment. April 22, Ottawa to London to return home. April 24, London to Ottawa to return to work. April 29, Ottawa to London to return home. May 1, London to Ottawa to return to work. May 7, Ottawa to London to return home. May 8, London to Ottawa to return to work. May 14, Ottawa to London to attend competition board as a member May 16-20. May 22, London to Ottawa to return to work. May 24, Ottawa to Toronto to attend Management Conference May 25-26. May 26, Toronto to London to return home. May 29, London to Ottawa to return to work. June 3, Ottawa to London to return home. June 5, London to Ottawa to return to work. June 10, Ottawa to London to return home.
4.	Yes. $2,803.56.


UIC-MR. RICHARD SULLIVAN
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the history of the employment with the Unemployment Insurance Commission of Mr. Richard Sullivan and specifically what appointment does he hold at the present time in the Ottawa office of the Commission or elsewhere?
2.	Has any official of the Commission been advised by any member of the Commission's staff or any member of the public that Mr. Sullivan is conducting a "Reign of Terror" in connection with whatever duties he is performing at the Ottawa District office and if so, what are all the details?
Order Paper Questions


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: 1.	Head Office Ottawa-Staffing Officer; November 1971-October 1972. Regional Office Belleville-Staffing Officer; October 1972-April 1974-Supervisor, Personnel Operations, April 1974-March 1975-Area Personnel Advisor, March 1975-August 1976-Senior Operations Officer, August 1976-Present. At the present time Mr. Sullivan is a Senior Operations Officer reporting to the Director of Operations, East.
2.	No.


FRANCE-CANADA RELATIONS
Mr. Jones: 1.	Is the government aware that (a) French Nationals have been on the staff and faculty of the University of Moncton and other Canadian universities or colleges in Canada, in lieu of serving an extra year in the military in France (b) French Nationals have been on the staff of L'Evangeline newspaper, Moncton, in lieu of serving in the military in France (c) France has established a full consulate office in Moncton, New Brunswick (d) France has paid for substantial portions of the equipment used in L'Evangeline newspaper, Moncton (e) France has taken steps to substantially increase the size of the (i) airport (ii) harbour for the islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon (0 France has plans to and is negotiating for establishment of a high powered television and/or radio station which will be beamed into parts of Eastern Canada and, if so, in each case, to what extent has the government studied or given consideration to such matters?
2.	Have negotiations taken place between France and Canada over the past five years and, if so, what are they?
3.	(a) How many French Nationals were employed in Canada in the years 1963 to 1977 (b) in what locations and in what manner were they employed (c) was special immigration clearance necessary to facilitate their employment terms and, if so, what are the details?
4.	(a) How many French Nationals have received Canadian citizenship over the past ten years (b) where are such persons presently employed?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of External Affairs, Employment and Immigration and the Secretary of State as follows: 1. (a) The government is aware that French nationals have worked and are working on the staff of Canadian educational institutions in lieu of military service in France; this is done with the full knowledge of the government, (b) Yes. The government is fully aware of this and has satisfied itself that it conforms to Canadian law and regulations, (c) Yes. The government is fully aware of this and has satisfied itself that it conforms to Canadian law and regulations, (d) Yes. The government is fully aware of this and has judged that there is nothing objectionable in the arrangement. (e) The government is aware of projects to increase the size of airport and harbour facilities at St-Pierre; these are not a source of concern to the government. (0 The government is aware that there are plans to improve radio and television broadcasting facilities in St-Pierre et Miquelon and is in touch with the French authorities with a view to being kept informed of the development of such plans as they may affect Canada. No negotiations are under way at the present time.
2. Negotiations have taken place between Canada and France in a wide range of areas, notably fisheries, air transport, telecommunications, territorial elimitation, economic relations, and scientific relations.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
3. (a) and (b); Statistics are not kept regarding the employ- employment visas destined to the provinces indicated in the ment of immigrants after they are admitted to Canada. From following occupations. Statistics for the period 1963 to 1972 1973 to May 1977, 5,956 French nationals were issued are not available as employment visas were not introduced 

 until 1973.
Nfld. P.E.I. N.S. N.B. Que. Ont. Man. Sask. Alta. B.C. Y. NWT.
Manager-Adminstr.	2	-	10	6	246	33	7	5	21	5	Nat. Scien.-Eng.-Math.	50	-	102	3	281	63	3	26	110	9	2Social Sciences	-	-	2	-	62	20	1	Religion	-	-	-	1	21	-	-	1	1Teaching	12	-	20	15	1067	253	31	18	23	26	Medicine-Health	-	-	-	5	289	6	1	1	Artist.-Lit.-Per. Art.	3	-	8	6	239	65	6	5	6	20	2Sports-Recreation	-	-	-	-	27	9	-	-	8	3	Clerical	-	-	1	-	105	24	1	3	7	4	Sales	-	-	2	-	68	12	1	-	i	2	Service	5	2	24	1	289	166	5	6	75	15	Farm-Hort.-Ani. Husb.	-	-	1	-	49	1209	70	8	35	15	Fish-Hunt-T rap	2	-	1	-	4	-	-	Forest-Logging	-	-	-	-	8	2	-	-	Mine-Quarry-Oil Gas	-	-	-	-	6	-	-	-	27	-	1Processing	-	-	3	1	36	7	-	-	2	1	3Machining	-	-	3	-	23	6	-	-	3	-	Pro. Fab.-Ass.-Repair	2	-	31	1	99	19	2	3	10	1	Construction	-	-	6	1	41	7	2	5	1	Transport	7	-	2	-	15	3	-	8	Material Handling	-	-	-	-	8	4	2	1	1	Other Crafts-Equip.	-	-	-	-	8	3	-	-	6	Not Classified - - 2 3. (c) No. They met normal immigration requirements.	30 9 4. (a) 18,749 (b) No statistical	- 3 data available.	1


GRANTS, LOANS AND COMMITMENTS-QUEBEC AND PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND CENTRES
Mr. MacKay: 1.	Between January 1 and May 31, 1977, how many grants, loans and other commitments were made by CMHC in the Constituency of (a) Verdun (b) Terrebonne (c) Langelier (d) Temiscamingue (e) Louis-Hebert (0 Malpeque?
2.	For each such Constituency, during the months of March, April and May 1977, what was the amount, purpose and name of the recipient or recipients of such grants, loans or other commitments?


Hon. Andre Ouellet (Minister of State for Urban Affairs):: 1
am advised as follows by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation: 1 and 2. See Table 1 following. note: Data compiled by CMHC on activities under the National Housing Act are based on municipalities and municipal counties and not on federal electoral constituencies.


POST OFFICE ADVERTISING
Mr. McKenzie: 1.	Did the Post Office Department commission an advertising agency to produce the brochure and postal code stickers "2 ways you can help yourself to better mail service" and, if so, what was the (a) cost (b) name and address of the firm?
2.	(a) What was the printing cost (b) how many were produced (c) what was the total cost (including printing, production, distribution, etc.)?
3.	What was the name and address of the firm that was contracted to produce the brochure and stickers?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. (a) and (b) The
creative aspects of the national postal householder package

(brochure and postal code sticker sheets) were developed under contract with B & B Advertising Ltd., 1010 St. Catherine Street W., Montreal, Quebec. Cost: SI 1,400*.
2.	(a) and (b) Overall production of the householder was handled through the Department of Supply and Services contracts, after the normal procedure of bidding and tendering. Seven and one-half million householders were produced. Itemized contract costs are as follows: envelope-$63,630.00; brochure-$69,503.98; stickers-$70,371.75; mailing preparation-$33,750.00; and primary distribution-$11,400.00*. (c) Total cost-$248,655.73.
3.	Printing production of the brochure was awarded under DSS contract to: Gazette Canadian Printing Ltd., 1000 St. Antoine St., Montreal, Quebec H3C 3R7. Similarly, contract for production of the stickers was awarded to: Southam Printing Ltd., Specialty Division, P.O. Box 1079, Montreal, Quebec H3C 2X6.


CUPW-NEW COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	Did the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) submit a list of demands on April 20, 1977 to be included in a new collective agreement being negotiated and did the Public Affairs Branch of the Post Office Department in Ottawa send a TELEX on April 19 to subordinate headquarters and/or postal facilities across Canada setting out the demands in detail and, if so, by what method did the Public Affairs Branch obtain particulars of the demands before April 20?


NHA ACTIVITY (1), SELECTED MUNICIPALITIES AND MUNICIPAL COUNTIES, PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND AND QUEBEC, JANUARY-MAY 1977
[Stage Direction]
Program
Queens County, P.E.I. L'Assomption Co. T6miscamingue Co. Terrebonne Co. Loans Units $000 Loans Units; $000 Loans Units $000 Loans Units $000
St-Felix-du-Cap-
Rouge	Ste-Foy	Sillery	Quebec City Verdun
Units
Loans Units $000 Loans Units $000 Loans Units $000 Loans Units $000 Loans $000
Private Mortgage Market
Approved Lenders Sec. 6
CMHC-Home Owner Sec. 58/59
CMHC-Assisted Home Owner S.C.H.L. Sec. 34.15 Social Housing Co-operatives Sec. 34.18
Community Revitalization Loans
Residential Rehabilitation Sec.
34.1
Neighbourhood Improvement Sec. 27.5 Grants
Neighbourhood Improvement Sec.
27.2
Infrastructure
Loans
Water and Sewerage Projects Sec. 51
Grants
Water and Sewerage (non-NHA) Sec. 56.2 Municipal Incentive Sec. 56.2
4	4	101	343 398 11,149	39	41 1,1002	2 25594	724 20,1977	7	2091	78 1,87275	75	346	-	-	-	-	89	356-	-	-	2	-	174	-	-	24	-	-	--	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	336	-	-	-36	-	-289	289(1)	Data are gross.(2)	Excluding Charlottetown.1	1	32	89	89 2,775	2	2	82	248	849 20,573	31 53 814-	-	1-	-	291	-	640	-6	43	
63	245	
[Stage Direction]
-	1,184	
[Stage Direction]
-	-	-	-	580	580
[Stage Direction]


s:
October 17, 1977	_____COMMONS DEBATES__________________________8253
[Stage Direction]
October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
2.	Should such a communication have been sent out by Treasury Board, designated as the employer in the current collective agreement with CUPW?
Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. CUPW, on April 20, 1977, submitted a list of demands in the form of a 12 page CUPW newspaper, previously published, quoted in the Toronto Globe and Mail of April 13, 1977, and dated March, 1977. Post Office ComTeam communicated a 170 word summary, via telex, on April 21, 1977 at 17:05 eastern standard time.
2.	No.


MINISTER OF STATE FOR FITNESS AND AMATEUR SPORT-COST OF EUROPEAN TOUR
Mr. Yewchuk: Was a tour conducted through Europe by the Minister of State for Fitness and Amateur Sport, Dr. Roger Jackson, Director of Sport Canada and Mr. Geoff Gowan, Technical Director of the Coaching Association of Canada, from April 24 to May 12, 1977 and, if so, at what cost?


Hon. Iona Campagnolo (Minister of State (Fitness and Amateur Sport)):: Yes. Refer to the answer to question 2,881 tabled this date.


SALARIES OF SOME MEMBERS OF CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD
Mr. Robinson: What is the salary of the (a) Executive (b) Director (c) Chairman (d) Vice-Chairman (e) board members of the Canadian Wheat Board?


Otto Emil Lang: In so far as the
Canadian Wheat Board is concerned: With respect to (a), (c) and (d), there are no positions in the Canadian Wheat Board with such titles. With respect to (b), there are a number of Board employees with the title "Director". However, Board employees are not public servants under the Public Service Employment Act nor do their salaries constitute an expense to the Government. Accordingly, information on their salaries is regarded as confidential. With respect to (e), the salary ranges for Board members are established by Governor in Council and are currently at the following levels: Chief Commissioner, $49,500-$65,300 per annum; Assistant Chief Commissioner, $43,000-$58,800 per annum; Commissioner, $43,000- $58,800 per annum.


ADVISOR TO MINISTER OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS FOR FRANCOPHONE COUNTRIES
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Was the Minister oT Supply and Services appointed Advisor to the Minister of External Affairs for Francophone countries and, if so (a) on what date (b) did the Prime Minister make this appointment after consultation with (i) Ivan Head (ii) the Minister of External Affairs (iii) others and, if so, what are their names?
2.	Since his appointment, on what specific matters and on what dates has the Minister offered advice to the Minister of External Affairs?
3.	What are the qualifications of the Minister of Supply and Services that justify his appointment to the position of advisor?
[Mr. Dinsdale.f


Ralph Goodale: 1, 2 and 3. See Department of External Affairs Press Release of May 4, 1977.


AIRCRAFT OPERATIONS GROUP CONTRACT
Mr. Baker (Grenville-Carleton): 1.	Has the Aircraft Operations Group of the Public Service, which has been without a contract for nearly two years, historical relationship with other aviation professionals, such as the Air Traffic Controllers, not been accorded any weight, thus allowing the Aircraft Operations Group to fall as much as $6,000 behind the Controllers where there has traditionally been a variation of only 1% and, if so, for what reason?
2.	Is it anticipated that at some time in the future the Aircraft Operations Group will be given an opportunity to catch up to the other professional categories to which it has had an historical pay-scale relationship and, if so, approximately on what date?
3.	Is consideration being given to amending Sections 38 and/or 44.(1 )(a) of the Anti-Inflation Act regulations to clarify the meaning of the words "entered into" and "established" as suggested by Mr. E. D. Jensen, Chairman of the Aircraft Operations Group in his letter to the Minister of Finance of January 12, 1977?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Treasury Board Secretariat and the Department of Finance as follows:
1.	The Aircraft Operations Group which still remains without a contract has filed an application with the Federal Court to set aside a decision made by the Anti-Inflation Appeal Tribunal on March 17, 1977. The decision upheld decisions already made by Cabinet and by the Administrator's office rejecting the request by the Aircraft Operations Group to disregard a ruling by the Anti-Inflation Board that had the effect of denying any historical relationship between the Aircraft Operations Group and others in the Technical Category including Air Traffic Controllers. The Anti-Inflation Board ruled that an Arbitration Award by Justice Emmett Hall granting increases of $3,700 and 10 per cent for a two-year agreement exceeded guidelines and ordered a roll back to a maximum of $2,400 in each year of a two-year agreement.
2.	This group remains subject to the Anti-Inflation Legislation and any catch up, if justified, will be in accordance with the appropriate guidelines.
3.	The Anti-Inflation Board is not contemplating amending Section 38 and/or 44(1 )(a) of the regulations. It is their view that the current interpretation given to these sections correctly reflects the intention of the Anti-Inflation Act.


LAND ASSEMBLY-CORNER BROOK, NEWFOUNDLAND
Mr. Marshall: 1.	Did the government provide funds through CMHC for the provision of water and sewage in the Elizabeth Street area in Corner Brook, Newfoundland and, if so, in what amount?
2.	What portion of the total funds expended for work in the land assembly area in the Elizabeth Street area was provided by the government?
3.	Did the government sign an agreement with the provincial government with regard to the work done in the land assembly area in the Elizabeth Street area and, if so, what was the extent of the government's responsibility as to completion in line with specifications?
October 17, 1977


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and the Department of Regional Economic Expansion as follows: 1 and 2. Under the terms of a land acquisition and holding Agreement with the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation under Section 40 of the National Housing Act, CMHC approved the expenditure of $111,750 (75 per cent of the estimated cost of acquisition), for the acquisition of 300 acres in the Elizabeth Street area of Corner Brook, Newfoundland. CMHC incurred costs of only $37,575 under this Agreement for investigation of such items as need, location, anticipated costs and selling prices. The acquisition of the land was financed under Section 42, as follows: (a) A loan of $671,730 was authorized on November 2, 1969 under Section 42 of the NHA to finance 90% of the cost of acquisition and servicing of 31.28 acres, (b) A loan of $1,616,058 was authorized on October 22, 1974 under Section 42 of the NHA to finance 90% of the cost of acquisition and servicing of 54 acres, (c) A loan of $2,149,851 was authorized on May 31, 1976 under Section 42 of the NHA to finance 90% of the cost of acquisition of 147 acres and of the servicing of 47 of these acres. Under the Canada/Newfoundland Second Special Areas Agreement, DREE provided funding for the "Upper Elizabeth Street Reconstruction and Water Reservoir" projects in the amount of $602,663, on the basis of a 50 per cent contribution/loan ratio.
3. The above noted CMHC commitments state that "the borrower shall undertake and complete the project in accordance with its accepted application for loan." Where CMHC provides funding through loans under Section 42 of the NHA, the borrower has the responsibility for completion in accordance with specifications. DREE-Canada/Newfoundland Second Special Areas Agreement, signed August 9, 1971. DREE-Under the terms of the Agreement, a Federal/Pro-vincial Management Committee was established to direct the implementation of the Agreement. The "Upper Elizabeth Street Reconstruction and Water Reservoir" projects were completed prior to December 1974, and deemed by the Management Committee to have been constructed in accordance with the prescribed specifications.


LETTER FROM CAPTAIN G. B. LANDIS
Mr. Brisco: 1.	Did the Office of the Prime Minister receive a letter from Captain G. B. Landis, 467 Earl Street, Kingston, Ontario, dated June 26, 1976 and, if so, was the Prime Minister advised of the substance of Captain Landis' recommendation?
2.	Did the letter receive a substantive response to date and, if not, for what reason?
3.	Did the Prime Minister or Secretary of State for Canada cause studies to be made of the language teaching method outlined therein known as alternating lingual communication and (a) if so, what have been the recommendations with respect to its use as an alternative to existing teaching methods (b) if not, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Prime
Order Paper Questions
Minister's and the Privy Council Offices and the Department of the Secretary of State as follows: 1. (a) Yes; (b) No.
2.	Mr. Landis' comments on languae policy in this letter and a follow-up letter of July 13 were acknowledged by the Prime Minister's Office on September 20, 1976.
3.	A study of the language teaching method proposed by Captain Landis was conducted by the Language Bureau of the Public Service Commission. It was concluded that the method did not fit the mandate for the teaching of a second language that the Language Bureau has received from Parliament.


MINISTER'S VISAS
Mr. Jelinek: How many ministerial visas were granted at (a) Vancouver International Airport (b) Toronto International Airport (c) Montreal Mirabel and Dorval Airports (d) other locations and ports of Canada in (i) 1972 (ii) 1973 (iii) 1974 (iv) 1975 (v) 1976?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: Permits are issued by Ottawa and in the Regions by Minister's delegated authority and statistics are not maintained on a Port of Entry basis.


APPOINTMENT OF DR. BERNARD SUTET
Mr. Jones: 1.	Is there any regulation in the rules of the Public Service Commission requiring high ranking officials to be or to have the intention of becoming a Canadian citizen?
2.	(a) Is Dr. Bernard Sutet a citizen of France (b) is he presently the Director of Economic Policy in the Policy Planning Office of the Unemloyment Insurance Commission (c) what are his qualifications (d) was there an open competition for the position he presently occupies and, if not, was he appointed directly?
3.	(a) For what position was he hired by the Department of Manpower and Immigration in 1968 (b) was the position advertised as an open competition or was he appointed to the position?
4.	What special expertise does he have for high-ranking Public Service positions?
5.	Is he required to become a Canadian citizen and (a) if not, for what reason (b) if so, has he refused?
6.	(a) What is his salary (b) what is the amount of his expense allowance (c) what are his special privileges?
7.	Is he allowed to sit in on Cabinet meetings and, if so, has he ever done so?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Department of Employment and Immigration and the Public Service Commission as follows: 1. There is no requirement for any person appointed under the Public Service Employment Act to be or to have the intention of becoming a Canadian citizen. In appointments from outside the Public Service, however, a preference is given to Canadian citizens. Therefore, if both a citizen and a non-citizen are found qualified, the citizen is appointed before the non-citizen. In addition, all employees are required, upon appointment from outside the Public Service, to take and subscribe the oath or affirmation of allegiance and the oath or affirmation set out in Schedule III of the Public Service Employment Act (oath or affirmation of office and secrecy).

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
2.	(a) Yes. (b) Yes. (c) BA Economics 1959, MA Economics 1961, Ph.D. Economics 1966, 1966-68 Market Research, Texas Instruments, France, 1968-date Economist in MID, NH&W, UIC. (d) Dr. Sutet was selected from a number of candidates from various departments on the basis of interviews held following an interdepartmental search conducted by the Public Service Commission.
3.	(a) Dr. Sutet was hired on April 1, 1968 as an Economist 3 in position M&I-PD-60, Research Branch, Immigration and Foreign Manpower Section, (b) The position was advertised as an open competition (67-430-39).
4.	Dr. Sutet demonstrated he possessed an excellent knowledge in the statistic and econometric fields. Furthermore, he had experience in policy studies and in studies on the economical situation of France and the Common Market. He made financial studies of companies located in Europe. See 2 (c) above.
5.	No. (a) See answer to Part 1. (b) Dr. Sutet obtained Landed Immigrant Status March 27, 1968 and has recently applied for Canadian citizenship.
6.	(a) $32,080-539,080 ES-8 salary range, (b) As required according to Canadian Government Travel Regulations, (c) None.
7.	No. Cabinet Committee Meetings only.


NEW HORIZONS CONTRIBUTIONS IN NEW BRUNSWICK
Mr. Jones: In the latest series of contributions through the New Horizons Programme of the Department of National Health and Welfare, were grants awarded to Francophones in the Province of New Brunswick totalling $37,612 and to Anglophones totalling $16,850 and, if so, for what reason?


Hon. Marc Lalonde (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: Contributions through the New Horizons Program are announced 10 times throughout the year and are made in response to applications received from groups of senior citizens. In any particular series the funding pattern for a province is likely to vary significantly from the long range pattern. In addition, it is difficult to divide New Horizons allocations between Anglophone and Francophone organizations, especially in a province such as New Brunswick where members of both linguistic groups may participate in any one group; determination from the language of application or the name of an organization will not necessarily reflect the proportion of the members of Anglophone and Francophone origin. Given these restrictions on the validity of dividing New Horizons statistics between official language groups, grants awarded to applications filed in English and in French were as follows: (1) for series number 47 released in June 1977, the figures stated in the question are correct; (2) for the six series released in 1977, a total of $154,300.00 was awarded to organizations who applied in French and a total of $166,557.00 to those in English.


GRANTS GIVEN TO TEACHERS TO IMPROVE THEIR LANGUAGE SKILLS
Mr. Jones: Under the terms of the Federal-Provincial Agreement on Bilingualism in Education, are contributions being made to enable (a) French (b) English teachers in each province whose mother tongue is (i) French (ii) English to improve their language teaching skills and, if so, in each case, how many and in what amounts?


John (Moody) Roberts: Department of the Secretary of State: Under the Teachers' Bursary Programme of the Federal-Provincial Agreement on Bilingualism in Education contributions are made to the provinces to enable teachers of French and English as second languages and teachers in the official minority language to take short refresher courses to improve their skills. Bursaries are awarded to the teachers by the provincial governments, according to their priorities in the area of bilingualism in education. The attached tables show the amounts contributed by the federal government to each province under this programme since its inception in fiscal year 1972-73. As the mother tongue of the teachers concerned is not a factor in the awarding of the bursaries, no statistics on this point are available.
Teachers' Bursaries
To enable second-language or minority language teachers to take short refresher courses To improve their skills
Amount paid to each province in each year Fiscal Year
Province	1972-73	1973-74	1974-75	1975-76	1976-77Newfoundland Prince Edward	18,200	22,200	31,343	35,934	45,708Island	4,470	5,682	7,255	9,920	15,192Nova Scotia	34,261	39,576	65,298	52,155	78,417New Brunswick	14,300	48,200	47,354	57,370	85,298Quebec	5,200	88,538	385,505	406,902	412,044Ontario	79,990	402,200	592,662	510,929	702,605Manitoba	7,560	12,075	18,586	24,780	91,080Saskatchewan	13,350	18,900	27,750	35,850	37,450Alberta	22,255	36,670	68,971	72,041	137,875British Columbia	-	26,000	124,417	126,755	217,327National Total	199,586	700,041	1,369,141	1,332,636	1,822,996Cumulative	199,586	899,627	2,268,768	3,601,404	5,424,400
National Total


CONSUMER ASSISTANCE GRANTS PROGRAMME
Mr. Jones: 1.	How many local voluntary groups which offer a range of consumer information, education and mediation services applied for grants under the Consumer Assistance Grants Programme of the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs?
October 17, 1977

2.	Were any of the thirteen grants awarded given to the Provinces of Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba or Saskatchewan and, if not, for what reason?
3.	Is the availabilty of grants under the Programme advertised publicly and, if so (a) in what manner (b) were they advertised in the Moncton area?
4.	Did any local voluntary groups from the Constituency of Moncton apply?


