1977-04-06

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):: Mr. Speaker, I have a specially important motion to move under the provisions of Standing Order 43. I move, seconded by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles):
That this House compliments the Prime Minister on the decision announced today by his office that, in return for the hon. member for Crowfoot, the government is offering five Quebec backbenchers, three parliamentary secretaries, two Grade A Alberta steers and, last but not least, the Minister of Transport.


Mr. Speaker:: Order.

[ Translation]


OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
Mr. Rene Matte (Champlain):: Mr. Speaker, I rise under the provisions of Standing Order 43 to present a motion of urgent and pressing necessity.
Given the strong interest that every Canadian has in political development in Quebec and the fact that the white paper published recently by the Quebec government is an important step forward and that this French language charter in Quebec might create a new concept of bilingualism in Canada, I move, seconded by the hon. member for Shefford (Mr. Rondeau):
That the federal government urge all the other Canadian provinces to develop as well a white paper on the minority language status within their boundaries as well as on the jeopardy in which the majority language, that is English, finds itself, so that we might properly assess the real status of the French and English languages in Canada.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The House has heard the motion put forward by the hon. member. Pursuant to the provisions of Standing Order 43, debate on this motion requires the unanimous consent of the House. Is there unanimous consent?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Some hon. Members:: No.



ORAL QUESTION PERIOD


Mr. Doug Neil (Moose Jaw):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development and it concerns the progress of the Beaufort Sea drilling project. Progress is now going ahead despite the fact that the government has not yet decided whether or not drilling is to go ahead this summer. In view of the fact that the minister assured the House last month, in response to a question of mine on March 23, that he will be able to make a decision by the end of March, will he tell the House whether it is his intention that procrastination on this matter will do for the Beaufort Sea exploration what procrastination on oil and gas regulations has done for northern exploration as a whole?


Hon. Warren Allmand (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development):: Mr. Speaker, so far as 1 am concerned there has been no approval of further work in the Beaufort Sea by Canmar-Dome. The hon. member is correct in stating that I was promised the final report with respect to the evaluation by the end of March. I have not received that report. That is not to say that it is not ready, but 1 am busy with many things and I hope to deal with it very soon. 1 have not yet seen the final report with respect to the evaluation. Once the report is received, we will make recommendations to the cabinet and make a decision.


ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS
Douglas Charles Neil: I have a supplementary question for the Minister of the Environment. Yesterday, Mr. Les Edgeworth, head of the environmental protection service at Environment Canada told the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Forestry that Department of Environment officials oppose renewal of the Canmar licence from the environ-

April 6, 1977
Oral Questions
mental point of view. In view of the opposition to the project expressed by the minister's predecessor, will the minister tell the House whether it is the policy of his department to oppose the continuation of the Canmar drilling project?


Hon. Rom6o LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries and the Environment):: I have not seen the exact words used by Mr. Edgeworth. I thought they might be in my book but I have not found them yet. We have serious reservations about the project. The problem is dealing with a blowout, if there is one. We have learned something from last summer's drilling and we have also learned to worry about certain aspects of the drilling. We will be assessing our position as a department and making our views known to cabinet, but we do not yet have a final departmental position.


NORTHERN AFFAIRS
Douglas Charles Neil: My supplementary question is again to the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. In view of the guerilla warfare that officials of Environment Canada appear to be waging against this project which last season had the official sanction of the cabinet, will the minister assure the House that he will examine the 50 new environmental and technical conditions being proposed by Environment Canada to ensure that they are fair both to the public and the company?


William Warren Allmand: When 1 as minister examine this, make a decision and propose it to cabinet, I will of course consider all these things and I am sure the cabinet will do the same. We will consider the environmental, energy and people questions involved and we will make a decision which will be in the best interests of Canada.


ALLEGED OFFER OF CANADIAN ARCTIC GAS TO SETTLE NATIVE LAND CLAIMS-GOVERNMENT ACTION
Miss Flora MacDonald (Kingston and the Islands):: Mr. Speaker, my supplementary question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. It concerns the telegram, which I am assured is authentic, by U.S. House of Representatives subcommittee staff which was sent by the U.S. embassy in Ottawa to the U.S. State Department. In view of the fact that the telegram described in some detail discussions between Ambassador Enders and staff and representatives of Canadian Arctic Gas with respect to an Arctic Gas offer to settle outstanding native claims in the Mackenzie Valley, will the minister tell the House what steps he has taken since yesterday when this matter was brought to his attention to make it clear to United States authorities either through his colleague the Secretary of State for External Affairs or direct-

ly, that our land claims are a matter for Canadians and Canadians alone to settle?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, when I learned about this particular story yesterday my first task was to determine whether or not it was correct. The information I was given, although more work remains to be done, was that it was not correct and that no such offer was made. I was told before the question period that the U.S. ambassador said there was no such offer as described in the press story.


REQUEST FOR ASSURANCE NATIVE LAND CLAIMS SETTLED BY CANADIAN GOVERNMENT
Flora Isabel MacDonald: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask the minister to check with the Indian Affairs and Public Lands Committee in the United States Congress to find out whether it is an authentic document and in fact has been tabled there. Since as a result of this telegram put before a U.S. congressional committee, there are now a great many Canadians under the impression that our native land claims are being worked out in Washington, will the minister categorically assure the House that the government will give an absolute guarantee that native land claims will not be a pawn in the trans-shipment of American natural gas?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, what I can do is assure the hon. member, this House and the Canadian people that the land claims negotiations and any settlement that will be reached will be between the native peoples and the Canadian government. I have attended many discussions with native groups on land claims and I have never heard or seen any involvement of Americans and no discussion of an involvement by them. In the first part of her question the hon. member asked me to get in touch with the committee in the United States. I am certainly anxious to get to the bottom of this and will pursue any lead that is available, but I do not know whether as a Canadian minister I should deal directly with an American congressional committee. I will discuss that with the Secretary of State for External Affairs.


An hon. Member:: Pick up the phone.


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
John Edward Broadbent: Mr. Speaker, my question for the Minister of Finance arises from the Conference Board of Canada forecast published today which indicates that even after an analysis of the implications of the minister's budget, unemployment in Canada will average 7.9 per cent in 1977 and in the province of Quebec will reach the

April 6, 1977
astronomical level of 10 per cent in 1977 meaning some
400,000	Quebecers will be out of work during the coming 12 months. Considering that more than 50 per cent of the new unemployment in Canada in the last two years has already occurred in the province of Quebec and given the implications for national unity of maintaining high levels of employment, has the government at long last reconsidered its position and is it prepared to announce its intention to bring in some new job creation measures, particularly for that province?


Hon. Donald S. Macdonald (Minister of Finance):: Mr. Speaker, we have not constructed the economic policy to deal specifically with one province. We recognize Canada is a single country but that there are regional problems and in the budget we recognized this with more favourable terms for investment tax credits in the Atlantic provinces and parts of Quebec. Indeed, the impact of the direct job creation measures is to favour those particular areas but I do not propose to bring forward specific measures with regard to the province of Quebec alone.


John Edward Broadbent: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Considering the disproportionate amount of new unemployment that has occurred in the province of Quebec in the last two years I would have thought it would justify specific measures by the government to deal with it.
Considering that within the next two months there will come on the labour market some 100,000 university students, 60,000 students from community colleges, plus 288,000 who will have left high school, all together about 400,000 young people, I ask the minister if the government has any additional plans to cope with the serious unemployment problem those young people will face this coming summer, since this will be the worst summer for employment for young people in Canada since the great depression.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I think it is fair to remind the hon. gentleman that we have added another S100 million in direct job creation, to make the total $458 million during the current fiscal year. I also point out to him, and I hope he will think seriously about this, that the best long-run prospect for these young Canadian graduates coming on to the market lies in making a strong addition to Canadian industrial and commercial capacity, thereby creating additional jobs in the private sector.


John Edward Broadbent: A final supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. If rhetoric could create jobs we would have had full employment months ago. Since the government is doing less now on a comparable basis, given present levels of unemployment, to create jobs than it did in 1971, and since we will have all those young people coming on the job market in a couple of months, is the Minister of Finance really saying today what the Prime Minister said in the University of Toronto two weeks ago, that if young people want jobs they have to leave the country?
Oral Questions


Donald Stovel Macdonald: No, Mr. Speaker. 1 am saying to the hon. gentleman that if young people want jobs, and we want them to be able to secure those jobs, efforts such as his to discourage investment in Canada are working very much against them.


COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Ren6 Matte (Champlain):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Communications.
Could the minister tell the House whether the present inquiry the CRTC is carrying out into the objectivity of the CBC might also cover other broadcasting and television networks?


Hon. Jeanne Sauv6 (Minister of Communications):: No, Mr. Speaker, the terms of this inquiry are limited to the French and English networks of the CBC.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, on a supplementary.
Can the minister tell us whether complaints have been made with regard to the lack of objectivity of networks other than CBC?


Jeanne Sauvé: Not to my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, but that does not exclude the possibility that complaints may have been made.


René Matte: Mr. Speaker, I should like to put another supplementary question.
Does the minister know that formal complaints have been made by Radio Centre-Ville in Montreal concerning its objectivity and that, at the request of those who were wronged in that regard, those complaints were conveyed to the CRTC which has said it would be willing to hear them during that inquiry?


Jeanne Sauvé: No, Mr. Speaker, I am not aware of it, but there is nothing abnormal about that since complaints must be addressed directly to the chairman of the CRTC, or to the tribunal or commission set up to conduct the inquiry. There is absolutely nothing unusual about my not being aware of it. In any event, it is not up to me to pass judgment on those grievances but up to the CRTC.

April 6, 1977

Oral Questions


THE CANADIAN ECONOMY
Mr. Sinclair Stevens (York-Simcoe):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Last evening in committee the minister indicated in response to a question that the number of unemployed will be up considerably at the end of this year, as compared with last year. The minister's actual words were, "in absolute numbers I think that is probably accurate", after which he added, "that is quite right". Would the minister confirm to the House his belief that the number of unemployed will in fact be higher this year end than it was last year end and indicate what numbers he feels will be jobless at the end of this year.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, the size of the work force will be greater because of the number of additions to the work force. Therefore, since I indicated that the rate of unemployment might be expected at the end of 1977 to be about at the level of 1976, in absolute numbers, both the work force and those seeking jobs will be larger.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: As it was reported in this week's Financial Times that the minister stated, and I quote "if it appears by September that last week's budget will not suffice to keep unemployment at tolerable levels, the government will stimulate the economy further through direct federal expenditure", will the minister indicate if that is an accurate reflection of his view and what does he regard as a tolerable level of unemployment as many of us feel we already have intolerable unemployment?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, that term would not be accurate, but it would be accurate to say that having made room for the private sector in terms of tax changes and also keeping a restriction on government expenditures, if the private sector does not take this opportunity for the purpose of creating further economic growth in Canada, there obviously will be pressure. We would have to recognize that the public sector should assume greater responsibility.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, that was a phony little game the hon. member was playing.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Donald Stovel Macdonald: As the budget speech indicated, the deficit is stated on the national accounts basis, and it is not at the S7.1 billion level.


