CANADA HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES OFFICIAL REPORT FIRST SESSION- TWENTY-FOURTH PARLIAMENT 7 ELIZABETH II VOLUME I, 1958 COMPRISING THE PERIOD FROM THE TWELFTH DAY OF MAY, 1958, TO THE TENTH DAY OF JUNE, 1958, INCLUSIVE INDEX ISSUED IN A SEPARATE VOLUME EDMOND CLOUTIER, C.M.G., 0.A., D.$.P . QUEEN'S PRINTER AND CONTROLLER OF STATIONERY OTTAWA, 1958 CANADA 1!,ouse of ~ommons 1llebates OFFICIAL REPORT Speaker: The Honourable Roland Michener FIRST SESSION-TWENTY-FOURTH PARLIAMENT The twenty-third parliament having been prorogued on the first day of February, 1958, and dissolved by proclamation on the same day, and writs having been issued and returned, a new parliament was summoned to meet for the dispatch of business on Monday, May 12, 1958, and did accordingly meet on that day. Monday, May 12, 1958 This being the day on which parliament is convoked by proclamation of His Excellency the Governor General for the dispatch of business, and the members of the house being assembled: Leon J. Raymond, Esquire, O.B.E., the Clerk of 1:he House, read to the house a let ter from the secretary to the Governor Gen eral informing him that the Honourable Patrick Kerwin, Chief Justice of Canada, in his capacity as Deputy Governor General, would proceed to the Senate chamber to open the first session of the twenty-fourth parliament of Canada on Monday, the twelfth of May, at eleven o'clock. A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows: Members of the House of Commons: The Honourable the Deputy Governor General desires the immediate attendance of honourable members in the chamber of the honourable the Senate. Accordingly, the house went up to the Senate chamber, when the Speaker of the Senate said: Honourable Members of the Senate, and Members of the House of Commons: I have it in command to let you know that His Excellency the Governor General does not see fit to declare the causes of his summoning the present parliament of Canada until the Speaker of the House of Commons shall have been chosen accord ing to law, but this afternoon, at the hour of three o'clock, His Excellency will declare the causes of calling this parliament. And the house being returned to the Com mons chamber: 57071-3-1 ELECTION OF SPEAKER MR. ROLAND MICHENER, MEMBER FOR THE ELECTORAL DISTRICT OF ST. PAUL'S Righi Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Raymond, in the light of the experience of the last few minutes, all hon. members realize that the traditional and constitutional requirement for the formal setting up as an operating body of the House of Commons demands the appointment of a Speaker. The choice of a Speaker is one of those responsibilities which more than any thing else conduces to the regularity of our proceedings, to the assurance that the assembly shall be orderly in its operation, and above all that the prerogative rights and privileges of members of the commons shall be scrupulously maintained and preserved. Whoever is chosen Speaker will have much to do with determining the order of the proceedings of the house, the assurance that they are businesslike and efficient; and also, as I said a moment ago, he will determine whether the rights of minorities shall be preserved, without which parliament, under our traditions, cannot attain its responsi bilities. There are certain requirements that through the years have been referred to as necessary in the person of the member amongst us who is chosen to be the first commoner. One is that he shall be absolutely impartial; that is a fundamental requisite without which the discharge of his responsibilities would not be in keeping with the extent of those r-espon sibilities. Whenever a government has a large majority it is more than ever important that he who is chosen shall, in every particular, 2 HOUSE OF COMMONS Election of Speaker divest himself from his normal party affilia tions and thereby practise an impartial, even a judicial rule. He must be the servant of no party. His responsibility is to be the servant of the whole house. To that end he must have a calm and equitable temper ament, and from the experience of the past, a superabundance of patience. He must be firm. He must have a good presence and a good voice; and something that we all need in public life, a reasonable degree of humour, with an adequate knowledge of the practices and procedures of the house. The hon. gentleman whose name I shall propose has demonstrated that he has that knowledge, as well as the experience that comes from having sat as a private member of the House of Commons and also in the legislature of the province of Ontario. The choice of a Speaker is not the right or pre rogative of the government, although in our country since confederation the motion that is invariably made for the appointment of the Speaker has been at all times made by the prime minister of the day. I think I should say a word with regard to the question of a permanent Speaker. This is a subject that recurs from time to time. At Westminster, the source of our parlia mentary traditions, our usages and practices, the Speaker once elected is honoured by be ing re-elected to the chair at the beginning of each new parliament. But there is a dif ference between their procedure in that re gard and ours. We have, in the light of the duality of our citizenship, provided in general for succession as between the two major races. I have nothing to say on this occasion with regard to the question of a permanent Speaker; that is a matter for future par liaments to determine in the light of the cir cumstances that develop through the crucible of history. This is the second occasion on which I have moved the election of a Speaker, and the motion I make concerns the same candidate whose name I placed before you last year. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Diefenbaker: Mr. Raymond, the re sponse that has been given this suggestion indicates the generous support that his name will receive, by reason of the experience which those of us who sat in the last par liament had during his tenure of office. Some may say that this is a departure from the established practice. I may remind you that in three parliaments in the twenties one of the great custodians of that office, Hon. Ro dolphe Lemieux, was appointed Speaker. He [Mr. Diefenbaker.] was appointed first following the general elec tion of 1921. His name was placed in nomina tion by the then prime minister, Mr. King. He was appointed again in the short session after the election of 1925, and finally in the new session that began following the elec tion in 1926. During all those three sessions Mr. Lemieux acted as Speaker of the House of Commons. In the Senate, Hon. Hewitt Bostock remained Speaker during the same period of time. Our rights, our traditions, our liberties and our ceremonies which we inherit from the past are in the custody of the Speaker of the House of Commons, and something more, the future of parliamentary government. All these things are embodied in the person of the Speaker. I think I can sum it up in this way: he is one of us, he is part of us, but he is apart from us. I believe that, if elected, the hon. member for St. Paul's, Mr. Roland Michener, will preside over the delib erations of this house in the tradition of the most illustrious of his predecessors who have occupied the most exalted position that it is possible for the House of Commons to confer. I am most happy, therefore, to place in nomination, and I now so move-I am happy because this motion will be joined in by the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson): That Roland Michener, Esquire, member for the electoral district of St. Paul's, do take the chair of this house as Speaker of this twenty-fourth parliament of Canada. Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Raymond, I hope the Prime Minister will not draw any wrong conclusions as to my subsequent behaviour in this house if I tell him that my first words-and I am speaking not only on behalf of myself but on behalf of the official opposition-must be in hearty and complete agreement with what he has just said. I am indeed happy to second the nomination of Mr. Michener, the member for St. Paul's, to be our Speaker. The Speaker is not only the servant but the first member of the commons. He is the pro tector of its rights and its privileges. He is the arbiter of our parliamentary problems and the composer of our procedural difficul ties. As has so often been said in this house, it is an office with an old and fine tradition which we have inherited-as we have in herited so many good things-from the mother of parliaments at Westminster. As the Prime Minister has said, it is a position that requires tact, firmness, a sense of pro portion and perhaps also a sense of humour. Above all, it requires fairness. The hon. member for St. Paul's has already shown, Mr. Raymond, that he possesses these qual ities in an exemplary degree. Some of us MAY 12, 1958 3 Election of Speaker have already benefited from them when he favourable to the point of order advanced presided over our deliberations in the last by those on the opposition side of the house. short parliament. The Prime Minister has dealt with the The office is also important, because the precedent of alternating between an English Speaker of the House of Commons can do speaking Speaker and a French speaking much to promote in the country respect for Speaker. In the light of all the precedents, the House of Commons and for parliamentary and in the light of the short last parliament, institutions at a time when this is very I think the name of Mr. Michener was the necessary. We know also that Mr. Michener best one that could have been advanced at is eminently qualified for this wider service. this time. However, I feel that alternating There is another reason why I am happy to second this proposal, and it is purely personal. Even if the hon. member for St. Paul's did not have such outstanding quali fications of personality and experience for this position, I would still be happy to see him as our Speaker because of our old and close friendship, which I value and cherish. Indeed there is about him only one thing which I have never been quite able to under stand. I refer to his party affiliation, which, however, I am sure he will agree, has never interfered with our mutual regard and esteem. As Speaker this particular weakness, which perhaps he inherited, will never be noticed because of the impartial position to which I feel certain this House of Commons is now going to elect him. Therefore, Mr. Raymond, I have the great est pleasure, on my own behalf and on behalf of the party which I have the honour to lead in this house, to second the nomination of the hon. member for St. Paul's as our Speaker. Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboial: Mr. Raymond, on behalf of myself and the C.C.F. group it is a pleasure for me to associate myself and my party with the words of the Prime Min ister and the Leader of the Opposition in proposing the name of Mr. Roland Michener, the hon. member for St. Paul's, as Speaker of this house. To the majority of members of this p(lrliament Mr. Michener is relatively new. Many of us, however, have known him for a number of years. We have been asso ciated with him in the opposition. I can look now at the government benches and say that it is by association in the opposition that we get to know each other best. We got to know Mr. Michener when we were in the opposition. We came to admire his ster ling qualities. In the short parliament recently ended we found that Mr. Michener as Speaker was impartial, fair, courteous, firm and honest in all his decisions. The government knows, as do members of the opposition, that the ruling of Mr. Speaker was not always favourable to the point of order put forward by those on the government side of the house, any more than it was at all times 57071-3-1½ between an English speaking Speaker in one parliament and a French speaking Speaker in a subsequent parliament is a good normal procedure. That does not, in my opinion, detract in any way from the excellent argu ments that can be advanced in favour of naming a permanent Speaker. So long as we do not have a permanent Speaker, I think such alternation is ordinarily wise to follow. But in this instance, because the last parlia ment was so short we feel that in every respect the name of Mr. Michener was the one that should have been proposed. It has been said by others, better than I am able to do it, that one of the important functions of the Speaker is to rule fairly on all points of order, no matter by whom they may be advanced. In the last parliament we were all a group of minorities. Confronted with a group of minorities Mr. Michener did an excellent job. In this parliament I think he will be tried even more severely than he was in the last parliament. I realize that in the last parliament we all had our thoughts, at least some of the time, on the possibility of an imminent election. But in this parliament we have a government party that has the largest majority that any government or any party has had in the Canadian House of Commons. I know the Speaker will use his office to protect the traditional rights of minorities in this house. In exercising that traditional role he will do great service to Canada, I suggest, in this parliament in protecting the rights of all members, no matter where they may sit. It is an extreme pleasure on behalf of the C.C.F. group to associate ourselves with the motion proposing the name of Roland Michener as Speaker of this house. The Clerk of the House declared the motion carried in the affirmative, nemine contradic ente, and Roland Michener, Esquire, member for the electoral district of St. Paul's, duly elected to the chair of the house. Mr. Michener was conducted from his seat in the house to the Speaker's chair by Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker and Hon. L.B. Pearson. 4 HOUSE OF COMMONS Election of Speaker Mr. Speaker: Hon. members of the House of Commons, I beg to return my humble acknowledgments for the great honour you have been pleased to confer upon me in electing me as your Speaker. These tradi tional words used by my predecessors in the chair are no mere formality. They express the deep appreciation which I have for your confidence, particularly as it has been given a second time within the short space of seven months. I thank the right hon. Prime Minister for the generous, yes, even embarrassing words in which he proposed my name, and also the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the C.C.F. party for their gracious endorsation. We are a House of Commons very different from the last; but although there have been greater changes than usual among the hon. members and in the proportions of the parties, the principles of parliamentary procedure and the fine traditions of the house remain intact. It will be my aim and my duty as the servant of the house, and with your approval, to up hold these principles and traditions, secur ing to each hon. member the right to express his opinions within the limits necessary to preserve decorum; protecting the recognized privileges of hon. members, of minorities and of the house itself; facilitating the trans action of public business in an orderly man ner and with due economy of time and, above all, seeking to be fair and impartial in such decisions as you entrust to me. If these are also your objectives, as I think they are, I ask for your patience and co operation in approaching them. Success will not be unrelated to your moods-and these have been known to change between Monday and Friday-and also to your will, which is the final arbiter in all matters in the House of Commons. (Translation): My dear colleagues, allow me to thank you for this expression of confidence and to say that it will always be a pleasure for me to hear hon. members speak in the beautiful tongue of Bossuet, Racine or Cor neille, for which I have always had the greatest admiration, even though I cannot express myself perfectly in that language. Be assured that you may, at all times, count on my impartial enforcement of the standing orders of the house, which, in their basic provisions, have been handed down to us, by custom and tradition, from the Anglo-Norman monarchy of which all of us in Canada are the proud inheritors. [Mr. Argue.] (Text): SITTING SUSPENDED Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, without making a formal motion at this time might I suggest the suspension of the sitting until three o'clock this afternoon. At 11.50 a.m. the sitting was suspended until 3 p.m. this day. SITTING RESUMED The house resumed at three o'clock. OPENING OF THE SESSION Mr. Speaker read a communication from the Governor General's secretary announcing that His Excellency the Governor General would proceed to the Senate chamber at three o'clock on this day, for the purpose of for mally opening the session of the dominion parliament. A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows: Mr. Speaker, His Excellency the Governor General desires the immediate attendance of this honour able house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the house went up to the Senate. Then Hon. Roland Michener, Speaker of the House of Commons, said: May it please Your Excellency: The House of Commons have elected me their Speaker, though I am but little able to fulfil the important duties thus assigned to me. If in the performance of those duties I should at any time fall into error, I pray that the fault may be imputed to me, and not to the Commons, whose servant I am, and who, through me, the better to enable them to discharge their duty to their Queen and country, humbly claim all their undoubted rights and privileges, especially that they may have freedom of speech in their debates, access to Your Excellency's person at all seasonable times, and that their proceedings may receive from Your Excellency the most favourable construction. The Honourable the Speaker of the Senate, addressing the Honourable the Speaker of the House of Commons, then said: Mr. Speaker, I am commanded by His Excel lency the Governor General to declare to you that he freely confides in the duty and attachment of the House of Commons to Her Majesty's person and government, and not doubting that their proceed ings will be conducted with wisdom, temper and prudence, he grants and upon all occasions will recognize and allow their constitutional privileges. I am commanded also to assure you that the Commons shall have ready access to His Excellency upon all seasonable occasions, and that their pro ceedings, as well as your words and actions, will constantly receive from him the most favourable construction. MAY 12, 1958 5 Then His Excellency the Governor General was pleased to open parliament by a speech from the throne. And the house being returned to the Com m ons chamber: Mr. Speaker: I have the honour to report that, the house having attended on His Excellency the Governor General in the Senate chamber, I informed His Excellency that the choice of Speaker had fallen upon m e, and, in your names and on your behalf, I made the usual claim for your privileges, which His Excellency was pleased to confirm to you. OATHS OF OFFICE Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 1, respecting the administration of oaths of office. Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE Mr. Speaker: I have the honour to inform the house that when this house did attend His Excellency this day in the Senate cham ber, His Excellency was pleased to make a speech to both houses of parliament. To pre vent mistakes, I have obtained a copy, which is as follows: Honourable Members of the Senate: Members of the House of Commons: It is my pleasure to welcome you to this first session of the twenty-fourth parliament of Canada. We all recall with pleasure the historic events of last autumn when Her Gracious Majesty was present to open parliament herself and to receive the warm welcome and wide acclaim of her Canadian sub jects. We look forward to the presence this summer of Her Royal Highness Princess Margaret to take part in the centennial ceremonies of British Columbia and to visit other parts of Canada. As further evidence of the expandin g sen se of mutual Interest among the countries of the common wealth as well as the growth of the commonwealth itself, it is pleasing and significant that we will be welcoming to Canada this summer both the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the Prime Minister of Ghana. My ministers have been glad to note the widely expressed desire of the peoples of many nations that the manifold advances of science shall be devoted to the betterment of mankind rather than to the arts and engines of war. My government will continue to make unremitting efforts to assist in the peaceful solution of international problems and in the accomplishment by patient negotiation of a substantial measure of disarmament. In the meantime. my advisers will ask your support to maintain, in co-operation with our allies, armed forces adequate to deter any potential aggression. My government believes that the condition of international economic affairs is such as to require major concerted efforts to encourage the expan sion of trade. It is accordingly very gratifying that all countries of the commonwealth have accepted the proposal of Canada that a commonwealth trade and economic conference be held in September of this year in Montreal. Speech from the Throne We look forward with pleasure to the visits to Canada this summer of the President of the United States and the President of the Federal Republic of Germany. My ministers welcome the opportun ities which these visits will afford for useful conversations. My government regrets to have to report that efforts to avert a strike of firemen on the Canadian Pacific Railway were unsuccessful. It is however encouraging to note that negotiations which my ministers arranged between the parties have suc ceeded in narrowing the issues in dispute to the point where further direct discussions may yet resolve the question. My government continues to maintain a constant watch over developments in this situation and will be ready in the light of events to recommend such action as the national interest demands and circumstances may require. My government will propose to you the enact ment of a bill of rights to safeguard the rights of all persons in Canada in respect of all subjects within the jurisdiction of parliament. You will be asked to approve a number of meas ures and appropriations to continue and extend the program of my government in sustaining employ ment by the acceleration of useful public works and by encouraging the development and processing of our natural resources. You will be asked immediately to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act in order to extend for a further six weeks, during the current year, the period during which special seasonal benefits may be paid. Already the amendments to this act made in November last and those made to the Unem ployment Assistance Act have proven their value in mitigating the difficulties of Canadians who are temporarily without jobs. Further amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act will be pro posed at a later stage in the session. My government will continue to promote a vigor ous program of house building, which has already proven to be a strong feature of our economy and which constitutes the best opportunity for increased work in meeting the needs of our people. My ministers are ready to co-operate fully under the authority of the National Housing Act in further projects for slum clearance and urban redevelop ment to improve the cities and towns of Canada. In order to ensure the continuation of our national housing program, you will be asked at an early date to approve an increase in the public funds made available under the National Housing Act. You will be asked to make provision for a substan tial program of public investment to be carried out by government departments and crown com panies and to provide assistance to provincial gov ernments for certain agreed types of projects. In particular, a large expansion in the construction and equipment of our system of airports and air ways will be proposed and an increase in our work on harbours and rivers and public buildings. In order to promote our national development on the frontier in the north you will be asked to authorize the construction of a railway to Great Slave lake. My ministers regard this as a major step in the establishment of productive industry on an economic basis in the Northwest Territories. You will also be asked to provide for the con struction of important roads needed for develop ment in the Yukon and Northwest Territories and in the provinces, with the co-operation of their governments. You will be asked to provide for the initiation of a program of research to assist in opening up the mineral resources of our Arctic islands. My ministers have made progress in arrange ments for the construction of the South Saskatche wan project. Proposals will be placed before you to make possible the commencement, this year, 6 HOUSE OF COMMONS Speech from the Throne of the construction of the main dam intended to create a great reservoir in the heart of the prairie in order to further the productive development of this part of Canada. The easing of the stringency in the capital markets of Canada during the past eight months encourages confidence in the expectation that large programs of public investment can be successfully financed not only by my government and its agencies but also by provincial governments and municipalities. My ministers remain mindful of the importance of financing their large program of expenditures in such manner as will best safeguard against a recurrence of inflationary dangers in future. They wish to urge upon all groups in our society a recognition of the dangers and inequities of infla tion and the need to restrain demands which will give rise to increases in prices and the costs of production. The improvements in our financial relations with the provinces made by the last parliament are having a beneficial effect upon our economy by making it possible for provincial governments and their municipalities to proceed with greater con fidence upon expanded programs of necessary services and works. There will be placed before you a proposal to establish a new agency to regulate broadcasting in Canada and to ensure that the Canadian Broad casting Corporation and the privately owned broad casting stations work effectively together to con stitute a national system to provide satisfactory television and radio services to all Canadians within reach. Related amendments to the Radio Act will also be proposed. To promote and guide the proper long-term devel opment of our national capital region upon lines worthy of our nation, my government will request you to enact a new national capital act to replace the present Federal District Commission Act. Changes will be proposed in the Hospital Insur ance and Diagnostic Services Act to make certain that payments may be made to participating prov inces qualifying under the act in respect of any periods commencing after June this year. You will be asked to authorize the establishment of a harbour commission to combine the growing harbours at Fort William and Port Arthur and to fit this lakehead harbour to handle the larger traffic to be expected as a result of the seaway. Unremitting efforts are being made to sell Canadian agricultural and fisheries products in the markets of the world and considerably larger exports of wheat and cattle have been made. Sup port prices have now been established for a con siderable number of products under the Agricultural Stabilization Act to carry into effect, for the current year, the desire of parliament that agri culture should be thus assisted to realize fair returns for its labour and investment. The act to provide cash advances on farm-stored grain has proven to be of advantage to • a large number of farmers and to the economy as a whole. Certain amendments will be proposed to that act in the light of experience in its application. Amendments will also be proposed to the Prairie Farm Assistance Act and the Canadian Farm Loan Act. In order to assist small business, there will be established a small business section within the administrative machinery of government. The func tions of this organization will be to provide liaison between the government and small businesses, to study the problems of small business and to advise on measures necessary to meet them. You will be asked to replace the present Ticket of Leave Act with a new statute to establish a national parole board. There will be submitted for [Mr. Speaker.] your consideration amendments to the Citizenship Act and the Indian Act to eliminate certain dis criminatory provisions in these statutes. Amendments will be proposed to the Veterans Insurance Act, the Returned Soldiers Insurance Act, the Children of War Dead (Education Assistance) Act, the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act, the Transport Act, the National Parks Act and a number of other statutes. Members of the House of Commons: You will be asked to appropriate the funds required to carry on the services and payments approved by parliament. My ministers will lay before you in accordance with the law the special warrants which I issued upon their advice to authorize expenditures urgently required for the public good during the period since the twenty-third parliament was dissolved. You will be invited to consider and approve these expenditures. An amendment to the Financial Administration Act will be proposed relating to the use of special warrants. Other measures will be proposed to improve the effectiveness of the processes of parliament. The government will ask your approval of the installation in the House of Commons of a system of simultaneous translation. You will be asked to set up a select committee on broadcasting, a standing committee on estimates and a standing committee on veterans affairs, all with power to send for persons and papers. My ministers will propose that a member of Her Majesty's loyal opposition be elected chairman of the committee on public accounts. Honourable Members of the Senate: Members of the Commons: May divine Providence bless and guide you in the accomplishment of the high purpose which brings you here. Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister) moved: That the speech of His Excellency the Governor General to both houses of parliament be taken into consideration later this day. Motion agreed to. THE LATE ARZA CLAIR CASSELMAN TRIBUTE TO LATE MEMBER FOR GRENVILLE-DUNDAS Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, the longer we are in this chamber the more we become aware of the fact that we who meet together through the years find our ranks reduced year by year to an extent which gives all of us occasion to realize something of the shortness of life. In this parliament, in this House of Com mons which had not yet been constituted, one of those who over the years has been a valued member of this chamber passed away last evening. If he had taken his place in this parliament he would have had the distinction of having been elected to, and taken his place in, eleven successive parliaments. He was first elected in 1921 for the constituency of Grenville-Dundas; he resigned to make way for Right Hon. Arthur Meighen, and was re elected to subsequent parliaments since then. MAY 12, 1958 7 During the passage of the years he had become the dean of this chamber. He served as party whip to the Conservative party for 20 years but finally gave up that position with the advent of a lengthy illness some two and a half years ago. However, after being absent for a very long period of time he re turned to his parliamentary duties in October last, becoming the deputy chairman of committees in the house. I refer, Mr. Speaker, to Arza Clair Cassel man, known to members who served in pre vious parliaments as "Cass". Born in 1891 and educated at Osgoode Hall, he went overseas at the beginning of the war as a gunner in the artillery, served overseas, and then returned to serve his country in days of peace as in the days of war almost con tinuously throughout the intervening years with the exception of four years in that parliament during which Right Hon. Mr. Meighen sat for Grenville-Dundas following the resignation of Mr. Casselman. It is difficult to express what one feels on an occasion such as this. If there is one thing which new hon. members will ap preciate as the years go by and as they look back on their membership in this house, it is the comradeship and the fellowship in this chamber which know no boundaries of political faith. Speaking now as one belonging to his own party, I know something of the way in which the late Mr. Casselman discharged his duties. When I came here as a new member in 1940, it was Mr. Casselman who gave me that as sistance, that direction and that counsel which all of us receive as new members. I feel a distinct sense of personal loss as, I know, do all of us who served with him through successive parliaments. Able, cour teous, Mr. Casselman takes his place among those very few people who of the 24 parlia ments-this being the twenty-fourth since confederation-had been elected to almost half. To those he left behind I extend on behalf of this party and I am sure on behalf of hon. members in every party in this house our heartfelt condolences. To Mrs. Casselman and to the sons and daughter go our heart felt feelings of sympathy. It is very seldom-it certainly has not occurred in my time-that at the same time as I refer to the passing of a fellow member in this house condolences with one of the hon. members should also be in order. I refer to the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe). To him and through him to the other surviving members of the family goes that abiding feeling of comfort which flows from the membership of this house. The hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe has lost a son in-law, but all of us have lost a fine public The late A. C. Casselman servant who gave devoted servi-ce and made a contribution to the betterment of his country which few of us are :privileged to make. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Casselman belonged to that group of men who in their devotion to their country earned not only the com mendation of their fellow men but, in this house, something that is far greater-that feeling of fellowship which binds us all together and which is evinced on occasions such as this. I ask the sympathy of the House of Commons, and I am confident it will be extended to those who mourn at this time. Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposi tion): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has I am sure spoken for all members of the house in the tribute of respect and regret which he has just paid to our late colleague, but on behalf of the opposition and on my own .behalf I would like to join him in that tribute. I think when we met this morning many of us hoped that at this opening we would be spared the sad duty of paying a tribute to one of our colleagues who had passed away since we last met, but when we came here this morning we learned that that was not to be. The Prime Minister expressed in words which I believe reflect the feelings of us all what those of us who were his colleagues in the house thought of the late member for Grenville-Dundas. As has been said, he was the dean of the House of Commons having been first elected in 1921, but before he be gan his long period of service to his country in this house he had already served Canada gallantly and well in world war I. Through out his career in the house and out of the house he took a great interest in the welfare of veterans. For many years, of course, Mr. Casselman was the chief whip of his party, and as such he was an officer of parliament who won the respect and affection of members on all sides and in all parties. It is a melancholy circum stance that he has been succeeded as dean of the house by one who was so close to him not only in friendship but through the marriage of his daughter to Mr. Casselman. I am re ferring, as the Prime Minister has referred, to our friend the hon. mem'ber for Dufferin Simcoe (Mr. Rowe). May I conclude by joining the Prime Min ister once again in the expressions of regret that he has given, and tell him that we sym pathize with him and the members of his party in the loss of a valued party colleague. Especially do we extend at this moment our deepest sympathy to Mrs. Casselman and the members of the family in this hour of great sorrow. 8 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Ministry Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboia}: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the C.C.F. group I know I can say that the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition spoke for us today as I know they spoke for all members in this house when they said it was with profound regret that we learned of the passing of a long-time friend in the person of Mr. Clair Casselman. I want to join with them in the sympathy they have extended to the family, the relatives and friends. I have known Mr. Casselman for a number of years, indeed since 1945 when I came into the House of Commons. He was the chief whip of the Conservative party from 1935 to 1955 and in that office served his party faith fully and well under a number of leaders. The office of chief whip is an important one in any party. It is one that carries with it a great deal of responsibility and work and requires a person who is devoted to his task. It is not one of those positions that carry with them the same degree of public ap pearance and perhaps public acclaim as well that is carried with other posts, but we do know it is one of the most important posi tions in any political party in the House of Commons. In the years that I sat near Mr. Casselman I saw from personal observation that he was a faithful attendant in this chamber and that he carried out his duties for his party and for the members of this house loyally and efficiently. The C.C.F. group join with all hon. members of this house in expressing to the Prime Minister and the members of the Conservative party our sympathy at their loss and our condolences to the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe, Mrs. Casselman, ~nd the three sons and daughter. ST ANDING COMMITTEES Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister) moved: That a special committee be appointed to prepare and report, with all convenient speed, lists of members to compose the standing committees of this house under standing order 65, the said com mittee to be composed of Messrs . Argue, Balcer, Cardiff, Green and Habel. Motion agreed to. INTERNAL ECONOMY COMMISSION Right Hon, J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister} presented the following message from His Excellency the Governor General: The Governor General transmits to the House of Commons a certified copy of an order in council appointing the Hon. Donald Methuen Fleming, Minister of Finance, the Hon. Leon Balcer, Solicitor General, the Hon. George Clyde Nowlan, Minister of National Revenue, and the Hon. Ellen Louks Fairclough, Secretary of State, to act with the Speaker of the House of Commons as commissioners [Mr. Pearson.] for the purposes and under the prov1s1ons of chapter 143 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1952, intituled: An act respecting the House of Commons. (Translation): HOUSE OF COMMONS APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES OF THE WHOLE Righi Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister) moved: That Pierre Sevigny, Esquire, member for the electoral district of Longueuil, be appointed chair man of committees of the whole house. Motion agreed to. (Text): APPOINTMENT OF DEPUTY CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES OF THE WHOLE Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister} moved: That Charles Rea, Esquire, member for the elec toral district of Spadina, be appointed deputy chairman of committees of the whole house. Motion agreed to. THE MINISTRY ANNOUNCEMENT OF CHANGES AND APPOINTMENTS Righi Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, at this time, with your permission and with the leave of the house I wish to make a brief statement con cerning changes in the ministry. I regret to have to announce that hon. Senator John T. Haig has relinquished his appointment as government leader in the Senate and has retired from the cabinet in which he served as a minister without port folio. I am sure all members of this house will agree that in his many years of service, not only in the other place but also prior thereto in the municipal and legislative arena, he has given devoted service to his country. He has been in the Senate since 1935, and has been Conservative leader in that place since 1945. He was prevailed upon by his family to retire. They believed the time had come for him to give up the heavy and responsible duties in that place. He will con tinue to hold an honoured place in the upper chamber. His counsel will be available to the people of Canada and to the parliament of this country. In his place I had the pleasure to announce this morning the appointment of the hon. Senator Walter Aseltine as government leader in the Senate. Senator Aseltine's ex.perience in that place dates from 1933. His service to the parliament of Canada and to the com mittees of the Senate over those years has MAY 12, 1958 9 been such that I am very happy he has ac cepted the additional responsibilities that follow in the wake of his appointment. In this chamber I wish to announce that the hon. member for Hamilton West (Mrs. Fairclough) was today sworn in as Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Since her appointment to the cabinet she has had the custody of the Great Seal of Canada and it is necessary on occasions such as 'this to advise the house that she returned the Great Seal this morning for safekeeping to His Excellency the Governor General. Shortly thereafter His Excellency was pleased to hand the Great Seal to the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche), who was sworn of the privy council and to the portfolio of Secretary of State. At this time as well I wish to announce that the portfolio of defence (Production the responsibilities of which have been ' dis charged by the house leader since June last will now have a permanent appointment and not an acting one, in the person of the' hon. member for Lotbiniere (Mr. O'Hurley), who was sworn of the privy council and to the portfolio of Minister of Defence Production. The hon. gentleman was e1ected for the first time last June and assumed responsi bilities as a parliamentary assistant, and as such we believe, having discharged his duties so well, he meriited the advancement he has received. This, sir, does not complete the entire roster of appointments. There will be another appointment made at a very early date to cover that area in the eastern part of Quebec that is as yet not represented in the cabinet and I hope in a very short time to be abl~ to announce a further appointment in that connection. SUPPLY APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, by leave of the house I wish to move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. FUeming): That this house will, at its next sitting, resolve itself into a committee to consider of a supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to. WAYS AND MEANS APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move, seconded by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming): That this house will, at its next sitting, resolve itself into a committee to consider of the ways and means for raising the supply to be granted to Her Majesty. Motion agreed to. 57071-3-2 The Address-Mr. Lafreniere SPEECH FROM THE THRONE ADDRESS IN REPLY, MOVED BY MR. ROBERT LAFRENIERE AND SECONDED BY MR. ERIK NIELSEN The house proceeded to the consideration of the speech delivered by His Excellency the Governor General at the opening of the session. (Translation): Mr. Robert Lafreniere (Quebec-Montmo rency): Mr. Speaker, following the right hon. Prime Minister's, Mr. Diefenbaker's, kind invitation to propose the address in reply to the speech from the throne read by His Excellency the Governor General a few mo ments ago, I sought for quite some time to detect what strictly personal qualifications had made me worthy of so redoubtable an honour. I must humbly confess to this house that I failed to discover any. It was easier for me to consider that this mark of appreciation and esteem was meant for the people of the riding of Quebec-Mont morency who gave to the man now addressing you a victory that will remain historic. In the hope that no one will eontradict me on this point, at least until the end of my speech, may I say, Mr. Speaker, that the county of Quebec-Montmorency, with its industrious population of about 125,000, is one -0f the most densely populated and most beautiful ones in Canada. To those people I express today my kindest and most grateful regards, and the assurance of my fullest dev,otion to their cause. Moreover, Mr. Speaker, I note that the seconder of this motion, the representative of the Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) is also a young man. The honour we are sharing today -0n this memorable occasion is therefore more particularly aimed at our young people who, throughout Canada, most generously gave the right hon. Prime Minister and his govern ment their warm and enthusiastic support. There has never been a public figure in Cana da who has inspired our youth with as much confidence in the future of this country, and the results of the last federal election are unprecedented in Canadian history and certainly also in the records of most demo cratic countries in the world. At the very beginning of my remarks, may I be allowed, Mr. Speaker, to offer you, on behalf of my colleagues and myself, warmest congratulations on your appointment to this exalted position to which you have been called on account of your deep knowledge and distinguished personality. The qualities you have displayed at the last session, which were appreciated by Canadians in all provinces, 10 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Lafreniere have no doubt guided the Prime Minister's decision again to entrust to you that high function. Mr. Speaker, no one here will be surprised if I take the liberty of recalling in particular the memorable day of March 31, 1958, which will forever remain engraved in the hearts and minds of all Canadians. That historic event could not have occurred save as a result of the fruitful achievement and character of a great statesman whom all Canadians, without exception, including polit ical opponents, have learned to love, to admire and to respect, that is to say the magnanimous successor of Sir John A. Mac donald and Sir Georges-Etienne Cartier (the twentieth century saviour of the Canadian confederation), the right hon. Prime Minister of Canada. On behalf of all government members, of all my colleagues, old and new, on behalf too of the population of the province of Quebec and of Quebec-Montmorency which I particularly represent, may I be allowed, •Mr. Speaker, to offer the Prime Minister our appreciation for the wisdom and foresight with which he has administered the country since June 1957, and especially for having so splendidly served, through positive action, the great cause of national unity. As I said a moment ago, never before in the history of our country had the Canadian people elected so many members to form a government. The reasons behind this extraordinary achievement are to be found in the numerous and efficient initiatives taken by a minority government in the last parliament. In my constituency and, indeed, all across the country, people are fully aware of what the government has achieved in the last legislature. It raised the old age pension to $55 a month, increased veterans' allowances, ear marked $300 million for the building of new homes, extended the period of unemploy ment benefits and, according to His Excel lency the Governor General's speech, I now find that this period is to be further extended. It has provided for agricultural products a fair program of minimum prices based on production cost, organized a vast public works program, increased wheat exports and provided advanced payments for farm-stored wheat. It has determined and recognized the particular needs of the maritimes, and all it has achieved over there is not to be compared with all that it will do to put all parts of Canada on an equal footing. Having realized the responsibilities of Canadian statesmen, the Prime Minister and the members of his cabinet have informed us that they propose to develop our Canadian north. [Mr. Lafreniere.] This, Mr. Speaker, is only a very incom plete list of the government's achievements during the last parliament and these achieve ments benefited millions of Canadians who then found a way to prove their gratitude. When I think of this government, which was a minority government until the last general election, I have to recall those words pronounced by Sir Winston Churchill when he described the Royal Air Force in the last war: (Text): Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few. (Translation): The people having understood that this government wished to get closer to them the better to serve them, got closer to the gov ernment the better to support it. I take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to express the admiration which the population of Canada has felt for all the members of the cabinet who gave to the whole country a consistent example of devotion to duty of dignity and ability. With all the ministers and members of this house, I am glad to see in the speech from the throne delivered by His Excellency that many of the above mentioned accomplish ments will be further improved upon. I wish to emphasize particularly that at the beginning of the speech from the throne, the government has expressed its intention to co-operate with all other nations in taking all possible means to apply scien tific developments to the welfare of mankind rather than to the creation of weapons and to the arts. of war. And this reminds me of the words of the Prime Minister speaking before the students of St. Mary's University, of Halifax, on January 31st 1958, and I quote: (Text): There is a new higher premium on science, on the scientist. The laboratory is to become either the cradle of humanities golden age or the mortal cockpit of mankind. (Translation): We should add, Mr. Speaker, that we are reassured by the mental attitude of the head of the government, who makes it a point in all his activities of raising spiritual values above material values. It would be interest ing for all to know this statement of the Prime Minister, which is engraved on one of the walls of the Canadian pavillion at Brussels, in Belgium. It is as follows: (Text): I am of those who believe that freedom can survive in the future as it has in the past only MAY 12, 1958 11 when free men, while not ignoring the demands of science and technology, maintain undiminished their faith in ethical and spiritual values. (Translation): We are grateful to the Prime Minister for his constructive and courageous efforts for the maintenance of peace. It is undoubt edly interesting to hear fine speeches on peace but deeds are more effective, and I believe the suggestions made by our Prime Minister as representative of our country are more important than mere theories on this subject. Mr. Speaker, the speech which His Ex cellency the Governor General so eloquently delivered a while ago in the upper house casts in the heart of all Canadians unlimited hope in the immediate and distant future of our country. Our national economy will certainly be greatly improved by the com monwealth economic conferences soon to be held and by means of which our trade rela tions with other countries will be diversified and developed. Everyone in this ,country will be happy to see that this government intends to intensify the development of our natural resources in co-operation with the provinces and to see to it that, as far as possible, our raw materials are processed in Canada, to the greater advantage of our own people. Other con ferences will be held with regard to our commercial relations. I am happy to see, Mr. Speaker, along with most of the young people of this country who are about to marry, that the government is determined to amend the national housing act so as to put more money into the hands of taxpayers. We were all sorry to see the credit restrictions which were, in a large measure, responsible for the unemployment crisis, in so far as they paralysed the building of homes throughout this country. It is with pride today that we can hope for an ever increasing development of private enterprise through the easing of ,credit restrictions. Do I need to mention here to what extent the extensive program of new public works has been appreciated, particularly by the manual workers who make up such a large proportion of the population of this country? Mr. Speaker, there is one matter which is very close to the heart of every Canadian, whatever his or her origin. It concerns a rela tionship between the federal government and the provincial legislatures. Since the present government has been in power, praiseworthy efforts have been made to foster understanding and harmony between federal and provincial authorities. During the last parliament $81 million in all were distributed to the various provinces of this country. In 57071-3- 2½ The Address-Mr. Lafreniere fact $19 million went to the province of Quebec which I represent more partic ularly. That money was made available to the needy mothers of my province. Those higher authorities will hold other conferences and such conferences will lead to financial agreements which will be of advantage also to all municipalities of Can ada. Several members have had experience in municipal councils and they are aware of the problems facing municipalities. Munic ipal governments are the cornerstone of democracy. They get their powers from pro vincial legislatures and, as the financial situation of the provinces improves, the financial burden weighing so heavily on the municipalities will be lightened accordingly. May I now, Mr. Speaker, express the earn est hope that this government will direct its attention to the problems besetting at this time the workers of the Canadian textile industry. There are many of those workers across Canada and their problems are also of particular interest to an important part of the people of the constituency of Quebec Montmorency which I have the honour to represent in this house. It is highly advisable that appropriate measures be taken in this regard in the very near future by this government. The speech from the throne also mentions the fact that the house will be called upon to amend the Transport Act. In view of the wide expanse of our country and of the natural wealth to be found in the most isolated corners of Canada, the government shows great foresight in promoting trans portation, so that the inhabited areas of our country may be extended as rapidly as possible. Let me point out at this point the initiative and driving spirit of the minister responsible for that department. The National Parks Act will also receive particular atten tion from the government. If I may, I should like to point out to the house that the federal government, thanks to the Prime Minister, has granted to the city of Quebec the Jacques Cartier park which will soon be turned into a national site. Mr. Speaker, I wish to remind the people of Canada of the great honour graciously granted them last year by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, when for the first time she opened a Canadian parliament. This historic event will be an imperishable mem ory. We, of the province of Quebec, were particularly moved when, in the speech she delivered in both languages, she said she was proud to say that the French Canadians had remained faithful to their language and to their faith. This year again Canada will 12 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Lafreniere be honoured by the visit of Her Royal High ness Princess Margaret who will take part in the ceremonies of the British Columbia centennial. This royal solicitude reminds us that Canada is one of the oldest members of the commonwealth of nations. Mr. Speaker, despite all my good will, it will be understood that I cannot analyse the huge program submitted by the govern ment for this session. The study of all this legislation will require strenuous and con sistent efforts on the part of each and every hon. member. There are a great number of them, and many are still very young, so much so that it could be said that this parliament is the parliament of youth and of the future. May I be allowed to congratulate them, whatever their political colour, on having been chosen by their respective con stituencies as official representatives of the population. Mr. Speaker, you have acquired the repu tation of getting out of trouble, with as much wit as tact, any member who gets himself into certain difficulties in this house. With the new members of this parliament, you will surely have numerous opportunities to exercise that skill and to show your cus tomary impartiality. I wish to congratulate the government for its intention to study the advisability of installing in this house an improved system of simultaneous translation. Since such a system is not working today, I am sure that my English-speaking listeners will no doubt think that I have delivered a good speech. Before closing, Mr. Speaker, I wish to ex press, because of very special circumstances, a few ideas concerning the population of our country. I believe that my constituency of Quebec Montmorency is a reduced image of the gen eral aspect of Canada. We have French Canadians, English Canadians, Irish, Scots, as well as other fellow-citizens from other racial descent, and of various religious beliefs. Ours is a happy community where work is done in harmony and where no group ever attempts to interfere with another. For too many years, Mr. Speaker, a few politicians have attempted to create disrup tion and disunity among the people of Canada by playing on racial and religious prejudices. In the name of the province of Quebec, which I particularly represent, I wish to say to the house that we are proud of the co-existence and cohabitation of the two great races which constitute the population of our country. We of Quebec earnestly want national unity through the respect of the rights and privi leges of each and everyone of our citizens, whatever their race, religion or language. [Mr. Lafreniere.] • (Text): Mr. Speaker, I feel that I should repeat this statement in English. Whatever has been said before, I want you to know that we from Quebec want national unity in the respect of everyone's rights and privileges, justice for each and every Canadian citizen. We members of parliament should give an example to the nation and never speak from now on about prejudice of race and religion. (Translation): I have said, Mr. Speaker, in the respect of the rights and privileges of everyone. I wish to add that the word respect, in its true meaning, includes esteem which in its term is conducive to the most cordial friendship. Our French and English cultures are dif ferent but they are not incompatible. The mingling of our cultures and of our different racial qualities is a source of enrichment rather than a subject of contradiction for our country. For a Canadian citizen, whether by birth or by naturalization, there is no barrier to success if he has talent, initiative and willingness to work. As for us, members of parliament who rep resent the different races of our country, our function can be compared to that of an educator and our duty is to give to the Cana dian people a living example of national unity and mutual understanding between the na tions that, by God's will, must live on the same territory, to build a country which is already playing a major part in world affairs. We realize that the Prime Minister, who presides over the destinies of our country, is above all moved by a great spirit of justice towards all and each of the Canadian citizens without distinction of race or religion. In the last election campaign, we reasserted the concept of the constitution and we have taken one more step towards the transformation of the concept of confederation into greater national unity. Our forefathers under Macdonald and Cartier developed western Canada; they settled the country from one ocean to the other. The task undertaken now by our Prime Minister and his government is the development of north ern Canada. These northern lands hold vast unworked riches, hydro-electric resources, various minerals and practically all the re sources required to expand substantially our present economic structure. The province of Quebec has chosen two thirds of its representatives amongst the conservative candidates. That is a striking fact. There have been differences of opinion and difficulties in the past but, to me, the last election has the same significance for all those living in the province of Quebec. That MAY 12, 1958 13 province, the province of Ontario and all the other provinces, as well as people of all nationalities, are all determined to work for the success of that great experiment which is the building-up of our country. And now, having expressed the pleasure I derive from this occasion, I have the honour to move, seconded by the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen): That the following address be presented to His Excellency the Governor General of Canada: To His Excellency the Right Honourable Vincent Massey, C.H., Governor General and Commander in-Chief of Canada. May it please Your Excellency: We, Her Majesty's most dutiful and loyal subjects, the H ouse of Commons of Canada, in parliament assembled, beg leave to offer our humble thanks to Your Excellency for the gracious speech which Your Excellency has addressed to both houses of parliament. (Text): Mr. Erik Nielsen (Yukon): Mr. Speaker, may I first say how acutely aware I am of the honour which has been bestowed upon me, the people of the Yukon and the north in my being afforded this opportunity to second the address in reply to His Excel lency's gracious speech from the throne and to tell you something of the Yukon's hopes and aspirations. I should first like to congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, on your election to the high office which you occupy in this house. The people of the Yukon and I are grateful to the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) for being given this opportunity to dispel some of the mis conceptions that are held about the north, particularly misconceptions born of such appearances as perhaps that of the hon. mem ber for Mackenzie River (Mr. Hardie) who unfortunately is not here at the moment but who appeared in this august chamber today in native garb. It is most appropriate at this time when Yukon is this year celebrating her gold rush jubilee that I am given this opportunity, for it was 60 years ago that the Yukon was in the middle of this nation's greatest gold rush in history. Sixty-two years ago this August 17 gold was first discovered near Dawson city. I would consider it a privilege, as I am sure would all Yukoners, to be host to as many hon. members of this house as would care to come to Yukon this summer to experience personally some of the wonders of the north. The immediate history of the Yukon and indeed of all of northern Canada is that of mining. Its future is a mini~g future. As the The Address-Mr. Nielsen history of Canada has unfolded from the beginning of this century, great advances have been made in all phases of our nation's development. Our manufacturing industry has come into its own, particularly as a result of the demands placed upon it by world war II. At the outset of the century this industry was valued at one half billion dollars as con trasted with the situation today when it is valued at $19½ billion. Agriculture in 1956 yielded a gross $3¼ billion and our industries based on forest products yielded $2 billion last year. The metals industry yielded the same. Viewing this advance across Canada against a gross national product of $37 billions gives us every justification for believing that the 20th century is indeed Canada's. Canada has progressed in her development from the Cobalt days of silver to the dis covery and development of this nation's vast hard rock and gold mining industry, with her copper and nickel in Ontario and Mani toba and her copper and iron ore in Quebec and Labrador, her base metals in British Columbia and fresh discoveries in New Brunswick, of silver in the Yukon, uranium in Ontario, Saskatchewan and the Northwest Territories and her infant oil industry rapidly growing in Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatch ewan and even now advancing into the Yukon and Northwest Territories. More and more mineral discoveries are coming to light in the more northern areas of the provinces and within the last decade Canadians have often heard such names as Ungava, Cassiar, Moak lake, Rankin inlet, Uranium City, Beaverlodge, Calumet, Yukon, Yellowknife. The Canadian mining industry is making prodigious advances and I cannot overem phasize the importance of all Canadians particularly business and political leaders taking a keen and personal interest in the welfare of this industry. Mining is by nature an industry of many problems and one that is most sensitive to political and world con ditions. It is an industry which should at all times be encouraged for, in the not too dis tant future, Canada will take her place as the leading mining nation of the world. Living as we do on the threshold of the space age the door is open to many new uses and an increased world demand for metals-metals which a few years ago were of secondary importance and which are now springing into the limelight, such as boron, uranium, molybdenum, titanium and lithium. These are now most sought after by pros .pectors. In the struggle to conquer outer 14 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Nielsen space it appears obvious that those countries possessing the greatest mineral resources to gether with the scientific ability to utilize them will lead the way. Because of the vital importance of the metals industry to the preservation of our democratic way of life, we have not only a national but an international obligation to :foster the healthy growth of our mining industry in every possible fashion. As the world demand for metals increases our north ern frontiers must be pushed further and further back by those venturesome people associated with the mining industry. The in dividual prospector must be encouraged and assisted in every way. Northern Canada and particularly those areas such as the Yukon with already proven mineral resources should indeed have a bright future ahead. But mineral wealth is a hidden wealth and vast amounts of time and money are required to bring new mines into existence. The risks are great and the disappointments many. If this industry is to flourish-and the future of Canada demands that it must flourish there should be a minimum number of restric tions and the maximum amount of en couragement-encouragement which has been wanting for so long, particularly in the more northerly areas of Canada. It is important that confidence be restored among those whose tasks it is to discover and develop Canada's mineral resources. Adequate and immediate measures should be taken to develop these northern resources, for it is of vital importance to the future of our country. The resources of the Yukon stand second to none--gold, iron, asbestos, copper, silver, nickel, and all the other base and precious metals are there, as well as potentially vast oceans of oil. We have the necessary power potential to process these minerals. As a matter of fact the latent potential of the Yukon river and lake system is twice that of the St. Lawrence seaway project. These are the main reasons for the people of the Yukon being there at all-they are there because they have a faith, born of knowledge, of the potential of the Yukon. Until recently this faith has been shared only by those who sought their futures in the Canadian north, people who are in the fullest sense pioneers. But these people now see the fulfilment of their hopes-the hopes of all Canadians-in the dynamic plans for resource development which lie at the very core of the policy of this government. It has taken a long time, perhaps too long, for the attention of Canadians to be drawn to their northland, its wealth and its people [Mr. Nielsen.] and, I might add, its location. It rather surprised me to learn of the number of people who believe that the Yukon is either a part of Alaska or of the Northwest Territories, or who are still wondering whether or not British Columbia has taken over part of the Yukon. I wonder how many realize, calculat ing ore reserves, that the largest silver mine in the world is in the Yukon; I wonder how many realize that our temperature compares with that of Alberta and Saskatchewan; that the Alaska highway-giving access to the Yukon from Alberta and British Columbia and maintained by the Canadian army at such a high standard-is the best gravel highway of its kind to be found anywhere on this continent. I do not think that any member of this house entertains any doubt about the future of the Yukon or the certainty of her riches or the quality •Of her people, but wealth and willing hands alone are not enough without the means of transportation. I have spoken of the Alaska highway and we also have the beginning of a road system within the Yukon and a railway from Whitehorse to tide water at Skagway in Alaska. Between us and the heritage of the people of Canada in the mineral and oil resources of the north, how ever, lie miles upon miles of bush, rock and uncrossed rivers. These gaps must be bridged and here lies the essence of this government's policy. We must build the roads, the rail ways, the communications to make accessible these northern areas of hidden wealth. We must build the power projects and unite them with the mineral wealth to ensure the in dustrialization of Canada's north. I need not remind you, sir, of the part that transportation has played in uniting this nation from east to west, politically and economically, but today there is a new and exciting concept which can be grasped by those who have confidence in Canada's future. Canada's first national development policy was given to her by our first great, and Conservative, prime minister, Sir John A. Macdonald. In that day the building of a railway and other communications was a matter of vision, of faith, and confidence in the future. There were men of little vision then; men who said that a railway to the west coast would add nothing to the econ omy of this nation; men who said that the vast open spaces of the prairies were destined to remain empty; men who said that the Pacific could never be safeguarded for North America. But Sir John A. Macdonald and his gov ernment were not prepared to wait for the oil wells of the west to flow, those same oil fields which only last year contributed MAY 12, 1958 15 almost $445 million to the national economy; they were not prepared to wait for the development of the forests . and mines of British Columbia; they were not prepared to wait for the uranium, industrial and other resources of the prairie provinces to develop. Sir John A. Macdonald and his government of that day built those communications, and who today can doubt the wisdom of their having done so. Today just as then, we have another great, and Conservative, Prime Minister. He and his government have formulated a new and dynamic national development policy; a pro gram involving the construction of a vast network of roads and other communications in northern Canada; a program which is the first step in a long overdue aggressive approach to national development; a program based principally on northern development, parts of which are already under way-for instance the survey of the road north from the Dawson city area of Yukon into the oil bearing area of the Peel plateau has started. I might pause for a moment to mention, sir, that contrary to the belief of some hon. members to your left, Yukon is not a land where there is nobody, and I can assure you, sir, that there are really no igloos in Yukon. The speech from the throne will bring satisfaction to Canadians everywhere as they note the definitive measures of this government to give effect to its policies. The whole national development policy can reach fruition only as we build our com munication and transportation lines to enable our raw materials to be collected, processed and distributed. Under former governments proven re sources had to exist before development roads could be built. We now see roads pro jected that will enable Canadians actually to carry out the development tasks that must follow upon exploration before re sources can be proven and brought to market. A few moments ago I spoke of the pro jected road into the potential oil fields of northern Yukon. It is with a great deal of gratification that I note that since the Prime Minister's opening campaign address in Win nipeg three months ago today-an address in which the Prime Minister outlined the na tional development policy of this government The Address-Mr. Nielsen -almost 25 million acres have been taken out in Yukon and Northwest Territories oil exploration permits. The oil companies con cerned are committed at this date to spend $25 million in exploration work in Yukon alone. This is action suited to the need. The railway to Great Slave lake will bring into production the vast mineral deposits at Pine Point on the south shore of the lake. The decision to proceed with the develop ment of this mine is an indication of the confidence with which Canadian investors greet the forward-looking policies of this gov ernment. This railway will unlock these mines. It will connect the railway system of Canada to Mackenzie river navigation without the impediments of the shallows of the Athabasca delta and the portage at Fort Smith. The railway will also bring life to other resources along its route-timber, fish, agriculture, the vast wealth of oil in the tar sands and other mineral deposits. North from Great Slave lake we are to see a road pushed through to Great Bear lake and ultimately to the Arctic coast linking up with the route through the promising Yukon oil fields to Fort McPherson. Roads in the northern parts of the provinces are welcome news to all as they are most essential to northern development and to the full realiza tion of the resources development program. So, we see the first steps that are being taken to unite Canada north and south, just as they were taken so long ago to unite this nation east and west. It gives me as a Yukoner and a northerner the utmost grati fication to reflect on the manner in which all Canadians have overwhelmingly caught the vision of a new and greater Canada. In seconding the address in reply to the speech from the throne I should like to con clude on a note of warmest satisfaction that in this year of Yukon's gold rush jubilee we are seeing the beginning of a truly national development-northward. I should like to think that in welcoming this new era I speak not just for the people of Yukon but for all Canadians everywhere. On motion of Mr. Pearson the debate was adjourned. On motion of Mr. Diefenbaker the house adjourned at 5.30 p.m. 17 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, May 13, 1958 fhe house met at 2.30 p.m. MAIN ESTIMATES, 1958-59 A message from His Excellency the Gover nor General transmitting estimates for the financial year ending March 31, 1959, was presented by Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Min ister of Finance), read by Mr. Speaker to the house, and referred to the committee of supply. FINANCE STATEMENT BY MINISTER RESPECTING SPECIAL WARRANTS Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of . Finance): Mr. Speaker, may I make a state ment to the house concerning some of the financial matters with which the government has had to deal since F ebruary 1, and in dicate to the house how it is proposed that those matters be treated in the house from this time forward. Since dissolution on February 1, three special warrants pursuant to section 28 of the Financial Administration Act have been issued. One of these was for the balance of the fiscal year 1957-58. It is No. 1958/ 222, dated February 7, 1958, and was for the sum of $544,290,332.32. It was published in the Canada Gazette, part I, page 558 of February 15, 1958. The second and third warrants were in respect of the fiscal year 1958-59. The first of these warrants is P.C. 1958/ 492, dated April 9, 1958, for the sum of $203,368,605. It was published in the Canada Gazette, part I, of April 19, at page 1416. The third warrant is No. 1958/ 641 and is dated May 1. It is in the sum of $107,191,590. It was published in the Canada Gazette, part I, May 10, at page 1705. The schedules to the warrants as published in the Canada Gazette show the amounts involved by items in the r elevant estimates. The statement required by section 28 of the Financial Administration Act I have today deposited with the Clerk of the house in accordance with order No. 40 of the standing orders of the house. Mr. Martin (Essex East>: My hon. friend mentioned the date of May 1; the third cate gory was May 1. Is it May 1 to the present time? • Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I will touch on that point a ·little later in my remarks. I am drawing attention, Mr, Speaker, as deliberately as possible to the terms of these warrants and the provisions made by them. I should like now to point out the way in which the government has studiously avoided going one iota beyond what was immediately required to meet the necessary expenses of government, with the result that the supply appropriated by these warrants is intended to provide sufficient to meet the urgent expenses of government only until the 16th day of May, which is this Friday, Such supply will be exhausted by that date. It is proposed to ask the house tomorrow to grant interim supply for the needs of govern ment until the 31st day of May. That means that early in June a further request will be made of the house by the government for a vote of interim supply. We have in this way sought, to the limit that the circumstances existing would permit, to assure to the house the fullest control over the expenditure involved. In order that the house may have full information when considering the estimates and the matters to which I have referred I should like briefly first to describe the use made of the warrants during the period in question; second to indicate the manner in which it is proposed that parliament shall have opportunity to discuss fully the use of the warrants in respect of the fiscal year 1957-58 and the fiscal year 1958-59; and third, to relate the warrants of 1958-59 to the forth coming interim supply bill. As to the first point concerning the warrant of February 7, 1958, may I say this. At dissolution parliamentary sanction had been obtained to the extent of five-sixths or, to relate it in terms of months, ten-twelfths of all the estimates with the exception of the final supplementary estimates, and in some cases sums in excess of ten-twelfths. There had been passed a series of interim supply bills which appropriated sums required to meet all expenses of government to January 31, and the warrant which was issued on February 7 included the cash needs, and the cash needs only, to complete the programs of the fiscal year ended March 31, 1958, including the elements provided in the final supple mentaty estimates which had been tabled ifl January. 18 HOUSE OF COMMONS Finance-Speciial Warrants In determining the immediate cash needs in accordance with the provisions of section 28 of the Financial Administration Act the government had to consider the maintenance of employment and the necessity of meeting promptly, as they fell due, the bills incurred by the government. We succeeded in reduc ing the amounts of the estimates which had been drawn up and tabled by the previous government, by efforts in the various depart ments of government, by the sum of $73.6 million. Under the Financial Administration Act provision is made for the appropriation of money to meet the cash needs of government but no provision is made there for dealing with those items in the estimates which we commonly call the legislative items, the so called one dollar items, nor with those items which have as their purpose the authorization of the crediting of accounts in the consolidated revenue fund. It will be the intention of the government at a suitable time in the session to present to the house a measure in respect of the accounts for the year 1957-58 to deal .specifically with these items, and on that occasion there will be afforded to the house, it is proposed, the fullest opportunity in com mittee of supply to discuss, to obtain informa tion and to pass any judgments that may be required on the sums appropriated and expenditures made under the provisions of the governor general's warrants. With reference to the fiscal year which commenced on April 1 and in respect of which provision has been made by the second and third warrants, I should again like to stress that in the warrants we have appropriated only those sums directly and urgently required to meet the expenses of government. There has, of course, been no attempt made to deal with the items that are legislative in their character or which involve transfer items. Had the house been meeting, let us say, on April 1 the government would have asked the house under the circumstances to vote two months' interim supply based upon the estimates. I wish to point out that the amounts which have been appropriated pur suant to the two warrants I have mentioned are not as large with respect to these items, subject to one or two exceptions which I will mention, as would have been involved had we been asking at the beginning of this fiscal year for a vote of two months' interim supply. The exceptions are those cases in which construction was involved. Because the season has been favourable to progress in the construction programs of the govern ment, it has been necessary to proceed some what in advance of the pro rata basis measured in terms of months. That is not [Mr. Fleming (Eglinton).] unusual; that has been the practice followed in past years, and in the bill which will be presented to the house tomorrow those items will be singled out and any explanations required will be fully given in regard to them. I therefore stress to the house that the steps which the house will be asked to take tomorrow will include the sums appropriated for this period from April 1 to the middle of this month and the provision will contem plate the vote of two months' interim supply in the ordinary way, less the sums already appropriated and expended in pursuance of these two warrants. I can assure the house that every effort has been made to limit just as far as possible within the usual proportions the sums thus appropriated by the warrants. Where these have been exceeded in the exceptional cases to which I have referred, the items are in one or other of four categories. The first is the works program which I have mentioned and related urgent problems-for example, the gift of wheat to India which is all to be taken up in the present crop year; the second is the work attributable to the fact that we have had the advantage of an open winter; the third is the action we have taken to pay the accounts promptly. We have made no attempt to delay payment of accounts so as to carry them over into the later period; we thought it proper that these accounts be paid as they fell due. The fourth factor is the lower turnover and better recruiting up to personnel establishment of the various departments of government. I stress that all the items in these warrants have been provided in the main estimates which I have today tabled, with one excep tion. That exception concerns the interim financing of Trans-Canada Air Lines. This interim financing has become necessary by reason of faster deliveries of aircraft pur chased and these were altogether desirable. The funds that are provided by the war rant for loan are intended to meet the needs of Trans-Canada Air Lines up to June 30 next. The usual Canadian National Railways financing and guarantee bill to be introduced this session will cover the loan provided by warrant for Trans-Canada Air Lines. This is not an item which appears in the book of estimates. I stress again that the items do not include any grants except those that could be con sidered obligations, and do not include any legislative or accounting items. As hon. members will recall from the terms of the speech from the throne read yes terday by His Excellency, it is the intention MAY 13, 1958 19 of the government to introduce during the course of this session a bill to amend the Financial Administration Act. Therefore I think the house will realize that we have done as much as was possible in the circumstances to avoid spending one cent more than was strictly and absolutely necessary to meet the urgent expenses of government. In the procedures that have been proposed the fullest opportunity will be af forded to all hon. members to obtain all information required and which they may desire in reference to any of the items in volved in these appropriations by governor general's warrants, and to pass on the actions of the government such judgment as may •commend itself to them. Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, there will be a more appropriate opportunity to discuss this matter -tomorrow when the interim supply bill is brought down, and in the light of that we will be able to make up our minds on this side whether the commitments to which the hon. gentleman has referred have in fact been carried out. For that purpose the in formation he has given us will be helpful. I take it from what he has said that ex penditures of between $850 million and $900 million have been made under governor gen eral's warrants and that he is giving the house an assurance--an assurance which we were not able to secure in the last days of the previous parliament when this matter was under discussion-that there will be full opportunity to consider all these ex,pendi tures, whether they have been made under _governor general's warrants covering the estimates for the current financial year or for the previous year. Mr. Hazen Argue (Assiniboial: Mr. Speaker, we welcome the statement of the Minister of Finance. We understand him to have assured the house that the government will make it possible for members of parliament to pass -0n the action of the government in procuring very large sums of money by means of gov .ernor general's warrants. I think hon. members realize that the provision of supply to Her Majesty and control over the supply of funds is one of the main prerogatives of the House of Com mons, one of the prerogatives which must be protected a,t all costs. I think the apparent change in attitude of the government as compared with the last day of the previous parliament is a change which commends itself to the house, but we will have further remarks to make when ithe appropriations and the bills are presented. Mr. Winch: Mr. Speaker, may I ask a question? Inquiries of the Ministry Mr. Speaker: I think the custom has been for one spokesman for each group to com ment on a ministerial statement, and if my hon. friend would keep his question until the question period we will preserve the practice. CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON STRIKE SITUATION On the orders of the day: Hon. L, B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he has any statement to make in regard to the railway strike. Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, there is nothing further to report other than what has already appeared in the press, which included a statement by the Minister of Labour to the effect that the negotiations are still con tinuing between the two parties. I think the field of dispute has been very materially reduced. I felt that was the situation late Saturday night and Sunday morning, and I feel that since then there has been further advance made. As soon as there is anything to report the house will immediately be made aware of it. TRANSPORT KETTLE VALLEY RAILWAY-REPORTED REDUCTION IN PASSENGER SERVICE On the orders of the day: Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West): Mr. Speaker, I wish to transport a question to the Minister of Transport. In view of the fact that when replying to the vehement pro tests made by representatives of many organ izations in Kootenay West against a reduction of passenger service on the Kettle Valley railway the minister's main political trump was to say he would consult with Messrs Crump and Rump, would the minister inform the house if as a result of his consultations with these gentlemen the present inadequate Budd car service on the Kettle Valley rail way will soon blossom forth into an adequate passenger train service? Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport): Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for his customary courtesy in advising me of his intention to ask this ques tion. The board of transport commissioners advise me that the introduction of Budd car service between Lethbridge and Vancouver resulted in the speeding up of the running time and made connections with the Cana dian Pacific Railway trains Nos. 1 and 2, The Canadian, at Medicine Hat westward and 20 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry eastward. In making this important connec tion the company no doubt improved the service to its patrons in the Nelson and Trail areas from which point the greater portion of the traffic of this train originates. Some complaints did reach the board in respect of the handling of express shipments on the Budd service, but these complaints have been satisfactorily taken care of. The Doukhobor situation between Nelson and Penticton broke the through connection, and as long as that situation exists the board feels that no improvement in the service can be anticipated. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NORAD-INQUIRY AS TO CANADA UNITED STATES AGREEMENT On the orders of the day: Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can the minister tell us first of all whether or not the arrangement entered into by Canada with the United States under NORAD has in fact now resulted in a written document and, if so, when may this intergovernmental agree ment between the United States and Canada be tabled in the house? Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I am happy to inform the hon. member that all the negotiations with respect to the exchange of notes have been completed. I propose to make a statement in the house on Friday afternoon in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. The note will be tabled at that time. INCOME TAX PREMIUM IRON ORES-CANADIAN REPRESENTATIONS TO U.S. GOVERNMENT On the orders of the day: Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur): Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can the minister tell the house whether the Cana dian ambassador to the United States has in recent weeks made either a public statement or any official representation to the state department on his government's position in the Premium Iron Ores tax case? Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I would like to take that question as notice. I have no recollection that this has been done in recent weeks, but I will accept the question as notice. [Mr. Hees.] UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE REQUEST FOR STATEMENT ON SEASONAL BENEFIT PAYMENTS On the orders of the day: Mr. M. W. Martin (Timmins): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Min ister of Labour. I regret that due to the hustle and bustle of the formalities connected with the opening of parliament I was unable to give him adequate notice of my intention to ask this question, and he may prefer to ac cept this as notice. In view of the widespread ,confusion and misunderstanding with regard to the inter pretation of the act would the minister inform the house just what percentage of the un employed are currently drawing seasonal benefits, and whether this ratio can be ex pected to continue or improve in the future? Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, because the question seeks the percentage of those drawing seasonal benefits, I will take it as notice and supply the answer to the hon. member tomorrow. TELEVISION REPORTED LIMITED COVERAGE IN NORTHERN ONTARIO On the orders of the day: Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue in his capacity as ministerial spokesman for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. I won der whether the minister has noted and con sidered action on the point that the area known as northern and northwestern Ontario, which has very limited television coverage, failed to catch another kind of vision on March 31. Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of National Revenue): Mr. Speaker, I take it that the hon. gentleman is paying tribute to the educational work carried on by the C.B.C. in the greater areas of Canada, and I presume he will support me in my efforts to see that this educational work is continued in the future so that the vacuum to which he has referred will be obliterated in the next election. CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS COCHRANE, ONT.-REPORTED REMOVAL OF DIESEL REPAIR SHOPS On the orders of the day: Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming): Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Minister of Transport a question. Is the minister aware of the intention of the C.N.R. to move the MAY 13, 1958 21 diesel railway repair shops from Cochrane immediately? This move will leave the town of Cochrane, which is mainly dependent on the railway workers, in desperate straits. Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trans port): Mr. Speaker, I was not aware of the situation, but I will draw the hon. member's remarks to the attention of the management of Canadian National Railways and as soon as I receive a reply from them I will com municate it to the house. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE SLAUGHTER OF ANIMALS--OBSCENE LITERATURE -INQUIRY AS TO INTRODUCTION OF LEGISLATION On the orders of the day: Mr. W. L. Houck (Niagara Falls): I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. In the last parliament he referred to proposed legislation concerning the humane slaughter of animals and obscene literature. Does he intend to introduce bills covering these matters at this session? Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Justice): Mr. Speaker, during the last parliament we gave a pretty firm commitment to reintroduce legislation dealing with the humane slaughter of animals at this session, and subject to the exigencies of the session that is still our intention. With regard to the question of obscene literature, no commitment was given beyond saying that the matter was being studied. It is being studied and progress is being made, but I am not yet able to make a firm commit ment with regard to legislation. HOUSING CENTRAL MORTGAGE AND HOUSING-PROVISION OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS On the orders of the day: Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-Coquitlaml: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. I do not imagine that he needs notice. Is the minister able to inform the house whether the supply of money granted to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation by the last parliament has been exhausted? If it has been exhausted, what is being done in the interim until further money is voted in order to en sure the continuation of the home-building program? Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works): Mr. Speaker, the fund has not quite been exhausted; there still remains a small amount. If the hon. member will refer to Votes and Proceedings for today he will The Address-Mr. Pearson find there a resolution which will be on the order paper tomorrow providing for a further $350 million. We hope to be able to get that through the house this week. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY The house resumed, from Monday, May 12, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session. Hon, L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition): Mr. Speaker, at the beginning I should like, and in no mere formal way, to extend my congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. Under circumstances which are at best always a test of one's nerves, they acquitted themselves in a way which I am sure will commend itself to their constituents and which, I am also sure, has impressed the house with the desire to hear them again. The fact that they come from constituencies so far apart and so very different in char acter, experience and history underlines not only the vastness of our country but its variety of culture and development. Quebec-Montmorency is in the very heart land of Canada, the centre of so much of our history and our traditions. While inhabited, of course, by people who are vigorous and forward looking in their activities, it also mirrors our past. It emphasizes the con tinuity of our growth and reflects the forces that have given that growth stability. The Yukon is astride what is, I suppose, our last physical frontier. There, new challenges are being met and new opportunities of progress are being exploited. "Go north" is now the call to adventure and achievement, as the hon. member who seconded the address so well illustrates by his own experience. May I also, Mr. Speaker, offer my con gratulations to you. I am not going to em barrass you by repeating the things I tried to say about you yesterday before you were chosen Speaker but I have not changed my mind overnight. I should also like to offer my congratulations and good wishes to the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker), to his supporters in the house and to his party on their decisive, if from our point of view somewhat regrettable, victory on March 31. I am afraid that for us at that time it was not a question of the ides of March but the tides of March that swept over us. I know that the Prime Minister and his colleagues in the cabinet face many and 22 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Pearson heavy responsibilities. We on this side, and when I say "this side" I am speaking not in a geographical but in a political sense-I do not want to embarrass my friends who, not through our choice, have joined us over here -wish them health, strength and success in all those endeavours which will advance the national interest and promote the national good. A few of us over here have learned from experience how many, how burdensome and how pressing are the problems that con front ministers every hour of every day of every week in the year, and of the sacrifices of leisure and private life they have to make in dealing with these problems. We know also, Mr. Speaker, that these problems could not be dealt with successfully by any govern ment, however strong it might be, if it were not for a civil service second to none in the world for devotion and efficiency. May I also, Mr. Speaker, offer congratula tions to the new members who make up in unprecedented numbers the class of '58 for their success in matriculating into the faculty of practical political science. Many of them, I hope, will graduate in 1962 or 1963 and I am sure they will do so cum laude. They are entering the commons at a time when parlia mentary government, based on decisions made after full, untrammelled discussion by the representatives of the people chosen in a free election, is under increasing criticism and attack in so many parts of the world. We are prone to assume that this democratic and parliamentary system of ours is not only accepted as the best for man's progress and welfare, but is so firmly and deeply rooted in history and experience as to be unshakeable. The first assumption has been rejected by those who control the destinies of more than half the people of the world, and the latter is not historically accurate. Indeed, our form of parliamentary and democratic government is a comparatively modern growth and is far from being secure, even in those countries where it now exists. Parliamentary institutions today are under attack from four sources. They are under attack from those who do not believe in freedom and advocate totalitarianism or autoc racy of one kind or another; from those who have concluded that our parliamentary insti tutions are unable efficiently to meet and adapt themselves to the new problems that face us in 1958; from the indifference of the electorate to parliament and to politics, especially between elections; and finally from the occasional indifference of a few parlia mentarians themselves to the best traditions and highest purpose of these institutions. In that respect therefore, Mr. Speaker, every one of us in this house has a special responsi bility and special obligations as well as special [Mr. Pearson.] privileges. The way we discharge them here will affect not only the administration of the government but the strength of our parlia mentary and democratic institutions. Speak ing for the opposition, we will try to act in a way which will show our understanding and acceptance of these responsibilities. We shall try to be guided by something more than mere partisan considerations as we approach our work. While vigorous and alert in carry ing out our responsibilities to oppose, we will try to do this in a constructive way and co-operate with the government in all those endeavours which in our view further the national interest. Like members opposite, of course, we on this side are influenced and perhaps at times oppressed by human prejudices and other emotions. We shall endeavour to prevent opposition degenerating into mere negation or criticism into mere obstruction. A well known parliamentarian in Great Britain in the early part of the nineteenth century, Mr_ Tierney, claimed, and his observations have been repeated by more than one member in this house including the Prime Minister, that the duty of the opposition was to propose nothing, to oppose everything and to turn the government out. Mr. Diefenbaker: I did not agree with every section of that. Mr. Pearson: I agree with the Prime Minister that Mr. Tierney was only one-third right, according to the more enlightened par liamentary standards of Canada today. Per haps the Prime Minister will permit me to quote a more weighty and experienced authority on the functions of the opposition, namely himself. He used words in Toronto on October 27, 1949, which should be a guide and inspiration to us on this side. They are all the more impressive as they come from one to whom we do not normally look for political inspiration or guidance. I quote from what he said in Toronto: If parliament is to be preserved as a living institution, His Majesty's loyal opposition must fear lessly perform its functions. When it properly discharges them the preservation of our freedom is assured. The reading of history proves that freedom always dies when criticism ends. It upholds and maintains the rights of minorities against majorities. It must be vigilant against oppression and unjust invasions by the cabinet of the rights of the people. It should supervise all expenditures and preventing overexpenditure by exposing to the light of public opinion wasteful expenditures or worse. It finds fault; it suggests amendments; it asks questions and elicits informa tion; it arouses, educates and molds public opinion by voice and vote. It must scrutinize every action by the government and in doing so prevents the short-cuts through democratic procedure that gov ernments like to make. MAY 13, 1958 The absence of a strong opposition means a one party state. A one party state means an all powerful cabinet. Those were very wise words uttered by the Prime Minister some years ago when he was in opposition. Well then, Mr. Speaker, it is our duty in parliament to oppose, and that will mean causing divisions of this house on occasions. We do not forget that we are united in a sincere desire to serve our country and that the influences that draw us together in that ideal of national service are much stronger than the influences that separate us into political parties. So far as the quantitative as contrasted with the con stitutional position of the opposition is con cerned, perhaps I might describe it in the words of Shakespeare which are so well known and which he put into the mouth of Henry V on the eve of Agincourt: We few, we happy few, we band of brothers. I admit at once, Mr. Speaker, that the analogy in regard to the circumstances in which the words were uttered is not quite perfect. Henry spoke of his gallant band before a surprisingly decisive victory, while I speak of ours after a defeat of a surprisingly decisive character. This defeat, I might add, had some of the force of a nuclear explosion, the fall-out from which is not yet entirely dissipated, but nevertheless left the Liberal party with approximately 2.5 million sup porters in this country. It will be our purpose, therefore, to act here so as to add to that number whenever the opportunity presents itself. At the moment, however, I admit that we are outnumbered. Indeed, we are almost surrounded. The Con servative party, Mr. Speaker, has been long in achieving this position of unprecedented numbers which it now holds in the house. Yet I must confess that during the long, lean years they never lost their courage, their heart or their energy. Apart from the Prime Minister himself, t o whose electoral activity and achievements I pay a sincere if somewhat rueful tribute, there is no one, I think, who would get and be entitled to more satisfaction out of the present situation of his party than the man who led that party with such patri otic zeal, determination, and sincere conviction during many years of opposition. I refer, of course, to the present Canadian high com missioner to the United Kingdom, my good friend Mr. George Drew. Many of my own party colleagues, Mr. Speaker, of previous parliaments have not returned. They have fallen by the electoral wayside. We on this side shall certainly miss them. They gave good and devoted service to Canada over many years, as indeed did the members of other opposition groups who are not with us today. The Address-Mr. Pearson Perhaps I might make special mention of the one whose place in this house, as leader of the Liberal party, I have the honour and responsibility to try to fill, Right Hon. Louis, St. Laurent. We admire and respect him, and always will, as one of our great citizens; one whose contribution to the welfare of his country, made with modesty, sincerity and selflessness, has been truly magnificent. I think of the sacrifice he made in entering public life in the first place as a wartime duty, and of what he did to assist and unify the war effort in those days. I think of his leadership in facing and helping to solve so many post-war problems and in helping to guide Canada into and through the greatest period of national development in her history. I think of the wise direction he gave to Canada's participation in international affairs. In that participation he was always, and with quiet determination, guided only by Canadian considerations. But he never forgot. that the greatest Canadian consideration is. peace and good relations between people, so he never allowed the proud and strong. Canadianism to become a strident little Cana dianism. His place in -our affection is as secure· as it will be in Canada's history. After these preliminary observations which perhaps have been too long, Mr. Speaker, I come to the speech from the throne itself,. which was to me most inadequate perhaps for its omissions and the vagueness. of so much of its language. Its in adequacies of commission and its sins of omission will be dealt with in detail by my colleagues in the opposition during this debate. My own remarks concerning it will be of a more general character. To read the speech, Mr. Speaker, you would never get the impression that this country is in any economic difficulty at all, with more than half a million men out of work. The word "recession" is not mentioned. It is a bad word, apparently, which must not be used. The causes, the nature and the extent of the unemployment problem are not referred to. Indeed in the address there is very little indication of the present position of our ex ternal trade. There is no mention even of that policy of diverting trade from the United States to the United Kingdom, an omission which I hope to repair in this speech of mine. Surely the trade mission of which we have· heard so very much outside this house was worth at least a word. Was not the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) given an opportunity to make a contri:bution to the first draft of the speech from the throne? Then there is the dominion-provincial con ference which was to be reconvened, as we heard last November, I think it was, as soon as possible. I believe the impression was given 24 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Pearson that it would be reconvened in January. Has it disappeared? The problems they did not deal with last November have not dis appeared, nor have the promises made by the Prime Minister and the government con cerning them. Then there are the very few lines covering those matters that come under the jurisdic tion of my friend the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Smith). There are at the beginning of the speech the customary references to foreign relations, but they could hardly be less adequate or less informative. Four lines of a very general character indeed are devoted to our foreign relations, to the search for peace; that is less space than is given to the establishment of a harbour com mission at the head of the lakes important, of course, as that matter is. There is in the speech no reference what ever to the United Nations, to NATO which has just finished an important council meeting in Copenhagen, to the government's attitude toward the abolition of nuclear tests, or to the summit conference. There is no indication of whether, in the government's view, the dangers to peace are decreasing or increas ing. Of course I do not expect the speech from the throne to go into these matters in any detail, but surely we had the right to expect some indication of awareness of the im portance of these matters, some views con cerning them, in a speech of such a lengthy character as the one before us. Similarly on another matter of the most immediate and greatest importance, namely that of national defence. There we have three lines to the effect that we should maintain, in co-operation with our allies, armed forces adequate to deter any potential aggression. That is all we find. There is no indication of the necessity which has become so appa rent lately of a complete re-examination of national defence policy in the light of recent developments, centred around the conquest of outer space, missile development, and partic ularly the possession by a potential enemy of an intercontinental ballistic missile which will soon-if it has not already done so make our existing defence arrangements on this continent as inadequate as the Maginot line even though they may have been, when planned and first put into motion, adequate for the conditions of that time. Nor is there in this speech any suggestion that in the light of these developments which have al ready affected the deployment and the character of the forces of other NATO countries, there is any need for a reassess ment of the nature and scope of our contri bution to NATO. It is to be hoped, Mr. Speaker,-and I feel confident that this hope will be realized [Mr. Pearson.] that an opportunity will be provided in this house very shortly for discussions on external affairs and on national defence, at which time ~hese matters can be gone into in that kind of detail which will reflect their vital im portance, an importance which is not even suggested in the speech from the throne. The international situation, however-and surely it is not possible to deny this-remains tense and dangerous. Perhaps it is no worse than it was when the House of Commons met last October, but certainly there has been no improvement significant enough to give us any cause for comfort. On the other hand, the consequences of failure to keep the peace are now even greater than they were six months ago. It is true that the western coali tion has developed a powerful deterrent against aggression. It is true that that remains essential. But that simply means that peace, even of the kind which we now have, rests on power so terrible that neither side dares to use it. If we do not soon find a better basis for peace than that we cannot expect indefinitely to escape destruction. Meanwhile the diplomatic manoeuvring goes on, the slow and devious progress to a conference at the summit. If that conference meets and tries to deal with concrete com plicated problems in the atmosphere which now exists between the two sides to the cold war and without satisfactory preliminary political and diplomatic discussions, a con ference of that kind is almost certain to do more harm than good. It is fairly clear, however, that public opinion now demands some kind of summit meeting. The western powers and this gov ernment, in view of that fact, I think are well advised to press ahead with prepara tions. My own view, for what it may be worth, is that the best kind of meeting at this time would be a short and informal one between the heads of the two most powerful nations, namely the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., where views can be exchanged without bene fit, or perhaps I should say without handicap, of an agenda and where the effort at least can be made to clear away some misunder standings and to ease fears through a per sonal contact. At this moment I merely repeat what I said a moment ago, that I hope there will soon be a chance to discuss these matters in this house-these matters which are of such fundamental importance-in greater detail. May I now say a few words on one or two aspects of our domestic problems. Two of them I think are perhaps uppermost in our minds, and those two problems are more closely connected in Canada than in perhaps MAY 13, 1958 25 any other country in the world. I am re ferring to trade and unemployment. I have neither the desire nor the intention to exag gerate the seriousness of the economic reces sion; the facts are present for all to see, and each of us can draw his own conclusions from those facts . I well know, as I believe most members of the government know, that confidence is a vital element in the success ful functioning of our complex economic system, and that such confidence can be destroyed or certainly easily weakened by irresponsible words, and even more seriously weakened by an irresponsible attitude. In my opinion even more harmful would be a head in the sand attitude, a refusal to recognize the facts in the hope that they will go away. A realistic attitude and a realistic acceptance of the situation based on the facts as they are, not as we would like them to be, are essential as a starting point to any improvement. There is therefore no justifica tion whatsoever in any · charge or reproach of doom and gloom-mongering being thrown at those who talk about the facts. Such dis cussion is an essential prelude to doing something about the harsh realities of the present which, if they are not corrected, will dim the vision of the nation's future which we all share. One thing is clear, that notwithstanding some of the optimistic adjectives used in the election campaign the recession is still with us. The economists and the politicians may debate whether and how much it is easing and how soon it will disappear; we are told that the recession has "levelled off" or, if I may use a new and somewhat dis couraging expression, that it has "bottomed off". Well, even if this qualified optimism were justified, what are the steps being taken not to keep on the level but to improve the situation so that we can go up? We cannot get very much comfort in merely bumping along the bottom, even if we are not going down any further. It seems clear to me furthermore that our difficulties have international as well as national implications, and we will certainly not surmount those difficulties without a flourishing and healthy external trade. It is therefore perhaps well to remind ourselves that trade across the border is especially important in this regard, and these are the facts which must be faced in order that our present recovery can be ensured. As a factor in recovery from the present recession, trade with the United States is exceeded in importance only by, as it is largely influenced by, the domestic economic situation inside that country. When we talk about salvation from the economic dominance of any other The Address-Mr. Pearson country, of national control and independence -about which there is no division of opinion in this house or, I think, in this country-it is still chastening to realize that even if our policies here should be wise, vigorous and far-sighted, we cannot isolate ourselves from our neighbour's economic decisions or eco nomic fortunes. We can and we should of course cushion ourselves in every way possible against shocks from the south, but there is no way in which we can escape the fact of these shocks and we do not need any special detecting apparatus to discover them. We must naturally protect our interests when they are prejudiced by United States policy. We must, for instance,make it quite clear that the United States cannot expect full and complete co-operation in continental defence, which is desirable, if she treats us unfairly in her tariff and trade policies. But at the same time we must do everything we possibly and honourably can, to avoid economic conflict with the United States, which conflict would be bad for both countries and certainly disastrous for us. I read an editorial in a local paper a few days ago which carried this headline: "Can ada Must Determine her Own Economic Future". A headline of that kind merely ignores the hard fact that no country in the world today, let alone Canada, can alone determine its economic future; and the sober realization of that fact is essential to the formulation of a wise Canadian international economic policy. Somehow we must reconcile its necessity with that vigorous, vibrant and proud nationalism which I believe will re main the mainspring of our country's growth. Having regard, therefore, to the import ance of these external trade factors, let us look at the trade and employment picture. The Prime Minister more than once during the election campaign referred to external trade. He is reported, for instance, as having said in Cornwall on February 24 and again in London on March 7, and I quote from the press report: Our exports- He was talking about our exports to the United States. -went down and our imports increased when the Liberals were in. Let us look at the facts. In 1936, which was the first full year of Liberal administra tion, our exports to the United States were $333.9 million; in 1950 they had risen to $2,050 million and in 1956, the last full year in which the Liberal administration was in office, they had increased to $2,879 million. 26 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Pearson Mr. Diefenbaker: Would the hon. gentleman mind quoting the text there, because that is obviously extracted from a general state ment? Possibly that would clarify the matter. Mr. Pearson: I have the newspaper reports. Mr. Diefenbaker: Would you just read on, then? Mr. Pearson: These reports quote the Prime Minister or refer to the Prime Minister in quotations. To be entirely fair I realize that the figure for 1936 could not have been in his mind, but I think the figure for 1950 or the post-war figure might have been in his mind when he said that. I also realize that the increase in imports from the United States was even greater than our increase in exports to the United States, but the Prime Minister also said, according to the press and that is the only source of information I have for so many of his election speeches, and it is perhaps the only source of information he has for some of mine-- Mr. Diefenbaker: That is right. Mr. Pearson: The Prime Minister said in Fredericton on March 24 and he said this in other places as well, so I think he will recall the statement: In 1957, our export trade was greater than in the history of our country- That is true. -and that is continuing in 1958. The facts are, and they can be ascertained from official sources, that our exports in the first quarter of 1958 as compared with the first quarter of 1957 dropped from $1,118 million to $1,092 million, a drop of $26 million; our imports dropped from $1,359 million to .$1,193 million, or a drop of $166 million in the first quarter of this year. With the United States alone our exports dropped $5 million and our imports $165 million. With the United Kingdom our exports dropped by $3,500,000 and our imports increased by $2,500,000 in the first quarter of 1958. Now it is quite true-the Prime Minister got a good deal of satisfaction out of this in some of his statements, and I do not complain about it-that our adverse balance of trade with the United States in this first quarter has been reduced by more than $150 million. Any satisfaction which can be obtained from this fact must surely be largely offset by the fact that it was not achieved by increasing or even by diverting exports, because exports to the United States have declined. It was achieved by a far greater decline in imports; and any decline in imports from the United States, any rectification of the adverse bal ance achieved in that way by the fact that [Mr. Pearson.] our decline in imports is much greater than even our decline in exports, -can surely give very little satisfaction, especially if that de cline in imports from the United States is not by any means paralleled by an increase from the commonwealth or from any other source. That decline in United States imports, instead of being encouraging, is a depressing feature of the trade picture be cause it clearly indicates that our develop ment has been slowed down, that we no longer require as many of those capital goods as we needed in previous years in order to ,continue the expansion and growth which charader ized this ,country during the years between 1945 and 1957. A decline of this kind in United States imports and investments may give comfort to those who are so worried about United States penetration of our economy; but until that decline is offset by goods and capital from other sources, and that is not going to be easy, it will give little comfort to those who wish to keep our economy active and expanding. We should all like to exercise the greatest possible measure of control over our own national development but we do not wish, on this side of the house at least, to do so at the price of slowing it up. There fore the keynote of our trade and develop ment policy on this side has been-and surely this must be a wise poli-cy for any Canadian government-expansion on the basis of the freest possible trade rather than restriction or diversion. I should now like to say something about restriction and diversion. It seems to me that diversion of trade is neither a wise nor a beneficial principle to introduce into our foreign economic policy, though diversifica tion in harmony with expansionist practices and principles is. To tell our best customer, for example, that we are going to do what we can to take more than $620 million dollars worth of business from her, thereby giving ammunition to those across the line who would place further obstacles in the way of imports from us, does not make sense, to us over here at least. To tell Britain that we wish to help her-and we have helped Britain sin:ce world war II-to increase her trade with Canada does make sense and is some thing we can all support. Our record in regard to that kind of help from 1945 to 1957 is one in which our party can take pride. Perhaps it is just as well to recall, in view of some of the things which have been said, that after the second world war, when Liberal governments were in office, we made avail able to the United Kingdom by loan, credit or gift, more than two billion Canadian MAY 13, 1958 27 dollars. In order to promote trade between our two countries we set up a continuing committee on trade and economic affairs whose work was assisted by the dollar sterling trade council set up for that purpose; and if anyone thinks the forthcoming com monwealth economic conference in Montreal is a unique venture in commonwealth eco nomic diplomacy I should like to point out that there were more commonwealth meet ings on the prime ministerial and ministerial level in the post-war years, when we were in power, than in any previous period in the history of the commonwealth. These included the economic conference of 1952 and seven meetings of commonwealth finance ministers. The figures indicate that in spite of difficulties-and there were great difficulties in those years-results were achieved which went far to build up and restore trade between the United Kingdom and Canada after the dislocation and destruc tion caused by the second world war, during those years when Britain had a hard time getting dollars, when it was comparatively easy for her to sell goods in the sterling area countries especially since they had such enormous sterling balances. In spite of those difficulties imports from the United Kingdom rose from $189 million in 1947 to $486 million in 1956 and our ex ports to the United Kingdom, in spite of the difficulties I have mentioned, including the low prices obtained by agricultural producers in the United Kingdom market, rose during that period. And this was the market we were supposed to have lost completely. Nevertheless, in spite of our ,success in this direction we feel our policy should be not to concentrate on expansion in any one market but in all markets, and it will not help this policy if we merely try to divert trade from one market to another. That is why we on this side of the house last autumn criticized very strongly the proposal to divert 15 per cent of our imports from the United States to the United Kingdom. We opposed that particularly when the response of the Canadian government to the United Kingdom free trade offer-the only way in which this diversion could take place in any reasonable space of time-was entirely negative. Mr. Green: May I ask the Leader of the Opposition a question? Is the Liberal party in favour of f:r:ee trade between the United Kingdom and Canada? Mr. Pearson: I will come to that in a minute or two. I have already stated our position on that question, and I will be glad to do so again. However, not only was the attitude of the present government with re gard to that offer entirely negative but it The Address-Mr. Pearson resulted in what the London Economist called the other day the "free trade fiasco". The Prime Minister, nine months after his first announcement on this matter, in an interview with a United States magazine, the U.S. News and World Report which I happen to read every week, says there is no such diversion policy, and that no such proposal for diversion was ever made. Mr. Diefenbaker: Read the question and the answer. Mr. Pearson: The question put to the Prime Minister which appears in this news magazine was: Do you think Canada actually will divert 15 per cent of its trade from the United States to Britain? And the answer was: -At no time did we say that we were going to divert 15 per cent. I said, as an example, that, if 15 per cent were diverted, the result would be to bring about a reasonable deficit in our trade with the United States and, at the same time, assure us markets that are virtually non-existent today. Well, that question and answer raised two or three questions in my mind, and I am sure the same questions were raised in a lot of other minds. The first question raised in my mind was, "What did the Prime Minister say at that time?" The second question was, "What im pression was created by his statement in Canada, in the United Kingdom and in the United States of America." And the third question was, "What steps, if any, were taken during the last nine months to correct this impression, if it was a wrong one, of Cana dian policy?" Let us examine the first question. Ac cording to the Canadian Press the Prime Minister stated on his return from the United Kingdom on July 7, and I quote from the Canadian Press story: He- The Prime Minister- -would like to see about 15 per cent of Canadian imports from the United States diverted to Britain. On July 23 the Ottawa Journal, an unim peachable source, quoted the Prime Minister as saying in an interview: I regard that objective- Fifteen per cent diversion, of course -as reasonable, equitable and obtainable. On November 22 the Prime Minister is re- ported by the Canadian Press as saying: .... he- The Prime Minister- -has every confidence that the Canadian trade mission will achieve its objective of diverting 15 per cent of Canadian imports from the United States to Britain. 28 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Pearson The Prime Minister on this occasion said he was sure that 15 per cent of Canadian imports could be shifted from the United States to the United Kingdom. In answer to a reporter's question he is reported to have replied, and I quote: I would never have enunciated such a principle last July, if I had not thought it possible. Furthermore on Friday, October 25 last in this house, as reported at page 399 of Hansard of that date, the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin) asked the Prime Minister whether he was going to discuss with the United Kingdom Prime Minister his proposal -the word used was "proposal"-to divert Canadian purchases from one friendly coun try to another. Did the Prime Minister on that occasion object to the word "proposal"? Not at all. He merely replied that he would discuss all matters of mutual interest with Mr. Macmillan. During the election campaign the Prime Minister more than once referred, and with some satisfaction I think, to his plan to divert 15 per cent of our imports from the United States to the United Kingdom. It seems to me it is perfectly clear, therefore, from the Prime Minister's own statement that the objective was not merely to increase United Kingdom exports to Canada but to divert Canadian imports from the United States to the United Kingdom. It was diversion; there is no doubt about that. Nor was there any doubt left in people's minds that this was a policy of this government, an objective to be achieved, a governmental purpose to be realized. It was only nine months later, after the election, the Prime Minister apparently decided that his statement really had nothing to do with policy or purpose; the 15 per cent diversion was merely something that might conceivably happen in some way outside government policy and if it did that would be just fine. But that was not the impression created in the country, and I have here a good many newspaper quotations which make it quite clear beyond any doubt that the impression created in the newspapers of this country was that there was a govern ment policy, a government proposal, a gov ernment objective to divert $620 million worth of business from the United States to the United Kingdom. Even Mr. James Duncan, who has been pretty close to the government and who I am sure has been a great help to it in these trade missions, is reported in the Globe and Mail of January 22 as having talked of the Prime Minister's 15 per cent diversion proposal. Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) in this house last October 23, as reported at page 308 of Hansard, said that the policy of the gov ernment was "to seek a diversion of trade". Later on during the election campaign, on March 19 in Vancouver, as quoted in the Vancouver Sun of that date the hon. gentle man went a little further and referred to the government's "decision". That is the word he is quoted as using. He referred to the government's decision to shift 15 per cent of' Canadian trade to the United Kingdom from the United States and he even added, and these were really quite astonishing words, that the Americans welcomed this loss of $620 million worth of business; they would realize it was for everybody's good. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): That is not an accurate report of anything I said. Mr. Pearson: I will send the newspaper story to my hon. friend. Then the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Churchill) on his arrival in London with the Canadian trade mission is quoted as stating its purpose to be a diversion of $620 million worth of purchases from the United States to the United Kingdom. He called this the Prime Minister's goal and described it as a "thoroughly practical" one. Mr. Churchill: What are you quoting from? Mr. Pearson: I am quoting from newspapers. and I would be very glad to send these clip pings to my hon. friend. Some hon. Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Pearson: If my hon. friend doubts the accuracy of these reports he should have denied them when they appeared. Mr. Churchill: I never even heard about them until now. Mr. Pearson: When we were debating this. matter in the House of Commons last autumn my hon. friend was in his place and he intervened in the debate. Why did he not at that time characterize our description of this policy as inaccurate and unfair? Mr. Churchill: I have all the way through. I have been doing that for months, and you know what the results have been. Mr. Pearson: No; at that time there was not a word from any hon. member opposite as to the inaccuracy of our description of this 15- per cent diversion as a governmental policy, a governmental proposal and a governmental objective. Indeed, members of the government accepted that statement and took all the credit they could out of it during the election campaign. What did my hon. friend's own in the government say about it? colleagues What was the impression left in the United Well, the Kingdom? I will just quote from the London [Mr. Pearson. J MAY 13, 1958 29 Times, which on July 8 referred to the Prime Minister as saying that 15 per cent diversion was a "planned objective" and again, on No vember 22, as a "project" of the Prime Min ister; and later, on April 21, 1958, it com plained that the Prime Minister's statement to the U.S. News and Wortd Report had caused "some perplexity here." As late as April 28 of this year Sir David Eccles called the diver sion idea a "proposal", which it now seems to be in the minds of hon. gentlemen opposite. There was also no doubt in the United States as to the meaning of what had been said. It was interpreted by our neighbours .across the border as a government proposal, as government policy and as a government objective to do what it could to switch 15 per cent of our imports from our neighbour to the south to our mother country, and that a Canadian mission was sent to the United Kingdom at government expense for that pur pose. Indeed, what other interpretation was possible in the light of all that evidence? But one is prompted to ask, why this retreat from that interpretation now? Why this attempt to slip out of this policy by diversion? Mr. Garland: The election is over. Mr. Pearson: Yes, the election is over and perhaps that may have something to do with it. But perhaps also the government has learned something about the facts and require ments of international economic policy. There is another aspect of United Kingdom Canadian trade policy that I would like to mention again, namely the offer of a free trade agreement made to the government by the Chancellor of the Exchequer last summer and on which our policy has already been stated more than once before the election, during the election and after the election. The Liberal party has taken a stand with regard to this question. Mr. Green: And no one has been able to determine what your stand is. What is your stand? Mr. Pearson: Our stand is that this proposal should have been given at once full and sym pathetic consideration by the government on the highest political level. It certainly should have been given that consideration by a government which had just expressed its intention to switch $620 million worth of business from the United States to the United Kingdom. Mr. Green: Are you for it or against it? Mr. Churchill: Watch the hon. gentleman divert to another subject. Mr. Pearson: Mr. Speaker, I am very glad indeed to talk about this. We have already stated that immediately upon receipt of this The Address-Mr. Pearson offer we would have responded at once to the request of the United Kingdom to set up a political meeting at the highest level so that immediate, careful and sympathetic con sideration could have been given to this policy. Well, what did my hon. friends opposite do? Mr . F leming (Eglinton): What about your attitude? Mr. P earson: They did not even talk about it. There was an embarrassed silence on the part of a government which has not been silent in many other respects, especially re cently. There has not been one word from any representative of the government that I have been able to detect in regard to this particular offer, and perhaps we should re member that the president of the board of trade has within the last few weeks said in Montreal, on his way to Venezuela, I think, that this offer will be renewed at the forth coming commonwealth conference. I ask the Prime Minister again, what will be the attitude of the government to that offer which has been renewed within the last few weeks? While this party, as I have already said, has over many years been con cerned with developing trade with Britain, we have also been even more concerned with developing- Mr. Green: Trade with the United States. Mr. Pearson: -international trade gen erally on the widest possible multilateral basis, with the freest possible exchange of goods and services, with the removal of quotas and controls and restrictions, with the return to convertibility between the dollar and pound. It must give any Canadian some cause for anxiety at this time to realize that restrictionist tendencies have begun to appear again on the international trading scene. That is true not only in the United States but also in Europe in spite of the movement there toward a common market and a free trade area. Surely there is r eal cause for anxiety on the part of any Canadian in that development. There can be no more important policy for Canada, no more important step to the realization of our great destiny, than to defeat these restrictionist tendencies at home and abroad, to work for the greatest and freest possible system of trade and payments, not merely on a bilateral but on a wider and, indeed, particularly on an Atlantic basis. That may seem to be a farfetched, unre alizable vision, one impossible to achieve, but I suggest that its achievement is becom ing more and more essential both for political and economic reasons. Either the Atlantic community, the Atlantic association goes 30 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Pearson forward to closer economic and political unity or it will lapse back into separate and competing national units or perhaps into two groups to the harm and disadvantage of the whole free world. Indeed, the world is too small and too pre carious a place for that kind of backsliding, especially in the face of a mounting soviet offensive which is as economic as it is political if, in fact, you can distinguish the two things. In that offensive soviet Russia has the ad vantage of central direction and control of a cohesive, aggressive, unified foreign economic policy, concerned less with financial than political considerations, and against that the Atlantic powers are groping without much success for a unity which is still largely mi litary in character and is practically non existent economically. I know, as my hon. friends opposite know, that there are moves in the other direction, important and encouraging moves in Europe. But will their end result merely be the replacement of competing national units by two competing groups, one on each side of the Atlantic? Is it to be western Europe versus the United States of America in the field of trade and economics? The British know the significance of these European developments. They know that they cannot stand aloof from them and they are working out their own association with the European free trade market. But if the United Kingdom moves across the channel how will that affect Canada and the rest of the commonwealth? Can we too make sa tisfactory arrangements with a European free trade area and help to bring about freer trade in the whole Atlantic area, including the United States of America? If not, what is the alternative for us? Isolation, which would be impossible, or North American continen talism, which would be bad. Surely this is a vital problem for Canada and one which demands public leadership and action by us in the search for a solution. Lack of Canadian vision here, lack of energy and drive in working for the wider Atlantic economic area may indeed throw us into that complete economic dependence on the United States which frightens, and rightly, hon. members opposite and hon. members over here. An expansionist trade policy, with arrangements made between the common wealth, the United States of America and Europe for closer integration in a larger At lantic system surely is the essential objective to be sought by this country in its international economic policy. Surely that is the result which we must do our best to achieve or we will never be able to realize the vision nearer home of Canada's greatness. [Mr. Pearson.] I have no illusions about the difficulties and the obstacles in the way, especially across the border in the United States of America and especially in a time of economic recession when restrictionist interests and impulses are given new opportunities, but I do suggest that if we do not make progress in spite of these difficulties in this field of Atlantic co operation we will have cause to regret the day and the whole Atlantic system may weaken and fall apart. I repeat that this is going to be more difficult now in a period of economic recession and one convincing proof that we are still in that recession is unemployment, the last matter with which I am going to deal. I am only going to touch on unemployment. We were told categorically and emphatically in February and March of this year during the election campaign that unemployment had passed the peak. That was wrong. We were also told that it had not been in any event as severe in its impact, having regard to the total labour force, as it was in 1955. That was not correct. As recently as April 21 the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) said that "unemploy ment is declining at a gratifying and ac celerating pace." His timing for that state ment was singularly unfortunate because the official figures, those lower bureau of statistics figures which my hon. friends op posite would never accept when they were in opposition, came out just after my hon. friend spoke and they showed that as of March 22 ten per cent of the working force of this country, or 590,000 persons, were jobless, an increase of 35,000 over February. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Get your dates straight. I was speaking of the situation at the date I spoke in April. My friend is talking about a different period away back before April. Mr. Pearson: If my hon. friend had some information when he spoke which was not available to the rest of us perhaps he should not have used it in a public speech of that kind. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): The information which I used was available to anybody, the figures on unemployment registrations, which are what I was speaking about, as the hon. member can see if he will read the speech. Mr. Pearson: My hon. friend says that he was talking about registrations at the un employment insurance offices. I am talking about the bureau of statistics figures. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Why don't you read the speech? MAY 13, 1958 31 Mr. Pearson: If my hon. friend used those figures he has had quite a conversion because when he was in opposition and talked about unemployment he would have nothing to do with those figures as being a grossly exag gerated statement of the unemployment problem. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Read the speech and get it straight. Mr. Pearson: Whatever figures my hon. friend took, he said that unemployment was decreasing at a satisfactory and accelerating pace at that time in April and he took great satisfaction from it. Mr. Fleming (Eglinion): That is true. Mr. Pearson: It will be very surprising and, indeed, it will be very disappointing if there has not been a substantial decline in un employment since those figures were issued, but compared with the figures of last year at this time surely my hon. friend is not going to suggest that the unemployment situation in this country is not serious, which I suspect, when there are over half a million unemployed on the basis of the last calcula tions, the dominion bureau of statistics figures. If that does not constitute serious unemployment in this country, what does? In this connection, we were told during the election campaign that $1,185 million would be spent on public works in this calendar year to give emergency employment. We were told also that $280 million of this money would be spent during the first quarter of this year. The people were certainly led to believe that this would be emergency action, and in addition to the normal public works expenditures. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): No. Mr. Pearson: Yes, they were given that idea. Possibly if my hon. friend were to read the statements made during the election, now that the heat of battle has cooled, he would get the impression that the people of the country got, that this was an emergency unemployment program and that $280 million would be spent for emergency employment in the first quarter. This quarter is complete and therefore we shall expect to learn very soon about the details of that special expend iture and what it did to prevent unemploy ment from increasing even more than it has increased. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): You had better get your facts straight. Mr. Pearson: It is very difficult indeed to get one's facts straight when one has to base them on statements made in the press by my hon. friend opposite. The Address-Mr. Pearson According to the classical theory of eco nomics, a recession with mounting unemploy ment should mean lower costs and prices. Indeed it has been argued by persons who are far from being classical economists that at the first sign of a recession monetary action through the easing of credit should be taken to halt the decline on the assumption that inflationary pressures are over or at least less dangerous. Well, things are not working out that way in Canada, as I am sure my hon. friend the Minister of Finance knows. In spite of falling employment and a slackening of economic development the cost of living in this country, as determined by the consu mer price index, has risen from 120.9 in April, 1957 to 125.9, a new high, in April of 1958. Inflation, therefore, remains a menace in the midst of recession; that is the dilemma which faces the government today. It must deal simultaneously with inflation and reces sion. We shall no doubt hear soon from the Prime Minister and from the Minister of Finance as to how they propose to resolve this dilemma. The problem is all the more complicated because of growing rigidity in our economic structure preventing market forces from operating, even in a period of recession, in a way that should reduce cost and prices. The fact is that great and organized groups of many kinds and characters inside our society have acquired enough collective power to insulate themselves, if only partially, from the effect of certain economic forces which are harmful to them. At least, they have enough power to make the attempt. When that power is used responsibly, as it has been and can be used, it can remove injustices and unfairness. If it is used irresponsibly or with regard only to special interests, we get into difficulty nationally. Troubles that may have arisen from other causes, such as the decline of external trade, become even more serious. The situation today then imposes on every one of us in this house and every one of us in this country the duty and necessity of acting with responsibility, with restraint and always with primary consideration for the public interest. If we do not in the discharge of our affairs show these qualities and follow these principles we will not overcome the problems that face us. The present situation also imposes on the government the necessity for specially determined and effective efforts to increase and maintain employment at home, not only by sound fiscal and economic policies but also by the promotion of expansionist not diver sionist policies of external trade. It is true that where there is no vision the people 32 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Diefenbaker perish. But for Canada, where there is dimin ishing trade, the vision also dims. The policy of this government, enunciated in the speech from the throne, does scant justice to the importance of this particular con sideration. I move, therefore, seconded by the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier): That the following words be added to the address: "We respectfully represent to Your Excellency that a high level of employment and prosperity in Canada requires a high and expanding level of international trade; and that this will be promoted m ore effectively by vigorous measures for the expansion of trade with all countries than by efforts to divert from one country to another." Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to relive the election campaign in any way, but for a moment sir, you will allow me to say that when I heard applause coming from the other side of the house I forgot that there had been recent events. I must say I con gratulate my friend, the Leader of the Oppo sition (Mr. Pearson), upon the manner of his presentation. I shall deal with those matters that were not dealt with recently because, after all, I cannot be more in agree ment with my hon. friend than when he said that when there is no vision the people perish. Mr. Speaker, that has equal appli cation to all of us, to political parties as well as to nations. One of the great and abiding character istics of our system of government is that spirit which was exhibited here this after noon by my hon. friend. I say this in all sincerity. It is what distinguishes us from those who do not understand our parlia mentary system of government. It was fine and generous, and if I may say so, revealed a delightful touch of that attitude of sports manship which is characteristic of our system and .not foreign to him. I am not going to become involved in acri monious discussion today. I am going to refer to what we have undertaken to do. My hon. friend I am sure will allow me to say this. I agree that the speech from the throne that was read yesterday by Her Majesty's representative was different from those we used to hear read in the past. In this speech we did not have His Excellency deal with generalities. We had His Excellency ask par liament to direct its attention to those things which we believe are necessary and of im mediate importance for the benefit of the people of Canada. I join with my hon. friend in the words of congratulations he uttered to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) who are both young men. Both revealed un usual ability and capacity. Both, as he said, [Mr. Pearson.] have youth and though separated by many thousands of miles, have that common Cana dianism that brings us together. I say that the strength of parliament depends on a con tinuing infusion of new and able men and women representative of the basic races and the many other racial origins of this C'OUntry. I want also to say a word of congratula tion to you, Mr. Speaker, and more so to parliament in having you to preside over parliament during the next several years. I wish also to say a word regarding the Deputy Speaker, the hon. member for Longueuil : Have representations been made for the exten sion of seasonal benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act beyond May 15, 1958? Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour): Mr. Speaker, the answer to the question is yes. The government has given notice of intent to introduce legislation to amend the Un employment Insurance Act to provide for the extension of the seasonal benefit periods to June 28, 1958. MOTIONS FOR PAPERS ST. LAWRENCE RIVER WORKS, LACHINE SECTION Motion No. 1-Mr. Chevrier: For a copy of all letters, telegrams, plans and other documents exchanged, since July 1, 1954, between the federal government and the govern ment of the province of Quebec, and/or Hydro Quebec, concerning the carrying out of works, including the development of power in the Lachine section of the St. Lawrence river. Hon, George H. ·Hees (Minister of Trans port): Mr. Speaker, a similar motion was agreed to by the last parliament but because of dissolution it could not be acted on. At that time it was understood in conversation with the hon. member that the reference to works in the Lachine section of the St. Law rence river means the Lachine section of the St. Lawrence seaway, including the develop ment of power. On that basis, together with the usual reservation as to the consent of the province, there is no objection to the motion. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion subject to the comments of the Minister of Transport? Motion agreed to. MAY 14, 1958 63 HOSPITAL INSURANCE ACT Motion No. 2-Mr. Martin (Essex East): For a copy of all correspondence, telegrams and other documents exchanged between the federal government and the provinces of Canada since January 1, 1957, in respect of matters having to do with the hospital insurance act enacted by parlia ment on April 10, 1957. Hon. J. W. Monteith (Minister of National Health and Welfare): Mr. Speaker, we have no objection to the tabling of this correspond ence, subject, of course, to the usual reserva tion with regard to receiving permission from the provinces. I would point out, how ever, that on February 4, 1957 some corre spondence with the province of Ontario was tabled and that on March 26 some additional correspondence up to that date was also tabled, and I presume the hon. member would not wish those particular items to be tabled again. Mr. Speaker: Subject to the limitation ex pressed by the minister, is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion? Motion agreed to. NATIONAL DEFENCE CAPE BRETON NAVAL BASE--LAY-OFF OF CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES On the orders of the day: Mr. W. L. Houck (Niagara Falls): Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of National Defence, but per haps the acting minister would answer the question in his absence. Considering the fact that there are ap proximately 800 .persons presently laid off at the Sydney steel plant, would the min ister -consider cancelling a previous directive ordering a lay-off of some 112 civilian em ployees at the Point Edward naval base at Cape Breton, of whom 80 per cent to 90 per cent are returned veterans? Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minister of National Revenue): Mr. Speaker, the Minister of National Defence is away attending a funeral, as the house will know, but I will draw his attention to this question on his return and endeavour to have an answer for the hon. member at an early date. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS UNITED STATES-REPORTED ACTION OF SECURITY SUBCOMMITTEE On the orders of the day: Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. I nquiries of the Ministry Has the attention of the minister been drawn to the front page report in this morn ing's GLobe and Maii to the effect that the United States Senate internal security sub committee is reviving the E. Herbert Norman ,case in a prelude to a full-dress defence of its investigation of our Canadian diplomats, in cluding Mr. Bryce. If so, is his department contemplating making any representation to the responsible department in Washington, and, should the investigation be proceeded with, will Canada's position be made abundantly clear on this matter? Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, in reply to this question I must state at the outset that I have not seen the report which has been pre pared pursuant to the direction of that com mittee of the United States Senate. All I can depend on are the newspa,per reports. Assum ing that these are accurate I must say that I resent an additional occurrence of ex parte proceedings, leaving behind innuendos against Canadian citizens. For example: I have known Mr. Bryce for a long time and I have a high regard for him. According to this morning's newspaper he made the statement that he has nothing to hide, and I endorse that statement on behal:! of Mr. Bryce. One aspect of this matter concerns my department. Hon. members will recall that on April 10 last year our ambassador in Wash ington, acting on the instructions of the Canadian government, presented a note to the United States government regarding the pro cedures which had been followed intermit tently by the internal security subcommittee, a subcommittee of a committee of the United States Senate, in releasing the names of Ca nadians who had been mentioned in its proceedings and particularly in its executive sessions. I am going to take the time of the house to read a part of that note: The Canadian government has more than once complained of the methods employed by that subcommittee in releasing the names of Canadians and has stated that if the names of Canadian officials appear in evidence before investigating committees in Washington, those names should be sent in confidence to the Canadian government so that the allegations can be investigated and dealt with in Canada. This procedure requested by the Canadian gov ernment has, however, never been followed and references made in proceedings of the subcommittee to individual Canadians have not been made known to the Canadian government except through the press. As the United States government knows, the Canadian government finds the procedures adopted by the subcommittee with respect to Canadians difficult to understand, unfair and indeed intoler able. The Canadian government therefore requests 64 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry again that these procedures be altered in so far as Canadians are concerned along the lines indicated above. In reply to this request the United States Secretary of State, in a note dated August 13, 1957 stated: The view of your government was made known to the appropriate members of the United States congress, at which time the Department of State emphasized the great importance the United States attaches to maintaining the friendliest relations with the government of Canada. I wish to assure you that this sentiment is wholeheartedly entertained by the congress. In view of the friendly sentiments expressed in this way by the United States congress the Canadian government decided to let the matter rest, trusting that should the names of Canadian citizens thereafter appear in evidence before congressional investigating committees these names would, as we had suggested, be sent to us in confidence for investigation if necessary in Canada. The developments to which the hon. mem ber has referred have shown that this trust was misplaced. Once again an investigating committee of the United States congress has made public the name of a Canadian civil servant in complete disregard of the Canadian government's views forcibly made known to the congress only a few months ago as to the fair and proper way to deal with matters of this kind. I am sure that all hon. mem bers of this house will share the Canadian government's disappointment at this turn of events. I am, therefore, instructing our am bassador in Washington to convey to the United States government the sense of the statement I have just made. Mr. Winch: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a supplementary question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs, but before doing so I wish to state I am certain that all hon. members appreciate the information that has been given to us by the minister. However, in view of what he said and in view of the question of the Norman case being reopened and a new name brought in, could I ask the minister if it is now the intention of his department to again make the strongest possi ble protest to Washington and to make our Canadian position exceedingly well known, not only in the interests of diplomacy but in defence of the two men who have been named in this fashion? Mr. Speaker: Order. I think the house will agree that this is not supplementary but a repetition of a question which has already been answered. Mr. Winch: I did not get my answer as to whether or not due representation was going to be made. [Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenac) ,] Mr. Speaker: I understood the minister to say that. TRADE COPPER-INQUIRY AS TO STEPS TO PROTECT CANADIAN INTERESTS On the orders of the day: Mr. Armand Dumas (Villeneuve): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Will the minister tell the house what steps have been taken to implement the recommenda tions made to him recently by the Canadian Metal Mining Association regarding the pos sible reimposition of import duties on Cana dian copper by the United States? Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Trade and Commerce): Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the hon. member for giving me notice of this question. The answer is as follows. I have had detailed discussions with a delegation from the Canadian Metal Mining Association on the subject of the possible re imposition by the United States of a tax on copper. Copper is normally subject to a United States import tax of 2 cents per pound, but in recent years this import tax has been temporarily suspended by act of congress. According to this legislation the suspension will end on June 30 next. The United States administration has not seen fit at this time to seek a renewal of this suspension, which has been so obviously in the interests of both Canada and the United States. In accordance with commitments under our trade agreement, the United States rate of import tax on cop per will, in the absence of further suspension, amount to either 1.7 cents or 2 cents per pound, depending on whether the market price in the United States is above or below 24 cents per pound. Hon. members may be assured that the views of the Canadian government as to the importance of ensuring that there is no in creased tariff or other barrier to exports of base metals from Canada to the United States have been made known to the United State:i government. BROADCASTING REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF SERVICES On the orders of the day: Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question of national significance to a gentleman of national importance, namely the Minister of National Revenue. In view of the fact that thousands of Canadians are still denied satis factory radio reception and particularly the MAY 14, 1958 65 opportunity to listen to the Canadian Broad casting Corporation programs, will the min ister inform the house what action the government intends to take to remedy this long-standing injustice? Hon. George C. Nowlan (Minis:ter of Na:tional Revenue): Mr. Speaker, the ques tion, without the flowers, was sent over to me after the opening of the house. Canadian Broadcasting Corporation programming is a matter under the control of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The matter of pro viding funds for that corporation is the re sponsibility of the government and, as the hon. gentleman will see by looking at the estimates, this government this year has pro vided several millions of dollars more to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation than has ever been provided before. I know it is the intention of the corporation to proceed with an expanding service in various -communities within the next few months. ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY INQUIRY AS TO DECISION RESPECTING TOLLS On the orders of the day: Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport, of which I sent notice to his office. When will a decision be reached concerning the proposed shipping toll charges on . the St. Lawrence seaway and Welland canals? Will these proposed toll charges be tabled in the house and an op portunity given to members to consider them? Hon. George H. Hees (Minis:ter of Transpor:tl: Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for his courtesy in advising me of his intention to ask this question. The Canadian-United States toll committees have not yet completed their work. Once a decision has been reached, public announcement will be made and hearings will be held at Ottawa by the St. Lawrence seaway authority and at Washington by the St. Lawrence seaway development corporation. If hon. members wish to express their views on these tolls or on what they think they should be, they are quite free to do so in the debate on the address. Inquiries of the Ministry Mr. Fleming (Eglin:ton): There is no par liamentary assistant. Mr. Winch: Has the attention of the Min ister of Justice been drawn to the case of William Heikkila of San Francisco, who was placed by United States immigration authori ties in the Vancouver jail under a false name, held incommunicado for some 39 hours and not brought before a justice of the peace or judge on any charge as required by Cana dian law? If so, can the Minister of Justice inform the house whether an investigation is being made relative to the matter, and can he inform the house as to whether or not there is any Canadian-United States agreement or treaty under which a foreign power can detain a non-Canadian citizen in a Canadian jail, contrary to Canadian law? Hon. Howard C. Green (Minis:ter of Public Works): I shall be very glad to draw these questions to the attention of the appropriate minister. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE STATEMENT ON SEASONAL BENEFIT PAYMENTS On the orders of the day: Hon. Michael S:tarr (Minis:ter of Labour): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Timmins asked me a question relating to the percentage of unemployed workers who were presently receiving seasonal benefits. The answer is as follows. On April 30 the percentage figure of per sons receiving seasonal benefits related to the total number of active claimants was 30 per cent. In answer to the second part of the question I can only say that on March 31, a month earlier, the same ratio was in the neighbourhood of 27 per cent. The reason for this is that the number of registrations declined during the period, causing an in crease in the proportion of those on seasonal benefits. INCOME TAX PREMIUM IRON ORES-CANADIAN REPRESENTA TIONS TO U.S. GOVERNMENT On the orders of the day: ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE WILLIAM HEIKKILA-REPORTED VANCOUVER JAIL DETENTION Hon. Sidney E. Smi:th (Secretary of S:ta:te for Ex:ternal Affairs): Mr. Speaker, yesterday the hon. member for Port Arthur asked this IN question: On the orders of the day: Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver Eas:t): Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Justice or, in his absence, to his parliamentary assistant who perhaps will take it as notice. 57071-3-5 Can the minister tell the house whether the Canadian ambassador to the United States has in recent weeks made either a public statement or any official representation to the state department on his government's position in the Premium Iron Ores tax case? The Canadian ambassador to the United States did not take any initiative in respect 66 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry of making further representations to the state department. However, Mr. Speaker, on February 28 the state department asked the Canadian government to clarify certain ob servations made by my colleague the Minis ter of National Revenue in the house on February 1, in reply to a question by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River. In clarifying these observations the Canadian government took the opportunity to review the considerations on which their position in this matter has been based. The explanation of the remarks made by my colleague the Minister of National Revenue was in these terms: What the minister had in mind, in his answer to a question in the house on February 1, was that the Canadian government would wish, in due course, to study the court of appeal's judgment in relation to the facts established in this case to see whether the terms of our double taxation convention had been inter preted in the sense we had intended them to have at the time they were negotiated and, if not, to consider whether those terms require revision. SHIPPING COASTAL TRADE-INQUIRY AS TO REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier): May I direct a question to the Prime Minister or, in his absence, to the leader of the govern ment. Can either of them tell the house when the report of the royal commission on coastal shipping will be handed down? Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works): Mr. Speaker, I shall be glad to make inquiries about that report. HARBOURS LAKEHEAD-INQUIRY AS TO ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION On the orders of the day: Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William): I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Can he give us the approximate date when legislation will be introduced to establish a lakehead harbour commission, in view of his pre-election state ments that municipal tardiness was holding up the projected harbour improvements? Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trans port): As the hon. member well knows, h aving listened attentively to the speech from the throne, the government intends introducing legislation to establish a lakehead harbour commission at this session. The [Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenac) .] legislation will be presented to the house just as soon as the business before the house permits. DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS NEWFOUNDLAND-INQUIRY AS TO REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION ON REVISION OF TERMS OF UNION On the orders of the day: Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo): Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Finance. Can the minister inform the house whether the report of the royal commission on terms of union with Newfoundland has yet been received by the government? If not, how soon does the gov ernment expect to receive it? Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance): The report has not been received, and I have had no intimation from the royal commission as to when it expects to conclude its work and submit its report. SUPPLY The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sevigny in the chair. INTERIM SUPPLY Mr. Fleming (Eglinton) moved: That a sum not exceeding $626,292,380.09, being the aggregate of (a) one-sixth of the total of the amounts of the items set forth in the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 195D laid before the House of Commons at the present session of parliament; (b) three-quarters of the total of the amounts of items 439, 443 and 502 of the said estimates; (c) one-half of the tota l of the amounts of items 111, 200, 362, 409 and 513 of the said estimates; (d) one-quarter of the total of the amounts of items 49, 148, 312 and 399 of the said estimates; (e) one-sixth of the total of the amounts of items 37, 94, 162, 297, 311, 368, 432, 446 and 447 of the said estimates; and (f) one-twelfth of the total of the amounts of items 65, 74, 90, 98, 153, 163, 179, 224, 229, 234, 242, 246, 264, 333, 364, 391, 401, 402, 431, 479, and 485 of the said estimates, be granted to Her Majesty on account of the fiscal year ending March 31st, 1959: Provided the amounts hereby authorized to be paid' and applied in respect to those items shall be deemed to include and not be in addition to the amounts authorized for such items by the special warrants issued by the Governor General pursuant to orders of the governor in council of April 9, 1958 (P.C. 1958-492) and of May 1, 1958 (P .C. 1958-641). He said: Mr. Chairman, may I, as the first member of the house to address you since you have assumed the office of Deputy Speaker of the house and chairman of its committees, extend to you the heartiest con gratulations and warmest good wishes for your success in the important responsibilities which you have assumed. You hold this office by a decision of the house and in due MAY 14, 1958 67 recognition of your own .high personal merit. In addition however, sir, I know it is a matter of very considerable gratification to all hon. members in this house that in your election to this high office, a worthy son is following in the footsteps of a very worthy and distinguished father. I am sure it will be the wish of all hon. members that in the discharge of your re sponsibilities you will earn the same con fidence and the same gratitude that your distinguished father earned in his time in the discharge of these same duties 40 years ago. As all hon. members are aware, Mr. Chair man, from the statement I made to the house yesterday, the house is being asked today to vote a fraction of the estimates which were tabled yesterday for the fiscal year 1958-59. The expenses of the government have been already provided for only until the 16th day of May, which is Friday of this week, and the government will be without funds after that date. The government has taken the utmost steps to ensure under the existing circum stances the utmost control by the house over the appropriation of needed moneys. By way of emphasizing the urgency of today's motion, may I remind the house that in addition to the fact that funds available now will be exhausted after May 16, it is always necessary for the treasury to have funds in hand some days before the date on which the salary and pay cheques go out because they have to be sent to all parts of the country. We have to allow time as well for passing by the Senate and royal assent to the bill. The house is concerned as to the extent of the funds to be appropriated under the present measure. The appropriation now proposed is intended to provide funds for the needs of the government until the 31st day of May. That means that a further request for interim supply will be made to the house in the first week of June. It is of course obvious that we might have a'sked for ~ larger sum now, but we felt that under all the circumstances the usual course should be followed of asking in the first motion for interim supply the equivalent of two months' needs. There are some hundreds of items in the book of estimates tabled yesterday. In all but 42 cases the sum now asked for is one sixth of the total, or in other words the equivalent of two months of these items which are capable of being disbursed or lend themselves to disbursement on a pro rata basis throughout the year. As to the 42 items in question, they fall within one or other of the four categories I mentioned yesterday of 57071-3-5½ Interim Supply cases in which the needs contemplated by the item are not capable of pro rata calcula tion or disbursement month by month throughout the year. The total amount the house is being asked to provide for these needs to May 31 appears as the sum of $626,292,380.09. But that sum is subject to a reduction in a manner I shall mention in a moment. I wish to make it very clear that even in the case of these 42 items in none of them is the house asked to vot~ today the entire sum. There are a few of them in which the program is already well ad vanced and in which as much as eleven twelfths of the total item are asked today, but these are items of an exceptional nature. I stress the fact that at least a portion of these extraordinary items remains to be voted by the house on a future occasion. Therefore with respect thereto the house will retain its f~ll opportunity to discuss, review and con sider. I shall shortly be giving to the house the usual assurance with respect to the rights' of all hon. members of the house in reference to every one of the items of which a portion is being appropriated today. I mentioned yesterday the issuance of two special warrants under the terms of the Financial Administration Act by His Ex cellency the Governor General on the advice of council in order to meet the needs of government from April 1 until the 16th day of May. These are the two warrants which are referred to in the proviso which con stitutes the closing paragraph of the resolu tion now under discussion. The two warrants for which I gave particulars yesterday amount to the sum of $303,560,195. Every item that was included in the governor general's warrants is to be found in the book of estimates tabled yesterday with one excep tion, and one only, which I mentioned yesterday. That is an item of $7 million appropriated by governor general's warrant which does not find its way into the book of estimates because it is a loan to Trans Canada Air Lines and therefore will be in cluded in due course in the bill that normally provides for the requirements of the Ca nadian National Railways. That item of $7 million which was appro priated by governor general's warrant carries the needs of Trans-Canada Air Lines to June 30, and it is trusted that by that time the house will have been in a position to pass the bill respecting the provision for Canadian National Railways financing. So with regard to all items in the governor general's war rants, with that one exception they are to be found in the book of estimates which was tabled yesterday and a portion of each item in which the house is being asked to appro priate today. 68 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim Supply A question may be asked as to what is the appropriate relationship of the appropria tion already made by those two governor general's warrants to the appropriation of a portion of these items in the estimates which :he house is being asked to approve today. There was a similar situation in the year 1940. There had been an election in the month of March of that year. The house was called to meet in May on a date a little later than the date on which the present parliament was called to meet. Both in the late days of the fiscal year ended March 31, 1940 and in the period of April and May 1940 prior to the convening of parliament a number of governor general's warrants had been issued. Indeed, the number was quite formidable; actually fifteen warrants had been issued. In the fiscal year which had commenced April 1, 1940 the warrants issued in that period had appropriated sums aggre gating approximately $100 million; and I am sure that the finance minister at that time, the late lamented Mr. Ralston, was faced with a similar question. One finds that in the first appropriation bill that he introduced in the early days of the 1940 session the house was called upon to appropriate sums intended to provide all needed supply for the first two months of the year, but in the bill no provision was made respecting the governor general's warrants which had already taken effect and which by their nature had already appro priated sums of money. The first interim supply or the first ap propriation bill of that session made no reference whatever to the governor general's warrants. We have considered that the better practice is to ask the house in this first appropriation by statute in this new session to take note of the issuance of the two governor general's warrants since the opening of this present fiscal year on April 1. Mr. Benidickson: What about the earlier one? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I think the practice which was followed on that occasion is the one which had obtained earlier and it is our view, Mr. Chairman, that the course which the government now proposes is one which preserves more directly the control of the house over the appropriation of public money. In other words perhaps I might say this; that in 1940 on the first motion for interim supply the subject of the governor general's warrants was not even mentioned. The interim supply was voted through all stages in this house in a matter of about eight or nine minutes and it was only in the final supply bill of the year that account was taken of the sums which had already [Mr. Fleming (Eglinton).] been appropriated by governor general's warrant prior to the opening of the session. The next appropriation by way of interim supply on July 31, 1940 occupies half a column in Hansard, indicating that the motion was passed through all stages in perhaps a minute or a minute and a half, but in the final appropriation of the year reference was made to the governor general's warrants and I should like to lay before the house the clause in question. The statute is chapter 47 of the statute of 1940, and clause 2 of that statute provides for the ap propriation of the named sum of money and then proceeds to set forth this proviso: Provided the amount hereby authorized to be paid and applied in respect to each item, set forth in said schedule A, shall be deemed to include and not to be in addition to, the amount authorized for each such item by governor general's warrants issued during the fiscal year 1940-41 prior to the 16th day of May, 1940. We propose that the measure which the house is being asked to p:lss today should include a clause in those , 1ords so that it will be clearly understood, and indeed is expressly provided, both in \he resolution now under discussion and ir, the bill to follow, that the house is being asked to appropriate the full sum of $626 million odd, which is the entire sum required to meet the expenses of government from April 1 to May 31, and there will be a provision that this sum is to be deemed to include and not to be in addition to the two sums already appropriated by governor gen~ral's warrants. In saying that I ask hon. members to bear in mind, of course, that under the- Mr. Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, may I ask the Minister of Finance if in referring to this clause he would suggest that this would prevent us from later discussing item by item the matters which are referred to in that clause? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): No, Mr. Chairman; I intended to speak on that matter. There is no room for question on that subject whatever. However, before I leave the point with which I was dealing I do wish to draw at tention to the form of the appropriation. Under the Financial Administration Act, section 28, an appropriation, under the cir cumstances there provided by governor general's warrant operates as an appropria tion. It would not be proper to ask the house to reappropriate sums already ap propriated; nevertheless we are anxious that in the fullest manner the control and authority of the house over appropriation and expenditure of moneys should be clearly asserted, and that is why both the resolution and the bill take the form I have indicated. MAY 14, 1958 69 I would now like to say a word or two about the rights of the house with respect to dis cussion and approval or disapproval of items under these estimates at a later period in the session. All these items in the book of estimates will be reviewed, of course, in the ordinary way in the committee of supply, department by department. Neither the ap propriation of any item by governor general's warrant nor the appropriation of any portion of any item by an interim supply bill will prejudice the right of hon. members to discuss such an item when it is reached in the ord inary course in committee of supply. The position in that respect is not in any degree different with respect to those items appro priated by the governor general's warrants from the position of those items appropriated by interim supply. Never has a vote of interim supply nor an appropriation by governor general's warrant precluded the fullest dis cussion of the item when it is reached in committee of supply in the ordinary ,course. Mr. Benidickson: What about February 1? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Mr. Chairman, there was no attempt to preclude or limit discussion on that matter on February 1. Mr. Benidickson: Oh, you are very wrong. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I am afraid the hon. member is completely mistaken. There was an assertion at that time, apparent ly, by some members on the question of the Interim Supply Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): No, there was nothing that went wrong except that those who sat on the same side of the house where my hon. friend now sits-or at least his portion of that side of the house- Mr. Palle:t:t: That is better. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): -had misappre hended the position. I think they were anti dpating the blowing of election winds, and jumped the gun in that respect. They were makin'g, in essence, hustings speeches and I think we can leave the matter at that. I do, however, wish to make it abundantly clear to the house that neither the appro priation of any portion of the estimates by governor general's warrant nor any appro priation of any portion by a vote of interim supply affects the rights and privileges of the house in this regard. I can give the house the time honoured assurance that the passing of this bill will not prejudice the rights and privileges of hon. members to criticize any item in the estimates when it comes up for consideration in committee of supply, and the usual undertaking is hereby given that such rights and privileges will be respected, not curtailed or restricted in any way as a result of the passing of this measure. Mr. Pearson: May I ask the minister a question? What provision will be made to ensure that we shall have the same rights of discussion of the warrants of last year? position of the house with respect to sums Mr. Benidickson: Five hundred and forty appropriated by two warrants which had four million dollars. been issued in the summer of 1957, and in fairness to one or two hon. members who raised this point I think it was over looked by them that the procedure contemp lated by the Financial Administration Act both in regard to tabling of the warrants in the house and in regard to their publication in the Canada Gazette had been scrupulously followed by the government. There was no attempt whatever to limit discussion or de bate on February 1, and I do not think my hon. friend is going to suggest that February 1, in view of the matters which were discussed and the things that were said in the course of that day, was an altogether normal day. I am not going to apply a too strict examination to the contentions of some hon. members who sought that day to make something of an alleged limitation of their right of debate; there was no limitation. As a matter of fact I think my hon. friends will recall that debate waxed long and furious on the subject through, I think, Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I think the hon. gentleman will recall that much of those estimates had already been approved. Mr. Benidickson: Oh no. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Oh yes. There had already been enactment of approval of some of those items, and more than half of the total had already been approved in committee of supply, although the usual ap propriation bill based on them had not been passed. The hon. gentleman will recall that there were altogether five appropriation bills dealing with interim supply. The house had already appropriated a minimum of ten twelfths of every item and eleven-twelfths of some items. In addition, the estimates of the Post Office Department had been ap propriated in full and, further, the committee of supply had already given approval to a very substantial portion of the other items. that entire day. Mr. Winch: Were all the expenditures Mr. Benidickson: But the master's voice approved in the last house approved also in was not available. That is what went wrong. the other place? 70 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim Suppty Mr. Fleming (Eglinton}: The hon. member understands that the appropriation bills were passed in both houses and received royal assent. In other words, those five interim supply bills I have mentioned were duly enacted in the constitutional manner. Then, of course, there were the statutory items which take effect anyway. Mr. Winch: But all the matters discussed toward the end of 1he last parliament were not approved in both houses, and there was no approval of the expenditures for either February or March of the previous budget. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I thought I made that clear. Parliamentary appropriation on account of those items by means of interim supply bills had, by joint action of both houses and with the royal assent, appropriated by statute a minimum of ten-twelfths of all items and eleven-twelfths of some. The estimates of the Post Office Department had been appropriated in full in April 1957. Then, with respect to the other items I have men tioned here, the committee of supply had given approval to them though the house had not been called upon to pass the usual appropriation bill on that portion which had been approved. Mr. Benidickson: It was not given the chance. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): If hon. members opposite wish to go back and begin raising issues which, one had thought, had to some extent been disposed of, that can be dealt with, but I thought I gave the house a clear assurance yesterday that in the provision which the governor general in council made in strict accordance with the provisions of the Financial Administration Act to meet the needs of government and provide the sums urgently required for the public good for the balance of the fis cal year to March 31, nothing had been done that was not included in the estimates, and that provision would be made this year at this session in due course for as much review as hon. members may wish of any appropriation made by governor gen eral's warrant. The matter is as plain as that. The items which are embraced under the governor general's warrants were fully pub lished in the Canada Gazette for all to see; we did not even wait for the conclusion of the period named in the Financial Administra tion Act for such publication, but published those governor general's warrants as quickly as was possible to get them in each case into the next issue of the Canada Gazette. I would remind the house also that parlia ment has been called to meet at the earliest possible date after the election, indeed, two days too early for one hon. member; that [Mr. Winch.] the estimates were tabled on the earliest pos sible date after the convening of parliament; that the date up to which needs were pro vided for by warrant was the earliest date by which parliament could be expected to assume its task of providing for those needs by interim supply bill, and that with the leave of the house this is the earliest date upon which the government could possibly have asked hon. members to proceed to vote sums by way of interim supply. Having completed that review may I just say a few words in the hope that they may be of assistance to new members of the house with respect to today's procedure. Pro cedure with regard to a vote of interim supply can sometimes be a little confusing or even baffling to those who have not wit nessed it before. May I just touch briefly upon the stages through which we propose asking the house to pass this measure. We are now in committee of supply, and if the committee sees fit to report the resolu tion now, it will be reported to the house, read twice and agreed to. Then I shall move that the house resolve itself into committee of ways and means, and in that committee I shall move a resolution similar to the one now under consideration in the committee of supply. If and when that resolution is re ported to the house it will be read twice and concurred in. Then I shall move for leave to introduce a bill, which will be the first appropriation bill of this session, for the actual vote of the moneys now under con sideration. The house will be asked to give first and second reading to that measure. It will then go into committee of the whole and back to the house for third reading. I have gone into this matter at somewhat greater length than is usual on motions for interim supply in view of the questions that have been involved, and in order to clarify the situation as far as I am able. Normally these interim supply motions are dealt with -and this has been true over the years in a matter of five or ten minutes, hon. members realizing that all their rights to discuss any question in the book of estimates are preserved until that time when, in com mittee of supply, in the normal consideration of the estimates, any particular item is reached. Mr. Benidickson: Mr. Chairman, may I say that those associated with me will certainly be enthusiastic in joining with the Minister of Finance in complimenting you on this first occasion when you preside in committee of the whole. We, also, are well aware of your family tradition of parliamentary activity. We have great confidence in the impartial MAY 14, 1958 71: Interim Supply administration which you will always pro- bit with the Minister of Finance when he vide in this office and our greatest felicitations says he has followed what has been the go forward to you. traditional practice of our Canadian parlia We have heard from the Minister of Finance, very properly, an excellent expose of the position in which we are now placed in dealing with some of these matters. A very important question is whether or not the items under governor general's warrant No. 1 which amounted to $544 million and which properly belong to the former fiscal year are items to be referred to specifically on another occasion. The minister has said that in the new governor general's warrants Nos. 2 and 3, with the exception of the T.C.A. item, there is nothing we cannot readily find in the book of estimates tabled yesterday. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Mr. Chairman, I can make that clear at once to my hon. friend. In fact, I thought I had mentioned it. Every item included in the governor general's war rant of February 7, 1958 is to be found in either the estimates or the supplementary estimates of the fiscal year 1957-58. Mr. Benidickson: We, of course, had no opportunity to deal with the details of those estimates with the exception perhaps of those things my hon. friend referred to, the esti mates of the Post Office Department and to some extent the Department of National Defence and one or two others. Would my hon. friend indicate to the committee whether or not a similar privilege would be afforded us to examine some of these expenditures respecting warrant number one in the com mittee of supply as we proceed? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I pointed out yesterday and I repeat that the items included in the warrant are all set forth in full in the Canada Gazette and I gave the assurance to the house yesterday and I repeat it today that any hon. member who wants any infor mation or who wishes to discuss any of those items will have the opportunity to do so in committee of supply. That is not a matter of the same urgency as is the other with respect to 1958-59, but as I indicated yesterday that opportunity will certainly be afforded to all hon. members in committee of supply. Mr. Benidickson: I think all hon. members will welcome that statement from the Min ister of Finance and by consent we can as we go into supply on items in this year's estimates doubtless have some reference in our debates with tolerance to some of the items that by unusual circumstances were in last year's estimates and not passed by this house in the normal way. In that respect I would just like to say that I quarrel a little ment in this respect particularly with regard to governor general's warrants. With all de ference to him I say this is not so. With the exception of some supplementary estimates in 1940 we never before had a dissolution of this house without parliament being given the opportunity to examine and pass the major estimates of expenditure proposed in a democratic parliament. As I have indicated, this government dealt with $544 million by governor general's war rants last February. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): In February. Mr. Benidickson: Yes, in February. That had never been done before in the history of any Canadian parliament. It is not the intention of the official oppo sition today to delay the adoption of this resolution especially in view of the under taking that was given yesterday and today by the Minister of Finance. We understand that we will be given a full opportunity at a later stage to review in detail and discuss not only the governor general's warrants applicable to the fiscal year commencing April 1 but, with tolerance and agreement, the governor general's warrant that is ap plicable to the last session. I merely wish to point out that the amounts authorized by these warrants are unprecedented. Never before has anything of this equivalent been allowed to pass in a Canadian parliament. While we are discussing interim supply at this time most of our thoughts are directed to the presentation yesterday of the estimates in toto. They, too, are unprecedented. Never before have we had a government in peace time or at any other time ask for expendi tures of the size and degree of those that were presented yesterday by the Minister of Finance. We all, I think, are loath to have directed to our attention some of the remarks we have made in the past but I feel I am duty bound to remind the Minister of Finance that he had some very stirring remarks to make when he sat on this side of the house-- Mr. Churchill: Very helpful, too. Mr. Benidickson: -about this incessant growth in expenditures by government de partments. I recall that when the minister was the private member for Eglin' on, speak ing at a nomination meeting for one of his colleagues who is a senior member of this house, the hon. member for York East, he had this to say: A Progressive Conservative government would chop $500 million from Canada's tax bill by 'sound and accurate budgeting'- 72 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim Supply Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): What year? Mr. Benidickson: 1953. This statement is reported in the Toronto Telegram of June 30, 1953. My hon. friend has introduced expendi tures in these estimates of unprecedented proportions and I ask him to consider some of the thoughts he presented to the house in days gone by. Indeed, the official financial critic of his party, the hon. member for Greenwood, should also be referred to for the guidance of the present Minister of Finance and some of the suggestions he has made in this house in fairly recent days noted. I have here what the hon. member for Greenwood said: I am not going to weary you- He said, speaking to the house- -with a long dissertation on government spending. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Date? Mr. Benidickson: March 19, 1957, in the budget debate. He continued: Everyone who is not a moron knows that govern ment expenditures could be cut down. My hon. friend is proposing to this com mittee expenditures on a considerably en larged basis even though his leader had some important things to say in this respect. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): We also made some cuts, you know. Mr. Benidickson: They do not show up in the over-all total. Mr. Churchill: Are you going to follow the example of the hon. member for Greenwood and not weary the house? Mr. Benidickson: The Prime Minister had some interesting comments to make in this regard and I am thinking especially of a headline I have in front of me which reads: End Spending Orgy at Ottawa is Pledge of Mr. Diefenbaker The article says in part: A Progressive Conservative government would certainly chop- As the Minister of Finance himself has said- -ssoo million from the expenditures of the gov- ernment of Canada. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Date? Mr. Churchill: 1953? Mr. Benidickson: Yes, 1953. Mr. Churchill: You are living in the past. Mr. Benidickson: If you would like to be brought up to date I can refer to a statement made by the Prime Minister in 1957: In 1957 Mr. John Diefenbaker accused the Liberal administration of picking the Canadian taxpayers' pockets far beyond the needs of government. [Mr. Benidickson.] On that basis some acclaim has been given to my hon. friends opposite by the public but I believe they will deplore and regret the fact that the principles enunciated at that time have not been put into practice when given the opportunity. However, we in this party are very interes ted in the proposals of the government with respect to expenditures that may have some relation to stimulation of the economy at the present time. In this respect I am sorely disappointed in the book of estimates which I perused in some haste within the last few hours. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Does that mean the hon. gentleman wishes that there were more expenditures provided for in the book of estimates? Mr. Benidickson: For a temporary and pass ing phase with respect to things that would stimulate the economy of this country and about which we heard a great deal in the recent election campaign, yes. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Does that mean that the hon. gentleman advocates an increase in the sums provided for expenditure in the estimates? Mr. Benidickson: I would like my hon. friend again to look at the table which was attached to the book of estimates and which I am sure had his approval. I would like him to look particularly at column 13, which refers to buildings and works, including land, construction or acquisition of property. He shows there that the increase in proposed expenditures in this particular category, having regard to the economic situation in this country, has gone up by only $6 million. It is $380 million in the new book of estimates as against $374 million for the last fiscal year. I draw this to the attention of the hon. gentleman and ask that he reconcile it with some of the grandiose propositions with respect to bolstering the economy through public works expenditures, which we heard about very recently. The public works program contained in the estimates, as I calculate it, will amount to $685 million. This calculation is based on a rapid examination of the figures presented yesterday. It may require some corrections and I am sure the minister will inform me and the committee if these figures are not correct. As I calculate it, the figure represents budgetary provisions for buildings and works, including land-and I refer again to columns 13 and 14 of this table presented by the minister-of $430 million. Secondly, I add reference to loans and advances to certain government departments and crown compa nies, amounting to about $200 million; and, MAY 14, 1958 73 thirdly, other budgetary provisions for the trans-Canada highway and the grade crossing fund of $55 million. If we compare this program with those of the previous years we find that the total amount spent in 1956-57 was about $600 million; in 1957-58, $595 million, as compared with $685 million in the book of estimates before us at the moment. The increase for this year is only $85 million as compared with 1956-57. Having regard to the lapse of time of two years and the inflationary process which has developed in that time, I suggest to the minister that this is not the type of announce ment that he was presenting to the electorate in the recent campaign. That is why I am led to the conclusion that the special works program visualized and presented to the public of this country by the Prime Minister during the election campaign either does not exist or has not been included in the main estimates for consideration now. Are we to expect that supplementary estimates of great significance are later to be presented to this house? Before we are ready to adopt another bill of this kind, as the minister indicated yesterday we will be called upon to do about June 1, we would like to have a precise state ment on this very important issue, and we expect it from the Minister of Finance. We would like also to have more detailed information on the public works program an nounced by the Prime Minister in a press re lease dated February 18 of this year, which I have in front of me. We would like to know in particular to what extent this .program was of a new or of a special character designed to meet unemployment, and to what extent it was part of the normal program which would have been carried out by any government irrespective of the current economic situation. I just draw my hon. friend's attention to the fact that if he looks at the Prime Minister's press release he will find something that I think will trouble his mind as it has mine. For instance, the Prime Minister indicated that out of a total expenditure for trans-Canada highway on an annual basis, proposed at $46 million, $23 million would be spent in the first quarter of this year. In this country we do not normally make this proportion of expenditure on highways in the first quarter of a calendar year. In the same press release the Prime Minister also announced a public investment program of $280 million for the last quarter of the fiscal year 1957-58. We would welcome, and indeed we request, a statement on the part of the Minister of Finance before the next motion of this kind, which will soon come before us, to show how this program was carried out in the first quart.er of 1958. We would also like to know what were the new projects which were 57071-3- 6 Interim Supply initiated during that period and which were not included in the estimates prepared by the previous administration. I quite understand, as I think most members of the committee do, that we have not exactly before us fraction items of ex penditures. I think the minister has been very fair in explaining that. In reading Hansard I think we shall find we are not voting an exact fraction of the total amount of the expenditures set out in the blue book of estimates. I think that is true with respect to the warrants also. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Will my hon. friend enlarge on that? I do not quite follow him. Mr. Benidickson: I am concerned somewhat about the warrants themselves and the rela tionship of the amounts of money asked for in the warrants-shall I say the fraction relationship-to the total amounts of the books of estimates. Will my hon. friend indicate? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Yes; I thought I made that clear yesterday. The warrant of April 9 was intended to make provision for the needs of April. The May warrant was intended to make provision for the first 16 days of the month of May. Mr. Benidickson: I feel we should receive from the minister a fairly clear indication of the difference between the amounts asked for and reported in the Canada Gazette as governor general's warrants and, shall I say, a fraction, one twelfth or two-twelfths, or whatever it may be, of what appears in the book of estimates which members of parlia ment received. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Does my hon. friend wish me to do that now? Mr. Benidickson: No, I am sure the min ister will do it in reply. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I can clear it up in a moment. There are 520 items in the estimates and on all of these, except the 42 I mentioned earlier this afternoon, disburse ments proceeded simply on the normal basis, prorated month by month. As to the 42, there were those special situations of the four categories which I mentioned yesterday, and those observations apply both to the 42 items mentioned specifically in the interim supply bill today and the same items in the governor general's warrants. They are the same items in both cases. Otherwise, everything pro ceeded on a pro rata basis. Mr. Benidickson: I think, in addition, the minister should inform the committee about, shall I say, his estimate or something up to date because it is a long time since we have 74 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim Supply had anything very authoritative from the minister that has not been in the newspapers with respect to an item that is not in these estimates, a possible deficit for the Canadian National Railways. This is not included in the astronomical figures we see as the total pro posed expenditure or cost of government in this country. Would he also perhaps indicate to us what his expectation is for the coming fiscal year with respect to the old age pension deficit not provided for by taxes, specially provided by statute, to cover that item? Another very notable omission in this presentation of gov ernment costs, in my opinion, is the question of an estimate of the likely federal expendi ture in the coming fiscal year on hospital insurance. I think, too, that probably the minister has ready now some supplementary estimates. I think it would be appropriate that we hear something about those. In addition to that, I think all of us know that we are in serious times, more difficult times than we have experienced in some years, and this will result in declining reve nues, particularly when those revenues are based on the income of our individual Cana dian citizens. I feel that that demands from the minister a new estimate beyond what he provided last December with respect to the possible income of this administration, not only in the past year but in the immediate future. We hear estimates from various sources and we can only go on those estimates because the minister has been unusually silent since his baby budget about advising and taking into his confidence this House of Commons concerning the balance sheet of this government of Canada. We hear predic tions that our deficit may be very substantial indeed. I believe that, in reply, the minister should revise some of the advice he has been giving to the House of Commons. Mr. Pearson: My hon. friend, the member for Kenora-Rainy River, has covered our in terest in this matter rather thoroughly. I have only one additional question which I am sure the minister would be glad to answer. On January 30, 1958, page 4019 of Hansard, he said this: I think at March 31 government operations for the year.- that is last year. -thanks to prudent management, will show a respectable surplus. I wonder if the minister is still of that opinion. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I think I should follow the constitutional course of reserving the answer to that question until the budget is brought down. [Mr. Benidlckson.] Mr. Pearson: This is last year. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): The same answer holds good. Mr. Fisher: It was peculiarly fitting that the Secretary of State for External Affairs should make a statement today on the Premium Iron Ores case. This is the topic that I planned to deal with, and it happens that this statement is one more of the pecu liarities connected w ith this strange and interesting case which I plan to review rather thoroughly. I shall conclude with some questions. The peculiarities, so far as I am concerned, begin with the fact that I find myself argu ing along the same lines as such reactionary ' nstitutions, in my view, as the Toronto Globe and Mail. Aside from that, this Premium Iron Ores case has a great deal of interest for me and my area. If this test case should be won by the United States government it could affect a great number of corporations operating in my constituency. The case, in essence, is one brought in the United States tax court against Premium Iron Ores, the sales agency for Steep Rock iron, and two United States citizens, the charge being that their company and they, themselves, were liable for taxation in the United States, even though we have a con vention with the United States to avoid double taxation, and even though these men and the company paid their taxes in Canada. Ste7p Rock iron mine presents a very in terestmg story, beg:nning in 1939. It was really begun by people from the city of Port Ar~hur. They found three very large high grade deposits of iron underneath a large lake. In order to get the mine under way they required a considerable amount of capital. Unfortunately they were not able to raise that in Canada. In 1940 they approached two Cleveland financiers, Cyrus Ea~o_n and Frank Daley, and they began in qm_nes as to whe~her or not they could get Umted States capital through this particular group. In July, 1942, Mr. Eaton undertook to raise $7.5 million, to provide a program to look after relationships with the federai and provincial governments, and to work out a sales system for Steep Rock iron ore. On September 11, 1942, the Department of National Revenue, income tax division issued the following ruling so far as th~ general setup and financing of Steep Rock iron mine and Premium iron ores were concerned: The setup re financing as contained in the memo randum of September 8, 1942, is aceptable and no tax will arise aRainst any entity by reason of the !act that 2 million shares of the company are valued at one cent a share on the books of the sales company. MAY 14, 1958 75 With regard to the position of the sales company under the Excess Profits Tax Act, the ruling was: "The sales company will be exempt from tax for the same period as the operating company and will be allowed the same rate of depletion on net profits realized. In effect, this means that the rate of taxation of the sales company will be the same as that of the operating company." In other words, both Steep Rock and Premium Iron Ores, the sales company, were exempt for three years from taxation dating from the day operations were commenced. That is a point to remember in connection with this case. Mr. Eaton, working as the head of an investment house and also as the United States citizen most interested in put ting Steep Rock into production, managed to get the Canadian government to undertake the building of a spur line and construction of a dock at Port Arthur. The total expendi ture by the government was $2.5 million. He managed to get the Ontario hydro to under take an expenditure of $1.5 million to instal hydro lines. This group managed to get an agency of the United States government, Re construction Finance Corporation-rather ironically this institution was begun by that free enterpriser, President Herbert Hoover, and yet we find it taking this rather socialistic attitude-to lend $5 million to this Canadian company to get it under way. The whole ap proach required the co-operation of the United States government, the Canadian government and the provincial government. They were all closely intertwined, and the conclusion one may come to is that the Canadian government at the time and the United States government at the time were interested in seeing this mine in operation. Of course, if you look at the year, 1942, you can understand why. The tax convention to avoid double taxa tion was brought up to date a year before the arrangements were completed for the start of Steep Rock iron mine through this $5 million loan from Reconstruction Finance Cor poration. The mine experienced considerable difficulty during its early operations J.argely due to flooding and the spreading of silt, but it finally managed to get going fairly well in 1944-45. ' By the end of the war it was recognized as one of the premium propositions. Indeed it was sort of the great leader of iron ore operations in Canada. The company was accepted as a Canadian company, Steep Rock Iron Mines. So was its sales agency. It was being taxed in Canada. Both of them were being taxed in Canada. Things went along in that way until 1947 when something occurred owing to a peculiarity of the United States tax system. I should not say a peculiarity; it is part of their law and we 57071-3-6½ Interim Supply must respect it. They have a provision in their tax code that anyone that is able to present the gist of an idea as an informer to the tax authorities which leads to con viction and collection of taxes and penalty is able to collect up to 25 per cent of the penalty and the taxation collected. What happened in this particular case was that in 1947 an informer came forward to the United States taxing authorities, laying in formation against Premium Iron Ores, arguing that because they did not haye to pay taxes for those first three years under the Canadian tax arrangement the United States government should come in and tax the company for those years because the company happened to have at the head of it, men who had offices in Cleveland. The claim was not asserted until 1953. In other words, from 1947 to 1953 the claim seems to have been under investigation. I think you will recognize that is a very long period. It certainly is of perhaps more than incidental interest that the claim was not proceeded with until the United States government changed at the beginning of 1953. When the claim was proceeded with, it was recognized, of course, that Canada was involved and out of the general discussions came the informa tion that the Canadian authorities had co operated very fully with the United States authorities. We have the word of one of the witnesses at the tax trial, referring to this period when the investigation was taking place in Canada. The agent concerned said this: So far as I know, there has never been a prior instance where a revenue agent secured the assist ance of a foreign government in assessing tax liability. I met with the director of national revenue and his subordinates. They assigned a Canadian assessor to work with me. Whatever information was available to the assessor was in turn furnished to me. We called on the Royal Bank of Canada and the Canadian assessor asked the manager of the bank to produce records pertaining to Premium Iron Ores Limited. The Toronto investigation took a period of seven months. That is the end of the quotation from the testimony of this United States agent in the court. We happen to know that that in vestigation lasted for more than seven months and covered such places as far apart as Winnipeg and Nova Scotia. All through this period before a charge had been laid in United States courts, before a claim was asserted, Canadian officials were co-operating with United States officials in connection with a company that at that particular time was paying taxes in Canada as a Canadian company. The justification for this co-opera tion is something that we cannot understand very clearly at the present time. The 76 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim Supply Canadian government of course, had rep resentations. For example, they had this representation from the local of the United Steelworkers of America and Steep Rock Lake, Ontario. It was sent to Hon. Milton F. Gregg, Hon. Walter Harris and Hon. Lester B. Pearson. This resolution condemns the role played by Canada in co-operating with the United States authorities. One of the phrases used in the resolution reads as follows: Whereas, the United States taxing authorities are harassing Consolidated Premium Iron Ores Lim ited, a Canadian corporation, by claiming taxes from it based on transactions which the Canadian taxing authorities have either taxed or specifically exempted from tax, and Whereas, we do not believe that it ls in the best interest of the employees of Steep Rock Iron Mines Limited, the local community or the econ omy of Ontario and Canada for United States taxing authorities to harass a Canadian, corporation by claiming taxes on Canadian income which have been specifically exempted from tax by the Canadian goverament. The concern expressed by such organiza tions, unions, by representatives of the com pany, finally led to the government on November 28 of 1956 presenting an aide-me moire from the Canadian ambassador to the Secretary of State. I have checked up on the definition of an aide-memoire and it appears it is used in situations where very powerful but at the same time informal presentation of opinion is given to the foreign country to whom the memoire is sent. The gist of this aide-memoire from the Canadian ambassador to the Secretary of State is in the last paragraph: The Canadian government, therefore, feel that the United States government should not take from the assistance it obtained from Canadian officials the inference that Canada supports this claim to tax the company because, on the contrary, it is felt that the facts show that when the Canadian government, as a war measure to increase essential production, agreed to exempt this company from income and excess profits tax for a period of three years, it was not contemplated that there would be any United States tax applicable to these operations of the company which the Canadian ~nd the United States governments were both try mg to accelerate in the joint interest of the two countries. In other words this aide-memoire sent to the Canadian ambassador by our prime min ister of 1956 covers almost exactly the same argument put forward by the resolution that I have read from the union on the scene of Steep Rock Iron Mines. The peculiar effect of this aide-memoire is this. One would tend to think that this would make a strong im pression on the United States authorities and might even lead to their decision not to proceed. But we find this: Under date of December 20, 1956, the Department of State in Washington stated in writing to the foreign affairs committee, as follows: [Mr. Fisher.] The effect of the Premium Iron Ores tax case on our international relations with Canada is, of course, a matter of concern to the state depart ment. You may be interested, therefore, in the Canadian official response to the action. In preparing the United States case, our internal revenue officials received the co-operation of Canadian officials. Throughout this period of prepa ration and co-operation, no formal representa tion or objection was made by the Canadian government. On May 26th, shortly before the case was to be tried, the Canadian ambassador discussed it with the acting secretary of state. During his interview, the ambassador emphasized he had not been instructed to make representations of any kind. On November 29, 1956, the Canadian ambassador- At the same time this aide-memoire was given to the United States State Department. -left with the department of state an aide memoire on the subject. Since the Canadian government has not sought representation in connection with the case, either before or after it was brought to the court, the department of state has had no reason to take further action in this regard. In other words, despite what we may think of the force of this aide-memoire which was dispatched by the former prime minister the department of state advised the United States foreign affairs committee that really this was in effect no representation at all. The next point in connection with this case developed when the government changed hands. Of course, with a new government in Canada representations were made to this government to take up this case and to stop what in effect could be double taxation if it was successful. On December 23, 1957 the Canadian charge d'affaires delivered a state ment to the U.S. secretary of state as follows: The Canadian government is desirous of avoid ing any misapprehension concerning its position in this matter. Accordingly, the Cana.dian govern ment would wish the United States government to be aware that the views contained in the aide memoire presented by the Canadian embassy on November 28, 1956 and in the statement made by the previous Prime Minister in the Canadian House of Commons on April 9, 1957 are very strongly shared by the present Canadian government. For reference purposes the relevant extract from the House of Commons debates for April 9, 1957 is attached. This extract deals with the question put by the hon. member for Kamloops to the min ister of national revenue at that time, the Hon. J. J. McCann, and to the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent, who was prime minister at that time, and the substance of this inter jection is contained in Mr. St. Laurent's last remark as follows: Mr. Speaker, the position was taken that there was a question of fact that was now submitted to the court, and if as a consequence of the court's finding on the evidence relating to that question of fact it was felt that the real intent of the treaty with respect to the avoidance of double taxation was not being carried out, there would have to be reconsideration of its terms. MAY 14, 1958 77 I think it will be agreed that that sounds very much like the statement which was read today by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. This was the representation made by the present government on December 23, 1957. The next date which is of any interest in this case is when the United States tax court came out with its decision. The judge filed his decision on April 23, 1957 and the peti tioners, that is to say Premium Iron Ores Limited, Mr. Eaton and Mr. Daley won their case and the interesting thing about this whole judgment is that it is built around the fact that it is not right for the United States tax authorities to proceed against this com pany because of the tax convention and the protocol between the United States and Can ada. In other words we have a United States judge standing up for Canada's position as far as this treaty and the tax convention are concerned and so the judge ruled against the United States tax authorities. The tax author ities thereupon appealed to the whole body of judges of the tax court who ruled against the United States tax authorities. Since then it has been indicated that the United States tax authorities are going to take this case to an appellate court and there is an indication that if they lose there they are going to take it to the supreme court. That possibility raises an interesting point. If they do take it to the supreme court and should win, as I understand the position from Americans, that means that it has the force of law and no further appeals are available. It also means the penalties must be applied to these two people and to the company and that raises the question that if this should happen will our Canadian author ities then reimburse this company and reim burse these men for the taxes which have been paid in Canada in connection with these operations? There is, however, a much more interesting point because we hear today from the Sec retary of State for External Affairs that on February 28 the United States state depart ment asked the Canadian government what the Minister of National Revenue meant on February 1 when he made a statement in this house in connection with Premium Iron Ores Limited. In effect his statement was that this present government stood behind Mr. St. Laurent's aide-memoire. The statement read by the Secretary of State for External Affairs said that in the course of clarifying observa tions the Canadian government took the opportunity to review the considerations on which their decision in this matter had been based, and what the minister had in mind in his answer to a question was that the Interim Supply Canadian government would wish in due course to study the court of appeal judgment in relation to the facts in the case as to whether the terms of our double taxation convention have been interpreted in the sense we intended them to have at the time when they were indicated and, if not, to consider whether these terms require revision. We have this relatively strong statement on the position of the Minister of National Revenue, saying in effect that the Canadian government treats this matter very seriously and that it may undertake a complete revi sion of the double taxation policy, then on March 27, 1958-that is a month after the Canadian government made this representa tion-we find the United States internal revenue service stating in a letter to the senate committee on foreign affairs-the top officials of the United States revenue depart ment-that J. G. McEntyre, the Canadian deputy minister of national revenue, had agreed with the position taken by the United States. We are not exactly sure as to what is that position with which Mr. McEntyre agreed but we do have the peculiar situation where, before a tax claim is even asserted, United States tax officials through the advice of our Canadian tax officials are being al lowed to examine the books and go into the banks and look at the records of many peop1t in this country, people who are actually Canadian citizens. This is something, of course, which our party has been bringing forward for a number of years in order to make income tax records more open and yet we find that our bill is always voted down and it is said that that would be a tre mendous violation of Canadian personal free dom. Yet we find that United States tax snoopers can come up here and spend ex tensive periods of intensive investigation and they seem to be encouraged by Canadian tax officials. Furthermore, we now have a statement dated one month after our present govern ment has stated it takes a very serious view of the matter to the effect that our Canadian deputy minister of national revenue has agreed with the position taken by the United States. I have to agree, in fairness to the deputy minister, that we do not know the position the United States has taken, but it seems that it could very easily be the position that these companies, with United States' capital operating in Canada at present, which are taxed by the Canadian government, can also be taxed in certain cases by the United States government. If this is so it is a very serious situation and its seriousness is exem plified by the tremendous number of edi torials one reads in such sterling right wing 78 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim Supply papers as , the Financial Post, the Winnipeg Tribune and the Montreal Gazette. I would therefore like to suggest to the ministers concerned that they give us some information on the position really taken by their government at the present time in con nection with this matter. Do they not think that this has been an invasion of Canadian sovereignty; do they not think it peculiar that the state department receives an aide memoire through our external affairs depart ment which states something very strongly and at the same time we have another leak to the United States through our Department of National Revenue into the United States treasury which seems to operate completely to one side? There appears to be a lack of rapport in this whole case as between the Department of External Affairs and the Department of National Revenue. One thing I think we need to know is whether the Canadian government will con sider reimbursing these people for taxes already deducted if double taxation does come into effect as the result of the position taken by the United States appeal or supreme court. I think this is something which is quite im portant because it is, in essence, a test case. I do not feel at all ashamed in bringing it forward because I believe it will have a very serious effect on the operations of the par ticular corporations involved in my part of the country. At the present time Steep Rock Iron Mines is not having an easy time of it· we are losing miners from the Atikokan corn: munity and there is not as much ore as pos sible being shipped. The blow to that company and to its sales agencies from an ad verse decision could be extremely serious and could even lead to a shutting down of the mine. I think, therefore, that this is a case which deserves an explanation from the Minister of National Revenue as to the part played in the negotiations by the officials of his own department. Mr. Regier: Mr. Chairman, I wish to as sure the Minister of Finance that we are doing all we possibly can to expedite the pas sage of interim supply; I will attempt to say as little as I feel needs to be said. We in this group were very pleased indeed at the assurance which the minister gave yesterday that time would be allowed later for a full discussion of the remaining esti mates of the 1957-58 fiscal year and, especially for a discussion of the issuing of Governo; General's warrants. We are very pleased in deed at the new attitude which the Minister of Finance has adopted since this matter was last taken up in the house on February 1. I can assure him we shall have some very serious considerations to bring forward at that time. [Mr. Fisher.] I was a little amused at the reference made by the spokesman for the Liberal party on the size of the estimates for the year 1958-59. We in our group have long realized that the population and the problems of Canada are growing and that the responsibil ities of government have to grow along with them. When we consider the change in the value of money we have never been particu larly surprised or horrified to find we are con fronted with a growing gross national ex penditure. I must, however, point out at this time that though the government's expendi tures are obviously increasing there is some suspicion that the government's gross in come may be declining. For the federal government that is not an overly serious matter because the dominion government has at its disposal ways and means of operating on an income which is less than its expendi ture. I am referring to the principle of deficit financing, and many indications have already been given that we may have to meet a very heavy outlay by this means. I should like to refer now to some of the expenditures which the Minister of Finance makes and which are, I believe, made directly by his department, namely the assistance given to another level of government, munic ipal government. The assessment notices from municipalities, in our province at least, are now being mailed to homeowners, and our people back home are going to view with some concern the growing expenditures of the federal government and the growing costs of municipal government. They will realize that while the federal government has ways and means of meeting such growing expenditures in a time of recession their local municipal government has no such easy, or compara tively easy, remedy. The only remedy avail able to municipal governments is to add to an already high tax burden on Canadian homes, Canadian farms and other Canadian real estate. The situation which exists in my own province applies, I think, throughout Canada. It is very serious indeed, and unless some action is forthcoming shortly to provide relief -and I do not say that the federal government alone is responsible, because some, at least of the provincial governments should be able to do more-we may one of these days be faced with a mass resignation of our municipal elected officers throughout the nation and I am sure none of us would like to see that happen. I call to mind again, as I have done before in this house, what the Minister of Finance and his colleagues in the government had to say on this subject when they were members of the opposition. I do not wish to delay the committee too much, but I must read again MAY 14, 1958 79 one sentence by the present Minister of Fi nance as reported on page 4788 of Hansard of May 17, 1954: The federal government, with its abundant sources, should be devising ways of helping the m unicipalities to meet these urgent demands for necessary but costly services which they are finan cially unable to provide. And on page 4789 he said: There must be, in my submission, an opening of the eyes of the federal government to the way in which they are increasing the burdens and the d ifficulties of the municipalities. And the Minister without Portfolio, then the hon. member for Greenwood, on the same day, at page 4786, said: It is no answer to shrug off the municipalities. I was very pleased indeed to learn that on February 7 last during the election campaign, six days after dissolution, the municipalities of Canada presented a brief to the federal cabinet. I understand from the newspaper reports that the cabinet listened to the brief for 90 minutes, and that subsequently there were several announce ments. I wish to refer to what is possibly the most important announcement, as reported in the Gazette, datelined Ottawa, February 7. This is a Canadian Press dispatch reading. Prime Minister Diefenbaker said today he plans to caJl an informal federal-municipal conference this year to discuss the financial plight of Canadian m unicipalit ies. That indicated a slight change of heart, because last fall we pleaded with the Minister of Finance to admit municipalities to a domin ion-provincial conference, and the most we could get out of him was an agreement that they might attend as observers. Later on in the session he said: "We respect the constitu tion", indicating that there was something in the British North America Act which might prevent the federal government from holding serious discussions with municipal govern ments. I am very pleased that the Prime Minister, as repor ted in the Globe and Mail of February 8, announced at the same time that he planned to call for a new deal in financing a t a dominion-provincial-municipal confer ence, and I am very pleased to say that he has now found room under the British North America Act to ca ll it, unless he was wrongly reported, a dominion-provincial-municipal conference. In any event, the Prime Minister said, he planned to hold a dominion-municipal conference before 1959. Our newspapers out w est said the Prime Minister had promised to hold an informal dominion-municipal conference. The reason I am raising this matter at this time is because I notice in the speech from the throne only a claim that the govern ment has h e ped municipalities, meaning I Interim Supply suppose that they have done so by helping provincial governments. But there is nothing in the speech from the throne to indicate that the Minister of Finance or the government have any serious intention of implementing any early action to increase the aid which they plan to give to municipal governments. At the conference between the munici palities and the cabinet on February 7 the following point was raised as reported in the Gazette of February 8: Pending a permanent solution of the problems of municipalities the federal government should take interim measures to assist municipal governments. I realize that that is not an easy matter. The problem involves our whole constitu tional arrangement. I am keenly interested in this matter and have pointed out the needs of the municipal governments in this house for a number of years. I would like to point out to the minister that we have operated under the British North America Act for some 91 years. In many respects and especially with regard to those aspects that apply to financial resources of muni cipal governments the British North America Act belongs to the horse and buggy days. In nine years we will be observing our one hundredth anniversary as a nation. I appeal to the minister to use his influence to arrange a dominion-provincial-municipal con stitutional conference which would . explore the possibilities of finding agreement between the various regions of Canada, the diversified interests of Canada and the several levels of government in Canada so that at an early date and not later than our one hundredth anniversary we might be able to announce a new constitutional arrangement which would supply adequate resources to those levels of government that are charged with the heaviest responsibilities of government. It is very easy for us in our ivory tower here to claim that we need over $6,000 mil lion a year to run this government. It is relatively simple to find ways and means to obtain the money that we intend to spend. I have yet to find a government that thinks any of its expenditures could reasonably be reduced. However, I plead with the govern ment to acknowledge that this is the time to indicate to those of our people who are active in the real business of making democracy work on the home front, these willing public spirited citizens who sacrifice much more of themselves in the common welfare than many of us do as members of the federal house, that relief will be pro vided. Let us not wait for some possible future dominion-provincial conference to reach a solution which will be an interim 80 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim Supply solution at best because most of these agree ments operate for only five-year periods. I hope the minister will offer the muni cipal governments some hope and encourage ment at an early date and will not say to us again at some future time, "We respect the constitution," because it has been pointed out over the years by many of us in this house and also by the Canadian Federation of Mayors and Municipalities in its briefs that the Minister of Finance could relieve the financial plight of our municipalities in many ways without violating even the spirit of the British North America Act. I wish the minister would say at this time what the government has in mind when it refers to a dominion-provincial-municipal conference and also what it has in mind when it refers to an informal dominion municipal conference. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Mr. Chairman, I have just a brief word to say. First of all I should like to extend to my friend the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River my personal congratulations on his selection as financial critic of the official opposition and say that I know his experience with the Department of Finance will enable him to render to the house and to the official opposi tion very high service in that capacity. I have already indicated indirectly to him that the services of the department are at his disposal to supply any factual information he may require at any time in the discharge of his responsibilities. Mr. Benidickson: May I thank the minister for that courtesy already given earlier today. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): Mr. Chairman, I do not propose to deal at length with the various matters touched on by the hon. gentlemen who have spoken. In the case of most of their comments which were of a financial nature I believe the budget or the stage of consideration of the items themselves in committee of supply in due course would be a better place to do so. With respect to the dominion-provincial conference I think that is a matter on which my friend the hon. member for Burnaby Coquitlam should address his inquiry to the Prime Minister. Mr. Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I want to take this opportunity to bring a matter to the atten tion of the house which is of serious concern to the people of southeastern British Colum bia. As hon. members who have been here for a number of years know I never raise a matter unless it is one of public importance and necessary at the time. Also I might say I promised a lot of organizations and people in southeastern British Columbia, including [Mr. Regier.] people in Kootenay West, Kootenay East and in the Okanagan valley, that I would raise this matter in the house at the first opportunity and that is why I do so now. The question which concerns me is that of the reduction of passenger train service between Vancouver and Medicine Hat by the Canadian Pacific railway commencing this year. It has caused a great deal of concern to business and people generally throughout the whole area. This train service serves a rich and productive area which last year produced in the neighbourhood of $300 million worth of goods. It is the centre of a large coal, mining, smelting and lumbering industry. The interesting aspect of this matter is that this is one of the wealth producing areas of the Canadian Pacific railway. As a matter of fact I wish the Minister of Transport were here because I would say for his information that in my area he is now being referred to by many people as the minister of diminishing transport. The C.P.R. owns 51 per cent of the stock of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company right in the very area where people are being denied at the present time satisfac tory passenger train service from which the railway makes a large percentage of its net profit. For many years we have had a highly satisfactory passenger train service running between Vancouver and Medicine Hat, a first-class train carrying sleeping and dining cars, coaches, baggage and mail cars and so on. It was viewed favourably and supported by people throughout the area but since the beginning of the year the Canadian Pacific railway has installed what is known as a Budd car service which consists of one car with a single engineer in the cab. It has the advantage that it does make an excellent connection with trains Nos. 2 and 3 to Medicine Hat, but it has many other disad vantages. I think what the people are asking for is not unreasonable and that is why I have no hesitation in bringing their rep resentations to the house. This matter has been discussed at chambers of commerce meetings. All the chambers of commerce in the whole southeastern area of British Columbia have taken very strong exception to this reduction in passenger serv ice. It has been discussed by farmers, organ izations, by municipal councils and by all the trade unions in the area. I think I can truthfully say that not only all these organ izations but 100 per cent of the people of the southeastern area of British Columbia object very much to being served with this Budd car service at this time. It is a long train journey from Vancouver to Medicine Hat or even to Nelson. It is an overnight journey whichever MAY 14, 1958 81 way you go and it is a great discomfort to older people because there is no place to lie down. It is a great discomfort to people with families and to children. I have travelled on the train. It is most uncomfortable indeed to have to sit up overnight and suffer that inconvenience, "Particularly to those who are old, people with children and persons who are ill. In addition to that the meal service is very poor indeed. You have to get a sandwich and a cup of coffee from a newsboy. On several occasions even the supplies of food have completely run out before the train reached Vancouver. It is a most inade quate service for a wealth-producing area such as the southeastern portion of British Columbia. In addition, there are certain other disad vantages. Our country cannot be satisfactorily served by air every day in the winter. During 1957 the planes that were supposed to land at Castlegar were unable to land for some thing over 80 days. That presents quite a problem to persons who have to go to the coast, persons who are ill and things of that sort. I wish to read a letter which was written by the chairman of the board of the Kootenay lake general hospital. This gentleman was a former official of the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company. The letter is ad dressed to the board of transport com missioners for Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, and is dated April 28, 1958. It reads: Gentlemen: At the last meeting of the board of directors of the Kootenay lake general hospital, the matter of the passenger train service here was of concern to members, and a resolution was unanimously passed protesting the inadequacy of the present train service, and asking that the board of transport commissioners be notified of this protest, and Informed that the lack of service is an obstacle in the way of good patient care. As you know, train service to and from Nelson Is presently confined to a twice-weekly service westward with stopover at Penticton, and a daily service to and from the east. Both these services are day coach only with no separate or private accommodation of any kind. At fairly frequent intervals it becomes necessary for patients from this hospital to be transported to other facilities-usually at the coast. These patients are sometimes mentally disturbed, sometimes urgent accident cases, sometimes suffering from a com municable disease. In nearly all cases privacy and quiet are recommended conditions for their travelling comfort and well-being. In the case of communicable disease, of course, privacy is a neces sity for the protection of other travellers. Recently a patient suffering from a communicable disease had to be taken to the coast by private car as no other means of transportation was available. Air transport is an alternative for accident cases when weather conditions are favourable, but neither mentally ill persons nor those suffering from com municable disease are permitted to travel by plane. The overnight train stop at Penticton, with con sequent moving of stretcher cases and considerable Interim Supply delay in reaching the desired medical attention at the coast is also a serious factor. The board of directors fully appreciates the diffi culties under which train service is maintained in this area, but feels it is their duty to point out the serious inadequacies of the present drastically curtailed service when sick persons require transportation. It is asked that you give this matter your con sidered attention and do all in your power to press for improved rail passenger service for Nelson. Yours truly, E. M. Stiles, Chairman of the Board That deals with the passenger train service, Mr. Chairman, which lacks sleeping car and re freshment car a-ccommodation. Under present circumstances, owing to certain actions on the part of certain persons unknown at the present time, the service has been somewhat curtailed between Vancouver and Nelson al though, I understand, at the wish of the at torney general of British Columbia. The men operating on the road cannot understand why it is possible to run freight trains daily and yet it is not possible to run a passenger train daily. However, I am not going to deal with that aspect of the question because it is one that is somewhat unusual and somewhat abnormal. But we are concerned about this running of a Budd car over this long length of Tailway through our territory. When the Minister of Transport was in Nelson and peregrinating around my con stituency during the election he was met by representatives of the municipal council, trade unions, chambers of commer-ce and other organizations. In conversation with them I understand he admitted he had no power under the act to compel the Canadian Pacific railway to improve the service. I am sure the former minister of transport will correct me if I am incorrect in this. This is a reduction of service and it does not impose upon the company the necessity to ask the board of transport commissioners for permission. • On that basis you can reduce it to almost zero and still not contravene the act. I am of the opinion that there should be an amendment to the act in that respect, and I intend to introduce a private bill, when we get over the first hurried days of the session, suggesting an amendment of that type. The minister did say that he would-and as I indicated yesterday this was his political trump on that occasion-consult with Messrs. Crump and Rump. Apparently he has not been very successful. In his answer to my question yesterday he rather indicated to me that the matter has been sort of satis factorily settled. I think there has been some improvement with respect to the handling of express, some livestock and things of that 82 HOUSE OF COMMONS Interim SuppLy sort. The basic complaint still rests there and that is why I am rising today at the request of the people whom I have men tioned. I do not think these people are ask ing too much. We recognize the difficulties. You cannot ask people to run trains for nothing, without patronage and things of that sort. The patronage is diminishing daily because of the nature of the service. I do urge the minister to do everything in his power, to go into this matter again with the appropriate officials of the Canadian Pacific railway, to see whether this train could not also include a sleeping car and a dining car or a cafe car. If the train con sisted of a sleeping car, a cafe car and a coach, the service of the district would be improved and there would be comfort there for old people, people with families, men tally and physically ill people and for the public generally. I have said all I wish to say at this time, Mr. Chairman. I made these few remarks at the request, as I said before, of a large number of organizations and in support of the opinions of 100 per cent of the people who reside in southeastern British Columbia. Mr. McMillan: Mr. Chairman, in presenting his budgetary statement on December 6 the Minister of Finance said that he would accept the former minister's estimates of income and in spite of further proposed principal expenditures he expected a budgetary sur plus of $106 million. Can the minister tell the committee whether those figures now stand? If not, what was the situation at the end of the 1957-58 budgetary year? I would expect the minister to be approxi mately right in his predictions because they were made after two-thirds of the fiscal year had passed; but it is right that we should know something about the past year before we appropriate money for this year. On December 6 the minister predicted savings in deductions of $64 million. Yesterday I thought he mentioned that this amounted to $73.6 million. I should like to ask him what these savings were. I have heard the minister on many occa sions refer to the waste and extravagance of former governments, when the Hon. Mr. Harris and the Hon. Mr. Abbott were min isters of finance. I think he made these criticisms more in the light of the fact that the estimates were up in those particular years. This year, if one looks over the esti mates that were tabled on Tuesday, one finds a substantial increase in almost every department. I know that the estimates of the Department of National Defence have decreased by $6.8 million. It is also true [Mr. Herridge.] that the minister's own department shows a decrease in expenditure of $18 million, but his department benefits to the extent of over $100 million as a result of the change in the federal-provincial tax sharing agree ment with the province of Ontario. If we took all those tax sharing agreements and totalled them up I calculate that he would have an increase in expenditure of $31 mil lion in his department instead of a decrease of $18 million. In the past I have heard the minister refer to the large number of civil servants as an example of waste and extravagance. Last year the former secretary of state, during the consideration of her estimates, admitted to me that the number of civil servants was up over the preceding year. I should like to ask the minister if he has been successful in effecting a reduction in the number of civil servants this year. There has been an increase of over $6.5 million in interest alone on our public debt. This is shown in these estimates. This repre sents an increase of about 40 cents for every man, woman and child in Canada. I feel that this is only the beginning. It suggests to me that the poor old taxpayer in Canada is going to have a tough time in the years ahead. Being told by the Minister of Finance the charges on the public debt does not in form us of the amount of the public debt itself and this, in my opinion, is unprece dented. I believe that he must know the debt in order to calculate the interest on it, and he should reveal the amount at this time. In any event this house should be favoured with a statement on the 1957-58 budgetary year before we vote money for the current fiscal year. As the people's representatives we have been kept in the dark long enough. Any government which respects the rights of parliament and the rights of the people should tell us how we stood at the end of the last fiscal year before asking us to vote money for this fiscal year. They should not leave so much to surmise. We should be able to obtain a clear idea concerning how much this government is spending to run our country, and we should also be told how much the unemployment insurance fund has been depleted since they took office last June. Mr. Regier: I wonder if the minister would be good enough to repeat his answer. The loud speaker system does not seem to be working properly and no one heard his re ply concerning a contemplated dominion municipal conference. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): What I said to the hon. member was that that was a question that I thought should be more properly directed to the Prime Minister. MAY 14, 1958 83 Mr. Fisher: I notice the minister of mines is in the house, and I wonder if he would answer a question which has something to do with the supply that would be passed for his department? Representations have been made by the geologists association of Canada that some emergency steps be taken by his de partment with regard to the employment of undergraduates who are training as geolo gists. I wonder if the minister could give me any information on that? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): That matter is under consideration. Mr. Benidickson: I think the hon. member for Welland is entitled to a reply to the very pertinent questions he raised. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): The hon. member for Welland has been in this house for some time and knows that the matters he has raised are appropriate to the budget and will be dealt with there. Mr. Benidickson: At least the item he raised concerning the $73.6 million, to which my hon. friend referred yesterday, I think should be broken down and explained to the committee. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton}: That is in the esti mates of 1957-58, and not in the estimates of 1958-59. This is the sort of thing that could be properly dealt with when an accounting is given to the house in respect of the reve nues and expenditures for the year 1957-58 at the time the budget is introduced. Mr. McMillan: Is it not possible to tell us our standing at the end of March 31? Are we in the red or in the black? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton}: I have answered that question, Mr. Chairman. Resolution reported and concurred in. WAYS AND MEANS INTERIM SUPPLY The house in committee of ways and means, Mr. Sevigny in the chair. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton) moved: Resolved, that towards making good the supply granted to Her Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the fiscal year ending March 31st, 1959, the sum of $626,292,380.09 be granted out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Canada, as set forth in the resolution concurred in this day in the committee of supply. Resolution reported and concurred in. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton) thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-6, for grant ing to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year e,nding the 31st March, 1959. Ways and Means Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. Mr. Speaker: When shall the bill be read a second time? By leave now? Some hon. Members: Agreed. Mr. Speaker: By unanimous consent. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton) moved the second reading of the bill. Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Kenora•Rainy River): Mr. Speaker, I reiterate that I feel that the hon. member for Welland (Mr. McMillan) should at this time receive an answer from the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) to two or more very important and interesting questions that he raised. One had a direct reference to the minister's own remarks yesterday afternoon when he referred to what he said was an underexpenditure of $73.6 million from the estimates for last year tabled in the house. I think the other one is a very interesting and desirable question and that is the recent expenditures on or costs of unemployment insurance or the diminution of that fund. Mr. Speaker: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion? Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Sevigny in the chair. On clause 1. Mr. Benidickson: Surely the minister can answer that very simple question as to what items are involved in the $73.6 million to which he himself made reference yesterday. I am sure he could break · it down. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I think my hon. friend probably could not have heard my response to that question. The $73.6 million has nothing whatever to do with this bill. It has nothing to do with the appropriation for the fiscal year 1958-59; it relates to the estimates for the year 1957-58. Mr. Benidickson: I agree. But my hon. friend will also agree that in his remarks yesterday, when he indicated to the house that he proposed to bring this legislation forward, he suggested that he had reduced expenditures by $73.6 million. I suggest that he merged his remarks yesterday when he was giving advice to us that he had this legislation in mind for today and I think we are entitled, in common courtesy, to an answer. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I never mentioned this subject in my remarks on this bill. The remarks I made yesterday were made on motions to indicate the procedure that the government proposes to the house with · I. 84 HOUSE OF COMMONS Ways and Means respect to both financial years 1957-58 and 1958-59. Today's proceedings relate entirely to the year 1958-59. With regard to the matters raised by the hon. member for Welland, I have given my answer that we should follow the constitutional course and give that information when the budget is introduced. Mr. Mcllraith: Why did you not follow the constitutional course yesterday? Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): I gave the house the proper information yesterday. Mr. McMillan: We are into a new year, Mr. Chairman and I certainly think the minister should tell us whether we had a deficit or a surplus before we start in appro priating money for a new year. I think he should tell us whether we had a deficit or a surplus last year. I think that is the only reasonable thing to expect. I think if a businessman ran his business in this way he would not be in business very long. I cer tainly think the minister could give us that information. Mr. Winch: We in this group recognize the importance of passing money which is re quired for the service of Canada. This bill takes care of certain aspects of that matter. Irrespective of some of the numerous ques tions that many of us would have liked to ask we are at this time accepting the com plete assurance of the Minister of Finance as to the right of all members to question expenditures that have been made subsequent to February 1. In view of the assurance that has been given to us by the minister, to which assurance we shall hold him in the days which are to follow, we are not in any way whatsoever going to block the speedy passage of money required at this time. We take this position to a major extent because we want to see come forward necessary legis lation which is required in the interests of the economy of Canada and which we under stand must go through fairly speedily if it is not going to be blocked by the fact that the other house is not sitting. Therefore on the assurance given by the Minister of Finance that all questions and all estimates are open, we raise no further objection to this bill going through at this time. Clause agreed to. Clauses 2 to 6 inclusive agreed to. Schedules A to E inclusive agreed to. Preamble agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton) reading of the bill. [Mr. Fleming (Eglinton).] moved the third Mr. Speaker: When shall the bill be read a third time? By leave now? Some hon. Members: Now. Mr. Speaker: Before accepting the min ister's motion for third reading, may I ask the house for its consent to put the two motions together. We have been in the habit of moving third reading and then of moving a further motion that the bill be now passed and that the title be as on the order paper. I have considered this practice at the last session and again at this session and have conferred with the officers of the house. There is no provision in our rules for any thing further than a third reading and as far as the rules are concerned when a bill has received its third reading it is passed. This second motion, or fourth motion as it really is after the first, second and third readings, that the bill pass and that its title be as on the order paper is an historical relic as far as I can find out and one which has been abandoned in other parliaments. I would suggest if the house is willing, therefore, that the motion be accepted in the form that the said bill be now read a third time and do pass and if at any time there appears to be any reason for adding an ad ditional motion we could revert to the prac tice. In the meantime it would be an economy of time. Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurierl: In so far as we on this side of the house are concerned, Mr. Speaker, there is no objection to the sug gestion. Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): We accept the suggestion, Mr. Speaker, but would like it made quite clear that what you have now announced would not at any time remove the right and privilege of members to speak on the principle on the third reading of the bill. Mr. Speaker: It would not, of course, affect the rights of the house when third reading is called in any way at all; it just eliminates an apparently unnecessary motion. Is it agreed that we follow this practice? Some hon. Members: Agreed. Bill reported, read the third time and passed. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FOR EXTENSION OF SEASONAL BENEFITS Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution: That it Is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the temporary extension of the seasonal MAY 14, 1958 85 benefit periods under the Unemployment Insurance Act for a six weeks period, from May 18, 1958, to June 28, 1958. Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Sevigny in the chair. Mr. Starr: Mr. Chairman, the purpose of this bill is to extend the six weeks period from May 17 to June 28 as the period in which seasonal benefits may be paid. We are proposing a life span of only six weeks for this legislation because it is intended to meet a situation which we believe will not recur. As hon. members know, unemployment reached a postwar high during last winter and while the situation has considerably and markedly improved in recent weeks there still exists something of a special problem in that there remain people in our labour force who need further protection pending a firmer upturn in economic activity. We believe this upturn is now in evidence and that is why we are at this time proposing this short-term legislation which will, without disrupting the existing formula, provide the flexibility we need to meet this particular set of circumstances. This measure will place additional pur chasing power in the hands of those who most need it. We estimate that some 200,000 claimants will benefit from this legislation to the extent of close to $14 million. I would like to note that in the five months beginning December 1, 1957, and I think this will answer a question asked in the house earlier, almost $230 million were paid out in unemployment insurance benefits but in spite of these heavy expen ditures the unemployment insurance fund had at the end of March a remarkably healthy balance of more than $740 million. We feel that this fund is therefore in a sound posi tion to yield this extra protection which we feel should be provided and thus continue to do the job it was intended to do. In further explanation of this bill I would like to emphasize both what it is proposed to do and what it is not proposed to do. Perhaps for the benefit of those who are not familiar with our unemployment legisla tion I could best begin by explaining what seasonal benefit is and also its relation to regular benefit. Seasonal benefit was brought into being in 1950 after a decade of experience with un employment insurance which had revealed two weaknesses in the regular benefit formula. Firstly, there was a large number of Cana dian workers who simply did not work long enough each year in insurable employment to ever be able to qualify for regular benefits and, secondly, there were many whose Unemployment Insurance regular benefits became exhausted during the winter months, the very time when it was most difficult to get another job. The seasonal benefit idea was to lower the normal qualify ing requirements for a limited period and thus provide unemployed workers with a better bridge with which to span the gap between jobs, a gap that was causing a good deal of hardship to many Canadians through the years. Last autumn we improved the structure of this bridge when we lengthened the seasonal benefit period by one month at each end. Where it was previously from January 1 to April 15 we extended it to from December 1 to May 15 and now we are proposing another temporary improvement to meet a special situation. I would like to make it quite clear at this time that this bill does not constitute a blanket addition of six weeks of benefits for those who are now drawing seasonal benefits and I must emphasize that benefit payments also have to be based on prior contributions, but it does mean that those who have not exhausted all their entitlement by May 17 will be able to go on drawing benefits until they do exhaust their entitlement, or until June 28. But for this legislation all seasonal benefit payments would, of course, cease on May 17, this week. Perhaps a few examples will help to il lustrate the -categories of claimants who will be entitled to additional protection from this measure. Let us take persons who became unemployed early in February. Those claim ants had 24 contributions since the previous March 31-that is, March 31, 1957-and on the basis of five weeks of benefits for every six weeks of contributions they were able to qualify for 20 weeks of seasonal benefits, ef fective February 9. Under the present legisla tion payments to these claimants would cease on May 1 7 even though they had used up only 14 of their possible 20 weeks. The bill we are proposing will enable them to go on drawing the other six weeks of their entitlement. Thus, he receives his full 20 weeks to which he is entitled because of his contribution. Another category of claims which will benefit from the legislation affects those who become unemployed and who claim benefit on or about May 17 but who are unable to qualify for regular benefit. Such claims could under this measure be considered for sea sonal benefit provided the claimant had not already exhausted the seasonal benefits claimed since December 1, 1957. Under the present legislation there would be no pos sibility of qualifying for seasonal benefit on failure to qualify for regular benefit because this benefit period would end this week on May 17. 86 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance A third example would be a claimant who earlier in the year had been drawing seasonal benefit but who had found work again be fore exhausting all his entitlement. Suppose he becomes unemployed again. Under present legislation he would be unable to draw his unused entitlement because the seasonal benefit period would be over on May 17. Under this bill, however, he would be able to receive payment either until his entitle ment was used up or until June 28. With this example I think it would be clear that claimants who would not be entitled to fur ther payment as a result of this legislation are those who have already been paid all the seasonal benefit to which they are entitled. A claimant who earlier established his right to 20 weeks seasonal benefit and who has already been paid 20 weeks seasonal benefit will not receive further payment and, as I have noted, benefit is based on prior contributions. There are two other small points I should like to note in regard to this bill. One is that no waiting period would have to be served in respect to these additional weeks established as a result of this extension. The other is that this bill applies equally to those engaged in the fishing industry who were covered this year for the first time by special regulations under the act. In conclusion I should like to say again that this bill is a temporary bill designed to solve a temporary problem. It is, in fact, a re-affirmation of an aim we have often enunciated, namely that Canadian workers shall not suffer hardships because of unem ployment that occurs through no fault of their own. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Mr. Chairman, the minister who has just spoken said that this particular measure was one designed to cover a situation which-to use his own lan guage--he believed would not occur again. I am sure all of us in this house would agree with the minister in hoping that the situation which brought this bill into being will not occur again. However, the Prime Minister, when he spoke yesterday, said at the conclu sion of his speech as reported on page 42 of Hansard: First, we meet the problem of unemployment by again removing the difficulties inherent in the extension of the payments. He was referring to the measure which has just been introduced by the hon. minister. I am sure the minister himself will be the first to recognize that this particular measure does not in any way meet the problem of unemployment. This is an amendment de signed to give assistance to men and women in our country who are without work and [Mr. Starr.] who need financial assistance in order to maintain themselves and their families. In no circumstances can anyone be justified in saying, as the Prime Minister observed yesterday, that this is a measure designed, to use his own words again, to meet the problem of unemployment. The fact is that the measure before us does not touch the problem of unemployment except in the way I have mentioned. We are therefore obliged to bring to the attention of the government at this time, as was done by my leader yesterday, the fact that the foremost domestic problem in Canada at this moment is that there are about six hundred thousand men and women out of work. This does represent a very serious situation and the government, having the responsibility, has a definite obligation to give leadership in this matter, a leadership which, if it is given, will be warmly suppor ted, I am sure, by every hon. member in this house who shares the view of the Prime Minister expressed during the election that unemployment was a social disaster. The fact that the unemployment insurance fund lost $131 million in the last fiscal year and-if my estimate is correct-a further $40 million in April, 1958, is in itself an indica tion of the seriousness of unemployment in our country. An examination of the state ment of revenues and expenditures of the unemployment insurance fund over the period of the last two months spells out in an emphatic way the extent of this problem in Canada. I have before me certain reported expenditures by way of benefit payments through supplementary and seasonal benefits provided under the amendment of last fall. I find that in the month of December last the total supplementary and seasonal benefits paid out were $2 million. In the month of January they rose to $12 million-I am now using round figures-in the month of Feb ruary to $15 million, and in the month of March last to almost $20 million. Those are figures having to do with supplementary and seasonal payments. The situation is even more serious when examined in the light of the total benefit payments including supplementary and sea sonal payments as well as ordinary payments provided for under the Unemployment In surance Act. For instance, in the month of September last it was $13 million; in October, $16 million; in the month of November, $18 million, close to $19 million; in the month of December, $31 million, close to $32 million; in the month of January, $60 million; in the month of February, $63 million and in the month of March, $72 million. Again I use round figures. MAY 14. 1958 87 Mr. Starr: Mr. Chairman, may I draw to the attention of the hon. member who is now quoting these figures that he is taking the ordinary column, say, in the month of December, amounting to $29 million and then adding the total to it to make it $60 million. Actually, he should be taking the ordinary figure of $29 million and adding to it the supplementary figure of $2 million to get $31 million. Mr. Martin (Essex East): My hon. friend could be correct but he will not deny that the figure for- Some hon. Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Some hon. mem bers applaud but I am sure they have not fully appreciated the point the minister has made. The fact is that the figure for the month of March is some $72 million and my hon. friend will remember that in the month of February last year I suggested to him that the estimates which I had made at that time based upon the figures then presented suggest that the total expenditures could reach the figure of same $73 million at the end of March of this year. The report now indicates that this is the situation. These figures in themselves reflect the seriousness of the problem in Canada. It does not mean, of course, that the jobless figures are identical with the implications involved in these figures but it does indicate that at the present time the unemployment problem in Canada continues to be an ex tremely serious one. I suggest it is the first and most important problem on the domestic level facing Canada and the government and parliament at this time. This particular measure is not in any way going to relieve the pressure or improve the situation. The government, along with the other factors in the Canadian economy and the Canadian people, will have to resort to measures other than this if the government is going to be able to say it has made some serious reduction in the level of unemploy ment in Canada. In 1955 when we had a situation not comparable to this, but one in which there were a lot of people out of work and when the then minister of labour proposed measures of this sort, hon. members opposite were insistent in reminding the government of that day that with regard to unemployment it had a highly important and direct obliga tion. The present Minister of Transport, for instance, said in 1955, and his words can be found on page 76 of Hansard for that year: Unemployment Insurance Despite this evidence, however, the government s~ems to persist-well, it does not 'seem', it per s1sts-s1mply to duck its responsibilities in this matter, so far as the citizens of Canada are concerned. The hon. gentleman was talking about unemployment, as the context of his remarks will show. I suggest to the government today that those words of the Minister of Transport are much more applicable now than they were then. The same is true of the words of the distinguished new Minister of Citizen ship and Immigration as found at page 138 of Hansard for 1955 when she said: They- The unemployed- -cannot live even on 100 per cent- -of regular benefits. While I do not want to comment on the fairness of that charac terization I say to the minister if those words wer~ applicable then they are certainly applicable today. Nobody can live on even 100 per cent of seasonal benefits and certainly these benefits in themselves will not provide work for men and women who need it. In my own community of Windsor as the Minister of Labour knows, there ~re still many thousands of men and women out of work as there are all over this country. Inasmuch as this measure will assist some it will be welcomed, but the fact is, and the country should know it, this amendment will not assist the majority of the unemployed in Canada. We also have the statement of the present Minister of Transport in 1955, as reported at page 143 of Hansard, when he said: There i~ no ~se in the minister saying the gov ernment 1s doing everything it can. I say that everything you can do is not being done. You are trying to find them jobs, but you cannot find them jobs. A man finds himself without credits and without a job. He has a family and he has to. eat, and so does his family. What are you going to do for him? I want to know that. That, too, is the question which I know the Minister of Labour for whom I have the greatest respect will understand is in the minds of many thousands of men and women throughout Canada as well as in the minds of hon. members of this house as we begin the discussion of this matter. What we should have from the government is a clear statement indicating what steps it proposes to take if it believes it can take steps to relieve this situation. We know the difficulties involved but yesterday we were given the impression by the Prime Minister that the government was tackling this problem and that the bottom had been reached. However there is no real evidence before this house that the bottom of unemployment in Canada has been reached. 88 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance There is evidence to the contrary and we have good reasons for suspecting that in a period when unemployment should be some what reduced we are likely to find increased unemployment, that is during the months of July and August. It is estimated, I under stand, that possibly as many as 300,000 people will be out of work at that time. This government has not yet presented us with a program by which this problem could be resolved. I suggest that at this stage the government might well look at the remarks made by the Leader of the Opposi tion when speaking about this matter during the course of the federal election on February 12 when he said: In order to provide special incentives for work to be carried on in the winter months whenever possible, a Liberal government would set an example to private enterprise and to provincial and local governments by recognizing that winter job lessness is a real cost to the community and it ls therefore sound economics to carry on some kinds of work even though they are more expen sive in the winter. Whenever appropriate, there fore, we would provide in federal contracts the payment of adequate extra costs where work ls done in the winter; and we would offer effective grants In aid to the municipalities and local author ities to enable them to do the same. I mention that as the kind of approach the government could take as a means of dealing with this problem. What have we been told in that connection? We were told by the Prime Minister that a program of public works could do the job. No one will deny that a properly conceived program of public works eould put a considerable number of men and women in this country to work but ,certainly not the ,program enunciated by the Prime Minister just prior to the last general election, one which is not in fact a public works program at all. That has been said repeatedly but this is the place now to examine it and to unmask this synthetic and alleged program of public works. I ask the government to tell us during the -course of this debate how many men and women have been put to work as a result of the operation of this public works program to date? How many men and women will be put to work as a result of the expenditure of $1,185 million during the course of the present fiscal year? How many men were put to work as a result of the expenditure for three months of some $270 million in volved in this program which was announced with all of the powerful propaganda available to the government at the beginning of this election? When we examine this ,program we find it is not an emergency program at all. The program announced by the Prime Minister represented items that had been for the most [Mr. Martin (Essex East).] part contained in the estimates o! the previous administration. It included the St. Lawrence seaway representing $106 million; the Cana dian National railways, $140 million; the Department of Public Works, $145 million; national harbours board, $38 million; Depart ment of Transport, $244 million; Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, $308 million; and crown -corporations, $72 million. All of these items are the ordinary annual estimates for the departments or the crown corporations I have named. They are not materially different from those tabled by the former administration for 1957. In fact, they come surprisingly close to the same figure so that we on this side of the house say with confidence that that particular program of public works, designed to relieve unemploy ment, could not possibly have been used for that purpose. If hon. gentlemen opposite dis agree, I ask them to tell us how many indi viduals, in addition to those normally engaged in those particular enterprises of the crown, have been employed as a result of the enun ciation of this policy. If the answer is not to be given or if it is in the negative, what steps does the government propose to take to try and do something about this problem of unemployment? There are many things that the government can do, and about some of those I would like to say something in a few moments. I suggest to the Minister of Labour, who carries this measure for the government at this time, that he and the government should give very careful consideration to the proposal made by the Leader of the Opposition, a proposal which is being seriously examined in the United States, where they likewise have a problem which, in terms of unemployment, is not quite as serious as ours. I might say to the Minister of Labour one thing he could do that would help some in my own con stituency, as I am sure it would help in his, is to abolish completely, for instance, the tax on automobiles. That would help consider ably. There are many other things the gov ernment could do. I am not placing this on the doorstep of the Minister of Labour alone because it is a responsibility that belongs to the government as a whole. In spite of its boasts, in spite of the mandate given to it by the people of Canada, this government has not given any evidence of a program designed to meet this national problem of unemploy ment in Canada at this time. I have said that the particular measure before us, commendable to the extent that it goes, does not in any way provide assist ance to anything like a substantial proportion of those individuals who are now in receipt of unemployment insurance or whose benefits MAY 14, 1958 89 are running out. I do not know what the exact figure is of those who are on unemploy ment benefits at this time, but I suggest to the Minister of Labour that this particular measure will not give assistance to a quarter of the men and women who are now in re ceipt of unemployment insurance. I suggest further that there will be great disappoint ment that the extension contemplated in this measure will not include those whose benefits run out prior to May 17. If that is the situa tion-and I understood the Minister of Labour to indicate that that was the situation-this extension will actually only benefit those who have any credits on May 17, or who have been able to file a claim for seasonal periods follo wing their regular benefit period. If this is the situation, and I believe it is, I am sure the minister will appreciate that there will be great disappointment in the country. I think we should have a clear statement on this point from the minister so that we can get a true appreciation of this amend ment which, in so far as providing assistance to individuals who come within its compass are concerned, will be welcomed by us. We should not underestimate the help provided nor should we exaggerate the benefits pro posed. I would ask the minister to tell us at some point in our discussion how many per sons have established seasonal benefit claims for the period from December 1, 1957 to May 15, 1958. I would also like to ask him what was the aggregate amount of seasonal bene fits paid to such persons. We would be able to derive some impression of this particular measure if we get from the minister the answers that he should be able to give us. I know he will give us answers but I suggest to him-I know he does not want to mislead the public or this house; he is not that kind of man-that he should give us a clear and concise statement indicating precisely what the cost of this is going to be. Is it going to be $9 million; is it going to be $14 million; is it going to be $30 million? From this answer we shall be able to make a deduction as to the likely number of individuals who, at Unemptoyment Insurance least in part, will get some assistance :from the amendment proposed in the resolution before the house. I submit to the minister that those are very important considerations if we are to discharge our responsibility in this matter. As the minister said, the Unemployment In surance Act-introduced, incidentally, by an other administration in 1940-was amendetl in 1950 to provide for the first time for the payment of supplementary benefits during the period of January 1 to March 31. As my hon. friend said, advantage was taken of the experience of the operation of the act to deal with this particular traditional mid-winter problem which we have in Canada, though abnormally greater this year. Four classes of seasonal benefit payments were established by the 1950 amendment. For a proper understanding of the measure before us we should clearly understand what those four classes were. We should also recognize the importance of maintaining the integrity of the unemployment insurance fund which is contributed to mainly by two groups of the Canadian people, the employee and the employer, with a smaller contribution by the people as a whole through the government. It is a fund to which a limited number of Canadian citizens contribute; it is a fund, the integrity of which we wish to see maintained. The time has come when we should carefully examine this situation in the light of this important objective. Progress reported. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Mr. Chevrier: May I inquire what is the business for tomorrow? Mr. Green: Mr. Speaker, tomorrow we shall continue with this measure and then go on with the measure amending the National Housing Act, and then resume the debate on the throne speech. At six o'clock the house adjourned, with out question put, pursuant to standing order. 91 HOUSE OF COMMONS Thursday, May 15, 1958 The house met at 2.30 p.m. INDIAN ACT AMENDMENT TO GIVE INDIANS RIGHT TO VOTE IN FEDERAL ELECTIONS Mr. Frank Howard {Skeena) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-7, to amend the Indian Act. Some hon. Members: Explain. Mr. Howard: The purpose of the bill is to give native Indians the right to vote in federal elections without any infringement on their hereditary or aboriginal rights, and is to be taken in conjunction with the bill standing in my name on the order paper immediately following this one. Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. CANADA ELECTIONS ACT AMENDMENT TO PROTECT VOTING RIGHTS OF INDIANS Mr. Frank Howard {Skeena) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-8, to amend the Canada Elections Act. Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. ST. LA WHENCE SEAWAY REPORTED STATEMENT IN WASHINGTON WITH RESPECT TO TOLLS On the orders of the day: Mr. W. H. McMillan {Welland): Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Yesterday I asked him a question concerning shipping toll charges on the St. Lawrence seaway and he replied as set out in yesterday's Hansard at page 65. While he was replying to my question the president of the St. Lawrence seaway development corporation in Washington made the statement that tolls on the sea way had in effect been agreed upon and would be made public on July 1. May I ask the minister why he was not aware of this decision, and why decisions of this kind must always emanate from Washington? Hon. George H. Hees {Minister of Transport): Mr. Speaker, the decision on tolls is a joint one .between Canada and the United States. It has been studied jointly by the tolls committees of both countries. To my knowledge the discussions are still proceeding, no firm decision has been reached and the statement I made yesterday is cor rect. POWER COLUMBIA RIVER-REPORTED STATEMENT BY MINISTER OF PUBLIC WORKS On the orders of the day: Mr. H. W. Herridge {Kootenay West>: Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, and I do so because I am unable to see through the greenery. In view of the fact that the Minister of Public Works, when addressing the 41st annual meeting of the British Columbia division of the Canadian Manufacturers' Association at Vancouver on April 29, is reported as saying: It won't be long, I hope, before we'll be starting on the Columbia, a billion dollar project, and my hope is based on the trend- -would the minister inform the house of the developments in these negotiations which give cause for hope, and also give the house a definitive explanation of the word "trend" as used by the Minister of Public Works in his statement? Hon. Alvin Hamilton {Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources): Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Kootenay West for giving me notice of his question. I am not altogether clear from the question as to the negotiations to which he refers, but I think he probably means nego tiations with the government of British Co lumbia or the United States government or through the international joint commission. I would suggest that it would be well if we left a statement in this regard for a few weeks until certain developments are com pleted, at which time I could give the house a much more thorough statement than I could make at the present time. As to the reference to the word "hope", we all know the Minister of Public Works is an optimist and I am very glad to share that optimism with him. I, too, am very hope ful that things will be progressing on the Columbia river. As for a definitive explana tion of the word "trend", I am not sure 92 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry whether my hon. friend has reference to trends in national development or whether he refers to political trends. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS ALLEGED U.S. MEMORANDUM CONCERNING THE LATE E. HERBERT NORMAN On the orders of the day: Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Has the minister's attention been drawn to the report in this morning's Globe and Mail and Gazette that the central intelligence agency of the United States alleges it has a memorandum quoting the late E. Herbert Norman as saying that he feared he would be called before a royal commission and would have to implicate 60 or 70 others? If so, could the minister inform this house whether such a proposal for a royal commis sion was considered by the government, or whether the appointment of a royal commis sion is now being considered to clarify the situation from the Canadian viewpoint? Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I will take that question as notice. TRANSPORT ATLANTIC PROVINCES-PROGRESS OF STUDY OF TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS On the orders of the day: Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester): Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minis ter of Transport. Is the minister in a posi tion to advise if the bureau of transportation economics operating within his department has now completed its study undertaken last year regarding transportation problems in the Atlantic region and, if so, when we may expect a report on its findings? Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport): No, Mr. Speaker, that study has not been completed. FINANCE REQUEST FOR INCREASED FEDERAL AID TO MUNICIPALITIES On the orders of the day: Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-Coquitlam): Mr. Speaker, acting upon the advice of the Minister of Finance I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. As the municipalities in Canada are at the present time preparing their budgets and mailing tax notices, is he in a position to elaborate on his reported pledge to call an informal federal-municipal conference in 1958, and [Mr. Hamilton (Qu'Appelle).] also to indicate whether some increased aid to municipalities may be available in 1958? Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, the government is in the position at the moment of being unable to answer either of those questions definitely. LABOUR CONDITIONS NEWFOUNDLAND--CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVE MENT OF PICNIC AREAS TO PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT On the orders of the day: Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Bonavista-Twillin gatel: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could direct a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources purS'Uant to the very welcome assurance he gave in the last parlia ment that the government would give consideration to extending the time for com pletion of the work on picnic sites in New foundland, which is providing badly needed employment and which got started very late because of the condition of the roads. I can assure the minister that such a step would be very welcome. Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources): Mr. Speaker, I welcome the hon. member's question. This is a matter which, I think, we have been considering and when a decision has been made there will be an announcement in the house. Mr. Pickersgill: I thank the minister. COMBINES INVESTIGATION ACT PULPWOOD--REQUEST FOR ACTION ON REPORT On the orders of the day: Mr. Rodolphe Leduc (Gatineaul: Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Justice. Is the minister going to take any action against the 19 companies which have been found guilty of fixing the price of pulpwood bought from farmers and settlers in eastern Canada, according to the report of the investigation under the Combines Investigation Act published on April 29, 1958? (Translation): Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Justice): Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for giving me notice of his question. As it was drafted in French, I might perhaps answer in the same language. The report was received on March 31 and published on April 29. The department is now choosing a legal adviser to whom the matter will be submitted. MAY 15, 1958 93 BRIDGES MONTREAL-INQUIRY AS TO NAME FOR NEW BRIDGE (Text): On the orders of the day: Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier): Since the Minister of Justice has replied in French to a question asked in English, perhaps I can reverse the roles now. (Translation): I want to ask the Minister of Transport a question. Has the hon. member received representations from the Montreal chamber of commerce with regard to the choice of a name for the new bridge connecting Montreal island with Nuns' island? Would the hon. minister also give serious thought to giving this bridge a name that would be associated with the French-Canadian history of the city of Montreal? Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trans• por:t): Mr. Speaker, I shall be very pleased to consider the question. (Text): POST AL SERVICE KITIMAT, B.C.-REQUEST FOR LETTER CARRIER DELIVERY On the orders of the day: Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Postmaster General. Has any report been received as a result of the recent investiga tion into the possibility of instituting a letter carrier mail service in Kitimat and, if so, what recommendations are contained in the report and what action is planned to insti tute such a service? Mr. Speaker: Order. If we begin to ask the Postmaster General about arrangements for letter carrier service in each of the constituencies I think we could occupy our selves indefinitely. The question is undoubt edly one of importance in the hon. mem ber's constituency, but it seems to me it would be equally well dealt with on the order paper, and I suggest that it be put there. NATIONAL DEFENCE CAPE BRETON NAVAL BASE-STATEMENT ON LAY-OFF OF CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES On the orders of the day: Hon. G. R. Pearkes (Minister of National Defence): Mr. Speaker, yesterday during my absence the hon. member for Niagara Falls asked a question regarding the employment of civilian employees at Point Edward naval Inquiries of the Ministry base near Sydney, Nova Scotia. As hon. members will know, this base has been used as the home base of the reserve fleet of the Royal Canadian Navy for a number of years. Owing to the present policy of having as many ships as possible in commission the number of vessels in reserve has been re duced. This year some ten Bangor type escort vessels were reconditioned for transfer to the Turkish navy. In order to accom plish this reconditioning in time 113 casual employees were taken on strength. It is expected that the last of these vessels will be handed over to the Turkish navy before the end of this month, as the Turkish crews are already in Sydney; therefore the work load in Sydney naval base will be reduced. We appreciate that it is difficult for men to obtain other employment there, and a committee has been set up consisting of rep resentatives of the Department of National Defence, the national employment service and the civil service commission to try to find alternative employment for these men. In addition there is a reconditioning program at the base starting at the end of this month, and a further examination is being made to see whether some more permanent operation may be established at that base by the reallocating of naval services from elsewhere. Everything possible is being done in order to find employment for the men who are now at the base. There have been no discharges made, and none will be made before the end of this month. THE CANADIAN ECONOMY GORDON COMMISSION-REQUEST FOR COPY OF REPORT On the orders of the day: Mr. Maurice Bourget (Levis): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. Can the minister inform the house if a copy of the Gordon commission report and studies will be made available to hon. members of the House of Commons? Hon. Donald M. Fleming (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, it is my understand ing that one copy will be available to every hon. member on request through the distribu tion office. SHIPPING COASTAL TRADE-INQUIRY AS TO REPORT OF ROYAL COMMISSION On the orders of the day: Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier): Mr. Speaker, may I reiterate a question which I asked the Prime Minister yesterday in his absence. When may the house expect the report of the royal commission on coastal shipping? 94 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, I just noticed that the question had been asked as I looked over Hansard a moment ago. I will com municate with the chairman of the commis sion with a view to ascertaining when the report may be expected to be filed with the appropriate minister, and when it is it will be tabled in the house. AGRICULTURE PULPWOOD-INQUIRY AS TO METHOD OF SETTING FLOOR PRICE On the orders of the day: Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Can the minister tell us whether the floor price for pulpwood, when established, will be on a regional or a national basis? Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agricul ture): Mr. Speaker, I think it would be inappropriate for me to try to make any statement along that line anticipating the advice that the advisory committee may give, or the advice which the stabilization board may give. PUBLIC BUILDINGS SUDBURY, ONT.--OPENING OF NEW FEDERAL BUILDING On the orders of the day: Mr. D. R. Mitchell (Sudbury): Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. When may we expect the official opening of the new federal building in Sudbury and its occupancy by the post office and other government departments? Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works): Mr. Speaker, I will have to find the answer to that question: I am unaware of it. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FOR EXTENSION OF SEASONAL BENEFITS The house resumed, from Wednesday, May 14, consideration in committee of the follow ing resolution-Mr. Starr-Mr. Sevigny in the chair: That it is expedient to introduce a measure to provide for the temporary extension of the seasonal benefit periods under the Unemployment Insurance Act for a six weeks period, from May 18, 1958, to June 28, 1958. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Mr. Chairman, under the rules of the house I have but a few moments left at my disposal. However, I propose at some later date, either during the resolution stage or when we are discussing [Mr. Chevrier.] the bill, to make further observations in connection with this matter. But, taking advantage of the few moments that remain, I should like to go back to the emphasis I placed yesterday upon the severity of the unemployment problem which now confronts Canada. Possibly in this connection the committee would be interested in the April issue of the Canadian Statistical Review which has just come out today and which contains some very interesting statistical observations. It has to do with the percentage of people without jobs and seeking work in Canada. It shows that in January of 1958 the per centage figure was 201; in February of 1958, 202; and in March of 1958, 213. The index of 100 is based on 1956, which was the last full year of the last Liberal administration. It is of the greatest interest that the figures published earlier, before revision, were as follows: January, 195; February, 196. The March figure shown above, namely 213, is a preliminary figure and it may well be higher than 213 when the revised figures are avail able later this month. Therefore, on the basis of this revision, the government is confronted with a very serious situation which will not in any way be obviated or minimized by the a::surance of the Prime Minister that all is well and that the bottom has been reached. The evidence is that that is not so, and on this government rests the responsibility of meeting the mandate which was given to it by the people of Canada, based upon the assurances of the leader of the government himself that this problem would be resolved courageously. We have no program put forward by this government consistent with those assurances. The day before yesterday the Prime Minister said that the measure now before us would resolve this problem of unemployment. I dealt with this situation yesterday but I repeat that this particular measure, welcome as it is to the extent that it goes, in no way resolves in any particular the problem of unemployment, the statement of the Prime Minister to the contrary notwithstanding. In spite of what has been said by the Min ister about the cost, the amendment will fall far short of meeting the need. It will do no more than allow supplementary benefit claimants who are on claim as of May 17 to continue after that date as long as their respective entitlements will permit. Many claimants will exhaust their benefit periods during the week of May 17. Some others may get an additional week, as the minister indicated yesterday, still others two weeks and so on. But it should be clearly under stood that those claimants whose benefit MAY ,15, 1958 95 periods terminated at any time prior to May 17 will receive nothing even though they may continue to be unemployed. That situation is a by-product of this meas ure, and I think the house and the country should know that the measure before the house does not go as far as the generaliza tions in the speech from the throne suggested on Monday last. I say to the minister that his figure of 200,000 persons who will benefit in part from this measure is undoubtedly a correct statement, if he says so, and what he says I accept readily; but I suggest to him that in order to give stuff to that statement we should know what "in part" means. What percentage of the 200,000 will receive the full amount during the period of six weeks? That may not be easy for my hon. friend to give, but in the absence of that reply the 200,000 figure must stand with obvious limitations. At a later time I hope to indicate that I think the government has a responsibility to do more in this particular measure. That opportunity will come, but my closing words at this stage--! am sure the Minister of Labour will be the first to acknowledge what I am saying-is that this is not an unemploy ment measure but a relief measure. To the extent that it covers and gives assistance to those in need it will be welcomed on all sides of the house, but by no means, by no stretch of the imagination, can it be con cluded that this measure goes as far as earlier indications seemed to suggest. Mr. Marlin (Timmins): Mr. Chairman, first may I say that this measure, limited as it may be, is certainly welcomed by both myself and my colleagues with whom I am proud to be associated. It seems that the history of this country has always been that every winter we have seasonal unemploy ment. That, I believe, was the basis on which the unemployment insurance fund was first established. In recent years, in fact three times since world war II, we have had quite severe recessions. Unfortunately the reces sion we are having at the present time has all the earmarks of that strictly forbidden word "depression". In fact I believe that only in one year during the 1930's, if even then, was the situation as serious or any more serious than it is today. The hon. member for Essex East is a rather difficult man to follow because he has touched on almost every point that one might wish to bring up, but I think it will bear repeti tion that the measure before the house at the present time certainly does not solve the problem of unemployment. In all probability it is not intended to do that. I should also like to stress the fact Unemployment Insurance that it would be regrettable if wrong im pressions should be created across our coun try by the way this measure was brought in and possibly the measure of publicity it re ceived at that time. It could possibly create the misunderstandings that unfortunately were created when a similar measure was brought in during last session. I have met many people, and possibly other hon. mem bers have also done so, who had the im pression that they would qualify for benefits under the amendment made during the last session, but unfortunately when they applied for those benefits they found to their sorrow that they were not eligible. Welcome as it is, this measure is nothing more or less than one extending payments for certain classes of unemployed. There is no provision for the unemployed without suf ficient contributions. There is no provision for many of the unemployed whose benefits have already run out. I should like to know whether the government hopes to bring in before too long some measure to alleviate the condition of these classes I have men tioned. It is fine to help the ones this legis lation will help, but what about the ones it does not touch? I am hopeful that further measures may be brought in at a later date in order to deal with those persons. The Minister of Labour yesterday quoted a few figures. He said he hoped this legisla tion would benefit roughly 200,000 of our unemployed and that it would benefit them to the extent of $14 million. A matter of simple arithmetic tells us that the calcula tion works out at an average of $70 each for the 200,000 people. Spread over a six week period it works out at $11.66 per week. I am sure all hon. members will realize that with today's prices, $11.66 per week is not going to keep too many wolves from the door. There is one other aspect of this measure about which I should like to have more in formation. It is not clear to me yet where this additional money is coming from. It has not been explained, at least to my under standing, whether this money is to be paid from the unemployment insurance fund or from the consolidated revenue fund. My un derstanding of the unemployment insurance fund is that it is based, dollar for dollar, on the contributions of the employer and the employee, with the federal government con tributing 20 per cent of that total. I also believe that was the basis of the formula to meet the normal needs of seasonal unemployment. Mr. Martin (Essex East): That is right; take the case of Newfoundland. 96 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance Mr. Martin (Timmins): I cannot help wondering whether, if these additional or extended benefits are charged to the unem ployment insurance fund, it will not tend to upset the apple cart. I know the minister mentioned yesterday that the fund was still in a fairly robust condition, but we also realize that it is possibly not as robust as it was a year ago. If this unemployment stiuation does not change, as we all hope it will, in a few months we could be in for serious difficulty. I maintain, Mr. Chairman, that this should definitely be treated as an emergency amend ment. This is not normal unemployment as we have known it in the past. An emergency measure should not be charged to a normal fund. It should be handled out of the consol idated revenue fund. It should not be handled by the relatively small numbers ,of insured people in this country. The emergency should be met by the people of Canada as a whole. During the remarks he made yesterday my friend the hon. member tor Essex East made reference to another matter which could be possibly of considerable benefit at this time, namely the abolition of the automobile tax. I might remind my hon. friend and other members of this house that we had in the last house a measure dealing with the reduction of the automobile tax and, if my memory does not fail me, I believe most of his colleagues voted against that measure. I am glad to see the change of heart. I should like to return now, Mr. Chairman, to this matter of the unemployed in this country who will not benefit from this measure. At the present time they are forced to fall back on the resources of their munici palities. I fail to see where the municipalities at the present time are any more able to meet this situation than is the federal govern ment. The resources at their disposal certainly are not anything to be compared with the resources at the disposal of the federal government. I believe this matter is something that should be taken under consideration. The only hope, as far as the municipalities are concerned, is not that they are going to get any assistance but that at least their situation will not get worse with regard to those who will be able to benefit from this measure at least for another six weeks. I hope the government will take these matters under consideration and make the necessary moves to alleviate the situation both of the unemployed and of the munici palities in which they reside. Mr. Carter: This legislation will be general ly welcomed in my province where unem ployment has reached unprecedented proportions and where, because of a curtail ment in the woods operations and reduction of [Mr. Martin (Essex East).] employment on the United States bases, the prospects for employment are poorer than they have been at any time since confeder ation. When the minister was speaking to his resolution he stressed the fact that the present formula will be used in relation to this extension. In that connection there are one or two questions which I should like to ask him, because I think they have an important bearing on the amount of benefit a person may receive from this legislation. As reported at page 85 of Hansard the minister himself quoted certain examples. Among them he stressed the point that this legislation would enable people to benefit who became entitled on the 17th day of May. If we follow the present formula, a person gets five weeks' benefit for six weeks' stamps, and he must have 15 stamps to quality. That means that the minimum entitlement that a person who is qualified can get is about 12 or 13 weeks. This extension will enable him to receive six or possibly seven weeks of his entitlement. The first question I want to ask the minister is what happens to the balance of his entitle ment, the remaining six or seven weeks during which he cannot benefit under this extension. Will it be possible for him to carry over that entitlement into another benefit period? The second question I would like to ask the minister is, what about those people whose regular benefits run out during those six or seven weeks, in other words whose regular benefits would run over into the extension period? Will they also carry on and take advantage of this extension right up to the end of June? Mr. Peiers: Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the minister for having extended this benefit period, and I am very pleased to know that the benefits may apply to 200,000 people and give a benefit of $14 million. In my area we have a serious unemploy ment problem, and the situation very much hinges on the problem of seasonal employ ment. During the past year the period during which our workers have been able to work in sawmills has been curtailed owing to lack of sales and in most cases they are no longer eligible, because of the short sawing season, for regular benefits. They have there fore depended for some time on seasonal benefits. I was very perturbed to find that after the last extension of seasonal benefits, when the period was advanced by one month and an additional month was added to the end of the period, these people were no longer eligible to draw seasonal benefits for the length of the benefit period. MAY 15, 1958 97 I agree that if 200,000 people are eligible then we have done something, but I was certainly under the impression, as I think were many of my constituents as well as many of those people in other areas who were accustomed to drawing seasonal benefits, that if we extend the seasonal benefits we will be giving to those people who are sea sonally unemployed the advantage of these benefits. There has been a great deal said right across the country with respect to a standing seasonal benefit taking care of the unemployed on this basis. I think we should possibly consider the matter of again providing supplementary benefits and, if necessary, changing the basis of contribution so we can cover, on a sup plementary basis, these people who are seasonally unemployed for the full length of time during which they are entitled to benefits. The minister has said this is an emergency measure, and I feel that some consideration could be given to the fact that we could take additional money-the $14 million or probably a considerably larger sum-out of the consolidated revenue and put it into a supplementary benefit for the seasonally un employed. If we did this we would not be hurting the unemployment insurance fund for years to come. I say this because, although the minister has said this is a temporary measure, I am quite sure if a similar situa tion arises next year there will be a great deal of pressure and considerable weight in the argument that the arrangement should be carried forward once again. I think some consideration should also be given to changing the arrangements now in effect on the basis of the contributions. I am of course aware that this matter could better be discussed at various stages of the bill, but I do think some consideration should be given to industries such as the lumber and the automobile industries where lay-offs have taken place seasonally over the years and people have become more and more dependent upon what we consider to be seasonal bene fits. Now, because of other curtailments, their periods of employment have decreased and their need for benefits has correspondingly increased. If a person went on seasonal benefits-and many in the lumber industry in my area did go on seasonal benefits in the first week of December-then they are no longer eligible and will no longer be eligible under this amendment. In fact they have not been eligible for seasonal benefits since some time in early March. I think the impression has certainly been given to many people across Canada that the changes which were going 57071-3-7 Unemployment Insurance to be made would be much more generous than they have been, and would cover those who are no longer qualified for seasonal bene fits in the regular way. If we now put into effect a supplementary benefit period, that would allow those people who for several weeks or months have been excluded from seasonal benefits to draw some assistance. There is, of course, a method which could be used to assure them seasonal benefits at the present time. That method is provided for under the public assistance legislation, which of course goes into the matter of municipal assistance. I am aware that many, or at least some, of the unemployment offices have forms under that particular legislation, and these offices help the claimants who are no longer able to qualify for seasonal benefits to fill out these forms and they send them down to the town hall, after which the federal, provincial and municipal governments review the situation from the point of view of public welfare. I am one of those who have paid into the unemployment insurance fund from the date it commenced, and I am sure that many of us who have never had and will never have an opportunity to draw benefits are benevolent enough to wish to see some change made so these people-and particularly the munici palities, who are ill-equipped to handle even minor expenditures on such a welfare basis may be helped by taking some of the money from the general revenues and having it given to the commission to enable them to carry on with supplementary benefits for this period as requested by the minister. That could be carried out on a supplementary basis, in addition to the seasonal benefits, for those who have now exhausted their seasonal benefits. Mr. Winch: Mr. Chairman, as far as this measure goes it will, of course, receive the unanimous support of all hon. members. However, I want to be quite blunt and say I am very disappointed in what the Minister of Labour apparently believes is the necessary emergency measure at this time as an answer to unemployment in Canada when the seasonal benefits, as they are called, are running out. When I think back to only a few weeks ago and remember how the hearts of the Con servative candidates bled for the unemployed of Canada; when I remember their platitu dinous statements about what they would do for the unemployed immediately the House of Commons was called, should they be elected to power; and when I read the terms of this emergency measure as far as financial aid is concerned, I am unable to reconcile 98 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance those bleeding hearts before the election with the action taken by the Conservative govern ment after the election. I think we all fully understand that unem ployment is the measure or the scale of our economic trouble. There can be no question but that Canada faces a serious unemploy ment situation and, in consequence, major difficulties both for the country generally and for the unemployed in particular. Our unem ployment situation can be broken down into two categories. I believe that a little less than 40 per cent of our working force are not covered by any unemployment insurance provisions whatsoever, and I cannot help but wonder just what thought, if any, the gov ernment has given to how that part of this 40 per cent who are unemployed are getting by today. However, the resolution before us does not deal with this 40 per cent of our labour force which is not covered by unemployment in surance. It deals, in part, with the just over 60 per cent who do come within the provi sions of the act, of which group many hun dreds of thousands are today unemployed. These people have run out of both regular benefits and seasonal benefits, or are about to do so. In an effort to take care of the situation to some extent the Minister of Labour introduced this motion, and we congratulate him on having done so. But while congratulating him on the distance he has come we should like very much to know why he has not considered the emergency in all its aspects, and taken the opportunity afforded by this resolution and the proposed bill to take action to guar antee at least a semblance of a standard of living so as to afford the basic require ments of life to all who come within the provisions of the act. Even with the provi sions which have now been introduced many will not be able to carry on unless they can get work. I find it difficult to understand the thinking of the government and the minister with regard to this matter. First of all we are told that this is a temporary extension of the seasonal benefit period. It wi1'1 close on June 28 of this year. The minister obviously must realize that there will be many who will not have employment by June 28, nor will they be in receipt of benefits. But the fact that he uses the expression "temporary" can mean only one thing; that he is either fooling himself or that he is trying to fool this house and the public in general, because if he has the fantastic idea that there will be a return to economic and employment normalcy by June 28 he has another guess coming. I wish he were correct. I wish it were not necessary to have an extension of the benefit [Mr. Winch.] period. But if we are going to be honest with ourselves-and I think as newly elected mem bers we should be honest-we must recognize that there is nothing temporary about the unemployment situation in Canada. It appears, therefore, that under the prin ciples of this resolution the Minister of Labour should have had the decency and the courage to face the facts and recognize that it is not only necessary to bring in a change in the Unemployment Insurance Act at this time to extend benefits until June 28, but that the proper thing to do in a civilized country under a responsible government would be to bring in the necessary changes to take care of the unemployed until such time as they can find employment. Must we be faced just prior to June 28 with yet an other amendment to the act? I am afraid this will be the case unless the Minister of Labour decides to allow the unemployed to do without. I wish to register strong objection to the policy of the government. I want to urge the government to face the economic and un employment situation of this country in a realistic way, and give the people an assur ance that satisfactory solutions will be found prior to June 28. I should also like to add to what has already been said by some previous speakers, namely that sym pathetic though the administrators in the various provinces may be, they are governed by regulations made in Ottawa, and because of the way in which these are worded they will not be able to give assistance, even under these provisions, to countless thousands of needy unemployed in our country. In the same way I have questioned the use of the word "temporary". I also question the use of the word "seasonal". The provisions of an act of this House of Commons or o! an amendment thereto should be designed to take care of the unemployed no matter how long they are out of work. I am telling hon. members that a man can be just as hungry on June 29 as he can on June 28; he can be just as hungry in the fall as he can be in the winter, if he is out of a job. I feel that not only in the last parliament but also in this parliament the government is making it completely obvious that it does not understand economics or the needs o! the people of this country. Members of the government do not understand the broad principles which should apply to the care of our people if they are incapacitated, hungry or unemployed at any time of the year, and the sooner recognition of these needs comes about-and I am sorry such recognition is not evident in this measure the better it will be both for the government and for the people. MAY 15, 1958 99 That is the general principle. There is also a particular principle which may not apply in some of the provinces of Canada but which very definitely applies in British Columbia, one of whose constituencies I have the honour to represent. Seasonal unemployment is not based on dates that may be set by the Conservative government. Seasonal un employment is based on the occupation in which you are engaged, and there are various seasons for each of the various occupations. Let us take the fishing industry and lumbering operations as an example. Depend ing on the weather you can be seasonally un employed in the winter but you can also be seasonally unemployed in the summer. Under the concept of the past and apparently under the presently existing concept seasonal un employment is taken not on the basis of the occupation but on the basis of whatever date the government decides to set as the period when the individual can be unemployed and draw extra seasonal benefits. If I correctly interpreted the speech from the throne I understand this is not the last time the Unemployment Insurance Act may be opened during this the first session of the twenty-fourth parliament of Canada. I can only say that we in this group welcome the advance that is being made, but we feel very sad at what is either the lack of knowledge of the present government or its lack of in itiative, in that in the introduction of the emergency measure it did not spread the benefits to cover all emergencies in the labour field as far as unemployment insurance is concerned. I recognize the sincerity of the Minister of Labour; I do not question that one bit. His sincerity leads me to believe that he will as speedily as possible introduce a complete overhaul of the act, bringing in major amend ments; and when he does so I trust he will bring in an increase. I am sorry that none is provided for at this time. I feel confident that the ready acceptance that will be given the present change by all parties in this house will lead the minister to introduce the kind of changes to which I have referred. I was in Winnipeg when the Prime Minister addressed the second national convention of the Canadian Congress of Labour. I sat in the auditorium as he spoke and I heard him waxing as only he can wax-and I mean "waxing" in more than one way- eloquently and telling the people of Canada to spend, spend, spend. I can still picture him as he stood there telling the people to spend. There are a few hundred thousand people in our country who do not have money to spend, and there are also a few hundred thousand 57071-3-71 Unemployment Insurance who are dependent on unemployment in surance. They would like to spend, but the maximum they can get is $32 a week. Mr. Chairman, I would like you to attempt to buy a house or rent an apartment in the city of Vancouver, for instance, and learn what the monthly payments would be. In many cases you would be required to pay anywhere from $85 to $140 a month. If you are unemployed and eligible for unemploy ment insurance you can receive a maximum of $32 a week. Thousands of families in my city find this amount barely adequate to pay their rent, their mortgage and bank payments and their taxes. There is little enough left over for food and clothing. And the Prime Minister asks them to spend. It is easy enough for us in this house to get by, earning as we do between $10,000 and $37,000 a year, but the working class man who is buying a home and who unfortunately through no fault of his own is unemployed finds it difficult to provide for his family on unemployment insurance. I think it is the epitome of outright, damnable hypocrisy to go out, as the first minister of Canada did, and tell the people to spend, spend, spend and in that way work our way out of our present problems. The government is now going to do some spending, which is fine and dandy; but it should give the many people on unemploy ment insurance a little more money to spend which would help them to restore the economic balance and give them something more than the amount of money required to meet their basic rent and mortgage payments. I suppose it is useless to ask that an in crease in unemployment insurance payments be granted today, but I hope this will be considered by the minister and speedily acted upon. I feel quite strongly about this. I feel I understand the problems of those who are unemployed, because I see them almost every day in my home constituency. I also met those who were not eligible for unem ployment insurance because of technicalities in the regulations governing the administra tion of the act. I welcome the present measure and will most certainly support it. I thank the min ister for having gone as far as he did, and I hope he will take the opportunity in the not too distant future to correct his present mistake in not bringing in major amendments to the act and an increase in the benefits payable thereunder. Mr. Herridge: Mr. Chairman, I want to take this opportunity of congratulating the Prime Minister on what I consider is his great personal achievement in securing his 100 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance election as such. I am sure that great num bers of Canadians were very much influenced, I trust temporarily, by his Lincolnesque vo cabulary, his persuasive though somewhat ecclesiastical manner and his Shakespearean sense of the value of dramatics, phonetics and cosmetics. I am sure we all agree that without any doubt the Prime Minister pro vides a brilliant political facade to the economic deficiencies of modern capitalistic society. That is the way we in this group look at it, Mr. Chairman. However, I am somewhat inclined to think that the Prime Minister's eminence is somewhat overemphasized by the flatness of some of the landscape around him. Nevertheless, in our opinion, regardless of his wishes and best intentions-and I give him all credit for good wishes and good in tentions-he cannot under this system avoid being to some extent a political flockmaster for the economic barons of St. James and Bay streets. I hasten to say, however, that we all wish him well in what he does to offer us palliatives to partially remedy the evils of our present day capitalist society. We in this group look upon this present measure as a palliative which will provide minor relief to a minority of the unemployed in Canada at this time. I am not going to speak at length on this subject, because other speakers in our group have advanced our point of view. However, before going on to my other few remarks, I cannot resist men tioning at this stage an editorial which appeared in the Trail Daily Times of March 8, 1958, a Conservative newspaper owned by the family of the Minister of Public Works, in which unemployment and the unemployed are dealt with. Mr. Green: It is not owned by me. Mr. Herridge: I should explain in fairness that it is owned by a nephew of the hon. gentleman, if I am correct in my understand ing, but in any event having some family association. In this editorial there is some criticism of the unemployed and reference is made to about one-third of the unemployed in Canada lacking initiative. The editorial says in part: Unhappily, theirs is what appears to be a grow Ing attitude among people today-the attitude that Canada owes its sons a living, and its older sons a pension. Surely Canada, with all her natural re sources, owes a living to anyone who is willing to work; certainly she owes the older citizens a pension. However, after berating the unemployed and then berating the party to which I belong and berating the present member for Kootenay West, the [Mr. Herridge.] writer puts in this article facsimiles of ad vertisements of job opportunities in Canada. Then he goes on to say that if people will only buy there will be lots of employment. The job opportunities which he advertises in this editorial created a great deal of interest in my district. These are the ad vertisements for salesmen for garter belts, girdles, brassieres, real estate, Watkins products, unique promotion plan, door to door salesmen of other products. This is published in this paper, indicating the thousands of job opportunities that are avail able for the unemployed in Canada who will only show initiative. You know, Mr. Chair man, it reminds me of the Tory attitude years ago. I can see that the Minister of National Defence is not agreeing with me. I am sure many members of the Con servative party would not agree with this. I remember reading the records of the House of Lords on one occasion. The House of Lords was dealing with an education act to provide free education for a larger number of people in Great Britain. This noble lord rose in the House of Lords. He was a very well known Tory with a record of great service to the empire and common wealth. He said, "After 50 years of service to the empire and commonwealth and 50 years of interest in public education, and after witnessing the expenditure of a vast amowit of money on public education, I and one of my associates have come to the conclusion that all we have succeeded in doing is lowering the level of the vulgar writing on the toilet walls about 12 inches." That is about the attitude of some people toward the unemployment question. I give credit to the sincerity of those who bring this measure forward but we in this group believe these remedies are quite insufficient. They are temporary; they will improve things in some instances, but we simply are not approaching this question in a realistic manner. The government suggests a national de velopment and public works program. We have supported that because we need public development and public works; we need to put as many people to work as possible. That presents a limited scope from the point of view of sound economics and from the point of view of employing the largest number of people at this time. We in this group say that what causes our unemploy ment is simply surplus production which is not being sold at home or abroad. There is the whole basis of the reason for our unemployment at the present time. Here we have surplus wheat, surplus lumber, surplus metal, surplus fish. In our opinion the only sound remedy is a planned economic system MAY 15, 1958 101 that provides for a sound expansion of our overseas trade. I am not suggesting this can be done overnight, or that it is a simple matter. On the other side of the world in Asia we have almost unnumbered millions suffering from the deficiencies of industrial production, food production and things of that sort. I might say that while we support every effort to expand our markets in Britain and in Europe, this- is a very well harrowed and ancient field which offers limited opportu nities for the expansion of our markets for industrial and agricultural products. We wish the government well in what they can do in that direction, but it presents a very limited field. We say the markets in Asia present a great opportunity for us to do something within the reasonable future to remedy our unemployment situation and accept our responsibilities to some extent for international welfare and the welfare of other people. We recognize the difficulties in this respect. It is not as easy to deal with these people as it is to deal with people who have sound currencies. We have not made an attempt in this direction. We know certain things can be sold for sound currencies, dol lars, but they are in limited amounts. We say, as I have said before, we should first of all recognize these countries because they have certain sovereign pride and things of that sort, and you cannot deal effectively with people until you recognize them. It is not sufficient to send trade ambassadors up the back stairs and not recognize them officially if they get into trouble. We should recognize China so we could have an ambassador there, with consuls and commissioners. I read a statement about five weeks ago in which Mr. Mcivor, the former chairman of the Canadian wheat board, said that if we could obtain the Chinese market our wheat surplus would disappear almost overnight. There are three or four possibilities there. We believe there should be a recognition of those countries. We should do everything possible to expand our markets in Asia to relieve our unemployment. We should accept local currencies and have those currencies reinvested in local development, something after the fashion of the Colombo plan, and so on. People say we cannot afford that. Is it better to afford that than to have 500,000 or 600,000 unemployed and idle people in Canada. We have calculated that if those people were all employed, if our farmers were producing at full blast and all the working people employed in this country, they would be paying income tax. The present Unemployment Insurance unemployment is causing a loss to the Cana dian people of somewhere between $350 million and $500 million in income tax. Is it not better to keep our farmers producing and paying income tax, and to keep our workers producing and paying income tax, and to use the surplus income tax we receive from this source and add it to what we have to stimulate markets in Asia along the lines I have suggested? We in this group believe there is no other solution for the planning of our marketing. We should accept our responsibilities to the people of Asia, the underprivileged and under developed countries of the world. We should sell our surpluses to them on a long-term credit basis and accept their currencies and reinvest them for their industrial and agri cultural development. At the same time we should accept our responsibilities to the farmers and to the unemployed of this country. We believe that is the sort of plan that is essential if we are to commence to solve this recurring disease of capitalism, namely unemployment, which faces us at the present time. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I do want to say that we support this measure and we support all the other measures. I am not for a moment questioning the hon. gentle men's integrity or their intentions or their best wishes, but we do want to emphasize the fact that they fail to realize that we are living in a rapidly changing world where, if we do not accept new principles, probably of a mixed economy, and a new basis for a trad ing relationship with Asia, we shall continue to have unemployment and we shall continue to suffer the disabilities of our national development that are related to it. That is all I have to say, Mr. Chairman. (Translation): Mr. Leduc: Mr. Chairman, I wish to make a few brief remarks concerning this bill. In the first place, I wish to congratulate the minister for having brought in this amendment, just as I did when he introduced one last November. This November amend ment was such as to bring help to a large number of seasonal unemployed, as the amendment proposed by the minister at this time will certainly contribute much along the same lines. However it will not solve the problem of unemployment in my constituency nor anywhere else in the country as a whole. What we are voting at this time is nothing more than direct relief, such as was experi enced under the Bennett regime, with this difference that between 1930 and 1935 direct 102 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance relief was afforded to all unemployed who needed it whereas under the terms of the proposed legislation relief will only be given to those who qualify tor seasonal benefits under the unemployment insurance act regu lations. Now in my constituency as in the rest of this country there are a certain number of people who will receive no benefit whatever from the proposed amendment. The other day I heard the Prime Min ister (Mr. Diefenbaker) announce that there would be implemented in this country a program of public works designed to relieve unemployment. I have noted that among those that were listed, very few could directly solve the problem of unemploy ment in my constituency. I would like the house to know that in my constituency, as in a number of others in the province of Quebec, most of the unemployed are bush workers, farm workers and workers in certain types of industry. The unemployment problem is more serious in the province of Quebec than in other provinces of this country. There are more unemployed in Quebec, in proportion to the population, than in the other provinces of Canada, a fact which is mainly attributable to a slowdown in the pulp and paper industry. The measure brought down by the government, that is the program of public works announced by the Prime Min ister, will not solve the problem of unemploy ment in my constituency. My constituency is served by three unemployment insurance offices. The south ern half is served by the Hull unemployment insurance office, the Lievre valley area by the Buckingham office and the northern part of the constituency, extending from Grace field north of Maniwaki, by the local office at the latter point. It is only from the Mani waki office that I can obtain exact figu~es with regard to the number of unemployed, since those who live in the southern part of my constituency and in the Lievre valley area are served by the Hull and Buckingham offices, which also look after the unemployed from other constituencies. I would like to bring to the minister's attention the fact that last week there were still more than 2,000 unemployed receiving unemployment benefits from the Maniwaki office alone. In my constituency, there are over 3,000 persons receiving unemployment benefits at the present time and I should like to point out to the minister- Mr. Martin (Essex East): How many? [Mr. Leduc.] Mr. Leduc: More than 2,000 jobless come under the Maniwaki office. I should like to point out to the minister that, according to the officers in the unemployment insurance office in Maniwaki, there is in the northern part of my constituency, that is to say from Gracefield northward, a labour or workinli! force of 3,500 or 3,600 coming under the Maniwaki office and that at the present time more than 2,000 of them are jobless. This means that over 60 per cent of the working population of the northern part of the con stituency is jobless and I am convinced that, by June 28 next, there will still be over a thousand workers without jobs unless the government undertakes some public works in my constituency. So it is my duty to suggest to the govern ment some public works which could be of assistance in solving the problem and in giving jobs to these unemployed. If the federal government could come to an agreement with the government of the province of Quebec or with municipal coun cils, it would be very easy to undertake road construction work as well as sewerage and water service works in some municipalities. Moreover, the Gatineau park, which is a federal undertaking, is in my constituency. All the government would have to do would be to grant a few extra million dollars to the Federal District Commission. Then, the commission could undertake to complete the park, which is part of the national capital plan. In Aylmer, last year, the municipality donated a beach to the Federal District Com mission on the condition that a park and a public beach be set up there. Well, if the Federal District Commission had the funds required, it could undertake such works immediately. Other works which would be of ass:stance to the unemployed could also be undertaken in my constituency. You must not think, Mr. Chairman, that the build ing of highways into the Yukon, of a railway leading to the Great Slave Lake, an im portant extension of our airports and their equipment, as well as an intensification of harbour works, will solve the problem of unemployment. On the contrary this will help but a small proportion of the unem ployed, not only of my constituency but of all constituencies in the province of Quebec and other provinces. If the government really intends to solve the unemployment problem, to give jobs to the jobless, I urge it to undertake such useful public works in the various constituencies of the province and of the country. MAY 15, 1958 103 Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a suggestion which could very well be the sub ject of an amendment to the Unemployment Insurance Act. In my constituency as else where, many people cannot get unemploy ment insurance benefits; I refer to farm hands. At the present time, these people do not qualify for benefits and it seems to me that the time has come to amend the Unem ployment Insurance Act so as to cover them since, at present, many farmers cannot hire any unemployed persons, as these people, knowing that no stamps will be affixed to their unemployment insurance booklet, do not wish to work on the farms. This situation is also unfair to farmers' sons who, instead of going to work in industries, remain on the farm to help their father and are thus deprived of un employment insurance benefits. It seems to me that the law should be amended so as to include farm employees. These were the few observations I wished to make. I urge the government to be kind enough to take into consideration the few suggestions I have put forward. In order to bring a real solution to the unemployment problem in the rural parts of the country, the federal government must co-operate with the provincial governments toward the imple mentation of a public works program capable of relieving unemployment. Mr. Robichaud: Mr. Chairman, I can assure you right now that my remarks on the resolu tion before us will be very short. My remarks are prompted by what the hon. Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) had to say yesterday when he proposed the resolu tion now before us, and I quote from page 85 of Hansard of May the 14th: I would like to note that in the five months beginning December 1. 1957, and I think this will answer a question asked in the house earlier, almost $230 million were paid out in unemployment insurance benefits but in spite of these heavy expenditures the unemployment insurance fund had at the end of March a remarkably healthy balance of more than $740 m1llion. We feel that this fund is therefore in a sound position to yield this extra protection which we feel should be provided and thus continue to do the job it was intended to do . Now, Mr. Chairman, we know that on March 31, 1957, the unemployment insurance fund contained $884,800,000 and, according to the minister's statement yesterday, on March 31, 1958, i.e. hardly nine months later, this fund had decreased to $740 million. And judging by the present unemployment situa tion in this country and by the number of Unemployment Insurance unemployed who are receiving, and will con tinue to receive benefits, we may assume that the unemployment insurance fund, which was so sound when the Liberal government re linquished control to the present administra tion on June 22 last, would, on April 30 of the current year, have been reduced to $675 million, and before May 31 will probably have gone down to less than $600 million. And if we may judge by the number of unemployed who I said, will probably con tinue to receive benefits, the unemployment insurance fund will be reduced by 50 % by March 31, 1959. I therefore agree with the previous speaker in saying that this legislation for direct relief is no different from the one passed by the Bennett administration except that, at that time, direct relief was taken from the country's general fund, whereas to-day it is paid out of money put aside by this country's workers. I would like to close my brief remarks by quoting words spoken last Tuesday in Montreal by commissioner R. J. Tallon, who was representing the workers at the Unem ployment Insurance Commission. According to La Presse of May 14, 1958, page 17, Mr. Tallon said: It is unfair that the workers and leaders of industry should be the only ones to assume the cost of assistance to needy citizens. This should be the responsibility of the nation as a whole. Which means of this country's government. (Text): Mr. Pickersgill: There are one or two ques tions that I should like to put to the minister and one or two observations I should like to make about the proposed amendment. Like other hon. members on this side of the house or, perhaps I should say, in this quarter of the house, I reluctantly support this amend ment which is for the purpose of extending the winter into June. I think we should re member that that is its purpose. These sea sonal benefits were established for the pur pose of meeting the seasonal unemployment problem that is inescapable so far owing to our climatic condition in this country. It seems to me that, for a government that is obliged to say that the winter season is being extended into June, it is rather hard to argue that the economic situation in the country at the present time is not a serious one. If the hon. member for St. John's West, the minister without portfolio, were in the house or if the hon. member for St. John's East were in his place, I am quite sure they 104 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance would echo my words that in the province which we represent in this house the unem ployment situation is very serious indeed. I think the minister is well aware that from the nature of things the amount of seasonal unemployment in that province, and perhaps to some degree in all the Atlantic provinces, is rather greater than it is in many other parts of the country. As a consequence, the number of persons capable of receiving these seasonal benefits because they have enough stamps to entitle them to receive the benefits and who are still receiving them at this late date must be very small. In order to give us who represent that part of the country a clear picture of what it is the minister is asking us to do, I feel that when he replies or at some stage before this measure is ,passed he should give us this in formation. Of course, I should like to see the information for every province but I should particularly like to see it for the province of Newfoundland. I should like to know how many persons received seasonal benefits this year since the 1st of December, 1957, how many have already exhausted their benefits and how many are still receiving them. It may well be, as the minister has said- Mr. Starr: In Newfoundland or in all Canada? Mr. Pickersgill: I should like the informa tion for both. In fact, I should very much like to see it for every province; I should like to have it broken down by provinces, but that may be asking a great deal of the min ister. However, I certainly should like to see it for Newfoundland. From the very large amount of correspondence I myself have re ceived-and I know other members from Newfoundland have had a similar experience -it is my impression that the number o! persons whose benefits have expired and have been expiring and who are now having to go on the dole is increasing very rapidly and has been increasing very rapidly ever since early March. There are some of us who were nasty enough to have the suspicion that one of the reasons the government was so anxious to dissolve the last parliament and have the election at the early and unseasonable date at which it was held was precisely that they knew that these seasonal benefits would ex pire and that there would be a great deal more discontent in the country in April than there was in March. registrations in our offices across Canada to the extent of 120,000 in the last month, a more rapid pace than they dropped off last year at the same time, even without seasonal benefits. Mr. Pickersgill: I rather anticipated the minister would say that. Perhaps he would tell us how much of that drop in registra tions consists of fishermen who, of course, would be going back to fish and who would only have been eligible for seasonal benefits in any event; and how many others are in rural parts and who, once their benefits had expired and there is no reasonable pros pect to their getting jobs from the offices, do not consider it worth while to keep their names on the roll? Mr. Starr: If the hon. member would put this question on the order paper I shall be glad to get the information for him. Mr. Pickersgill: The minister who is not a new member of this house and who is asking us to take a rather extraordinary measure- Mr. Starr: A proper measure. Mr. Pickersgill: -in extending seasonal benefits that in a previous regime were re quired only in the winter time into the summer I think should not be telling hon. gentlemen opposite, the small band of people in the opposition, that they can wait for the order paper to get information relating directly to the measure that he is piloting through the house. Mr. Starr: The former government left the people destitute after April 15. Mr. Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, the hon. member has the floor and he has the right to speak. An hon. Member: Don't be so touchy. Mr. Chevrier: I have no intention of sitting down, although my hon. friend who very rarely makes a contribution in this house would like me to do so. I want to protest against the attitude of the minister in the course of this debate. The Chairman: I think the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate realizes that if he takes his seat then the minister can answer his questions. If he does not do so, he is not obliged to answer them. Mr. Starr: If the hon. member would Mr. Pickersgill: I thank the hon. member permit me to do so, I should just like to for Laurier for coming to my defence. I inform him that there has been a drop in must say that I myself would have taken [Mr. Pickersgill.] MAY 15, 1958 105 no exception to the minister's attitude al though I am afraid that it is a rather curious commentary, and not the first one in this very short period we have been here so far, on the attitude of the overwhelming majority. Some hon. Members: Oh, oh. Mr. Pickersgill: First of all, on the very day that the Prime Minister, with his hand on his heart, talked about extending the rights of parliament, an effort was made to prevent the opposition from having its tra ditional right, its fair share in debate. I know you are going to tell me I am out of order, Mr. Chairman, and I recognize the fact that I am. But today we have the min ister doing what I really cannot complain of because I am afraid I have done it oc casionally myself; I refer to interrupting in the middle of sentences in an effort perhaps to disconcert a speaker. However, I am not at all disconcerted. But what I am discon certed about, Mr. Chairman, is the difficulty that there appears to be in appreciating what will be the real effect of this measure. Though I profess to be no expert on the Unemployment Insurance Act, it is very hard for me to conceive that there could be many persons who would have enough stamps left in their books to get seasonal benefits who would not have had enough stamps in their books to get regular benefits. There may be the odd case here and there of so~eone who has had employment through the wmter and who has lost his job in AprH or late in March but who would not yet have exhausted his seasonal benefits. But, as I understand it, the purpose of these seasonal benefits is to give benefit to persons who have not enough stamps to get regular benefits. The government already extended the season by something like eight or nine weeks during the last parliamentary session so it is hard to conceive how it could be possible that in this country where, the government says, em ployment is increasing rapidly, there could still be 200,000 people who could benefit under the proposed extension of this act. I therefore think we ought to know a little more than we do about what it is the govern ment is going to ask us to do and what the real effect of it is going to be before the debate closes. Even if only a few people will benefit it is, of course, a very good thing to do in the circumstances, but I have a suspicion that the number of people who will benefit from this measure is very small. I do know that, in the province of New foundland at the present time-and I know this from correspondence I have received from people in my constituency since the elec tion-that there is an increasing number of 57071-3- 8 Unemployment Insurance persons who have exhausted their unemploy ment insurance benefits and are having to go on relief. This group increases every week. Fortunately in Newfoundland we have a rea sonably well organized system of outdoor relief-rather better than that which exists in some other provinces-but still it is a humiliation for many people to have to go on relief. It is a regrettable necessity and it seems rather a curious commentary on the speech-and I use the word in the singular because it was the same speech-made over and over again by the Prime Minister only a very short while ago. Before we go further in this debate, I think I should perhaps refresh the memories of some hon. gentlemen on the other side of the house with respect to what their leader did say during the election campaign and the kind of appeal that was made and the kind of promise that was given on this question to the people of Canada. I have a reproduction of an article from the Toronto Star on Feb ruary 28 last. The heading of it is, "Let No one Suffer is Diefenbaker's Pledge to Jobless." An hon. Member: Who wrote it? Mr. Pickersgill: It was written by Bruce Macdonald, a very reputable member of the press gallery who accompanied the Prime Minister over a good part of his tour, I believe, and I am sure the Prime Minister would admit he was an accurate correspon dent. If the Prime Minister wants to quarrel with Mr. Macdonald's report he may do so. In the first paragraph, the subject matter was the floor prices on fish. I might ~ite that paragraph on another occasion, but 1t would, however, be out of place at the moment. The article continues: Discussing unemployment, he said it could not be denied that it did exist in some parts of Canada.- That was quite an admission for the Prime Minister to make when according to the statistics issued by his own government 590,000 persons were unemployed in the country. -it could not be denied that it did exist in some parts of Canada , for which the Liberals were to blame.- Although we had not been in office for the previous nine months. He went on as follows: -unemployment in March, 1955, stood at 9.5 per cent of the working force.- That figure, of course, is not accurate as the hon. member for Essex East showed in the figures which he gave us yesterday from the bureau of statistics. We all know, of course, the Prime Minister has no great passion for accuracy. Some hon. Members: Oh, oh. 106 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance Mr. Pickersgill: And he went on as follows: -which was a higher percentage than exists today. That statement, of course, was completely untrue. "I will make one more promise," the Prime Minister asserted. I have had experience, I know the lot of the average Canadian. Of course most of those in this house do not, but the Prime Minister does. -I know the lot of the average Canadian. Mr. Walker: That is more than you do. Mr. Pickersgill: Let the hon. gentleman speak for himself. Mr. Charlton: He is speaking for himself. Mr. Pickersgill: I continue: "I've gone through it," he said, dropping his voice and speaking in solemn tones. An hon. Member: You have some of those, too. Some hon. Members: Oh, oh. Mr. McPhillips: He is sensible, anyhow. Mr. Pickersgill: Again I continue: I'm not here for the purpose of telling of my experience in my early days until well into my late teens. I know, I know . . . An hon. Member: You are a funny boy. Mr. Pickersgill: And again: . . . I know . . . a man who is unemployed is a human being, not a statistic. All of us who were elected by our fellow citizens know that, too. I make this promise. We acted. I think the Prime Minister never said truer words than when he said "we acted". We acted. My pledge is to every man and woman in this nation who is unemployed- Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Pickersgill: Now listen to these words: -to every man and woman in this nation who is unemployed-so long as I am Prime Minister no one will be allowed to suffer in this nation. No one will be allowed to suffer in this nation. There was some question as to my source of information but I have another quotation, this time from the Montreal Star, and this is a Canadian Press story. It reports the speech made by the Prime Minister in Toronto and the date is March 5, 1958. I will just read the last paragraph of it. An hon. Member: Read it all. Mr. Pickersgill: It says: As long as I am Prime Minister, this govern ment will not rest while one Canadian remains out of work. No one will be allowed to suffer. [Mr. Pickersgill. J I do not know, Mr. Chairman, what are the conditions in the riding which you repre sent, but I do know that in the riding I represent there are at present hundreds of people on the dole. Mr. Bigg: They need a new member over there. Mr. Pickersgill: They need a new govern ment, perhaps. I know 'that in the riding I represent and the ridings represented by the hon. members for St. John's there are hun dreds of people on the dole. Mr. Starr: He is doing something about it, though. Mr. Pickersgill: I can only say that those who are on the dole are suffering; perhaps not suffering actual physical privation, though some of them certainly are, but suffering because they want to work and there is no work. The Prime Minister said no one would be allowed to suffer. Then he came into the house the other day and used these astonish ing works: "First, we meet the problem of unemployment by again removing the diffi culties inherent in the extension of payments." This is how the suffering is being relieved. I know the minister is not going to get up and tell us that even a small proportion of those people who are now unemployed will be covered between now and June 28 by this measure. The minister is an honest man and • I know he would make no such dishonest claims. But I do think that before we are asked to pass this measure the minister should give us some further information. Of course, he cannot guess about the num ber of those who are not yet unemployed and who may become unemployed, but surely. the minister would not have recommended this measure to the house if he had not found out from his officials how many people there are in the country today, or at the latest date for which he can get the information, drawing the seasonal benefits and, on an average, how much more benefits they are entitled to draw, whether it would be one week more or two weeks more; in most cases it would not be more. This is the kind of information which the minister should give us in some considerable detail because other wise a false impression is likely to be created. I had a letter from one of my constituents this morning from which I gather that this impression is already widespread. I know that what this man said was wrong, but nevertheless it is the impression which has been given. He said the government ex tended the benefits from March to May 15, but that "they won't give me any more". Of course he was not entitled to any more, MAY 15, 1958 107 because he did not have the necessary stamps but many people have the impression that because this measure is being extended for another six weeks every unemployed person in the country will be looked after for another six weeks. To the extent that this provision is helpful we welcome it, but I am afraid it will have a very small effect indeed in any part of the country. In those parts of Canada where seasonal unemployment is, on the average, more severe than in others, the effect will be less. Obviously it will have the most effect where there is the most regular employment and the least effect where seasonal employ ment is experienced from one year to another more severely, because in those areas there will have been less opportunity for people to have accumulated stamps in the past and thus become entitled to receive benefit. I do not intend to labour this point but I should like to remind the minister again of the particular information which I should like to have and which, I am sure, other members from Newfoundland would like to have in so far as that province is concerned, namely the number of persons who have at any time since December 1 received seasonal benefits, the number who are still receiving seasonal benefits and, if they can be given, the comparable figures for the whole country. Those figures would be interesting, and I think the minister should also tell us his estimate of the period of time during which those persons now receiving benefits are likely to continue receiving benefits under this measure and also give us some kind of guess as to how many persons not yet un employed may become unemployed and likely to be covered by these provisions, because, as I say, he is not likely to have brought in this measure unless some estimate had been made. Of course, if there are no such persons, if the optimistic view which the minister ex pressed when he interrupted me is the correct one, and if no one is going to lose his job, that information will not be relevant. In such a case, however, I think the minister should tell us why it has been necessary to extend this period until June 28, because it is almost inconceivable that there would be any considerable number of persons drawing benefit now who would still be entitled to benefit by June 28. Mr. Starr: Mr. Chairman, I wish to express my appreciation to the hon. members who have taken part in this debate on the resolu tion stage, and to thank those who put for ward suggestions. We will, of course, endeavour to answer some of the questions that have been asked, Unemployment Insurance questions, that is, with regard to which in formation can be obtained at the moment with reasonable ease. Naturally we cannot supply answers to questions when no statis tics are available. That would require crystal ball gazing and even though I am sometimes depicted in the role of a prophet I can assure the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate that that is not my profession. However, I do appreciate the attitude taken by hon. mem bers and it heartens me to know that they will support this measure even though that support may in some quarters be reluctant. Mr. Martin (Essex East): I think the min ister would wish to be very fair. There was only one hon. member who used the word "reluctant" and he certainly did not use it in the sense which the hon. gentleman has sug gested. The hon. member for Bonavista Twillingate spoke of being reluctant, but not in the sense in which the hon. minister has just used it. Mr. Starr: No, no. I referred to it in the same sense as it was put forward at the time and I do not mean to do it in any other way. Mr. Pickersgill: Perhaps the minister will allow me to put my position clearly. I am as reluctant to support the measure as the min ister was to introduce it, and no more r eluctant than that; and the minister himself said he was very reluctant to have to in troduce it. Mr. Starr: Now the hon. member is crystal ball gazing and looking into the future. I am not r eluctant in bringing in this measure because I know it is going to benefit a great many Canadians who, in the past, after April 15 have been left to shift for themselves without aid of 'any kind from the previous government of which the hon. member was a minister . This government did not intend to bring in this measure as one putting an end to un employment. It was brought in to help in a situation which has been serious and which we admit has been serious. It was brought in to help those who find themselves affected by this situation to tide over the period of time before employment in Canada is at its highest peak. This measure was brought in for that purpose alone, and it was brought in on a temporary basis in that it is only in effect for the year 1958 and for the period May 18 to June 28. Unemployment is serious, and we realize that unemployment is serious- An hon. Member: At last. Mr. Starr: I have admitted it in this house and I have admitted publicly that unemploy ment presents a serious situation. I want to 108 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance tell hon. members that this is a cause of con cern to myself and to this government at all times, and it is because of this situation that the present measure is being presented to parliament. It is being presented in good faith and as showing good faith to the people of Canada to help them in a difficult situation. If we felt the same way as the former govern ment felt about the situation in 1955 and in other years we should have taken no action at all and just sat it out as the former govern ment did. There has been an expression of alarm and concern about the position of the unemploy ment insurance fund. And yet, at the same time, there has been alarm and concern about those who will not be receiving any benefits under this measure. Unemployment insurance is an insurance. It has been set up as such on a contributory basis. We are going to help 200,000 people under this ex tension which will cost approximately $14 million. Hon. members opposite may disa gree with me on that but those are the figures that have been supplied to me by ex perts in the department who are continually working on this problem and have the data available. I said that unemployment insurance is on a contributory basis. Surely it cannot be on any other. The formula has been changed for seasonal benefits. A person now receives five benefits for six weeks of contributions and in order to qualify for seasonal benefits he must have since March 31, 1957, at least 15 contributions in his book. A number of questions were asked and I will endeavour to answer first the question asked by the hon. member for Essex East. I believe the hon. member for Bonavista Twillingate wishes the same information. The number of seasonal benefit periods estab lished December 1, 1957 to April 30, 1958, which is the last date for which we can get a record at this time, was 373,674. Mr. Martin (Essex East): That is from December 1 to May 15? Mr. Starr: April 30, 1958. The estimated amount of seasonal benefits paid from Decem ber 1, 1957 to April 30, 1958 was $71,026,817. This is the last date for which figures are available at the moment. Mr. Martin (Essex Easil: In my question I asked for information covering the period December 1 to May 15. Has my hon. friend that information? Mr. Starr: We could get information only for this period. Mr. Denis: It does not include the farmers. [Mr. Starr.] Mr. Starr: This includes all persons who have established a claim for seasonal benefit periods. Mr. Denis: There are many who did not work and did not receive any benefits. Mr. Starr: Our registrations at the national employment service offices would have drop ped considerably if we had cut off seasonal benefits on April 15, as was the custom in the past, but this government wanted to help these people. We extended the period for one month earlier and one month later and now we are granting a further extension. We could cut this off and let those people shift for themselves as they did in the past under the former administration. An hon. Member: You are a real Tory. Mr. Robichaud: Will the minister permit a question? Even with the 200,000 receiving seasonal benefits under the new measure will there not still be more unemployed not re ceiving any benefits at all than there were last year under the Liberal administration? Mr. Pickersgill: Yes, that is obvious. Mr. Starr: I have not the figures available but I would suggest the hon. member is gues sing and indulging in crystal ball gazing. Let me remind the hon. member that those people are receiving benefits which they did not receive during that period of time when the hon. member was part of the gov ernment sitting on this side of the house. Mr. Pickersgill: Because they had jobs then. Mr. Denis: And you think ihis is supposed to correct the situation? Mr. Starr: In answer to the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo the balance of entitlement that a claimant may have at June 28 lapses on that date. However, some or all of the contributions that provided this entitlement may count for either regular benefits later or seasonal benefits next year. In answer to his second question, claimants whose regular benefit terminates after May 17 will auto matically qualify for this seasonal extension that we propose in this legislation. Mr. Carter: Just to clarify what the minister said, if a person has six weeks of unused benefits before he became eligible on May 17 can he use that six weeks to qualify next year or must he qualify first before he can use those six weeks? Mr. Starr: It may count for either. Mr. Carter: He can use it to make up his 15 weeks next year? MAY 15, 1958 109 Mr. Starr: It may count for either regular or seasonal benefits next year. Mr. Pickersgill: That was not the question. Mr. Carter: My point is this. Next year that same person instead of requiring 15 new stamps could qualify with nine new stamps and six left over from this period, is that correct? Mr. Starr: I am not certain about that but I could obtain that information for the hon. member. Mr. Winch: Are we not at the resolution stage and not the committee stage? Mr. Pickersgill: We are in committee. Mr. Starr: In answer to the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate I have part of the information he wanted. The number of sea sonal benefit periods established in the period December 1, 1957 to March 31, 1958 in New foundland was 17,822 and the amount paid in seasonal benefits in this period to these people was $3,542,070. Mr. Pickersgill: I think the minister may have forgotten the other two questions I asked, the number at the latest available date still receiving benefits in Newfoundland and the number still receiving benefits in the whole of Canada. It seems to me that is the most important figure of all. Mr. Starr: I am reminded since the hon. member has spoken that the authorities at the unemployment insurance office advised me that that information is not available at the moment. They cannot give that informa tion. Mr. Pickersgill: As of April 30, for example? Mr. Starr: That is right. Mr. Pickersgill: That is ridiculous. Mr. Carter: Mr. Chairman, would the min ister be good enough to try and secure the information to clear up the point I raised, perhaps later today? Unemployment Insurance to such persons during that period and I will amend my question to make it to the period the end of April. Mr. Starr: I have already indicated it was $71,026,817. Mr. Pickersgill: Mr. Chairman, I wonder it I could say a word about this other point. The minister says he is not a crystal ball gazer, that he obtained the figure of 200,000 from his officials as the best estimate these experienced people could give. I assume that this total must be made up of two kinds of persons. It would include persons receiving benefits now and persons who will become eligible between now and June 28. It cannot be anything else and what I have said is really a statement of the obvious. I am sure the minister does not know the figure for May 15 nor does anyone else and it would be unreasonable to ask for it but surely it is not unreasonable when he is introducing this measure and when he tells us 200,000 people will benefit from it to ask him how many people were benefiting from it on the last date on which the commission added up the number. I am quite willing to accept April 30 if that is the latest date for which the min ister has information. That seems to me to be a most crucial piece of information. Mr. Starr: I gave that information; 373,674. Mr. Pickersgill: That number were receiv ing benefits on April 30? Mr. Starr: Yes, that number had established seasonal benefit periods. Mr. Pickersgill: But many of those people had gone off benefit, surely? Mr. Starr: About 90 per cent of that num ber actually received benefits on that date. Mr. Pickersgill: On April 30? Mr, Starr: Yes. Mr. Pickersgill: Seasonal benefits? Mr. Starr: That is right. Mr. Starr: I will try to do so. I conclude (Translation): that with these remarks. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Before my hon. friend concludes perhaps he has forgotten my question or perhaps he intends to answer later on. I asked him to indicate the number of persons who had established seasonal benefit claims from December to the middle of May. My hon. friend says he can now only give that information to April 30. • Mr. Starr: Yes, April 30. Mr. Martin (Essex East): In the second part of my question I asked what was the aggregate amount of seasonal benefits paid Mr. Pigeon: Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the workers of my constituency, I congratu late the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) for introducing a measure extending by six weeks the period during which unemployment insurance benefits can be paid. I am sure, Mr. Chairman, that all labour unions in Canada are happy to see that the Minister of Labour is asking for a six weeks extension of these benefits. The difference between this government and the administration led by my hon. friends from the opposition is that the Minister of Labour is more readily able to cope with 110 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance an emergency or to recognize when an amend ment to the Unemployment Insurance Act is in order. Therefore, on behalf of the workers of my riding, I take this opportunity to congratulate and to thank the Minister of Labour. (Text): Mr. Martin (Essex East): Mr. Chairman, I indicated when I spoke earlier that I had some other remarks to make which, under the rules of the house, I was precluded from making because of lack of time. One could make them on the first clause of the bill but this would be just as convenient a point at which to do so. I understand the difficulty that attends the minister at this time in answering some of the questions, particularly those that seek to elicit precise information as to the actual numbers who will benefit. The minister ought to indicate to his officials the desire on this side of the house for this information which I think could be given perhaps a little more precisely and in greater detail than has been given thus far. The minister says that the number of people who will benefit in part is in the neighbourhood of some 200,000 individuals, and he gives as the total cost of the particular amendment before the committee some $14 million by way of estimate. I suggest that if 200,000 people are going to benefit, and if any of that 200,000 are going to benefit for longer than a period of a week, it cannot possibly be done at a cost of $14 million. Last night I was trying to make some calculations and in my own amateurish way I came to the conclusion that it could not possibly be done unless the benefits for at least 75 per cent of the individuals were to be paid for less than a week, certainly not more than a week. Perhaps before we reach the bill the minister would inquire of his officials whether or not it is possible to give more detail with regard to this particular aspect of the problem. The reason we are interested in knowing this is not only because of the obvious one. We wonder whether or not the fact that six weeks is the period selected does not arise so much out of a desire to help a group of unemployed who need assistance as out of a statement by the Prime Minister. To me the period of six weeks is an unusual one to take. It happens to be the figure that was pulled out of the air by the Prime Minister during the election when he was speaking in the city of Winnipeg and I wondered about it at that time. Knowing the Prime Minister's desire to give the impression that all of his promises are being fulfilled, it would not surprise me-and I am not now charging the [Mr. Pigeon.I minister with this-one bit if the figure of six weeks was a figure selected not by the commission itself or not recommended by the minister, but selected arbitrarily by the Queen's first minister so that he could at some later date say, "Here again I have carried out my promise". I do not know whether that is so but it is a form of speculation in which I think the minister will acknowledge we on this side of the house, particularly at this stage of the new parliament, are entitled to indulge. I mentioned to the minister earlier that there would be great disappointment if the extension of those benefits did not include those whose benefits run out prior to May 17. Mr. Starr: It cannot. Mr. Martin (Essex Easil: The minister has indicated that it will not include them. I can only say that will mean that a very consider able number of people in this country, potential beneficiaries, will receive this information with the greatest regret. It certainly does not jibe-as the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate indicated-with the promises made by the Prime Minister during the election. I have in my hand an unrevised book which contains the statements and promises made by the Prime Minister, not in the election of 1957 but in the election of 1958. I find, not from the Toronto Star but from an equally responsible newspaper, the Brantford Expositor, that the Prime Minister is reported on February 17 as saying: Like Mr. Pearson, the Prime Minister said he does not regard the unemployed as mere statistics. He knew. how grim unemployment was from personal experience. '"The humblest of our people will not be for• gotten," he promised. "'The people who are unemployed wiJJ not be put in the false position of bemg put on relief". I ask the minister, is this particular measure a fulfilment of that promise? No one is going to be given relief; no one is going to be given the dole. I will see to it that you get jobs. That was the statement of the Prime Minister. Then, the next day, February 18, in a telecast made to the nation, the Prime Minister said: Unemployment reached a postwar record of 520,000 in mid-January. By the way, that was an understatement. As long as I am Prime Minister of Canad~ everything that can be done-everything without regard to limit-will be done to the end that no one will suffer. I am sure that the Prime Minister meant that. No human being wants to do anything that will cause others to suffer. But I ask the Minister of Labour, in view of the fact that a very substantial number of recipients of benefits under the Unemployment Insur ance Act, whose benefits will run out before MAY 15, 1958 111 May 17, will not be included in this measure, can it be said that this proposal is consistent with the assurances or the promises given by the Prime Minister to the people of Canada during the course of the election? I think that no one can confidently argue that that is so. Then, on February 27, as reported in the Patriot of Charlottetown, the Prime Minister said: I make this promise. We acted. My pledge Is to every man and woman in this nation who is unemployed-so long as I am Prime Minister no one will be allowed to suffer in this nation. I say to him that in those provinces where there is no public assistance measure and in the municipalities where there are no relief measures, or in provinces that have no relief measures and where they will not profit from this measure there will be people who will suffer. I know of people in my own constituency who will not qualify under this amendment and who will suffer and who will, as a result, not receive the kind of assistance which this measure seeks to provide. I say that in that particular the Prime Minister's promise to the people of Canada is not being fulfilled by this resolution. Then he said in Chatham, near my own city of Windsor, on March 5, as reported in the Chatham News: But I say to them, unemployment Is Jess today than In 1953, 1954 and 1955 ... That was not, of course, an accurate statement. I know the needs of the humble . . . and as long as I am In power no person Is going to suffer because of the Inaction of the government. These are some of the statements and there are many others. I say to the minister as a member of the government-I am not direct ing these remarks to the minister because he did not make these statements but through him to the Prime Minister-that this measure and any program of the government now known to the house or the Canadian people do not fulfil the promises made to the Cana dian people by the Prime Minister of this country. I suggest furthermore that instead of 200,000 people benefiting for a period of over 8 days there will be less than 40,000. I sug gest that my hon. friend ascertain during the dinner hour before the bill is reached whether or not that calculation is not a more correct one. I want to deal with something that was said by the hon. member for Timiskaming and the hon. member for Timmins. I think what they said was constructive and it was im portant that it should be said. This particular assistance is being provided out of the unem ployment insurance fund, a fund now roughly Unemployment Insurance $742 million, I think, a fund contributed to basically by the employee and employer groups of our country with a lesser contribu tion by the taxpayers of Canada generally. All groups are rather proud of the actuarial position of the fund. They are proud of the fact that this is something to which indi viduals have contributed themselves, some thing with regard to which they deserve the right of beneficial treatment as a result of their own contributions and hard work. What are we doing? We are taking out of the fund moneys for the benefit not only of those who have contributed but for many who have not contributed to the fund, and the argument made by the two hon. members to whom I have referred is that this is a responsibility that should be borne not by two groups of the population but by the tax payers ge-nerally. Mr. Starr: I wonder whether the hon. member would clarify his statement that the fund will be beneficial to those who have not contributed to it, that people will derive bene fit from the fund who have not contributed. Mr. Mariin (Essex East): I am glad my hon. friend has corrected me. He is quite right, but people will benefit from the fund who have not contributed in equal measure. That is what I meant to say and that is important. Mr. Pallett: Which is quite different. Mr. Martin (Essex Easil: It is not quite dif ferent as I am going to show if the hon. member will just be patient. What will hap pen is this. This is the third time we have resorted to this particularly extraordinary means of dealing with the fund apart from the main provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act. It is conceivable that we could have an abnormal unemployment situa tion year after year and that together with other intrusions on the fund the result might be that it might get down to a couple of hundred million dollars, let us say. At that point the Minister of Finance will have to give consideration to replenishing the fund and I am sure if that time arrives there will also be a disposition to increase the con tributions of employers and employees. I say that if that kind of situation eventuated it might be unfair to these two main con tributing groups. The minister may say that it was the gov ernment of the Liberal party that introduced the principle of seasonal benefits. That is true but when we did so we provided for grants made out of the consolidated revenue fund. We replenished the fund. We amended the act in 1950 to provide for the payment of sup plementary benefits during the period Janu ary 1 to March 31. There were four classes 112 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance to be covered, as I indicated yesterday, and two of those groups were covered by direct contributions of one cent each that were im posed on them to take care of the moneys being provided by that particular amendment. With regard to the two other classes, and I need not give the details of their character, the minister of finance was authorized to transfer from the consolidated revenue fund a corresponding amount so that in no way was there any impairment of the unemployment insurance fund. That was likewise done when in 1955 the then government of the day brought in further supplementary benefits, and when Newfoundland entered confedera tion the unemployment insurance commission administered an unemployment assistance scheme that was financed out of the con solidated fund. That was what was done by the previous administration with regard to this measure and as a result of the steps they took the integrity of the fund was maintained. Last year the seasonal benefit period was extended so that it commenced on December 1 and ended today and, of course, is now being extended to June 28. In addition, my hon. friend proposes a change in the formula for calculating the duration of benefit. The formula was one week of benefit for two weekly contributions. The formula now is five weeks of benefit for every six weekly contributions. The 1957 amendment made no provision for additional revenue to the fund to meet the cost of the new formula and the extended period. My hen. friend estimates today that the amount of money involved in his proposal will come to $14 million. I have suggested that it could conceivably come to $25 million or $35 million if a substantial number are going to benefit for over a seven or eight day period. Last year the amount of the ex penditure was, I think, $31 million. Whatever it was, it was a considerable sum of money. In any event, that was taken out of the fund and the government has taken no steps to replenish it. It is clear that at some date this or some other government, in the event of depletion of the fund to a substantial degree, will have to take steps, but what I am pointing out is that at that time there will be a disposition to impose upon the two main contributing groups a further obligation and if the situation is as I am now describing I do not think that would be fair to them. We have on the statute books now a measure that was designed for this very situa tion. We have a public assistance act which was introduced by the previous administra tion. That legislation was introduced so as [Mr. Martin (Essex East).] to impose the burden upon all the people of Canada and not only upon a limited number because the responsibility for maintaining those who need this assistance is a responsi bility that does not belong to the unemploy ment insurance fund per se. It is an obliga tion that belongs to all of us and the principle behind the public assistance act was to do that very thing. I know that the Minister of Labour has a very good answer, an answer which I would give myself if I were sitting in his seat, namely, that under that act as amended last year by the previous administration by remov ing the threshold it is up to the province to set the amount of assistance. At the present time no province pays assistance by way of relief to the level provided for under the Unemployment Insurance Act. Therefore I agree with the minister that in order to give the maximum measure of assistance to those who need it he is quite justified at this time in the circumstances, faced with the emer gency, in using the unemployment insurance fund, but I say that at some time he should take steps to replenish it, if not now. Then I say further that, having in mind the opportunity now at his disposal, he should take steps in negotiation with the provinces to see that they accept their re sponsibility in connection with this matter. I am sure that, for instance, in Ontario the reason why the public assistance act is not being used-I fully agree with the minister; and I know this because I heard the premier of Ontario say it when we were discussing this very matter in another room in this building-is that the government of Ontario did not want to pay relief payments that were at the same level as the unemployment insurance benefits. I say that it should be the objective of the Minister of Labour and of this government, in negotiation now with governments that are so friendly to them, to see that they increase their payments under the public assistance act to a level that will warrant on future occasions for these partic ular purposes the use of public assistance rather than the unemployment insurance fund. But in any event, now that the minister has no other alternative but to use this measure, I say to him that the government at the same time should have taken steps to replenish the unemployment insurance fund to the extent that it was intruded on last year and to the extent that this year it proposes to intrude on that fund. It may be that the contemplated amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act will go in part toward that objective; I do not know. The minister may at some time perhaps indicate to us, if he can, what particular amendments MAY 15, 1958 113 he has in mind, if the story is true that he does have in mind further amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act. But if the minister does not accept the suggestion that the fund should now be replenished and if he does not want to follow the practice which was pursued by the previous administration in this particular, I hope that the minister will at least say to us, as was suggested to him by the former member for Coast Capilano last year, that at least very careful consideration should be given by the govern ment and particularly by the Minister of Labour to the position of the fund in the light of this very serious situation that now confronts us and in the light of the possible situation which could eventuate on another occasion. I think that the points made by the hon. member for Timiskaming, the hon. member for Timmins and others, particularly with regard to the fund, deserve support. It is for this reason that I have spoken about that matter perhaps longer than I should have spoken. But I say to the minister now before I take my seat that our position is this. We welcome this measure to the extent that it goes. We feel that it is not fair to give the impression that it goes farther than the general statement in the speech from the throne indicates. But above all, we take this opportunity of reminding the government of their own assurances to the people of Canada, of the pledges they made in the course of the last federal elec tion campaign as a result of which they were accorded the largest majority ever given a political party in this parliament. The government has a very heavy responsi bility. The only way in which it can be adequately discharged or honourably met is by the government giving leadership and really doing something to provide work, as it said it would, for the almost 600,000 men and women in this country who are now at this period without work. That is a responsibility that rests on the shoulders of the government. No majority, no amount of debate will excuse this administration from the need of facing up to that responsi bility not at the next session but at this present session of parliament. Mr. Pickersgill: I am going to rise very briefly in order to ask the minister another couple of questions about his statistics. I did a little bit of arithmetic while my friend the hon. member for Essex East was speak ing. I will put this very slowly because I do not want to misrepresent what the min ister said. If I understood correctly what the minister said, it was that there were approximately 373,000 persons who at one Unemployment Insurance time or another up to April 30 had been entitled to receive unemployment insurance seasonal benefits. He said that approxi mately 90 per cent of that number was still receiving that on April 30. Mr. Starr: There were 226,000 receiving seasonal benefits who were claimants on April 30. Mr. Pickersgill: Oh, 226,000 on April 30. The figure I used in arriving at the 90 per cent was 336,000, and I just could not believe that the minister thought the number was going to drop from 336,000 to 200,000 be tween April 30 and May 15, so I am very glad indeed to have that explanation. In other words, on April 30-that is two weeks ago there were 226,000 persons receiving seasonal benefits and the minister says he anticipates that 200,000 will receive benefits under the legislation he is now proposing. To put it another way, there are about 26,000 he thinks, who have gone off for one reason or another or who will have gone off by tonight. Mr. Starr: If I might explain, it is estimated that 25,000 of the 226,000 will go off the rolls before May 18, leaving 201,000. It is further estimated by the department that they will go off at the rate of 32,000 a week until 41,000 will remain after June 20. Mr. Pickersgill: Forty-one thousand? Mr. Starr: Forty-one thousand-the average rate of benefit is estimated at $20 per week. Mr. Pickersgill: I thank the minister for that information; it is the information I was seeking. Mr. Robichaud: Mr. Chairman, I have an other question I would like clarified and perhaps the minister could give us the answer after the recess if he cannot give it now. He mentioned earlier that there was a drop of 120,000 in the registration of unemployed persons during the last month. Could the minister give us the exact dates to which he was referring and at the same time, if he has them, could he give us the total figure of unemployed released by the dominion bureau of statistics for similar dates? Mr. Starr: No, Mr. Chairman, I have not the dominion bureau of statistics figures for similar dates. These are the national registra tion figures as of May 1, 1958 and they show the total in Canada as 758,028. From March 13, when the seasonal high point was reached, to May 1, the total has decreased by 128,757, as compared with the decrease of 123,136 which occurred in the corresponding period of last year. That is what I referred to when I said that the rate in that period between those dates was more accelerated than it was in the year before. 114 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance Mr. Pickersgill: Could the minister perhaps give us the percentage of the drop in both cases? Mr. Starr: I do not have them. (Translation): Mr. Valade: Mr. Chairman, representing as I do a constituency where most of the electors belong to the working class I feel it is my duty-a pleasant duty, by the way-to thank the government for bringing in this legisla tion which will certainly be of benefit to all these workers who now find themselves in very unfortunate circumstances through the lack of foresight of our predecessors. Mr. Chairman, I represent a constituency which, unfortunately, was not too well treated by the previous administration and if my electors have chosen me to represent them here it is because they have recognized that the government in power at this time has, on occasion, managed to provide for the immediate needs of the working people. While I do not wish to impinge in any way upon the rights of the opposition, may I point out at this time that it is not by holding up the passage of emergency mea sures designed to help workers that we can help them. During the last campaign to which our friend~ made reference some' time ago, they proclaimed themselves, on various occasions to _be the friends of the worker. Moreover: I l!stened to certain Liberal members refer to the words of the right hon. Prime Min ister (Mr. Diefenbaker): "I will see that you get jobs." We are proud of those words of the Prime Minister since it is not the Conservative party, to which I belong, that left the work ing people of this country in straitened cir cumstances. On the contrary it is our opponents who, through their lack of fore sight, are responsible for the situation. I am sure that the amendments brought in by the government will really help the worker, who is bound to appreciate that help, a help which will be all to the credit of the government that concerned itself with the workers' problems. Mr. Chairman, I trust you will forgive my nervousness. I hope to be able to overcome it in time, and I ask my colleagues' indulgence. I have been elected here to represent workers and I intend to defend their rights and to support emergency legislation which will bring relief to those who, unfortunately, were all too long neglected by our friends in the previous administration. (Text): Resolution reported and concurred in. [Mr. Starr.] Mr. Starr thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. C-9, to provide for the temporary extension of the seasonal benefit periods under the Unemployment Insurance Act for a six weeks period, from May 18, 1958, to June 28, 1958. Motion agreed to and bill read the first time. Mr. Starr moved the second reading of the bill. Mr. Martin (Essex EasU: Mr. Speaker, I do not think the bill has had general distribution. Mr. Starr: I made copies of the bill avail able, Mr. Speaker, to the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) and the leader of the C.C.F. party. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Yes. My hon. friend was kind enough to pass one on. Mr. Starr: But there has not been general distribution. Mr. Chevrier: Are there not extra copies? Mr. Speaker: I am informed that there are not copies available for general distribution. I have put the motion for second reading. Mr. Martin (Essex East>: I think it would be most unusual, Mr. Speaker, to proceed without having a copy of the bill before every member. I have had an opportunity of seeing it but there are many others who are interested. What is the reason for the delay; can we not get the bill within a few minutes? Mr. Starr: I am very sorry about this, Mr. Speaker; I took it for granted that the bill would be made available. Mr. Madin (Essex East>: It is not my hon. friend's fault. Mr. Starr: Yesterday or the day before I made a few copies available to the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the C.C.F. party. If a few more bills can be made available and my hon. friends feel they should be made available before we go on to second reading I will certainly do my best to provide them. Mr. Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, I have a sug gestion which perhaps might be helpful. If the minister and, of course, the house leader would agree, perhaps we might go on with the housing resolution now and the minister might have the bill on unemployment benefits available so that at eight o'clock we could return to consideration of his bill. Mr. Green: Mr. Speaker, we would be very glad to do that. There may be this difficulty: the printed bills, copies of which have been given to the leaders of the opposi tion parties, are not printed in large numbers and you will notice that there is a blank for the date of the first reading. MAY 15, 1958 ll5 Mr. Martin (Essex East): I would suggest that they could probably be obtained during the course of the evening. Mr. Green: It might be possible to get them later this evening but I doubt whether very many have been printed as yet. Mr. Martin (Essex East): I think if you would give instructions right now to the printing bureau they could do that before eight o'clock. Mr. Green: We will do our best. Mr. Speaker: I wonder if hon. members would consider passing second reading. It is a debate on principle and I take it that the principle of the bill has been discussed, and then defer the committee stage until after recess. Mr. Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, without wanting to hinder the progress of the house in any way I think, with your approval, we would prefer to suspend the debate or to move an adjournment of the debate and proceed with second reading later. Mr. Winch: May I just say, Mr. Speaker, that to some extent we in this group agree with what has been said for we have in the past been somewhat upset by the fact that there were so few of the printed bills avail able on occasions of this nature. I feel certain, however, that I am safe in :saying as far as our group is concerned we understand from the bill what is its intent. We have had a very full opportunity of making our opinions known at the resolution stage. We feel accordingly that there is no requirement or necessity under the circum :Stances for discussion on second reading of -the bill even though we have not all had the .bill in front of us. We in this group are most anxious, having had our say very fully in the resolution stage, -that the bill be accepted as speedily as pos .sible in order that-although not as many as we would like will receive the benefits of the hill-as many people as possible will do so without delay. Mr. Mariin (Essex East>: Mr. Speaker, may 1 just say I fully agree with what has just .been said and I share the desire of the hon. member that there should be no delay in the _passage of this bill. I feel sure, however, the hon. minister would confirm that if we did wait until eight -o'clock an.d if the bill is then passed there ,would be nothing lost. Unemployment Insurance Mr. Starr: I am not of the same opinion because I do not know what the circumstances may be or what might happen. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Surely the min ister could be a little more precise than that. If we have the bill and we pass it, say at nine o'clock, there would be as much advan tage from that procedure as if the bill were passed at this time. Is that not right? Mr. Starr: I did not quite follow. Mr. Martin (Essex East): I am saying that in view of what the hon. member who has just spoken said, and in view of the fact that we concur in the desirability of putting through this measure at the earliest possible moment, notwithstanding its limitations, and, having asked for a copy of the bill, which is certainly not an unusual request, no dis advantage or loss will occur by postponing our deliberations on second reading until eight o'clock. Is that not the situation? Mr. Starr: I do not know, Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker: May I interrupt to say that the Clerk informs me that between 20 and 25 copies of the bill could be distributed now if that would meet the problem. Mr. Winch: May I, through you, Mr. Speaker, ask the leader of the house, the hon. Minister of Labour and perhaps, the hon. member who has just spoken whether anything would be lost if, in the light of the full discussion we had on the resolution, the bill were now passed through second reading and as many copies as possible made avail able during the committee stage when we reconvene later. Mr. Starr: I understand that there are 25 copies available. Are any more necessary to go round? Mr. Martin (Essex East): Let us distribute the bill and let each hon. member look at it. Mr. Starr: It would mean printing 265 copies of the bill and I do not know whether that could be done tonight. Mr. Chevrier: May I repeat the suggestion I made earlier that pending the distribution of these 25 copies and the time it takes for hon. members to look at the bill we might proceed with the resolution on housing so that no time would be lost. Mr. Green: That is very good, Mr. Speaker, but I hope I am not going to encounter the same problem on my housing bill, because there are probably only 25 copies of that available. Mr. Starn I do not know. Mr. Martin (Essex East>: If you do as Mr. Martin (Essex East): Would the min- well as the Minister of Labour you will be :ister explain'? doing fine. 57 0 71-3-'8½ 116 HOUSE OF COMMONS National Housing Act Mr. Bourque: As a printer, Mr. Speaker, I cannot understand why we cannot print 265 copies if we are able to print 25. The presses run at about 5,000 copies an hour and it only takes five minutes longer to print the extra copies. Mr. Speaker: Is it by the unanimous con sent of this house that second reading of this bill be taken later this day? Some hon. Members: Agreed. NATIONAL HOUSING ACT AMENDMENT INCREASING AGGREGATE AMOUNT AVAILABLE Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works) moved that the house go into com mittee to consider the following resolution: That It is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the National Housing Act, 1954, to increase from four hundred million dollars to seven hundred and fifty million dollars the aggregate amount that may be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund under subsection 1 of section 22 of the act. Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. Sevigny in the -chair. Mr. Green: Mr. Chairman, this resolution sets out practically word for word the actual bill which will be brought before the house. It deals only with one section of the National Housing Act, namely section 22 which is the section that provides for advances out of the consolidated revenue fund for the payment of certain loans. The purposes for which this money has been used in the past are as follows: in the first place, it was used for making direct loans in the smaller centres of Canada, direct loans by the Central Mortgage and Housing Corpo ation. In addition, it was used for what is called the limited dividend plan, that is, in assistance to the financing of the undertakings of companies which build low rental dwellings for old people and for low income families. A third use to which the money provided under this section has been put was to finance the building of rental housing for workers in primary industries; in the mining industry for example, in forest industries and other primary industries. Under the act as it was originally passed in 1954 there was a total sum provided under this section of $250 million. When we took office last summer there had been spent for these three purposes I have mentioned, namely direct loans in small centres, financ ing of limited dividend corporations and advances for housing in primary industries, approximately $100 million so that there remained available under this section of the act about $150 million. This was the position in the summer of 1957; $150 million available for housing under this section. [Mr. Martin (Essex East).) We had not been in office very long before we found that there was a rapid falling off in housing construction across Canada. Lending institutions were advancing money reluctantly because of the tight money policy then in effect and this tight money policy was hitting the building industry harder than any other industry in the country. It was fairly easy to get a loan for an expensive home but it was very hard to get one for a small home. At the same time there was a great demand for smaller homes by young people wishing to buy their first home and by older people with modest incomes. It there fore appeared to us at that time that there was a great need for homes of this kind. Also, we began to see this dark cloud of winter unemployment coming up over the horizon. For these various reasons the government adopted what we have called a small homes loan policy. We decided to take this $150 million which was available under the exist ing legislation and use it for lending out for the construction of small homes. We put a limit on the size of the homes; 1050 square feet was the maximum for a three-bedroom home, for instance. We found that this was the only fair way to impose a limitation because if we put a limit by way of money value then in some of the centres of Canada it would have been impossible for anybody to qualify. We also limited to 25 the number of loans that any one builder could get in order to spread the work out across the country and among various builders. We made an agreement with the lending institutions of Canada, including the banks that they would act as our agents in the placing of these loans for what we considered was a reasonable fee. This meant we could get action quickly. They were in the lending business and we considered that the fastest way to get sma'11 homes under construction was to put out these loans under this agency plan. When we adopted the plan we were un certain that it would be a success. After all, we were very green in government but of more importance we were not quite sure we had found the right solution. However, we had splendid advice from the officials of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation and also from the lending institutions. We try to dis cuss these things frankly with the people in the business whose main function is to pro vide funds for the construction of homes and that has been our approach throughout. The results of this policy have been ex tremely gratifying to the government and I think to all hon. members of the house. By the time November had rolled around we MAY 15, 1958 117 found that the $150 million was rapidly being depleted. I would remind hon. members it had to be used as well for direct loans in the smaHer centres and for the limited divi dend corporations. We did not try to expand the loans for housing projects in the primary industries and that was a very small part of the business in any event. Last December the members of that parlia ment were good enough to put through a bill increasing to $400 million the total amount available under this section. That meant an addition of $150 million. At the time we asked for this increase we also changed the down payments, the idea being that this would mean people with lower incomes, a group that had not been able formerly to take advantage of the plan, would derive benefit under the scheme. In addition to reducing down pay ments we increased the proportion of a per son's income that could be spent on housing when the application for loan was being con sidered. I believe it was increased from 23 per cent of a person's income to 27 per cent. The decision with regard to this proportion, of course, really rests with the lending institu tions some of which I believe are still work ing on the 23 per cent basis. One other ,provision was that work had to be commenced within a certain number of days. This re striction was imposed in order to get work under way during the winter months. The plan continued to go well throughout the winter. Loans continued to go out and starts were made on new houses and finally we reached the position early in March when we had to stop putting out loans for the construction of rental apartments. About 20 per •cent of the money had been used for financing small apartments although the main purpose was the construction of small homes. About a month ago the balance remaining became so small we also had to stop the loans for small homes. The loans for limited dividend corporations as well as direct loans in the smaller centres also increased in that period. When we suspended the plan we had many applications in the offices of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Applications came in very rapidly in April. I sometimes wonder whether some applications made under this agency plan should not really have been made under the ordinary National Housing Act in sured loan. Be that as it may, when we were running out of money we went to the lending institutions and the banks and stated the problem. We explained that many people wanted to build small homes and requested them to take on the applications in order that no hardship would result and there would be no delay in the construction of homes in Canada. The institutions have responded very National Housing Act well and over 75 per cent of the applications with which we were unable to deal last month have been taken up by the lending institutions. Perhaps hon. members would be interested in the figures which will illustrate what has happened to the $400 million fund. I have figures here as of May 9. Under the agency loan plan-that is, our small homes loan plan-$256,485,766 had been put out. Every cent of that sum has been put out since last August. I sometimes think when the opposi tion grow very critical of the government for doing nothing to provide employment dur ing the winter they tend to forget that not one cent of this $256 million-odd would have been spent if it had not been for this small homes loan plan. Mr. Chevrier: The minister should not antic ipate what is going to be said. Mr. Green: I am not anticipating, I am just remembering what has already been said. Mr. Chevrier: Not in this debate. Mr. Green: It was said this afternoon that we were doing nothing about unemployment, that we had not provided any work and that we were sitting in our seats letting the world go by and all that sort of thing. By the way, I would be interested to hear any member of the opposition say that this small home loan plan has not meant direct employment in Canada in winter of at least 100,000 Canadians building houses for young Canadians, strengthening the foundations on which this nation rests. We are rather proud of this small homes loan plan, as the hon. member for Laurier will, I am sure, under stand. For direct loans in small centres-mind you some of this had been advanced before last autumn; this is not since last August $59,051,214; to limited dividend corporations, $70,193,114; and for housing projects and primary industries, $6,343,519. Therefore, there was a total of $392,073,614 used up, leaving something less than $8 million in the fund. Mr. Chevrier: May I get the amount for the direct loans to small centres? Mr. Green: The amount is $59,051,214. The number of units covered by this small home loan plan is 26,241. As of April 30 there had been starts-that is, houses actually under construction under this plan-of 20,675, and 1,722 of the small houses and apartment uillits had been completed. It is interesting to see the difference in the group of people who have been helped by this 118 HOUSE OF COMMONS National Housing Act small home loan plan. I have here a table which I should like to place in Hansard. The table follows: C.HARACTERISTICS OF AGENCY AND NON AGENCY NHA LOANS, 1957 Single Family Dwellings Only Fourth Quarter, 1957 Non- Per Cent Agency Agency Difference Average estimated cost of single family dwellings . ... ..... . Floor area/sq. ft .... . Average construction cost sq. ft ... .. ..... . Down payment (approx.) ......... . $15,146 $13,192 1,199 l,Q48 10.38 10.23 $ 3,746 $ 2,692 Single Family Dwellings (Full Year 1957) 13% 13% 1.5% 28% Per cent of Applicants Applicant's Income Non-Agency Agency Under 2,000 . ......... . .. 2,000-2,999 ........... . 0.1 0.1 3,000-3,999 .......... .. 6.0 11.3 4,000-4,999 ........... . 29.l 46.3 5,000-5,999 ........... . 27.7 25.8 6,000-6,999 . .......... . 16.9 9.5 7,000-7,999 ...... .. .. .. 8.7 3.9 8,000-8,999 ........... . 4.6 1.3 9,000-9,999 ........... . 2.2 0.5 10,000 and over ..... . 4.7 1.3 Total .. . .......... . .. . 100.0 100.0 Hon. members will appreciate that quite outside this small homes loan plan there are the regular N.H.A. housing loans. For the fourth quarter of last year the average esti mated cost of a single family dwelling under the non-agency plan-that is, under the regular N.H.A. plan-was $15,146. Under the agency plan it was $13,192, or a cut of 13 per cent. I come now to down payments. Under the agency plan these were approximately $2,692, and under the non-agency plan $3,746, a difference of 28 per cent. I shall now deal with the figures for the income of the applicants for those loans; they are also interesting. Under the non-agency plan there were .1 per cent under $3,000 and the same per cent, by the way, under the small home plan; under $4,000, six per cent under the non-agency plan, and 11.3 per cent under the agency plan; under $5,000, 29.1 per cent under the non-agency plan and 46.3 per cent under the agency plan. We have got these benefits down to a lower income group. I am not maintaining this afternoon that it is yet down as far as I would like to see it go, but we have succeeded in extending those benefits down to a much lower income group than is the case under the regular National Housing Act loans. This brings me to our present request. We are asking for an additional $350 million. [Mr. Green.] That will bring the total amount under sec tion 22 to $750 million. This money will have to be used for the direct loans in small centres which are of great importance. We do not intend to have those Canadians who live in small centres by-passed in our gov ernmental housing policy. Then, it will also have to provide for financing limited dividend corporations. We have done, and we shall continue to do, everything possible to en courage those limited dividend corporations. This is the plan under which a service club or a church may form a corporation to build houses for senior citizens. We think that these undertakings are of great benefit to the nation, and we shall give them every possible assistance. It will also have to provide for continuation of the small homes loan plan which the government initiated last summer. We have as our objective the helping of young Can adians to build houses, the idea being to do everything possible to help Canadians to own their own houses; also to provide employ ment. I doubt whether there is any way in which jobs can be furnished more quickly than in housing, not only jobs for the men who do the work but also for the men and the women who make the furniture and all the other articles that go into a house and in the development of land, and so on. This particular activity in our country involves a great many jobs. We do not aim to become the main source for housing money. The view of the govern ment is that the bulk of money for house building should be provided by the private lenders. It is hoped this year that there will be 140,000 housing starts in Canada. That will be a record. I think the nearest was about 137,000. As of today it looks as though that objective will be reached, by the way, in spite of all the hard-times talk we some times hear from-well, I will not say whom. I do not want to make any trouble for myself in getting the bill through the house. Mr. Pickersgill: The minister is learning wisdom. Mr. Green: I am being very polite. Mr. Chevrier: He does not want to hold up his own resolution. Mr. Green: One hundred and forty thou sand starts and an average loan of $10,000 mean $1,400 million to be found by somebody for building these houses. Quite frankly, we are not in the business to that extent and I do not think any government in Canada could or should be. So I repeat that we believe the bulk of the money for house building should be provided by the private MAY 15, 1958 119 lenders. Our intention is that Central Mort gage and Housing Corporation should act only in a residual capacity, in other words, to make available the facilities of the National Hous ing Act to all qualified applicants when loans cannot be obtained from the approved lenders. The extent to which the corporation will draw on the proposed additional funds will, of course, depend largely upon the participa tion of the private lenders and, as I intimated a few moments ago, I am very glad to say that in recent weeks the private lenders have been playing a more active role in the market. During the first 18 weeks of 1958 approved lenders made insured loans-these are ordinary N.H.A. loans quite apart from the small home loans-for almost twice the number of units as in 1957, the figures being 11,775 as against 6,054 last year. Mr. Garland: Will the minister permit a question? Can he suggest why that was so? Mr. Green: I think one reason is that whereas last summer the housebuilding industry was heading for a real slump, when the small homes loan plan was initiated and we set out deliberately to encourage house building across Canada the builders of Can ada and the lending institutions, including the banks, caught the vision. Mr. Garland: I expected an answer to my question. Mr. Green: There was not much vision anywhere before June 10 of last year. I had better be careful. However, there has been a spirit of optimism in the housebuilding industry of Canada ever since. I hope it will continue. Mind you, if it should appear that people are no longer ready to buy small homes then we will have to change our policy accordingly. It may be that some other type of building will have to be fostered, but I am sure the hon. member for Nipissing will admit that there is a very good spirit across the country today so far as housebuilding is concerned. It has been one of the bright spots and we aim to keep it that way because we think it is of tremendous importance to the very fabric of the nation. I would ask that the house approve the resolution. I hesitate to ask that the bill be put through more than one stage in the one day. I only do so because at the moment we are right out of business and we wish to have this money available so that there will not be a falling away. At one time the government thought of providing the money without wait ing for parliament and we probably could have done so but we are genuinely concerned about any whittling away of the rights of parliament, particularly where the division National Housing Act of parties is so unequal. I am sure that mem bers opposite will give us credit for doing a lot of worrying about that situation. We decided that it would be far wiser to delay for the few intervening weeks and place the issue squarely before parliament and get parliamentary sanction before we expended any further funds. The members of the other place, at least a small part of them, are waiting with a good deal of impatience, I imagine, for the measure which was under debate prior to this one and the amendment to the National Hous ing Act so that they can be passed this week. I am hoping we can get this measure through quickly. An opportunity will be given to discuss the whole housing policy at an early date, probably on the estimates. We are very anxious to have suggestions. We do not pretend to have all the answers on this matter and we will provide an opportunity for such a discussion. Mr. Badanai: May I ask the minister whether money will be available for housing in villages and other small communities? Up to the present it has been impossible for anyone living in a small village to obtain a loan. We have cases in my constituency of small communities where people have been unable to obtain loans notwithstanding the great efforts made by them. Mr. Green: This comes under the direct lending activities of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. My understanding is that this money is supposed to be available for the smaller centres. Finally, may I repeat the offer we made last year that if members of the two parties in opposition wish to undertake a study of housing activities all the facilities of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will be made available to them just as they are available to members of the government party. Last year we had a committee of our own members making a study of housing problems and we believe it would be very beneficial for as many private members as possible to acquaint themselves fully with these problems. Mr. Crestohl: Will the minister answer a question? Can the minister tell us what yardstick was used to gauge the sufficiency of the additional $350 million? Mr. Green: I do not want to give away any trade secrets but we are hoping that this amount will be sufficient certainly until another parliament meets. Mr. Crestohl: Is it purely a guess or an estimate or was it gauged by some system of estimating the sufficiency of the amount? 120 HOuSE OF COMMONS Unemployment Insurance Mr. Green: We considered what amount we thought would be required and this was the conclusion reached. Of course we cannot be sure but we believe this amount will be adequate. At the same time we have to convince the Department of Finance that we are not asking for more than we really need. The hon. member will know that this is another consideration which has to be borne in mind because there are many other ways to spend the money. At six o'clock the committee took recess. AFTER RECESS The committee resumed at eight o'clock. Mr. Chevrier: I understood, Mr. Chairman, that at eight o'clock we would resume the discussion of the extension to unemployment insurance benefits in order that the legislation might go to the other house and be disposed of this evening. However, I am ready to proceed if need be. The Chairman: We shall await the arrival of the leader of the house. Mr. Green: Mr. Chairman, I understand that copies of the bill amending the Un employment Insurance Act are now available for distribution. Accordingly I move that the committee rise, report progress on the housing resolution and ask leave to sit again later this day. The Chairman: Is that agreed? Some hon. Members: Agreed. Progress reported. UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE FOR EXTENSION OF SEASONAL BENEFITS The house resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Starr for the second reading of Bill No. C-9, to amend the Unemployment Insurance Act. Mr. Speaker: By unanimous consent Mr. Starr, seconded by Mr. Green, moves that the bill entitled an act for the temporary extension of seasonal benefit periods under the Unemployment Insurance Act be now read a second time. Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion? Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Sevigny in the chair. Clause 1 agreed to. [Mr. Crestohl.] On clause 2-Act not applicable in certain cases. Mr. Martin (Essex East): I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, but when you called clause 2 I was looking at section 50 and I was also thinking of subsection 2. If I may, I should like to ask the minister about it. I take it that subsection 2 of section 1 simply means that the waiting period of a week is waived. Mr. Starr: That is right. Mr. Martin (Essex East): At first glance one would think that a person did not qualify who established benefit periods on or after May 18. It is simply a waiver? Mr. Starr: That is right. In other words when the seasonal benefit period starts on December 1 there is a waiting period of one week. In this case because of the extension of time we have waived that waiting period. Mr. Pickersgill: There is one question I should like to put to the minister. I under stood him to say, in reply I think to the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo, that this ex tension would apply also to unemployment insurance for fishermen. I was wondering whether there was any restriction other than that in the bill. Does it mean that if fisher men cannot fish, even though it is a period when there is normal fishing in that area, he would still be entitled to benefit? Mr. Starr: The fisherman is in the same category during this period as he was at December 1. If he has sufficient contributions to qualify him for the seasonal benefits on or after May 18, he will be entitled to them. Mr. Pickersgill: What I was trying to get at was this. Apparently I did not express myself very well. What is the criterion of un employment? Is it the same as it would be in winter. In winter in most of these areas everyone knows the fishermen cannot fish, whereas in the summer it is normal to fish. I was wondering just how that would work out. Mr. Starr: I do not know when the fishing season starts on the Newfoundland coast or in Vancouver. Of course that will be de termined in the same way. A person must be available for work in order to receive unem ployment insurance benefits. It will apply just in the same way to fishermen. Mr. Robichaud: Are we on clause 2? The Chairman: Yes. Mr. Robichaud: If we are on clause 2, may I point out that it reads as follows: This act does not apply to a person who on or after the 1st day of December, 1957, under the Unemployment Insurance Act as in force prior to MAY 15, 1958 121 the coming into force of this act, established a seasonal benefit period that terminated on or before the 17th day of May, 1958 because he exhausted his benefit rights with respect thereto. Can the minister tell us what was the total number of employees who applied for unem ployment insurance benefits on or after the 1st day of December, 1957 and whose benefit had expired before May 17? Mr. Starr: I am afraid I cannot say at this moment. I could supply this information to the hon. member after getting in touch with the department in order to get these figures. But I have not these figures available at the moment. Mr. Robichaud: These figures are quite im portant. We have to take into consideration the statement which the minister made yes terday. I think we will all agree that quite a large percentage-maybe the largest per centage-of those who applied or who quali fied for seasonal benefits had their period expire before May 15 because they had ex hausted their unemployment insurance stamps. In concluding his remarks yesterday when he introduced the resolution, the min ister used these words as reported at page 86 of Hansard: It is, in fact, a re-affirmation of an aim we have often enunciated, namely that Canadian workers shall not suffer hardships because of unemployment that occurs through no fault of their own. I want to stress the point to the minister that all those who have exhausted their sea sonal benefit period before May 17 are now unemployed through no fault of their own. I think they have just as much right to be looked after as have those who will come under this bill. Mr. Martin (Essex East>: We seem to be on clause 2 but I am still a little bit confused because of the enumeration of the section. I had in mind the implications of the first clause on the back page which is section 52 of the present act, with the amendment pro vided, and that amendment provides that there shall be only one period between De cember 1, 1957 and June 28, 1958. That seems to be very restricted, having in mind the pur pose of this legislation. It certainly will dis courage anyone who has had seasonal benefits and who might be offered temporary work. It will certainly discourage such a person from taking temporary work if he knows that once he goes off seasonal benefits before June 28 he cannot qualify for seasonal benefits again. That is clearly one of the results of this clause and it restricts the number of individuals who could qualify under this amendment. Unemployment Insurance Mr. Starr: The basic qualification for re ceiving unemployment insurance benefits is that one must be available for work. Unless he is available, he is unable to receive sea sonal benefits. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Of course I agree with that. A person who receives unemploy ment insurance must be prepared to take work if it is offered to him. But my point is this. In the administration of the Unemploy ment Insurance Act by the local offices, no matter how much they may try, in the case of temporary jobs it is not always possible to give full effect to the directive my hon. friend has just mentioned. In any event, assuming that a man has had seasonal benefits and assuming that a tempo rary job is offered to him, which he must take, having taken that job he then cannot qualify -if he needs to do so-for a seasonal allowance between the period when his temporary job has ceased and June 28. I say that on that account this section is quite restrictive even though he may still have stamps and even though his credits may not have run out. Is that not the situation? Mr. Starr: I am not certain about that, but I will endeavour to get the answer. Mr. Martin (Essex East): I can quite under stand that perhaps the minister would not have the answer at his finger tips but the difficulty is that if there is any validity in my point the rectification will come too late be cause, as I understand it, the government hopes to send this measure to the other place tonight. Mr. Starr: We will have the answer before the house passes the bill. Mr. Pickersgill: I wonder if the minister has had the opportunity since we were in com mittee on the resolution of ascertaining the figure for which I asked this afternoon and which he did not then have. That is to say, the number of persons in the province of Newfoundland who on April 30 were receiv ing benefits? Mr. Starr: Mr. Chairman, I have not been able to get those figures because they are not available. I have checked and I am afraid my answer must be the same as I gave earlier, that they are not available at our office at this moment. Mr. Pickersgill: I would not for a moment wish to hold up the measure on account of this statistic because, as I said this afternoon, even if this measure was going to benefit only a very few people we would still have no intention of opposing it, but I wonder if the minister could undertake to give us the figure as soon as it is available or can be compiled? 122 HOUSE OF COMMONS Unempfoyment Insurance He gave us a figure of 226,000 across the country at April 30, if I recall correctly, and he estimated that as of today that figure would be 200,000 or 201,000; I think he estimated a 25,000 reduction. I think we in this house would all like to know the distribution by provinces. That should not be very difficult to get and if the minister would get that and make it available I am sure we would all appreciate it. Mr. Robichaud: The minister said he could not supply the figure on the number of persons who had exhausted their benefit period up to date or to May 17, but would he not have available figures as to the number of persons who were receiving seasonal benefits and whose period had expired, say on April 30. These figures must be available because he has been producing all types of figures which terminated on that date. Mr. Starr: I can get those figures, but they are not available to me at this moment. They would need to be tabulated and I would need time to get them. Had I antici pated the hon. member would require this figure I would have prepared myself to give it to him. Mr. Robichaud: But the hon. minister will realize that these figures are quite important because they are so much related to his last remark made yesterday when he said that no Canadian worker should suffer hardship because of unemployment. I am sure, and I want to state again, that perhaps over 100,000 or even 150,000 workers would not be able to qualify under this measure because they have exhausted their seasonal benefit period before this amendment to the act would come into force. Mr. Starr: In answer to the question asked by the hon. member for Essex East, I am informed that if a claimant who qualifies for, say 20 weeks entitlement should go to work after drawing, say 10 weeks, he will be able to again draw benefits on becoming un employed. That is, he could go back again on benefits. Mr. Martin (Essex East>: He draws under the Unemployment Insurance Act provisions but he can only draw under this amend ment, surely, one seasonal benefit. If he has had the benefit it is under the act as previ ously amended providing for seasonal bene fits. Then, having drawn those benefits, he is entitled under this section to only one seasonal benefit. Mr. Starr: The old section provided for a seasonal benefit period-at least the one that was passed last year-from December 1 to [Mr. Pickersgill.] May 15, while this one only extends it from May 18 to June 28, but the same principle will apply as applied last year. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Then it is clear that what I said is true. There is only one seasonal benefit; he may need another sea sonal benefit and he cannot get it and on that account this clause is restrictive. While I am on my feet I might ask a further question with regard to the final part of clause 2. It is clear that it does not include those whose benefits have already run out prior to May 17. That is quite clear and it is one of the points which the hon. member for Gloucester had in mind and it eliminates a very considerable number of persons un employed. Before dinner I had suggested that the number might be less than the minister suggested with respect to those who would benefit under this amendment. The minister had suggested 200,000 and I know of course that he said "in part". But I suggested that the number fully benefiting would not be more than 40,000. I am now wondering if even that was not too high a figure and would it not be fair to say, having in mind the present levels of unemployment, having in mind all those who ran out of benefits prior to May 17 being excluded, and having in mind the six weeks period, that the number of individuals who would benefit under this amendment for the six weeks period would be perhaps not more than 20,000? Mr. Starr: Mr. Chairman, earlier, the hon. member guessed at a figure of 70,000 and then it was 40,000 and then in the space of a few minutes it dropped to 20,000. These figures which have been supplied to me on the numbers who will benefit during that period of time have been supplied by people who are well versed in these matters and who have had many years of experience so I think I would take their estimate as being fairly accurate. Mr. Martin (Essex East): I do not think the minister and I are really at cross pur poses. I am not suggesting that the informa tion given by his officials is inaccurate. I agree with him that it should be accepted because they are reliable and efficient public servants but the minister said on the basis of this information that 200,000 individuals would benefit, in part. That was the state ment; not 200,000 would benefit, 200,000 would benefit in part. Before dinner I sug gested that, that being the case, for the reasons I have mentioned, it might be that not more than 40,000 would benefit for the full six weeks period and, since then, I have MAY 15, 1958 123 Unemployment Insurance been looking over the figures and I think it Star is a very reliable newspaper and it would be more reasonable to conclude that quotes the manager of the Windsor office as 20,000 only would fully benefit. saying 3,000 will benefit. If the officials could give some help in this regard I would be very grateful to them, but I think it is important that we understand clearly and that the country understand clearly the full implications of this measure. They will also understand that it does some good but that it does good in a limited way and for a limited number. It is clear that it does not apply to those whose benefits run out prior to May 17, but is it clear that persons who have been able to file a claim for seasonal periods following their regular benefit period can qualify? Mr. Starr: Yes. Mr. Martin (Essex East>: There is no doubt about that'? Mr. Starr: There is no doubt about that. I want to say something in regard to what the hon. member said a moment ago as to his guess that only approximately 20,000 would benefit during the whole period of six weeks under the extension of this act. I am not going to argue that point because I think he is only guessing but, as a matter of fact, in the city of Windsor alone, as I am advised by our local manager, if we did extend this act for another six weeks then something like 6,000 people would be taken off the rolls. So it is going to help at least to the extent of 6,000 persons in that city alone for the next six weeks. Mr. Martin (Essex East): If it benefits that number in Windsor no one will be happier than one who has represented that con stituency in this house for a long time and who has always had a sympathetic concern for his constituents. Mr. Churchill: They were not so sure of you this time. Mr. Martin (Essex East): They were so sure that they returned the member for Essex East for the seventh time. And I should like to say, in the spirit of comradeship which obviously pervades the Minister of Trade and Commerce at this moment, that if it had not been for "the vision" he would not be sitting here tonight. The Minister of Labour says 6,000 will benefit. I have a statement here which ap peared in the Windsor Star of this morning and which quotes the manager of the Windsor office of the unemployment insurance com mission as saying that an estimated 3,000 will benefit from this extension of seasonal bene fits in that area. The hon. gentleman says 6,000. I hope that is right, but the Windsor Mr. Starr: I quoted the figure 6,000 be cause I happened to be talking to him. I happen to be interested in the situation in Windsor and took the trouble to find out what the situation was there, and this was the figure supplied to me. In any event, I hope the hon. member for Essex East is cor rect and that there will not be more than 20,000 people benefiting by this measure, because we hope the number will not amount to 20,000. We hope it will be less. I should now like to answer some of the questions which have been put to me by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. Sea sonal benefit periods established between December 1, 1957 and April 3, 1958 amounted, for Canada as a whole, to 373,674 and for Newfoundland to 21,395. Seasonal benefits paid in the same period amounted, for Can ada, to $71,033,226 and for Newfoundland to $4,595,449. Seasonal benefit claims at local offices in all Canada on April 30, 1958 amounted to 226,870, and in Newfoundland to 15,178. Mr. Pickersgill: I thank the minister very much. Mr. Bourque: May I ask the minister a question pertaining to an unemployed person whose benefits end on May 31st? Would such a person have a seasonal benefit of four weeks or would it be six weeks, or would it end on June 28 as marked in the bill? Mr. Starr: I presume the hon. member is asking whether a person entitled to regular benefits which expired on May 31 would quality for the remaining period to June 20. The answer is yes. Mr. Pickersgill: Has the minister answered the question asked by the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo? He had to leave the chamber a moment ago and he asked me to take this up for him. The question concerned any stamps that might be left over for which benefit would not have been received on June 28. Mr. Starr: I thought I gave that answer but I am not certain. Mr. Pickersgill: I think the minister will recall that he said he was not able to give a precise answer as to whether, if a certain number of stamps were not used for benefit, they could be counted in a succeeding period. Mr. Starr: I did give an answer to the effect that the balance of entitlement which a claimant might have on June 28 lapses at that date. That is what I think the hon. 124 HOUSE OF COMMONS National Housing Act member had in mind. However, some or all of the contributions which provide this entitle ment may count for either regular benefit later or for seasonal benefit next year. Mr. Pickersgill: I think the hon. member for Burin-Burgeo-and I am speaking from recollection-said: suppose there were six stamps which had not been used, would the claimant have to get 15 new stamps before he would have any entitlement, or only 9 before he could get entitlement for the next season. Mr. Starr: No. They lapse on June 28, so he would have to accumulate stamps from March 31, another period of contributions. Mr. Pickersgill: He would lose the benefit of those six s,amps in that case. Mr. Starr: I would not want to answer that; I am not quite certain. Mr. Pickersgill: I admit it is a difficult question, and I should not expect the min ister to have the answer at his fingertips. Mr. Starr: I should like to answer the question asked by the hon. member for Gloucester who wanted to know how many people had exhausted benefits on April 30. I am informed that there is no record of this number until the end of the year. Clause 2 agreed to. Bill reported, read the third time and passed. NATIONAL HOUSING ACT AMENDMENT INCREASING AGGREGATE AMOUNT AVAILABLE The house resumed consideration in com mittee of the following resolution-Mr. Green -Mr. Sevigny in the chair: That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Na tional Housing Act, 1954, to increase from four h undred million dollars to seven hundred and fifty million dollars the aggregate amount that may be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund under subsection 1 of section 22 of the act. Mr. Chevrier: Mr. Chairman, together with a number of hon. members on this side of the house I have been given the responsibility of placing before the committee the view point of the opposition on this matter. I confess at once that I am not an expert on housing, but because of the circumstances in which I found myself I have had to do a lot of reading in the last two days on the most interesting subject of housing. I found, much to my amusement, that I did not have at my fingertips the expert advice which I once had when I sat on the other side of the house and I recalled the words of a former member of this chamber, now in [Mr. Starr.] another place, who one day stated here that it was almost like moving from a private car to an upper berth. However, I do not complain about the circumstances. In fact, in a sense I am somewhat happy because I am relieved of many responsibilities. I recall some of the suggestions that were made to us by hon. members opposite when we sat on the right of His Honour about technical and expert assistance and I hope they will not soon forget the recommenda tions which they made in that respect from time to time. Although I am not an expert on housing I am convinced of one thing and it is this. We on this side of the house would like to see every Canadian own a decent home and we are prepared to co-operate with the government with respect to this measure to the degree to which it will provide that kind of housing. The former hon. member for St. Antoine Westmount last year paid a tribute to the Minister of Public Works for the manner in which he presented the resolution he intro duced at that time. I recall what a clear and lucid picture the minister gave at that time and he did the same thing shortly before six o'clock this evening and while I will not be able to commend him for every thing he said I do want to commend him for the thorough manner in which he pre sented the resolution to the committee. I would not be fair to myself and to those who sit with me here if I were not to say he indicated in that presentation that he has a full knowledge of the subject matter which he was submitting to the committee. I thank the minister for the suggestion of co-operation on the part of his officials. He made a similar offer last year of which advantage was taken and we on this side of the house had the benefit of assistance from Dr. Bates, the president of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and some of his assistants and I can assure the min ister that that information was of great help to us. Had it not been for the short time at our disposal I am sure we would have again availed ourselves of that similar help this year. I should like to tell the minister that he should not be too touchy about what was said in another debate about unemploy ment because nothing of that sort has been said yet in this debate. I am not guarantee ing that it will not be said but I am sure no one on this side of the house will deny that this is a good measure in principle which will tend to relieve unemployment. What was said earlier-and I hope I am not out of order, Mr. Chairman, when I refer to it- MAY 15, 1958 125 was not in complaint of this particular measure but in discussion of the unemploy ment situation as a whole. In breaking down the amounts of money that have been spent on housing in the several categories I believe the minister said some $392 million had been used up out of a possible $400 million leaving roughly $8 million in the fund. In effect, to use round figures, some $400 million was spent by the government since it took office with reference to housing. Mr. Green: No; $100 million of that had already been spent when we took office. Mr. Chevrier: Yes. I understood from the minister that when the government took office about $150 million was left out of the $250 million originally passed by the former administration. The point I was trying to make is this. Notwithstanding that expend iture in the intervening time from the month of February until March unemploy ment had increased by some 70,000 in this country. In fact, the figures given by my friend the hon. member for Essex East indicate that in the month of March, the latest period for which we had figures, the unemployment figure had reached 600,000. Surely this measure is going to be of assistance, and there is no doubt in my mind about that, but the position we have taken is that this is not enough. There must be measures of an additional character. Dealing more specifically with the resolu tion now before the committee: It seeks to increase from $400 million to $750 million the aggregate amount that may be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund under sub section 1 of section 22 of the National Hous ing Act. We are being asked to advance these funds to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation for the purpose of making loans as broken down by the minister earlier under the four headings he mentioned including agency loans, direct loans to small centres, limited dividend corporation loans, housing projects and the like. This measure is also for the purpose of making loans under sec tion 40 and subsection 40 (a) of the act which is the section under which Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation has been making a large number of the loans which are popularly referred to as agency loans. The minister earlier this week stated in reply to a question that substantially all of the funds already voted by parliament have been used up and only a small balance remains, namely $8 million. As I under stand the position it is this: unless parlia ment places other moneys at the disposition of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation National Housing Act it will have to discontinue its lending opera tions. We of the official opposition do not think this would be desirable and accord ingly we have every intention of supporting this resolution and of facilitating its adoption by this committee and also of facilitating the passing of the requisite bill. However, our acceptance of the resolution does not mean we have nothing to say on the matter of housing in general because we know the funds to be placed at the disposal of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation will be used to make various types of loans and that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation itself is only one of several kinds of financial institutions that ordinarily invest their funds in mortgages. The increasing of the funds to be available to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation is, therefore, in our view the appropriate occasion to review the housing situation generally and that is what I would like to do now dealing with certain points as briefly and as factually as I can. In that connection I believe I should sound a note of warning because it is quite clear from what was said by the Prime Minister and other prominent Conservatives during the election campaign that they believe their actions in providing substantial funds for housing have been of invaluable assistance to the economy generally. I shall not deny that the loans made by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation have had a beneficent effect on the building of new homes but the facts as to mortgage lending in Canada last year make me wonder whether the govern ment's intervention in this field, hitherto occupied almost exclusively by private insti tutions, has not merely had the effect of encouraging these institutions to seek other forms of investment for their funds. I have here the Canadian housing statistics for the fourth quarter of 1957, published by Central Mortgage and Housing Corpora tion. They show a number of things which I should like to bring to the attention of the committee. They show firstly that in 1957 the life insurance companies and the trust, loan and other lending institutions invested $239.3 million, which was not much less than the $254.9 million they invested in those mortgages in 1956. These figures can be found on table 17 on real estate lending. Secondly, I should like to say that in 1957 the chartered banks actually increased the amount of their loans under the National Housing Act. The amount of such loans approved in that year was some $15 million greater than in 1956. As a matter of fact, as shown on table 18, this amount was $173.5 million as against $158.2 million. Thirdly, the loans under the National Housing Act made in 1957 by the life insurance companies and 126 HOUSE OF COMMONS National Housing Act the trust, loan and other lending institutions dropped very substantially. Whereas those lenders had invested $267.1 million under the National Housing Act in 1956, they invested only $104.6 million in 1957. This hon. members will agree, is a very big reduction and one cannot avoid asking oneself what is the reason for it. The answer seems to be suggested by the statistics which show that in 1957 Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation loaned $235.2 million in contrast to $19.9 million in the previous year; in other words, the government, through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, has not only made up for the reduction in lending by the private institutions, but has lent more than $100 million besides. I realize the difficulty in establishing posi tively that Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation activities account for the reduc tion in private investment and therefore I shall not attempt to labour the point any further. However, it will be sufficient for me to state and to draw to the attention of the government the dangers of it coming to occupy a preponderant or overdominating position in this field. There are advantages in encouraging in stitutional lenders who favour this type of investment, and not the least is the advantage which comes from the fact that these lenders are very sensitive to indications that in any particular locality or in any particular type of accommodation there is over-building. The next point I wish to touch on is that the building of new houses affords good em ployment opportunities and for that reason I consider it important not only that the gov ernment should be able to make loans, if and when that is desirable, but also that it should not discourage the traditional lenders in the mortgage field. Throughout the election campaign and since the government has emphasized the value of its lending activities as a means of providing employment. But having regard to the numbers who have been out of jobs I am very much surprised that at the very time the government was proclaiming the virtues of its lending program as a make-work project it was positively discouraging the building of rental accommodation. Early this year builders were told-they were encouraged-to submit plans and speci fications to those making the agency loans, and they were led to believe that their appli cations would be given favourable considera tion. Many builders went to considerable trouble and expense to prepare plans and specifications and then without warning the lending institutions were advised that the agency arrangements for rental loans were terminated. [Mr. Chevrier.] I hold in my hand the directive, or the advice, given by the executive director of the corporation in this regard. It is too long for me to read. Suffice it to say that this action was intended to conserve finances for home-ownership purposes. The minister touched on that earlier, but surely it is a rather highhanded way of proceeding, partic ularly when it seems desirable to encourage all forms of building as a means of increasing employment, and as the need of rental units is very acute in many places and in some cases greater than single family residences. If the placing of these funds at the disposal of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation means morE> work and more employment in one field, it is difficult for me to understand why one should discriminate against rental housing in favour of single-family houses because one provides just as much employ ment as the other. In fact, I am told that the former provides more work than the latter. This brings me to another point, namely that there is a real need to give attention now, having regard to present levels of employ ment to the question of slum clearance and to the building of low-rental accommodation. I should like to remind the committee, if I may that after the convention of the Liberal part~ which was held in Ottawa in January, several resolutions were adopted but one particularly having to do with housing. I do not want to labour the point, but I should like to draw the attention of the committee to the preamble of the resolution and to one or two of the items that had to do with housing. Because of the importance of good housing to our way of life and to the health and happiness of Canadians, the Liberal party has as its goal the provision of a decent home for every Canadian. Accordingly we on this side of the house stand for that measure and we stand also for the encouragement of the building of moderate and low-rental accommodation by increasing the maximum loan. We are in favour of introducing a municipal grants assistance act under which the federal govern ment would assist municipalities in the installation of essential services. We would like to extend the participation of the federal government in slum clearance and urban redevelopment programs by increasing the federal government's share of the cost of acquiring and clearing blighted or sub standard areas, and in special circumstances by lending to the municipalities their share of the cost of such projects. We would increase the federal government's share of the cost of constructing low-rental sub sidized housing for low-income families. MAY 15, 1958 127 I hope, therefore, that the government will later this session introduce further amend ments to the act, designed to make federal assistance greater and its co-operation along those lines more effective. I come now to another point which I think should be of great interest to the committee and, of course, to the minister, namely the rate of interest to be charged on loans made by Central Mortgage and Housing Corpora tion. During the election the Prime Minister repeatedly stated that as a result of govern ment action since last June interest rates had fallen sharply. He made that statement at Calgary on March 14; he made a similar statement at Selkirk, Manitoba, on March 17; and he spoke of it again in Halifax on March 24. He pointed out that the rate had fallen from a high of 4.3 per cent to 2.89 per cent in recent weeks. Yet despite all of these assertions, the rate of interest on the loans by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation remains fixed at 6 per cent. I hope that when he speaks later the minister will ex plain the reason the government has for maintaining the rate at 6 per cent, and how he reconciles the maintaining of that rate with the Prime Minister's electoral pronounce ments. No doubt the minister, in his usual skilful fashion,- Mr. Green: I have a good answer for that. Mr. Chevrier: -will explain these ques tions. Well, if he has a good answer then probably he can explain this one. I refer to the pronouncement made by the Solicitor General in a speech he made not so long also about the legislation which was going to be introduced in the house. I hope the minister will deal with that. Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria): On housing? Mr. Chevrier: Yes. I should like to refer to the statement made by the Solicitor General and I hope the house will bear with me if I read it in French because it is a report that appeared in Le Devoir of November 9, 1957 . I am informed that it is a very accurate statement of what the Solicitor General said and it goes like this : (Translation): HON. BALCER ANNOUNCES HOUSING AND CREDIT LEGISLATION Hon. Leon Balcer, Solicitor General of Canada, let it be known yesterday that the Conservative government ls planning legislation on housing and on measures designed to promote loans and to put money in circulation in Canada. He also indicated that the Dlefenbaker government might make a step backward in order to reduce the high rate of interest imposed by the Liberal government prior to June 10. National Housing Act (Text): I cannot refrain from translating that part. It states: The Diefenbaker government wlll make a step backward- ! do not understand why he made that statement but in any event that is the effect of the translation. -in order to reduce the high rate of interest imposed by the Liberal government prior to June 10. Then he goes on and says something more significant with his reference to his colleague, the Minister of Public Works. (Translation): The Minister of Public Works will shortly intro duce a bill which according to Hon. Leon Balcer, will p romote the building of homes. The Minister of Finance, for his part, is said to have in mind another bill which would settle the matter of interest rates and easier borrowing. (Text): I hope the Minister of Public Works will be able to explain to the house the statement of his colleague, the Solicitor General, in Montreal in addressing a construction group when he said that the interest rate on mort gage loans would be reduced. Of course, I will tell the minister at once that if such a bill is introduced it will get quick support from this side of the house. I would also ask the minister to tell us what effect the increase of $350 million for housing will have on the money market in Canada. The Prime Minister told the electorate several times that the releasing of $300 million for new housing had eased the tight money situation and of course I would not think for a moment of going into the political aspects of that question since the minister himself refrained and restrained himself more than once with reference to a discussion of a political nature on this measure. Therefore, I will also refrain but I wish he would tell me what effect the additional $350 million is expected to prod uce on interest rates. There are a number of other things I could say but I am prompted to refer to a statement that appears in one of the local newspapers written by a person whom I am sure the Minister of Public Works would have liked very much to have seen in the house but who, thanks to my colleague, the hon. member for Ottawa West, is not able to be in the house. I could say something else to my hon. friend- Mr. Pickersgill: Prenez garde. Mr. Chevrier: -but since it concerns a lady I do not think I should and even if I did so I would have to say it with my tongue in my mouth. Some hon. Members: Oh, oh! 128 HOUSE OF COMMONS National Housing Act Mr. Chevrier: I made that mistake once before. Mr. Harkness: That is a very appropriate place for it. Mr. Chevrier: I made that mistake once before and I hope the house will accept my apology for my imperfect English. However this article which appeared in the Ottaw~ Citizen is extremely critical of some aspects of the housing situation in Canada generally and of some of the measures which the minister is introducing this evening. I wonder whether I would be allowed- Mr. Green: Are you quoting it as an auth ority? Mr. Chevrier: If my hon. friend wants to take it as such I have no objection. I am not saying how I am quoting it. I should like to put it on the record and if my hon. friend wants to reply to it I will be most interested ~o listen to what he will have to say. This 1s what the article which appeared in the Citizen of May 9 has to say in part: It does seem time to stop, look and seriously consider more effective control in preventing public credit_ des1gned to provide housing from being exploited to send land costs zooming at six times the rate per square foot of building costs . Y~ung families and new settlers need moder~t~ priced rental housing ... More multiple units are needed at moderate rentals for the increasing number of "no-family" households. There is no doubt about land values zoom ing, to use the expression of the lady who wrote the article. If my hon. friend looks at table 56 of Canadian Housing Statistics entitled "Estimated Costs Of Single Family Dwellings Financed Under The National Housing Act" he will see under the column headed "Land" that land costs increased from $523 in 1947 to 2,293 in 1957. In the first quarter of 1957 land cost was $2,153 and in the last quarter $2,443, an increase of almost $30_0. That is a tremendous increase, and I believe I am accurate in saying that land cost is perhaps the most important of all the elements that enter into the increased cost of housing. The situation with reference to land is so serious that I believe it is having an effect on the whole question of housing. This very rapid increase in land costs is not only un desirable but is giving rise to the impression that public credit is being exploited to send land costs so high. I believe the situation is serious enough to have the president of Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation look into the matter because I think it is one which the minister will want to have examined more carefully. I would also ask the minister to look into the question of appraisals. I cannot avoid thinking that they are not being made in [Mr. Chevrier.] the spirit of the National Housing Act. Ap praisals too are an important part of the discussion of the resolution as in the question of housing generally. I think I have almost used up the time at my disposal and I will not proceed further because I know the gov ernment is anxious to bring in the bill as quickly as possible so that it can be passed. I may have something to say later. I hope that the minister will find it possi ble to answer some of the points which I raised. More particularly I will listen care fully to what he will have to say concerning the suggestion, the promise or the statement by his colleague that legislation would be introduced to reduce the rate of interest on loans. Mr. Re~ier: At the outset, Mr. Chairman, I should like to assure the minister that the group in this corner of the house is in whole hearted agreement with his main aim of obtaining this additional money for Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I was very much interested in the minister's remarks this afternoon. I should like to express our apreciation for his kind offer when he extended an invitation to members of the opposition who were especially inter ested in housing to use the offices of the ~entral Mortgage and Housing Corporation m order to make themselves more knowl edgeable members when they speak on this subject. I was also very much interested in the minister's remarks because it was an amazing half hour. It was almost like a chinook out west where for one hour you have a temper ature of 30 degrees below zero and then for several minutes you experience a temperature of 30 degrees above zero. The minister seemed at times to be one of the finest ad vocates of socialism in this house that I have heard for a goodly number of years. Yet every once in a while he insisted that ht was a genuine free enterpriser after all; he only regretted that free enterprise was not meeting the housing needs of the Cana dian people and therefore he was by force of circumstances a very good socialist and was pleading with the house to be socialist with him. The minister reviewed the act since 1954 and he listed the uses that had been made of the money that had been made available to Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. He mentioned the direct loans in smaller communities, the limited dividend plan for low rental houses and, as a third, he listed the fact that the money had been used for the building of low rental houses for workers in primary industry. I believe the minister forgot to mention a fourth use that was made MAY 15, 1958 129 over a goodly number of years, namely a time when the money supplied by this par liament was used to supply a oortion of the regular loans that were made by the private lenders. I believe it was 25 per cent of all loans made under the act by private lenders at one time. Mr. Green: That was an earlier plan. That plan has not been in existence since the amendments, I think, of the year 1954. Mr. Regier: I fully realize that fact; the minister is right. It was before 1954 that there was a fourth way in which the money was used. The year 1954 was the year in which it seemed as though the lenders would have adequate resources of their own and the government in that year, in amending the act, abolished supplying a portion of the funds. Last year we again entered the field where the taxpayers' money was used to supply, through lending agencies, the mortgage money necessary for housing. I remember very well the minister's optimism and his confidence in the ability of the reg ular lending institutions to supply the rest of the money that would be needed a year ago. I recall especially the questioning of the minister in the house by the then hon. member for Regina who did his utmost to warn the minister that before the minister would again be able to obtain money from a new session of a new parliament his existing supply of funds would have been exhausted. I am thinking now of what appears at page 3459 of Hansard of January, 18, 1958 when the minister replied to the then hon. member for Regina as follows: And if further money is required to carry out this work, the government will ask parliament to vote it. Several days later, as reported at page 3511 of Hansard of January 20, the minister said this: As I pointed out to the house on Saturday there is still the sum of $90 million available, and if further money is required the government will not hesitate to ask parliament to vote it. At that time what we in this group were doing in effect was pleading with the min ister to ask parliament for more money before dissolution. All of us, I believe, were rather aware of the fact that there might not be a session of parliament for a considerable number of months. The very thing that we feared might happen has happened, in that the minister ran out of money. We have the minister's admission this afternoon that two months ago he had to begin curtailing the activities of the house building program in Canada, that he had to limit the amounts available for apartment buildings and that sometime ago- I believe it was a month or 57071-3-9 National Housing Act so ago, if I remember rightly-he had to curtail these small loans. I was greatly inter ested in the minister's admission this after noon that in the middle of last year, in mid summer, they saw unemployment coming on the horizon. That is an admission that we have been waiting for some considerable time to hear, namely that even the Conserv atives a year ago were aware that unemploy ment was on the horizon. Mind you, at that time we were not able to gain that admission from them. The housing needs of the Cana dian people have not lessened at all. The minister has made much-and I think rightly so-of the good work the money that was voted him has been able to accomplish. How ever, this money-that is the money that he is now asking for, the $350 million additional funds-is only 41 per cent of the investment capital available in the Canadian economy this year. I believe that in round figures the forecast is that there will be invested in Canada some $8,000 million. In the light of that figure, $350 million available for housing is not overly much. I know the minister is asking for only enough money to supply in effect the money for 35,000 housing units which is roughly 25 per cent of the expected 140,000. However, taking the minister's own estimates as being accurate--and I am sure they are; so far they have always been near the mark-it means that there will be in vested by government and by private ini tiative in housing in Canada this year 17½ per cent of the amount of money that will be invested in all the various fields through out the country. It is not an overly large percentage when you consider that our peo ple at the present time are still short of one million housing units. In a year such as this, when we are faced with a surplus of lumber and with unemployment, I believe the program that the minister envisages in the field of housing is a modest one indeed. We in this group have for a long time advocated the establishment of a national investment board which would ensure that the social and public needs would not have to suffer for lack of investment capital. Under a properly constituted national investment board there would be regulation of the flow of investment capital in Canada; not neces sarily the ownership of that capital but regulations to ensure that the Canadian people would not lack the capital necessary for housing, hospitals, roads, bridges, railways, public power development, industrial expan sion and the capital to finance the carrying on and operation of the Canadian economy. I see that the minister's right-hand man last night read a speech at Kitchener, Ontario-he was unable to deliver it in person but he had someone read it for him- 130 HOUSE OF COMMONS National Housing Act which was an appeal to private investors of Canada to make available enough housing money so that 3½ million new homes could be built in this country in the next 23 years. With a rough bit of arithmetic it appears that he would mean by that 150,000 housing units per year. I am afraid that our experience over the last several years has shown that the mere appeal of government members or civil servants at annual meetings and the like for investment in housing is quite in adequate. Investment capital naturally flows where it earns the highest return and, as the minister very well knows since he was in the house with me during the last several years, when the earnings of Canadian enter prises began to rise, especially after the reduc tion in corporation taxes allowed by the former government, the interest of people who had investment capital at their command began to move away from the orthodox fields of investment and in the direction of in dustrial expansion because the return there was so much higher. In such cases as public and private utilities investment was at least as secure as it was in housing. At such times the former government became quite frantic and appealed in similar terms to the appeal made last night in Ontario and to the min ister's appeal in the house this afternoon. They appealed to the managers of invest ment capital to make more provision for the housing needs of the people but their appeals fell on deaf ears and did not bring about the desired results. So the former govern ment finally found a new source of capital for housing. The chartered banks of Canada have never been primarily interested in the investment of capital in long-term industrial expansion and the government realized that these banks, because of our economic expansion, were a little flush with funds. The chartered banks were then put into the field of housing and that arrested the decline in housing for a time, but only for a time. It was not very long before the banks had invested what they considered to be an equitable and safe share of their assets in housing. The earn ings of corporations continued to increase and less and less private money was made available for housing. These pious hopes for the social needs of Canada being met by mere appeals at annual meetings will not bring money into the housing field, and we must have that money. It is for these reasons we have always ad vocated a national investment board whereby the government of the country would assume some responsibilty for the direction of the flow of investment capital and would see that there was a rational distribution of the [Mr. Regier.] available investment capital at all times. I know this would involve amendments to several acts. The Bank Act would likely have to be amended; the act respecting loan companies would have to be amended and the Canadian and British Insurance Companies Act would require an amendment, and other acts would have to be amended. There are, however, ways and means available to the government whereby it could exert the pres sure necessary to be exerted on managers of investment capital to ensure that we will not have a reckless expansion of certain segments of our industrial enterprise--often to our own regret later on when we find we have not the markets to handle increased produc tion-and to ensure that enough money will be available where it is most urgently needed in the public interest. Mr. Walker: Might I ask my hon. friend a question? Getting back to the subject of the bill, I wonder if my hon. friend would indi cate to this side of the house whether or not he is in favour of the bill before us because, so far, none of us have been able to determine that. Mr. Regier: Mr. Chairman, I believe the hon. member may not have been present in the house when I started to speak. At the out set I said we heartily endorsed the min ister's request for an additional $350 million to supply the housing needs of the Canadian people through Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. An hon. Member: He has been here all the time. Mr. Regier: If the hon. member has been listening he would have heard what I said, but perhaps his microphone is not working any better than mine. I did wish to point out that in our opinion this is not adequate and that a mere appeal to private initiative to supply, on an almost voluntary basis, the other 75 per cent of the mortgage needs of the Canadian people for housing is not neces sarily the answer. Experience has shown this to be the case as the minister knows full well. As a matter of fact, private enterprise sud denly lost all interest in investment in hous ing in Canada about a year ago and it took quite a bit of aggressive action on the part of the minister-and I would like to give him full marks for this-to make more money available. However, if he feels that the mak ing available of $150 million or $350 million is going to prevent a slump in housing, all I am saying is that this is not necessarily the case. It all depends on where the other 75 per cent of the money is going to come from. If the earnings of the Canadian corporations are going to be allowed to rise again, as they MAY 15, 1958 131 have done on other occasions, the minister six months hence may find himself suddenly left holding the bag with his 25 per cent and he will find that the other 75 per cent of the money on which he had relied to meet the needs of our people has vanished. I hope we will have another chance to dis cuss the act but I do regret that the minister has not yet seen the need to supply insurance policies under the act, insurance for the buyer as well as the lending agency. It is becoming a very common practice in this country, wherever there is a new housing subdivision, that two or three days after the new home owner has moved in there is a knock at the door and an agent, very often the agent from the very life insurance agency which has handled the mortgage, calls and is able to convince the new home owner that he should buy a life insurance policy which will retire the mortgage in the case of his death. I feel that is to be regretted because under the act the buyer has to pay a premium which insures the lending agent against de fault, against inability of the buyer to meet his monthly payments. However, there is nothing in the act to give adequate protec tion for the buyer's equity in his new home. I feel that even if a slight extra rate in this insurance premium is necessary, the govern ment might be able to supply this added protection for the occupant of the new home. I note again, as I did last year, my concern that much of the success of the minister's program has involved a reduction in the size of the home. Many people in Canada have commented to me about the dangers involved in building units of hundreds upon hundreds of new homes which are limited as to floor space in relation to the number of rooms pro vided in the houses, and there is a fear abroad that these homes may end in years to come as areas which we sometimes refer to as slum areas. This may be part of the price we have to pay for an aggressive home building pro gram. I do not know. But I regret it if this is one of the sacrifices we have to make in order to obtain homes for our Canadian people. I have not yet looked at the minister's esti mates but I hope he is going to ask for more money for the research department of the C.M.H.C. We have made tremendous tech nical advances in almost every field of activity, yet when it comes to building a home we are using almost the same techni ques as we used 40 or 50 years ago. I do not know where the bottleneck is, but I hope the day is not far removed when we shall see some technological advances applied to the building of Canadian homes, because it is the high cost of homes which is primarily respon sible for many of our difficulties. 57071-3-9½ National Housing Act I am going to end now- Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Regier: Mr. Chairman, members of this house who feel that there is anything amiss when other hon. members are discussing housing in the light of the serious situation in Canada today have many things yet to learn in this present session, and I can assure them that they will hear often from me on this and on other subjects. I do not mind at all when Conservative members of parliament are pleased to see me sit down. When Con servative members of parliament love to hear me speak I feel I should be failing in my mission. Housing has social implications. The saying is that when poverty enters the door love flies out of the window. Thus, all of us who are concerned about the social welfare of our Canadian people will welcome this move to make more homes available. Mr. Green: Mr. Chairman, I should like to thank the hon. member for Laurier and the hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam for the moderation of their remarks and also for the suggestions they have made. We will have them very carefully considered. I believe the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation does a very worth-while job in keeping in touch with developments in the housing field as they arise, and there are always useful suggestions made in a debate of this sort. I was a little surprised by the lack of logic or commonsense shown in a portion of the remarks made by my old friend the hon. mem ber for Laurier. He began by criticizing me very severely for having the government do all the lending. He said: You should let the private institutions do this lending; you are going too far; you are getting the govern ment into this field too deeply. And then, after he had made a few other remarks and forgotten what he said in his opening, he told me: you had better drop the interest rate; you are charging too much; there has been a decline in general interest rates, so why do you not lower the interest rate on housing. The hon. gentleman cannot have it both ways. If he wants us to get the lending insti tutions to put up more money for home building the finest way to fail in that objec tive would be to drop the interest rate, because the problem has been that where the lending institutions can get a higher rate of interest in some other investment the tendency was to put their money into that other investment and not into housing. I am sure that upon reflection the hon. member will appreciate that this is the situation. Were we to announce tonight that the interest rate on N.H.A. loans is to be lowered it would be 132 HOUSE OF COMMONS National Housing Act just that much more difficult to get mortgage money from lending institutions. As a matter of fact the present rate is well within the statutory provision and I think it would be doing a great disservice to the country if I were to announce a drop such as the hon. member for Laurier has suggested. Then the hon. member inquired what effect I thought this $350 million would have on the money market. Neither he nor I are experts on financial matters. I do not pre tend to be able to prophesy what effect it will have on the money market, but I am sure it will have a good effect in providing homes for young Canadians. There is no doubt at all about the effect of the policy of the former government when it supported the tight money policy. There certainly is no question about the effect that had on housing and on the availability of funds for builders who were to construct that housing. The hon. member for Laurier said we should get into the slum clearance and re development field. I did not deal with that subject because it does not come under this particular section of the National Housing Act. These redevelopment schemes are joint federal, provincial and municipal schemes. Money is provided quite apart from this par ticular section, so a discussion of that sub ject was not relevant in the debate before the committee this evening. The hon. mem ber read me part of the platform which was passed by that ill-fated convention last Jan uary. The actual fact is that we are very much interested in redevelopment schemes and are doing our best for them. For example, there is a redevelopment scheme in Halifax and I signed the agreement for the dominion government last month. Then again, we are going ahead with the Jeanne Mance project in Montreal. There are also negotiations un der way for a redevelopment scheme in the city of Windsor. Mr. Martin (Essex Easil: Welcome. Mr. Green: I did not hear that comment. I presume the hon. member for Essex East was not complaining this time. I hope there will be one under way shortly in the city of Vancouver. As a matter of fact, I hope there will be a small one in the city of Trail in the constituency of my old friend the hon. member for Kootenay West. Where ever a city takes the initiative and shows an interest in a redevelopment scheme we pay three quarters of the cost of the inves tigation leading to a redevelopment, half the cost of acquiring the land and then we pay three quarters of the cost of a new housing scheme to house the people who have to leave the slum area. We are keenly interested in these redevelopment plans. [Mr. Green.] The hon. member for Burnaby-Coquitlam mentioned the fear that these small homes might become slum areas. I am confident that that is not the case. I would be ex tremely upset if I thought that would be the result of the small homes loan plan. The hon. member will be interested to learn that great interest is being taken by architects, designers and builders in the construction of modern, efficient small homes. A young builder-designer who lives just across the Fraser river from the hon. member's constit uency won a prize in a nationwide contest for the finest design for a small home last year. Architects and builders are taking a great pride in working out attractive and efficient small homes. They realize just as we do that if more and more expense is put into homes all the time then it will never be possible for the vast majority of our people to acquire proper houses. The real need is for the development of a first class modest home and it is that type of house in which the present government is interested. The hon. member will also realize that we could not very well go into the life insurance business. I understood his suggestion to be that the government should arrange to take a life insurance policy on the person who buys a home. That is a pretty far-reaching suggestion and we are not in favour of a plan of that kind. The hon. gentleman might be interested to know that in his own area the small homes loan plan has been a greater success than in any other part of British Columbia. In the area coming under the jurisdiction of the New Westminster office of the Central Mort gage and Housing Corporation there have been 1,283 housing units built for a total value of $12,750,781.35. In that particular district, a great portion of which is in the hon. member's own riding, there has been a great amount of homebuilding and I think he will agree with me that these new homes are not of the slum type. However, we will keep all these suggestions in mind and I hope that at an early date it will be possible to have a discussion which will cover the whole housing field. This particular measure covers only the funds required for one section of the National Housing Act. As such I believe debate is properly limited to a discussion of the housing activities which come under that particular section. (Translation): Mr. Bourget: Mr. Chairman, before coming to the few remarks I propose to make on this resolution, I wish to take this first oppor- MAY 15, 1958 133 tunity to offer you my sincere congratulations for the honour which your party has bestowed upon you in choosing you as chairman of this house. I know by experience that such functions entail much honour but, on the other hand, many responsibilities are attached to them. However, I am sure that you will discharge your duties with good judgment and impar tiality and I wish to extend to you my per sonal good wishes. (Text): Mr. Chairman, it is not my intention tonight to speak at great length on the resolution that is now before the committee. As the minister has just said, we will have other occasions in the future tn discuss the whole housing situation. In addition to that, when a similar measure was introduced last December I had occasion to make some remarks and sugges tions on the subject. At that time I said that although more millions were placed at the disposal of prospective borrowers it does not mean that many more people with modest incomes will be in a better position to take advantage of the provisions of the act. Those words can be repeated with even more signi ficance today. Although I am in favour of this resolution I think it does not go far enough and conse quently it does not reach the real purpose of the act which is to provide a decent home for every Canadian. For example, how can a prospective borrower secure a loan of $9,000, if his weekly salary is $65 which is the average salary in the province of Quebec? He will be advised by the banks or the lending institutions that they cannot grant his request because the monthly payments will be not less than $78 or $80 to amortize the capital and pay off interest and taxes; and this amount of $78 or $80 does not take into account the ordinary expenses for the maintenance of the house. It seems logical to assume, therefore, that a borrower who wants such a loan will have to earn a salary of at least $85 a week. Moreover, according to the latest information I could obtain the average income of people who bought houses under the act last year was $5,857. Mr. Green: That does not refer to applica tions under the small homes loan plan; that is under the ordinary National Housing Act part. Mr. Bourget: I will come back to that point later and explain exactly what I mean. From what I have said we can see it would be impossible for the great majority of wage National Housing Act earners to meet monthly payments on a $9,000 loan, the requirements being too high. Another ipoint I would like to raise at this time has to do with the difficulties that are experienced by those who live in small cities or municipalities in trying to obtain loans from the lending institutions. Even if the supply of mortgage money is increased, unless the government takes immediate action and sees to it that some of this money is mad ascertain if meas ures could not be taken in that respect. I realize it is not a matter that is under the jurisdiction of central mortgage, but they are so keenly interested I was wondering if there was not some way, in their dealings with the municipal authorities, other public bodies or even private enterprise, of finding a means of c0ntrolling the situation? National Housing Act Mr. Green: Not only Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation but also provincial gov ernments, municipal governments and hous ing authorities all over Canada, are very much concerned about this question. They are all working to find a solution. One method which has been followed is land assembly projects in which the dominion and provinces share. There are quite a number of those across the country. Mr. Winch: There are one or two questions I should like to ask the minister in view of his statement because I think they are of importance. I am particularly interested in an explanation of the minimum amount that a person could have under the regulations. as a steady income in order to apply for a loan under the act. Before the minister answers that, Mr. Chairman, I see that, according to routine proceedings, it now being five o'clock we should proceed 1x> the next order of business. The Deputy Chairman: I was just about to draw the attention of the committee to that fact. Shall I rise, report progress, and ask leave to sit again? Mr. Chevrier: I do not want to interrupt proceedings, but so far as we are concerned, we would be prepared to proceed with this bill now. Mr. Winch: Mr. Chairman, I am certain we all appreciate the desire to proceed with this measure, but personally I do feel it is of the utmost importance that, at least on a nominal basis, we maintain the rights of members. It only takes a few minutes. Progress reported. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE REQUEST FOR CLARIFICATION ON PROCEDURE Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East>: Is it proper for me to ask, as a point of infor mation, whether or not the bill we are dis cussing now could go before the other house some time this day if we proceeded? Hon. Howard C. Green (Minister of Public Works): The unfortunate part, of course, as I explained to the representative of the hon. member's group and to the hon. member for Laurier, who is the house leader for the Liberal party, is that if this bill does not get through this house today it probably cannot go through for ten days or two weeks, and also there was a chance that it could go through the Senate this afternoon. There would still be that chance had the bill been passed, but now of course that is quite im possible. 174 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Allard Mr. Winch: Is there time to do that today; address in reply to the throne speech is now is there time for it to go through the other about to be debated, it will become part of place this day? the ten days allocated to this debate? Mr. Green: I cannot speak for that place. PRIVATE BILLS On the order: Mr. Frank Howard (Skeenal: I wonder if I could have some information from you, Mr. Speaker. If we allow these orders to stand, to what would the house revert, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker: The house would revert to the business that was interrupted for private bills, Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): Could it go to the Senate in time, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker: I cannot answer that. NATIONAL HOUSING ACT AMENDMENT INCREASING AGGREGATE AMOUNT AVAILABLE The house resumed consideration in com mittee of the following resolution-Mr. Green -Mr. Rea in the chair: That It is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the National Housing Act, 1954, to increase from four hundred million dollars to seven hundred and fifty million dollars the aggregate amount that may be paid out of the consolidated revenue fund under subsection 1 of section 22 of the act. Clause 1 agreed to. Title agreed to. Bill reported. Mr. Speaker: When shall this bill be read a third time? Now? Some hon, Members: Agreed. Mr. Green moved the third reading of the bill. Bill read the third time and passed. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY The house resumed, from Tuesday, May 13, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amend ment thereto of Mr. Pearson, and the amend ment to the amendment of Mr. Argue. Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, the rights of the members now having been pro tected and this having taken only a few moments, can you state whether, since the [Mr. Green.] Mr. Speaker: I do not think there is any need to make a decision on that point at the present time. When the time arrives for vot ing under the rules the decision will be clear, but I will consider the point raised by the hon. member. (Translation): Mr. Maurice Allard (Sherbrookel: Mr. Speaker, last Tuesday night, before moving the adjournment of the debate, I had the opportunity to tender you my congratulations on your recent appointment. Today, I hasten to state that we are certain that you will fill this post, as you did before, with dignity and competence. When expressing my feelings of admira tion, I am not forgetting the hon. members for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) and Spadina (Mr. Rea) who were recently appointed, respec tively, chairman and deputy chairman of the committees of the whole. Moreover, I congratulate the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne (Mr. Lafreniere and Mr. Nielsen), because the two hon. members for Quebec-Montmorency and the Yukon, while residing in entirely opposite areas, have several qualifications in common, like their youth, their dynamism and perspicacity, both of which are necessary to any man engaged in public affairs. I also take this opportunity today to thank publicly, on behalf of the province of Quebec, the right hon. Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. Diefenbaker) who has kindly appointed two other members from our province to his federal cabinet. Mr. Speaker, my remarks will bear on three aspects: constitutional, economic and cultural. In the economic field, it is an undeniable fact that our problems are very numerous. Besides, it is for this reason that, on June 10, 1957 and March 31, 1958, the people of Canada changed teams so that these problems might be solved. The root of these problems lies in inflation, unemployment and a too great economic de pendence upon the United States. The causes of these problems are both re mote and immediate. Among the remote causes, we could mention the political pattern of Canada which is, as it were, a challenge even to geography. We know that whereas the Canadian terri tory extends over a thin band from east to west, our economic regions run north and MAY 16, 1958 175 south. It will be said, that this diversity might be beneficial in due course for the Canadian nation. That is true but, at the present time, it is such as to give rise to varied and aggravated problems because of the disper sion of a small population over a vast territory. The settling of this Canadian terri tory of ours has cost a great deal, and it is not, as yet, an economic operation. Among the remote ,causes of the problems facing this country, we might add the absence of co-operation and of an inefficient co-ordi nation in economic policy between the federal, provincial and municipal govern ments. Whereas the present federal govern ment is prepared for deficit financing, •because of the present economic needs, the provinces are still aiming at surplus budgeting. Among the remote causes of the problems facing this country, a great many are related to the Canadian confederation itself, such as, for example, the sharing of powers and the presence of two principal races within our borders. Mr. Speaker, we might well ask if the Canadian constitution which was written in the year 1867 has not become a strait jacket for the 1958 economy. Among the immediate causes of our prob lems, we find unemployment and inflation. I will make no attempt at this time to enu merate every reason for this economic re cession, far from it. I will merely list the causes of economic recession which were brought about, undoubtedly, by the last Liberal administration: credit restrictions, the maintenance of heavy taxes, a surplus budget when economic needs called for the contrary, mass immigration-in June 1957, one immigrant entered the country every 90 seconds-accumulation of surpluses, too great an economic dependence on our neighbours to the south, the dumping of textile products. And we also have waste in government expenditures. Our problems in Canada cannot be solved along a straight line but rather as a whole. Indeed, they must not be considered sepa rately, far from it. They must be considered as a whole because they are interrelated, they bear on one another just as the spokes of a wheel bear on the rim and insure its smooth running. When a spoke fails, all the other spokes are weakened in proportion and the rim can break on the run. If one of the spokes is too long, the whole wheel is un balanced to the point of endangering the driving. So, the solution to our problems in Canada are well summarized in this principle which our government and our eminent leader, the The Address-Mr. Allard right hon. member for Prince Albert, have applied since coming to power on June 10, and which they continue to apply for the prosperity of the Canadian economy. This principle consists in putting and leaving as much money as possible in the hands of the Canadian taxpayer while stepping up large public works. This wiser economic method is not new. It is as old as the centuries which have put it into use. In fact, in Rome, in the early days of the republic, senators Appius and Flaminius applied that economic method when they constructed the famous Appian and Flaminian ways. Well, Mr. Speaker, I congratulate our gov ernment and our right hon. Prime Minister on their planning to apply that most efficient economic doctrine to the solution of our Canadian problems and I would ask them to be kind enough to consider the problem of our municipalities and that of our school boards and to determine whether it would not be possible for them to pay municipal and school taxes on their buildings and even to eliminate the 10 per cent tax on all pur chases made by the municipalities and the school boards. (Text): Mr. Speaker, among Canadian problems there is one which concerns my own beautiful constituency of Sherbrooke, that is the textile problem. The textile industry is rated second among Canadian industries, according to the number of employees engaged in its operation. There are 725 factories in our country located chiefly in Ontario and in Quebec. Whereas 52 per cent of all Canadian manufacturing industries are owned by outsiders, 80 per cent of the textile industry belongs to Canadians. It is, therefore, our own industry, built up with our own funds and through our own initiative. In the province of Quebec this industry, to be found in 354 establishments, supports 20 important towns and provides work for over 47,000 workers. In Quebec the textile in dustry is the second largest job provider in the province. In Sherbrooke, there are 14 factories which employ 44.1 per cent of the workers, both male and female. I have as certained that since 1951 the population of Sherbrooke has increased by 17 .3 per cent, but that textile employment has declined by 18.2 per cent. On discovering so much uneasiness and unemployment in our textile industry we must expose the profound and remote causes. Nothing satisfactory was done by the former Liberal administration since 1935, either to adjust the customs tariff or to prohibit the import into Canada of foreign products which 176 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Allard flood our markets and paralyse production in our own industry. More especially, during the past 10 years, the former Liberal admin istration has been giving free rein to foreign competitors and, in a blind and improvident manner, has left our Canadian market at the mercy and whim of imports coming in from Japan, the Indies, Italy, England, West Ger many and the United States. It is very commendable to enter into collab oration, but it should never be done at the risk of sacrificing our economic freedom and becoming a victim and slave to enterprising countries. How can one expect Canadian in dustries to compete with foreign products when the cost of production is not to be compared? In Canada the average hourly wage is $1.20, whereas Japanese and Hindu labourers work for between 12 and 15 cents an hour. By allowing imports of this kind the Liberal party has for many years openly encouraged what is commonly known as dumping. By "dumping", we mean the great quantity of surplus imported merchandise which is allowed to enter Canada. During the course of the twenty-third par liament and under the high direction of the present Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) the government ordered that an investigation be made by the federal commission on tariff rates in order to study the whole Canadian textile industry. Since the brilliant victory of March 31 last, the representatives of the Prime Minister in the eastern townships have met at Sherbrooke in order to form a special committee to study economic and industrial problems. I had the honour to be elected the first president of this special committee. There fore, in the name of the members of this committee and also in the name of those who are directly or indirectly interested in this highly important industry in our country, I propose to my government the following possible solutions: 1. A complete revision of our tariff rates, the Imposing of which should take into consideration the Canadian consumption. 2. The possibility of imposing customs duty, per square yard, instead of on weight per pound. 3. The abolishment of preferential tariff for the Indies. 4. To step up customs supervision. 5. To revise, in the law, the definition of the word "dumping" so that the price of the Imported product will include the total cost of production, plus a reasonable margin, covering selling and administration costs, and profit. 6. To form, in the heart of this federal commis sion on tariff rates, a permanent committee to study the problems of the textile Industry. [Mr. Allard.] 7. To ascertain that the textile products launched on the Canadian market be labelled In such a way as to indicate clearly both the quality and the place of origin. 8. To request that an economic survey be made of the nature of our exports and imports, In order to arrive at a better balance of our commercial exchanges with other countries. 9. To suggest that an economic orientation council be formed, in the heart of the United Nations, or a like organization, to co-ordinate production between the Interested parties. 