Hon. A. C. Abbott (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: 1. The Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs Canada is in regular contact with voluntary consumer groups through its regional and district offices. This contact includes many informal requests regarding the availability of financial support from the department in addition to formal application for money under the Consumer Assistance Grants Programme. The numbers of the former type of contact have not been tabulated: formal application for grants were received from seventy local groups during the 1976-77 fiscal year.
2. The Department assumes that this question refers to voluntary organizations located in the provinces of Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and not to the provinces themselves, as no grants are awarded to the provincial government by the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Further, the Department assumes that this question refers to a news release dated May 19, 1977 regarding the awarding of 13 grants. None of the recipient groups had offices located in any of Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Manitoba or Saskatchewan. However, several of the groups offer services to consumers living in those provinces i.e. Allergy Information Association, Consumers' Association of Canada, and Transport 2000. At the time the news release was issued, applications from agencies located in the above listed provinces did not meet the criteria of the grants
Order Paper Questions


CANADIAN SHIPYARDS SUBSIDIZED BY I.T.C.
Mr. Lambert (Bellechasse): 1.	During the past three years, have the Canadian shipyards subsidized by the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce been used and, if so (a) by which countries (b) how many ships were (i) built (ii) renovated?
2.	Have ships been renovated in these shipyards following an accident and, if so, how many?


Fabian Hugh Poulin: In so far as the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce is concerned: 1. Listed are the names of the companies that have received subsidies for the construction of vessels for export completed during the fiscal years 1974/75-1976/77, the number of vessels subsidized and the country where the vessels were registered:
Shipbuilder
Allied Shipbuilders Ltd.
Bel-Aire Shipyard Ltd.
Burrard Dry Dock Company Ltd.
Canadian Shipbuilding & Engineering
Davie Shipbuilding Limited
Davie Shipbuilding Limited
Hawker Industries Limited
Hawker Industries Limited
Marine Industries Limited
Marine Industries Limited
Marine Industries Limited
Matsumoto Shipyard Limited
Saint John Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co.
Vancouver Shipyards Co. Ltd.
No. of	Country of
Vessels	Registration
2	Bermuda
5	Bermuda
1	Cayman Island (UK)
2	United Kingdon
3	United Kingdom
2	Liberia
2	Liberia
1	United Kingdom
2	Algeria
1	Cuba
6	France
2	New Zealand
5	Liberia
1	Bermuda
2. During these fiscal years, no subsidy was paid toward the renovation or repair of ships.


AMOUNT SPENT BY SOS IN SAULT STE. MARIE SINCE 1972
Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Secretary of State Department?
program.
3.	National press releases regarding the Consumer Assistance Grants Programme are made'on a regular basis.
4.	No formal grant applications have been received from voluntary consumer groups from the Moncton constituency.


EMPLOYMENT OF EXECUTIVE AND SPECIAL ASSISTANTS
Mr. McKinnon: By ministry, from December 31, 1972, what are the names of all those who were employed as executive assistants and special assistants to Ministers and of these (a) which ones were also employed by the government in any capacity as of December 31, 1976 (b) what were their (i) positions at that time (ii) remuneration?


Ralph Goodale: With regard to the names of those employed as executive assistants and special assistants to Ministers since December 31, 1972, see the replies to the following Questions: Nos: 1,028, ordered May 14, 1973; 42, ordered March 26, 1975; 518, ordered April 9, 1975; 1,204, ordered July 30, 1975. It is not possible to provide the remainder of the information in the form requested.


John (Moody) Roberts: From October 1972 to July 1977, the Department of the Secretary of State spent an amount of $473,900 in Sault Ste. Marie. The sums were allocated as follows:
Amount
Travel and Exchange 1972-1975	$ 23,000
Opportunities for youth 1972-1973	118,500
Native Citizens 1972-1977	212,185
Hostels 1972-1975	60,000
Womens Program 1972-1977	2,100
Student Community Services Program 1972-1975	58,115


EXPENDITURES-SAULT STE. MARIE
Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows:
October 1, 1972-March 31, 1973	$	30,056April 1,	1973-March 31,	1974	62,553April 1,	1974-March 31,	1975	67,383April 1,	1975-March 31,	1976	4,956,440April 1,	1976-March 31,	1977	539,331April 1,1977-Present	0Total	$5,655,763
8258

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


TRANSPORT-EXPENDITURES IN SAULT STE. MARIE
Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Department of Transport?


Otto Emil Lang: The total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date is: $10,669,594.


EXPENDITURES-SAULT STE. MARIE
Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Department of National Health and Welfare?


Marc Lalonde: $660,754. from October 1, 1972 to May 31, 1977, the latest date for which figures are available. (Payment for benefits under the Old Age Security, Guaranteed Income Security, Spouses' Allowances, Family Allowances and Canada Pension Plan programs are recorded by province, not by municipality).


MINISTRY OF SECRETARY OF STATE (MULTICULTURALISM) EXPENDITURES
Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Ministry of State (Multiculturalism)?


Hon. Joseph-Philippe Guay (Minister of State (Multiculturalism)):: The amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October, 1972 to August, 1977 under the Multiculturalism Program totals $30,700.


EXPENDITURES-SAULT STE. MARIE
Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Department of the Solicitor General?


Francis Fox: Canadian Penitentiary Service and National Parole Service: Records are not kept in a manner that would enable the provision of expenditure figures by cities. Royal Canadian Mounted Police: $841,754.00 (includes both capital and law enforcement expenditures). Ministry Secretariat National Parole Board: Nil.



Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Department of Manpower and Immigration?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: The total amount spent by the department in Sault Ste. Marie from October, 1972 to date is $15,784,159.



Mr. Symes: What was the total amount spent in Sault Ste. Marie from October 1972 to date by the Post Office Department?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: Operating Expenditures	Capital Expenditures	Expenditures From Revenue	TotalOct 1/72 -Mar 31/73	556,563	3,057	12,998	572,6181973/74	1,149,243	403	29,916	1,179,5621974/75	1,301,347	709	31,844	1,333,9001975/76	1,611,433	2,001	35,506	1,648,9401976/77	2,004,861	104	36,290	2,041,255Apr 1 /77 -May 31/77	371,317	7,248	378,565Total	6,994,764	6,274	153,802	7,154,840



Mr. Symes: Note: Monthly expenditure statements are not available for the fiscal year 1972-73, therefore, included in this figure is the amount spent for the entire F/Y 1972-73 to date.


CBC-GUIDELINES FOR ALLOTMENT OF TIME FOR MPS
Mr. Jones: 1.	Are there guidelines laid down by the CBC for allotment of time for Members of Parliament to appear on such programmes as the Nation's Business and, if so, what are they?
2.	Does the CBC, on such programmes as the Nation's Business, permit those not affiliated with any recognized political party to appear and, if not, for what reason?
3.	What amount of money is allocated to the programme the Nation's Business for production crews, interviewers, researchers and other persons connected with it?


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the CBC as follows: 1. CBC does not allot television time to individual members of parliament. The relevant policy reads as follows: (a) It is the policy of the corporation during the periods between election campaigns to make free time available to federal parties for political broadcasts on a national CBC network, (b) The corporation provides free network time to bona fide parties which are national in extent and which reflect a significant body of opinion throughout the country.
2. No. It is felt that only national parties should be represented on a national program. It is suggested that each party requesting time on such a program meet the following requirements: (i) Have a recognized national leader, (ii) Have a nation-wide organization established as the result of a national conference or convention, (iii) Form a group in the House of Commons under a recognized leader to whom the house has accorded privileges in the conduct of parliamentary business.
October 17, 1977

(iv) Have sought the election of candidates in at least three of the provinces and have put into the field at least one candidate for every four constituencies in the immediately preceding general election.
3.	It has not been customary to require the CBC to provide such information as the costs of programs. However, the budget of "The Nation's Business" is minimal.
GRANT OF $300,000 to A.C.F.O.


Mir. Jones: 1.	Did the French speaking Association of Ontario or the counterparts in each of the nine other provinces in Canada receive a grant of $300,000 and, if so, under what government programme?
2.	Was the $300,000 for use by the Ontario Association only or was it to be divided among all ten provincial groups?


John (Moody) Roberts: 1. Only the French speaking Association of Ontario received such a grant of $300,000 in 1976-77. This grant was provided by the Official Language Minority Groups Directorate of the Secretary of State Department. The counterparts received grants apart from this but of a less amount.
2.	The grant of $300,000 was given to the French speaking Association of Ontario for the implementation of its animation program and was not to be divided among all ten provincial groups.


PERSONNEL OF PRAIRIE REGIONAL OFFICE OF UIC
Mr. Ritchie: 1.	How many individuals are employed at the present time on a (a) part-time (b) full-time basis, at the Prairie Regional Office of the Unemployment Insurance Commission and the Department of Manpower and Immigration?
2.	How many individuals are employed as field representatives?
Order Paper Questions
3.	In what locations is it proposed to establish new provincial offices for the Department of Manpower and Immigration and the Unemployment Insurance Commission in (a) Alberta (b) Saskatchewan (c) Manitoba after passage of Bill C-27 and, in each case, how many individuals will be employed as (i) full-time (ii) part-time (iii) field representative for these services?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: Prairie Regional Office
	Unemployment	Department of
	Insurance	Manpower
	Commission	and Immigration
1. (a) Part-time Employees	Nil	Nil(b) Full-time Employees	210	1292. Field Staff	(Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta	Northwest Territories)	783	1628Alberta	Saskatche-3. Location of Canada Employment	NWT	wan Manitobaand Immigration Commission	Region	Region RegionRegional Offices	Edmonton	Regina WinnipegFull-time Employees	(i)Regional Office	(a) 159	88 142Part-time Employees	(ii)Regional Office	(a) 2	3 Nil(iii)Field Staff	(a) 1,033	479 679
(a) Planned for fiscal 1977-78


SUMMER JOB CORPS PROGRAM
Mr. Marshall: What is the breakdown of the jobs and allocation of funds, by province, under the Summer Job Corps Program implemented in 1977 and sponsored by the Department of Manpower and Immigration for (a) service (b) fisheries and marine (c) environmental protection (d) environmental management?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: Summer Job Corps Program 1977 breakdown of the number of jobs and allocation of funds by province, for (a) service; (b) fisheries and marine; (c and d) environmental protection and management. See table below.
Subject: Breakdown of the jobs and allocation of funds* by the following activities
Environment
Provinces	Services # of Jobs	Funds	Fisheries & Marine # of Jobs	Protection & Management Funds # of Jobs	FundsNewfoundland	140	259,585	0	0	0	0Nova Scotia	235	477,035	53	118,004	0	0Prince Edward Island	52	95,525	0	0	0	0New Brunswick	211	426,412	0	0	10	23,783Quebec*	1,112	2,181,955	7	13,601	13	, 31,696Ontario	1,152	2,126,237	0	0	114	245,902Manitoba*	327	589,191	0	0	21	54,297Saskatchewan	292	538,628	0	0	0	0Alberta*	286	548,775	0	0	0	0British Columbia	717	1,389,015	0	0	0	0North West Territories	29	64,783	0	0	7	18,244Yukon*	61	87,422	0	0	18	44,428Totals	4,614	8,784,563	60	131,605	183	418,350
Figures were taken from data compiled as of the second of June, 1977.
800 20-5 8 Vi

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


ORDER IN COUNCIL
Mr. Jones: 1.	What exactly is the purpose of the Order in Council?
2.	Of the 3,327 Orders in Council in 1976, how many were brought before the House of Commons for discussion?
3.	What is the general nature of the majority of Orders in Council?
4.	Are Orders in Council brought before the House of Commons for discussion as general practice and, if not, for what reason?
5.	Is there any government procedure which could replace the Order in Council and provide for a more democratic government?


Ralph Goodale: 1. An Order in Council is a legal instrument evidencing action by the Governor General acting by and with the advice of, or by and with the advice and consent of, or in conjunction with the Queen's Privy Council for Canada. Most Orders in Council are passed pursuant to specific authority set out in particular Acts of Parliament. A few are also made under the royal prerogative. In 1976, 3265 Orders in Council were passed pursuant to statute and 61 were passed pursuant to the royal prerogative.
2.	Of the 3326 Orders in Council passed in 1976, 653 were statutory instruments within the meaning of the Statutory Instruments Act and as such stood referred to the Standing Joint Committee on Regulations and Other Statutory Instruments pursuant to section 26 of the Statutory Instruments Act.
3.	Description of Orders in Council for the year 1976
	Number	Percentage
Appointments (includes re-appointments, resignations and fixing salaries)	750	22.55Regulations and other Statutory Instruments	653	19.63Lands and other property (includes exchanges, acquisitions, transfers to or from a Province, sales of lands under the Surplus Crown Assets Act and under the Veterans' Land Act)	481	14.46Contracts and other agreements	289	8.70Pardons and Revocations (under Criminal Records Act)	234	7.03Foreign Investment Review Act	232	6.97Payments, loans, contributions, grants and gifts	161	4.84Remission Orders	82	2.46Satisfied Securities	75	2.25Judges Act, other than appointments (annuities to widows, approving residence, retirements, etc.)	55	1.65Railways	41	1.23Ex gratia payments	35	1.05Other	238	7.18Total	3,326	100.004.	A list of Orders in Council is tabled monthly in the House of Commons. As stated in answer to part 2, those Orders in Council that constitute statutory instruments within the meaning of the Statutory Instruments Act stand referred to the Standing Joint Committee on Regulations and Other Statutory Instruments pursuant to that Act.5.	See Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms, Fourth Edition, Citation 171 (a), (b), (f), (g), (h) and (i).


MR. A. T. DAVISON OF PARKS CANADA
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Did Mr. A. T. Davison of Parks Canada outline in a telex dated March 9, 1977 and sent to Mr. Mike Mclnnis, Chairman of the Advisory Board to the government on St. Lawrence Islands National Parks, information on grants-in-lieu of taxes to municipalities as a result of Parks Canada being involved with land contained therein and, if so (a) how are such grants-in-lieu of taxes determined (b) does the Treasury Board accept provincial assessment procedures (c) as an example, what would the grant be for 200 acres assessed at $3,000 with the local tax rate at 100 mills and the municipal tax payable being $300 per annum (d) is land considered "developed" at the start or at the completion of development (e) how is the necessary degree of development determined, who makes the decision and can it be reviewed?
2.	Did Mr. Davison's telex state "it is possible in addition that the Act will be revised in the next couple of years to provide for more liberal tax grant arrangements for National Park lands. We are continuing to work with the Department of Finance on that possibility" and (a) if so, have any steps been taken as yet in this direction (b) if not, when will such steps be taken?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and Finance as follows: 1. Yes. (a) In accordance with the Municipal Grants Act as administered by the Department of Finance, (b) Property owned by the Crown in right of Canada is not taxable property, but the municipal or provincial assessor may place an assessed value for such property on the assessment roll. This valuation will be accepted by the Minister of Finance for purposes of determining the amount of a grant in lieu of real property taxes on property which is eligible for a grant provided that its amount is deemed to be fair and equitable in relation to the valuation of similar taxable property within the same assessment jurisdiction. In practice, values of federal property are most likely to be in line with those for taxable property where the municipal or provincial assessment authority has used the same "procedures", i.e., the same steps and the same methods, in placing values on federal property that it has used for taxable property, (c) If S3,000 is deemed to be a fair and equitable value for 200 acres of federal land which is subject to grant in lieu of real property taxes, the grant would be $300 per annum when computed at a local tax rate of 100 mills. Grants are based upon the full mill rate in nearly all instances. However, a lower rate would be used if the government is making separate payments for a particular local service. Thus, in a few instances, the federal government makes special arrangements to pay for the cost of schooling of children of federal employees living on federal property. In such instances, the amount of the grant would be determined
(Mr. Cullen.]
October 17, 1977

without reference to the school portion of the tax rate in order to avoid paying twice for the same service, (d) At the completion. (e) (i) Developed lands are considered as being lands acquired by Parks Canada which are being used for the purposes for which they were intended to be used, i.e., public use of the land is available in a manner compatible to the development of a national park or historic site or park, (ii) Parks Canada in consultation with the Department of Finance, (iii) Decisions on the designation of developed/undeveloped category would be open to review to ensure that decisions have been made in accordance with established guidelines upon reasonable request.
2.	Yes.


TAR SANDS RESERVES
Mr. Brisco: 1.	What are the total known tar sands reserves in Canada?
2.	How long will they last at present and predicted future rates of consumption?


Hon. Alastair Gillespie (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources):: The Department of Energy, Mines and Resources reports as follows:
1.	It is estimated that 26.5 billion barrels of synthetic crude may be recovered from the mineable portion of the tar sands, using existing mining, upgrading technology, and under appropriate economic conditions. The extent of additional recoveries from a total resource in place of 789 billion barrels will depend on technological progress in mining and in-situ recovery methods and the extraction costs.
2.	The only volumes of reserves from the tar sands, expressed in terms of recoverable upgraded synthetic oil, are those today within economic reach and the two plants now operating or under construction. This volume is 2 billion barrels; at current and projected production rates, the reserves available to these plants would last approximately 25 years.


NATURAL GAS RESERVES
Mr. Brisco: 1.	What are the total known natural gas reserves in Canada exclusive of the Arctic?
2.	How long will they last at present and predicted future rates of consumption?


Alastair William Gillespie: The Department of Energy, Mines and Resources reports as follows: 1. Canada's proven reserves of natural gas (exclusive of Arctic) total 61.4 trillion cubic feet.
2. The reserves noted in 1 above will provide gas supplies for many years into the future. However, the limiting factor with regard to meeting all of our required needs at any point in time is the potential rate of production rather than the size of the remaining reserves. Present estimates suggest that production rates possible from presently known reserves may fall short of meeting all Canadian needs before the mid-1980's. If produc-
Order Paper Questions
tion was not a limiting factor the reserves noted would meet present and projected needs for about 19 years. In making this estimate no allowance has been made for new reserves that will be found and it was assumed that: 1. There will be no change in exports, currently about 1 trillion cubic feet a year; 2. that domestic demand will increase by approximately 3 per cent a year.


OIL RESERVES
Mr. Brisco: 1.	What are the total known oil reserves in Canada exclusive of the Arctic?
2.	How long will they last at present and predicted future rates of consumption?


Alastair William Gillespie: The Department of Energy, Mines and Resources reports as follows: 1. Canadian proved oil reserves as of January 1, 1976 amounted to 6,474.3 million barrels, exclusive of the tar sands and related resources.
2. The reserves noted in 1 above will provide oil supplies for many years into the future. However, the limiting factor with regard to meeting all of our required needs at any point in time is the potential rate of production rather than the size of the remaining reserves. The production capacity currently available is already less than that required to meet total Canadian demand. Therefore, while the present reserves will be meeting a portion of our needs for many years into the future, that portion will be a smaller and smaller percentage of our requirements. If production was not a limiting factor the reserves noted would meet present and projected needs for approximately 12 years. This estimate is based on the assumption of an average annual rate of growth in domestic consumption of 2 percent compared to 5 percent over the past 15 years, and a complete phase-out of exports to the United States by 1981.


LAC ST. JEAN INTERNATIONAL CROSSING (SWIMMING) COMPETITION
Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): Did the Department of Manpower and Immigration (a) accept (b) carry-out projects in Roberval in connection with the Lac St. Jean International Crossing (Swimming) Competition and, if so, in each case (i) which projects (ii) in what amount, each year since the creation of the contest?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: (a) Yes. (b) Yes. (i), (ii) See list below. Subject: Breakdown of the participation of the Local Initiatives Program in the Lake St. John International Crossing (Swimming) Competition since 1974. Year 1973-74, Project 3H-4863; Title: Construction of bleachers and improvements at the finishing line of the crossing. Grant:	$17,280; Year 1974-1975, Project
AH-3608-9; Title: Construction of a wharf. Grant: $17,262; Year 1975-1976, Project BH-5644; Title: Cultural and sports promotion of the 22nd Crossing; Grant: $21,413; Year 19761977, Project CH-3695; Title: Development of grounds at the marina; Grant: $48,110.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions SUBSIDIES TO CITY OF ROBERVAL


Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): Since 1956, has the Department of Regional Economic Expansion granted subsidies to the City of Roberval for the construction of a breakwater and rampart, directly or through programmes such as the Winter Capital Projects Programme and, if so, what was the amount annually?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: DREE was not created until April 1, 1969, and since that time the department has not provided any funds for the construction of a breakwater or rampart in Roberval.


CBC-ANNUAL CONSUMPTION OF PROCESSING AND PRINTING 16 MILLIMETER FILMS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
Mr. Lee: From 1973 to 1977, what was the annual consumption of processing and printing services for 16 millimetre film, in terms of dollars and footage, by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in British Columbia?


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows: Fiscal years: 1972-73, $281,263; 1973-74, 297,465; 1974-75, 292,426; 1975-76, 296,966; 1976-77, 338,658. These figures include other film laboratory services such as edge numbering, sound mixing and transfer. No cumulative record is maintained of film footage processed and printed, and this information cannot be extracted readily or without an inordinate amount of work, time and expense.


CNR PENSION TRUST FUND
Mr. McKenzie: 1.	Did the Superintendent of Insurance, in 1967, approve a 60 year period for CNR to pay off their debt to the employees' Pension Trust Fund and, if so, for what reason?
2.	Was this an unusually long period of time when the Pension Benefits Standards Act required payment in full by October 1, 1967 and, if it is not, for what reason?
3.	Did CNR, upon receiving permission to pay off their $671 million obligation over a period of 60 years on an amortized basis ($29,255 annually), increase the interest rate from 4 per cent to 1'A per cent thus reducing their debt to $300 million and, if so, for what reason?
4.	How was the IVi per cent interest rate arrived at?
5.	Was the Superintendent of Insurance aware that the change was to be made at the time he was asked to approve the 60 year repayment period and, if not, was he subsequently informed that this change was being made and given the reasons for it?
6.	What information was the Superintendent of Insurance given concerning this matter and what was his response to the CNR Pension Trust Fund?
7.	Is this type of change a common occurrence or was this a unique situation?
8.	Did the change create a paper surplus of $371,000,000 which would not have to be paid into the pension fund account by CNR and are the pension funds being held owned 100 per cent by employees and pensioners and, if so, did (a) the employees and pensioners receive 100 per cent of the paper surplus and, if not, for what reason (b) CNR receive any part of the paper surplus in their position as a trustee and, if so, for what reason?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments

of Finance and Transport as follows: General Comments: From the questions, it would appear that there may not be a common understanding as to the nature of funding under the Pension Benefits Standards Act. Accordingly, so that Canadian National's answers may be meaningful, its understanding is stated as follows: the term "Fully Funded", when applied to a pension plan, describes one which has assets which, with their earnings, qre sufficient to provide for all pension and other benefits payable under the terms of the plan in respect of service of employees and former employees; and "Unfunded Liability" is the amount by which the assets of the plan are required to be augmented in order to make it fully funded. It follows, then, that an unfunded liability is not a fixed sum of money, but rather an estimate, prepared by independent professional actuaries, of the amount which, at a particular time, would have to be added to the trust fund in order to make that fund, together with its earnings, adequate to provide for payment of all pension benefits payable under the terms of the plan. In making such an estimate, the actuary bases his opinion upon assumptions related to life expectancies of employees and pensioners, and their spouses, anticipated earnings of the fund, the rate of inflation, and the anticipated rate of change in salary levels. Each of these factors varies, from time-to-time; at intervals of not more than three years each, a plan must be reviewed to establish, among other things, the amount of the unfunded liability arising out of a change in the actuarial methods or bases, and the experience deficiency or surplus, if any. 1. No. A sixty-year period was permitted by the Regulations for Crown corporations.
2.	When the Act became effective on October 1, 1967, Crown corporations were permitted a period of sixty years to liquidate deficits that existed on October 1, 1967; other employers having pension plans subject to that Act were permitted a period of twenty-five years.
3 and 4. As at December 31, 1968, on the recommendation of its independent consulting actuaries and investment advisors, reflecting more realistically investment and wage trends, the earlier assumption with respect to investment income was revised from 4 per cent to IVi per cent; and a 4 per cent wage inflation factor was, for the first time, built into the assumptions. The actuaries concluded that the amount of the unfunded liability of the CN pension plan, as at that date, was, in fact, approximately $300 million rather than the $671 million which had been previously estimated.
5.	The Superintendent of Insurance was not aware, on October 1, 1967, of any intention to change the interest rate used to value the obligations under the pension plan. When the change was made in 1968, the Superintendent was aware of the change and was given the reasons for it.
6.	Information was given to the Superintendent of Insurance concerning the rate of interest being earned on the assets in the fund and the rate of interest expected to be earned in the future in the light of investments currently being made. Discussions took place with the actuary responsible for the valuation. The choice of the interest rate to be used was the
October 17, 1977

responsibility of the actuary, not of the Superintendent of Insurance.
7.	It is common to change the interest rate used in the valuation of a pension plan when the general level of interest rates is changing. It should be borne in mind that under pension plans such as that of the CNR, the pension benefits of retired employees are determined by a formula that is based on the employees' salary and years of service, not on the investment income of the fund. The contributions by employees are also fixed by a formula related to each employee's earnings: the balance of the cost is met by the employer. If interest rates rise, the employer's cost is reduced; if they fall, his costs are increased.
8.	All that occurred in 1968 was a change in the estimate of the amount which would be required to liquidate the initial unfunded liability. It did not create any surplus funds or assets. Accordingly, there was no surplus to distribute or dispose of. All of the assets of the Pension Trust Fund are held in trust to provide for the payment of benefits pursuant to the terms of the CNR pension plans.