SALE OF CANDU REACTOR TO KOREA-INQUIRY AS TO USE OF AGENT
Mr. Allan Lawrence (Northumberland-Durham):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, I will direct my question to the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce. The Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce has had a discussion with Secretary Y. J. Cheng, the minister responsible for the Korean Electric Company. Mr. Cheng has also seen the chairman and president of AECL. Will the minister advise whether the government, he or his colleagues who met with Mr. Cheng today and yesterday have requested the cooperation of Mr. Cheng and his government in the inquiries that are about here in Canada respecting the services provided by a commercial agent with regard to the First CANDU reactor now being in Korea?
[ Translation]


Hon. Jean Chretien (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):: Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to confirm that the Minister of Trade and Commerce of the Republic of Korea is in the gallery attending our proceedings and I welcome him-


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: -but I have not yet had any official meeting with the minister; we lunched together and I am to meet him at three o'clock. I know that he met the president of the Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. this morning. I do not know whether they dealt with the problem but I will inquire. Of course this Crown corporation is not under my responsibility but under that of the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources. I will inquire of the minister of the Republic of Korea when I see him later this afternoon.


AMOUNT OF BUDGETARY DEFICIT-POSSIBILITY OF INCREASE
Sinclair McKnight Stevens: As last evening, five days after his budget, the minister was still not aware that his budgetary deficit for this fiscal year, as tabled in this House, was $7.1 billion, will the minister indicate if he takes the action to which the Financial Times referred, namely further government expenditure, he anticipates that this budgetary deficit that he was not fully aware of last night, notwithstanding it is $7.1 billion, will go up even further or does he just not know?


REACTION OF KOREAN GOVERNMENT TO APPOINTMENT OF AGENT FOR POSSIBLE SALE OF SECOND CANDU REACTOR
Allan Frederick Lawrence: When the minister in inquiring of his colleague, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, will he also inquire whether the AECL officials asked Mr. Cheng to ascertain his government's reaction to the fact that the Canadian government quite stupidly entered into an agreement with the same agent in respect of any second CANDU reactor to be built in Korea, bearing in

April 6, 1977

mind it will be the Korean people and the Korean government who will eventually have to pay the fees of these reactor agents?
[ Translation]


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I know that the hon. member made his comments realizing that the minister is in the gallery. I will ask the minister whether he understood the question put by the hon. member.


PUBLIC SERVICE
Mr. Lincoln M. Alexander (Hamilton West):: Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the President of the Treasury Board. Given the fact that we have some one million unemployed, among which I am sure there are some airworthiness engineers and engineering test pilots, can the minister advise why the Public Service of Canada found it necessary to advertise on behalf of Transport Canada in Aviation Week and Space Technology of March 14, 1977, a publication centered in New York, for airworthiness engineers and engineering test pilots? Do we not have any of those kinds of people in Canada or what are we trying to do?


Hon. Robert K. Andras (President of the Treasury Board):: I shall certainly get a copy of the advertisement. It is one which I have never seen, and probably I would not be expected to see it. I shall refer it to the minister and to whom the Public Service Commission reports and make sure they are aware of it.


Lincoln MacCauley Alexander: 1 thank the minister for his interest, but does he not think it is about time to cease and desist from advertising employment opportunities in foreign periodicals when there are more than a million unemployed here-and at the rate we are going there will be a lot more in the near future?


ASSUMPTIONS MADE IN CONNECTION WITH ACTUARIAL STUDY OF PENSIONS-POSSIBLE AMENDMENT OF TERMS OF REFERENCE
Mr. Donald W. Munro (Esquimalt-Saanich):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the President of the Treasury Board. The terms of reference in connection with the actuarial study of public service pensions tabled on Monday call for the determination of the future cost implications of alternative funding methods and an assessment of the economic assumptions on which the projections are based. By my reading, this means the assumptions have already been fully elaborated. Will the minister either confirm my understanding that this is the case or else assure the House that the independent actuari-
Oral Questions
al group will be allowed to draw up its own assumptions based on its own forecast of what is likely to develop in this country and produce its report on that basis?


Robert Knight Andras: 1 think I will say yes to both questions. The assumptions upon which the present calculations are based are, of course, known. Much of this material is contained in the "basic facts" document which was tabled in the House. But 1 would also give the hon. member the assurance that the independent actuarial firm is not confined to them by the instructions it has received.


Donald W. Munro: Since it is not clear from the terms of reference that there will be this freedom of action, would the minister be prepared to amend those terms of reference so as to make it perfectly plain to the actuarial group that it will be free to make its own set of assumptions on which to base its study?


Robert Knight Andras: I think it is axiomatic. I do not see how they could check one set of assumptions-if there was any doubt about them-without comparing it to another which they would have to devise. 1 think that if the hon. member would read the terms of reference he would find they really are a request for the unadulterated facts, something which we want as much, 1 guess, as the hon. member does.


POSSIBILITY OF EXTENDING STUDY BEYOND PENSION BENEFITS
Donald W. Munro: The second task of the actuaries is to advise on the extent to which the implementation of the compensation policy for the federal public service takes account of the value of pension benefits. Will this study extend beyond public service pensions to include a review of the total compensation package of public servants, including salaries and other fringe benefits?


Robert Knight Andras: We do, of course, possess a great deal of data regarding what we call the total compensation package and this will be made available. But we also want to get a weighting, from their opinion, as to the component which is attributable to pension and pension indexation. The answer is yes. They would have access to that kind of information and be able to give us their judgment.


SUGGESTED SURCHARGE ON PROFESSIONAL ICE SHOWS TO HELP PAY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF FIGURE SKATERS
Mr. Otto Jelinek (High Park-Humber Valley):: Mr. Speaker, I believe this to be an opportune time to put a question to the Minister of State responsible for fitness and sport in view of the fact that Canada's top figure skaters are in our gallery.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!

April 6, 1977
Oral Questions


Otto John Jelinek: Unfortunately, for some of them, continuance of an amateur career is in jeopardy because of inadequate financing. A month ago, I asked the minister if she would consider imposing, perhaps by way of legislation if necessary, surcharges on foreign professional ice shows which continue to drain our talent without contributing in any way to its development. I wonder whether she has received the report from the CFSA for which she asked, and whether she has taken any positive decisions in this regard.


Hon. Iona Campagnolo (Minister of State (Fitness and Amateur Sport)):: Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased that we have had the opportunity to honour Canada's top skaters who are in your gallery today-Lynn Nightingale, Ron Shaver, Sue Car-scallen and Eric Gillies.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Iona Campagnolo: In response to the hon. member's question I have not as yet received a reply from the Canadian Figure Skating Association, so I cannot give him any further information.

[ Translation]


BILINGUALISM
Mr. Hal Herbert (Vaudreuil):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State or his parliamentary secretary.
Is he aware that the Quebec Minister of Education, following a study of the the teaching content in the "O Canada" kit, has sent a circular letter forbidding its distribution in Quebec schools? Will the minister make sure these kits are distributed and that there are enough to meet the demand?


Mr. Jacques Guilbault (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, I was not aware of the points the hon. member has just raised. However, if he will provide me with further details, we shall certainly inquire and report to him.


INDIAN AFFAIRS
Mr. Lome Nystrom (Yorkton-Melville):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. Three or four days ago the monthly publication of the Saskatchewan Indians revealed that radioactive radon gas had been found in the drinking water in one of the wells on the Red Earth Indian reserve in Saskatchewan in a concentration some 70 to 225 times higher than the level normally

considered safe. How long has the government known about this situation and what is being done to protect the people living on this reserve? Do they have access to alternative water supplies?


William Warren Allmand: For some time now, the Indians on the Red Earth reserve have been exploring for radioactive minerals and rare gases on the reserve, particularly uranium and helium. In the course of this exploration they drilled some deep holes and carried out other work. Recently it was found that radon gas had been released and concern was felt about one of the wells, a well near a lumber mill. This was tested by the Department of National Health and Welfare. Tests are still being conducted by the department and while the water itself is not dangerous the Indians were warned against the gas itself. We are keeping in close touch with the situation and we have advised the Indians to be careful in their work.


Lorne Edmund Nystrom: Is the minister giving any consideration to checking the water supply in nearby communities or in some of the buildings situated near the well?


William Warren Allmand: I should make it clear that the well on the reserve does not seem to be affected at all. Tests have been made of it. There is another well which was used by the Indians, a well near the lumber mill, and this caused concern; there seems to be some gas nearby. But there do seem to be sources of water which are safe.


REGIONAL ECONOMIC EXPANSION
Mr. Jack Marshall (Humber-St. George's-St. Barbe):: question for the Minister of Regional Economic Expansion Mr. Speaker. Would the minister tell us whether he has had any discussions with the provincial authorities in Newfoundland with regard to the distressed state of the Labrador linerboard mill, closure of which could affect 2,100 jobs?


Hon. Marcel Lessard (Minister of Regional Economic Expansion):: Mr. Speaker, I have not personally spoken recently with the Newfoundland government on this issue, but a few months ago, during my visit to this province, the subject was among those that were discussed. But as concerns particularly the situation today, I have asked the officials of my department to inquire into the present situation and, especially, to examine if possible the preliminary report of the group responsible for looking into the potential of the mill so that we might find out how to solve this problem.

April 6, 1977


PUBLIC WORKS
Mr. Roch La Salle (Joliette):: Mr. Speaker, 1 have a question for the Minister of Public Works.
Last week, I asked a question to the Minister of State responsible for Urban Affairs. He had assured the city of Montreal of the completion of projects concerning Place Guy Favreau, the development of Lachine Canal and the improvements to the port of Montreal amounting to nearly $300 million in investment, of which I am very happy. However, it was not the first time that such promises were made to Montreal and the minister was unable to tell me when the work would begin, but he invited me to look at the budgetary items to show that the departments involved already had the funds and votes required. Can the minister guarantee that the departments concerned or his own department already have the funds required and can he say when the work will begin?


Hon. Judd Buchanan (Minister of Public Works):: Mr. Speaker, as far as the Lachine Canal is concerned, the funds are there and the work will be going ahead in the current year. With regard to the Place Guy Favreau, we are making some changes in the design, so that we are really in the design or architectural stage. There have been some earlier designs, but we are still making changes in the existing one. With regard to the third project, I think that should be directed to the Minister of Transport.


TRANSPORT
Mr. David MacDonald (Egmont):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Agriculture and the Minister of Transport. Neither of them are here today. Perhaps whoever is acting for the Department of Agriculture or the Department of Transport can give an answer. It relates to the answer I received Monday, and raised by way of point of order yesterday with the Minister of Transport, concerning the report to the Ministers of Transport and Agriculture on the future of transportation facilities for the potato producers of eastern Canada. Inasmuch as this report is to be considered by senior officials next Tuesday, April 12, I wonder if the government has made a decision as to whether or not this report will be tabled and whether the report is being made available to the organizations that represent the potato producers in New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island in order that there can be full consideration of all of the aspects of this very important decision?
Oral Questions


Mr. Marcel Roy (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Transport):: Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member raised this question at the time of adjournment, I did not say that a report would be tabled at the April 12 meeting with the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Industry, Trade and Commerce, and the Department of Regional Economic Expansion.


David Samuel Horne MacDonald: Mr. Speaker, perhaps the parliamentary secretary misunderstood my question. I knew he did not state that it would be tabled; but in view of the importance of the report it should be tabled. This is why I raised it with the Minister of Transport. I wonder if he could indicate whether that action will be taken, whether it is being made available, prior to the meeting next week, to provincial producing organizations in these two provinces, and also in view of reports that have been produced, particularly in Prince Edward Island by the Potato Marketing Board, whether this report will also be part of the over-all consideration? Otherwise, it may be a very incomplete and inadequate one.


Marcel-Claude Roy: Mr. Speaker, I shall refer the representations of the hon. member to the Minister of Transport.


FISHERIES
Mr. John C. Crosbie (St. John's West):: April 6, 1977
Oral Questions
with a clear understanding of the importance of the second fishery.
availability of data on which allowable catches


John Carnell Crosbie: Mr. Speaker, the total allowable catches for 1978 are now being set by the Minister of Fisheries for all stocks within the 200-mile zone. Newfoundland has asked that the biological and economic information used in making the decisions on the allowable catches be made available to the Newfoundland department of fisheries and the fishing industry. Is the minister able to do that? Does he accede in that request? What is the position?


Hon. Romeo LeBlanc (Minister of Fisheries and the Environment):: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. member is familiar with the consultative process that does take place before allowable catches are set. As a matter of fact, representatives of officials, processors and provincial governments are involved in the discussion of quotas. In this case, because of Canadian jurisdiction, obviously our needs have to be met first. These consultations are going on. I have not seen recommendations. The industry, fishermen, processors and provincial governments have traditionally and will continue to be fully involved in the discussions.


CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Halifax):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Acting Prime Minister. Each member of the government, like other members of parliament, received the request from the chairman of the CRTC which was seeking any help that he or she might give with regard to the investigation as to how the CBC has discharged its mandate. Does the government adopt any policy with regard to the minister's responding? Does it adopt the position that the ministers should respond or not? Is it left to the ministers to decide that question for himself or herself?


Jeanne Sauvé: Mr. Speaker, I will take the question even though it was directed to the Acting Prime Minister. No, there has been no policy adopted by the government as to whether ministers should send in complaints or respond to the notice that the chairman of the CRTC circulated to all parliamentarians. I suppose each parliamentarian can decide on his own. I know that some parliamentarians have sent complaints or have forwarded letters which they have received from some of their electorate.


Robert Lorne Stanfield: Mr. Speaker, I direct my supplementary question to the Acting Prime Minister. Can he indicate whether any minister has, in fact, responded to the letter from the chairman of the CRTC setting forth specific instances of any

bias on the part of the CBC, as was so frequently and noisely alleged by a good many members of the government before the investigation was established?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I have nothing to add to the answer given by the Minister of Communications. As a minister I made my statements in public. I might put them in writing if needed.


VENEZUELAN RAILWAY CONSORTIUM PROJECT-REQUEST FOR REPORT ON CANADIAN BID
Mr. Elmer M. MacKay (Central Nova):: Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce which is supplementary to the questions I asked last December to the Prime Minister on the progress of the Canadian bid on the Venezuelan railway consortium project. I was wondering if the minister, at this time, would indicate if there were any new developments on this proposed project which offer hope for increased employment in Nova Scotia, particularly to Sydney Steel and Hawker Siddeley in Trenton?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, as I have already stated in the House, Canada's bid was the lowest received by the Venezuelan government. I know that the Venezuelan government selected three bids that are presently being studied. We think that the President of Venezuela will make a decision within a few weeks. In fact, we thought he would announce his decision one month ago but there have been some delays. I hope we will know the decision of the Venezuelan government in the coming weeks.


Elmer MacIntosh MacKay: Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the minister for his answer. I wonder if he could be a little more precise as to when he expects there will be a reasonable expectation of some definite announcement in view of the fact that, as the Minister of Finance has pointed out, the best hope for unemployment is for jobs such as those that will be created in this instance. I would remind the minister that the $100 million direct unemployment subsidies will last unemployed Canadians for only about a week.


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, I also wish that this decision will be made as soon as possible. But it is up to the Venezuelan government and 1 know they intend to make it soon. Of course I cannot put excessive pressure. Again recently we contacted
April 6, 1977

the President of Venezuela and the right hon. Prime Minister took the initiative of communicating with him.


INQUIRY WHETHER PRODUCTION OF &quot;SEX EDUCATION AND TEACHERS' GUIDE&quot; HAS CEASED
Mr. Dean Whiteway (Selkirk):: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. It has to do with the package of booklets entitled "Sex Education and Teachers' Guide". 1 have asked the minister a question about this matter before. In light of booklet No. 4, which is obviously contrary to the Criminal Code provisions relating to abortion, can the minister tell the House whether or not it is true that he has in fact stopped production and distribution of the series having to do with sex education?
[ Translation]


Hon. Marc Lalonde (Minister of National Health and Welfare):: No, Mr. Speaker.


CONSULTATION WITH JUSTICE MINISTER ON BOOKLET NO. 4 OF &quot;SEX EDUCATION AND TEACHERS' GUIDE&quot;-REQUEST FOR REPORT
Dean Waldon Whiteway: Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the minister. Would he tell the House whether or not he has consulted with the Minister of Justice and discussed the matter; and can he tell the House what was the decision of the Minister of Justice, as 1 asked him in the House, with specific reference to booklet No. 4 of that series?


Marc Lalonde: Mr. Speaker, I did not stop the distribution of that booklet for the good reason that copies are no longer available; the demand from Canadian teachers was quite considerable. We are now reprinting it and I got no warning that it contains information contrary to the Criminal Code or not in compliance with current legislation in Canada.


COMMUNICATIONS
Mr. Howard Johnston (Okanagan-Kootenay):: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct my question to the Acting Prime Minister in her capacity as Minister of Communications. Can the minister indicate, considering the extraordinary criticisms of the telecommunications bill made by the chairman of the
Oral Questions
CRTC, whether the bill will be withdrawn for reconsideration?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, is the question directed to me as Acting Prime Minister or to the Minister of Communications? I think that the Minister of Communications will be prepared to answer.


Howard Earl Johnston: Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Communications; I was assuming a double capacity today because of an earlier question. Can the minister now indicate, considering the extraordinary criticisms of the telecommunications bill made by the chairman of the CRTC, whether the bill will be withdrawn for reconsideration?
[Translation[


Jeanne Sauvé: Mr. Speaker, indeed I tried to contact the chairman of the CRTC to know whether the statements contained in some newspapers truly reflect his thinking because 1 feel that it is up to the elected representatives of the people to determine the nature of the terms of reference a regulatory body such as the CRTC could have.
With respect to the first part or the preamble of his question, I must tell him that the bill I tabled last week was, on the contrary, extremely well received, at least by the provincial ministers of communications with whom I had a two-day meeting in Edmonton where indeed they understood that this bill contained the necessary provisions to ensure some flexibility in the formulation of the telecommunications policy in Canada and to allow the provinces to participate in that policy, and even in exercising the authority in this area.


Howard Earl Johnston: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. While the minister is hunting up the chairman, who may well be investigating the CBC at the moment, considering the doubt cast on the entire bill would the minister now be ready to announce a moratorium on the closure of telegraph offices?


Jeanne Sauvé: I cannot, Mr. Speaker-


Mr. Speaker:: I have great difficulty relating that question as a supplementary to the other question.


NORTHERN AFFAIRS
Mr. Wally Firth (Northwest Territories):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern

April 6, 1977
Oral Questions
Development and it concerns his department's policy regarding northern businessmen submitting tenders for government contracts. In view of the fact that his department has promised to maintain a policy of preferential treatment, and in view of the fact that all departments in the federal government are not now adhering to this policy, can the minister assure the House that this policy will be applied by all departments in the future? What steps is the minister prepared to take to convince his colleagues of the value of this policy?


William Warren Allmand: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member is correct. We had a report of a task force which recommended certain preferences for northern businesses. Our department is attempting to implement several of those recommendations, although I must say that we have not had full agreement from all departments on all of them.


Mr. Benjamin:: Why not?


William Warren Allmand: Well, it is a democratic society and not everybody agrees. But 1 am doing my best to convince these people that this is needed and I hope that progress will be made.


FINANCE
Mr. Jack Murta (Lisgar):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. Can the Minister of Finance inform the House when a very important report will be ready for tabling in the House of Commons, this being the tariff board report on horticultural products, the tabling of which is approximately a year late?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, the chairman of the tariff board promised me the report by Easter. It looks rather as though we will have to wait the return of the House, if indeed we do take a vacation longer than the Easter weekend.


Jack Burnett Murta: A supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Hopefully we can expect the report no later than the end of April, and at that time there will have to be discussion of the report itself. I should like to ask the Minister of Finance when he feels that the government and the horticultural industry will be prepared to present a negotiating position to our negotiators in Geneva so they may take part in a meaningful way in the agricultural negotiations which hopefully will be ongoing toward the end of 1977?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I share the hon. gentleman's concern with regard to the importance of having our position worked out with the domestic industry. I hope that as soon as the report is received and the parties have had

the chance to examine it we might have early consultations respecting the stance that we should take on the negotiation of these particularly important tariff items.


EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Bill Clarke (Vancouver Quadra):: Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the minister I should like to direct my question to the Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs. Recent reports indicate that the Korean government plans to appoint as ambassador to Canada Mr. Han Byung Kyu, the son-in-law of President Park. In view of reports that until recently Mr. Kyu has been supervising the activities of the KCIA in the United States, can the acting minister tell the House what has occurred, and will the matter be investigated so that the appointment of an inappropriate ambassador can be avoided?


Mr. Fernand E. Leblanc (Parliamentary Secretary to Secretary of State for External Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, we will inquire into the matter and obtain an appropriate answer to the specific question raised by the hon. member.


HOUSING
Mr. Robert Muir (Cape Breton-The Sydneys):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister in charge of housing or for whoever is cast in the role of acting minister today. My question is prompted by the urgent necessity for more funding for housing, particularly for the RRAP program in Nova Scotia. May I ask the hon. gentleman or gentlelady how soon the announcement will be made as to how much funding will be made available for these programs, and how soon the money will be made available after the announcement?


Mr. Jean-Robert Gauthier (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of State for Urban Affairs):: Mr. Speaker, funding has been decided. We have also decided to increase to $107 million the funding made available for RRAP. I think the minister is considering the distribution by regions and an announcement in this regard will be made in the near future.
April 6, 1977


FINANCE
Mr. Peter C. Bawden (Calgary South):: Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance. In view of the reported presence in the lock-up briefing session last Thursday of people who are not members of the press gallery, will the minister say if it is correct that the Canadian Labour Congress was granted access to the briefing session? Will he also say if any other outsiders were invited or included in this lock-up?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: The
Canadian Labour Congress had requested admission for representatives of a number of their publications. I felt that it would not be appropriate to give access to the press gallery lock-up to anyone else than accredited members of the parliamentary press gallery. So far as I know, the CLC did not have any representatives present. It was my understanding they would not be represented and the lock-up would be confined to those who are officially accredited to the House of Commons.