INTRANSIT WAREHOUSE IN NORTH SYDNEY
Mr. Jones: 1.	What is the purpose of the intransit warehouse, funded partially by the Department of Transport, recently opened in North Sydney?
2.	Will the warehouse service countries other than France?
3.	What are the details of the funding and operation of such a warehouse?


Otto Emil Lang: 1. The purpose of the warehouse is to accommodate inbound and outbound foreign and domestic cargo shipped through North Sydney.
2.	The warehouse is a public shed and as such will serve general cargo to and from any country.
3.	Transport Canada funded the construction of the warehouse at a cost of $101,123.58 and will operate it as a public facility. Gateway Marine Services Ltd. of North Sydney and Armement Paturel Freres of St. Pierre et Miquelon will be the main users of the warehouse and have signed an agreement with Transport Canada regarding their use of the facility.


FEDERAL TAX ON LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES
Mr. Rynard: 1.	Is there a federal tax on an insurance policy of a 25 year old man, dying at age 50 for a (a) $100,000 whole life (b) $50,000 whole life (c) $50,000 term (d) $109,000 term life with wife as beneficiary (e) $200,000 term with wife as beneficiary and, if so, in each, what (i) is the tax (ii) premiums are tax deductible (iii) countries allow insurance premiums as tax deductions (iv) countries have no tax on life insurance policies?
2.	Since the Government of Ontario has a two percent tax on premiums, was there any consultation with the Province before the federal tax legislation was considered?
3.	What consideration, if any, was given to larger policies being written to offset the loss in value of the purchasing dollar?
4.	What consideration, if any, was given to the difference in the gain or cash value or endowment proceeds to the death benefit?
5.	On what basis was a death benefit considered as a cash gain over the fact that it was payment for the loss entailed by future earning power or partnership?
Order Paper Questions
6.	On what basis was it concluded that money borrowed on a life insurance policy was not used for investment to earn income?
7.	How much consideration was given to the incentive of individual security or the individual attempting to provide for his family and his own security?


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (Minister of Finance):: 1. (a) A
proposal introduced in the 1977 budget and incorporated in Bill C-56 will treat as income when a life insurance policy is terminated by death the amount, if any, by which the cash surrender value of the policy immediately before death exceeds the cost of the policy. The aggregate of such gains will be reduced by $10,000 if the policyholder was the person whose life was insured. In the absence of data as to the cash surrender value and the cost of the policy (generally premiums paid minus policy dividends) neither the amount to be included in income nor the tax can be determined, (b) Same as (a), (c) The proposal will only apply to cash value insurance, consequently it has no application for term insurance-the proceeds of which remain exempt from income tax. (d) Same as (c). (e) Same as (d). The tax treatment of life insurance proceeds and of companies varies from country to country and it is not possible to give a listing of the countries that allow premiums as deductions. There is a tax of one form or another, either on the policyholder or on the insurance company, in most countries.
2.	No.
3.	The budget proposal was designed to tax the investment income earned on a life insurance policy. This form of income will be treated as any other form of investment income. The inflation factor is recognized by the indexing of the personal income tax.
4.	Only the portion of the policy proceeds that represent investment income is subject to tax. The portion of the proceeds that represent a mortality gain remains exempt from tax.
5.	See answer to question 3.
6.	Interest paid on a policy loan is to be treated as a premium thus serving to increase the cost of the policy and reducing the taxable gain if any. Under the existing rules if a policyholder paid interest on a policy loan, the proceeds of which were used for a purpose other than to earn income, he was not entitled to any tax relief in respect of the interest. The amendment will ensure that all policyholders who pay interest on policy loans will receive the same income tax treatment in respect of that interest.
7.	See answer to question 3.


BELLEVILLE HARBOUR COMMISSIONERS-SALARIES
Mr. Robinson: What is the salary of the Belleville Harbour Commissioners?


Otto Emil Lang: Chairman, $1,000-$1,250 annually; Commissioner (acting as secretary), $750-$1,000 annually; Other Commissioner, $500-$750 annually.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions COMMUNITY AIRPORT FACILITIES FUND


Mr. Brisco: For each year 1970 to 1977, what amount of federal funding was provided to the Community Airport Facilities Fund and what was the number of applications for assistance under the programme in each year?


Otto Emil Lang: (a) Actual Capital Expenditures: 1970-71, 829,628; 1971-72, 932,000*;
1972-	73, 1,504,697; 1973-74, 2,082,915; 1974-75, 1,126,119; 1975-76, 1,467,573; 1976-77, 1,555,899. (b) Number of Applications Received: 1970-71, 25; 1971-72, 20; 1972-73, 47;
1973-	74, 41; 1974-75, 68; 1975-76, 59; 1976-77, 41; 1977-78, 18 (to July 15).
* rounded to nearest 000's.


BILINGUAL PUBLIC SERVANTS
Mr. McKenzie: 1.	Flow many bilingual public servants in departments, agencies and Crown corporations are required to use a second official language in the performance of their duties?
2.	What is the total amount of compensation the government owes to such public servants who fall under the agreement that was reached with employee unions that the government would pay compensation retroactive to November I, 1976?
3.	Did the Prime Minister receive a letter dated June 21, 1977 from Mr. C. L. Lockhart, President of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, in regard to the implementation of compensation for bilingual public servants and, if so, what was the response to the letter?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Treasury Board Secretariat and the Prime Minister's Office as follows: 1. For those departments and agencies for which the Treasury Board is the employer, the information recorded in the Official Languages Information System as of July 1, 1977 indicates that there were 68,643 positions identified as bilingual, or requiring the use of both official languages. Of this total, 16,253 bilingual positions were vacant and 52,390 bilingual positions were filled. Of the latter, 40,954 incumbents met the language requirements of their position.
2.	The amount of compensation to be provided to qualified employees required to work in both official languages will be the subject of consultations with employee unions. These consultations are just about to begin. Consequently, the total amount owing, in meeting the commitment that payment would be made retroactive to November 1, 1976, has not yet been determined.
3.	Yes. A response is being prepared. The exchange is private, but Mr. Lockhart may wish to make the reply public.


PROPANE GAS REFRIGERATORS
Mr. Halliday: 1.	Are propane gas refrigerators manufactured in Canada and, if so, in what locations and by whom?
2.	Are there custom tariffs or other duties on the importation of such refrigerators and, if so, what are they?


Fabian Hugh Poulin: In so far as the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce is concerned: 1. According to the Electrical and Electronics Manufacturers Association of Canada, there are no regular sized propane gas refrigerators manufactured in this country. However, the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce is aware of one company, Escort Cooler Co. Ltd., 728 Dundas East, Mississauga, Ontario, that manufactures a light weight portable refrigerator which has a capacity of 1.3 cubic feet and can be powered by propane gas, 12 volt or 110 volt electricity.
2. Tariffs on non-electric refrigerators according to Schedule A are as follows: British Preferential Tariff 20 percent; Most Favoured Nations Tariff 21'h percent; General Tariff 30 percent.


LEASED PROPERTIES IN NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
Mrs. Pigott: 1.	Does the government lease properties in the National Capital Region and, if so, how many?
2.	What person, agency or department is responsible for tabulating and overseeing properties leased by the government?
3.	What are the annual rental costs for the new Industry, Trade and Commerce Building at 240 Sparks Street, Ottawa and what is the length of the
lease?
4.	In what year was final approval granted for the construction of the Building?


J. Judd Buchanan: 1. Yes, 223 properties leased by Department of Public Works.
2.	Department of Public Works tabulates and oversees only those properties under DPW responsibility.
3.	$6,100,000. Term of lease-35 years.
4.	1974.


OTTAWA BUILDINGS-LEASES, COMMITMENTS AND PENALTIES
Mrs. Pigott: 1.	Will the government be required to pay any penalties for breaking office leases in Ottawa buildings in which it will leave vacant space as a result of departmental moves to Hull and, if so, what will be the approximate total amount of such penalties?
2.	Is the government committed to any lease payments in the Ottawa offices to be vacated as a result of the moves to Hull beyond the date of each of the respective moves and, if so, what is the duration and annual cost of each lease commitment?


J. Judd Buchanan: 1. No,
the department does not plan to buy out any leases at the present time; therefore, there will be no penalties.
2. The department is not committed to any lease payments as a result of the moves to Hull. Where leases continue beyond the expected moving dates of the departments to be relocated to Hull, the vacated space will be reused by other government departments and agencies.
October 17, 1977


UNIVERSITY OF MONCTON
Mr. Jones: 1.	Does the University of Moncton recreational and sports facilities receive funds from the government and, if so (a) from which department (b) in what amount (c) what is the percentage of these funds in relation to the whole?
2.	What steps are or have been taken to assure that there is no discrimination by reason of race, religion or language in the use of the government funded facilities?
3.	Is the government aware of any discrimination in the use of the facilities in the summer of 1977 and, if so, have any corrective steps been taken?
4.	Will the government continue funding where there is discrimination by reason of language?


Marc Lalonde: 1. Yes; (a) Department of National Health and Welfare, Fitness and Amateur Sport Branch; (b) $100,000; (c) 5 per cent of total national program.
2.	Funds are provided for facilities which can be used by all citizens in the area and particularly all university students enrolled in the institution concerned.
3.	No.
4.	There is no other contribution to be provided to University of Moncton.


UIC-KEY DATA CANADA
Mr. Cossitt: Has Key Data Canada ever made use of the Unemployment Insurance Commission's computer system in Quebec and, if so, in each case (a) on what dates (b) at what times of day (c) for what lengths of time (d) what are the names and job designations of all officials authorizing such use and specifically did Mr. Robert Kingsley, Mr. Dorval Mainville or Mr. Gabriel Beland have anything to do with the arrangements with Key Data Canada (e) what is the total sum of money paid for the use of the computer system and to whom was it paid (0 what are the names and job designations of all employees who worked overtime or otherwise for such purposes and, in each case (i) what were they paid (ii) who paid them (iii) was the money paid in cash in envelopes addressed to each employee or were cheques involved?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: The matter has been referred to the RCMP for investigation. Upon completion of the investigation the question will be answered.


REMOVAL OF FLUORESCENT LIGHTS
Mr. McKenzie: 1.	Were any fluorescent lights removed from the Canadian Grain Commission Building at 303 Main Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba as an energy conservation measure or for any other reason and, if so (a) how many (b) on what date (c) at what cost?
2.	Were the lights disposed of and (a) if so, in what manner (b) if not, have they been stored for future use?


J. Judd Buchanan: 1. Yes; (a) 3,695; (b) June 14-22, 1977; (c) $1,147.00.
2. Yes. (a) Approximately 3,600 fluorescent tubes were destroyed. These lamps had less than one year of useful life remaining, therefore would have been a net liability to the department if placed in storage and used for relamping, (b)
Order Paper Questions
Approximately 100 fluorescent tubes with a significant remaining useful life were retained in storage for future use.


&quot;THE 1976 INCOME, ASSETS AND DEBT QUESTIONNAIRE&quot;
Mr. Bawden: 1.	What is the purpose of the Statistics Canada questionnaire "The 1976 Income, Assets and Debt Questionnaire"?
2.	(a) Is the information confidential to Statistics Canada (b) is the information distributed among various departments and, if so, which departments?
3.	Are there any penalties for failing to respond to the Questionnaire and, if so (a) what are they (b) have any persons been prosecuted?
4.	(a) How many questionnaires were distributed in Canada (b) how many were returned answered (c) how many persons refused to answer?
5.	What procedure does the Department follow when a person refuses to answer the Questionnaire?
6.	Are respondents informed that they need not answer the Questionnaire or are they told that they must answer it or face a fine or imprisonment?
7.	Are any safety provisions taken by the Department to ensure that irresponsible persons do not get their hands on this very confidential and private information and, if so, what are they?
8.	Do the enumerators provide evidence to the respondents as to their authority to receive the information?
9.	Has the Department instituted any measures to ensure that its employees do not pass the information on to other government departments, private firms or individuals and, if so, what are they?
10.	What is the total cost of the Questionnaire Programme and what is the cost per Questionnaire?


Fabian Hugh Poulin: Statistics Canada reports the following: 1. The only way in which factual information on incomes, assets and debts can be obtained on a confidential basis is through the Survey of Consumer Finance. Similar surveys on the asset and debt situation of Canadian families were taken in 1956, 1959, 1964 and 1970. There are strong indications that considerable changes have taken place in the financial situation of Canadians in the past seven years and a much needed update is required for policy and research purposes in many fields of government, labour and private enterprise. The results of the survey will also indicate which groups of the Canadian population are most affected by inflation. It should be noted that Statistics Canada collects income data annually through household surveys.
2.	(a) Yes; (b) Government departments only receive data in a form which does not allow identification of respondents. They have no access to the original questionnaire.
3.	(a) Under the Statistics Act 1971 there can be prosecutions for failure to respond to a Statistics Canada questionnaire. The maximum penalties for a breach of the Statistics Act are fine not exceeding $500 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, or both, (b) In sample surveys of individuals, Statistics Canada has not found it necessary to prosecute as it is the bureau's policy to seek the voluntary cooperation of the public. This has been successful. There have been no cases of prosecution in sample household surveys.
4.	(a) Questionnaires were distributed to 17,500 households across the country, (b) and (c) The final response and nonresponse rates to this survey have not yet been calculated since

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
processing procedures are still in progress. It should be noted that refusals are only one component of non-response. Other components include households in which Statistics Canada was unable to contact any member during the survey period or households which were not required to complete the survey due to special circumstances (e.g. serious illness in the household).
5.	Persons who refuse to complete a questionnaire are contacted by supervising officials of the bureau. Any questions relative to the survey are answered and respondents are given a detailed explanation of the reasons why the information is being sought. These explanations usually result in completion of the questionnaire.
6.	The interviewer does not inform respondents that the questionnaire need not be answered nor are they told by the interviewer they must answer it or face a fine or imprisonment.
7.	The documents containing this information are held in a specially secured controlled access area, available only to employees with "a need to know" in pursuance of their duties. All these employees are sworn to secrecy under the Statistics Act with severe penalties for any breach.
8.	Yes. Interviewers hold official Statistics Canada identification cards which are shown to each respondent before the interview takes place.
9.	The Statistics Act provides for severe penalties on conviction of up to $1,000 fine and/or six months imprisonment for any divulgence of information by Statistics Canada staff obtained in the course of his/her duties.
10.	The cost of collecting the information is estimated at $358,000 or $20 per household. Wages to temporary employees hired to carry out the survey account for a very large part of this amount.


ONE PARENT ASSISTANCE SUBSIDIES IN ABITIBI
Mr. Laprise: Since 1972, have one-parent families assistance subsidies been granted in the Constituency of Abitibi and, if so (a) how many (b) in which locations (c) of what amount, in each case?


Marc Lalonde: In keeping with the nature of the cost-shared programs administered by the Department of National Health and Welfare under the Canada Assistance plan, information of this type would be available from provincial authorities only.


AUDITOR GENERAL'S SALARY
Mr. Robinson: What is the salary of the Auditor General?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: $60,000 per annum, effective April 1, 1977 (in accordance with Section 56(2) of the Financial Administration Act).


AIR CANADA FLIGHT TO CANADA
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Did Air Canada cease operating its Sunday day-time flight to England and, if so (a) on what date (b) for what reason?
2.	What was the filled seat capacity percentage during the past four years the flight was in operation?
3.	Will the flight be re-established and, if so, on what date?


Otto Emil Lang: The management of Air Canada advises as follows:
1.	Yes. (a) October 24, 1976. (b) The day-time flight was a more costly operation than the overnight service because time differences and airport curfews made it necessary for the aircraft to layover in London during the late evening and early morning hours. Also, passenger demand on the transAtlantic routes was for wide-body aircraft and to have placed one of these aircraft on a day-time flight would have made the operation even less economical.
2.	Data for this complete period is not available. However, during the last 12 months of operation the day-time flight averaged a 50% load factor.
3.	There are no immediate plans to re-establish a day-time service. However, a future operation, subject to market conditions, demand and economics, cannot be precluded.


REGIMENTAL TIE
Mr. O'Sullivan: 1.	Do the Governor General's Footguards have a regimental tie and, if so (a) is it available for purchase to members of the regiment and at what cost (b) is it available for purchase to others and, if so, to whom?
2.	Has the Post Office Department recently issued to some of its employees a tie similar to that worn as the regimental tie of the Governor General's Footguards and, if so (a) is the tie identical and, if not, what is the difference (b) what is the cost per tie to each employee (c) how many have been issued or sold to employees (d) at the time of its purchase, were departmental officials aware of the similarity of the tie to that of the Governor General's Footguards (e) has the Department had any communication from the Department of National Defence concerning the tie?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of National Defence and Post Office as follows: 1. Yes. (a) It is available to members of the Regiment at the regimental kitshop at $4./tie. (b) The tie can be bought by anyone at certain civilian/military tailors.
2. Since 1976, the Post Office Department has issued items of clothing to counter sales clerks consisting of maroon and blue jackets, white shirts and ties for males, and scarves for females, (a) There are two styles of ties issued: (1) Style A- three stripes running left to right. Width and colour of stripes: maroon, 1-1/8"; blue, 1-1/8"; white, 1/8"; (2) Style B-two stripes running left to right. Width and colour of stripes: maroon, 1"; blue, 1"; The Governor General's Footguards regimental tie has two stripes, maroon and navy, each 1" wide-stripes run right to left (opposite direction to Post Office tie). There is a similarity between this tie and the Post Office tie Style B, but they are not identical, (b) Cost per tie

October 17, 1977

$1.47. Employees issued with two ties each year, one of each style, (c) Approximately 15,000 ties of each style issued. No sales, (d) Post Office officials were not aware of similarity between Style B tie and Governor General's Footguards tie when the style was originally approved, (e) No communication has taken place with the Department of National Defence concerning this tie.