REASON FOR DELAY IN BRIEFING MEMBERS ON BUDGET
Peter Colwell Bawden: Would the minister say why the press was granted the lock-up briefing session at 2 p.m. and the opposition members only at 6 p.m., four hours after members of the press, and why selected members of parliament who were included were not permitted to have any staff with them? Would the minister say whether he is prepared to take steps to cease this farce in view of the fact that members of the House were not as well briefed on the total budget as those who sat in the lobby and watched the television when the minister was standing in the House delivering it?


Donald Stovel Macdonald: The
practice I followed in this regard is one which has been followed for many years in the House. I might say to the hon. gentleman that I suggested to his colleagues that we might indeed improve the practice.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: And we agreed.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: That was refused by the hon. member for York-Simcoe in particular.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: That is not so; come clean.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: It seems to me that the practice could be improved in total, but with the refusal to have a better presentation of the budget speech, I postponed until next year the exact manner in which the briefing would take place.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!
Privilege-Mr. Stevens BILINGUALISM


REASON FOR FAILURE TO ATTACK QUEBEC WHITE PAPER ON LANGUAGE POLICY ON CONSTITUTIONAL GROUNDS
Mr. Gordon Ritchie (Dauphin):: The question is for the Acting Prime Minister. In view of the Prime Minister's description of the white paper on language of the Parti Quebe-cois government as an ethnocentric view of society, why does the government feel it would be a trap to attack it on constitutional and legal grounds at this time? Has the government ruled out any action along these lines?


Joseph Jacques Jean Chrétien: Mr. Speaker, right now, it is only a white paper and not legislation yet. Therefore it is impossible to know in what precise terms the policy might be anticonstitutional. The basic issue is to know what kind of society we want for Canada and we believe it is possible to have a bilingual and multicultural society throughout Canada, including Quebec.


PRIVILEGE
Sinclair McKnight Stevens: Mr. Speaker, I have a question of privilege and then a point of order.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: My question of privilege arises from the latest remarks of the Minister of Finance (Mr. Macdonald) that 1 had refused the televising of parliamentary debate. That is not correct. Two times in the minister's office I indicated our support for the televising of the debate procedure and our co-operation. I wish he would set the record straight.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: My point of order arises out of an answer given to my second supplementary question earlier today to the minister at which time I made reference to the fact that last evening he had stated, in response to a question put by me in which I stated:
You anticipate a budgetary deficit of $7.1 billion.
The minister replied:
Mr. Stevens, at no stage did we say there was going to be a budgetary deficit of $7.1 billion.
In my question today I made reference to that exchange last night, of which I have a transcript of the electronic recording with me. 1 said that I felt the minister should indicate, with that $7.1 billion budgetary deficit, that he was apparently not aware of last night, the increase, if he spent the further funds that were referred to in the Financial Times. I believe he was less than candid when he then said to the House that he had referred to the national accounts last night, not the budgetary

April 6, 1977
Privilege-Mr. Korchinski
deficit. The fact is that twice last evening he tried to correct his mistake.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Whatever disagreement the hon. member has with any answer given today by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Macdonald), it can be the subject of debate in the four days remaining in the debate on the amendment and the budgetary motion. If the hon. member for York-Simcoe (Mr. Stevens), or any other hon. member, has a disagreement with answers given or the interpretation being put upon them on the basis of evidence given by the Minister of Finance before a committee or of any other evidence or arguments, it is a legitimate point of debate but not a legitimate point of order. With respect to the question of privilege that the Minister of Finance may have left a wrong impression on the record about arrangements to televise the debate, the Minister of Finance seeks the floor.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: Mr. Speaker, I put two successive proposals to opposition representatives, First, that television should be permitted in the House for the purpose of televising at least the first night of the budget debate and for that purpose an opportunity should be given, after a 30 minute statement by the minister, for opposition spokesmen to reply. Consent to that was refused by the opposition spokesmen. Subsequently I suggested that, in the absence of an electronic broadcast, we might present that format in any event in the budget speech. The hon. member for York-Simcoe came over and sat beside me in the House and he indicated that he and his colleagues would not be prepared to change the procedure at this time.


Some hon. Members:: Shame!


Donald Stovel Macdonald: I am advised that that same position was taken by the representatives of that party before the Standing Committee on Broadcasting, Films and Assistance to the Arts, and it was in that sense that I made the observations that the hon. gentleman had refused to change the procedure.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: That is not right.


Mr. Paproski:: What a cheap political shot.


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please.


Donald Stovel Macdonald: You have an integrity problem.


Sinclair McKnight Stevens: You have it.


Mr. S. J. Korchinski (Mackenzie):: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege occasioned by the fact that the Minister of State for Urban Affairs (Mr. Ouellet) has absented himself from the House in the last three days, which has made it impossible for me to put a question to him of vital importance. On Monday the Minister of State for Urban Affairs was in the House and you may have noticed, Mr. Speaker, that I tried to get your attention on that day. However, before I could be recognized, the minister slipped out of the House. I was in the

House again yesterday and awaited his arrival, but again he was not here. Today my office called his office to inform him of the question I wished to raise. The question is of a type that could not be answered by the minister's secretary. It might have been shrugged aside by the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) himself because it involves an order in council. I believe the secretary would not be privy to the type of information I am seeking. I believe that the minister's first duty is to parliament, and his responsibility to the Liberal party is secondary.
[DOT] (UIO)


Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. The hon. member raises a grievance which I am sure upon reflection he will realize does not constitute a question of privilege.



ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS


[Stage Direction]
Second report of Standing Committee on National Resources and Public Works-Mr. Martin.
[Editor's Note: For text of the above report, see today's Votes and Proceedings.]

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)
Mr. Ralph E. Goodale (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):: Mr. Speaker, the following questions will be answered today: Nos. 1,135, 1,156, 1,550, 1,566, 1,683, 1,684, 1,690, 1,782, 1,878, 1,888, 1,902, 1,987, 1,988, 2,039, 2,040, 2,071, 2,177 and 2,179.

SPEECH BY PAUL GfiRIN-LAJOIE


Mr. Forrestall: With reference to the publication of the speech by Paul Gerin-Lajoie at the Conference on International Capital Markets and the Arab World entitled "The Arab World and Canada: Prospects for Cooperation", what was the (a) cost of (i) typesetting (ii) layout (b) cost of paper (c) cost of typesetting in arabic (d) cost of translation (e) cost of (i) printing (ii) binding (iii) cover (f) number of copies printed (g) cost, if any, of distribution (h) total cost of the publication?


Hon. Donald C. Jamieson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):: (a) (i) $1,135, (ii) $4,133; (b) $1,721; (c) $1,100; (d) $650 (Arabic), $801 (French); (e) (i) $5,164.90, (ii) cost included in (e)(i), (iii) cost included in (e)(i); (0 7,540 copies; (g) $440.07; (h) $20,544.97*.
* (includes the cost of copy preparation and research on content)
April 6, 1977


Mr. Beatty: 1.	Has the wife and daughter of Mr. Boris Bibershtein, Toronto, Ontario, been refused exit visas from the Soviet Union and, if so, did Mrs. Bibershtein contact the Canadian Embassy in Moscow to either seek or appeal for official Canadian intervention to aid her efforts to obtain an exit visa for herself and her daughter?
2.	Did Mr. Bibershtein in a letter to the Minister of External Affairs on March 3, 1976, appeal to the government to make official representations to the Soviet Union on his wife and daughter's behalf and, if so, have any such representations been made and, if not, for what reason?
3.	Does the government contemplate any future action on the matter and, if so, in what manner?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: 1. The wife and daughter of Mr. Boris Bibershtein were refused exit visas from the Soviet Union in early 1976. Mrs. Bibershtein contacted the Canadian Embassy in Moscow by letter on May 6, 1976 to request official Canadian intervention.
2.	Yes, Mr. Bibershtein did write a letter to the Secretary of State for External Affairs on March 3, 1976 asking for the government's help. Representations were made to the Soviet authorities on September 10, 1976.
3.	No, Mr. Bibershtein's wife and daughter have received exit visas from the Soviet authorities and were reunited with Mr. Bibershtein in Toronto on March 7, 1977.


Mr. McKenzie: 1.	Has the Department of Agriculture 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. E. F. Whelan (Minister of Agriculture):: 1. (a)(i) 8, (ii) 4, (iii) 2, (iv) 17, (v) 164, (vi) 1, (vii) 1, (viii) 2, (ix) and (x) Nil; (b)(i) to (iv) Nil, (v) 13*, (vi) to (x) Nil. * Employed more than six months.
2.	Main estimates.
3.	(a)(i) $5.87, (ii) $5.28, (iii) $5.90, (iv) $5.42, (v) $6.18, (vi) $5.95, (vii) $5.20, (viii) $5.00, (ix) Nil, (x) Nil; (b) Hourly rates paid by employment agencies to their employees are not known to the Department.
Order Paper Questions
(c)
(i)
British Columbia
Alberta
Saskatchewan
Manitoba
Ontario
Quebec
New Brunswick Nova Scotia Prince Edward Island Newfoundland


[Stage Direction]
(ii)
Mr. Marshall: 1.	How many (a) chronic and domiciliary care (b) active care beds are available at Westminster Hospital, London, Ontario?
2.	(a) What is the state of progress in negotiations with Ontario on the transfer of Westminster Hospital (b) are departmental lands included in the negotiations and, if so, what is the (i) area (ii) assessed value (iii) market value?
3.	(a) What officials of the Department of Veterans Affairs are responsible for the negotiations (b) are any veterans associations represented in any way in the negotiations and, if so, what are their names?
4.	Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs give the same assurance as that of the former Minister as stated in a letter dated June 30, 1972 to the Federation of British Canadian Veterans of Canada "that when the possible terms of transfer have been defined, but before any commitment is made, the department will discuss the draft proposals with veterans' groups so that they will be fully informed and that their views will be taken into account"?
5.	Has any consideration been given to the request by the Federation of British Canadian Veterans that (a) the parcel of land owned by the Department south of Commissioners Road and East of Wellington Road in the vicinity of Westminster be retained and that a suitable building be provided for chronic and domiciliary care patients (b) the surrounding park lands be designated as a memorial in perpetuity to the veterans of Canada?
6.	What are the projections of the Department as to the number of chronic and domiciliary beds that will be required up to 1985, as a result of the Minister's commitment to the Federation of British Canadian Veterans that the government ensures that a sufficient number of priority beds will remain available to meet the needs of veterans?
7.	Were reports made by Kates, Peat, Marwick and by Woods Gordon and, if so, what were their recommendations as to the (a) transfer of chronic, psychiatric and domiciliary care patients (b) retention and/or disposal of the land surrounding Westminster and Victoria Hospitals?


Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald (Minister of Veterans Affairs):: 1.	(a) Chronic, 281; domiciliary, 161. (b) Active, 259.
2.	(a) There have been no negotiations since negotiations were broken off about one year ago. However, the province is well briefed on the Department of Veterans Affairs position and will, it is anticipated, in the very near future indicate its agreement or otherwise to terms of transfer that have been developed with the assistance of departmental staff, (b) Departmental lands are not included in the negotiations other than those surrounding the hospital buildings complex.
3.	(a) The Deputy Minister, Department of Veterans Affairs is responsible for all hospital transfer negotiations, (b) No. Veterans associations do not have representatives participating in negotiations although liaison is maintained with them during negotiations.
4.	As a matter of course, veterans groups are kept informed on the progress of all hospital transfer negotiations and ample opportunity is available to make their views known.

April 6, 1977
Order Paper Questions
5.	(a) Yes. Ample land will be maintained on the Westminster Elospital site to enable the department to maintain facilities for the treatment of veterans in the acute, chronic, mental and domiciliary categories, (b) Yes. The use of the land in question it is expected will not change from its present use at least for some years.
6.	It is anticipated that approximately 440 chronic and domiciliary care beds will be required up to 1985.
7.	Yes. Kates, Peat, Marwick were commissioned by the London Ontario Health Coordinating Committee to prepare a report on "Health Services, Teaching and Research in London". The report was submitted to the Committee on April 27, 1971. Woods Gordon Report on "Provision of Hospital Beds in London" was presented to the Ministry of Health, Province of Ontario, in December 1972. (a) and (b) The reports were made to the agencies that commissioned the studies.


Mr. Jelinek: 1.	Have any members of the staff of the Soviet Embassy or any of its consulates been asked (a) to leave Canada (b) not to return to Canada and, if so, in each case, how many in the year (i) 1970 (ii) 1971 (iii) 1972 (iv) 1973 (v) 1974 (vi) 1975 (vii) 1976 (viii) 1977?
2.	In each case, what were their names and the reason for the expulsion?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: 1. (a) Yes (i) 1970, 0; (ii) 1971, 0; (iii) 1972, 0; (iv)
1973,	0; (v) 1974, 0; (vi) 1975, 0; (vii) 1976, 1; (viii) 1977, 0. (b) Yes (i) 1970, 0; (ii) 1971, 0; (iii) 1972, 0; (iv) 1973, 0; (v)
1974,	0; (vi) 1975, 1; (vii) 1976, 0; (viii) 1977, 0.
2.(a) (vii) Major Valdimir M. Vasiliyev-unacceptable activities (b) (vi) Alex G. Kovalev-unacceptable activities.


Mr. Jelinek: 1.	Have any members of the staff of the Cuban Embassy or any of its consulates been asked (a) to leave Canada (b) not to return to Canada and, if so, in each case, how many in the year (i) 1970 (ii) 1971 (iii) 1972 (iv) 1973 (v) 1974 (vi) 1975 (vii) 1976 (viii) 1977?
2.	In each case, what were their names and the reasons for the expulsion?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: 1. (a) Yes (i) 1970, 0; (ii) 1971, 0; (iii) 1972, 0; (iv)
1973,	0; (v) 1974, 0; (vi) 1975, 0; (vii) 1976, 1; (viii) 1977, 2. (b) Yes (i) 1970, 0; (ii) 1971, 0; (iii) 1972, 0; (iv) 1973,0; (v)
1974,	0; (vi) 1975, 0; (vii) 1976, 0; (viii) 1977,1.
2. (a)(vii) Alfonso Herrera Perdomo-unacceptable activities (viii) Jesus Rodriguez Verdes-unacceptable activities Fernando Rivero Milan-unacceptable activities (b)(viii) Rene Valenzuela Acebal-unacceptable activities.


Mr. Howie: 1.	Since January 1, 1972, how many foreign diplomats, and from which countries, has the government (a) requested be withdrawn from Canada or not return if already outside the country (b) declared persona non gratal
2.	In how many cases was a formal protest lodged with the foreign government involved?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: 1. (a) Seven, including four from Cuba, one from the PRC and two from the USSR, (b) During their term of appointment all diplomats are considered persona grata in the eyes of the receiving country. Following "agrement" in the case of the head of mission, or notification in the case of other members of the mission, any action by the receiving state to terminate the appointment indicates that the person concerned is no longer grata in the receiving state. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations does not leave any other choice. While Article 9 of the Convention refers to the two categories of persona non grata and not acceptable, the latter expression is normally intended to cover non-diplomatic staff, with respect to whom the term persona non grata is not usually employed. Therefore, any diplomat whose recall or expulsion is requested by the receiving country can be considered persona non grata.
2. In each of the cases listed above a formal protest was lodged with the foreign government involved.


Mr. Beatty: By month, in 1976, of those persons with diplomatic status in Canada and asked to leave by the government, in what Canadian communities were they working immediately prior to being asked to leave?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: January, not applicable. February, not applicable. March, not applicable. April, not applicable. May, not applicable. June, (1)-Ottawa. July, not applicable. August, not applicable. September, not applicable. October, not applicable. November, not applicable. December, (1)-Ottawa.


Mr. Cossitt: 1.	Did the Hon. Judd Buchanan, when Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, give an undertaking that no further properties would be purchased by Parks Canada in the St. Lawrence Islands National Park area other than the four which had proceeded beyond the stage where negotiations could be terminated and, if so, did he state that one of the four was the Eastern portion of Hill Island?
2.	Did the Minister in a speech to the Gananoque Rotary Club on April 14, 1976 state " .. . nor are we interested in purchasing properties on the West side of Hill Island where there are many would be summer homes"?
3.	Has the government under the present Minister proceeded with the purchase of a large section of the Western portion of Hill Island and, if so (a) for what reason in view of the former Minister's statement (b) is this contrary to the Firm assurance given a year ago by the government?
April 6, 1977


William Warren Allmand: 1. Yes. Mr. Buchanan's January 27, 1976 letter to Mr. Cossitt referred only to the general location of the four purchases under negotiation and made no attempt to precisely define the properties with respect to the properties involved. The letter stated only: "The properties to which I refer are: 1) Wallace Island-the largest part; 2) Melville (or Hay) Island-the largest part; 3) McDonald Island-part, as well as all of Leeward Island; 4) Hill Island-eastern portion". No further mention of location of the properties was made in the letter. While the reference to "Hill Island-eastern portion" may not have been precisely correct, it reflected the location where the greatest preponderance of the total acreage is located. Of the lands for which negotiations were under way at that time, 790 acres were located to the east of Highway 137 and 112 acres to the west of it.
2.	Mr. Buchanan said, " .. . nor are we interested in purchasing properties on the west side of Hill Island, where there are already many established summer homes." However, the land purchased on the west side of Hill Island was part of the package under negotiation, and is not developed with summer homes. It is vacant land.
3.	Yes. (a) For the reason stated in 1 and 2 above, that the property in question was part of the four parcels excluded from the moratorium on land acquisition, (b) This purchase is, therefore, not contrary to any assurance given by the government.


Mr. Neil: What interest has been paid on the sums standing to the credit of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act for each year since the plan was phased out?


Eugene Whelan: Nil.


Mr. Clarke: 1.	Do Canadian airlines habitually use the airspace over Cuba?
2.	Has permission to enter Cuban airspace ever been refused to a Canadian aircraft and, if so (a) on what date (b) for what reason (c) which aircraft or airline has been involved in such an incident?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: 1. Air Canada operates six flights a week with Cuba as final destination, and nine other flights with Jamaica as destination, involving regular overflights of Cuban airspace. There are of course other occasions when Cuban airspace may be used by prior agreement with the Cuban Government; these include official visits and charter flights.
2. To our knowledge, no Canadian aircraft has ever been refused permission to enter Cuban airspace as long as directives were complied with and procedures followed.
Order Paper Questions GOVERNMENT GRANTS


Mr. O'Sullivan: 1.	Since 1972, by year, what amount in government grants and/or contributions was actually distributed by the Department of Consumer and Corporate Affairs under the Consumer Affairs Programme to various consumer organizations having their executive offices in Ontario and, in each case (a) what was the name and address (b) what was the amount granted?
2.	In each case (a) how was the contribution awarded (b) what was the criterion used?


Hon. A. C. Abbott (Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs):: 1. Grants were distributed to voluntary organizations with executive offices in Ontario as follows:
Amount in
Group	thousands
of dollars
1972-	73
CAC, 251 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa	150.0
Canadian Toy Testing Council, P. O. Box 6014, Station J,
Ottawa	8.0
University of Guelph (College of Family and Consumer Studies)	2.0
Total	160.0
1973-	74
CAC, 251 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa	366.1
Canadian Toy Testing Council, Box 6014, Station J, Ottawa	2.5
N.A.P.O., 196 Bronson Avenue, Ottawa	15.0
Total	383.6
CAC, 251 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa	448.0
Canadian Toy Testing Council, Box 6014, Station J, Ottawa	6.5
University of Guelph (College of Family and Consumer Studies)	17.0
N.A.P.O., 196 Bronson Avenue, Ottawa	17.0
Quinte Information & Assistance Centre, 22 Campbell Street,
Belleville	12.0
Total	486.5
CAC, 251 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa	285.0
Canadian Toy Testing Council, Box 6014, Station	J,	Ottawa	15.0University of Guelph (College of Family and	Consumer	Studies)	4.0
Quinte Information and Assistance Centre, 27 Campbell Street,
Belleville	15.0
Nutrition Improvement Project, 185 King Street, Waterloo,
Ontario	2.0
Consumer Complaint Centre, 83 Ontario St. South, Kitchener,
Ontario	15.0
New Welfare Action League, 2428 Islington Avenue North,
Rexdale, Ontario	8.0
Total	344.0
CAC, 251 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa	440.0
Canadian Toy Council, Box 6014, Station J, Ottawa	17.5
N.A.P.O., 196 Bronson, Ottawa	3.2
Quinte Information and Assistance Centre, 25 Campbell Street,
Belleville	10.0
Nutrition Improvement Project, 185 King Street, Waterloo	8.0
Nepean Contact, 1683 Merivale Road, Ottawa	3.7
Family Life Centre, 539 Cassells, North Bay	3.2
Thunder Bay Indian Friendship Centre, 401 N, Cumberland
Street, Thunder Bay	1.835
Hamilton Central Information Service, 42 James St. North,
Hamilton	7.0
Porcupine Credit Counselling Service, 54 Algonquin St. E.,
Timmins	1-3
Italian Immigration Aid, 1215 St. Clair West, Toronto	12.0
Public Interest Advocacy Centre, 53 Queen St., Ottawa	50.0
Peterborough Information Centre and Volunteer Bureau, 165
King Street, Peterborough.	7.0
Total	564.735

April 6, 1977
Order Paper Questions
2. (a) Grant funds have been divided into three categories: grants to local groups; grants to national and provincial groups; and grants for advocacy purposes. Each province has been assigned a base fund allocation for grants to local groups according to the percentage distribution of families in that province. Some of the groups listed in 1 above offer consumer services on a national level: C.A.C., Canadian Toy Testing Council, University of Guelph, N.A.P.O. Advocacy funds were awarded to both the CAC and the Public Interest Advocacy Centre. The other groups received money out of the local group allocations, (b) Each grant request is assessed according to the criteria of the Consumer Assistance Grants Program. An assessment is made of: 1. the population served by the group; 2. the group's rapport with its clientele and with other agencies; 3. the range of services offered by the group, its expertise and the quality of the services; 4. the stability of the group; 5. the group's administrative capabilities; 6. the group's need for support including its projected costs; 7. the governmental services provided in the area. Programs funded include: 1. informing, educating or counselling the public about goods, services and trade practices; 2. protecting the consumer against fraud, deception, or safety hazards in products or services; 3. assisting consumers in the resolution of individual problems with products or services; 4. representing the consumer viewpoint publicly before regulatory Boards and Tribunals, in Small Claims Court, etc.