GOVERNMENT AIRCRAFT
Mr. Reid: What is the government's policy on the use of government aircraft by Parliamentarians and what are the costs of such use?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Transport and National Defence as follows: 1. For approximately 30 years, Transport Canada and the Department of National Defence have operated aircraft for the use of cabinet ministers of successive governments. This is part of the responsibility shared by the two departments for providing airlifts for Members of the Royal Family, the Governor General, the Prime Minister, Ministers of the Crown, foreign dignitaries visiting Canada, Parliamentary Committees, or delegations on official business and, occasionally, senior federal officials on government business. The flight operations of Transport Canada are confined mainly to the North American continent, while the Department of National Defence provides flights both within North America and overseas.
2. The cost for flying the aircraft, the number of aircraft now in service, and their passenger capacity are as follows:
Type	No. in Passenger Service Capacity	Operating Cost per hour 1975-76Transport Canada	Jets tar	3 8	$553.00Viscount	2 22	415.00King Air	1 4	118.00D.N.D.	Boeing 707	5 170	$1,241.00Cosmopolitan	5(7) 38	547.00Falcon	4 8	751.00
The hourly cost figures stated above include the incremental costs incurred by operating the aircraft, rather than leaving them idle on the ground. They therefore include the cost of fuel and oil consumed and an annually calculated hourly cost allocation covering standard prorated maintenance, repair and overhaul costs, ground handling charges and landing fees and overtime or temporary duty expenses of the crews.
3.	The following table shows the time required for flights between Ottawa and different points in Canada: see below.
4.	The use of government owned aircraft by ministers of the Crown has been considered by successive governments to be legitimate use of public funds. The central government of a country as large as Canada cannot rely exclusively on commer-
Order Paper Questions
cial services for the travel requirements of cabinet ministers and/or visiting foreign dignitaries. Ministers' responsibilities are not limited to the Ottawa area. They must be able, with a minimum of delay, to travel to various areas of the country to carry out those responsibilities, and frequently require travel facilities on short notice. Government owned aircraft make it possible for ministers to accept engagements in distant parts of Canada and yet to be in Ottawa for important work as late as possible before and as soon as possible after the engagement. Moreover, they allow ministers to work in privacy while travelling and, particularly for the Prime Minister and foreign dignitaries, to maintain the level of security required without causing inconvenience to the travelling public on commercial airlines (see page 8618 of Hansard for December 11th, 1973). Guidelines governing the use of government aircraft by cabinet ministers were first established in June, 1963, to formalize the practices generally adhered to over the previous years. These guidelines state that ministers on government business may use government aircraft: (a) when the flight is being made to a point where there is no commercial air service; where no space is available on a commercial air service; or where because of difficulties in routings or time tables, substantial savings of essential time can be made by using departmental aircraft in place of commercial service; (b) where sudden changes in plans require emergency movement; (c) in instances where ministers are travelling with official parties of some size which need to travel together and where advantage can be gained by use of a specific aircraft. In the cabinet system of government, a minister's responsibilities extend well beyond the operations of his department across the country. Ministers must meet with provincial and local government officials and with private groups to explain and develop programmes and policies. In addition, ministers have a major responsibility for ensuring that Canadians across the country remain informed about government actions, and therefore often accept speaking engagements outside Ottawa. As far as the use of government aircraft is concerned, a minister's responsibility for his political party is considered separate from his ministerial responsibilities. Naturally, however, the demands placed on a minister's time by constituency work complicate scheduling and make it all the more important that essential time not be sacrificed by inefficient travel arrangements.
5.	When ministers use government aircraft, they may choose the individuals who will accompany them. In most cases these individuals are members of the minister's staff or departmental officials. However, ministers often extend invitations to members of parliament travelling to the same destination and sometimes to newspeople interested in their activities and to other individuals.
6.	Ministers and members of parliament and their dependents may also be provided space on regular DND flights within Canada and to Europe with the approval of the minister.
7.	Government expenditures for DND and Transport flight operations are open to the scrutiny of parliament when estimates, public accounts, and reports of the Auditor General are considered by the appropriate committees of the House.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Jetstar	Viscount	King Air	Falcon
Cosma
Nautical___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Outbond Return Outbond Return Outbond Return Outbond Return Outbond Return Outbond Return
Bagotville	265	:50	:55	1:20	1:30	1:25	1:40	1:00	1:10	1:20	1:25	1:00	1:00Baie Cornea u	403	1:15	1:20	1:45	2:00	-	-	1:15	1:25	1:40	1:50	1	15	1:20Brandon	1059	3:00	2:35	-	-	-	-	3:10	2:40	4:15	3:40	2:45	2:30Brantford	246	-	-	-	-	1:30	1:15	1:00	:55	1:20	1:15	-	-Calgary	1596	*	5:25	3:40	*	8:15	*	6:40	-	-	* 5:45	*	5:10	6:15	5:20	4:00	3:40Charlo	435	1:10	1:20	1:55	2:05	2:10	2:30	1:15	1:30	1:45	2:00	-	-Charlottetown	532	1:35	1:50	2:15	2:35	2:25	3:00	1:30	1:55	2:00	2:25	1:30	1:35Chatham	480	1:20	1:35	2:00	2:20	-	-	1:20	1:35	1:40	2:05	1:25	1:30Churchill	1045	2:45	2:45	8:30	7:30	-	-	3:10	2:45	4:20	3:45	2:45	2:30Churchill Falls	726	1:50	2:10	3:00	3:35	-	-	1:55	2:20	2:30	3:10	,-	-Cold Lake	1556	*	5:15	3:35	*	7:30	*	6:20	-	-	4:25	*	5:05	5:50	5:10	3:45	3:25Downsview (CFB)	200	:50	:50	1:05	1:00	1:20	1:00	:55	:55	1:05	1:00	55	:55Earlton	243	:50	:50	1:10	1:00	1:25	1:15	1:00	1:20	1:15	1:40	_	-Edmonton	1608	*	5:15	3:40	*	8:15	*	6:35	-	4:40	*	5:15	6:15	5:30	4:00	3:40Fredericton	404	1:15	1:20	1:40	2:05	1:50	2:15	1:10	1:25	1:40	1:55	1	15	1:20Frobisher	1115	3:10	3:10	5:30	5:30	-	-	3:05	3:25	4:10	4:10	2:45	2:45Gander	921	2:20	2:40	3:25	4:30	-	-	2:20	2:45	3:10	3:45	2:15	2:30Goose Bay	796	2:10	2:30	3:00	3:35	-	-	2:05	2:30	2:40	3:20	2:00	2:10Gore Bay	309	1:05	:55	1:40	1:25	1:45	1:30	:50	1:00	1:05	1:20	-	-Greenwood	471	1:20	1:35	1:55	2:15	2:15	2:45	1:20	1:35	1:45	2:05	1:20	1:25Halifax	536	1:30	1:45	2:15	2:35	2:30	3:05	1:30	1:50	1:55	2:20	1:30	1:35Hamilton	238	1:00	:55	1:15	1:05	1:30	1:15	1:00	:55	1:15	1:10	55	:55Inuvik	2645	*	8:45	*	6:30	*	13:30	*	12:00	-	-	**10:20	**10:00	* 9:50	7:35	-	-Kamloops	*	5:45	5:15	*	9:30	*	7:30	-	-	* 6:20	*	5:40	7:10	6:05	-	Kelowna	1820	*	5:45	5:15	*	9:30	*	7:30	-	-	* 6:15	[DOT]	5:35	7:05	6:00	-	-Kitchener	236	-	-	-	-	1:30	1:15	1:00	:55	1:20	1:15	-	-La Grande	507	1:30	1:30	2:20	2:20	-	-	1:40	1:40	2:10	2:10	-	-Lethbridge	1556	*	5:10	*	4:20	8:15	6:40	-	-	* 5:45	*	5:15	6:25	5:20	3:55	3:30London	285	1:05	1:00	1:30	1:15	1:45	1:25	1:05	1:00	1:20	1:15	1:00	1:00Medicine Hat	1481	*	5:00	*	4:20	*	8:00	*	6:30	-	-	* 5:45	[DOT]	5:05	5:55	5:00	-	-Moncton	482	1:25	1:35	2:00	2:20	2:15	2:45	1:20	1:35	1:45	2:10	1	25	1:30Mont Joli	383	1:10	1:20	1:35	1:50	1:50	2:15	1:10	1:25	1:30	1:50	1	10	1:15Montreal	81	:40	:40	:40	:45	:45	:45	:40	:35	:35	:40	35	:35Muskoka	166	:45	:40	1:00	:55	1:10	1:00	:50	:45	:50	:45	-	-North Bay	173	:55	:50	1:00	:50	1:10	1:00	:50	:50	1:00	1:00	50	:50Prince Albert	1328	*	4:45	[DOT] *	4:00	7:00	*	5:50	-	-	* 5:25	3:35	5:25	4:40	-	-Quebec	215	:45	:50	1:00	1:10	1:10	1:20	:55	:55	1:00	1:10	:55	:55Regina	1233	3:30	2:55	*	6:50	*	5:30	-	-	* 5:05	3:00	5:05	4:05	3:10	2:55Riviere du Loup	309	1:10	1:20	1:40	2:00	1:50	2:10	1:00	1:10	1:15	1:25	-	-Roberval	269	1:05	1:15	1:10	1:25	1:25	1:40	:55	1:05	1:05	1:15	-	-Rouyn	235	:50	:50	1:15	1:15	1:25	1:15	1:00	1:10	1:10	1:20	-	-Sarnia	336	1:00	1:00	1:45	1:35	2:00	1:40	1:25	1:10	1:45	1:30	-	-Saint John N.B.	430	1:15	1:20	1:45	2:00	2:05	2:25	1:15	1:25	1:35	1:55	1	15	1:20Saskatoon	1328	3:40	3:10	*	7:00	*	5:50	-	-	5:25	3:35	5:25	4:40	3:20	3:05Sault Ste. Marie	387	1:30	1:15	1:55	1:35	2:15	1:55	1:25	1:15	1:45	1:35	1	15	1:10Sept-lies	512	1:35	1:50	2:00	2:35	2:25	2:55	1:30	1:40	1:50	2:00	1:25	1:30Sherbrooke	164	:50	:55	1:00	1:10	1:00	1:10	:50	:50	1:00	1:00	-	-St. Catharines	203	:55	:55	1:10	1:00	1:20	1:10	1:00	:55	1:10	1:05	-	-St. Hubert	96	:40	:40	:45	:50	:45	:50	:35	:35	:45	:40	40	:40Stephenville	759	2:00	2:25	2:50	2:25	-	-	1:55	2:20	2:35	3:00	1	55	2:05Sudbury	232	:55	:55	1:15	1:10	1:30	1:15	1:05	1:00	1:10	1:10	55	:55Summerside	506	1:30	1:45	2:00	2:25	2:20	2:55	1:30	1:45	1:55	2:10	1	25	1:30Sydney	663	1:45	2:05	2:45	3:20	3:00	3:45	1:45	2:10	2:25	2:45	1	45	1:55Syracuse	140	:50	:50	1:00	1:00	1:00	1:00	:45	:45	:50	:50	50	:50Thunder Bay	617	1:55	1:40	2:50	2:25	3:30	2:45	2:10	1:50	2:45	2:20	1	45	1:40Timmins	340	1:20	1:10	1:40	1:25	2:00	1:40	1:20	1:10	1:45	1:35	-	-Norbay	976	2:30	2:50	3:40	4:40	-	-	2:35	3:00	3:30	4:00	2	25	2:35Toronto	227	1:00	:50	1:15	1:00	1:20	1:05	:55	:55	1:05	1:00	55	:55Trenton	124	:40	:40	:45	:45	:55	:50	:40	:40	:50	:50	45	:45Trois-Rivieres	141	:45	:50	:55	1:00	1:00	1:00	:45	:45	:50	:50	-	-Val DOr	191	:50	:50	1:00	1:00	1:15	1:05	:55	:55	1:05	1:05	1:00	1:00Vancouver	1962	6:10	*	5:30	10:00	*	7:45	-	-	* 7:00	*	6:20	7:50	6:30	4:45	4:20Victoria	1998	*	6:15	*	5:35	*	10:10	*	8:00	-	-	* 7:10	*	6:30	* 9:00	6:35	4:50	4:25Whitehorse	2490	*	8:45	*	6:45	*	13:00	*	10:25	-	-	*10:05	**	8:45	* 11:05 *	9:40	5:25	4:55Windsor	360	1:15	1:05	1:50	1:40	2:20	1:55	1:20	1:10	1:40	1:30	1	10	1:10Winnipeg	920	2:40	2:20	4:30	3:30	-	-	2:55	2:30	3:50	3:20	2:25	2:15Yarmouth	496	1:20	1:30	2:05	2:35	2:20	2:55	1:20	1:30	1:40	1:55	1:25	1:30Yellowknife	1860	*	6:15	*	5:25	*	10:00	*	8:00	-	-	* 7:25	*	6:25	6:35	5:30	4:05	3:45
Legend: * (each) One hour stop en route for refuelling (included in route times)
Notes: - 1. Route times include-15 min ground taxiing-appropriate wind factor applied to longer stage distances.
2.	Distances shown are approximate only and will vary depending on the type of aircraft/route used.
3.	The en route times provided are for guidance only; they should not be used for operational planning.


AIRCRAFT TO FREIGHT SERVICES
Mr. Broadbent: 1. What is the number of DND aircraft, in the service of Air Transport
Command, available to service points in (a) Northern Ontario (b) Northern Quebec (c) the Eastern Arctic?
2. How many are equipped to carry freight and, in each case, what is the type of aircraft, its load capacity and base airport?

October 17, 1977

3.	What is the average number of trips per month, carrying freight, to (a) Northern Ontario (b) Northern Quebec (c) the Eastern Arctic?
4.	What is the average excess capacity by weight and volume per flight (freight) to (a) Northern Ontario (b) Northern Quebec (c) the Eastern Arctic?


Barnett Jerome Danson: 1.
(a), (b), (c) and 2. The Department of National Defence does not have a scheduled freight service to Northern Ontario, Northern Quebec and the Eastern Arctic. Air Transport Group has the following type and number of aircraft capable of carrying freight into Canada's northern regions. CC130 Hercules-12 at CFB Trenton and 12 at CFB Edmonton; CC115 Buffalo-5 at CFB Trenton. Load Capacities: CC130 Hercules-Normal 30,000 lbs for 2,500 miles, maximum 45,000 lbs for 1,500 miles; CC115 Buffalo-Normal 4,000 lbs for 1,400 miles, maximum 10,000 lbs for 300 miles.
3.	and 4. See Part 1 and 2 above.


P.M.'S TRIP TO WESTERN CANADA
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What was the cost to the taxpayer of the Prime Minister's recent trip to Western Canada during which he met with the West German Chancellor, including the cost for all those accompanying him?
2.	In addition to the meeting(s) with Chancellor Schmidt, what were the other places visited and functions attended and, in each case, which were of a political nature, in whole or in part, and who was the sponsoring organization?
3.	Will the Liberal Party of Canada reimburse the public treasury for all portions of the trip that were not government business and (a) if so, on what date and in what amount (b) if not, for what reason?
4.	What are the names and job designations of all persons travelling with the Prime Minister on each section of his trip?
5.	Of the total cost of the trip, how much was for (a) the use of government owned aircraft and other transportation (b) food and drink by the Prime Minister and for those accompanying him?


Ralph Goodale: 1. to 5. See reply to question 2,881 answered today.


CBC INTERNATIONAL SERVICE
Mr. Cossitt: Did the statement of June 1977 entitled "Touchstone for the CBC" written by CBC President A. W. Johnson make any mention of the international service of CBC and, if not (a) for what reason (b) is it considered unimportant and unworthy of comment (c) is Mr. Johnson aware that certain questions concerning the international service have remained unanswered on the Order Paper during the First and Second Sessions of the 30th Parliament, at least up until the date this question was asked and, if so, what are the reasons for such a situation?


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the CBC as follows: 1. No. (a), (b) Radio Canada International is considered an extremely important component of the CBC, but by no means all the services and plans of the corporation were mentioned in "Touchstone for the CBC". It was designed as a blueprint for the domestic broadcasting services.
In so far as the Secretary of State is concerned: 1. (c) The government takes responsibility for the answers it provides to questions and for the process involved in replying to such questions. It is not appropriate therefore to provide information about internal administrative arrangements.
Order Paper Questions


STUDENT SUMMER EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM-1977
Mr. Marshall: 1.	With reference to the answer to Question No. 2,426, what is the breakdown, by province, of the number of students and allocation of funding for (a) reserve training (4,000 students at a planned cost of $6,029 million) (b) community assistance (1,450 students at a planned cost of $1,885 million) (c) cadet training (1,053 students at a planned cost of $2,998 million)?
2.	Is KATIMAVIK a DND programme and, if not, which department is responsible for it?


Barnett Jerome Danson: 1.
(a), (b) and (c); The data is presented in the following table. However, it is presented by regions rather than by provinces since actual expenditures by provinces will not be available till late October when Final reports are received.
2. KATIMAVIK is administered by a private corporation formed for this purpose but funded by the government. This corporation reports to the government through the Hon. Barney Danson, Minister of National Defence.
Student Summer Employment Program 1977-By Regions
Program	Region	Number of Students	Funding	Reserves	Pacific	560	$ 844,060Prairie	400	602,900Central	1,000	1,507,250Eastern	1,120	1,688,120Atlantic	920	Total	1,386,670 6,029,000Community Assistance	Pacific	195	253,500Prairie	215	279,500Central	280	464,000Eastern	360	468,000Atlantic	400	Total	520,000 1,885,000Cadet	Northern	4	35,000Training	Pacific	96	455,000Prairie	120	465,000Central	223	730,000Eastern	400	750,000Atlantic	210	Total	563,000 2,998,000


NEWFOUNDLAND CROWN CORPORATION
Mr. Marshall: Have any proposals been made to the government by the Newfoundland Crown corporation established to oversee certain development aspects of its Fishing industry and, if so, what are they?


Hon. Romdo LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries and the Environment):: No.


DEFOLIATION OF TREES
Mr. Malone: 1.	Was a Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development grant made to the Hobbema Indian Reserve, Alberta, for the defoliation of trees and, if so, what was the amount of the grant in (a) 1976 (b) 1977?
2.	How many acres of trees were to be defoliated?
3.	What chemical was to be used in the defoliation?

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
4.	What risks or potential risks to the health of animals or humans can occur with such defoliation chemical?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Agriculture and National Health and Welfare as follows:
1.	The Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development did not grant any funds to the Hobbema Indian reserve for the defoliation of trees in 1976 and 1977. This particular program was funded by the Montana Band (40 per cent) and the Province of Alberta (60 per cent).
2.	Approximately 100 acres were defoliated.
3.	The chemical used was 2-4D-20 Ester.
4.	The Department of Agriculture is not aware of any risks or potential risks to the health of animals that might arise from the use of 2-4-D Ester when used in accordance with directions carried on labels registered under the authority of the Pest Control Products Act. In so far as the Department of National Health and Welfare is concerned: This chemical is the commonly used one in many products available in garden stores and plant nurseries. The pharmacology is not well characterized. Both the acute and chronic toxicities to laboratory animals are low, and there seems to be no significant difference between 2-4-D and its various salts and esters in terms of their action and potency. All animal species tested react similarly, and the acute oral LD50 value is in the range of 300 to 700 mg. per kg. (LD50 is the lethal dose that kills 50 percent of laboratority animals). Clinical reports of poisoning are rare. Peripheral neuropathy has been described in elderly patients who had percutaneous absorption of the spilled chemical. This condition has not been reported among persons occupationally exposed.
4.	What are the regulations concerning the disclosure of outside directorships held by Order-in-Council appointees to the Ministers to whom they report and on what date did the Chairman of the Farm Credit Corporation first report his directorship with the Manitoba Institute of Management to the Minister of Agriculture?


Eugene Whelan: Farm Credit Corporation advises: 1. Yes.
2.	No. The Declaration and Promise of Fidelity and Secrecy applies to employees of the corporation. As a governor in council appointee, Dr. Kristjanson is in compliance with the guidelines for such appointees. On December 18, 1973, the Prime Minister informed the House that persons appointed by the governor in council to senior positions in Crown corporations are subject to the same general guidelines, including those concerning outside directorships, as members of the cabinet. The guidelines for cabinet members were outlined to the House on July 18, 1973.
3.	No. (a)(b)(c) N/A.
4.	The Minister of Agriculture was informed on September 10, 1975.


ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED-PAYMENTS TO AGENTS
Mr. Lawrence: For the fiscal year (a) 1974-75 (b) 1975-76 (c) 1976-77, how much did Atomic Energy of Canada Limited pay to (i) the Marubeni Corporation, Japan
(ii)	the Labkar Company Limited, Iran (iii) Roberto L. Lannes, Uruguay (iv) Kostas Karayannis, Greece, as an agent and what was the purpose of and services rendered for such payments?


Alastair William Gillespie: Atomic Energy of Canada Limited reports as follows:


MANITOBA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT
Mr. Beatty: 1.	As of July 13, 1977, was the Chairman of the Farm Credit Corporation a director of the Manitoba Institute of Management and, if not, on what date did he resign his directorship?
2.	Did the Chairman of the Farm Credit Corporation sign a Declaration and Promise of Fidelity and Secrecy stating, in part, that he "will not hold an outside office or employment that could place on (him) demands inconsistent with (his) official duties or call in question (his) capacity to perform those duties in an objective manner," that he "will not hold directorships in associated or nonassociated commercial corporations without the prior consent, in writing, of the Chairman of the Corporation whether or not such directorships are remunerated" and that he "will not accept or offer or agree to accept from a person having dealings with the Corporation, a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind directly or indirectly by (himself) or through a member of (his) family or through anyone for (his) benefit, unless (he has) prior consent in writing from the Chairman of the Corporation; and (he is) aware that such action by an official or an employee of the government is an offence under Section 110(1 )(c) of the Criminal Code" and, if so, on what date?
3.	Did the Director of the Farm Credit Corporation, since his appointment, receive any commission, rewards, advantages or benefits from the Manitoba Institute of Management and, if so (a) on what date and in what form (b) did he disclose the information to the Minister of Agriculture or the Board of Directors of the Farm Credit Corporation (c) were such benefits received with the approval in writing of the (i) Minister of Agriculture (ii) Board of Directors of the Farm Credit Corporation?
[Mr. Malone.)
Marubeni Corporation,
(i)	Japan Labkar Company
(ii)	Limited, Iran Roberto L. Lannes,
(iii)	Uruguay Kostas Karayannis,
(iv)	Greece
(a)

(b)

Payments to the agents in question represent commissions on sales of equipment and products relating to the medical and therapeutic application of ionizing radiation, principally for the treatment of cancer. The payments also comprise remunerations for their maintenance of capability and their responsibility to provide installation and servicing of the equipment sold while warranties are in force.


GOLDEN ARC PUBLISHING LTD.
Mr. O'Sullivan: 1.	Was a letter received by Sport Canada dated January 14, 1975, addressed to Dr. T. R. Bedecki, Director, from the honourable Member for Hamilton-Wentworth, enquiring as to the possibility of assistance for the continued
October 17, 1977

publication of equestrian journals published by Golden Arc Publishing Ltd., Ancaster, Ontario and was a reply sent and, if not, for what reason?
2.	Was a letter received by the (a) Secretary of State (b) Minister of Agriculture dated January 14, 1975, from the honourable Member for Hamil-ton-Wentworth, enquiring as to the possibility of assistance for the continued publication of equestrian journals by Golden Arc Publishing Ltd., Ancaster, Ontario and, in each case, did the reply indicate that such assistance was available under existing government programmes, either under the Department or programmes known to the Minister?
3.	Has the Young Canada Works Programme funded the equestrian publication Equipoise in Hamilton, Ontario and, if so (a) how much was the grant (b) did the conditions of the grant allow the publication to accept and run advertisements free of charge in competition with privately published equestrian magazines?
4.	How does the government reconcile the funding of an equestrian publication such as Equipoise with its refusal to assist the continued publication of other equestrian magazines such as those published by Golden Arc Publishing Ltd.?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Minister of State (Fitness and Amateur Sport), the Department of the Secretary of State, Agriculture and Employment and Immigration as follows: 1. Yes; a reply was sent to Golden Arc Publishing Ltd., on February 13, 1975.
2.	(a) A letter dated January 14, 1975 from Mr. S. O'Sullivan, member for Hamilton-Wentworth was received by the former Secretary of State, the Hon. J. Hugh Faulkner. In reponse to Mr. O'Sullivan's query regarding the possibility of assistance for Golden Arc Publishing Limited, the Secretary of State replied on February 17, 1975 that aid to publishing ventures was available under the auspices of the Canada Council, but that such aid was limited to periodicals of either a literary, artistic or scholarly nature. It was suggested, therefore that a representative of Golden Arc Publishing Limited contact officials of the council to discuss the nature of the assistance available. Officials of the Canada Council advise that they were never approached in this regard, (b) Yes, the letter was received. The reply prepared by the department advised that Agriculture Canada has no program to provide financial assistance to the publishing industry. The reply further advised that the Canada Council administers a broad program of aid to the publishing industry of Canada.
3.	Yes. (a) The project was funded for $8,265. (b) The publication may accept and run advertisements free of charge.
4.	The Fitness and Amateur Sport Branch has not funded either the equestrian publication, "Equipoise", nor the equestrian journals published by Golden Arc Publishing Ltd. Neither the Secretary of State's department nor the Canada Council have funded the equestrian publication entitled "Equipoise."


GRANT AWARDED TO ENGLISH MINORITY IN THE PROVINCE OF QUEBEC
Mr. Jones: Was a grant awarded to the English minority in the Province of Quebec similar to that recently awarded to La Societe Franco-Manitobaine St. Boniface, Manitoba under the Official Language Minority Groups Directorate, Secretary of State Department and, if so, in what amount and to whom?
Order Paper Questions


John (Moody) Roberts: Yes. Grants, totalling $93,875, were awarded to the English minority in the Province of Quebec as follows:
	1976-77
Quebec Farmer's Association	$20,100
Committee for Anglophone Social Action	36,775
Anglo-Quebec en mutation	25,000
Pontiac Social Planning Council	12,000


DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE TRAINING
Mr. Jones: Are there any provisions for the training of personnel to work in the new $3 million isolation unit to be built in Ottawa and, if so, what is the length and nature of the training programme?


Barnett Jerome Danson: The
Department of National Defence has formulated a training plan that calls for continuous part-time training of sufficient numbers of doctors, nurses, medical assistants, X-Ray and laboratory technicians, and maintenance and housekeeping staff, to ensure rapid activation of the facility whenever needed. The plan calls for a small cadre of full-time supervisory and training personnel to develop and perfect the techniques necessary for effective nursing while maintaining absolute isolation of highly infective cases. These techniques are based on recent experience using presently available, less sophisticated equipment, and the experience of others in the U.S.A. and the U.K. The present training concept is to develop a basic course of several weeks duration for the large number of hospital staff potentially needed for full operation of the unit, to be followed by the periodic short refresher courses.


SALARIES OF CFDC OFFICIALS
Mr. Robinson: What is the salary of the (a) Executive (b) Director (c) Chairman (d) Vice-Chairman (e) board members of the Canadian Film Development Corporation?


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the Canadian Film Development Corporation as follows: (a) Not applicable; (b) Director: $31,500 to $41,500; (c) Chairman: $150.00 per working day, maximum $25,000 per annum; (d) Vice-President: $125.00 for each day on which he attends a meeting, or per working day when acting in absence of chairman; (e) Members: $125.00 for each day on which they attend a meeting.
RETURN REPLY CARD ER-2-7 "LET'S TALK BUSINESS" Question No. 2,903


Mr. McKenzie:: 1.	Did the Industrial Incentives Branch of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion commence use of the return reply card ER-2-7 titled "Let's Talk Business" and, if so (a) on what date (b) in what publications has it appeared and (i) on what dates (ii) at what cost?
2.	Since its first appearance, how many responses have been received?

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. The Industrial Incentives Branch of the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is using the return reply card ER-2-7 titled "Let's Talk Business" (a) which was first placed in service on July 10, 1977; (b) for use in Air Canada's in-flight publication "En Route"; (i) the July-August 1977 issue only; (ii) at a cost of $2200.00.
2. The responses to the insert in the July/August 1977 issue of "En Route" are only beginning to arrive. As of July 31 eleven reply cards had been received. A previous insert in the December 76/January 77 issue of "En Route" resulted in 337 responses.


MRS. DEBORAH A. PAGE-DICK
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Did Corporal Wayne Schmiller of the RCMP conduct an investigation of Mrs. Deborah A. Page-Dick and, if so (a) did he represent the Security Division (b) what was the purpose of the investigation (c) did Corporal Schmiller advise those he interviewed that the purpose of the investigation was that Mrs. Page-Dick had applied for a government position (d) was the investigation carried out approximately four months after Mrs. Page-Dick had actually left the Public Service?
2.	Did Mrs. Page-Dick leave the Public Service on November 16, 1976?
3.	What is a full explanation of the apparent infringement of the private rights of a citizen by this investigation?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of the Solicitor General and Manpower and Immigration as follows: 1. Yes. (a) Yes. (b) The investigation was conducted in response to an official request from the Department of Manpower and Immigration because Mrs. Page-Dick required a security clearance, (c) Yes. (d) Security screening enquiries were initiated in July 1976 and were terminated in March 1977 upon notice being received from the Department of Manpower and Immigration that Mrs. Page-Dick was no longer in its employ.
2.	No. Mrs. Page-Dick left the Public Service on December 2, 1976.
3.	See answer to Part 1(d).