Mr. Friesen: How much square footage does CBC rent in (a) Vancouver (b) Edmonton (c) Calgary (d) Whitehorse (e) Regina (0 Saskatoon (g) Winnipeg (h) Toronto (i) Ottawa (j) Montreal (k) Saint John (I) Charlottetown (m) Halifax (n) St. John's and, in each case (i) at what cost (ii) for what purpose?


Hon. John Roberts (Secretary of State):: I am informed by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as follows:
	Square Footage	(ii) Purpose
(a) Vancouver	12,900	Storage(b) Edmonton	9,565	Production (Fr.) and office(c) Calgary	NIL	NIL(d) Whitehorse	4,702	Radio station(e) Regina	19,806	Studios and offices(0 Saskatoon	7,341	Studios and offices(g) Winnipeg	36,747	Studios, offices and storage(h) Toronto	610,730	Studios, offices and storage(i) Ottawa	47,747	Offices and storage(j) Montreal	33,749	Offices and storage(k) Saint John	350	Offices(1) Charlottetown	2,000	Studios and offices(m) Halifax	29,808	Studios, offices, storage and shop
(i) It has not been customary to require the CBC to supply such details of its internal administration and management as business arrangements with outside companies. The background to this custom is explained in detail in the reply to question no. 2,530, May 22, 1975.


Mr. Howie: Is consideration being given to amending the Income Tax Act to extend the time for filing a notice of objection to reassessment from 90 to 180 days?


Mr. Bob Kaplan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Finance):: This concern has been raised by the Joint Committee on Taxation of the Canadian Bar Association and the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. Consideration has been given to an extension of the time for filing a notice of objection, but a final decision has not yet been taken.


Mr. Howie: Have studies been done, or consideration been given, to permit a taxpayer to file an amended income tax return up to two years after original filing to protect against loss of rights in case of overpayment?
Mr. Bob Kaplan (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of
Finance): This concern has been raised by the Joint Committee on Taxation of the Canadian Bar Association and the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants. Consideration has been given to the possibility of permitting a taxpayer to file amended returns, but a final decision has not been taken.


Mr. Hnatyshyn: Is the government giving any consideration to establishing a consulate or other diplomatic office in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic in view of the recent initiative in this respect by the United States?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: The topic of a Canadian Consulate in Kiev has been a subject of discussion within the government for many years. At the time the Soviet Union opened their Consulate General in Montreal, it was agreed that the Canadian Government would be free to open one either in Kiev or in Leningrad. While there is much to be said in favour of opening an office in Kiev, we have not, to this time, done so. We must look at issues such as this in terms of global priorities within the framework of the constraints imposed upon us by the government's austerity program. Representatives of the Canadian Embassy in Moscow make periodic trips to the Ukraine and, for the present, seem able to cope with the problems that arise there. We will continue to give consideration to the possibility of opening in Kiev, but we would be less than frank if we did not say that it is unlikely in the near future.

April 6, 1977


Mr. Herbert: 1.	Has La Compagnie Jean Duceppe received grants from the Touring Office of the Canada Council and, if so, what amount has been awarded in the past five years?
2.	Did the production of La Compagnie Jean Duceppe entitled Medium SaignanI play at Place des Arts for a period prior to the November 15, 1976 Quebec provincial election and, if so, for what period?
3.	Was the content of the production known to the Canada Council?


John (Moody) Roberts: I am informed by the Canada Council as follows: 1. Yes, $25,000 to tour "La mort d'un commis voyageur" in Quebec (and in a few New Brunswick and Northern Ontario centers) from September 23 to November 22, 1975; $25,000 to present "Je veux voir Mioussov" in Quebec and Ontario from September 28 to October 31, 1976.
2.	La Compagnie Jean Duceppe played "Medium-Saignant" at the Place des Arts from November 4 to December 12, 1976.
3.	Before approving a grant to a theatre company, the Council requires the company to submit full details of its proposed program. Council assesses the professionalism of the company and the artistic merits of its past productions. It does not require the company to submit the scripts of its proposed productions for approval. In applying for a grant for its 1976-77 season, La Compagnie Jean Duceppe informed the Council that it intended to present Medium-Saignant.


Mr. Herbert: Has La Compagnie Jean Duceppe received a grant from the Department of External Affairs and, if so, what amount has been awarded in each of the past five years?


Donald Campbell Jamieson: La Compagnie Jean Duceppe has not received assistance from the Department of External Affairs so far. La Compagnie Jean Duceppe raised for the first time in January 1977 with the Department the possibility of departmental assistance with a tour abroad. The Department has expressed interest in principle and the matter is now under study. The two productions under consideration are Le Retour des Oies Blanches by Marcel Dube and Encore 5 minutes by Franchise Loranger.
 * *


Ralph Goodale: Mr. Speaker, would you be so kind as to call starred question No. 1,187?
Motion for Papers


Mr. Fairweather: What evidence has the Nutrition Branch of the Department of Agriculture produced to support the statement that "Beef makes people ferocious"?


Mr. Irenee Pelletier (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Agriculture):: Mr. Speaker, the question was:
What evidence has the Nutrition Branch of the Department of Agriculture produced to support the statement that "Beef makes people ferocious"?
Mr. Speaker, the Research Branch of Agriculture Canada has not conducted research in this area. The hon. member might wish, nevertheless, to peruse the following statements:
Give them great meals of beef and iron and steel, they will eat like wolves and fight like devils. (William Shakespeare, "Henry V", Act III, Scene VII, Line 166.)

"Great eaters of meat are in general more cruel and ferocious than other men." (Jean Jacques Rousseau, Emile, Book 2)

On being presented with a very fine salmon, Mr. Churchill said "That is indeed a very magnificent fish. I must have some of him. No! No! I will have meat, carnivores will win this war. (Sir Winston Churchill in the book "The Wit and Wisdom of Sir Winston Churchill" by Iain Sproat.)
I would recommend to the minister that he eat heifer beef. Heifer beef is more submissive and it does not arouse the anger. (The hon. member for Crowfoot, Minutes of Proceedings and Evidence of the Standing Committee on Agriculture, December 2, 1976.)


Ralph Goodale: 1 ask, Mr. Speaker, that the remaining questions be allowed to stand.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Ralph Goodale: Mr. Speaker, would you please call notice of motion for the production of papers No. 74?


[Stage Direction]
Motion No. 74-Mr. Dinsdale:
That an Order of the House do issue for a copy of the Report by Hay Associated Ltd., Management Consultants, concerning the management of the Post Office Department, together with a list of the recommendations implemented by the Department.
Mr. Walter Smith (Parliamentary Secretary to Postmaster General):: Mr. Speaker, the report by Hay Associated Ltd.,
4702

April 6, 1977
Easter Recess
Management Consultants, is a confidential internal working paper and therefore cannot be produced.
I therefore ask the hon. member to withdraw his motion.


Mr. Dinsdale:: Transfer for debate, Mr. Speaker. And if 1 may make a comment, this publication has already had wide circulation. My reason for asking that it become available to all members is that it would be helpful in clearing up some of the problems of the Post Office Department at the present time, and also in the interests of freedom of information.


Mr. Speaker:: Transferred for debate.
Shall the remaining notices of motions for the production of papers be allowed to stand?


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


[Stage Direction]
The House resumed from Friday, April 1, consideration of the motion of Mr. MacEachen:
That, when the House adjourns on April 6, 1977, it shall stand adjourned until April 18, 1977, provided that at any time prior to that date if it appears to the satisfaction of Mr. Speaker, after consultation with the government, that the public interest requires that the House should meet at an earlier time during the adjournment, Mr. Speaker may give notice that he is so satisfied, and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice, and shall transact its business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time; and
That, in the event of Mr. Speaker's being unable to act owing to illness or other cause, the Deputy Speaker or the Deputy Chairman of Committees shall act in his stead for the purpose of reconvening the House.
Mr. Speaker:: Order, please. Before giving the floor to the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Leggatt), I hope I am not being at all presumptuous in saying that should events transpire later this day to give effect to the motion under debate, it will of course be my pleasure, in the usual manner, to receive in the usual room the usual guests for the usual festivities.


Mr. Stuart Leggatt (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I hope you were not intending to change the direction of the remarks 1 was about to make! I must say it is a very tempting situation.
As I was concluding on Friday last, we had talked about the need for more time to be spent in this House rather than seeking an adjournment. Since the weekend there has been Monday and Tuesday to canvass the possibility of any change of heart on the part of the government to produce legislation or to amend what is clearly one of the most inadequate budgets the country has ever seen. I must say I am rather pessimistic at this point that there is going to be any change.
This would have been a useful time for the opposition parties to unite. It is too bad so much time was spent on Friday with one opposition party attacking the official opposition and vice-versa. Quite frankly 1 do not think that adds very much to
(Mr. Smith (Saint-Jean).]
the debate concerning the budget, because it is a government budget. I am quite satisfied that neither the New Democratic Party nor the Conservative party would have brought in this kind of budget. 1 do not think it is a Tory budget. I think it has probably out-toried the Tories. God knows it is not an NDP budget. It seemed to me rather futile to spend a good part of last Friday attacking one another when we should have been in opposition to and fighting the kind of budget we saw come from the other side of the House. I therefore urge my friends to my right to unite with us in opposing a budget which does not respond in any way to the needs of the country in this very desperate time of economic stress.
There is one thing we can be sure of-that we are not facing an election on this budget. What the government has done this year, I predict it will reverse 100 per cent next year. We foresee a budget with personal tax cuts, capital works programs, and a reduction in corporate rip-offs. This will of course give them something popular to run on in the next election.


Mr. Anderson:: Hear, hear!


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: I am glad to see my good friend, Mr. Anderson, cheering that. I can see he is familiar-


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: Order, please. The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Leggatt) will please refer to hon. members of the House by riding, not by name.


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It gave me a chance to remember that the hon. member's riding is Comox-Alberni, one of the finer areas of Vancouver Island. I see he is delighted not to have to run on this budget and that is why he is so spirited this afternoon. I hope the voters in his riding will remember that the budget he supports does nothing for the one million unemployed. That is what the next election will be about, and the kind of phony budget we can expect a year from now will purport to do the things the government should be doing at the moment if it were not so cynical.
During the debate on Friday the hon. member for Peel-Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Milne) put a very significant question to the hon. member for Oshawa-Whitby (Mr. Broadbent). "What about a deficit? After all, we have limits to what we can do" he said. I think we in this party will agree that we have to be concerned about deficits. You grant $1.2 billion in tax concessions. Instead of forgoing all that money, if you put it into the treasury and reverse it at the other end, and provide it as tax cuts, you would not have to worry about a deficit. You would have reduced the deficit and still would have done a good deal about consumer demand and putting people back to work.
I know I must relate my remarks to the motion before us. The question is, should this House rise this afternoon, or should it not? I am still of the view that it should not rise, although no doubt it will. We should sit here and contemplate.


Mr. Rodriguez:: Meditate on the unemployed.
April 6, 1977


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: We should meditate for one week at least about those people whose search for work has been futile. I agree with the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. McRae) that debate on this question has grown simplistic. It is simplistic for the reason that the government has failed to understand that our unemployment rate is a symptom of the system under which we live. It is a chronic symptom. Mr. Speaker, we have never sought different or new solutions to the problem. Instead we have decided to live with the problem. Continuing concessions to the corporate sector have only resulted over the years in ever higher rates of unemployment. What does the $485 million corporate tax concession mean? Is it a tax incentive for investment? The Minister of Finance (Mr. Macdonald) quite rightly says, "Oh, but the corporations will not get it unless they invest. They must first put the money out." But the minister did not say that they should spend the money in order to reduce employment, not increase it. If they spend money on capital equipment, on capital intensive investment, they will be able to employ fewer people and enjoy a tax benefit for doing so.
This budget will reward corporations for throwing workers off the assembly line and curtailing their jobs. It is a budget in reverse, a budget which not only will not create more employment but may be instrumental in creating more unemployment, while large corporations are given tax concessions if they spend money. The least the minister could have done was tie those tax concessions to the number of jobs created. His failure to do so is a clear example of the government's negligence, a clear example that the government still fails to understand that there is another approach to the economy besides the chamber of commerce approach. The government must listen to the views of all parts of society. If it listens to the views of only one segment, it will dig this country's grave in terms of unemployment.
As technology grows, so does unemployment, something we have not considered. We ought to consider the question. As society invests more and more money in expensive machinery, in capital intensive projects, so more and more become unemployed. The answer is to use the public sector in order to bring unemployment rates down. 1 say the failure to heed such advice is a symptom of ideological fanaticism, Adam Smith fanaticism, right-wing fanaticism.


John R. Rodriguez: Fascism.


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: The government refuses to accept the other side of the equation, as most countries of western Europe have done for the last 20 years. Those countries have consistently out-performed this country in terms of providing employment for their people. I am thinking of West Germany, Sweden, and all the other countries in that part of the world.


An hon. Member:: There is lots of unemployment there.


John Edward Broadbent: Come off it.
Easter Recess


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: Order, please. The hon. member for New Westminster has the floor.


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: The reality of 1977 is that more capital intensive investment results in higher unemployment rates, and by so investing we throw more people on to the garbage heap in Canada, into prisons, into insane asylums, on to skid row. We are saying to them, "We don't need you any more. Because you are not qualified to do one of the new technical jobs, we don't want you. We have no work for you to do." Mr. Speaker, we are automating ourselves out of work, and the government refuses to respond to that reality.
The government's response is: we must increase our competitive position in the world by providing tax incentives to private industry. Mr. Speaker, we have done that for a long time. Eric Kierans not long ago pointed out that when the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) in his musings talks about a new society, the business community reacts with a sort of incredible paranoia. The Prime Minister was trying to tell some of our people that we live in a new society,-I have not called it socialism, for the Prime Minister would not use such a term-and the business community's reaction was incredible. But you see, Mr. Speaker, we do live in a new society, no matter how we look at it. Now it is a different society, because the age of the new technology dawned after the Second World War, and our technological achievements have been growing and growing.
Until you accept this new age as a reality, you will not improve this country's unemployment statistics. Oh yes, they will go down to 7 per cent, perhaps up to 8 per cent, and fluctuate somewhat; but too many people will be out of work. We are still telling our young people, unless we take into account the reality of the new society, that we do not need them, we do not want them. We are saying, "Us old guys are still going to run this place, and you young people had best take your place in the lineup for your welfare cheques or your unemployment insurance cheques." That attitude spawns all this country's crime problems, all this country's social disruption.
If you want to hold the country together, put people to work. I say that people have the responsibility to accept work, but first it is the duty of the government to provide jobs our people can accept. The government cannot quite accept that. It does not quite see the picture. In our new society, instead of handing a guy an unemployment cheque, hand him a job. It is the only answer. That is the only way to overcome what is, clearly, a breakdown in the country's social structure.
In the last 100 years we have looked after companies like the CPR. From 1881 to 1970, the company accumulated about $2.3 billion worth of assets. Under the present government, which is allegedly hostile to the business community, the CPR tripled its assets in five years. It took the company one hundred years to accumulate $2.3 billion, but between 1970 and 1975 it increased its assets to $6.2 billion. The same is true of the Royal Bank, Imperial Oil, and other major companies in the private sector. I do not say that is wrong. They are doing their job. It is their job to increase profits for their investors. I
80012-191/2

April 6, 1977
Easter Recess
accept that and respect it. Yet surely to God it is our job to look after all the people, and not just the investors in major corporations. This budget merely looks after that narrow section of the community.
We hear the government talking about tax dividend credits. My God, what about the guy who pays no income tax, has no investments, and cannot buy the products those large corporations are allegedly gearing up to produce? They will not gear up to produce those goods unless there is demand for them. Apparently the government is applying the trickle-down theory. It is providing wealth for people at the top, but doing nothing for the people at the bottom of the scale. They are getting nothing but the crumbs and have no capacity with which to buy goods. If they were able to buy, our economy could get going once more.
In this country we see new patterns of consumption. We must examine the new technology and consider how to apply it to the country's economy. The unkindest cut of all came from hon. members opposite who said that the NDP has no new ideas. My God, you have not even started to use our ideas. Why not try a couple of them? If you do you may find that you will save this free enterprise system you are allegedly trying to protect. Mr. Speaker, we are the best friends the small businessman ever had. We are saying, "Put purchasing power into the hands of those who spend and want to buy something." And what are you guys opposite doing? You are saying, "Oh no, we don't want to help those little guys. We are going to help the fellow who wants to make a couple of million dollars and invest his money."
Mr. Speaker, you have to help the clothier, the butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker, the real estate salesman, and all the other little guys in the economy. This budget does not help them.


An hon. Member:: Don't forget the farmer.


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: You have not done this, and that is why the government will not call an election on the strength of this budget.
But the government has done one thing. It has brought those at the summit of the economy back into the Liberal fold. It brought back the large corporations; but then, they have always been in the government's fold.


An hon. Member:: And Jack Horner.


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: And Jack, yes.


John Edward Broadbent: The budget did it for Jack.


An hon. Member:: Jack who?


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: Mr. Speaker, we could do much to improve the economy. We could bring in a capital works program, and ban overtime to spread the work around. A national succession duty law could be brought in so that we would not have gains between the provinces on succession duty and there would be some revenue from unearned income. We could have done

something about the ripoff on capital gains and taxed them as Carter said we should at 100 per cent, just like we do with income.
We could easily have done those kinds of things in the next week but, as I say, I am sure we are going to adjourn this afternoon. That will make everybody happy. We would not be adjourning if the opposition had united. However, we spent so much time attacking each other we forgot where the villains were.


An hon. Member:: Where are they?


Stuart Malcolm Leggatt: They are on that side. I close by saying this is a sad day for this country when we find the government willing to use a million plus unemployed for the purpose of its re-election in 1978.


John R. Rodriguez: Mr. Speaker, it is appropriate that I take up the optimism shown by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Leggatt) when talking about this adjournment motion. I am not an obstructionist.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John R. Rodriguez: I am not obstructionist by nature, but things around this place get me very riled up. Parliament is a very unreal place.


Mr. Landers:: The door swings both ways.


John R. Rodriguez: That is correct, Mr. Speaker. I do not know what the member opposite has to do. I think he is just here to write birthday cards and get well cards without worrying about the business of this nation. We are here as serious politicians to look at the problems facing the country and to try to solve them through legislation. By and large, all members of the House share that philosophy.
I became very upset recently when the Minister of Manpower and Immigration (Mr. Cullen) stood in this House and said we could not afford to attempt to solve the unemployment problem. It should be the other way around. We cannot afford not to solve the unemployment problem. That minister, who is responsible for unemployment opportunities, got away scot free while the government was scrambling to get the tories onto its side.
I can understand why the Conservatives want an adjournment at this time. The way it is going, they will not have a caucus in three weeks' time. In fact one of their members from Alberta, I believe the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Malone), said that all Conservative members from Alberta were offered some plums in the Liberal party. It is a sinister plan by the government to get rid of the official opposition. What Liberals cannot do in an election, they do after an election. They are trying to get them into the front benches. We have always said there was no difference between the two parties. Now it has been proven true.
April 6, 1977

Now dealing with the adjournment motion, we live in a society which talks about incentives. The economy must have incentives. What is the incentive for members of parliament to have a two-week break? What legislation has been tabled by the government? This break is a disincentive to do anything constructive about the problems facing the country. It has to be the height of cruelty.
Recently a report on youth and unemployment was put out by the Canadian Council on Social Development. It states that unemployment for youth is 14 per cent nationally and 16 per cent in the province of Quebec. That is an ominous percentage of young people unemployed in that province. What does the government bring forward? It brings forward a budget which states that the government cannot afford to solve unemployment in Canada. What a travesty on any responsible kind of government. It shows its members are bankrupt of any ideas. Then they come to the House and say we need a break. The hon. member for Ontario (Mr. Cafik) has his passage booked to the Bahamas. The hon. member for Skeena (Mrs. Campag-nola) has her passage booked to the Queen Charlotte Islands. The hon. member for Eglinton (Mr. Sharp) is booked to look over his estates in Brazil. They are all set for the holidays.


Iona Campagnolo: Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. I wish to point out to the hon. member that the Queen Charlotte Islands is in my constituency. That is where this member of parliament will be over Easter. If the hon. member would hurry up his speech, we could get on with the business of serving the needs of the people of this country.


John R. Rodriguez: Mr. Speaker, I am surprised that any Liberal would go back to his or her riding after that budget. 1 am surprised that they would have the gall to go back. I do not believe that many of them will go to their constituencies. They are all booked for the sunny south, the South Sea Islands.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: The hon. member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Rodriguez) has the floor for the purpose of making a speech. I suggest that he get on with it.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John R. Rodriguez: The government is asking us to consider an adjournment. Considering the extent to which some members of the government backbenches work, they do not deserve one day, let alone a ten day break. Very few of them attend committees and, when they do, they sit like bumps on logs. They do not speak in this House unless a motion of closure is introduced.
Let us look at what the government has produced since January 24 in terms of legislation. The Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs (Mr. Abbott) brought in a bill dealing with consumer credit. It was rather like an elephant. It was nine years in gestation, and then was a white elephant at that. It came before the House. There was no consultation on it. What we have is a white paper on consumer credit in the committee and it looks like it will be there for a while.
Easter Recess
What else did we get? We got an unemployment insurance bill. Far from doing anything constructive about unemployment it brought in a bill supposedly intended to tighten up the unemployment insurance program. What else have we got? We have the other part of the competition bill. That legislation, we are told, is taking a seldom used path; we are referring the subject matter to the committee, but not the bill.
To top it all, there was a budget which institutionalizes an unemployment rate resulting in one million being unemployed. Time was when we felt that an unemployment rate of 4 per cent was nearly disastrous for Canada. Eventually, though, we got to live with it; as a matter of fact we adjusted certain unemployment insurance payments to coincide with it. Now we have a sliding scale-a scale which is sliding ever upwards. There was a point at which we thought 6 per cent was disastrous. Now we are beginning to think of 6 per cent as an acceptable low level. The level is presently 8 per cent and it looks as though before the end of the year the Liberals will be prepared to regard 9 per cent unemployment as acceptable. Well, Mr. Speaker, I think a lot of them should be unemployed come the next election.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John R. Rodriguez: But what happens? They usually get appointed to boards or to commissions, or to the Senate. They do not run to be successful but to be defeated. There is more reward and more security in being defeated than in coming to the House and trying to do things here.
I see the hon. member for York South (Mrs. Appolloni) giving me hand signals.