SALARIES
Mr. Robinson: What is the salary of the (a) Executive (b) Director (c) Chairman (d) Vice-Chairman (e) board members of the Canadian International Development Agency?


Fernand-E. Leblanc: These positions do not exist in the Canadian International Development Agency and therefore the question is not applicable.


DISPOSAL OF CANADIAN STAMP IN CANADA
Mr. Gillies: 1.	Did the Post Office Department or any other agency under the direction of the Department, within the past eighteen months dispose of a quantity of Canadian stamps in Canada at less than face value and, if so (a) what issues were involved (b) at what price, relative to face value, were they sold (c) what was the total price?
2.	Were the stamps sold by public tender and, if so, how were bids obtained?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: 1. Yes; (a) 12 Olympic Stamps were involved, (b) The stamps were sold in bulk for $3.15 which was $1.85 below their face value. They formed part of an Olympic Souvenir Stamp Case and were affixed to a panel embedded in the lid of the case. The Olympic Souvenir Stamp Case was sold to generate revenue in financial support of the 1976 Summer Olympics. Toward the end of 1976 when it was realized there would be a surplus inventory of the case, bulk sales at a special price were authorized to sell-off this inventory and to thereby maximize net revenues to be credited to the Olympics, (c) $155,600.
2. No


SOLAR ENERGY SOCIETY OF CANADA
Mr. Gauthier (Roberval): 1.	Is the Solar Energy Society of Canada incorporated and, if so, what are the names of the directors?
2.	(a) What are the Society's source of funds (b) has the government made grants to the Society and, if so, in what amount each year since its incorporation?
3.	To date, what are the Society's achievements?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the National Research Council and the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources as follows: 1. The Solar Energy Society of Canada was incorporated in Winnipeg, Manitoba on the October 18, 1974, as a non-profit corporation under part 3 of the Manitoba Companies Act. The society is managed by a 12 member board of directors which are nominated and elected. Detailed business is performed by a "Winnipeg Executive" which is comprised of members of the board: the Chairman and/or Vice-Chairman, the Secretary, the Treasurer (Vice-Chairman Finance) and the Chairman of the Editorial Board. The minutes of the meetings of the Winnipeg Executive are circulated to all members of the board and decisions on important items are made by letter ballot or approved at full board meetings. There are 15 Chapters and 6 regions; British Columbia, Prairie, Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Newfoundland. A regional director who is a member of the board coordinates the activities in each region. Directors of the Solar Energy Society of Canada Incorporated: Prof. Peter J. Catania Director, Prairie Region; Doug Lorriman, Director, Ontario Region; Prof. Ray Chant, Chairman of the Board Director, Chapters; Ernest Robertson, Vice-Chairman, Director, Government Relations; Dr. Henry Flynn, Director, Energy Economics; Edward A. Speers, Treasurer, Vice-Chairman, Finances; Robert Gemmel, Secretary; Prof. Robert K. Swart-man, Director, Programmes; Erich Floffmann, Director, Pacif-
October 17, 1977

ic Region; Prof. John D. Welch, Director, Membership, Chairman, Editorial Board; Tom Lawand, Director, International Affairs, Past Chairman; Gerry Wright, Co-ordinator, 1977 SESCI, Conference; Jacques Beaudet, Director, Quebec Region; Bryan Cook, Director, Government Liaison; Dr. Jim Bolton, Director, Science and Technology, Chairman, Resolutions Committee; Fred Hamilton, Associate Director; Jim Collins, Director, Public Relations; Prof. Verne Ireton, Director, Atlantic Region; Dr. Alan D. Robb, Director, Newfoundland Region.
2.	(a) The society has three sources of funds, a $10 annual registration fee, corporate memberships of $250 for industry and the profits of the sale of 12 periodicals. On a local level, each chapter has a minimal annual fee and to supplement this, other activities are carried out such as selling books on solar heaters, houses, etc. In addition to this, half of the corporate membership goes to the local chapter in the region in which the industry is located, (b) The Department of Energy, Mines and Resources has made one grant of $35,400 to the society to help defray its operations. There have been also some grants made for conferences; both Central Mortgage and Housing and the Division of Building Research of the National Research Council made grants of $2,500 to the society for publishing the proceedings of the "Potential of Solar Energy for Canada" conference which was held in Ottawa in June of 1975. A $2,400 grant was also made by the National Research Council for the "Sharing the Sun '76" conference which was held in Winnipeg in August, 1976. The department of industry and commerce of the Manitoba government made a grant of $5,000 to the society for this conference as well.
3.	Besides being a means of creating a public awareness of the utilization of solar energy in Canada, the Conferences held by the society have served to create government interest in solar energy. This in turn will hopefully lead to increased government expenditure on research in the area of solar energy. In particular, the joint conference of the American section of the International Solar Energy Society and SESCI: "Sharing the Sun '76", which was held in Winnipeg in August, 1976 brought an awareness of international developments to the attention of the various levels of the government in Canada. Another major accomplishment of the Winnipeg conference was that the wide range of technical and policy papers which were presented have been outlined in 10 volumes of proceedings. These volumes constitute a very comprehensive documentation of the international status of solar energy. The chapters have concentrated on the dissemination of information on solar energy to the public by means of public meetings, extra copies of their newsletters, etc. With the same purpose in mind, chapter members have also given courses and lectures on such topics as the construction of your own solar water heater. A course such as this was given at Ryerson last year. The London chapter held a picnic where all the food was cooked on solar cookers and a contest was held by the B.C. chapter for the best solar collector designs. These are just two examples of some of the novel activities which were carried out by the individual chapters.
Order Paper Questions AMOUNT SPENT IN KOOTENAY WEST


Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of Communications in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


Mr. Ross Milne (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Communications):: The answer to the above question is "Nil".


AMOUNT SPENT BY DREE IN KOOTENAY WEST
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: The estimated expenditures by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion in the constituency of Kootenay West by departmental program are: (a) for the period April 1, 1969, to March 31, 1974: ARDA $118,898, RDIA $618,625; (b) for the period April 1, 1974, to July 20, 1977: Special ARDA $8,048, RDIA $1,154, 760.


EXPENDITURES-KOOTENAY WEST
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of Fisheries and the Environment in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


Hon. Rom6o LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries and the Environment):: The amount spent by the Department of Fisheries and the Environment in the constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 is $2,472,900; (b) 1974 to present is $2,184,000.


AMOUNT SPENT BY DEPARTMENT OF SUPPLY AND SERVICES IN KOOTENAY WEST
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of Supply and Services in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


Jean-Pierre Goyer: The department maintains records by cities and provincial boundaries and not by constituency boundaries.


EXPENDITURES-CONSTITUENCY OF KOOTENAY WEST
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of the Solicitor General in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


Francis Fox: Royal Canadian Mounted Police: (a) $6,890,412 for the years 1969/70 to
8274

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
1974/75. No records are available for the year 1968/69. (b) $4,856,888 for the fiscal years 1975/76 and 1976/77. Ministry Secretariat, Canadian Penitentiary Service and the National Parole Service, National Parole Board: Nil.


DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS EXPENDITURES IN KOOTENAY
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of Public Works in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


J. Judd Buchanan: (a) The
amount of money spent by the Department of Public Works from its own appropriations from April 1, 1971 to March 31, 1974 was $878,708. A total of $1,180,485 was spent by the Department of Public Works on behalf of other government departments, (b) The amount of money spent by the Department of Public Works from its own appropriations from April 1, 1974 to June 30, 1977 was $1,002,930. A total of $783,352 was spent by the Department of Public Works on behalf of other government departments. Information for the period prior to April 1, 1971 is unavailable as the government's Record Disposal Policy requires financial information to be retained for a period of six years only.


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the National Museums: The Museum Assistance Programmes, since their inception in 1972, have awarded grants totalling $145,700 to the Kootenay Doukhobor Historical Society National Exhibition Centre in the Constituency of Kootenay West, (a) In the 1973-74 fiscal year, a grant of $100,000 (under the Capital Assistance Programme) was awarded to the Kootenay Doukhobor Historical Society National Exhibition Centre to assist the construction of the National Exhibition Centre facility, (b) from 1974 to date, three grants totalling $45,700 have been awarded the Kootenay Doukhobor Historical Society National Exhibition Centre, as follows: 1976-77: $20,000 under the Core-Funding Assistance Programme; 1977-78: $20,000 under the Core-Funding Assistance Programme; $5,700 under the Special Activities Assistance Programme; total $45,700.


POST OFFICE EXPENDITURES IN KOOTENAY WEST
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Post Office Department in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


Hon.   J.-J. Blais@Postmaster General: The Post Office Department does not keep records of expenditures by electoral constituencies.


EXPENDITURES OF DEPARTMENT IN KOOTENAY WEST
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of National Health and Welfare in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


Marc Lalonde: The schedule below lists only those grants and contributions which are clearly identifiable as belonging to this Constituency:


CBC-AMOUNT SPENT IN KOOTENAY WEST 1968 TO DATE
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the CBC as follows: (a) $548,118, (b) $710,027.


EXPENDITURES IN CONSTITUENCY OF KOOTENAY WEST
[Stage Direction]
Fitness and Amateur Sport Program Grants-in-aid to student athletes Social Service Programs
New Horizons-Contributions toward projects aimed at providing opportunities for people retired from the labour force to help themselves, other Canadians and the community Family Planning-Grants to assist in the development of provincial, municipal and voluntary services and for specific projects in this area.
(a)	(b)
1968-74	1974-77
$10,000	$ 2,400
$86,511	$112,525
	$150,000
$96,511	$264,925
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of Transport, in respect of (a) air (b) water (c) rail (d) road transportation, including subsidies recommended by the Canadian Transport Commission in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (i) 1968 to 1974 (ii) 1974 to date?


Otto Emil Lang: (a) (i) 368,148, (ii) 1,388,145; (b) (i) nil, (ii) nil; (c) (i) nil, (ii) nil; (d) (i) nil, (ii) nil.


EXPENDITURES-KOOTENAY WEST AMOUNT SPENT BY NATIONAL MUSEUMS IN KOOTENAY WEST
Mr. Brisco: What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the National Museums Corporation in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (a) 1968 to 1974 (b) 1974 to date?

Question No. 2,926-Mr. Brisco:
What is the best estimate of the amount spent by the Department of Manpower and Immigration, including expenditures under (a) LIP (b) Canada Works and Young Canada Works (c) other job creating programmes in the Constituency of Kootenay West from (i) 1968 to 1974 (ii) 1974 to date?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: (i) (a) $1,029,342; (b) N/A; (c) not available; (ii) (a) $1,581,-

October 17, 1977

899; (b) $303,085; (c) $225,283 (OFY, LEAP, and Summer Job Corps).


IMPORT PERMITS-EGGS
Mr. Beatty: 1.	How many different companies received import permits for eggs during the period January 1, 1976 to May 31, 1977?
2.	During the same period, how many import permits were issued to each company?
3.	What was the quantity of eggs imported by each company during the period?


Fabian Hugh Poulin: 1. There were 188 companies issued with import permits to import eggs into Canada during the period January 1, 1976 to May 31, 1977.
2.	In view of the commercial confidentiality that is attached to permits issued to import goods listed on the Import Control List, it is not possible to divulge how many import permits were issued to each company to import eggs during the period January 1, 1976 to May 31, 1977. However, during the same period, a total of 330 permits were issued to 188 companies.
3.	A total of 655,560 boxes, containing 15 dozen of eggs each, were authorized for importation into Canada during the same period.


DISCUSSIONS WITH PUBLIC SERVICE ALLIANCE REGARDING MOVES FROM NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION
Mr. Darling: 1.	Were discussions held with the Public Service Alliance of Canada prior to the date that moves were announced from the National Capital Region of the (a) Unemployment Insurance Commission, Annuities and Central Index Units to Bathurst, New Brunswick (b) Department of Supply and Services (i) Superannuation Division to Moncton, New Brunswick (ii) Cheque Redemption Control Division to Matane, Quebec (c) Department of Veterans Affairs, Pension Commission Board et al to Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island (d) Department of National Revenue, Taxation Data Centre to (i) St. John's, Newfoundland (ii) Chicoutimi-Jonqui^re, Quebec (iii) Shawinigan, Quebec (iv) Winnipeg, Manitoba (v) Surrey, British Columbia (e) Department of the Environment, Canadian Hydrographic Service to (i) Victoria, British Columbia (ii) Burlington, Ontario (iii) Quebec City (iv) Dartmouth, Nova Scotia and, if so, what were such discussions?
2.	Were discussions held in relation to the moves with the (a) local governments in the cities (b) provincial governments in the provinces to which such units will move, prior to the date the moves were announced and, if so, in each case, what were such discussions?


Robert Knight Andras: 1. Discussions were held with the Public Service Alliance of Canada either at the national level or component level prior to the date of the relocation announcement of the government units listed in Part 1 of question 2,931. Discussions were held on such matters as the number of staff-years to be relocated, the identity of the work unit to be relocated, the name of the receiving community, the expected date of the relocation, and/or the expected date of the public announcement.
2. Discussions with the local and provincial governments were not held prior to the dates the relocations were announced.
Order Paper Questions


SALARIES OF CANADIAN PATENTS AND DEVELOPMENT LIMITED
Mr. Robinson: What is the salary of the (a) Executive (b) Director (c) Chairman (d) Vice-Chairman (e) board members of Canadian Patents and Development Limited?


Hon. Janies Hugh Faulkner (Minister of State for Science and Technology):: In so far as Canadian Patents & Development Limited is concerned: (a) General Manager Salary range $33,750-$38,750; (b) N/A; (c) N/A; (d) N/A; (e) N/A.


SALARY OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS-CANADIAN PENITENTIARY SERVICE
Mr. Robinson: What is the salary of the (a) Executive (b) Director (c) Chairman (d) Vice-Chairman (e) board members of the Canadian Penitentiary Service?


Francis Fox: The titles and salary range of the Canadian Penitentiary Service Senior Management Group are as follows:
Title	Salary Range
Commissioner	$41,000-$54,000
Deputy Commissioner Inmate Programs	$33,300-$46,300
Deputy Commissioner Operational Services	$33,300-$46,300
Deputy Commissioner Security	$33,300-$46,300
Director General Medical Services	$37,500-$52,300
Director General Human Resources	$29,000-$40,800
Regional Directors (5)	$29,000-$40,800


DEMPSTER HIGHWAY PROJECT
Mr. Nielsen: 1.	Was the Eagle River Bridge Construction property destroyed upon completion of the Dempster Highway project this year?
2.	Was any government property burned or otherwise destroyed at that time and (a) if so, for what reason was the property disposed of in this manner (b) if not, in what manner was the property disposed of upon completion of the project?
3.	What was the original landed cost of such property at the Camp Site?


Ralph Goodale: I am informed by the Departments of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, National Defence and Public Works as follows: 1 and 2. All DIAND property was retained by the department except the bridge steel cartes and miscellaneous construction items which were turned over to the Yukon government's department of public works for maintenance on the Dempster Highway. Property used by DND on this project was returned to DND stocks or to DPW for their use or disposal except the scrap wood and the incomplete shell of a prefabricated building which were
8276

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
disposed of by burning as they could not be economically recovered from the site. DPW property was assigned to Crown Assets for disposal.
3. The original landed cost is not known as most of the equipment on site was obtained from the Department of National Defence at the time of the turn-over of the Alaska Highway in 1964.


FISCAL YEAR EXPENDITURES FOR WESTERN PROVINCES SINCE
Mr. Epp: 1.	What was the amount of spending by the Department of Manpower and Immigration in (a) Canada (b) British Columbia (c) Alberta (d) Saskatchewan (e) Manitoba in the year (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972 (vi) 1973 (vii) 1974 (viii) 1975 (ix) 1976?
2.	For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: I. Expenditures Under Operating Budget Canada
British Columbia/Yukon Alberta/Northwest Territories Saskatchewan Manitoba
2. Percentage Spent in Western Canada
(SOOO's)
1970-71	1971-72	1972-73	1973-74	1974-75	1975-76	1976-7794,440	110,446	132,983	154,775	200,263	228,382	257,6059,164	10,827	12,814	14,717	19,722	21,277	24,7183,659	4,192	4,916	5,681	8,280	9,287	10,7481,914	2,125	2,737	3,219	4,569	4,310	5,2284,247	5,076	6,282	7,458	9,662	10,486	11,78918,984	22,220	26,749	31,075	42,233	45,360	52,48320.1%	20.1%	20.1%	20.1%	21.1%	20.4%	19.9%
note: Expenditures are not available prior to 1970-71.


DREE SPENDING IN WESTERN CANADA
Mr. Epp: 1.	What was the amount of spending by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion in (a) Canada, (b) British Columbia, (c) Alberta, (d) Saskatchewan, (e) Manitoba in the year; (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972
(vi)	1973 (vii) 1974 (viii) 1975 (ix) 1976?
2.	For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?


Marcel Lessard: 1. (a), (b), (c), (d) and (e): The Department of Regional Economic Expansion was formed in 1969. Expenditures for each fiscal year are shown in the attached table.
2. See following table.
1. Total expenditures by the Department of Regional Economic Expansion by fiscal years in thousands of dollars is as follows:
(c) Alberta	Budgetary	Non-Budgetary	Total1969-70	16,173	-	16,1731970-71	12,426	660	13,0861971-72	8,032	986	9,0181972-73	16,459	599	17,0581973-74	24,183	1,115	25,2981974-75	14,972	1,097	16,0691975-76	16,498	1,249	17,7471976-77	15,810	515	16,325(d) Saskatchewan	Budgetary	Non-Budgetary	Total1969-70	14,834	-	14,8341970-71	16,335	675	17,0101971-72	17,684	442	18,1261972-73	13,293	525	13,8181973-74	16,288	423	16,7111974-75	25,106	1,698	26,8041975-76	37,894	2,134	40,0281976-77	41,624	1,929	43,5532. Percentage spent in Western Canada.	(e) Manitoba	Budgetary	Non-Budgetary	Total1969-70	16,131	-	16,131(a) Canada	Budgetary	Non-Budgetary	Total	1970-71	15,125	1,214	16,3391969-70	179,349	40,180	219,529	1971-72	16,932	922	17,8541970-71	260,512	70,295	330,807	1972-73	23,220	1,179	24,3991971-72	308,634	36,213	344,847	1973-74	13,862	962	14,8241972-73	300,093	64,771	364,864	1974-75	26,878	1,581	28,4591973-74	361,729	62,615	424,344	1975-76	29,941	1,237	31,1781974-75	381,581	56,973	438,554	1976-77	35,274	1,564	36,8381975-76	449,017	34,464	483,481	1976-77	443,150	26,528	469,678	(b) British Columbia	Budgetary	Non-Budgetary	Total	Budgetary	Non-Budgetary	Total1969-70	4,775	-	4,775	1969-70	28.95	-23.65	1970-71	5,797	-	5,797	1970-71	19.07	3.63	15.791971-72	10,843	-	10,843	1971-72	17.33	6.49	16.191972-73	4,653	-	4,653	1972-73	19.20	3.56	16.421973-74	4,179	_	4,179	1973-74	16.18	3.99	14.381974-75	6,157	-	6,157	1974-75	19.16	7.68	17.671975-76	9,388	* -	9,388	1975-76	20.87	13.41	20.341976-77	8,783	-	8,783	1976-77	22.90	15.11	22.46

October 17, 1977


MINISTRY OF STATE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY EXPENDITURES
Mr. Epp: 1.	What was the amount of spending by the Ministry of State for Science and Technology in (a) Canada (b) British Columbia (c) Alberta (d) Saskatchewan (e) Manitoba in the year (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972 (vi) 1973 (vii) 1974 (viii) 1975 (ix) 1976?
2.	For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?


James Hugh Faulkner: In so far as the Ministry of State for Science and Technology is concerned: 1. (a) Canada: (i) 1968, N/A; (ii) 1969, N/A; (iii) 1970, N/A; (iv) 1971, N/A; (v) 1972, $2,031,482.00; (vi) 1973, $4,524,902.00; (vii) 1974, $4,632,413.00; (viii) 1975, $4,170,696.00; (ix) 1976, $4,693,601.00; (b) British Columbia-1968 to 1976-N/A; (c) Alberta- 1968 to 1976-N/A; (d) Saskatchewan-1968 to 1976- N/A; (e) Manitoba-1968 to 1976-N/A.
2. N/A.


DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS EXPENDITURES IN WESTERN CANADA
Mr. Epp: 1.	What was the amount of spending by the Department of Public Works in (a) Canada (b) British Columbia (c) Alberta (d) Saskatchewan (e) Manitoba in the year (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972 (vi) 1973 (vii) 1974 (viii) 1975 (ix) 1976?
2.	For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?


J. Judd Buchanan: 1. (a) to
(e)	(i), (ii), (iii): Not applicable. Information not available as the Government Record Disposal Policy requires financial information to be retained for a period of six years only.
		(a)	(b)	(c)	(d)	(e)
			British		Saskatche-	
Year	Canada	Columbia	Alberta	wan	Manitoba(SOOO's)	(SOOO's)	(SOOO's)	(SOOO's)	(SOOO's)(iv)	1971-1972	$344,950	$22,927	$ 9,924	$ 4,169	$14,277(v)	1972-1973	383,581	28,933	12,463	4,374	13,277(vi)	1973-1974	499,605	35,360	19,729	6,378	13,054(vii)	1974-1975	566,042	43,362	20,765	6,070	15 334(viii)	1975-1976	675,672	52,251	19,621	7,688	16,2o8(ix)	1976-1977	746,482	71,575	28,906	10,096	18,6642.	(a) to (e) (i), (ii), (iii): Not applicable.	See note	above.
Percentage spent in western Canada (includes Yukon and Northwest Territories) (iv) 1971-72 18.9 percent; (v) 1972-73 18.7 per cent; (vi) 1973-74 18.2 per cent; (vii) 1974-75 18.9 per cent; (viii) 1975-76 17.6 per cent; (ix) 1976-77 21.2 per cent.


DEPARTMENT OF INDIAN AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURES
Mr. Epp: 1.	What was the amount of spending by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development in (a) Canada (b) British Columbia (c) Alberta (d) Saskatchewan (e) Manitoba in the year (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972 (vi) 1973 (vii) 1974 (viii) 1975 (ix) 1976?
2.	For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?
Order Paper Questions


James Hugh Faulkner: 1. (a) Canada; (i) 1968-69; $260,746,313; (ii) 196970; $305,760,260; (iii) 1970-71; $349,202,471; (iv) 1971-72; $431,114,057; (v) 1972-73; $508,299,561; (vi) 1973-74; $600,328,742; (vii) 1974-75; $671,884,094; (viii) 1975-76; $852,164,149; (ix) 1976-77, $982,488,592*
*1976-77 expenditures could change slightly from those shown as final figures are not yet available in all cases.
(b)	British Columbia: (i) 1968-69; $29,792,000**; (ii) 196970; $39,643,000**; (iii) 1970-71; $49,671,000* * e (iv) 197172; $55,487,000; (v) 1972-73; $55,455,000; (vi) 1973-74; $62,374,000; (vii) 1974-75, $69,338,000; (viii) 1975-76, $77,566,000; (ix) 1976-77, $94,863,000..
** Includes Indian and Eskimo Affairs Program expenditures in the Yukon.
(c)	Alberta; (i) 1968-69 $27,137,000; (ii) 1969-70, $32,092,000; (iii) 1970-71, $38,395,000; (iv) 1971-72, $46,775,000; (v) 1972-73, $51,081,000; (vi) 1973-74, $62,039,000; (vii) 197475, $71,095,000; (viii) 1975-76, $86,176,000; (ix) 1976-77, $96,716,000; (d) Saskatchewan: (i) 1968-69 $19,796,000; (ii)
1969-	70, $25,145,000; (iii) 19700-71, $29,447,000; (iv) 1971-
72, $34,734,000; (v) 1972-73 $39,486,000; (vi) 1973-74, $48,622,000;	(vii)	1974-75,	$60,225,000;	(viii)	1975-76,$68,273,000; (ix) 1976-77, $83,591,000; (e) Manitoba: (i) 1968-69, $19,405,000; (ii) 1969-70, $23,323,000; (iii) 197071, $29,294,000; (iv) 1971-72, $36,428,000; (v) 1972-73, $38,691,000;	(vi)	1973-74,	$50,301,000;	(vii)	1974-75,
$60,605,000; (viii) 1975-76, $72,046,000; (ix) 1976-77 $89,014,000.
2. (i) 1968-69, 37 per cent; (ii) 1969-70, 39 per cent; (iii)
1970-	71, 42 per cent; (iv) 1971-72, 40 per cent; (v) 1972-73, 36 per cent; (vi) 1973-74, 37 per cent; (vii) 1974-75, 39 per cent; (viii) 1975-76, 36 per cent (ix) 1976-77, 38 per cent;


EXPENDITURES WESTERN CANADA
Mr. Epp: 1.	What was the amount of spending by the Department of Agriculture in (a) Canada (b) British Columbia (c) Alberta (d) Saskatchewan (e) Manitoba in the year (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972 (vi) 1973 (vii) 1974 (viii) 1975 (ix) 1976?
2.	For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?


Eugene Whelan: (a)	(b)	(C)	(d)	(e)
	1.	British			
				Saskatche-	
Canada	Columbia	Alberta	wan	Manitoba(0	1967-68 272,996,819	11,446,108	25,391,252	29,300,643	18,085,485(ii)	1968-69 262,355,871	11,975,633	25,463,221	14,496,358	15,862,667(iii)	1969-70 352,598,403	10,660,147	22,987,172	12,699,724	15,083,895(iv)	1970-71 238,574,483	10,346,732	21,269,755	14,477,547	15,416,468(V)	1971-72 256,112,751	11,224,120	16,765,230	12,377,488	14,073,905(vi)	1972-73 282,373,943	13,037,851	19,388,040	14,001,950	15,030,538(vii)	1973-74 396,122,317	19,963,538	40,000,609	27,092,567	26,588,268(viii)	1974-75 636,749,339	30,891,816	65,228,715	84,598,134	36,145,877(ix)	1975-76 625,807,148	30,766,810	76,136,434	47,673,988	39,154,3992. 1967-68-31%	1970-71-26%	1973.74_29%1968-69-26%	1971-72-21%	1974-75-34%1969-70-17%	1972-73-22%	1975-76-31%
8278___________________________________________COMMONS DEBATES_______________________________________October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
ENERGY, MINES AND RESOURCES EXPENDITURES	Manitoba in the year (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972 (vi) 1973
(vii)	1974 (viii) 1975 (ix) 1976?
_	.	2. For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?


Mr. Epp: 1. What was the amount of spending by the Department of Energy, Mines and Hon. Alastair Gillespie (Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources in (a) Canada (b) British Columbia (c) Alberta (d) Saskatchewan (e) Resources): 1.
(i)-(iv)	(v)	(vi)	(vii)	(viii)	(ix)1968-71	1972-73	1973-74	1974-75	1975-76	1976-77(a) Canada	Figures not available	$76,465,141	$220,936,149	$100,935,574	$133,057,294	$19,951,396(b) British Columbia	Figures not available	1,626,660	1,116,658	2,592,920	3,359,813	5,789,507(c) Alberta	Figures not available	3,837,271	4,605,869	5,222,912	7,543,774	11,986,444(d) Saskatchewan	Figures not available	152,885	663,888	484,374	818,973	708,425(e) Manitoba	Figures not available	369,029	449,992	459,991	705,231	953,083Western Canada	1968-71 Percentages	1972-73	1973-74	1974-75	1975-76	1976-77not available	8%	3%	9%	9%	10%
Note: When coding expenditures, the destination of the cheque determines the territorial code to be used. Therefore, the province in which the billing office is
located appears to have received the full benefit of the expenditures (i.e. all payments against Air Canada Credit Cards are coded to Manitoba, where their accounting office is located, regardless of where the credit cards were used). Based on this information, territorial expenditure reports are produced. The above figures were extracted from these reports.


DEPARTMENT OF NATIONAL DEFENCE EXPENDITURES
Mr. Epp: 1. What was the amount of spending by the Department of National Defence in (a) Canada (b) British Columbia (c) Alberta (d) Saskatchewan (e) Manitoba
in the year (i) 1968 (ii) 1969 (iii) 1970 (iv) 1971 (v) 1972 (vi) 1973 (vii) 1974
(viii)	1975 (ix) 1976?
2. For each of the same years, what percentage was spent in Western Canada?


Barnett Jerome Danson: 1 and
2.
Distribution of DND Expenditures ($000)
1968/69	1969/70	1970/71	1971/72	1972/73	1973/74	1974/75	1975/761. Canada	1,264,806	1,405,205	1,431,470	1,757,314	1,872,821	2,074,253	2,265,164	2.689.608British	Columbia	104,645	135,195	146,512	160,697	191,573	210,400	236,172	268,912Alberta	77,960	103,759	109,826	135,961	165,090	186,185	201,196	237,346Saskatchewan	18,708	22,196	23,250	27,891	31,274	35,676	40,770	50,641Manitoba	63,626	81,775	81,937	90,588	95,344	106,695	118,112	138,2602. % Western Canada	(Note 1)	19.37%	24.40%	25.26%	23.62%	25.80%	25.98%	26.32%	25.85%
NOTE 1: Percentage has been calculated against DND expenditures in Canada. Provincial amounts include-Civilian and Service Personnel Pay and Allowances. Travel and transportation.
Pensions and gratuities.
Supplies, including construction, operation and maintenance.


SPECIAL ARDA MANITOBA-RED SUCKER LAKE LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Red Sucker Lake Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2. On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $42,316.80 of

October 17, 1977

federal moneys were expended to assist the Red Sucker Lake Local Fur Council.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 6, 1974 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA MANITOBA-YORK LANDING LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The York Landing Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $8,984.94 of federal moneys were expended to assist the York Landing Local Fur Council.
2. Financial assistance was committed on October 5, 1973 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE PIKWITONEI LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Programme entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal monies were granted to The Pikwitonei Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the monies granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $22,809.55 to Pikwitonei Local Fur Council I; $5,281.93 to Pikwitonei Local Fur Council II.
2. Financial assistance was committed on April 11, 1974 to Pikwitonei Local Fur Council I, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities." Financial assistance was committed on November 23, 1976 to Pikwitonei Local Fur Council II, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/
Order Paper Questions
Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE NOR-EAST ENTERPRISES LTD.
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Nor-East Enterprises Ltd. in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $29,196.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist the Nor-East Enterprises Ltd.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 12, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that, (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-EINARSON'S TRAILER COURT AND STORE
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Einarson's Trailer Court and Store in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $19,268.39 of federal moneys were expended to assist Einarson's Trailer Court and Store.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 8, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE LOUIS RIEL COOPERATIVE-ST. LAURENT
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Louis Riel Cooperative at St. Laurent, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $57,384.43 of federal moneys were expended to assist The Louis Riel Cooperative.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 29, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE FISHER RIVER FISHERMEN'S FEDERATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Fisher River Fishermen's Federation in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $61,587.00 to Fisher River Fishermen's Federation; $57,529.23 to Fisher River Fishermen's Assoc. II; $16,803.89 to Fisher River Fishermen's Assoc. III.

2. Financial assistance was committed on July 7, 1973 to Fisher River Fishermen's Federation; on July 2, 1974 to Fisher River Fishermen's Assoc. II; and on July 28, 1974 to Fisher River Fishermen's Assoc. Ill, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-CROSS LAKE FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Cross Lake Fishermen's Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $23,010.51 of federal moneys were expended to assist Cross Lake Fishermen's Association.
Financial assistance was committed on May 30, 1974 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-MASIKEESK INN
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Masikeesk Inn in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, no federal moneys were expended to assist the Masikeesk Inn.


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-LAKE MANITOBA NARROWS LODGE
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Lake Manitoba Narrows Lodge in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department
October 17, 1977

of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $72,056.00 of Federal moneys were expended to assist Lake Manitoba Narrows Lodge.
2. Financial assistance was committed on July 20, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-DELTA LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Delta Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $24,500.47 to Delta Local Fur Council I; $19,080.14 to Delta Local Fur Council II.
2. Financial assistance was committed on February 11, 1974 to Delta Local Fur Council I, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities." Financial assistance was committed on February 1, 1977 to Delta Local Fur Council II, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-DELTA FISHERMEN'S FEDERATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Programme entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal monies were granted to The Delta Fishermen's Federation in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the monies granted and under what terms and conditions?
Order Paper Questions


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $59,071.98 to Delta Fishermen's Federation; $36,196.03 to Delta Fishermen's Association.
2. Financial assistance was committed on February 11, 1974 to the Delta Fishermen's Federation, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities." Financial assistance was committed on November 3, 1975 to the Delta Fishermen's Association, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/ Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE BARREN LAND BAND
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Barren Land Band at Lac Brochet, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $11,882.77 of federal moneys were expended to assist The Barren Land Band.
2. Financial assistance was committed on November 10, 1972 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE MOAK LODGE
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Moak Lodge at Grand Rapids, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $59,362.57 of federal moneys were expended to assist Moak Lodge.
8282

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
2. Financial assistance was committed on May 30, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-OAK POINT FISHERMEN'S AND TRAPPERS' ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Oak Point Fishermen's and Trappers' Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $33,236.57 of federal moneys were expended to assist The Oak Point Fishermen's and Trappers Association.
2. Financial assistance was committed on December 14, 1972 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-CORMORANT FISHERMEN'S CO-OP
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Cormorant Fishermen's Co-op in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $3,170.90 of federal moneys were expended to assist The Cormorant Fishermen's Co-op.
2. Financial assistance was committed on December 13, 1972 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative

primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-INDIAN RICE PRODUCERS
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Indian Rice Producers in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $56,324.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist The Indian Rice Producers.
2. Financial assistance was committed on May 10, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-CAMPERDUCK TRAPPERS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Camperduck Trappers Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $3,430.38 to Camperduck Trappers Assoc., $9,322.46 to Camperduck Local Fur Council.
2. Financial assistance was committed on December 2, 1972 to the Camperduck Trappers Assoc., and on October 24, 1974 to the Camperduck Local Fur Council, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."
October 17, 1977


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-NIKKELS ACTION CENTRE
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Nikkels Action Centre at Marchand, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, no federal moneys were expended to assist Nikkels Action Centre.


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE OAK POINT HOTEL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to the Oak Point Hotel in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $57,145.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist the Oak Point Hotel.
2. Financial assistance was committed on April 9, 1974 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-LAC DU BONNET TRAPPER'S ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Lac du Bonnet Trappers' Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $6,339.39 of federal moneys were expended to assist Lac du Bonnet Trapper's Association.
Order Paper Questions
2. Financial assistance was committed on November 13, 1972 under Section 1 (d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July zO, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-TRI-STAR CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD.
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Tri-Star Construction Company Ltd. in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $17,114.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist Tri-Star Construction Company Ltd.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 12, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-WABOWDEN TRAPPERS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Wabowden Trappers Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $15,561.46 to Wabowden Trappers Association; $9,362.75 to Wabowden Local Fur Council.
2. Financial assistance was committed on November 10, 1972 to the Wabowden Trappers Association, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development
80020-6OV2

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."
Financial assistance was committed on October 22, 1976 to the Wabowden Local Fur Council, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-FISHER BAY FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal monies were granted to Fisher Bay Fishermen's Association in Kootatak, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the monies granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $2,900.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist Fisher Bay Fishermen's Association.
2. Financial assistance was committed on May 24, 1972 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-CRANE RIVER FEEDLOT
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Crane River Feedlot in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $40,395.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist Crane River Feedlot.
2. Financial assistance was committed on September 5, 1972 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the

undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-PINETREE INN
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Pinetree Inn at Richer, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $21,274.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist Pinetree Inn.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 7, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-ARCTIC GRAIN
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Arctic Grain at Churchill, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, no federal moneys were expended to assist Arctic Grain.


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-E. MONKMAN
Mr. Epp: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to E. Monkman at Loon Straits, Manitoba?
October 17, 1977

2. On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $800 of federal moneys were expended on November 4, 1974 for fishing equipment; and $375 of federal moneys were expended on March 9, 1976 for training equipment, to assist E. Monkman.
2. Financial assistance was committed on November 4, 1974 for fishing equipment under Section 1(d) of the Canada/ Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities." Financial assistance was committed on March 9, 1976 for trapping equipment under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."
SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-A. MacAULEY


Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to A. MacAuley in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $5,186.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist A. MacAuley.
2. Financial assistance was committed on May 31, 1972 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."
Order Paper Questions


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-NORTHERN MEAT AND SAUSAGE
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Programme entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal monies were granted to Northern Meat and Sausage at Scanterbury, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the monies granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $58,635.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist Northern Meat and Sausage.
2. Financial assistance was committed on August 27, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-INTERLAKE CUSTOM KILLING
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Interlake Custom Killing at St. Laurent, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the monies granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $43,240.71 of federal moneys were expended to assist Interlake Custom Killing.
2. Financial assistance was committed on September 12, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that: (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-MR. LAUBMAN


Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Mr. Laubman at Pikwitoei, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $14,800.72 of federal moneys were expended to assist Percy Laubman.
2. Financial assistance was committed on August 8, 1972 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE YELLOW QUILL CO-OP
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Yellow Quill Co-op at Swan Lake, Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $66,334.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist the Yellow Quill Co-op.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 13, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that: (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE HOLE RIVER TRAPPERS' ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Hole River Trappers Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $26,256.81 to Hole River Trappers' Association; $9,345.49 to Hole River Local Fur Council.
2. Financial assistance was committed on November 2, 1972 to the Hole River Trappers Association under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities." Financial assistance was committed on May 14, 1976 to the Hole River Local Fur Council under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-ST. AMBROISE FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The St. Ambroise Fishermen's Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $22,565.24 of federal moneys were expended to assist the St. Ambroise Fishermen's Association.
2. Financial assistance was committed on December 13, 1972 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE DODGE TRADING COMPANY
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Dodge Trading Company in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: under the Special ARDA Program to July 31, 1977, no federal moneys were expended to assist The Dodge Trading Company.


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE BROCHET FISHERMEN'S CO-OPERATIVE
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Brochet Fishermen's Co-operative in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $16,800.00 of federal moneys were expended to assist The Brochet Fishermen's Co-operative.
2. Financial assistance was committed on May 18, 1973 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE MOLSON LAKE LODGE
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Molson Lake Lodge in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program to July 31, 1977, $15,589.28 of federal moneys were expended to assist Molson Lake Lodge.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 11, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision
Order Paper Questions
of services, including tourist facilities, provided that: (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-GRAND RAPIDS SERVICE STATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Grand Rapids Service Station in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program to July 31, 1977, $123,313.01 of federal moneys were expended to assist Grand Rapids Service Station.
2. Financial assistance was committed August 8, 1974 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services; including tourist facilities, provided that: (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment, measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE CORMORANT LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to the Cormorant Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $13,709.14 to Cormorant Local Fur Council I; $8,827.14 to Cormorant Local Fur Council II.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 6, 1973 to Cormorant Local Fur Council I, and on December 31, 1973 to

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Cormorant Local Fur Council II, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE NELSON HOUSE LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Nelson House Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program to July 31, 1977, $33,774.12 of federal moneys were expended to assist the Nelson House Local Fur Council.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 4, 1973 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-THE SPLIT LAKE LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to The Split Lake Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliament Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $54,345.11 to Split Lake Local Fur Council I; $47,600.21 to Split Lake Local Fur Council II.
2. Financial assistance was committed on August 12, 1973 to Split Lake Local Fur Council I, and on April 17, 1975 to Split Lake Local Fur Council II, under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-SHAMATTAWA LOCAL FUR COUNCIL
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Shamattawa Local Fur Council in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $10,227.87 to Shamattawa Local Fur Council I; $54,496.98 to Shamattawa Local Fur Council II.
2. Financial assistance was committed on November 14, 1973 to Shamattawa Local Fur Council I under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities." Financial assistance was committed on September 30, 1975 to Shamattawa Local Fur Council II under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-PRIMADJIHOWIN
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Project Primadjihowin in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, no federal moneys were expended to assist Project Primadjihowin.


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-SOUTH INDIAN LAKE FISHERMEN'S CO-OP
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to South Indian Lake Fishermen's Co-op in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, $343,078 of federal
October 17, 1977

moneys were expended to assist South Indian Lake Co-op Fisheries Ltd.
2. Financial assistance was committed on January 8, 1973, under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-GRAND RAPIDS FISHERMEN'S CO-OP
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Grand Rapids Fishermen's Co-op in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program, to July 31, 1977, the following federal moneys were expended: $17,803.00 to Grand Rapids Fishermen's Co-op I; $24,395.71 to Grand Rapids Fishermen's Co-op II; $4,839.76 to Grand Rapids Fishermen's Assoc.
2. Financial assistance was committed on May 21, 1972 to Grand Rapids Fishermen's Co-op I; and on September 4, 1974, to the Grand Rapids Fishermen's Co-op II, under section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities." Financial assistance was committed on January 22, 1976 to the Grand Rapids Fishermen's Association under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 18, 1975, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-NORWAY NURSING HOME
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Norway Nursing Home in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?
Order Paper Questions


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program to July 31, 1977, $202,724.47 of federal moneys were expended to assist the Norway Flouse Nursing Home.
2. Financial assistance was committed on October 18, 1973 under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that: (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at least two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-ST. LAURENT FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to St. Laurent Fishermen's Association in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the Special ARDA Program to July 31, 1977, $20,453.53 of federal moneys were expended to assist the St. Laurent Fishermen's Association.
2. Financial assistance was committed on September 7, 1972 under Section 1(d) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The development of viable supplementary or alternative primary producing activities for the purpose of improving marginal or submarginal incomes of disadvantaged people engaged in such activities."


SPECIAL ARDA PROGRAM-LAKE MANITOBA'S FISHERMEN'S CO-OP
Mr. Epp: 1.	Under the Special ARDA Program entered into under agreement between the government and the Province of Manitoba, what amounts of federal moneys were granted to Lake Manitoba's Fishermen's Co-op in Manitoba?
2.	On what dates were the moneys granted and under what terms and conditions?


Mr.   Ed. Lumley@Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Regional Economic Expansion: The reply for the Department of Regional Economic Expansion is as follows: 1. Under the

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
Special ARDA Program, to July 21, 1977, $2,563 of federal moneys were expended to assist Lake Manitoba Co-op Fisheries Ltd.
2. Financial assistance was committed on June 5, 1972, under Section 1(e) of the Canada/Manitoba Special Rural Development Agreement, dated July 20, 1971, as follows: "The establishment, expansion or modernization of any commercial undertaking engaged in the utilization of primary resources, in processing, in manufacturing or in the provision of services, including tourist facilities, provided that: (i) the undertaking is expressly organized so that at east two-thirds of those employed are disadvantaged people who have previously had little or no access to regular earning and employment opportunities; and (ii) there is adequate provision for such counselling, training and other adjustment measures as are necessary to the employment of disadvantaged people in the undertaking."


UIC-KEY DATA
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	In regard to the possible use of the Unemployment Insurance Commission's computer in Montreal, Quebec by Key Data Canada, was (a) a programme for any particular job labelled LG01 (b) the tape used labelled with the word "KAOTEK" or a similar name?
2.	Was (a) Gabriel Charbonneau (b) Elaine Gagne (c) Robert Martin (d) Jean-Pierre Cloutier (e) Michel Soucy (f) Jacques Benoit (g) Yvon Deguire (h) Andre Boileau involved in the project at any time including after-hours and, if so, was an attempt made to give them $20.00 in addition to their usual UIC salaries in order to involve them in an illegal project?
3.	Was this money presented to them in envelopes and, if so, by whom?
4.	Did Mr. D. Mainville, Chief of the Computer Section at the time, have knowledge of or anything to do with such a procedure?
5.	Was Key Data doing work for a company located in the area of Drum-mondville, Quebec and, if so, for what reason was it using the UIC computers for such purposes?
6.	To the knowledge of the government, did a UIC employee receive a swimming pool at his residence in return for making arrangements involved with this matter and did the employee arrange a promotion for one of his staff for assisting him?
7.	Were UIC computer services used by Key Data for a period of approximately two months and were transactions entered on the computer and, if so, how many transactions?


Jack Sydney George (Bud) Cullen: The matter has been referred to the RCMP for investigation. Upon completion of the investigation the question will be answered.

[ Translation]


QUESTIONS PASSED AS ORDERS FOR RETURNS
Yvon Pinard: Mr. Speaker, I ask that questions Nos. 2,482 to 2,529 inclusively and 2,559 to 2,623 inclusively be made orders for returns.
Mr. Speaker, if questions Nos. 29, 30, 160, 181, 212, 360, 487, 592, 643, 715, 725, 747, 771, 784, 786, 877, 941, 948, 955, 1,031, 1,072, 1,189, 1,192, 1,215, 1,224, 1,303, 1,322,

1,338, 1,358, 1,643, 1,737, 1,914, 2,073, 2,344, 2,369, 2,375, 2,378, 2,379, 2,380, 2,381, 2,396, 2,441, 2,531, 2,535, 2,548, 2,551, 2,643, 2,755, 2,756, 2,781 and 3,005 could be made orders for returns, these returns would be tabled immediately.


MINISTER'S USE OF AIRCRAFT
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Since January I, 1974, have any Department of Transport aircraft been used by Cabinet Ministers and, if so, in each case (a) what is the identity of the Minister (b) what type of aircraft was used (c) what was the purpose of the trip (d) on what date was such trip made (e) what was the (i) point of origin (ii) stop in between and its purpose (iii) point of termination (f) what was the complete cost to the taxpayer (g) what was the name and job designation of all others on board at any time (h) which trip, if any, included attendance at Liberal Party functions or political business of any kind, directly or indirectly?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
Return tabled.



Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Since January 1, 1974, have any Department of National Defence aircraft been used by Cabinet Ministers and, if so, in each case (a) what is the identity of the Minister (b) what type of aircraft was used (c) what was the purpose of the trip (d) on what date was such trip made (e) what was the (i) point of origin (ii) stop in between and its purpose (iii) point of termination (f) what was the complete cost to the taxpayer (g) which trip, if any, included attendance at Liberal Party functions or political business of any kind, directly or indirectly?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
Return tabled.


TRADE STATISTICS
Mr. Forrestall: By year, since 1965 for which trade statistics are available, what is the government's best estimate of the amount of cargo with the Canadian origins/ destinations routed via east coast American ports by country or origin/destina-tion in terms of (a) dollar value (b) tons?
Return tabled.


DEPARTMENTAL USE OF TAXIS IN OTTAWA
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What was the total Figure paid by (a) all departments (b) each department for taxis in the Ottawa area during the last year for which Figures are available?
2.	What was the total amount received by Blue Line Taxi Company from all departments during the last year for which Figures are available?
3.	Has Blue Line been used exclusively by the government and, if so (a) for what reason (b) were tenders called for such services and, if so (i) what are the details (ii) if not, for what reason?
4.	What was the total amount paid to all other taxi companies in the Ottawa area for all departments for the last year for which Figures are available?
Return tabled.


REORGANIZATION OF DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
Mr. Orlikow: For each department and agency, what were the dates of the completion of the two re-organizations preceding the most recent one (a) what contracts were
October 17, 1977

awarded in connection with these re-organizations (b) what was the total cost of each such contract?
Return tabled.


GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING IN ETHNIC NEWSPAPERS
Mr. Mitges: 1.	Is there a policy regarding advertising by the government in ethnic newspapers in Canada and is such advertising funnelled through individuals and/or different agencies and, if so, what are their names?
2.	What amount was allocated for advertising by the government in ethnic newspapers in (a) 1974-75 (b) 1975-76 (c) 1976-77?
3.	Which ethnic newspapers received government advertising in (a) 1974-75 (b) 1975-76 and what was the amount in each case?
Return tabled.


INMATES SERVING INDEFINITE SENTENCES
Mr. Hnatyshyn: How many inmates in Canada are serving indefinite sentences as (a) dangerous sexual offenders (b) habitual offenders and, in each case (i) how long have they been serving their sentence (ii) what number are currently on parole?
Return tabled.


DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Mr. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich): 1.	(a) How many regional offices are maintained by the Department of Agriculture (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.


MAILING LISTS
Mr. Beatty: 1.	What is the policy of the government with regard to the placing of names of individuals or organizations on mailing lists for the sending of unsolicited material during a period of restraint?
2.	(a) Approximately how many names are on such lists and how many mailings would each receive over the course of a year (b) what is the total cost to the taxpayer for such mailings?
3.	Does the government at least once a year request confirmation by those included on such lists that they, in fact, want the material and, if not (a) in each case, what is the nature of the mailing list and how many names are on it (b) for what reason?
Return tabled.
Order Paper Questions


CONSULTANT CONTRACTS
Mr. Coates: 1.	What is the total number of individuals, firms and agencies presently involved in any form of consulting work with the government through any department, agency or Crown corporation as of this date?
2.	Of the total number, how many have been employed by the government for a period longer than April 1, 1976 and, in each case (a) what has been the period of involvement to date (b) how long will the contract continue (c) what have been the payments in fees and expenses to date (d) what is the estimated final cost in fees and expenses (e) what is the objective of the work in question?
Return tabled.


GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS
Mr. Coates: 1.	Of the total number of persons who hold contracts with the government, its agencies or Crown corporations, how many were former employees of the government?
2.	In each case, what is (a) their name (b) the position formerly held (c) the contract presently held (d) the total estimated cost of the contract (e) the amount received to date in fees and expenses (f) duration of the contract?
Return tabled.


SPECIAL ADVERTISING PROGRAMS BY GOVERNMENT
Mr. Muir: 1.	How many special advertising programmes have been undertaken by the government or its agencies since April 1, 1972 and what was the purpose and cost of each?
2.	In each case (a) what was the name of the firm (b) what amount of the total cost was paid to each (c) of the total cost paid to each, what amount was received in fees and expenses and what percentage was part of the contract awarded to the firm?
3.	For each advertising programme (a) in what manner was it determined which firm or firms would participate in the programme and who made the decision (b) were tenders called and, if not, for what reason?
Return tabled.


DEATHS IN PENAL INSTITUTIONS
Mr. Leggatt: 1.	Between January 1, 1962 and January 1, 1976, how many persons have died in penal institutions?
2.	How many such deaths occurred in (a) maximum security (b) medium security (c) minimum security institutions, and, in each case, what was his or her (i) name (ii) status in the institution (i.e. inmate, guard, social worker, etc.) (iii) cause of death?
3.	To the knowledge of the government, by province, how many deaths occurred in provincial institutions and, in each case, what was his or her (a) name (b) status in the institution (c) cause of death?
4.	In each case where the victim was an inmate (a) for what crime or crimes had he or she been incarcerated (b) what was the length of sentence he or she had been serving?
5.	Between January 1, 1962 and January 1, 1976, how many hostage-taking incidents have occurred in penal institutions and, in each case (a) on what date (b) what was the number of hostages (c) what was the name of the institution?
Return tabled.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


SERVICES LEASED BY GOVERNMENT FROM TELEPHONE COMPANIES
Mr. Bawden: 1.	What are the details of the services leased by the government from (a) Bell Canada (b) Trans-Canada Telephone System (c) other telephone companies in Canada?
2.	In each case, what are the cost breakdowns?
Return tabled.


HOUSING UNITS-1968 TO 1975
Mr. Gilbert: 1.	For each year 1968 to 1975, what was the total number of housing units in (a) Canada (b) each province?
2.	For each of the same years, where applicable, what was the number of housing units in (a) Canada (b) each province classified as (i) low rental (ii) non-profit (iii) cooperative (iv) assisted rental (v) rural and native (vi) federal-provincial (vii) student (viii) public?
Return tabled.


PUBLIC OPINION SURVEYS
Mr. Beatty: 1.	Have any public opinion surveys been conducted or commissioned by the government in the past year and, if so (a) what are they (b) in each case (i) what was its purpose (ii) on what date was it conducted (iii) for what body or individual was it conducted (iv) by whom was the survey conducted (v) what was the cost to the taxpayer (vi) what was the sample size (vii) from what group(s) were respondents drawn (viii) what action, if any, was taken as a result of the survey (ix) from whom is a copy of the survey available?
2.	What further public opinion surveys are being contemplated for 1976?
Return tabled.


CONTRACT SPEECH WRITERS
Mr. Beatty: 1.	From March 1, 1975 to November 5, 1976, on how many occasions did a minister of the Crown employ or otherwise arrange for the services of a freelance or contract speech writer?
2.	In each case (a) who was the minister (b) what was the fee (c) what was the occasion of the speech (d) who was the freelance or contract writer?
Return tabled.


CMHC-OUTSIDE CONSULTANTS
Mr. Howie: Were outside consultants employed by CMHC between January 1, 1975 and November 1, 1976 and, if so (a) how many (b) who were the firms or persons (c) what amount was paid to each (d) for what purpose (e) in each case, is the report available to the public and, if not, will it be published?
Return tabled.


STUDIES OF GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION OR SERVICES
Mr. Howie: 1.	Have any studies been done on aspects of government administration or services that could be considered for contracting out to the private sector of the economy and, if so (a) on what date (b) by whom (c) has a written report been produced (d) in each case, will it be made public?

2.	Were any such studies prepared by outside consultants and, if so (a) by whom (b) what amount was paid to each?
Return tabled.


Question No. 1,031-Mr. Nystrom:
1.	How many products containing the contaminant dioxin are available for sale or may be sold in Canada?
2.	Who are the manufacturers who produce these products in Canada and/or the United States?
3.	What are the tolerance levels set for dioxin in the various products which contain this contaminant?
4.	What procedures are followed to ensure that the various manufacturers of these products stay within the tolerance levels set by the Canadian government?
5.	What is the dollar value spent in Canada on research to develop products which do not contain the contaminant dioxin?
6.	(a) What is the dollar value of research in Canada currently underway or recently completed on the possible effects on human health of products which contain this contaminant (b) what are the results of this research?
7.	Has there been any research on the cumulative effects of products which contain dioxin and, if so, what are the results of this research?
8.	Has there been any research in Canada, or in any other country, on the effects of the contaminant dioxin when combined with other chemicals which might be used simultaneously with products containing dioxin and, if so, what are the results of this research?
9.	(a) What is the Department of National Health and Welfare's estimate on the volume of dioxin used in Canada over the past five years (b) has the volume increased or decreased during this period (c) what was the volume used last year?
10.	(a) What is the Department's estimate on the volume of dioxin used in the US over the past five years (b) has the volume increased or decreased during this period (c) what was the volume used last year?
11.	(a) Are there any prohibitions on the use of products which contain the contaminant dioxin near residences (b) are there any other prohibitions on the use of these products?
12.	Are there any alternative products which do not contain dioxin and could be used as effectively as those products which do contain this contaminant and, if not, is there any research currently underway on alternative products?
13.	Is there any evidence of birth defects, still births or serious illness, in Canada or the US, associated with the spraying of herbicides which contain the contaminant dioxin and, if so, what are the details?
14.	Do any government departments use products which contain dioxin and, if so (a) which departments (b) in what quantities (c) are permits required for the use of these products?
15.	Has the government considered banning products which contain dioxin and, if not, for what reason?
Return tabled.


PRIME MINISTER AND PRIVY COUNCIL OFFICE PERSONNEL
Mr. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich): 1.	For the fiscal year (a) 1972-73 (b) 1973-74 (c) 1974-75 (d) 1975-76, what was the personnel strength of the (i) Prime Minister's Office (ii) Privy Council Office?
2.	For the same years, in each case, what was the strength by grade, class or category of employee?
3.	For the same years, how many in each category in Part 2 were employed as a result of (a) open competition through the Public Servce Commission (b) transfer from other departments (c) Order-in-Council appointment (d) Ministerial or Prime Minister designation?
October 17, 1977

4.	For the same years, in each category, what amount was paid in salaries and travel costs?
Return tabled.


DEPARTMENTAL PUBLICATIONS
Mr. Beatty: 1.	Which departments publish magazines concerning their activities and policies?
2.	In each case (a) what is the (i) name of the magazine (ii) nature of its contents (b) how often is it published (c) what was the (i) press run (ii) size of the distribution list for each issue in the past 12 months (d) what was the total cost to the taxpayer for the (i) preparation (ii) printing (iii) distribution of each issue in the past 12 months?
Return tabled.


GOVERNMENT HOSPITALITY
Mr. Beatty: What was the total amount paid by the government for hospitality in (a) 1975 (b) the first ten months of (i) 1975 (ii) 1976?
Return tabled.


USE OF DOT AIRCRAFT
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	On how many occasions have DOT aircraft been used by individuals, other than Cabinet Ministers, as far back as records are available and, in each case, what (a) is the name, address and job designation (b) was the point of departure and destination (c) was the cost (d) was the purpose (e) is the name of the highest ranking individual authorizing the flight and what is his job designation?
2.	What was the total cost to the taxpayer of all such trips?
Return tabled.


LAWYERS IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
Mr. Reynolds: What are the names of all lawyers used in British Columbia by the government or any Crown corporation?
Return tabled.


AUTOMATION IN POST OFFICE
Mr. Dinsdale: 1.	At what locations in Canada have machines been installed for the automated processing of mail?
2.	What types of machines were installed at each location?
3.	How many of each type of machine was installed at each location?
4.	On what date was each type of machine installed at each location?
5.	What was the original target date for the installation of each type of machine at each location?
6.	What were the reasons for the delay, if any, in installing each machine at each location?
7.	When was each type of machine at each location fully operative?
8.	What was the estimated cost of each type of machine installed at each location?
9.	What was the actual cost of each type of machine installed at each location?
Order Paper Questions
10.	What were the reasons, if any, for the difference in the estimated cost and the actual cost of each type of machine installed at each location?
11.	Who were the suppliers of each type of machine installed at each location?
12.	Who were the manufacturers of each type of machine installed at each location?
13.	Where was each type of machine installed at each location manufactured?
14.	What firms were asked to tender for each type of machine installed at each location?
15.	What time frame do the answers to parts 1 to 14 cover?
16.	At what locations in Canada does machinery have to be installed in order to fully complete the Post Office's programme of mechanization?
17.	What types of machines have to be installed at each of the locations?
18.	What quantity of each type of machine has to be installed at each of the locations?
19.	What is the estimated cost of each type of machine to be installed at each location?
20.	What is the target date for the installation of each type of machine at each location?
21.	What factors could delay the installation of each type of machine at each location?
22.	Who will be the suppliers of each type of machine to be installed at each location?
23.	Who will be the manufacturers of each type of machine to be installed at each location?
24.	What time frame do the answers to parts 16 to 23 cover?
Return tabled.


FLIGHTS TAKEN BY PUBLIC SERVANTS
Mr. Allard: 1.	How many flights were taken by public servants in (a) 1975 (b) 1976 and, of these, how many were first class?
2.	For the same years, what amount was spent on air travel?
Return tabled.


&quot;CITIZEN McCAIN&quot;
Mr. McCain: 1.	What was the total number of employees of CBC involved with the production of the film "Citizen McCain"?
2.	What is the name of each person involved with research during any stage of the production of the film?
3.	What is the name of each person involved at any stage in the editing of the film?
4.	What is the name of the producer of the film?
5.	What was the total number of working hours spent by CBC employees on the production of the film, including preparation, editing and public presentation?
6.	How many persons were interviewed during any stage of the production of the film and what is the name and address of each such person?
7.	How many persons interviewed did not appear in the final version of the film and what is the name and address of each?
8.	How many persons travelled to (a) England (b) any other location outside Canada during any stage of the production of the film?
9.	What is the name of each location (a) in Canada (b) in England (c) outside Canada other than England, which was visited during any stage of the production of the film?
10. How many locations (a) in Canada (b) in England (c) outside Canada other than England, were visited more than once during any stage of the production of the film and, in each case (i) what is its name (ii) how many times was it visited?

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
11.	What is the name of the location of each warehouse visited (a) during any stage in the production of the film (b) which did not appear in the production of the film?
12.	What is the name and location of each television station which has included the film in its programming to date (a) in Canada (b) outside Canada?
13.	Has the film been shown by any television station (a) in Canada (b) outside Canada, on more than one occasion and, if so, in each case (i) what is the name and location of the station (ii) how many times has it been shown by the station to date?
14.	What percentage of Canada's population will have been covered by the television stations which have included the film in their programming to date?
15.	Will the film be shown by any television station in or outside Canada in the future and, if so (a) what is the name and location of the station (b) on what date will it be shown?
16.	Has the film been presented to the public other than through the television media in or outside Canada at any time and, if so (a) in what locations (b) to whom (c) how many times?
17.	Will the film be presented to the public other than through the television media at any time in the future and, if so (a) in what locations (b) to whom (c) on what date?
18.	What was the salary of each person employed by CBC while involved with any stage of the production of the film and what was the total salary cost to CBC?
19.	What was the amount paid to each person interviewed during any stage of the production of the film?
20.	What was the total cost to CBC for travel, food, lodging and related expenses during any stage in the production of the film (a) in Canada (b) in England (c) outside Canada other than England?
21.	What was the total cost to CBC for the use of warehouses or other facilities used during any stage in the production of the film?
22.	What was the total cost to CBC for network time required for the public presentation of the film to date and on what basis was the cost calculated?
23.	What was the total cost for the complete production and presentation of the film?
Return tabled.


GOVERNMENT ADVERTISING
Mr. MacKay: 1.	In the year (a) 1974 (b) 1975 (c) 1976, what proportion of the total advertising budget of the government was directed to paid advertising in (i) member papers of the Canadian Weekly Newspapers Association or the Canadian Community Newspapers Association (ii) Canadian daily newspapers (iii) Canadian "ethnic" newspapers (iv) Canadian magazines, excluding Reader's Digest (v) Canadian radio (vi) Canadian television (vii) United States publications excluding Reader's Digest and other foreign publications (viii) United States television and radio (ix) other Canadian media (x) other foreign media?
2.	For the same years, what was the total government expenditure on government information services and publications?
Return tabled.


CROWN CORPORATIONS
Mr. Herbert: Do any Crown corporations incur obligations in the coverage of insured risks and, if so (a) which ones (b) what are the amounts of the contingent liabilities?
Return tabled.


MR. JOHN S. STRAITON
Mr. Gillies: 1.	Did Mr. John S. Straiton join the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources effective June 17, 1974 and, if so, what was his (a) title (b) salary range (c) salary designation level (d) job description (e) past experience?
2.	Did Mr. Straiton join the Department under the Executive Interchange Programme and, if so (a) what is a brief description of the concept and terms of the Programme (b) what are the specific details in relation to Mr. Straiton?
3.	On what date did Mr. Straiton leave the Department?
4.	Is John Straiton and Partners Ltd., Toronto, Ontario incorporated and, if so, since what date?
5.	Did Mr. Straiton of John Straiton and Partners Ltd. ever receive any consulting contracts from the Department of Energy, Mines and Resources and, if so (a) were tenders called (b) was there any kind of formal review to assess the contracts and, what is a description of such review?
6.	For each consulting contract referred to in Part 5, what (a) were the terms of reference (b) was the time period involved (c) was the time of the actual completion date (d) was the amount paid and the name of the project authority?
7.	Did Miss Ethel Teitelbaum serve as special assistant to the Honourable Donald Macdonald and, if so, what was her (a) specific function (b) salary range (c) date of (i) commencement (ii) departure?
8.	Is the government aware that in December 1976, John Straiton and Partners announced the appointment of Miss Teitelbaum and in an advertisement stated that she "was the principal liaison" between the Honourable Donald Macdonald and "major federal projects in Toronto", that her former job "brought her into contact with Members of Parliament, Ministers, government departments and agencies, civic and provincial officials"?
9.	Did the Prime Minister state in the House on March 24, 1976, that guidelines will have to be established governing the activities of former high level public servants and, if so, will he take into consideration the inclusion of exempt (appointed) staff in such guidelines?
Return tabled.


CMHC USE OF LAWYERS IN HAMILTON-WENTWORTH
Mr. O'Sullivan: 1.	(a) What are the names and addresses of lawyers who were given work by CMHC in the Constituency of Hamilton-Wentworth since October 1, 1972 (b) in each case, by year, how much was paid?
2.	For each year (a) 1972 (b) 1973 (c) 1974 (d) 1975 (e) 1976, what amount was paid to members of the legal profession in the Constituency of Hamilton-Wentworth by the Department of (i) Justice (ii) National Health and Welfare (iii) Labour (iv) the Solicitor General (v) Fisheries (vi) the Environment (vii) Consumer and Corporate Affairs and, in each case, what was the name and addresses of the lawyer?
3.	For each year 1972 to date, how many public servants did each Department have working in the Constituency of Hamilton-Wentworth?
4.	(a) What are the names of all advertising agencies in Ontario used by the government or any Crown corporation in each year 1972 to 1976 inclusive (b) what were the amounts paid to each (c) in each case, what work was done by the agency?
Return tabled.


CANDU COMMERCIAL REACTORS
Mr. Crosbie: 1.	In the safety report for a commercial CANDU reactor, is the unavailability of the vacuum building considered as a credible event?
2.	Has the vacuum building at Pickering, Ontario ever been unavailable while the reactors were operating and, if so (a) on what dates (b) for how long?
3.	Have the vent valves used in the vacuum building for the CANDU commercial reactors been tested at full scale?
October 17, 1977

4.	If the vent valves fail to function due to "common mode" failure would the vacuum building be incapacitated?
5.	Has the AECB sufficient independent expertise to evaluate the contents of the computer codes which are used in CAN DU safety analysis?
6.	(a) How many computer codes are used in CANDU safety analysis (b) what are their names and functions (c) where do they originate?
7.	Have any of the computer codes been modified in order to minimize discrepancies with observed phenomena?
8.	Is AECL or Ontario Hydro competent to do three-dimensional transient analysis in the course of CANDU safety analysis?
9.	Does AECB have the necessary expertise to independently evaluate the use of computers for control functions at the Bruce Atomic Generating Station?
10.	What has been the experience with regard to the combined availability of the two computers used for control functions at the Bruce Atomic Generating Station?
11.	(a) What is a power tilt and how does it develop (b) can a power tilt get out of control and, if so, what are the results (c) does the Bruce Atomic Generating Station demonstrate a tendency to develop a power tilt and, if so, at what power levels does such a tendency first manifest itself?
12.	Is it possible for ballooning fuel rods to block the flow of coolant in a pressure tube and, if so, what would be the result?
13.	How many seconds will elapse before a pressure tube deprived of coolant will explode assuming the reactor (a) is operating at full power (b) has just been shut down?
14.	Is there any conclusive proof that an exploding pressure tube cannot precipitate similar explosions or failures in neighbouring pressure tubes and, if so, what is it?
15.	Has the Lucens accident in Switzerland in 1969, in which an exploding pressure tube collapsed hundreds of other calandria tubes and totally destroyed the core of the reactor, been carefully studied because of its possible safety implications for CANDU reactors and, if so, by whom and with what results?
16.	What assurances are there that embrittlement of pressure tubes due to constant or only moderate bombardment with neutrons will not weaken some of the tubes to such an extent that they may explode spontaneously?
17.	(a) Are there signs posted in the area of the Pickering Generating Station indicating the nature of the dangers therein or are there simply "No Trespassing" signs in the outer and inner perimeter fences (b) are warning signs posted in English only or in both official languages?
18.	Have members of the public wandered within the confines of the inner fence and, if so, on what occasions?
19.	(a) What improvements in security have been undertaken since Dr. Morton Schulman made his unauthorized entry into the Pickering Plant (b) how many guards are posted at Pickering (i) by day (ii) by night (c) is there a gap at the western end of the outer perimeter fence where it meets Lake Ontario through which members of the public may and do wander freely onto the grounds at the installation?
20.	What laws and regulations are in effect to keep the public outside the grounds of nuclear facilities?
21.	What is the maximum credible direct impact of an airplane in terms of size and speed that one of the Pickering reactors could withstand?
22.	How many grams of (a) plutonium (b) uranium exist in Canada in a pure state or in a state that would qualify it as "strategic nuclear material"?
23.	What is the anticipated amount of "strategic" plutonium that will be in existence in Canada in (a) 1980 (b) 1990 (c) 2000 (d) 2025 (e) 2050?
24.	Is it possible for a CANDU reactor to suffer a major release of radioactivity as a result of (a) a conventional artillery or mortar assault (b) a single well placed conventional explosive charge and, if so, approximately how many living people possess the knowledge of where to place such a charge?
25.	Does the government have contigency plans for the evacuation of the Toronto metropolitan area in the event of a major radiation release at the Pickering Nuclear Power Station?
26.	(a) How long would it take to evacuate the maximum credible area endangered by a CANDU failure (b) what would be the dollar cost of decontamination of such a maximum credible area?
Order Paper Questions
27.	(a) Has the government established guidelines for coping with nuclear blackmail (b) what would be this government's reaction to credible evidence that some person or persons in Ottawa were in possession and control of a nuclear bomb?
28.	What specific plans and guidelines have been developed for decommissioning CANDU reactors and installations at the end of their useful period of service?
29.	What are the anticipated total dollar costs of decommissioning the (a) Pickering (b) Bruce facilities?
30.	What progress has been made in the research and development of the fuel processing capability?
31.	How much has been (a) spent (b) committed toward R & D of this capability?
32.	Is nuclear energy, in the government's opinion, economically viable over the long term (a) without (b) with the development of the fuel reprocessing option?
33.	Are any sites in Canada now under consideration for fuel reprocessing facilities and, if so (a) what are they (b) has any land been acquired by the federal or provincial governments at any site?
34.	What are the (a) costs (b) conclusions involved in re-using plutonium as reactor fuel in Canada?
35.	Has any progress been made in the assessment of the environmental, public health and safety risks involved in re-using plutonium as a reactor fuel and, if so, are these risks greater when plutonium is re-used?
36.	(a) Has AECL undertaken development of a second generation CANDU that can use recycled plutonium and, if so, on what date was the decision made and by whom (b) when is this second generation CANDU expected to come on line (c) what are the anticipated R and D costs of such a programme (d) how much has been (i) spent (ii) committed to such a programme?
37.	In the government's opinion, is nuclear power economically viable (a) without (b) with second generation development?
38.	Is it possible that a fully fuelled CANDU reactor be destroyed by sabotage, error, explosion, or earthquake and, if so, what is the government's estimate of the (a) likely (b) maximum possible, extent of nuclear contamination on the surrounding environment and the affects on public health and safety of such an event?
39.	(a) Was there an accident at the Chalk River NRX facility on December 12, 1952 and, if so, what was the extent of the damage that occurred on that date and in the period immediately following (b) have the causes of the accident been traced to (i) human error (ii) mechanical failure (iii) or a combination of both (c) what were the nature and extent of the repairs (d) what amount was spent on the repairs (e) how long was the reactor shut down following the incident (f) was any leakage of nuclear contaminants involved (g) what was the minimum distance that separated significant volumes of radioactive fluids from the Ottawa River in the period until this accident was brought under control?
40.	(a) Was there an accident (fire in the NRU refuelling machine) at the Chalk River NRU facility on May 25, 1958 and, if so, what was the extent of the damage that occurred on that date and in the period immediately following (b) have the causes of the damage been traced to (i) human error (ii) mechanical failure (iii) or a combination of both (c) what was the nature and extent of the repairs (d) what amount was spent on the repairs (e) how long was the reactor shut down (0 was any leakage of nuclear contaminants involved (g) what was the minimum distance that separated significant volumes of radioactive fluids from the Ottawa River in the period until this accident was brought under control (h) how many square metres around the NRU building were contaminated?
41.	Has the government undertaken any correspondence with the USA regarding the accident that took place at Lagoona Beach, Michigan, in the Enrico Fermi I Reactor?
Return tabled.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


USE OF CHARTERED AIRCRAFT BASED AT FORT FRANCES, ONTARIO
Mr. Reid: 1.	For the years 1975 and 1976, how many times has the Department of (a) National Health and Welfare (Medical Services Branch) (b) Indian Affairs and Northern Development (c) Public Works (d) the Environment (Water Resources Branch) used chartered aircraft based at Fort Frances, Ontario?
2.	For each such flight, what was the (a) date (b) place of origin (c) destination (d) length (e) name of the operator of the aircraft?
3.	Were any of the flights shared and, if so (a) with whom (b) to what destination (c) on what date (d) who ordered the aircraft (e) what was the name of the charter company?
Return tabled.


BICYCLES
Mr. O'Sullivan: 1.	Are imported (a) bicycles (b) bicycle parts and components recorded by size and/or specification?
2.	What was the total number of (a) 10-speed bicycles (b) 10-speed bicycle parts and components imported in (i) 1968 (ii) 1970 (iii) 1972 (iv) 1974 (v) 1976?
3.	What are the countries of origin of such items and, for each country, what is the percentage of the total supplied?
4.	How many (a) 10-speed bicycles (b) 10-speed bicycle parts and components are manufactured in Canada annually?
5.	How many Canadians are directly employed in the manufacture of bicycles?
6.	What are the tariff rates on (a) 10-speed bicycles (b) 10-speed bicycle parts and components?
7.	Does the government subsidize the bicycle manufacturing industry and, if so, to what extent and by what direct or indirect means?
Return tabled.