Some hon. Members:: Explain!


John R. Rodriguez: I am going to get an explanation later. Unemployment is very cruel. The unfortunate thing is this: the government has created a psychology of dependency. It has said to the unemployed. "We shall provide you with adequate unemployment insurance payments or welfare payments or with some other form of income support, so it really doesn't matter what the unemployment rate is, we have cushioned the effect."
When a party like ours talks about a philosophy of full employment, believing that a man or a woman should work for what they are getting, people over on the other side say to us in very cynical tones. "Where is the money coming from?" That is always the question they ask. Really the question should be turned around. Where do they get the money at the present time to support the unemployed? What is it costing Canada to keep one million people on unemployment insurance, welfare, or some other form of support? I would put the figure at about $1 billion. What does it cost Canada in lost productivity? I would put that figure at about $7 billion. What does it cost Canada in lost taxes, taxes which would have been paid by all these people had they been employed? That figure alone would run into billions. The total amount of the loss is staggering.

April 6, 1977
Easter Recess
How then can we afford to give the corporate sector $1 billion in goodies with no assurance whatsoever that more employment will be created as a result?
The budget has created more loopholes than it has closed. At a time when the countries of the western world are moving to close loopholes in their tax systems this government is moving in the opposite direction by opening up loopholes for the corporate sector. No wonder the executive director of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce commented on the budget by saying, "We are smiling from ear to ear." Mr. Speaker, 1 went by the Rideau Club that night and I could hear singing coming from the club. I was walking home. They were all singing and drinking double scotches. I saw the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Kaplan) there. He was there, and they were all singing "Happy days are here again."


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


John R. Rodriguez: We in this party have said time and time again that we are opposed to welfare handouts for the private sector. They have not shown they deserve it.


Mr. Huntington:: You don't know what you are talking about.


John R. Rodriguez: The hon. member, who comes from one of the Vancouver ridings, says I don't know what I am talking about.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John R. Rodriguez: I wasn't the one who appeared before a commission to present a brief on corporate concentration, and the commission said, "You don't know what you are talking about." If I present a brief to a commission, at least 1 read it. When the hon. member for Capilano (Mr. Huntington) presents a brief to a commission he ought to know what it contains. When I present a brief, whether it is to the CRTC or to any other body, I at least participate in structuring it. When the hon. member presented one, one of the members of the commission said, "You ought to go and read your own brief." No wonder a member of the Conservative party can oil his way into the cabinet. Those are the parties of privilege.


Some hon. Members:: Oh!


John R. Rodriguez: Anyway, Mr. Speaker, we do not wish to deny a vacation to the staff who keep this building going. After all, they got a big raise of 6 per cent. Some of them got a magnificent raise of 4 per cent! I would not want low paid members of parliament to keep these highly paid employees from having a break.


An hon. Member:: What about you?


John R. Rodriguez: 
The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: The hon. member will please address the Chair.


John R. Rodriguez: Bearing in mind the need for those who work around the parliament buildings to have some sort of respite, I intend to conclude my remarks.


Some hon. Members:: Hear, hear!


John R. Rodriguez: It is unfortunate that members on the government side will not be around their ridings to hear the complaints against the budget which was brought down a week ago. Suffice it to say that we in this party feel obliged to tell them, "You don't deserve a holiday at all!"


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: The hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Anderson) on a point of order.


Hugh Alan Anderson: Mr. Speaker, I am sure the hon. member for Nickel Belt (Mr. Rodriguez) did not want to mislead the House regarding the Liberal members attending committee meetings and speaking on these committees. At present I am Deputy Chairman of the Standing Committee on Indian Affairs and Northern Development; a member of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Forestry; a member of the Standing Committee on External Affairs and National Defence-


An hon. Member:: And Jack Horner is in the cabinet!


Hugh Alan Anderson: I am also a member of the subcommittee of external affairs on international development-


John R. Rodriguez: Wonderful, wonderful!


Lorne Edmund Nystrom: Trudeau bypasses you and goes to Horner.


Hugh Alan Anderson: I am also a Canadian delegate to the Law of the Sea Conference.


Some hon. Members:: Oh, oh!


Lorne Edmund Nystrom: You are also on the Standing Committee on the Restaurant of Parliament!


Hugh Alan Anderson: If the hon. member for Nickel Belt would check the reports of those standing committees he would find out that I, and many others on the Liberal side, spend a great deal of time questioning ministers and officials of the departments.


An hon. Member:: Is this a main speech?


Hugh Alan Anderson: I am sure the hon. member would not want to mislead the House regarding members on our side returning to our constituencies. I will be returning tomorrow to Comox-Alberni. It may interest the hon. member to know that in the next month I will be touring my riding with four cabinet ministers and spending approximately Five days during the Easter recess meeting with people.


An hon. Member:: You need their protection!
April 6, 1977


Hugh Alan Anderson: If the hon. member for Nickel Belt is going on holidays, let him say what he is doing; but let not that member impute motives to our side of the House, especially when those motives are incorrect.


Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):: Mr. Speaker, there is an important question being decided by this adjournment motion. While I am sympathetic to those members who have arranged many meetings in their ridings with cabinet ministers and others, there is an important matter to be settled. The matter involves the unemployment picture. There are a million people unemployed. If it were not for the decision of the official opposition, probably most members would be asked to stay here and discuss the problems affecting those who are unemployed and what we can do to put them back to work, whether it be through the budget or some other way.
We have an opportunity to tell the country that we are opposed to the callous treatment that a million Canadians are receiving, and that probably another 250,000 are going to receive when the schools empty this spring and they are unable to find work.
Easter Recess
an equal sum of money for those people who do not pay income tax and therefore are not getting any benefit and are unable to purchase goods and services. If they did that, it might do some good.
We have the opportunity of speaking and seeing that there is no Easter recess. That is a possibility. It is an exercise in which I have engaged previously. But because of the attitude of the official opposition, that would probably be self-defeating in that many of us would have to stay here with no hope of any accomplishment.
It is our intention to call a vote on the adjournment motion, and we will vote against it. If the official opposition wishes to vote for it and if the government members wish to vote for it, they will be saying they are not interested in staying in Ottawa to try to find some solution for those million to a million and a half who will be unemployed shortly.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: Is the House ready for the question?


Some hon. Members:: Question.


John Edward Broadbent: It is 400,000.


William Arnold Peters: My leader tells me that the figure is 400,000. Very few of them are going to find employment. It is a serious problem; it is a problem we feel the budget did not solve. The official opposition may have felt that the budget solved it, but they have agreed to support the budget that was presented.
There are several ways that we can make our point. As you know, a week or so ago we moved adjournment of the House. That was not the intention of the adjournment motion-


Mr. Hnatyshyn:: What was it? To stay here?


William Arnold Peters: It was simply to use the parliamentary tools available to us.


Ramon John Hnatyshyn: Oh, come on!


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?


Some hon. Members:: No.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: All those in favour will please say yea.


Some hon. Members:: Yea.


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


Some hon. Members:: Nay.


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


William Arnold Peters: Well, my young friend may be a very competent lawyer in a school sense, but he has not been here very long.


Ramon John Hnatyshyn: I have been here long enough.


The Acting Speaker (Mr. Turner):: Call in the members.
The House divided on the motion (Mr. MacEachen) which was agreed upon on the following division:


William Arnold Peters: April 6, 1977
Easter Recess
Messrs.
Dionne	Kaplan	Munro(No'rthumberland-	Kempling	(Esquimalt-Saanich)Miramichi)	Knowles	MunroDouglas	(Norfolk-Haldimand)	(Hamilton East)(Bruce-Grey)	Korchinski	MurtaDrury	Lajoie	NeilDuclos	Lalonde	Nicholson (Miss)Dupont	Lambert	OberleDupras	(Edmonton West)	O'ConnellDuquet	Landers	OlivierEpp	Langlois	O'SullivanFleming	Laniel	OuelletFlynn	Leblanc	PaproskiFoster	(Laurier)	ParentFrancis	LeBlanc	PearsallFraser	(Westmorland-Kent)	PelletierFriesen	Lefebvre	PhilbrookGauthier	Lessard	Pigott (Mrs.)(Ottawa-Vanier)	Lumley	PortelanceGendron	MacDonald	RitchieGillespie	(Egmont)	RocheGillies	Macdonald	RompkeyGoodale	(Rosedale)	RondeauGoyer	MacDonald (Miss)	RoyGray	(Kingston and the	(Laval)Guay	Islands)	Schellenberger(St. Boniface)	MacFarlane	SharpGuilbault	Macquarrie	SkoreykoHaidasz	Maine	SmithHamilton	Marchand	(Churchill)(Qu'Appelle-Moose	Marshall	SmithMountain)	Martin	(Saint-Jean)Herbert	Masniuk	StevensHnatyshyn	Matte	StolleryHopkins	Mazankowski	TessierHowie	McCain	TowersHuntington	McCleave	TurnerHurlburt	McGrath	WatsonJarvis	Mclsaac	WenmanJelinek	McKenzie	WiseJohnston	McKinnon	YanakisJoyal	McRae
NAYS Messrs.	Yewchuk-141.Benjamin	Firth	NystromBroadbent	Knowles	OrlikowDouglas	(Winnipeg	Peters(Nanaimo-Cowichan-	North Centre)	RodriguezThe Islands)	Leggatt	Symes-11.


Mr. Speaker:: I declare the motion carried.

Mr. Blais, seconded by the Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce (Mr. Chretien), moved:
That this House do now adjourn.


Mr. Speaker:: The hon. member for Saskatoon-Biggar (Mr. Hnatyshyn) on a point of order.


Ramon John Hnatyshyn: Mr. Speaker, before we put that motion 1 should like to ask the acting House leader what business he has in mind for the date on which we return?


Mr. Blais:: Mr. Speaker, I am happy to inform the hon. member we will be proceeding with the third day of the budget debate.


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


Some hon. Members:: Agreed.


Mr. Speaker:: Before formally adjourning the House may I just say to those hon. members who were not present earlier in the day that it will be my pleasure to speed them on their way to an Easter vacation with a small libation in Room 16.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Mr. Speaker:: This House therefore stands adjourned until Monday, April 18, 1977, at two o'clock in the afternoon.
On motion of Mr. Blais the House adjourned at 4.30 p.m.

Monday, April 18, 1977