KITCHENER ARTS CENTRE
Mr. Beatty: 1.	Did the government refuse a request for a grant to build an Arts Centre in Kitchener, Ontario and, if so, for what reason?
2.	(a) Under what programme was such a request made (b) what is the present total budget of the programme (c) what commitments have been made to projects under the programme in the current fiscal year and what are the projects?
3.	Is the government prepared to provide financial assistance for a Kitchener Arts Centre and, if so, under what programme and to what extent?
Return tabled.


EMPLOYMENT OF NATIVE PEOPLE
Mr. Holmes: 1.	For each year 1970 to 1976, how many (a) Status Indians (b) Native people have been employed by (i) the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development (ii) other departments (iii) agencies?
2.	For the same years, how many (a) Status Indians (b) Native people held positions as (i) Assistant Deputy Ministers (ii) Director Generals (iii) Directors (iv) Chiefs of sections in the government?
3.	For the same years, what was the total amount received in salaries by (a) Status Indians (b) Native people employed by the government?
Return tabled.
[Mr. Crosbie.)


ASSISTANCE TO BALLET SCHOOLS AND COMPANIES
Mr. Holmes: 1.	For each year 1970 to 1976, which (a) ballet companies (b) ballet schools have (i) requested (ii) received financial assistance from the government and, in each case, in what amount?
2.	For the same years, by province and territory, what amount did Canadian (a) athletes (b) sports organizations receive from government departments and agencies?
3.	For the same years, were there (a) Status Indians (b) Native people (i) athletes (ii) sports organizations that received money and are included in the reply to Part 2 and, if so, what amount did each receive?
Return tabled.


EXPENDITURES IN CONSTITUENCY OF ALGOMA
Mr. Foster: 1.	What amounts were spent by each department and agency in the Constituency of Algoma during the past five Fiscal years for community betterment projects, housing and economic development programmes?
2.	In which municipalities, unorganized townships or Indian reserves were such expenditures?
3.	Were such funds in the form of a loan or a grant and, if a loan, what were its terms?
4.	If it was a federal-provincial project, what portion was paid by the government?
5.	How many jobs were created by each project or programme?
6.	What is a description of each project or programme which received government aid?
Return tabled.


REACTOR SAFETY ADVISORY COMMITTEES
Mr. Douglas (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands): 1.	What is the extent of Atomic Energy Control Board's independent expertise necessary to evaluate the reliability of the ECCS?
2.	Have the AECB or its Reactor Safety Advisory Committees ever questioned the ability of the ECCS to prevent fuel failures?
3.	Have AECL or Ontario Hydro answered satisfactorily all questions concerning the ability of the ECCS to prevent fuel failures?
4.	If all of the radioactive gases and volatile substances from a single failed fuel bundle were to escape into the atmosphere surrounding the plant, what would be the maximum possible health effects (per thousand) among the surrounding population within a radius of (a) ten miles (b) five miles (c) two miles?
5.	In the event of a loss-of-coolant accident in a CANDU reactor, assuming that the ECCS works as planned, can it be categorically asserted that no fuel failures will occur?
6.	In the event of a loss-of-coolant accident in a CANDU reactor, assuming that all other safety devices function properly, what would be the probable consequences to the reactor if the ECCS were unavailable for any reason?
7.	Is it considered possible that steam binding could prevent the ECCS from functioning as planned and, if not, for what reason?
8.	Has the ECCS been tested under realistic operating conditions?
9.	In the event of an inlet header rupture without emergency cooling, what would be the probable consequences in terms of the release of Fission products from the fuel bundles?
10.	Is the WR-1 reactor at the Whiteshell Nuclear Research Establishment protected against an inlet header rupture and, if so, in what way?
11.	In the event of a loss-of-coolant accident in a CANDU reactor, what would be the probable consequences of a failure to scram?
October 17, 1977

12.	In the event of a design-basis loss-of-coolant accident at the Bruce A Generating Station, what would be the probable consequences if only one of the two scram systems were available?
13.	In the event of a loss-of-coolant accident in a CANDU reactor, within how many seconds must the reaction be shut down in order to prevent fuel failures from occurring and in what way does this time depend upon the design and/or the megawatt rating of the reactor?
14.	How many scram systems are in the Pickering A. Generating Station?
15.	Has consideration been given to the possibility of retrofitting the Pickering A reactors with an additional scram system for safety reasons?
16.	What is the estimated dollar cost of retrofitting an existing 500 MWe reactor with an additional scram system?
17.	In applying for a reactor license from AECB, is the licensee required to consider "failure to scram" as a credible event?
18.	(a) What is the maximum loss-of-containment assumed in the safety report for a commercial CANDU reactor (b) under what circumstances would a loss-of-containment occur and what would be the effects?
19.	In the context of a design basis accident, involving a loss-of-coolant accident coupled with a partial loss of containment, what would be the maximum health effects if the ECCS does not function as planned at the (a) Pickering site (b) Bruce site?
Return tabled.


COST OF PRODUCTION OF ANNUAL REPORTS
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What was the total cost in each of the past three years for printing, designing, mailing and circulating etc., the annual reports of all departments, agencies, Crown corporations etc. and what was the total cost of such reports for the three years combined?
2.	(a) What were the six most costly reports in each year (b) what was the total amount in each case for each year (c) what was the total cost of all of them for three years?
3.	Does the government plan taking any steps to cut down the expense to the taxpayer of such annual reports by using less glossy or fancy formats etc. and (a) if so, what are such plans (b) if not, for what reasons?
Return tabled.


MR. VICTOR CHAPMAN
Mr. Cossitt: 1.	What is the complete government employment record of Mr. Victor Chapman, including dates and annual salaries received?
2.	Has Mr. Chapman served the Prime Minister as a press officer and/or has he served the Prime Minister or his family in any other capacity?
3.	Since April 20, 1968, has Mr. Chapman and/or Intertask Limited, Ste. 700, 71 Bank Street, Ottawa received any business from the government and, if so, in each case, what (a) is a full description of the services performed (b) was the amount of money received?
4.	What was the total amount received for all such business?
Return tabled.


CANADA'S CONTRIBUTION TO MOZAMBIQUE
Mr. Caouette (Villeneuve): 1.	What has been the nature and dollar value of Canada's contribution to Mozambique under the terms of the agreement made at the Prime Ministers' Conference in Jamaica in 1975?
2.	Since 1975, how much aid has Canada accorded Mozambique through (a) CIDA (b) any other government agency?
Order Paper Questions
3.	Since 1975, what is the value and nature of Canadian exports to and imports from Mozambique?
Return tabled.


STUDENT SUMMER EMPLOYMENT
Mr. Young: 1.	How many students were hired for part-time, temporary or summer help as Canada Customs or Canada Immigration staff at the (a) Niagara Falls (b) Fort Erie port of entry in (i) 1972 (ii) 1973 (iii) 1974 (iv) 1975 (v) 1976?
2.	For each of the same years (a) how many applications were received (b) were interviews or examinations held and, if so (i) on what dates (ii) in what locations?
3.	Which government office was in charge of selections and which officers made the selections?
4.	Were any of the students hired related at the time to present or former employees of Canada Immigration or Canada Customs and, if so, how many?
5.	(a) What are the usual criteria for selection (b) did all such employees hired between 1972 and 1976 meet the criteria?
6.	What were the usual home addresses, by city, as opposed to the university-attended addresses, of those who were successful in gaining such employment?
Return tabled.


MR. IAN C. WALKER
Mr. Neil: 1.	What was the cost of the preparation of the publication by Mr. Ian C. Walker, Clay Tobacco-Pipes, With Particular Reference to the Bristol Industry, in 4 Volumes, and published by National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Parks Canada, Department of Indian and Northern Affairs in 1977?
2.	How many sets were published?
3.	What was the cost of publication?
4.	How many sets of the volumes have been distributed?
5.	Is Mr. C. Walker an employee of the Department?
Return tabled.


PRIVY COUNCIL AND FEDERAL-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS OFFICES
Mr. Cossitt: For the fiscal year 1976-77, what are the (a) duties and job designations (b) salaries (c) names of those employed by, under contract to, or on loan to the Privy Council and Federal-Provincial Relations Offices?
Return tabled.


FEDERAL AIRPORT ASSESSMENTS
Mr. Elzinga: 1.	On what basis is the assessment for federal airports made?
2.	Does the (a) method (b) rate of assessment vary from one airport to another?
3.	Is the municipality reimbursed, if taxes are not paid on the property occupied by the Air Force and, if so, in what manner?
4.	What is the amount of reimbursement to the municipality in which each federal airport is located?
Return tabled.

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions


SASKATCHEWAN RESIDENTS APPOINTED TO GOVERNMENT BOARDS OF DIRECTORS
Mr. Hnatyshyn: In each year since 1968, were Saskatchewan residents appointed to government boards of directors or the equivalent by Order in Council or to the boards of government agencies and Crown corporations and, if so, in each case, what (a) is his/her name (b) was the salary or per diem payment received?
Return tabled.


POST OFFICES IN TERRITORIES
Mr. Nielsen: 1.	How many post offices are in the (a) Yukon Territory (b) Northwest Territories?
2.	What is the grade of each post office?
3.	How many personnel are employed in each post office and, in each case, what is his/her (a) grade or classification (b) salary?
4.	In each case, what amount is paid for (a) rental (b) costs, other than rental of premises, and for what goods or services are such amounts paid?
Return tabled.


GRANTS TO OFFICIAL LANGUAGE MINORITY GROUPS
Mr. Neil: 1.	For the fiscal year (a) 1974-75 (b) 1975-76 (c) 1976-77, what was the total amount of grants paid under the Official Language Minority Groups Directorate, Secretary of State Department?
2.	For the same years, what was the name of the recipient and the amount in each case?
Return tabled.


PHASE II ALLOCATIONS UNDER CANADA WORKS PROGRAM
Mr. Alexander: In calculating Phase II allocations under the Canada Works Programme, for each constituency, what was the (a) labour surplus (i) number of beneficiaries (ii) number of unemployed Inuit (iii) number of unemloyed Status Indians on Reserves and Crown lands (iv) number of unemployed Non-Status Indians and Metis (v) total labour surplus (b) labour force (c) labour surplus rate?
Return tabled.


STARRED QUESTIONS
Yvon Pinard: Mr. Speaker, the answers to starred questions Nos. 1,992, 2,773 and 2,839 are lengthy, so I ask the consent of the House to have them printed in the official record of the House of Commons as if they had been read.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. parliamentary secretary is now seeking the same result with respect to the starred questions which he just enumerated. Is it the pleasure of the House that the said starred questions be treated in that way?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.
[Editor's Note: The answers to the starred questions enumerated are as follows:]


CRTC HEARINGS-ALLEGED BIASED NEWS REPORTING BY CBC
Mr. Jones: 1.	Was there a CRTC hearing with respect to the English speaking Radio Station CFCF Montreal and, if so (a) what facts led to such hearing (b) what were the findings and decision of CRTC?
2.	Have (a) Members of Parliament (b) Cabinet Ministers complained in the House of Commons with respect to allegations of biased news reporting by the CBC French Network, Radio Canada and, if so, in each case (i) how many (ii) what is his/her name?
3.	Does CRTC plan a similar inquiry, investigation and hearing of alleged biased news reporting on the CBC French Network, Radio Canada and, if not, do such hearings by CRTC only apply to minority English speaking radio stations in Quebec?


Fernand-E. Leblanc: I am informed by the Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission and the Department of the Secretary of State as follows: 1. Yes. On March 31, 1976. (a) The reasons for that hearing are exposed in its Public Announcement of January 12, "CFCF and Bill 22" and in its Notice of Public Hearing of February 23, 1976 for the Renewal of licence of CFCF. (b) The results and conclusions of CRTC are given in Decision 77-121 (February 24, 1977) and the accompanying Public Announcement "REPORT ON ISSUES RAISED BY CFCF'S ANTI BILL 22 CAMPAIGN".
2.	During the period of November 15, 1976 (the Quebec election) to March 4, 1977, there have been no direct references or allegations in the House of Commons to biased news reporting on the French Service Division of the CBC by federal Members of Parliament or Cabinet Ministers. There have been, however, a number of questions concerning charges of bias in CBC programming. The following can be found in Hansard: February 18, 1977, page 3188; February 25, 1977, page 3419; March 4, 1977, page 3660.
3.	In its Press Release of March 8, 1977 and its Public Notice of March 14, 1977 "COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY INTO THE NATIONAL BROADCASTING SERVICE" the Commission decided to undertake an inquiry and stated three major principles to be safeguarded during this Inquiry: "The first is the principle of freedom of expression, restricted only by specific legal requirements and prohibitions. Second, professional ethics and competence are paramount. Discrimination by reason of race, national origin, colour, religion, sex, or political views has no place in broadcasting. And thirdly, the Commission reaffirms its commitment to the principle of public broadcasting in Canada". Also "The Commission determined that the Committee's mandate should be as follows: (i) The Committee will examine and take into consideration all representations from the public submitted in response to this Announcement. The appeal to the public is based on the fact that the national broadcasting service in its entirety is owned and maintained by the people of Canada; (ii) The Committee will conduct interviews with members of the CBC and of the
October 17, 1977

public in order to gain a fuller understanding of how information and other programming is perceived by them, and actually carried out; (iii) The Committee will undertake research on specific matters related to programming and scheduling, as well as on the historical relationship between the French language and English language services of the CBC; (iv) The Committee may selectively analyze particular programmes". Then the public has hereby been invited to submit information and comment preferably by April 25, 1977 (Public Notice of March 24, 1977). Finally, the Commission stated that the Committee will submit its final report to the Commission before July 1st, 1977.


CHARGES LAID BY CANADIAN WHEAT BOARD
Mr. Murta: 1.	In the past 3 years, what was the increase in staff in the Inspection Services Branch of the Canadian Wheat Board and what did this represent in expenses?
2.	In each of the past 3 years, how many producers and companies have been charged under the "Delivery Regulations" and, in each case, what was the amount of the charges and the total amount collected?
3.	What was the total amount collected in fines by the Canadian Wheat Board for enforcing the "Inspection Service" and what was the amount in expenses to the Canadian Wheat Board for enforcing such service?


Otto Emil Lang: Insofar as the Canadian Wheat Board is concerned: 1. Over the 3 year period July 1, 1974 to June 30, 1977 the inspection staff of the Canadian Wheat Board declined in number from 25 to 20.
2. In each of the past 3 years, the following number of charges were laid and fines collected for violations of "delivery regulations" under the Canadian Wheat Board Act:
No. of	No. of grain	No. of Elevator	Total	Total AmountCrop	Producers	Companies	Managers	No. of	of FinesYear	Charged	Charged	Charged	Charges	Collected1973-1974	52	0	16	116	$10,914.361974-75	31	1	2	48	$ 4,636.241975-76	21	3	3	88	$10,019.59
3. The total amount collected in fines for violations of the Canadian Wheat Board Act is as above in (2). These fines were not collected by the Canadian Wheat Board but are levied and collected by the Courts. The Board's inspection staff and legal department perform many and varied tasks in addition to their inspection function. Records are not maintained with respect to the time and expense devoted to the task of "enforcing the inspection service".


CBC COVERAGE OF ONTARIO LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY
Mr. Douglas (Bruce-Grey): 1.	With reference to the answer to Question No. 2,345, for what reason does CBC have only three English language reporters assigned to cover the Ontario Legislative Assembly while it has seven French language reporters assigned to cover the Quebec National Assembly?
2.	How many (a) English (b) French language reporters are assigned to cover the Parliament of Canada?
Order Paper Questions


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the CBC as follows: 1. The CBC's French radio and television networks serve the Francophones of Canada, of whom 85 percent are concentrated in the province of Quebec. The steady flow of news generated by the Quebec government's policies is of intense interest to this audience in both the provincial and Canadian contexts. Nevertheless, the CBC's plans as enunciated in the June 14, 1977 statement by the President of the Corporation, call for greater use of French network news correspondents throughout Canada. The Ontario legislature is one of nine mainly English-speaking assemblies covered by the CBC's English Services Division. That has a total of 18 full-time and one part-time radio and television reporters covering provincial legislature across the country. In the case of the Ontario provincial legislature in particular, the CBC's English Services headquarters in Toronto are located within a few blocks of the provincial legislature and extra staff can be and are assigned at very short notice when required.
2. (a) Eight television reporters and four radio news reporters plus one radio agriculture commentator, (b) Three radio reporters and three television reporters. It is planned to assign two more television reporters in coming months.


Mr. Speaker:: Is it the pleasure of the House that the questions listed by the hon. Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council, which list has now been filed with the House by agreement, shall be deemed to have been replied to today, and that the questions subsequently referred to by the hon. parliamentary secretary shall be deemed to have been made orders for return, with the returns to be tabled forthwith?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Cossitt:: Mr. Speaker, I rise with regard to an assurance given by the government to this House on at least four or five occasions by the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council. He is the predecessor of the present parliamentary secretary, I realize, but nevertheless a commitment was made by the government which I am sure could not have been made by his predecessor had it not been approved by the President of the Privy Council and the Deputy Prime Minister.
I refer to Hansard at page 7790 of July 19, 1977, when at that time I brought the matter up for about the fifth time. I should like to quote one sentence therefrom when I asked why the answers to certain questions were being withheld. These answers were of an important nature and the Canadian people were entitled to know the truth. He replied: "May I indicate that I intend to provide answers to all questions standing on the order paper before the present session ends".
The present session will end in several minutes. There are 45 questions of mine and I am sure there are many other ques-

October 17, 1977
Order Paper Questions
tions by various members that were on the early order paper. 1 have some that go back two years on the order paper. These are questions concerning travel by cabinet ministers on government aircraft for their own personal use. There are also questions concerning ministers' car allowances for cars they do not have.
There are other various important things which have not been brought in, as we were assured they would be. Before this session adjourns this afternoon, it is time for us to have a complete and utter explanation from this government as to why they welshed out on a promise, given at least five times in this House, that we would be given answers to questions which the Canadian people are entitled to have.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Thomas Charles Cossitt: I should like to cite one further example which may seem somewhat frivolous. I raised on a previous occasion one question which the Minister of Transport had not answered, concerning the five pretty girls who came in on a government aircraft behind him on a government aircraft from Saskatoon. For over a year he had not answered that question. He said that the answer has been ready for months. That was three months ago. Where is the answer?


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Who were the girls?


Thomas Charles Cossitt: In conclusion, all these things involving expense by cabinet ministers to the Canadian people for which we, as members of parliament, and all the citizens of Canada are paying from our pocketbooks, should be made known to this House. The government has played around with the truth and has withheld information.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: Shame.


Thomas Charles Cossitt: If it were not unparliamentary, I would say the parliamentary secretary to the minister, and the Deputy Prime Minister, have lied to this House. But because it is unparliamentary, I will not say it.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Ralph Goodale: It is also untrue.


Thomas Charles Cossitt: The truth hurts.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Mr. Paproski:: That is why we have a new parliamentary secretary.


Yvon Pinard: Mr. Speaker, in support of the numerous questions I have answered a few minutes ago, I have here two boxes of papers which will be tabled and many of those have the answers to the questions asked by the hon. member. If he could only wait for these papers to be available and read them, he would receive an answer to the very numerous questions that he himself has asked. I still appeal to his courtesy and his

patience and also to his common sense and hope he realizes that I was sworn in at 10 o'clock this very morning. This afternoon I answered some 500 questions. I would appreciate it if he were to ask again the questions to which he has not yet received an answer. They will be on the order paper tomorrow and we will make a particular effort to provide accurate and comprehensive answers.


PRIVILEGE
Mr. Blackburn:: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. It is my understanding that three Liberal backbenchers and three cabinet ministers are flying to Brantford this evening, which is in my constituency. On a political junket such as this, I should like to know if it is proper for those three members and those three cabinet ministers to be travelling on government aircraft.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Perhaps that is information which can be sought at some other time, but it certainly does not constitute a question of privilege.


An hon. Member:: The ghost of Otto Lang lives.


MR. GOODALE-MRS. CAMPAGNOLO-POSSIBLE QUESTION OF PRIVILEGE RESPECTING MR. COSSITT'S REMARKS
Ralph Goodale: Mr. Speaker, with reference to the remarks made just moments ago by the hon. member for Leeds, at this stage I should like to reserve the opportunity to raise a question of privilege tomorrow with respect to what he said. I should like to check carefully the report of his language in Hansard to determine if my privileges as a member of this House have been breached.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Iona Campagnolo: Mr. Speaker, I should like to reply to the statement made by the hon. member for Leeds. Indeed, the question was answered concerning the "five pretty girls". I would like him to know that they were my staff and myself.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Iona Campagnolo: There were four, and not five. He is ill-equipped to tell the difference between girls and women, as he is ill-equipped to tell the facts as to why most of these women travelled on business which was essential to the people of Canada.
October 17, 1977


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Steve Eugene Paproski: The next prime minister's speech.


Mr. Hnatyshyn:: What were you doing in Saskatoon? I should like to know that. I do not care if you are pretty or not.


Thomas Charles Cossitt: Mr. Speaker, I should like to correct, briefly, two things. The Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council, 1 hope unintentionally, misled the House when he said that the answers to the 45 questions were in a box which he was tabling. Might I say that I knew, before the questions were answered, the numbers that would be answered, and none of those 45 was in the box to which he referred or I would not have raised the matter.
[DOT]	0520)
In reply to the minister who asked why I used the phrase "pretty girls", let me say that I was using the phrase which her colleague, the Minister of Transport, had used, apparently, in connection with her.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT
[Stage Direction]
A message was delivered by the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows:
Mr. Speaker, the Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable House in the chamber of the honourable the Senate.
Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the House went up to the Senate chamber.
[DOT]	(1530)
Then, the Deputy Governor General was pleased to close the second session of the thirtieth Parliament of Canada with the following speech:
[French text]
Honourable Members of the Senate:
Members of the House of Commons:
The Second Session of the Thirtieth Parliament opened on October 12, 1976. In the 370 days since then, the Senate has held 103 sittings and the House of Commons has held 175 sittings. Of the 64 bills brought before Parliament by the Government in this session, 44 have been enacted. In addition, 13 bills proposed by private members have been passed into law.
Members of the House of Commons
During this session you took the decision to permit the television and radio broadcasting of your proceedings. Citizens in every corner of Canada will now
Prorogation
have regular opportunities to see and hear you transact the business of the nation. Their response to what they observe will provide great incentive to you to organize your business in a manner that reflects the needs and interests of contempory Canadians.
[English text]
Honourable Members of the Senate:
Members of the House of Commons:
During this session, Canadians have focussed their attention more sharply on the future of Confederation. The Government of Canada has appointed a Minister of State for Federal-Provincial Relations and created a Task Force on Canadian Unity. You have approved the appointment of a new Commissioner of Official Languages and enacted a new Federal-Provincial Fiscal Arrangements Act and Established Programs Financing Act. The development of our federal system, however, will continue to be evaluated and, perhaps, altered in the next several years and Canadians in every province and territory will have to exercise great understanding and reason as they plan their future together.
The Canadian economy has been in this session, as in all, an area of major interest. The program of controls of prices and incomes has been extended through its second year while the Government has engaged in discussions with the provinces, with labour and with industry about the removal of controls and the guidance of the economy afterward.
You have enacted measures to restrain government expenditures and to give greater authority to the Auditor General. The Government has appointed a Royal Commission on Financial Management and Accountability.
[French text]
The less fortunate people in society have not been forgotten in this session. You have created a new Department of Employment and Immigration and a Canada Employment and Immigration Commission which together will assist Canadians in finding employment, assist those who cannot and administer the new Immigration Act, passed in this session. You have also enacted a Canadian Human Rights Act and have amended the Old Age Security Act and the Canada Pension Plan to improve benefits under those programs.
Canada has continued to attempt to bring together the rich and the poor nations of the world so that all may agree on a system of organizing the international economy so that all nations may share prosperity and live in peace. The Conference on International Economic Co-operation was chaired by Canada and our country played leading roles at the Commonwealth Conference of Heads of Governments and at the economic summit conference of the seven greatest industrial countries.
[English text]
Many other actions of great importance have been undertaken during this
session.
Members of the House of Commons:
I thank you for the provision you have made for the public services in the previous and in the current fiscal year.
Honourable Members of the Senate:
Members of the House of Commons:
May Divine Providence continue to bless our country.
This concluded the second session of the thirtieth parliament.