10. To form, if possible, a special committee in the House of Commons to study this problem which is both urgent and national. Such are the conclusions I submit most respectfully. (Translation): Mr. Speaker, on the constitutional level we should say that this is a matter which is at the source of all our Canadian problems. We must indeed govern under the constitution in this country, and comply with the legis lation we pass in this house, and doing so, we must keep in mind the spirit which moved the fathers of confederation. As I said a few moments ago, because of economic conditions, and following the eco nomic ups and downs which have marked the years since 1867, we may wonder whether it would not be wise to amend the Canadian constitution in some economic areas. Well, as long as this constitution of 1867 is not amended with the assent of all and every party concerned, we must, in opposition to the Liberals who undermined and sometimes ignored it, respect our Canadian constitution. I sincerely believe that the Conservative party, which presided over the birth of confederation, is the one which will restore in our country the confederative spirit. And it is precisely the feeling which the present Prime Minister expressed, on November 19 last, in this very House of Commons, when he said: "Ottawa has ceased to dictate its will to the provinces." In 1867, the two principal races and the four provinces of the time met together in order to establish a central government and entrust to it certain tasks, fields of action and problems which were then common to those provinces, such as money, mail and external affairs. The provinces reserved for themselves particular fields of action and privileges which are outlined under section 92 of the British North America Act. MAY 16, 1958 177 In so doing, the Canadian provinces, and all those which joined them later in that confederative spirit, founded what we call Canadian federalism. Canadian federalism is essentially a system of autonomous gov ernments, that is to say governments, federal as well as provincial, which are absolute masters in their respective and exclusive fields, and those governments must co-operate in fields of common interest, such as agricul ture and immigration, as prescribed by section 95 of the British North America Act. Those are the principles which the courts have confirmed several times . Let me recall the judgments of the Privy Council to this effect, particularly in the aeronautic case, th~ Great West Saddlery case and Edwards case, in which it was laid down as a principle that a great majority of the Canadian people can not live by state subsidies, that, in peacetime, the national interest can in no way justify the intervention of the central power, that the provincial governments are autonomous and absolute masters in their exclusive fields, and that no government has the right to do indirectly what it is prevented by law to do directly. Well, Mr. Speaker, when the Canadian provinces formed the Canadian federation in 1867, they did so not with the intention of renouncing their own subsistence and vitality, far from it, but rather to ensure their own vitality and we can find an indica tion of this in the preamble to the British North America Act, from which I quote the following: And whereas such a Union would contribute to the Welfare of the Provinces Well, Mr. Speaker, is it not logical to believe that national prosperity cannot exist without the prosperity of the provinces and municipalities which compose the Canadian nation? In order to recreate that Canadian reality, that constitutional reality, should the government not consider handing back, in a certain proportion and gradually, the direct taxes which belong to the provinces in accordance with paragraph 2 of section 92? Thus the provinces would have the financial means of fulfilling their own obliga tions, the federal government would be in a better position to enhance and improve its own fields of action, members of Parliament could study further the complex problems of international politics, which raise in the souls and hearts of all those who keep abreast of them a deep concern, as the world goes through-as we all know and feel-a very critical phase in international affairs. The Address-Mr. AUard In the cultural area we must endeavour to foster what I would call national understand ing. Our fine country would grow in the social and economic fields if all Canadians shared the same feelings and sought the same objectives. I am sorry to have to say so today, but during the last election campaign in the prov ince of Quebec I saw the Liberal party attempt to appeal to racial, language and religious prejudices. This party, which was so strong an advocate of national unity, was the very one who attempted by all kinds of insidious means to pit Canadians one against the other. We must deeply regret such antinational and antidemocratic attempts. Mr. Speaker, in the 23rd parliament, as well as in the recent election campaign and again last Tuesday night, I heard the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) insinuate that the province of Quebec was divided against itself. Well, Mr. Speaker, when the hon. member for Laurier used the word divi sion, my eyes automatically turned to the other side of the house and, to the exclusion of that part of the gallant Progressive Con servative team, I see before me, on the other side of the house, that they are not only divided but diminished, contracted and almost eliminated. The hon. member for Laurier, who has been living in the province of Quebec for a few years only, seeks to represent the aspira tions of that province but he should not forget that Quebec has an amazing memory, that it is a province which remembers. We remember, Mr. Speaker, that the present member for Laurier when he represented a constituency from another province and was a member of a federal Liberal government was the one who fought for many years against the construction of a railway line in the province of Quebec. Mr. Chevrier: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order. The hon. member is being utterly misinformed as regards what he has just said. I must tell him that I have never been opposed to considering the building of a rail way in the province of Quebec, as he claims. On the contrary, I endorsed such a project and I was actually the one who introduced the bill in the House of Commons. It is the members opposite, i.e. the Conservatives, who delayed adoption of the bill at a certain stage. I would ask you, Mr. Speaker, to require the hon. member to withdraw what he has just said. 178 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Allard (Text): Mr. Speaker: Although a great deal of latitude is allowed a member making a speech, it seems to me that the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Allard) was saying that the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) had delayed the passage of a railway bill for the province of Quebec. I do not know that that is a matter that he should be asked to withdraw. I will ask him to keep within the rules of debate. Mr. Chevrier: I do not want to interrupt the hon. member, who is a new member, but he states that as a representative of an Ontario constituency I had delayed and opposed the passage of a railway bill for the province of Quebec. That is simply untrue and he must accept my statement. Mr. Speaker: In the course of the debate the hon. member will have the opportunity to put the statement right. There does not appear to be anything in it that is a reflection on his character. Mr. Chevrier: I do not want to pursue the point unduly, but a member certainly has the right to defend his conduct which is clear according to the record. I say now that I did not at any time delay the passage of a railway bill for the province of Quebec; on the contrary, I introduced the bill in this house and encouraged its passage. I say now that the hon. member should accept the statement I am making. Mr. Speaker: Certainly the hon. member is correct in saying that his statement should be accepted when made in his place. I am sure the hon. member for Sherbrooke will accept the statement of the hon. member for Laurier. It was not the sort of statement which in my opinion a member should be asked to withdraw. If the hon. member for Sherbrooke is in error the hon. member for Laurier has the right to correct the error, which he has done, at the end of the speech, unless it is a point of real privilege. Perhaps that will satisfy the hon. member for Laurier. Mr. Chevrier: I bow to Your Honour's ruling, of course. I am not going to enter into a discussion, but I think the hon. mem ber should accept the statement I have made because I may not have an opportunity in this debate to reply. Mr. Speaker: I am sure he will aecept it; he will follow the practice of the house. (Translation): Mr. Allard: Mr. Speaker, as I pointed out in the last part of my speech, we should try to establish in this country real national understanding. In 1867, Canadians wanted [Mr. Chevrier.] to create a national entity. They did want to create this entity by stressing the equality between all citizens. In 1867, the prime minister of the Canadian confederation, the Right Hon. Sir John A. Macdonald stated that, in this country, there were no more victors nor vanquished, no majority nor minority, but that all citizens were equal. During the recent election campaign, the present Prime Minister expressed the same feelings, i.e. not the policy of a group or of a province, but a national policy, a democratic and Canadian policy. The Prime Minister advocated that same principle in Halifax, Vancouver, Montreal, Sherbrooke and in all Canadian provinces. And that is why we now see, in our great land of Canada, different mentalities, different races, religions and, as a result, different economic attitudes. Canadians must attempt to find a common denominator and in so doing they will manage to find formulas that make for balance between each group and each area. For a number of years the Liberal party preached national unity. If we are to give its proper meaning to the word unity, I believe, Mr. Speaker, that that word cannot be applied to the peculiar characteristics of our country. We know that unity means loss of identity and assimilation. In this country every group, every race, while wishing to live within a magnificent and rich Canadian mosaic, also wishes to conserve its respective characteristics and traditions. This is the way in which I look at national understanding. What I mean is that Cana dians of different races, different religions, different traditions, should wish to live together and tolerate each other good humouredly. That is what I call national understanding. After we have reached, in the very near future I hope, a higher degree of national understanding, it will become easy for our government to adopt officially a distinctive national flag as well as a national anthem. In order to favour the quick blossoming of this national understanding, our govern ment should entrust the Department of Citizenship and Immigration or any other appropriate department with the following functions: 1. To favour contacts between Canadians of various areas; 2. To set up a publicity campaign so that Canadians may know one another better; 3. To inaugurate low cost interprovincial travel at specified periods of the year; MAY 16, 1958 179 4. To encourage an increased exchange of university students between various provinces during the summer months; 5. To invite federal members of parliament to give lectures in various provinces. (Text): Last year, Mr. Speaker, the present gov ernment organized French courses for the English members. I would suggest that this year the government should organize English courses for the French members so that the Canadian nation will understand that par liament and our party are desirous of bring ing about national comprehension. I have submitted these considerations in the hope of contributing in a modest way to the ful filling of my most ardent wish, a happy and prosperous Canada. (Translation): Mr. Samuel Boulanger (Drummond-Artha baska): Mr. Speaker, my first words in this house, in this first session of the 24th parlia ment, will be to congratulate you on your appointment to your present functions and to congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) who has been elected Deputy Speaker, as well as the new ministers and all the members returned in the last election. I would have liked to congratulate in a particular way all the members, especially those of the province of Quebec, but I must make some reservations since there are mem bers from the province of Quebec who have been elected not by the popular vote but ac cording to an electoral method which we call the corrupted practice of vote buying. You had a sample of it a few minutes ago when the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Allard) spoke. The right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) visited the east ern townships before and during the election campaign, and a statement of his was re ported by La Tribune of Sherbrooke, on March the 24th, 1958, when the people were invited to elect Conservative candidates to represent them in Ottawa, and he ended with the following words: Send me Maurice Allard in Ottawa if you wish the nation to know where Sherbrooke is- A noteworthy fact is that mention was made that the Prime Minister intended to entrust him with an important post. I could read other reports published in La Tribune where a group of defeated members of parliament and candidates in the eastern The Address-Mr. Boulanger townships met to ask the right hon. Prime Minister that a portfolio be attributed to the member for Sherbrooke. Unfortunately, his intervention- (Text): Mr. Speaker: Order. The hon. member is not in the position of one who is making his maiden speech and I might recall to his mind that the subject under discussion is the amendment moved by the hon. member for Assiniboia and seconded by the hon. member for Kootenay West which deals with planned economic policies and trade. (Translation): Mr. Boulanger: I submit to your decision, Mr. Speaker, and I shall change my speech in order to speak of economic fields from which we anticipated a better standard of living. Among those, there is one in which I am particularly interested and that is the field of agriculture. Following the rapid development of new marketing conditions and new agricultural methods, I am convinced that the field of activity to which we will have to turn our attention in the next few years is the field of agriculture. There is no one in a better posi tion to appreciate that than the Liberals who were in power until 1957. Indeed, the Liberal government in the last 22 years it was in power had managed to improve the lot of the farmer in a sure and constant way by the passage of legislation which has never been proved valueless. It is over this period that we have seen an increase in the sale of agri cultural products which in 1936 were estimated at $536,000,000 as against $2,600,000,000 in 1955. During the same period we saw exports increase from $200,000,000 to $1,346,000,000. I could give you other figures such as those on the value of agricultural machinery which rose from $3,250,000,000 to $6,800,000,000. Investments in livestock, farm buildings and machinery increased from $4,700,000,000 to $10,100,000,000. I could continue to quote figures. However, it will be sufficient for me to state that over this period progress has been constant and sure for the farmer. I will not claim, however, that the Liberal government had found remedies for every ill nor solutions to every problem. This goes to show how complex is the agricultural problem. Still, the Liberal government had neglected nothing that could bring about the adoption of a fair policy. It is at that time that a Royal Commission on Canada's Economic Prospects was estab- 180 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Boulanger lished to make, among other things, a special study of agricultural prospects. It is also in 1955 that a committee was appointed to make an investigation of land use. This committee is still at work and we hope that it will conclude its work before a change of government. We have, however, the report of the Gordon Commission and it is in the light of the conclusions of that investigation that I am making my remarks and suggestions. I doubt whether the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) will attach much importance to my observations. It is his privilege as it was when he substituted another legislation for the Agricultural Prices Support Act. He makes me think of the premier of Quebec: anything coming from the Liberals is bad and must be destroyed, but their ideas can be implemented later on, under some other formula. What impressed me most in the Gordon Commission report was the large difference between the value of the commodities sold by western farmers and those sold by eastern farmers. I have compiled a few figures which I am going to quote to show that eastern farmers have much lower incomes than western farmers. Under the heading "Income of $250 and under"-excluding part time farms and farms operated by religious institutions-I find the following percentages: in the province of New foundland, 72.1 per cent of the farmers sell $250 worth of products or less; in Prince Edward Island, 15 per cent; Nova Scotia, 43 per cent; New Brunswick, 43 per cent; Quebec, 21 per cent; Ontario, 12 per cent; the western provinces 7 .8 per cent. Under the heading for sales of $250 to $2,499, we find somewhat the same percent- ages: Newfoundland, 21.7 per cent; Prince Edward Island, 59 per cent; Nova Scotia, 41 per cent; New Brunswick, 41 per cent; Quebec, 47 per cent; Ontario, 34 per cent; the prairie provinces, 45.2 per cent. Again according to the same survey, we see that the highest sales fall in the category from $2,500 to $20,000; in this respect, the western provinces come- (Text): THE ROY AL ASSENT A message was delivered by Major C. R. Lamoureux, Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, as follows: Mr. Speaker, the Honourable the Deputy Gover nor General desires the immediate attendance of this honourable house in the chamber of the honourable the Senate. Accordingly, Mr. Speaker with the house went up to the Senate chamber. And being returned: Mr. Speaker informed the house that the Deputy Governor General had been pleased to give, in Her Majesty's name, the royal assent to the following bills: An act for the temporary extension of seasonal benefit periods under the Unemployment Insurance Act. An act for granting to Her Majesty certain sums of money for the public service of the financial year ending the 31st March, 1959. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Mr. Chevrier: May I ask the leader of the house what is the business for Monday? Mr. Green: On Monday we shall take the throne speech debate. It being ten minutes after six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pur suant to standing order. 181 HOUSE OF COMMONS Monday, May 19, 1958 The house met at eleven o'clock. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN DECLARATION OF LOYALTY ON CELEBRATION OF BIBTHDAY Righi Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, this day is the day set apart for celebration as the birthday of Her Gracious Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Last October 14 was the Queen's day, but this is the day on which Canadians have an opportunity of reaffirming their affection and loyalty to Her Majesty. The Governor General, on behalf of the people of Canada, has sent a message to Her Majesty which reads as follows: With my humble duty I send to Your Majesty on the day on which we in Canada are proud and happy to celebrate Your Majesty's birthday the loyal and devoted good wishes of your Canadian subjects. As a reaffirmation and redeclaration of the loyalty of Her Majesty's members of the House of Commons I join with the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson), and with your leave, Mr. Speaker, in suggesting that we do now stand and sing "God Save the Queen". Whereupon the members of the house rose and sang God Save the Queen. HOSPITAL INSURANCE ACT AMENDMENTS TO AUTHORIZE CONTRIBUTIONS TO PARTICIPATING PROVINCES, ETC. Hon. J. W. Monteith (Minister of National Health and Welfare) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to ,consider the following resolution, which has been recommended to the house by His Excellency: That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act to authorize contributions being made as of the first day of July, 1958, to a participating province which has a plan in operation; and to make certain changes in connection with the admin istration of the act. Motion agreed to. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT ACT CONTINUATION OF AUTHORITY RESPECTING TRANSPORT OF GOODS IN BULK, ETC. Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport) moved that the house go into committee at the next sitting to consider the following resolution, which has been recom mended to the house by His Excellency: That it is expedient to introduce a measure to amend the Department of Transport Act to provide for the continuation for a further period of two years of authority to make regulations for the control of transport of goods in bulk including, amongst other things, the appointment of one or more controllers and one or more deputy controllers to carry out the provisions of such regulations, and the payment of their remuneration. Motion agreed to. IMMIGRATION REPORTED UNEMPLOYMENT OF EUROPEAN IMMIGRANTS On the orders of the day: Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kooienay West): Mr. Speaker, I take great delight in asking the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a question. I am sure because of her long time interest in this subject she has given attention to the matter. Have the minister's officials been actively recruiting immigrants in Europe, during re cent months, who on arrival in Canada have been unable to obtain employment and as a consequence have to be maintained at the expense of the federal government? Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Mr. Speaker, the officers in Europe have been receiving applications, of course, but I think the hon. member used a term which is not quite in keeping with what has been taking place. There has been no active recruiting; it has been more a matter of limited selection. Mr. Herridge: Has the minister any reply to the latter part of my question? Mrs. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, the latter part of the question is more an assertion than a question, and to remark on it I might say that by far the most of those who have been receiving assistance have been Hungarian refugees who were brought into Canada and have been in need of assistance, but those are special cases. Mr. Pickersgill: May I ask a supplemen tary question. Will the hon. lady say how many persons are receiving assistance at the present time from the immigration department? Mrs. Fairclough: Mr. Speaker, I do not have that information. I suggest that the question be placed on the order paper. 182 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry POWER NEW BRUNSWICK-NOVA SCOTIA-STATUS OF AGREEMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT On the orders of the day: Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester}: Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Minis ter of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Can the minister advise the house whether power agreements under section 3 of Bill No. 244, an act to provide assistance in respect of electric power development in the Atlantic provinces, have been signed with the governments of the provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia? It so, when may we expect such agreements to be tabled? Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources): Mr. Speaker, I should like to take that question as notice. CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION INDIAN AFFAIRS-REPORTED REQUEST FOR STUDY OF PROBLEMS On the orders of the day: Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): Mr. Speaker, I too desire to direct a ques tion to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. If you will permit me to say so, sir, admittedly I hesitate to do so having read a magazine article to the effect that the hon. lady uses her personality to get her own way. Mrs. Fairclough: Who doesn't? Mr. Winch: All I can say is that I cannot compete with her either on the basis of per sonality or beauty. According to press reports the native Indians of British Columbia are requesting a royal commis sion to study all aspects of native Indian problems. Can the minister inform the house if consideration will be given to a complete review of all aspects of native Indian problems, the protection of their rights and their desire to become known as first rank Canadians? If so, will action be taken at this session? Hon. Ellen L. Fairclough (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration): Mr. Speaker, commenting personally may I say that I have always considered the Indians to be first rank Canadian citizens. Any representa tions which are made will receive the sympathetic consideration of the minister. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS REPORTED INTRODUCTION OF CONFIDENTIAL LETTER BEFORE U.S. SENATE COMMITTEE On the orders of the day: Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur}: Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question [Mrs. Fairclough.] to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. Can the minister inform the house if it is a fact that a United States senator introduced a confidential letter from a former Canadian prime minister before a U.S. Senate committee on Friday? If so, has the min ister any indication of how that senator came into possession of a confidential letter from a Canadian prime minister? Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, if the description of the happening is true I have no knowledge of it. I will accept the ques tion as notice. NORAD-INQUIRY AS TO CANADA UNITED STATES AGREEMENT On the orders of the day: Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. A number of press re ports indicated that at today's sitting of the House of Commons copies of the treaty or agreement between the United States and Canada covering the arrangements relative to the use of the air force were to be filed. If that statement is incorrect, perhaps the Prime Minister will so state and also tell us if and when they will be filed. Righi Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, I hope the Secretary of State for External Affairs will be speaking in the debate today, and there will be a full answer to the question the hon. member has put. SPORTS BRITISH EMPffiE GAMES INQUIRY AS TO FEDERAL SUPPORT On the orders of the day: Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister or perhaps to the Minister of National Health and Welfare. In view of press reports that Canada's entry in the British empire games is very short of financial backing and it is uncertain if a representative team can be fielded, can the Prime Minister indicate what support the government will give to enable Canada to have a worthy representation at these games? Right Hon, J, G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister}: No consideration has been given to that matter yet, Mr. Speaker. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY The house resumed, from Friday, May 16, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to His Excellency MAY 19, 1958 183 the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amend ment thereto of Mr. Pearson, and the amend ment to the amendment of Mr. Argue. (Transration): Mr. Samuel Boulanger (Drummond-Artha baska): Mr. Speaker, when I moved the adjournment of the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne, I was comparing percentages on a certain scale of values for agricultural products sold in 1950 as between western and eastern farms. I said that farmers whose sales amounted to $250 or less were distributed as follows: 72.1 per cent in Newfoundland; 15 per cent in Prince Edward Island; 43 per cent in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick; 21 per cent in Quebec; 12 per cent in Ontario and 7.8 per cent in the prairies. It is sad to note, Mr. Speaker, that on 238,329 commercial farms in our six eastern provinces, 121,329 (about 51 per cent) had sold agricultural products valued at $2,500 or less. Out of this number, 41,896 farms, that is 16 per cent, had made sales amounting to between $250 and $1,200. If we consider the net income by indi vidual farms in the various provinces, we note that in Prince Edward Island, that in come was estimated at $1,586; in Nova Scotia, $963; in New Brunswick, $1,217; in Quebec, $2,195; in Ontario, $3,074; and in the prairie provinces, at $3,227. If we carry our analysis a little further, we note that the per capita production on the farm was estimated in 1953 at $162 in Quebec, at $304.60 in Ontario, and at $.507.60 in the prairies. Such is the situation of our eastern farmers. And I am not the one who compiled these figures. They are taken from the report of the Gordon commission which enquired on the economic and agricultural prospects of Canada. In quoting them, I have no intention of arousing feelings of animosity between western and eastern farmers. I merely want to show the government, the Conservative members as well as those of the C.C.F. party, that there is not only the wheat problem in our country but also the problem of the eastern farmers whose income is low, whether they live in northern Ontario or in the maritime provinces. They have to find sources of income outside of agriculture to support their family. Many of them work in factories, others work in the bush during the off-season. I may add that many of them The Address-Mr. Boulanger in the province of Quebec work for the high way department if they are supporters of the Union Nationale, or are favoured in some other way. It can be said that the eastern farmer works about twelve hours a day, the whole year round. Having lived on a farm in the west for over a year, I know that the western farmer also puts in a long day's work during the period from sowing to harvest time. I also know that many of them, during the off season spend the winter in the south of the United States and others seek a well-deserved rest in town. Our eastern farmers do not have time to rest; they have not the time to take a vacation because most of our farmers and our settlers, as I said, spend that period in the bush, away from their family, working hard nearly all winter to come back with a few hundred dollars in the spring. I am sure my political opponents will blame the Liberal party for this situation. It is always easy to clear oneself of blame when one does not want to assume one's own re sponsibilities, and that has been the case of the Conservative party for the past year. Yet in 1956, the same men, during the provincial election campaign, went about our farm dis tricts claiming that the farmers of the province of Quebec were the most prosperous in Canada. It should be recognized that the Liberal party has done a great deal to improve the farm situation in our country during the past 22 years, but that government also realized that there was still much to be done. That is why in 1955 it asked an inquiry into the progress achieved and on the prospects of our agricultural economy. At the same time, the Senate inquired into the use of our farm lands. The purpose of those undertakings was to cast light on the whole situation and allow our leaders to draw up a long term agricultural policy. One other thing that struck me in this r eport was the scope to be assumed by the demand for farm products in the course of the next 25 years, following the increase in urban population. Let me quote a few figures based on the years 1951-55. Taking 100 as an index, we see that the demand for the following agricul tural products will increase as follows be tween 1965 and 1980: 1965 1980 Red meat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 218 Poultry products . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 214 Eggs ..... .. ... .. .. ... ... .... 143 231 Dairy products ........... ... 129 168 Grain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 140 Fruit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 237 Vegetables .................. 134 193 184 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Boulanger How will the country satisfy this demand? The Gordon Commission report states that the total area under farming in Canada will in crease by close to 2 million acres between now and 1980, which will make the total cultivated area 176 million acres. The report indicates moreover that it is not on that that we must rely to satisfy our needs. It is recog nized that we should rather increase the yield by soil improvement, which means that we should increase the yield per acre, per unit of pasture and head of cattle rather than the yield per man-hour. To achieve this result in the eastern prov inces we must look to the improvement of farming methods and to a greater use of chemical fertilizer, especially on pasture land. In the eastern part of this country we have a large area with a high productivity poten tial. But these lands must be properly drained and cleared of stones and treated with ade quate quantities of chemical fertilizer in order to be profitable. No doubt there will always remain some submarginal farms. In this con nection I will offer a few suggestions at the end of my remarks. For the moment I wish to call the govern ment's attention to the value of family farm ing to the general economy of this -country. I could do no better here than quote the president of the American Farmers' Federa tion, who stated: We must neglect nothing that will help to pre .serve the family character of agriculture, not only because this is a social safeguard in a democracy, but because the family farm unit is the most efficient agricultural production unit yet devised. Mr. Speaker, having offered these general remarks, I would now like to offer some recommendations whose implementation I would like to see and which would be of great benefit to eastern farmers. The first recommendation is drawn from the Gordon report. It consists in carrying -out a program of geological surveys in the eastern and Atlantic provinces. Part of the mapping work in these areas has already been carried out, but we should nevertheless continue along these lines and speed up the work, while giving priority to those eastern areas which have not as yet been explored. According to the report there is yet another project of national scope which could be carried out, and that is the classification -of lands according to their possible uses, and the regrouping of small properties wherever it is possible. In some cases tree farming [Mr. Boulanger.] could be carried out more advantageously than agriculture. This classification of soils could be carried out in conjunction with a farm assistance plan in order to help those farmers who would prefer leaving the land to carry out another type of work. In order to bring this plan to a successful conclusion, we will need the sincere and continuous co operation of the provincial governments and of all interested parties. This plan should be implemented gradually and we should not look for extraordinary results before a certain number of years. A second suggestion I wish to make to the government has to do with the establishment of an intermediate term and easier credit to allow our farmers, and especially our young people, to carry out a plan of production and systematic operation of their farm. I would also recommend the granting of a $4 an hour premium on the use of bulldozers by farmers for draining and stone clearing. There are very productive lands in eastern Canada which need only draining and others just as good which need some levelling and stone clearing. It may be something new for some hon. members to hear about stone clearing on farms. This is just to show that conditions in our eastern provinces are very different from those prevailing on the prairies. Another suggestion which deserves govern ment attention concerns the advisability of better acquainting our farmers with the use of chemical fertilizers. Our farming experts and our experimental farms are doing a wonderful job in that field, but they do not reach the bulk of our farm population. Canad~ is one of the countries of the world where fertilizers are least in use. We use an average of 3.1 pounds of fertilizers per acre while Australia uses 25.7 pounds, New Zealand 13.8 pounds, the United States 11.6 pounds. I could add that The Netherlands, Belgium, Germany and Japan use more than 100 pounds. I repeat that Canada uses only 3.1 pounds. With proper use of fertilizers, production could be doubled on most of our farms. Research work done on experimental farms has shown that $1 worth of fertilizer used on pasture lands could bring from $3 to $5 in milk production. It would surely be wiser to spend $5 or $6 million to encourage the purchase of fertilizers than to sacrifice hundreds of mil lions for the construction of a dam on the South Saskatchewan river to reclaim 455,000 acres of land. MAY 19, 1958 185- We spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year to support agricultural prices because our lands do not bring enough rev enue to our farmers. Let us increase our production to meet our future needs by the use of fertilizers and the problem will be solved while our farmers will get a higher revenue. These are, Mr. Speaker, a few suggestions which the Liberal party sees fit to bring to the attention of the government in order to save our agriculture and particularly that of eastern Canada. May I also make a few remarks on the textile industry, particularly that of the prov ince of Quebec. Last year I made numerous representations to the Department of Trade and Commerce. I have even supported the requests of some municipalities of my riding that were seeking help from the government. I would like to read here a letter which a few of my colleagues in this house and myself have written to the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), in which we urged the government to help our textile industry. Let me read the last paragraphs of that request. (Text): Be it resolved to ask the Minister of Finance to act at once to prevent 1. The importation of textiles from countries whose standards of living results in lower produc tion costs, and 2. The importation of goods from those signa tories of GATT whose exporters are not adhering to the letter and spirit of this agreement. (Translation): We received a reply from the hon. Min ister of Finance (Mr. Fleming), and I am going to read its final paragraph. The minister said in his letter: (Text): For my better understanding of precisely what it is you ask me to do, may I ask you and your colleagues : 1. Precisely what are the steps that you ask me to take to prevent the importations? 2. What are the "countries whose standards of living result in lower production costs"? 3. What are "those signatories of GATT whose exporters are not adhering to the letter and spirit of this agreement"? 4. In the case of these signatories, what are the goods of which you ask me to prevent the importation"? (Translation): Such was the reply we received from the Minister of Finance. Recently I received from the town of St. Simon, in Drummond county, a resolu tion asking, among other things: The Address-Mr. Boulanger That the city council urge the federal govern ment to revise the tariffs now applying to the textile industry and make necessary and urgently needed amendments thereto. I forwarded that request to the min ister with my comments. Just like last year, the minister asked me: "What do you want me to do?" To which I answered with the recommendations that I am now going to read quickly. They are somewhat similar to those made last week by the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Allard). Here they are: 1. General increase in the tariffs in order to regain for our industry about 80 per cent of its market; 2. A revision of the Customs and Tariff act in order to make it more flexible, more adaptable to changing conditions; 3. Tighter control and supervision by our customs officers; 4. Better appraisal of imported commodities in order to establish a reasonable production cost abroad and to avoid dumping; 5. A government sponsored campaign encourag ing Canadian consumers to buy Canadian goods first, and Canadian producers to better identify their products; 6. Temporary reduction of the excise tax in order to give a renewed impetus to the textile industry. 7. Long term solution: Establish import "quotas" and enforce a practical system of classification and identification of imported goods. These are suggestions that can be studied and enforced. I believe that with some good will a solution could be found. A year ago, the government and its sup porters charged the Liberal party with being at the source of our troubles in the textile industry. I have here figures from the Cotton Institute of Canada which show that since the Conservative government has been in power, the situation has been deteriorat ing appreciably in the textile industry. I am just going to read you a few figures. I see that in the third quarter of 1956, we had 22,500 people employed in the cotton industry. During the same quarter of 1957, only 20,800 were so employed, which rep resents a decrease of 1,700 employees. Take the fourth quarter of 1956: we had 22,400 employees, and during the last quarter of last year, when the Conservatives were in power, there were 19,800 employees, that is a decrease of 2,600 employees. Never theless, we heard during the last electoral campaign that the Conservative government was going to save the textile industry. Fur thermore, if we had today's figures, we would probably see that the number of workers is 3,000 less, as compared to the figures of 1956, when the Liberals were in 186 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Boulanger power. I am going to quote a few remarks made by this organization. It is said, in connection with imports for example, that the United States have supplied us with 219 mil lion yards of textiles, i.e. 16 million more than the previous year. Imports from the United Kingdom remained at 10 million yards for each year but those from the other countries amounted to 63 million yards as compared to 56 million in the preceding year. That is the policy of the Conservative government! Once more, it is proposed to settle the textile problem by nice words, but I say that it is not by words that the textile problem will be solved, but by deeds. I could quote an article published in the Tribune of May 7, 1958. It says in part as follows: Women's nylon stockings of foreign make sold in Sherbrooke under Canadian label will be exhibited in the Canadian Parliament by Mr. Maurice Allard during the next session. The new M.P. for Sherbrooke in the House of Commons proposes to use these items to prove the unfair competition of foreign manufacturers on the Canadian market. And there is a photographic reproduction of a pair of stockings sold in Sherbrooke under the label Made in Canada, whereas another label showed their origin as England. Was the hon. representative for Sherbrooke not aware that last year, in 1957, the govern ment had sent a delegation to England with a view to buying from that country? The hon. member was to report to this house with regard to such unfair imports, but he did not do so. For my part, that it is not by means of publicity in press, nor by well turned phrases that the textile situation will be solved, but by deed and action. If the hon. member for Sherbrooke is sincere, let him move a resolution. We shall consider it and take a vote. Back home, in the Drummond riding especially, workers are jobless, and day after day the number of unemployed increases. Therefore I shall take the liberty, on another occasion, of dealing again with this matter of textiles. Mr. Speaker, those are the remarks I wanted to make on the floor of the house. I am convinced that if we get to work in a constructive frame of mind, we shall suc ceed in achieving progress. (Text): Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I desire [Mr. Boulanger.] in the first place to congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Niel sen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I am sure you can under stand, by reason of the fact that I entered this house for the first time only last Novem ber, that I have personal interest in the contributions made by these two hon. mem bers. The excellence of their presentation and the quality of the substance of their addresses augur well, I know, for their success in this house. To you, Your Honour, I offer my felicita tions. To have been selected as the first com moner during the last session of parliament was a manifestation of the belief that you had the requisite qualities for the speaker ship, and to be elected a second time is certainly a manifestation of the conviction that you have wise judgment, impartiality, grace and indeed a sense of humour, and I offer my felicitations to the house for having so elected you. I am very happy, Mr. Speaker, to have this opportunity to report to the house on the deliberations of the ministerial conference which was held under the auspices of NATO in Copenhagen from May 5 to May 7. That meeting was, I am convinced, a successful one. It was not intended at that meeting to arrive at any specific conclusions, but it offered to the foreign ministers of the 15 member nations of NATO an opportunity for consideration of the present internation·a1 situation and an opportunity to take stock of developments within the alliance. I came away from Copenhagen, Mr. Speaker, with a conviction that the spirit of unity and collaboration within NATO had never been higher than it was at that meeting. It is highly desirable for the success of NATO that there should be developed a spirit of unity within the Atlantic community. There is a great necessity for the maintenance of that spirit of un"ity and collaboration. I repeat, it must be the effort of every member of NATO to promote that objective of co-operation. Indeed, since the meeting of the heads of government in Paris in Decem ber last year there has been a marked up surge in consultation, political and otherwise, within NATO. The member nations have consulted readily-and I emphasize the word "readily"-on many grave issues which face us all. In the last few months the governments of NATO have considered such vital matters as MAY 19, 1958 187 disarmament, the preparation of agreed views with respect to the many letters that have come from the U.S.S.R., and of course the preparation for a summit meeting or meet ings. The degree of confidence which has been developed amongst the NATO allies, as the Prime Minister said the other day, has made it possible for three members of the alliance to act as trusted spokesmen in the conduct of negotiations on certain aspects of preparation for a summit meeting. I sug gest, Mr. Speaker, that this remarkable achievement of such close co-operation as is now being carried out under NATO is a unique development in the history of man kind. Indeed, I use the words of the com munique in this regard, "One of the most significant, promising events of our time is the spirit of union within NATO." During our discussions in Copenhagen there were observations that indicated that there are weaknesses within NATO and I would mention one particularly. That is in the field of information. It was acknowledged on all sides that NATO as an organization, indeed the member nations of NATO, have not been as successful as the U.S.S.R. in the field of information. Steps will be taken to provide better and improved machinery for the dis semination in factual terms of the views and the actions of NATO and in that way counter the propaganda of the U.S.S.R. I had the opportunity to observe at the meeting of the foreign ministers, and I do believe and Canada does believe that there can be a greater role for the parliamentarians of the NATO countries. I drew to the atten tion of the foreign ministers the resolution of the NATO parliamentarians last autumn, sometimes designated as the Kefauver resolu tion, whereby it was suggested by the par liamentarians that there should be held in 1959 an Atlantic congress to which not only parliamentarians would be invited but also leading citizens in various nations of NATO. I am hopeful that out of plans that are now being studied and laid there will be such a conference to the end that we can get the story of NATO better known to our peoples of the various nations; that there will be an Atlantic conference held about the time of the celebration of the tenth anniversary of the founding of NATO. On behalf of Canada I emphasized the im portance to NATO and to its principal insti tutions of article II of the treaty. Article II as you know, Mr. Speaker, has to do with economic matters, and I was gratified to re ceive from many sides of the membership at that meeting the expression of similar views. The Address-Hon. S. E . Smith We should invoke to a greater degree article II; we should put some flesh on the bones of that article. Undoubtedly there is an op portunity through NATO to promote economic prosperity, notably by-and I emphasize this term; we on this side of the house do not regard it as a naughty one-promoting the expansion of international trade and promot ing aid to underdeveloped countries. Consultation on methods and machinery for implementing the principles set out in article II will take place within the alliance. This does not imply, Mr. Speaker, that we en visage that the NATO council will be the executive organ for economic co-operation. It does seem to me that the best thing NATO could do in this regard would be to study article II and put forward principles, and by reason of or under those principles there could be consultations within the membership of the community and also consultations with international societies and organizations that would be better equipped to consider exe cutive matters. If NATO could implement article II to a greater degree, then un doubtedly, in addition to its military strength, its prestige and influence would be greatly enhanced throughout the world. I turn now, Mr. Speaker, to what were to us more vital issues on which consultation took place at the NATO meeting. These related, of course, generally to the inter national situation confronting the alliance, particularly to the trends of Soviet policy and the attitude the western countries could adopt toward the Soviet union. Exchanges of views in this regard brought about re markable unanimity of approach on these fundamental issues. We did at the outset agree that some of the recent actions of the U.S.S .R. have raised serious doubts as to the real intention of its leaders regarding a sum mit meeting. The members of that minis terial meeting of NATO regretted that the Soviet union had aggravated instead of reduced international tensions by its veto in the security council of the proposal put forward by the United States of America relating to the reducing of the risk of a surprise attack over the Arctic area. We also were bound to admit and acknowledge that proposals put forward by the Russians in recent weeks relating to the holding of a meeting, proposals not only of matters of sub stance but of matters of procedure, had made the preparations for a summit meeting more difficult. Nevertheless, despite the disappointments and doubts about the Soviet attitude, we 188 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith resolved to continue our efforts to pave the way toward a summit meeting. I quote from the communique: The NATO governments will not be discouraged nor give up their attachment to the principle of negotiation. It was recognized, however, that while summit meetings are desirable if they offer any reasonable prospect of reaching settle ment on fundamental questions, they are not the only way or indeed they may not be the best way of conducting negotiations for the reduction of international tension. A summit meeting could be helpful if it were properly prepared and if it were to take place in a favourable atmosphere. At the meeting I suggested that the summit meeting, the one for which we have been working through the ambassadors of three members of NATO in Moscow in recent weeks, should be regarded as one of a series of meetings. I suggested, indeed, that it would not necessarily be the first. It could be re garded as the second meeting and we would think of the Geneva meeting in 1955 as the first in that series. I desire to impress the point upon the house, if I can, that this approach would rec ognize that it may not be possible-indeed it will not be possible-to settle at one meeting at the summit all the problems which separate the Soviet bloc from the NATO countries. Undoubtedly there has developed in the public opinion of the European members of NATO, and indeed one can sense it in Canada and the United States, a feeling that if we could have a summit meeting we could settle once and for all-some of the suggestions go that far-the problems that separate us from the U.S.S.R. If we follow the concept of a series of meetings then the next one, the second one as I like to call it, could consider a limited agenda with limited objectives. We could then honestly convey to the public in the various NATO nations that if a question which they naturally would have thought should have been on the agenda of that second meeting was not there it had been postponed to a later meeting. If we have limited objectives and reach a satisfactory reconciliation of the different views in respect of those matters, the smaller items, shall I say, then confidence and trust will be de veloped in some measure and on the basis of that confidence and trust a further meeting could be called to discuss even more serious questions. Because of the trust and confidence that would have been developed even to a partial degree there would be better prospects for agreement being reached at a subsequent meeting or meetings. [Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenac) .] The other day the Leader of the Opposition suggested, and I recognize that he did so tentatively, that the best kind of a meeting at this time might be an informal one between the heads of the United States and the Soviet union for an exchange of views without an agenda. I am unable to share the optimism o! the Leader of the Opposition in this regard. While a serious burden of responsibility falls upon the two most powerful nations in the world, nevertheless there are other interests involved on the western side; and that was pointed out the other day in the house by the Prime Minister. Those interests should be adequately represented at a summit meeting. I have in mind that it would be probably unfair to place upon the United States the whole onus or responsibility for conducting negotiations at the summit and to be re sponsible for the failure of a summit meeting if that were the case. Also it does occur to me that it would be fruitful to have the heads of the two sides in question meet with an agenda before them. I am not being facetious when I say that I can well see Mr. Khrushchev and Mr. Eisen hower sitting down at a table without an agenda and saying, "What will we discuss now in the field of international tension"? The field of international tension in that context means a global field, and that would call for preparation in order that the partici pants in such a meeting would be prepared to put forward concrete and considered sug gestions. It is my view that such a meeting might not only prove useless but that its failure would increase international tensions rather than reduce them. At the Copenhagen meeting emphasis was placed on the question of disarmament. Mr. Pearson: Before my hon. friend leaves that part of his statement, would he be good enough to inform the house whether there was any change of views at the Copenhagen meeting, and if not what his own views are, with regard to the composition of this summit meeting? Mr. Smi:th (Has:tings-Fron:tenac): Mr Speaker, I should like to touch on that later As I said a moment ago, considerable em phasis was placed on the question of dis armament which would, of course, be one of the main items for discussion in any negotiations with the Soviet government. The ministers reaffirmed their view that the proposals of August 29, 1957, in the dis armament commission, the same proposals later being presented to the General Assembly of the United Nations, would form MAY 19, 1958 189 a reasonable basis for discussion of dis armament, but in reaffirming that view there was what one might well characterize as a note of flexibility. Pending more general negotiations, how ever, with respect to disarmament we felt that it might be possible, despite the recent setbacks that have been brought about by the attitude and action of the U.S.S.R., to inaugurate expert technical discussions be tween representatives of the Soviet union and the western powers principally con cerned, such discussions to . cover detailed measures of control over disarmament even though the precise disarmament proposals had not been identified. In discussing this facet of the problem of disarmament we had particularly in mind measures to prevent sur prise attack and measures to detect nuclear explosions. These conclusions were set out in the com munique, and they do indicate a degree of flexibility. But in the communique there is also a note of warning to the U.S.S.R. that their recent actions and attitudes have en gendered in the west some scepticism as to their real intentions. In view of the un certainties which exist and the present un fortunate lack of confidence between the Soviet leaders and ourselves, it is conceivable that many of our differences could not be reconciled at the diplomatic table. But we come back to this point, that even if we cannot contemplate reconciliation or settle ment with respect to some of these matters, surely this does not dictate that they should not be discussed at some diplomatic level. At the meeting I laid particular stress on behalf of Canada on the need for further con sideration of measures for inspection and control. In my opinion such measures are fundamental to any consideration, in any degree, of measures for disarmament. I do believe that measures with respect to control and inspection are fundamental to any dis armament negotiations. Then if we could agree to act with respect to this core problem, confidence would be created and on the basis of that confidence discussions could be held with respect to particular measures for dis armament. In so far as the west is concerned, and I know I speak for all the members of the house, control means confidence and con fidence is lacking at the moment. I proposed on behalf of Canada, and the other foreign ministers agreed, that the council should consider the possibility of carrying out studies and experiments on the technical problems of inspection and control. We recall that first Mr. Bulganin and then Mr. Khrushchev, in reply to letters from Mr. Eisenhower sug gesting that there should be experimentation The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith undertaken for the development of adequate techniques of detection and control, answered in the negative. I did suggest that we might undertake in NATO a pilot scheme for this technical study, and that scheme might be carried out in Canada or in other parts of what one might call the NATO area. If the Russians will not participate in such a joint scheme, the fact that we have initiated it might prompt them to undertake similar . studies in their country. Later we might invite them to exchange information with us, and then we might participate in their scheme and they might participate in ours. In this connection I am happy to report that there is some hope, as the result of a recent communication from Mr. Khrushchev to Mr. Eisenhower, that the Soviet union would be willing to participate in expert studies into the possible carrying out of an agreement to stop nuclear tests. I know we all hope this note of encouragement might be an indication that the Soviet union would be willing to agree to a similar discussion of the problems of disarmament. If some significant progress could be made in the studies and experimentation with respect to control and supervision of nuclear tests t}:lat would provide a notification of the imminence of an attack, then we could move on to some of the more substantive questions. As I suggested a moment ago, we will have to achieve a better mood of confidence before we can proceed even in that regard, but if we started on the NATO side to undertake studies and experimentation with respect to control and supervision it would be an in dication that we are very earnest about that matter, and would indicate to the world our resolution in that regard. The foreign ministers' meeting at Copen hagen did not consider military matters, which will be considered at the meeting of the NATO council to be held in Paris next December. We did, however, Mr. Speaker, express our satisfaction with the results of the conference of defence ministers which was held in Paris last month. In this regard some of us, and Canada's representative was one of them, expressed the belief that there should be a continued study of the political aspects and implications of our policy and our deci sions in the defence field. This is particularly true if we are to avoid developing rigidities in our political thinking. Surely the building up and the matching of nuclear weapons by the two sides need not be considered an irrevocable and inevitable process. Where would that in evitable and irrevocable process lead us? It might well lead us to that awful alternative, a catastrophic global war. It is therefore of 190 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith paramount importance that we study the relation of our defence position to the posi tion of political negotiations, and it is of para mount importance that we do not lose op portunities to negotiate when the time is ripe and when there is a clear indication of Soviet intentions. It is difficult for anybody to forecast what the future may hold with respect to dis cussions with the Soviet union. I am trying to describe the meeting at Copenhagen, and I know we approached that process in a spirit of unity, co-operation and trust within the alliance to which I referred earlier in my remarks. We do wish to avoid provocation and to seek by every possible means to reach agreement with the Soviet leaders. We are not only prepared but we are anxious to negotiate with them at any level, diplomatic or otherwise. I reiterate, however, that if it is a summit meeting there must be much preparation for it. I come now to the point raised by the Leader of the Opposition. Surely we should not endeavour to prevent the holding of negotiations across the table by reason of procedural matters. Surely if this becomes an important issue in our talks with the U.S.S.R. it should be possible to find a satisfactory formula-I do not know whether this will answer the question that was asked by the Leader of the Opposition-which would not be predicated on the recognition of some far-reaching principle of parity which the Russians have put forward in rather vague terms and which, if introduced into the United Nations, would destroy the effectiveness of that body. Certainly it would lead to a radical transformation of the main organizations of the United Nations and impair their representative character. Now, Mr. Speaker, I come to another important matter. I beg leave to table an exchange of notes between the United States and Canada. They were signed on May 12, one week ago. In this exchange of notes there is to be found the agreement between the government of Canada and the govern ment of the United States concerning the organization and operation of the North American air defence command, which is known as NORAD. Copies of this exchange of notes, I may say for the information of hon. members, are available in the parlia mentary distribution office. In order that I may keep in step with the United States Secretary of State, who will be making a similar announcement this morning in Washington, I am going to care fully follow my notes. Members of the house, Mr. Speaker, will recall that on August 1, 1957, the two governments announced their agreement to the setting up of a system of [Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenac) .] integrated operational control of the air defence forces of Canada and the United States. When I speak of Canada and the United States, I mean the country south of our border and also Alaska. An integrated headquarters was formed shortly after August 1, 1957 and the com mand has been operating on an interim basis for about nine months. In the light of intensive studies made by expert author ities on the problems of continental air defence and of the experience gained in the past nine months, the Canadian and United States governments have in this ex change of notes registered and recorded formally their understanding of the need for integration of their air defence activities and their agreement on the principles, both military and political, on which the organiza tion and operation of NORAD will be based and indeed have been based during the past nine months. For the past two decades the co-operation of Canada and the United States in the field of continental defence has grown ever more intimate. Even prior to the formation of. NORAD, as many hon. members of this house know, there was close co-operation between the air defence forces of the United States and Canada. That co-ordination arose out of the recognition that the air defence of the two countries had to be thought of as a single problem. Indeed, since 1954 an in- . tegrated system of air defence has been en visaged and preparations were made for it as early as that year. Recent technological developments had made it obvious to the two governments that co-ordination of national plans was no longer adequate. It is a truism that this globe has become smaller, and one of the main factors in that regard is the reduction in the time it takes to fly from one continent to another. That re duction is salutary and mankind applauds it. But we must never forget the implications of that truism for our defences, and we must construct defences against the pos sibility of a surprise nuclear attack. We must therefore have in existence in peacetime an organization which, in the face of surprise attack, could immediately take defensive action over our own territories in accord ance with a single air defence plan which had already been approved by the two governments. The integration, I would remind the house, is the practical application of the principle of interdependence within NATO. This in tegration will contribute to the effectiveness of the air defence of this continent. It will also increase the ability of Canada and the United States to meet the strategic objectives MAY 19, 1958 191 established in NATO, after the setting up of the Canada-United States region under NATO. The effectiveness of such integration has been amply demonstrated in other NATO areas. I am thinking of Canadians who are now under the command of SACEUR, the supreme allied commander in Europe. I am thinking of Canadians who are serving under SACLANT, the supreme allied com mander, Atlantic. There are other areas under NATO where there is an integrated command. I am thinking of the allied forces, central Europe, and the allied forces, Medi terranean, in which Canada is not repre sented. Our joint defence of the continent cannot, of course, be thought of in isolation. This continental effort forms part of our contribu tion to NATO defences. The Canada-United States region which was established under NATO is an integral part or indeed an inte grated part of NATO; and as I said a moment ago, the establishment of this integrated oper ational command known as NORAD will contribute to the strategic objectives set for the Canada-United States region in NATO and will assist our two governments to meet these objectives more effectively. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Would the hon. member permit a question? Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenacl: Yes. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Does this mean that the NORAD commander is now respon sible to the NATO council. Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenac): With the permission of the hon. member for Essex East, Mr. Speaker, I will speak to that matter later. The arrangements for air defence of Canada and the United States and the alloca tion of forces to NORAD for that task will be reported-I was just coming to that matter -to NATO through the Canada-United States regional planning group. In further reply to the question which has just been addressed to me may I say this. The commander of NORAD will be directly responsible to that group. I shall deal with that matter later. As the agreement tabled today indicates, the commander in chief of NORAD will be re sponsible to the chiefs of staff in Canada and the joint chiefs of staff in the United States; that is, he will make his recommenda tions on air defence to those two bodies. They in turn-and I emphasize this point will seek the approval of the political au thorities for the implementation of such of these recommendations as are acceptable to the chiefs of staff from a military point of view. Hence you get a direct line of respon sibility, the commander in chief NORAD with The Address-Hon. S. E. Smith the chiefs of staff in each country and then their responsibility to the political authorities in their respective nations. The commander in chief NORAD will operate within a single air defence plan which will be approved by the two governments. The appointment of the commander in chief NORAD and of his deputy will be approved by the two govern ments. Indeed, you will find the provision there that in the absence of the commander in chief the deputy commander in chief takes full command. There is another document to which I would refer. Mr. Speaker: Order. I regret to be obliged to inform the minister that his time has expired. Mr. Pickersgill: I rise on a point of order. Has not the minister unlimited time as the first speaker after an amendment? Mr. Speaker: Only with unanimous consent of the house. Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenac): May I have about five minutes? Some hon. Members: Go ahead. Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenacl: There is another document to which I would refer, Mr. Speaker, and that is the terms of ref erence. Detailed terms of reference for the commander in chief NORAD have been ap proved by the two governments. I could add this statement. These terms of reference flow out of and are therefore consistent with the notes that have been exchanged, but I must say that in the interests of national security these detailed terms of reference cannot be made public. Thus the NORAD exchange of notes makes formal provision for civilian control of the activities of the command in the manner I have outlined. These provisions, may I say, underline the obvious. Despite what has been said in this house and outside it, it was never the intention to cast any doubt upon or qualify the primacy of civilian authority. I may say in conclusion that the establish ment of integrated air defence arrangements between Canada and the United States in creases the importance of consulta tion, and hon. members will find in the note which has been tabled today reference to the neces sity of political consultations between our two countries. I can assure this house that the determination exists not only in Ottawa but also in Washington to ensure that such consultations can be invoked as required. I would say also that the integration of these forces under the command of NORAD subject to political consultation will assist in the 192 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Winch maintenance and development of the indi vidual and collective security of our two countries, and will fulfil the obligations which Canada assumed as a member of the United Nations and as a member of NATO. Mr. Pearson: May I ask the hon. minister a question before he sits down? Is it the intention of the government in respect of this very important intergovernmental agree ment to follow the normal procedure of giving the house an opportunity, by the sub mission of a resolution, to express its views? Mr. Smith (Hastings-Frontenacl: In answer to that question I would say no. The govern ment regards this as an amplification of and extension under the North Atlantic treaty. As reported to the house, the exchange of notes took place on May 12 last. However, I can assure the house there will be ample opportunity for a further discussion of this matter when the debate to which the Prime Minister referred last week takes place. Mr. Harold E. Winch (Vancouver East): Mr. Speaker, we have just listened to a most interesting discourse by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. The subject upon which he spoke is of such importance to this house and to the people of Canada that it is impossible to comment upon it adequately at a time when we are discussing the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I agree wholeheartedly that the importance of this matter is such that in the immediate future the Prime Minister should make avail able an opportunity for a discussion of in ternational affairs, with particular reference to the matter which has been raised by the Secretary of State for External Affairs. All I wish to say on this subject at the moment is that there seems to have been a strange change in the official viewpoint, be cause I know from the information I now hold in my hand, namely the Hansard report of January 4 of this year, that the Minister of National Defence made it clear when he informed this house of the arrangements existing with the United States, as reported in the second paragraph on page 2861, that the concept of the North American defence command is very definitely part of the whole NATO attempt to prevent war developing. I find it difficult at this moment, having heard the remarks of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, to reconcile completely the position taken by the Minister of National Defence in January with what is contained in the present agreement, according to reports in the press. Mr. Pearkes: No change whatever. Mr. Winch: I find this difficult especially in view of the minister's statement last [Mr. Winch.] January that no action whatever would be taken without the consent of the government of Canada. Apparently, there has been some change in the government's thinking during the current negotiations, and that is why I say we may have to wait for a better op portunity than this to go into the whole matter. What does strike me as strange and, perhaps, as something which should not oc cur, is that we should have been told a few moments ago that the question was discussed, and a decision reached, in May, whereas as long ago as January the statement was made that Canada had already been committed by the minister, or by the government. I think, Mr. Speaker, that there is a great deal of dif ference between the two positions, and I know a number of hon. members will be glad, when the opportunity arises, to examine the ministers' statements more carefully and, I will even say, to consider the principles which were evidenced last January as com pared with those contained in the statement to which we have just listened. I will say nothing beyond that at the moment, except to tell the Prime Minister again that we had better have an oppor tunity in the immediate future to discuss this entire question of international affairs and, in particular, the right of parliament to have some say when it comes to the principle of military alliances with other countries, irrespective of which countries they may be. An hon. Member: He says we won't have it. Mr. Winch: Who said that? An hon. Member: The minister. Mr. Winch: I must have missed that, Mr. Speaker, but if such a statement was made it certainly breaks down the meaning of democratic principles in our country. The question of a military alliance, and whether or not parliament should have a say on these matters, is a most serious one for this country, and the government will certainly hear more about it. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, if you would analyse what has been happening in the world in recent weeks and months you will agree, I am sure, that it is of paramount importance that parlia ment should have an opportunity to discuss and approve such arrangements, especially when they may place the Dominion of Can ada in a position between two powerful nations such as the United States and the U.S.S.R., where it might become a new Bel gium whether we like it or not. I have spoken on this subject at greater length than I had intended. Now I wish to MAY 19, 1958 193 refer to the speech from the throne and to the attitude taken by members of this group. I am certain we all listened to the speech with a great deal of interest; it is the longest I ever heard in my five years here and my 20 years in British Columbia. One of the main outcomes of the speech will, I hope, be a recognition by the Prime Minister and his cabinet that promises are not fulfilled, nor are problems met, merely by the early introduction of emergency legislation. It is very welcome as far as it goes, but it is of the utmost importance to the people of Can ada that emergency legislation in these fields be extended by the introduction of more comprehensive legislation at an early date, even though it may be delayed to some extent. May I very briefly say, as has been stated by other members of this group, that we welcome the change in the Unemployment Insurance Act, but that it is imperative that the entire act be overhauled so as to effec tively provide for the unemployed in all seasons and at all levels. All of us who are members of this House of Commons, irre spective of party, if we are honest in our opinions and our principles must realize that we cannot possibly rest content while we have an Unemployment Insurance Act cover ing only just over 60 per cent of the unem ployed persons in Canada, and which in times of stress covers only one season without recogmzmg the fact that unemployment, whether it be great or small, can occur at any time and even many times in the year to the same person, according to his occupation. I very much want to stress my opinion that the introduction of the emergency legislation is no solution to the unemployment problem, and must be followed by a complete overhaul ing of the act at an early date. I am of the same opinion with respect to the emergency bill in respect to national housing which has been passed by this house and has received royal assent. I am sure the complete National Housing Act requires further study so as to give a greater impetus to home construction, and specifically with respect to more detailed policies and regula tions to provide the opportunity for lower income groups in this country to leach the worth-while position of home ownership. Last week during the discussion on the ~ational Housing Act I had the opportunity to draw to the attention of this house certain despicable practices which I believed were being carried on in Canada to the disadvan tage of good citizens who needed help in the field of home construction by way of first and second mortgages but who were not 57071-3-13 The Address-Mr. Winch covered by the National Housing Act. I want to add just a few words on that sub ject to draw to the attention of the govern ment-perhaps I should say particularly to the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Public Works-in addition to what I said the other day, that something in the nature of legislation is imperative to bring a halt to exorbitant interest rates and the mortgage bonus system. Just a few days ago I gave this house con crete evidence of what to my knowledge was taking place in British Columbia. Although I have not personally seen it there must have been publicity with respect to the points I raised, because I received in the mail this morning not only confirmation of the position I took but further evidence as to the rooking of people in need, although they were pos sessed of good property backing, by those who like to use the capitalistic system to try to become millionaires in a hurry. The evidence I gave last week was from British Columbia but today I have a nation-wide statement by a company in Quebec inform ing people how they can take advantage o.f those people in need. If you wish, Mr. Speaker, I will file this paper with the House of Commons; it is something which was sent from Montreal to people in British Columbia who were thought to have money to invest. The publication is from the Credit Insured Mortgage Com pany, Dominion Square Building, Montreal and right on the front it says: Earn 12 per cent interest per annum on first mortgages. Earn 22 per cent per annum on second mortgages. They state that interested parties are in sured in order to make sure they will get that interest, and a prospectus is included with respect to what this company has to offer for sale. Just let me read one; it is headed "Insured Mortgages"- Mr. Speaker: I am not sure the hon. member has identified what he proposes to read. Mr. Winch: I have said, sir, that it is a publication from the Credit Insured Mort gage Company of Dominion Square Building in Montreal. Mr. Speaker: Is it a letter or a circular, or what is it? Mr. Winch: It is a circular which was sent to people who perhaps had a bit of money to invest, and I received it from one such person in Victoria, British Columbia. As I said, sir, I will be glad to file these 194 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Winch papers with the House of Commons if you so desire. If I may read from just one o! these pages, it says: Second mortgages for sale at 45 per cent discount. I would like to quote from the third paragraph: The following mortgages are on new homes and can be purchased at a discount of 45 per cent. These are all new homes and are naturally in excellent condition. I just want to bring this to the attention of the house in order to reiterate what other members in this group said last week during the previous discussion with respect to the need for this government to consider the situation with a view to bringing in legisla tion to protect the people of our country who have a certain need in the field of housing but who are not in a position, for various reasons, to be covered under the act or the regulations of the federal government or its lending institutions. To me it is a despicable situation. By the way, I would add that offers of mortgages of this nature come from almost every province in the Dominion of Canada. I say, sir, some action is required by a government that has a humanitarian instinct, and I understand from the last campaign that the Conservatives do have a humanitarian instinct, to take care of a situation of this nature. Now, sir, I was most interested in hearing the speech from the throne, to have substan tiated what in the campaign before March 31 was known as the vision of the Prime Minis ter. We heard a great deal during the cam paign and we heard something in the speech from the throne about that vision, and to some extent it was a northern vision. A great deal of money is to be spent by the federal government on the Prime Minister's vision of the north. I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that I have no objection to his vision of the north; but I would like the Prime Minister, who in the last analysis is responsible for the speech from the throne, not to neglect the vision of the west. Mr. Pickersgill: Or the east. Mr. Winch: And not, because his eyes are northward, to neglect a certain minimum requirement of the west that can and will pay great dividends. I sincerely hope that the government and its various departments, when they consider the spending of hundreds of millions of dollars on development rail roads and roads in the north, will at the same time consider whether or not they have played fair with British Columbia in our development railroads, especially the Pacific Great Eastern and the work that has been undertaken on it. I hope they will keep in [Mr. Winch.] mind, sir, that a great deal of the revenue from British Columbia-and it is pretty high in the national coffers-comes from areas that are very difficult of access by steamship, roads or planes. We tell the government that we will back them right down the line in northern development but at the same time -and I direct this to the Minister of Public Works who knows British Columbia so well -we ask them to give the most earnest con sideration to the unanimous resolution that was passed by the British Columbia legisla ture at its recent session asking the federal government to accept increasing responsibili ties as far as steamship, road and air access is concerned to a great many of our com munities on the coastline of British Columbia. I think, Mr. Speaker, the program of de velopment that has been announced in gen eral is acceptable to us all, though we shall have to wait for the details to arrive at a conclusion. We hope there will be a west ward v1s10n by this government where resources are known, as they are in British Columbia. Action was taken at the last session on behalf of the maritimes, and the speech from the throne this session contem plates action for the north. British Columbia is an exception. Since that is so, we hope there will be an early pronouncement on the government's position as regards active participation in developments on the Col umbia river. Policies have been announced but nothing has been said about financial participation. I will not say any more than that at this time on the Columbia river. I think we must emphasize also that in the campaign speeches of the Prime Minister and his colleagues and in the speech from the throne mention was made of secondary industries. It was just a general statement. I think, Mr. Speaker, we can say now very effectively that because of the economic situation in Canada, because of our unemployment situation, because of the invasion of what might be termed normal Canadian markets, where we are being undercut now as never before, speedy action is required by the government to back up the sentiment expressed in the speech from the throne relative to the establishment of secondary industry. In our own province of British Columbia this past year a great many of our basic industries have gone out of business. We have seen towns that have been established for many years become almost ghost towns as far as industry is concerned. In Fernie coal mining has been ended, and it was a very fine city. In Britannia a similar situa tion has developed, which gives an indica tion that speedy plans are required for the MAY 19, 1958 195 establishment of secondary industries on a long-range basis so that towns and cities are not decimated because of the failure of one basic industry. With that we must take into consideration certain aspects of foreign trade. Sir, I see it is one o'clock. Mr. Macdonnell: Mr. Speaker, might I suggest that you take up the offer of the hon. member who has spoken to deposit the document from which he read so it will be available to all. Mr. Speaker: Yes. Will the hon. member table the document from which he read? Mr. Winch: All documents? Mr. Speaker: The document from which he read. Mr. Winch: Yes, sir. At one o'clock the house took recess. AFTER RECESS The house resumed at 2.30 p.m. Mr. Winch: Mr. Speaker, at the time of adjournment I was drawing the attention of the Prime Minister and the government to the absolute necessity of carrying into effect the statement in the speech from the throne regarding action to establish secondary industries in Canada. I pointed out that immediate action was required. I mentioned an example in the province of British Colum bia involving two cities of which we are proud, namely Fernie and Britannia. I am not going to continue with that matter at the present time, as another opportunity will undoubtedly arise later in this session. However, with respect to the matter of secondary industries, we have to consider the position of Canada generally and that of the provinces in particular. Our country is gen erally dependent on export trade and the prov ince of British Columbia particularly so. For over a year now British Columbia has been very severely hit by the loss of our traditional markets for our base metals, our pulp and general timber products. This brings to mind something which I think it is very necessary to draw to the attention of the government at this time. Speaking particularly now of my own prov ince of British Columbia, may I say that in the past few months our predicament as far as employment is concerned has come about to some extent-I say only to some extent because we have been undercut in our tradi tional markets for base metals and timber products. This has been done, and I repeat only to some extent, by a new economic 57071-3-13½ The Address-Mr. Winch policy of the U.S.S.R. In the past year we have been undercut by that country on base metals and in the case of aluminum par ticularly to the extent of approximately 2 cents a pound. We have also been under cut on our timber exports. Without par ticularizing I will merely say that we now see the U.S.S.R. entering into a new phase of world diplomacy, a phase involving economic or trade manoeuvring, a policy that can have very serious results as far as Canada is concerned as an exporting country, although in the long run it may have beneficial aspects otherwise. In the past year a number of Canadian businessmen visited the U.S.S.R. and accord ing to the information I have received they state that Russia's logging industry is as efficient as that on the west coast of Canada, where we have prided ourselves as being very efficient, and that the sawmill end of the industry is possibly even more efficient. From what we have heard from these businessmen, and this is what I want to emphasize, Russia is spending approximately ten times as much as Canada on research per tree cut and per thousand board feet pro cessed. I do not have the time to go into all the implications of this new economic, trade and diplomatic policy, but as a citizen of Canada and a representative of the people of the country I do say that I feel personally it is necessary for the government to face up to the realities of the present trade situation. The government should face up to the reality of our loss of British Columbia markets for our base metals, particularly aluminum, and our timber products, and should recognize that we have definitely reached a time when, although basically the responsibility should rest on industry with regard to research, efficiency and other matters, the federal gov ernment should, in the interests of maintain ing employment and the trading economy of the nation, speedily announce greatly in creased allotments in the field of research as far as industrial operations are concerned. I want to emphasize in this regard that I think the government will be derelict in its responsibilities if it does not take a realistic approach to the matter and during the present session enunciate major policies and allocate large amounts of money to assist our provinces and industries in the field of research in order to enable us, operating under a capitalist system, to main tain employment through the medium of the export of our products. There is only one other phase of the speech from the throne to which I should like to draw the attention of the government and 196 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Winch the house. I believe that certain incidents of the past few days and, indeed, throughout the past year make it almost mandatory on the government to make ils position clear with regard to Canadian control of our own policies and our own economy. To put the matter in blunt language, I think the govern ment must now make it explicitly and impli citly clear that it is not going to be prone to deference to the United States. Deference to our powerful neighbour to the south must not give way to subservience either in the international field or with regard to our own economic policies. I think it is important to our country that there be policy statements and, if required, legislation so it may be made clear to the people of Canada in particular and of the United States that Canada controls its own destiny, its own international and economic polic;es. It must be made clear to the people of Canada particularly that there is no longer going to be subservience to United States companies that may own or control subsidiary companies in Canada from the point of view of their directing whether or not we can produce and sell to other countries. I refer, of course, in particular to the re ported incident in which Canada was not permitted to sell automobiles to China because of a United States law. I say, sir, that this is our country and no matter where companies are owned which are operating in our country, on our natural resources and on the wealth poduced by our people, it must be made clear, by legislation if necessary, that we in Canada sell where we desire to sell. As a corollary to that I want to add my support to the words so eloquently expressed by the hon. member for Kootenay West concerning the recognition of China. I feel very strongly on that subject. I said in a campaign speech before March 31, and I repeat on the floor of this house, that I am afraid Canada is still maintaining a position which is known agriculturally under a cer so much from hon. members of the govern ment over a long period of time concerning their love, loyalty and admiration for the United Kingdom that I suggest to them that when it comes to recognition of China, per haps they should have long ago followed the tain definition. I am convinced that some cloudy day for Canada, but a bright day for the United States, the United States will an nounce recognition of China and already have a settled basis for trade. We have heard lead of the United Kingdom. I feel that we in Canada should not drag behind the United States, but should follow the lead of the United Kingdom and recognize China on an [Mr. Winch.] ambassadorial basis, and enter immediately into negotiations to our mutual benefit in the trade situation. I have spoken about a number of matters during this debate. I recognize that my time is coming to a close. I have spoken in the main in generalities, but I hope I have been able to enunciate the principles which I personally, and I think I can safely say our group collectively, feel are of importance at this time. We hope to have an opportunity in the not too distant future to discuss these broad, general principles in detail. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, may I say that although we are a small group in this corner we have the same feelings of loyalty and understanding to our country as do the mem bers of any other party. There are three parties in this house, two of them holding the same fundamental principles. We believe in the necessity for a fundamental change; but believing in democracy we will, as repre sentatives in this house, do our utmost at all times to assist in constructive measures that will be of benefit to our country, to the peo ple in general, to our provinces and con stituencies. I want to take this opportunity of publicly, in the House of Commons, thanking the sup porters of Vancouver East, because, in my ninth election campaign, they thought I would make a good representative here. I wish to assure them that I shall at all times put for ward constructive criticism and constructive measures. Mr. Frank Mc:Gee (York-Sc:arboroughl: My first words, of course, Mr. Speaker, must be to concur in everything that has been said about you, and in particular to congratulate you, sir, upon achieving such favourable comment after such a hectic time during what, I suppose, is now going to be called the short parliament. My congratulations also must be extended to the Deputy Speaker, a worthy son succeeding a very worthy father. I have nothing except unabashed admiration for the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address on stepping into a situation as they did so early in the session and acquitting themselves in such distinguished fashion. If I may, I should like to add a word to the new members who joined us on March 31. A few short months ago I sat in their position, wondering when I was going to get the opportunity to speak; but let me assure them that even a four months' session does not do anything to lessen the terror with which one faces this situation. I can further assure them that Disraeli was correct when he said of the British house that it was the most chilling and nerve-destroying audience in the world. MAY 19, 1958 197 (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I should like to begin this speech by tendering a most cordial welcome to the new French-speaking members and I shall add that I hope one day to be able to share their traditional courage and well known ability which enable them to master another language. I avail myself of this opportunity to offer my warmest congratulations to the Right Hon. and Mrs. Louis St. Laurent who are today celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary in peace and serenity, far from the turmoil of politics. (Text): If I may be placed for a moment in the category of one making a maiden speech, Mr. Speaker, I should like to say something about the vast riding of York-Scarborough which I have the privilege of representing in this house. The first thing that must be said about this riding concerns an important father of confederation who, I am sure, is whirling in his grave somewhere in Toronto. I refer, of course, to George Brown, that great advocate of representation by population. In York Scarborough today there are approximately 200,000 people. By 1962, at which time it will be possible to bring about redistribu tion, according to a conservative estimate there will be between 325,000 and 350,000 people in that constituency. It will be ap parent immediately that York-Scarborough is not adequately represented in this house-- Mr. Pickersgill: Hear, hear. Mr. McGee: -present company excluded. I have made inquiries privately amongst the law officers and other agencies in a position to advise me, and I am told that I am at the mercy of the house in any attempt to achieve some relief in terms of trying and I underline the word "trying"-to rep resent adequately that many people. The physical proportions of the riding of York Scarborough are simply described by a line drawn through Yonge street and No. 11 high way, which roughly bisects the city of Toronto and sweeps around eastward to the lake. Within the boundaries of this area lies most of the open land available for building to take up the outward growth of the city. I think it is fair to say that of every two new houses built in the metropolitan Toronto area one will be built in York-Scarborough. Not too many years ago the riding of York Scarborough was a pleasant countryside on the perimeter of Toronto. Starting with the war and gathering momentum following the war an invasion of massive proportions took place. An example of the numbers involved I can give to you in this fashion. Between the election in 1953 and the election in 1957 The Address-Mr. McGee 100,000 people moved into that riding; and of course with the inspired policies of this government this pace has increased. Between the election of last June and the election in March there were 9,000 more voters on the voters' lists. Following this massive invasion of people mostly young people with young families moving into their own homes for the first time- came an accompanying movement of industry following the labour force and per sonnel to the suburban areas, resulting in such dynamic areas as the golden mile, to say nothing of Leaside and North York. But what is most important about the riding of York-Scarborough is the people who live within its boundaries. They are good citizens conscientious in the discharge of their civic duties at the municipal, provincial and federal level. As an example of good citizenship in action may I point out that during the last campaign their were no fewer than 15 joint meetings to which all candidates of all parties were invited for general debate, equal time being allowed and a question period following. In addition there were 150 neighbourhood meet ings to which I was invited. That is an example of a people interested, concerned and willing to participate in the functioning of democracy in this country. I have not the figures at hand, but it is my understanding that the percentage of people who voted in that riding is as high as any in the Dominion of Canada. There has been some discussion about the results of this election, and some reasons have been advanced as to why the result was as it was. The leader of the C.C.F. party, the hon. member for Assiniboia, summed it all up in simple words. He said the only reason the Conservatives formed the govern !:1ent was that many people were saying, Should we not give the government a chance?" or "Let us give John a chance"· that it was just as simple as that. ' I have a few comments which will indicate that it was not as simple as that by any means. In my opinion the reason stems first from the fact that the Conservative party had the dynamic and dramatic leadership of the Prime Minister. In the second place this government, which was a minority govern ment, faced a most difficult economic situa tion and a rather more difficult political situ ation. The verdict of the people, as I recognize it, was that it had done an excellent job, not just that it deserved another chance but that it had to have it. The fourth reason for the result which obtained is, I suggest, that in their own way each of the other parties in contesting this 198 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. McGee election made presentations and submissions to the people of Canada most of which added up to an insult to the intelligence of the Canadian voter. I refer to examples of can didates, some of whom were returned and others who were not, stumping the country and screaming that Tory times are hard times. One of them even went into an histo rical treatise to establish this preposterous nonsense, and it was interpreted as such by most of the electorate. In Toronto we had such extreme statements on the front pages of our newspapers as one saying that Tory policies were stupid and dishonest. We had suggestions that the government was anti American, as well as many other wild state ments which could not be supported. Cer tainly in York-Scarborough the voters gave their answer to such suggestions and accorded me a majority which I understand is larger than any previous one in history. As to the debate thus far and the amend ment involving economic planning may I say in spite of what the hon. member for Essex East stated: ... this government has not given any evidence of a program designed to meet this national problem of unemployment in Canada at this time. And the Leader of the Opposition's state ment: The word "recession" is not mentioned. It is a bad word. apparently, which must not be used. In spite of statements such as those, Mr. Speaker, I submit to you that this government has given Canada a new position in world affairs. I suggest that Canada leads all coun tries in the world in terms of anti-recession legislation. Policies which were orginated by this government are now being discussed in the United States at great length. Statements appeared during the election emanating from my opponent in my riding and from his leaders throughout the country that this was not so. If I may very quickly review the matter in detail I should like to do so. It seems to me that government action on an anti-recession basis should evolve in two ways; first, government anti-recession action should put more money into the hands of the people. Certainly this is fundamental economic theory. It should further, if possi ble, put that money into the hands of people who need that money and, of course it follows, who will spend it. In that regard I should like to list briefly the things that were done. They include the old age pension increase, the old age assistance increase, payments to disabled persons ex tended, the blind pension increased, veterans allowances and benefits, disability pension benefits; money put into the hands of people [Mr. McGee.] who needed that money and who would spend it, putting more money in circulation and certainly creating more purchasing power. Beyond that, the obvious method of putting more money back into the pockets of people in this country was by tax reductions, $146 million worth. Again what I liked best about this method-and certainly it was reflected in the reaction of the voters in my riding-was that they started substantially at the bottom, giving relief where it was most needed, in the lower income brackets. Certainly as far as in creased tax deduction for children was con cerned, this was greeted with much enthusiasm in my riding, which has more young children than any three normal ridings in this country. Other money was put into circulation to create purchasing power and economic activ ity through cash advances on farmstored grain and financial assistance to the provinces. In addition to taking action to inject more money into the bloodstream of the economy, the government took further action by ac celerating the public works ,program and moving forward starting dates on govern ment-sponsored projects in order to create more jobs. Even more important as far as my own riding is concerned, and as far as I per sonally am concerned, was the action taken in the last parliament and continued in this parliament by the Minister of Public Works to expand the house building program. Those 9,000 voters I mentioned who moved into York-Scarborough between last June and March of this year moved largely into homes built under legislation brought in by this government last year. My Liberal opponent experienced difficulty in sustaining his point that this government was doing nothing, when around us on every side, in every area of the riding, was a rate of home building double or treble the rate established in the winter months a year before. No policy for the recession? No anti-reces sion activities? I refer to the speech from the throne, and draw the attention of hon. mem bers to the amendment to the Unemployment Insurance Act and the relief attendant thereto; to the increased rate of house build ing which I have mentioned; to the substan tial public investment and to the expansion of public works in the north, all of which are part and parcel of the steps the govern ment has taken to deal with this situation. I should like for one moment to look at the situation in the United States in more detail, and to compare it with our own. A debate has been going on for something like seven months south of the border on whether or not taxes should be cut. The administra tion has been asking, "If we cut taxes will people save the money or spend it?" and so on. We in Canada began cutting taxes well MAY 19, 1958 199 back in last year. I suppose it is the privilege of a backbencher to make guesses like any body else in this country, and I suggest we may yet be cutting taxes some more. In the United States the debate goes on concerning whether or not government spend ing should be increased. Well, Mr. Speaker, our government began its program in this regard some time ago. We started last Octo_ber with unemployment insurance compensation, housing projects and so on; and on a com parable basis we have done five times as much as the United States in housing loans. The economies of the United States and Canada are so tied together that I believe there will never be a situation where one country is in the state of recession while the other is in a state of inflation. We may move upward and downward at varying rates, but substantially we will be in the same phase. I would encourage the government of the United States to take an example from the leadership which I mentioned a few moments ago and accelerate its program as we are ac celerating ours in order to bring about a continental economic situation which is so vital. I should like now to say something about the national pastime of suggesting what the federal government should do. Across my desk as, I know, across the desks of most hon. members flows an avalanche of material from every quarter-industry, labour, and every known organization-giving suggestions and ideas as to what the federal government should do. I have an idea that perhaps the responsibility for the economic future of this country does not lie exclusively within the federal realm, and I hope that when the Min ister of Labour convenes his conference of labour, management and industry, out of that meeting will come a progressive and ag gressive move on the part of labour and on the part of industry to pitch in and help us dig ourselves out of this recession. I would certainly look to labour, and the housing industry particularly, which has benefited tremendously from the expansion in this area of our economy, to come forward with a program which, I am sure, will be looked on with favour by this government, to bring about a solution to our winter un employment problem. We have had a lot of experience in fighting recessions in this country; we have a reces sion every winter. I should like to see a plan, long term and short term, involving public works-public works which before this government took office did not exist-co ordinated with the building industry and with labour to bring about a sort of public works The Address-Mr. McGee anti-recession measure each winter, a move which would certainly answer a social need. Technological methods of solving the dif ficulties of building during the winter have advanced tremendously in the past few years. In my own riding there is a development plan to accommodate 30,000 people. Certain im pediments exist which prevent this work being started. I would urge the government and the Minister of Public Works to take what action may be necessary to remove these impediments in order that next winter, the following winter and the year after that construction may go ahead on this project. Mr. Speaker, I mentioned earlier that during the recent election campaign charges of anti-Americanism were levelled against the government. In his speech the Leader of the Opposition mentioned at the outset some thing about telling our best customers things they were not too happy to hear. I used to be a buyer in my civilian occupation, and ir, that capacity I used to buy considerable amounts from various sources. On many occasions it became necessary for me to go to a good customer and move some of the contracts planned to be placed with that manufacturer to another in order to protect myself as a buyer and protect my company from the situation which might arise from having too many eggs in one basket. In fact the suggestion made in my riding during the election was that we should have followed such a policy, but not told the Americans that this was the intention. I have always believed in my own dealings -and I think they should apply also to gov ernment dealings on an international plane- that such things should be done openly and not behind people's backs, and if one is facing a new situation with regard to the balance of trade it is better, in my view, to say so frankly. With regard to this charge of anti Americanism I should like to refer the house to an editorial which appeared yesterday in the New York Times. Referring to a sug gestion in some quarters of an anti-American nationalism in Canada, the editorial says: This is a distortion. Canadian "nationalism," so-called, is prideful, honest and healthy. No right minded citizen of this country could deplore it. It will bring grievances to the surface, and that is all to the good. That is as it should be between close friends . Probably we need, here in the United States. a greater flexibility in some of our policies. Probably Canada needs a better understanding of what we are trying to do. This I suggest is the answer, or part of it, to such criticisms. Before I sit down, Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to outline my specific ambition in this House .if Commons. It is simply this; that 200 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Robichaud after I depart, through choice or otherwise, it may be said of me that I was a good member. I do not think there is any more worthy ambition for anyone coming into this house. The only promise I have made in two election campaigns, and the promise I now make to you, sir, and to this house, is that I will do my very best. I do not think anyone can or should promise more. Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucesier): Mr. Speaker, I would like to join with those who have preceded me in this debate by offering to you my sincere congratulations on having been selected for a second term as speaker of this house and to act as the first member of the commons. Those of us who were here during the last parliament have benefited from your fairness and good judgment, and I want to assure you at this early stage of the current session that you will continue to receive from the members of the official oppo sition the utmost co-operation and respect in your endeavours to protect the rights and privileges of all members, irrespective of their party affiliation. You received this co-operation from us during the last parliament and I want to as sure you that the members of the party to which I belong were shocked to witness the most unpleasant and embarrassing position into which you were forced-not by the op position members but by the Prime Minister himself-during the dying moments of Can ada's twenty-third parliament. An hon. Member: What about the twenty second parliament? Mr. Robichaud: It is to be hoped for the protection and safeguarding of the rights, traditions and principles of parliament that similar incidents will not occur during Can ada's twenty-fourth parliament. Mr. Palleii: You have a very short memory. Mr. Robichaud: Before resuming my re marks on the address in reply to the speech from the throne I would also like to con gratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address, which hon. members acquitted themselves in a way worthy of parliamentarians and to the glory and honour of their respective consti tuencies. (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I would like to join the hon. member for York-Scarborough (Mr. McGee) in tendering my most sincere congratulations to Mr. and Mrs. Louis St. Laurent who today, surrounded by their family, are celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary. May the Lord grant them many more years of happi- [Mr. McGee.] ness in which to enjoy the peace of family and home, sheltered from the worries and responsibilities of political life. (Text): From now on, Mr. Speaker, during the few minutes at my disposal my remarks will be restricted to or at least very closely con nected with, the program enunciated in the speech from the thone. The Prime Minister, as is outlined in the speech from the throne, is asking parliament to direct its attention to these things which are considered neces sary and of immediate importance to the people of Canada. We members of this house, irrespective of party affiliation and whether sitting with the government or the opposition, have a responsibility to protect the rights of the people and at the same time assure a high level of employment and prosperity in our country. There are certain measures there fore which we believe are necessary and of immediate importance in order to benefit the people of Canada. We have learned from the speech from the throne that all the countries of the com monwealth have accepted the Canadian pro posal that a commonwealth trade and economic conference be held in Montreal in September of this year. We certainly welcome such an announcement, but unfortunately we have good reasons to be rather sceptical about the result of any such conference. The people of Canada have not yet forgotten the Mont Tremblant conference which was termed "a great flop" when the British had prepared very thoroughly for that meeting while our Canadian representatives went to the con ference as though they had forgotten about their homework. Will the policy of the government at this coming conference be governed by a straight diversion of 15 per cent of our trade from the United States to Britain, or will it be based on more solid ground such a higher and expanding level of international trade with all countries, as we enunciated in the amendment moved by our leader, the hon. member for Algoma East? When employment for all should be the main concern of every member of this house, when unemployment figures are from 75 per cent to 80 per cent higher today than in May of last year, we are told in the speech from the throne that this parliament will be asked to enact a new bill of rights to safe guard the rights of all persons in Canada in respect of all subjects within the jurisdic tion of parliament. We realize that we have in such a bill a dream, a vision highly cherished by the Prime Minister himself, but we must also admit that we Canadians have enjoyed since the early days of our con stitution a maintenance and preservation of MAY 19, 1958 201 freedom probably unequalled in any other free country of the world. I would therefore suggest to the Prime Minister and to the other members of the present government that precedence be given to more urgent matters, matters which concern the immediate welfare and general economy of the Canadian people. The constitution of Canada established in the British North America Act safeguards the rights of all Canadian citizens irrespective of racial origin; and all Canadians are proud of this act which has given us, as I have just said, a freedom probably unequalled in any other free country. Speaking of a bill of rights, I might mention that listening this morning to the statement by the Secretary of State for Ex ternal Affairs I felt that what we now need is a bill of rights for parliament, when such a military alliance as the one announced by that minister this morning should be considered by parliament and should not rest upon the shoulders of the present government without consulting with parlia ment as a whole. There is another aspect of the speech from the throne which I would like to mention, and that has to do with a matter which concerns all of us in this house at the present time; that is, sustained employment for all together with accelerated develop ment of our natural resources. The govern ment has decided on what it calls a major program of useful public works projects and the encouragement of the development and processing of our natural resources. However, as has been said before by members of the opposition who preceded me in this debate, there is very little new in this so-called huge public works program launched by the government, the major portion of which was outlined in detail in the estimates for the fiscal year 1958-1959 tabled on Tuesday last. The works projects totalling $280 million during the first quarter of 1958 and $1,185 million for the full calendar year, a large part of which is for the government's so-called natural develop ment policy, will certainly not meet the objective of the government of removing the dark cloud of unemployment which is presently spreading over Canada from coast to coast, and which may be more apparent in the Atlantic provinces than in any other section of the country. It is, moreover, a recognized fact that the largest share of these public works projects included in the present estimates are but a continuation or completion of projects started by the previous government. We from the Atlantic provinces are not against such projects of major importance as 57071-3- 14 The Address-Mr. Robichaud the South Saskatchewan dam and the Pine Poin" railway in the far north. We under stand that the politically-minded Prime Min ister could not resist implementing certain of his promises to that effect, but this does not prove to us and to the country in general that such projects are economically sound and urgently needed at this particular time of recession. The program of building new roads in the northern territories to develop the wealth of mineral resources could have some economic justification; but just the same all hon. members, and particularly the mem bers of the present government, should take a second look at some of the announcements made by the Prime Minister, such as the one made in Prince Albert to the effect that he had in mind a road 212 miles long from Prince Albert to Flin Flon and also a 550- mile road from Lac La Ronge to Uranium City on lake Athabaska. We are not against future development of this country from north to south through a policy of access roads, making available the vast resources of the northern section of Canada, but we all understand also that new roads are urgently needed right now in some of the other provinces in areas already well populated, and where they could benefit already established and operating industries. We know what new roads would mean to the tourist industry in the Atlantic provinces and the additional revenue it would bring to our population. We would therefore ask the Prime Min ister before it is too late to reconsider his northern vision and give due consideration not only to a western vision, as was men tioned this morning by the hon. member for Vancouver East, but also to an eastern vision to include the other provinces of Canada. We are not against the so-called specific $75 million development at Frobisher bay on Baffin island. We recognize that Canada is a growing country with great possibilities and prospects for future development; but at the same time it is our duty as members of the opposition to suggest to this govern ment the right kind of planning in conjunc tion with a tax policy which will improve the present wavering economy o~ the country. We are aware of the vast mineral resources of the Arctic region. We know that the whole of the Northwest Territories, with its 1,300,- 000 square miles, offers new ground for important economic developments in the years to come. However, we must admit that right now, in the month of May, 1958, hundreds of thousands of Canadian citizens, in fact most probably over 500,000 of them, are seeking work which they urgently need. We recall those words of the Prime Minister, 202 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Robichaud uttered in his own town of Prince Albert including those representatives of the At on February 14 last, when he said: !antic provinces who are now members of As long as I am Prime Minister, no man or the present government? Is this canal not woman is going to suffer from unemployment so as urgent and as economically sound as the long as public works will provide them the assis- South Saskatchewan dam? tance they require. We have in the Atlantic provinces, in New Brunswick, in Nova Scotia and in Prince Edward Island, thousands of unemployed who are seeking work to earn a living to maintain their families. Is this really the proper time to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to open new roads in uninhabited areas to help discover new mineral deposits, when our own already populated areas need new roads and our people are urgently in need of employment? The transportation problem of the Atlantic provinces is one which deserves immediate consideration. We have in northern New Brunswick hundreds of millions of tons of base metal deposits which are ready for ex ploitation and which unfortunately lie dormant under the ground for lack of market outlets. In fact, in the last few days one of our major mining companies made the announcement that it had extracted its equip ment and machinery and placed them in moth balls, probably awaiting the return of a Liberal government to start operating again. Well, I certainly hope they will not have to wait too long, because our section of the country would definitely suffer from it. In Alberta our oil wells this month are producing at only 40 per cent of their ca pacity. A natural market for western crude oil has been gradually diminishing. In April, 1957, some 200,000 barrels per day were shipped through the Trans-Mountain pipe line to British Columbia and United States westcoast refineries. In April of this year the total shipment will be less than 81,000 barrels a day. Is this the right time to open new areas; is it economically wise for this gov ernment to launch on a spending spree with out first giving serious consideration to problems which, if solved, will have imme diate results in the betterment of our general economy? What is going to be the attitude of the present government to a request which has been before this house for a number of years, such as the Chignecto canal between New Brunswick and Nova Scotia to link the waters of Northumberland strait and those of the bay of Fundy? Is the present govern ment prepared to make it known to hon. members and to the country in general with out delay that it is now in a position to proceed with the construction of this canal the need for which has been recognized in this house so often by members of all parties, [Mr. Robichaud.] Why delay the improvements for Bathurst harbour which were announced by the Prime Minister on September 27 of last year? During the last campaign my opponent was taking credit for having succeeded in obtain ing $3,500,000 for immediate improvements in Bathurst harbour in my constituency of Gloucester. I hold in my hand the estimates for 1958-59. Where is this item for the Bathurst harbour project which my Con servative opponent claimed during the cam paign? If the present government has faith in the future development of our base metal deposits and our other natural resources, why could they not proceed now with the Bathurst harbour development and at the same time provide at least some measure of relief to some of our 4,000 unemployed in Gloucester county today? On Friday last I asked the Minister of National Revenue whether the government had conducted any discussions with the inte rested parties on the reported action contem plated by A. V. Roe to suspend operation of the Cape Breton coal mines for a period of 25 days in order to alleviate the coal market ing problem. In his reply the minister indi cated that he had no knowledge of such contemplated action, and that the government of Nova Scotia would communicate with the government of Canada if such action is contemplated. In reply to a supplementary question we were told by the Prime Minister that con sideration was being given by the dominion coal board to the disposal of the surplus of coal that is available under the circumstances referred to in my question. It is a well known fact that surpluses of coal now exist ing in the Nova Scotia mines are creating a disturbing problem for the industry and could result in a temporary lay-off of a large number of men in the very near future. If the Minister of National Revenue had no knowledge of the rumoured contemplated suspension of operations by the A. V. Roe Company it appears to me that the reply of the Prime Minister indicated that at least the dominion coal board was aware of the situation. During the last political campaign the Prime Minister, while discussing the matter of thermal power stations in the maritimes, is reported to have said in Halifax on March 24, as reported in the Halifax Heraid for MAY 19, 1958 203 the following day, March 25, that he wished to; and these were his words: . . . underline . . . that we are asking, we are demanding that coal be utilized. In the course of the last session, parliament was asked to approve a bill authorizing the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources (Mr. Hamilton) to enter, on behalf of the government of Canada, into an agree ment with the governments of any of the Atlantic provinces to provide assistance to the provinces in the generation of electric energy in the provinces by steam driven generators and the control and transmission of electric energy. Clause 3, subclause 2 (d) of the said Bill 244 made provision for the payment by Canada to the province of a sub vention in respect of eastern coal used in the operation of facilities for the generation of electric energy by steam driven generators. We are now entitled to know, Mr. Speaker, if in the power agreements signed or to be signed with the provinces concerned the federal government has insisted that coal be used instead of oil as such a decision or policy could in the future have serious effects on the coal industry in the Atlantic provinces. Another matter of great concern to all Canadians which is also included in the speech from the throne is the proposal to establish a new agency to regulate broadcast ing in Canada and to ensure that the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the privately owned broadcasting stations work effectively together to constitute a national system to provide satisfactory television and radio services to all Canadians within reach. The population of my own constituency of Gloucester now reaches close to 65,000 people. The neighbouring constituencies of Northum berland and Restigouche in New Brunswick and Bonaventure in Gaspe across the bay of Chaleur in Quebec with a population of 185,000 people make up a grand total of over 250,000 people, yes, over a quarter of a mil lion of our population who are even today deprived of practically any television recep tion or service. Before spending more money to establish new agencies to regulate broadcasting in Canada consideration should be given to giv ing adequate service to populated areas such as I have just mentioned. I want to draw to the attention of the government the need for extending television service to northeastern New Brunswick and to the Gaspe area in Quebec. The people of these areas have a right to ask for C.B.C. television coverage. We have there a mixed population of about 40 per cent English and 60 per cent French speaking. If it is the policy of the C.B.C. to give consideration to geographical distribu tion across Canada as well as language, this 57071-3-14½ The Address-Mr. Robichaud particular location should be selected and it will without any doubt give the largest coverage for every dollar spent. I realize that an application is now before the board of governors for the establishment of a privately owned television station at New Carlisle. This station proposes to divide its programs on the basis of 35 per cent English and 65 per cent French. What as surance, however, have we got that even this proportion will be followed? Are the people of northeastern New Brunswick and the Gaspe coast going to be satisfied with delayed programs based on a certain proportion of French programs and the balance in English? What our population wants is the same service and the same privileges which are today offered to other populated sections of Canada. In practice it may be difficult to give ade quate service to remote areas due to excessive costs, but anyone studying the present tele vision networks will soon realize that the connections now reaching Rimouski to the north or to the northeast and extending to Moncton and Saint John in New Brunswick, to Halifax and to Sydney in Nova Scotia and then to Newfoundland farther to the south east, leave without service whatsoever the large populated area of northeastern New Brunswick and the Gaspe coast to which I have just referred. Such a service might seem costly but a large population group is there to justify the extension of the service to it. Furthermore, the technological reasons which may make it difficult to extend tele vision service to some remote areas of the country do not exist in the areas I am referring to now. If immediate consideration could be given to extending the French network from Ri mouski to New Carlisle and the English network from Moncton to Newcastle and Bathurst and even Campbellton the entire area I am referring to will be provided with adequate television service by the C.B.C. This could be done economically by the construction and operation of small trans mitters known as repeater stations which would serve at least a quarter of a million of our population now deprived of such a service. I am convinced that such a recom mendation or suggestion by the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Nowlan) would meet with the approval of all members of the house. Before concluding my remarks on the address, I should like to touch briefly on another matter which was barely mentioned in the speech from the throne. In fact, the 204 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Robichaud only mention of fisheries was made in the following very few words: Unremitting efforts are being made to sell Canadian agricultural and fisheries products in the markets of the world- There is no doubt in my mind that the fishing industry today is experiencing its own particular difficulties. Our Atlantic coast fishermen are being paid today for their fish prices which do not keep pace with the national economy. Prices for fish are in many instances even lower than they were 8 or 10 years ago. What are the main reasons for this unfavourable situation? Is it disorderly marketing by our processors and dealers combined with too much empha sis by governments on production and conservation alone? The fishing industry is facing problems today which should be attacked vigorously if the industry is to survive and prosper. Governments, both federal and in the provin ces concerned, should give, in co-operation with the industry, more attention to market ing and at the same time establish a sound program of sales promotion, advertising and education. There is no reason whatsoever why in some areas of the Atlantic provinces our fishermen should be paid less than 3 cents per pound for their fresh cod delivered at landing points. It is not my intention at this time to make elaborate remarks on the fishing industry. My time is limited by the rule of debate and I will have other occasions to discuss this matter in much more detail. The fishing industry, however, is one of major importance on the east and west coasts of our country and deserves the full attention of the govern ment. I want to warn the government that the fishing industry has some definite reservations on the question of a firmer stand on trade with the United States, and one must not forget that one-half of Canada's fisheries products, to a value of $90 million annually, are consumed in the United States. The government will also be asked to give more serious attention to the declining Atlantic salt fish industry which is seriously affected by the loss of important inter national markets together with higher costs of production. Notwithstanding the statement made by the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean) in Halifax a few weeks ago to the effect that the industry should not be concerned with the recent curtailment of import quotas on fresh and frozen fillets by the United States government, we of the opposition feel that the possible consequences to the fishing industry of the government's stand on trade matters with the United States should be carefully weighed before proceeding further [Mr. Robichaud.] in this direction. We are aware of the efforts made on previous occasions by the United States fishing industry to curtail fish imports. We know what the acceptance by the United States government of the United States tariff commission recommendations would mean to our fishing industry and there is no need for us to emphasize further that the diversion trade policy of the government is creating disquietude and fear among our own fish exporters. We do not want further curbs on imports of fishery products by United States author ities, and again we are asking the government to exercise definite reservations in its attitude towards our United States neighbours, in order to protect an industry which is so vital to the economy of the Atlantic provinces. There are many other problems facing the fishing industry today which I should like to bring to the attention of this house, but I shall reserve my remarks for a later date when I may have an opportunity of dealing exclusively with fisheries problems. Since the open'ing of the present session, the house has approved amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act, extending sea sonal benefits to June 28, for this year only. This, we understood, was but a temporary, emergency measure to take partial care of the exception'ally large number of unem ployed at a period when usually employment should be at least normal. If unemployment insurance has been introduced to protect labour during a period of unemployment in this country, the act should be amended to cover farm employees who certainly deserve protection. In conclusion, I express the hope that the government will see its way clear to intro duce, during the present session, amendments to the Unemployment Insurance Act which would include benefits for employees on our Canadian farms. Mr. Harold Hicks (Fraser Valley): Mr. Speaker, as a freshman, I should like to take this opportunity of congratulating you upon the high position to which you have been elevated. I should like also to extend con gratulations to the Deputy Speaker and the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. At this time I should like to refer back 22 years to a time when Harry J. Barber, of Chilliwack, was the last Pro gressive Conservative member to represent the Fraser valley district in this house. I had a letter from him yesterday and he is just as much interested today as he was theri in the doings of this great parliament. I propose to locate for you, Mr. Speaker, the Fraser Valley constituency, and then I MAY 19, 1958 205 should like to take a few moments to outline some of the problems that we have in the Fraser valley. Before doing this, however, I should like to say that this is the centennial year for British Columbia. Those of you who have visited the province during the last month or two might wonder what it was that you saw walking around the streets of our cities and towns with large beards, mustaches, sideburns and so on. These people represent what human beings looked like some one hundred ago. Iri addition to that, our ladies love to go out dressed in the long skirts with the hoops, the large hats, and even in Chilli wack, the largest town in our district, it is quite the proper thing for every lady on Friday to go out dressed in such costumes. I trust, too, that whenever any district in British Columbia asks for help in celebratin'g this centennial year, this government will see fit to do what it can to help. The Fraser Valley constituency which I represent extends from about Cisco Lodge in the northeast corner, up the Fraser valley canyon on both sides of the river for about 150 miles, and then west to Aldergrove on the south side of the Fraser river, and to the Pitt river which runs into the Fraser on the north side. During the last election there were some 40,000 voters in the area. This is a very important tourist area and includes some very scenic routes, particularly the one down the Fraser valley canyon with the rug ged mountains showing on each side. In some areas the highway circles around the moun tain tops quite high from the bottom of the Fraser valley canyon. I have known several instances of our prairie neighbours, who are used to driving on the level, really getting the jitters when they are driving around some of these mountain peaks away up in the heavens. This Fraser canyon has in it Hell's Gate, at which point there are salmon ladders to allow the salmon to go up the Fraser river to the spawning grounds. When the water rises three or four feet during flood time at Hell's Gate it has little effect on the water level farther down where the Fraser river spreads out to a considerable width. The Harrison Hot Springs spa is also one of the tourist attractions in the Fraser river valley. Here, of course, is the Agassiz experimental farm, which is one of the original experimental farms started in 1888. It is in the shade of Mount Cheam, one of the beautiful mountains of the area. At this time of the year, as the snow melts, one can see the form of an angel outlined in the snow on the side of Mount Cheam, and that is known as the guardian angel of the Fraser valley. The Address-Mr. Hicks In this area there is a great deal of com mercial .fishing between the Pattullo bridge, which is in New Westminster, and the Mis sion City bridge. There has been some con cern amongst local .fishermen, who have been living on small farms and .fishing during the season, because the season has been curtailed lately. Last year closure was put on in this area from September 15, and the .fishermen felt this was a hardship. There is also some mining in this area, particularly in the Hope area on the south side of the Fraser. There is some small mining done on the north shore. From Lytton down the Fraser valley to the extreme western end, there is commer cial logging and lumbering. There are some quite large mills operating in the Hope, Mis sion, Chilliwack, Haney and other areas, cut ting lumber for the local and export trade. There are also many smaller mills in the area. These are important business concerns and certainly add a great deal to the employ ment opportunities and resources of the area. Agriculture, however, is our main resource in the Fraser valley, and is the thing about which I am mostly concerned. It includes such crops as peas, corn and the small fruits like strawberries and raspberries for canning and freezing. Also of great importance from an agricultural standpoint is the poultry busi ness, including not only the turkey breeding work but also the raising of poultry for meat and egg production. Growers in my constituency are thankful for the assistance given the turkey growers last fall when the United States turkeys were being dumped into the area. The poultry industry in this area almost equals in value the dairy industry. These two branches of agriculture in the Fraser Valley constituency are almost iden tical with the same crops from the edge of the Fraser Valley constituency to the coast. This area is in the New Westminster riding including Langley, Cloverdale, Ladner and so on. The poultry and dairy industries combined provide over 50 per cent of the cash value of the farms in the province of British Columbia. The large Fraser valley milk producers association, a co-operative that operates mostly in the Fraser valley, sold $25,580,597 worth of products last year. That will give you some idea of the importance of this great co-operative organization. I should now like to take a few minutes to mention some of the problems of the constituency with which I have been, shall I say, bombarded since March 31. You might be surprised to learn that this whole area which I have mentioned, even right down to the Ladner area which goes right to the coast, is extremely short of domestic water. Where the rainfall is so heavy and where the Fraser river runs through the centre of it, 206 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Hicks one would be inclined to think that the domestic water supply should be quite appropriate for the need. However, such is not the case. Almost every one of these areas is concerned about the domestic water supply, probably not so much for today but rather because they foresee what is coming in the years ahead, particularly as people are mov ing in in larger and larger numbers all the time. Some considerable work has been done in engineering and in making inquiries of all kinds in connection with trapping water from tributaries which run into the Vedder river southeast of Chilliwack. As this water comes down off the mountains from glaciers up on top, it is wonderful water, with no contamina tion whatever. If it could be put into large pipes and run right down through the centre of the Fraser valley and sold to each of the municipalities as it goes by, it would help a great deal not only in the Chilliwack area but in Sumas prairie, which is a dike farming area with very wonderful land, and also in Aldergrove and in Matsqui municipality and further on down to the coast outside of the Fraser Valley constituency which I represent. The Elk Creek water works of Chilliwack are the people who supply Chilliwack with its water at the present time and they are hav ing trouble in getting an adequate supply. In this same area is a large army camp of the Canadian engineers. Water must be sup plied to it. There are two tributaries running into the Vedder river. Incidentally the Vedder river is not suitable for damming because it goes on the rampage at flood time, so much so that engineers assert that it could not be dammed and handled properly. But there are, in fact, three tributaries running into it, with almost ready made places where dams could easily be put in. I know of no other one thing in my constituency or even in the Fraser valley as a whole that would give more satisfaction, more happiness or more pleasure to all the people therein than an adequate supply of fresh clean water. It could be used for domestic purposes in all the homes and it could also be used at certain seasons of the year for irrigation pur poses on farm land. Next I should like to mention the fact that I was invited to a council meeting in Haney not long before I left home. The Haney reeve is chairman of the mosquito control area there. They wondered whether more funds could not be secured from the federal government in order to assist, partic ularly in this centennial year, in controlling mosquitoes. Of course this matter has to do with all municipalities in the Fraser valley. I [Mr. Hicks.] understand the amount last year was $1,500. They should like to see that amount doubled. Let me mention some of the problems of some of the other municipalities. Inciden tally may I say that in some of my campaign talks I mentioned the fact that I would, if elected, try to keep in touch as much as possible with the municipal officers in the particular riding. By doing that one can keep in touch with the individuals as well. Just recently the teamsters strike was con cluded in British Columbia and this meant a great deal to the situation that had arisen in the Hope area which exists mostly on the tourist trade and lumbering. Nothing with regard to lumbering could be done there until the teamsters strike was settled. Then as to Chilliwack, I mentioned the army camp there. They are looking for larger grants to their municipality, not for getting and expressing thanks for what has been supplied previously. According to the information given to me, in 1955 there was a $13,159 grant to the municipality of Chilli wack; in 1956 it was $12,537. When I left they had not had word as to what the 1957 grant would be, but they hoped it would amount to $20,000. The trans-Canada high way runs through this municipality and they would hope that work on this project could be started immediately. On the north side of the river in Kent municipality they are desirous of having the highway completed as a civil defence project, if for no other reason. The Mission municipality, which also would benefit by this water supply that I mentioned some time ago, have a project which they should like to see developed, that is 100 acres being diked along the river bank and filled in, as apparently some company is en deavouring to purchase this site for industrial purposes. This, of course, would be a wonderful thing, something similar to what is being done on Annasis island at the present time. Matsqui municipality has a large airport which will be better known to hon. members as Abbotsford airport. This airport extends over some 1,200 acres, and the people feel that the assessment value of $3.50 per acre placed on it by the federal government is too low. They would like to see it increased. All municipalities in my area are, of course, looking forward to assistance and help from the government toward their education programs. Apparently the provincial govern ment is financially unable to supply all the requirements, and the municipalities are therefore looking to the federal government for some assistance in this regard. MAY 19, 1958 207 Another matter which is important to the constituency which I represent and to the area further down between the Fraser valley and the coast is the feed situation as it affects poultry men and livestock growers in that area. I believe that those interested have no quarrel with the Canadian wheat board regulations which set the price for milling wheat, but it does not seem fair to the poultry and livestock men in British Columbia that wheat can be purchased by one farmer from another, or by feeders directly from farmers on the prairies at be tween 50 cents to 65 cents a bushel for the lower grades while the price a producer has to pay directly the grain crosses the mountains is three times that sum, up to $50 a ton, which is the way feed is sold in British Columbia. Poultry and livestock men in British Columbia have to compete with the prairie producers of poultry products as well as with imports from the state of Washington. It is admitted, of course, that there is a freight subsidy on this feed coming into British Columbia, but it would still be a wonderful thing for the province if some thing could be done. Another problem, and one which is, I understand, being looked after at the present time at least as far as strawberry production is concerned, is raised by the dumping of berries into British Columbia from the state of Washington at very low prices. There will be something like 3,000 tons of rasp berries for export from the Fraser valley this year, but there will be imports of straw berries also on account of the frost which a few years ago killed a lot of the plants. These are some of the major problems we face in the Fraser valley. Mr. Alan Macnaughton (Mount Royal): Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a great pleasure to join with other hon. members of this house and congratulate you upon your election as speaker of the twenty-fourth parliament. I know that as a scholar and a gentleman you will maintain the rights and privileges of the minority groups in this chamber. In the tradition of this house I should like also to congratulate the mover and seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I think it might serve some purpose if in these fast changing times when each day the morning newspaper -screams new headlines at us I were to take a little time to discuss the really remarkable change and develop ment which has taken place in our political system and in our thinking since the time of confederation. There is no need for me to stress the economic strides made by this country; the fact that we have become the The Address-Mr. Macnaughton fourth trading nation in the world is suffi cient evidence of this growth. I should prefer to limit these few words to a discussion of Canada and the commonwealth, and to a new appraisal of the commonwealth. I should like to refer to the uniqueness of the Canadian position both geographically and historically and to the consequent opportunities in foreign policy that this gives us generally. It seems to me that the Canadian attitude toward the commonwealth has undergone very great changes in the past 50 years, and I think it may be said that from confederation in 1867 down to 1914 the principal struggle was how to convert responsible government and confederation into real working internal and external sovereignty for all effective pur poses. That question was largely solved by the realities of the first world war. We en tered into a second phase of Canadian poli tical development in the celebrated imperial conferences which were held in 1926 and 1931. Hon. members will remember the Balfour declaration of 1926--"free and autonomous nations, no one subordinate to the other" and the 1931 Imperial conference which re sulted in the Statute of Westminster. I think it is fair to say that the nineteen twenties and nineteen thirties were marked by a growing body of Canadian opinion more detached from commonwealth sentiment than before. This was probably due to an anxiety to express our new found independence in the fullest possible way. However, during the period between 1939 and 1945, the period of world war II, I think we learned the full meaning of sovereignty with all its attendant responsibilities; I think we came to realize that the mother country would, in time of crisis, depend to a considerable degree upon Canada in many important respects. We seem now to have marched into a new era of commonwealth interests and under standing; we have come to realize that the commonwealth is a unique and attractive political experience and we are happy to share in it as one of its senior members. There are many good reasons for this. It is important to find a bridge between the whites and the non-whites of the free world. The commonwealth serves this purpose admirably. It is important, I think, to find an English speaking counterpoise to the weight of the United States. The commonwealth does this in a loose but certainly an effective fashion. It is also important to try and discover links between those countries which are active in the free world and those countries which allege a sort of neutrality between east and west. The commonwealth provides us with this opportunity with no loss of friendship 208 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Macnaughton or contact because of the different roads along which member states move on the highway of world order. We are now experimenting with new oppor tunities for economic relationships with the commonwealth, particularly with the United Kingdom. These may or may not succeed. The conference held in Mont Tremblant last year and the proposed economic conference to be held in Montreal this September will at least give us the chance for a continuing re-appraisal of Canada and the common wealth, and help us to see whether there are questions o • an economic or political character important to Canada which should not be overlooked. I think the success of He,· Majesty the Queen's visit last year testified to the interest of Canadians in monarchy as an institution. Many hon. members will recall that the fathers of confederation at one time were considering using the term "Kingdom of Can ada" but that this term was changed at the insistence of Lord Derby who feared, and I quote, that "the name would wound the sensibilities of the Yankees". I do however, maintain that the universal acceptance by Canadians o! Her Majesty the Queen as Queen of Canada is much more than an emotional outburst. We are not a new group of people isolated in a given geo graphical territory in North America; we are the inheritors and in fact the guardians of two great historical movements-the British and the French. To my mind the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) summarized the situation in very well chosen words when, in a newspaper article he wrote in part: It is an inspiring thing to be a citizen of a new nation; helping to malr some benefits. The government must be congratulated on that effort. But I must tell the house that, under present circumstances, this extension of the benefit period will mean nothing for a great number of my fellow citizens who work in American lumber camps since they did not get the necessary stamps to be entitled to benefit from this new amendment to the act. I would therefore ask the house to take into special consideration the situation of the bush workers of many constituencies of eastern Quebec, particularly the counties of Beauce, Montmagny, !'Islet, Compton, Frontenac, Megantic etc. A question which has been much to the fore in newspapers for almost a year is the problem of unemployment. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, much has been written in Canada with a view to establishing the responsibility of the Liberal or Conservative party in this field. Far be it from me to assess these re sponsibilities. The only thing I am interested in at this time is the material comfort and the welfare of the people in my riding, that is of those who are ultimately responsible for the honour conferred upon me by making me the representative of the county of Beauce. In our part of the country, like elsewhere, unemployment has done and is still doing a lot of harm. The fact is not to be denied and my first steps in public life led me to see for myself at close quarters all the hardship caused by unemployment in my riding. During the last federal election, the Con servative party advocated means to alleviate unemployment and stop the slowing down of 218 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Racine our economy. I am not an expert in the matter, and would not like to pose as such, but the fact remains that, in my riding of Beauce, unemployment has reached such pro portions that some action, whatever it be, is urgently called for. There has been much talk about public works; I am all in favour of that, not in ten years hence but as soon as possible. In the town of St. Georges, for instance, plans and designs are ready for the construction of a federal building capable of accommodating the post office, the R.C.M.P., the unemploy ment commission and other services. What are we waiting for to undertake such works and give some employment to those unemployed heads of families of my con stituency who are wondering anxiously what tomorrow will bring! I therefore beg the hon. Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) to consider this problem at once and fulfil the solemn promises made to the voters of my con stituency during the last federal election. Several municipalities and towns of my constituency, such as Ste. Marie, St. Joseph, Valley Junction and others, could well benefit from a public building and would be in great need of it. Why not have those municipalities and towns benefit from the advantages that the public works program could bring to my fellow citizens of Beauce? As a perfect counter for unemployment in my constituency, there was the problem of the Chaudiere river which each year causes damages running into thousands of dollars. I know full well that I will be told that this is a matter for the Quebec government and that the federal government is in no way concerned. Nevertheless I am surprised, Mr. Speaker, to note that two governments which managed to get along so well during an election campaign, now indulge in buck passing when the time for action has come. Since the Conservative party and the Quebec Union Nationale get along so well together, I would be very happy indeed if they showed their friendship once more, and saw to it that the people of Beauceville who live on the river's edge get the assistance to which they are entitled. We would most heartily applaud any concrete action taken by the two governments in order to remedy a situation which turns into disaster and which could well bring about loss of life. Since the federal government is looking for ways to solve an unemployment situation which has become a cause of hardship in this country, I would suggest to them to settle once and for all that matter of the Chaudiere river, and to stop hiding behind provincial autonomy in order to avoid facing up to their responsibilities. [Mr. Racine.] Another measure which could be of assis tance to our jobless families, specially our large families, would of course be the increase in the rates of family allowances. It will be recalled that, at the time of the passing of this most beneficial social legis lation, the cost of living index was much lower than it is at the present time. Canadians in general and the electors of my constituency in particular would greatly appreciate the raising of the benefits from this social legislation at least in the same proportions as the old age pensions were raised in the course of the last session of parliament. Mr. Speaker, I wish to end here my first speech in this house. I will not do so however without saying one last word on the problem which I consider as important as all other problems of a material nature, such as for instance unemployment, the economy of the country, trade, etc. etc. I refer to the great problem of national unity in Canada. I would be the last to raise racial or religious issues against anyone in this house. During the few years when I shall have the privilege of living here among the represen tatives of our great Canadian family, I would wish to live in complete understanding, know ing that national unity must be exemplified in the parliament of the nation. However, understanding, co-operation and harmony do not mean subservience and still less in feriority. In our great country made up of two great races and enriched with two cultures, it is good to know that from one ocean to the other, Canadians are at home everywhere and are everywhere the members of the same great family. Who would not be proud of this opportunity to live here and share the same feelings and ideals in spite of languages, racial origins or religions which could perhaps divide us? It seems to me, Mr. Speaker, that a good way to achieve national unity, which was so much advocated in the past by the Liberal party, would be to give us a truly distinctive national flag, as the emblem of our country that has now become an adult nation of which we, Canadians, are so proud. In concluding, I am glad to thank my electors of Beauce riding who entrusted me with their confidence, and I can assure them that I will devote every effort to their interests and those of my country, Canada. (Text): Mr. John MacLean (Winnipeg North Cen tre): Mr. Speaker, this is a moment which I am not likely to soon forget, rising for the first time to take part in a debate in the MAY 19, 1958 219 House of Commons. I am very proud to have the honour to represent the constituency of Winnipeg North Centre. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. MacLean (Winnipeg North Centre): My constituency is one which I am sure is well known to the senior members of the house and perhaps, in many ways, is just as well known to the new members. My constitu ency has been previously represented by very able parliamentarians. Winnipeg North Cen tre was first established as a constituency in 1924 and the founder and first leader of the C.C.F. party the late J. S. Woodsworth, rep resented this constituency from 1924 to 1943. Mr. Stanley Knowles, who in the last parlia ment was deputy leader of the C.C.F., repre sented Winnipeg North Centre from 1943 until March 31 of this year. This is the first time that Winnipeg North Centre has been represented by a Conserva tive member. Leaving March 31 and the election cam paign far behind, for I am sure it is still quite fresh in the minds of hon. members, I should like to take a moment to say some thing about my two predecessors. Apart from party policy and party ideals, speaking only of the late Mr. Woodsworth and Mr. Knowles as individuals, I say in all sincerity that I consider it an honour and a privilege to follow them as the representative of Winnipeg North Centre. It is only my hope that through an accumulation of experience in this house I shall become as gifted a parliamentarian as were both those gentlemen. I am of the firm belief that, as a very wise man once said, there is a time to speak and a time not to speak. Be that as it may, I wish to say that the voice of Winnipeg North Centre will be heard in the parliament of this country as long as I am the member for this constituency and as long as there is anyone who deserves and requires a voice in this chamber. Before continuing I should like at this time to add to the remarks of those who have spoken before my congratulations to yourself as the Speaker of the house, to the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafre niere) and to the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen). In all those remarks I concur most heartily. I should also like to state as a new member one of my first impressions. It has to do with the protective staff. I have never seen a security force as competent and courteous as is this force. I am not aware of how they are trained or selected but the chief has a force of which he should be very proud. I am sure all hon. members join with me in expressing our appreciation of them. The Address-Mr. J. MacLean Winnipeg North Centre is composed of a broad and representative cross-section of urban people of all ethnic groups and con ditions. However, we have not many oc casions to use the French language and I should like at this time to associate myself with the principle that we cannot do too much to create and foster unity between the great French-speaking and English-speaking sec tions of our population. In this regard I should like to say: (Translation): On behalf of my electors of the Winnipeg North Centre riding, I welcome members who represent French-speaking Canadians. (Text): It would have been fanciful for me in the years gone by to have even considered that I would be a member of parliament today. At that time I did not think I should have the privilege of serving under the right hon. Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker). Our Prime Minister is respected and revered in every home in our country for his concepts of humanity, integrity and dignity. The Canadian people realize that the Prime Min ister has kept their confidence in the past and will continue to keep it in the future. We have here in the house visible proof that all Canadians have faith in the Prime Minister, in the cabinet and in the govern ment. Again, I had not anticipated having the privilege of listening to the oratory of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) or hearing the views and policies of the house leader of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation. However, I have listened very closely to the various speeches made since the beginning of the session and I feel it very necessary at this time to make reference to what I have heard in relation to the debate on the speech from the throne. The broader aspects of the speech from the throne have been quite fully and intel ligently discussed by various previous speakers. It is my opinion that the speech from the throne gives us much hope for effective measures to cope with the impor tant problems of the future. It appears to me that our government has assumed the initiative in matters vital to the well-being of Canada. Both the members of the official opposition and the C.C.F. party have stated that the speech from the throne is most inadequate because of the omissions in it. The hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) said, as reported at page 45 of Hansard: The Conservative party took office after making many promises to the people of Canada. We have now had the speech from the throne indicating that a very small part of that load of promises will be implemented during this session. 220 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. J. MacLean It does appear that my hon. friend and the members of the opposition are not aware that the speech from the throne contains the largest program of legislation ever placed before parliament at a single session. Let me read from the Ottawa Journal of Saturday, May 17, 1958, a column written by M. J. Coldwell, national leader of the C.C.F. party. He said: The government's program outlined in the speech from the throne is a remarkable document. Never before has so stupendous a legislative outline been placed before parliament at a single session, if it is to receive the examination and considera tion it deserves, parliament will be fully occupied for many months. Again, let me read from the editorial page of the Ottawa Journal of May 13, 1958: A time-honoured jibe at speeches from the throne is that they conceal more than they reveal. No such reproach, surely, will be directed at the speech which opened our new parliament yesterday; so chock-full is it of promised action, much of any thing concealed and to come later must mean a house in session until the snows of next winter have melted into spring. The Journal once said of Mr. Diefenbaker that among his many remarkable characteristics was an implacable determination to carry out his promises. That indeed is what is told by this speech. Every thing the Prime Minister promised in the election campaign, almost everything in fact that he as much as insinuated, is there, laid out in black and white on the parliamentary line. The editorial ends. Parliament, it can be said truly, has its work cut out for it, and this added: Whatever we may suffer from under John Diefenbaker's leadership it is not going to be the affliction of inaction. If there be omissions from the speech from the throne it is only because of the im possibility to include any greater outline of legislation at this session. We are acting, the government is acting in order to direct the attention of the house to those things which we believe are of the utmost necessity to Canadians everywhere. If I may, I should like to make a few remarks on the amendment to the amendment proposed by the C.C.F. party. The amend ment reads, after the preamble: -firstly, planned economic policies to ensure an ever-rising standard of living for the people of Canada; and. secondly, an expanding level of international trade that will be promoted by vigorous measures to develop and expand trade with all countries. Then, may I direct the attention of the house to the objectives of the C.C.F. party, as stated in Regina in 1933, and as previously mentioned by the hon. member for Assiniboia. We see that the most important part of the amendment has to do with complete economic planning. For such a planned economic pol icy the C.C.F. party would institute a full employment policy in this country. Just what exactly the policies would be are not known [Mr. MacLean (Winnipeg North Centre).] at this time. However, it must be agreed that there is necessary in a completely planned economy certain dictatorial decrees, and in a completely planned economy to insti tute full employment those decrees would have to be implemented. I say to the C.C.F. party that such a completely planned econ omy could never exist in Canada today. From an ideological viewpoint a completely planned economy is, of course, the only certain solu tion to depressions, recessions and inflation. But leaving this high ideological plane and proceeding to a more practical point of view which I am sure you will agree is of the utmost necessity in governing a country, it is seen that this will not be practical in any respects at all. I say this because the basic, simple reason it will not work is that the personal freedom of the individual is involved. The people of Canada still wish to choose their employment. They still wish to choose their way of living and they still wish to decide the way in which they wish to live. This has always been and will continue to be my belief. However, in support of my statements I should like to read a portion of an editorial in the Union Farmer of May 1958, written by J. F. C. Wright who is a noted observer of the Canadian political scene. I am sure that many members have read this editorial but I wish to read part of it to the house for the purpose of placing it on record. The editorial speaks of the Prime Minister and Mr. Wright, continuing with a reference to him, says: He is not going to plan for a planned economy which would be the one way that he could put all his promises and other related ones not yet made, into co-ordinated efiect. This he will not do for the simple reason that it is not his tempera ment to do so and, furthermore, a planned economy is not what the Canadian people want. The people want the over-all results of it without the personal involvement and inconvenience. Planned economy is inevitable here as elsewhere if the human race manages to escape annihilation as a result of an all-out war with fissionable material. But you and I are not ready to face the prospect of a planned economy because it would interfere with our individual lives and the way we think we like to live them. I might say, for instance, sure I believe in planned economy for everyone else except myself .:nd family. I know that well planned economy is the only certain solution to booms, busts, unemployment, depression, recession and inflation. But how many fringe farmers with uneconomic units would be willing to turn over their acreage for long-term land conservation purposes to the government in return for being rehabilitated in order to function in some other productive activity? How many industrial workers and labour t.nionists want to be told that they must, because of planned economy and resultant governmental decree, be transported forthwith to another job in another area? Or would they want the right to strike outlawed and so the establishment of wage levels beyond which the wage earners may make no further demands? MAY 19, 1958 221 Would business and professional men relish com parable regulation concerning profits, fees and con ditions of work? As for the less visible but powerful minority of corporation executives and millionaires who sit at the controls of giant industry and finance, here no comment is necessary. There may be an interim way to bridge the gap between free enterprise of a hundred years ago and disappearance of free markets and physical frontiers, plus the cumulative government inter vention of our day. This might be by government inducement and persuasion rather than by dicta t or ial decree requisite in a complete planned economy. That is all I wish to say at this time, on the amendment to the amendment. I should now like to direct my attention to the two government bills which have been passed at this session, namely the bill to extend sea sonal benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act and the bill to grant additional money for house building under the National Housing Act. My constituency, like most con stituencies, has great needs. In order to help it to continue in the way of progress it has given a mandate to this humble member who now requests sympathetic attention on the part of the members of the cabinet in order that I may acquit myself of this heavy task which I intend to carry out to the end in the interests of my electors. My constituency is peopled almost entirely by working people, most of whom have large families. They are seeking through their own labour to discharge their responsibilities. However honest and generous they may be, our working people must not nevertheless consider themselves as forming an inferior class. It is as honourable a class as any other class of society. Our working men are legi timately proud of what they are. The work ing man is entitled to the gratitude of the government. To his ability, competence and love of work we owe almost everything that the eye can see. The honest and conscientious worker, and these traits are typical of the working class in Winnipeg North Centre, is the builder of the nation and it is our duty to recognize that fact. But those who know the greatheartedness of our workers are aware that all they seek is gainful employment. For these reasons I am very pleased that the government saw fit to bring in legislation immediately to increase the program of public works and housing so that a considerably greater number of men and women in this country will be able to find employment. The workers of Winnipeg North Centre are also gratified that the government undertook an extension of seasonal unemployment insur ance benefits for, although work is more im portant than unemployment insurance, it is only right that Canadian workers do not The Address-Mr. J. MacLean suffer hardships because of unemployment that occurs through no fault of their own. I know that the government is concerned at the present time about the unemployment problem and Canadian labour. The two measures passed in the house are evidence of the government's concern. I have great con fidence that the government will do every thing possible to reduce unemployment and I am well aware that the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) is conscientiously endeavouring, on behalf of the people of Winnipeg North Centre and the Canadian people generally, to bring about a remedy for this situation. I should like also at this time to express the approval of the people of Winnipeg North Centre of the government's desire to establish a small business section to study the prob lems of small business and to advise on measures necessary to meet them. There are many problems confronting small business at this time. The small businessmen of Winnipeg North Centre welcome the government's action on this matter. Before concluding there are three recom mendations I should like to make to the government for its attention and considera tion. Part of the constituency of Winnipeg North Centre, and the only part that lies outside Winnipeg proper, is the village of Brooklands. This village, as is probably the case in all small rural municipalities, needs immediate direct financial assistance. Per haps its situation is worse than that of many other municipalities in that it borders on the city of Winnipeg and has to provide comparable living conditions with those that exist in Winnipeg. I realize that the government is also con cerned about direct assistance to munici palities in Canada. However, I direct its attention to Brooklands in particular. Here it is necessary that schools, roads, sidewalks and other local improvements be provided immediately if the village is to survive and exist in its present form. These small munic ipalities have a serious problem today and are entitled to the same consideration that is given to the larger towns and cities. I ask the government at this time to give con sideration to the distribution of at least a portion of the reserve fund for municipalities. I cannot stress too greatly how important it is that the village of Brooklands receive some direct attention on the part of the government. The next matter I should like to refer to the government deals with the physically handicapped people of Canada. As you are well aware, Canadians who are physically handicapped are at once in a prejudiced posi tion with regard to employment. Employers 222 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. J. MacLean are not anxious to hire these people. The usual reason given is that they are the cause of accidents. This is certainly not the case. It has been shown to the contrary that a physically handicapped person is less likely to cause accidents while employed than a person who is not handicapped. Again, if an employer does hire a physically handicapped person he usually expects to employ him at a lower wage than the rest of his employees. The reasons given by employers are ineffi ciency and low production. This again has been shown not to be true. A physically handicapped person's efficiency and rate of production in his proper employment are as high, if not higher, than a normal person. To remedy the situation I would ask that the government consider on behalf of all the physically handicapped people of Can ada the setting up of a separate employment department for them in every office of the national employment service across the country. I would further ask that physically handicapped people be placed in charge of such departments and further that these peo ple placed in charge would not only attempt to place physically handicapped people in employment but would also attempt to pro cure employment for them by regular con sultation with prospective employers. My last point before concluding deals with the promotion of physical development programs and athletics in Canada, and also on an international basis. I draw to the attention of the house the fact that the British empire games are being held in Wales in July of this year. A team represent ing the Canadian nation is to participate in these games. At the moment the Canadian team is experiencing great difficulty in ob taining the necessary finances to represent Canada at these games. I bring this matter before the house at this time, not only because I feel it is imperative that this team receive adequate support but to direct the attention of this whole house to the situation that exists in Canada today with regard to supply ing the facilities and training required by our youth in promoting good, clean, whole some athletics to improve their physical and moral standards. I like to think that I speak with some authority, having been active in all fields of sport and particularly hockey, ever since I have been able to walk. In the matter of support for athletics in Canada and the participation of Canadian teams in inter national competition, it has always been my belief that the federal government should undertake to support such a national and international program. I should like to point out the seriousness of this problem by taking [Mr. MacLean (Winnipeg North Centre).] the liberty of referring to some remarks made by Bill Westwick, a noted sports columnist, in his column in the Ottawa Journal on May 17 of this year. Mr. West wick begins: Canadian Press sports editor Jack Sullivan yester day quoted Major Jack Davies as 'completely disgusted' with the response received by the British Empire Games' Association for funds to send Canada's team to Wales in July. Since there's just six weeks left before the team leaves, there seems ample reason for concern by Montreal chairman of the BEG association over the financial plight of Canada's entry which is supposed to number 100 athletes. It makes you wonder about our Canadian setup in amateur and international sports when the response to an empire meet is so poor that Davies uses the term 'completely disgusted'. Something very wrong here, and not likely to be corrected until some rather drastic steps are taken. They won't be drastic so far as many other countries are concerned. But the unvarnished facts are these strictly amateur sports, which should be a great benefit to the nation, can't operate in step with the rest of the world without some revision of thinking. From time to time you hear vague remarks about Canada sometime playing host to the Olympic games. Well it could be, but if our attitude doesn't change fairly quickly most of us will have beards as long as a javelin before it ever happens. He goes on, and here he is referring to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Monteith): Even the minister will hardly suggest that the programs so urgently presented in the form of a brief by the Canadian sports advisory council would not tend to help curb the declining moral standards of our youth as well as benefit them physically. At least they wouldn't contribute to them. At the same time it would be bound to help the country's position in international sports such as the Olympics, which isn't what many feel it should be ... We'll grant it will require some study, but many people undoubtedly would feel more satisfied if it were tackled. They'd likely feel more satisfied too if some of the money which the Canada Council intends to hand over to the C.B.C. for cultural programs were earmarked for something along this line. He goes on to speak of culture and a track meet and says: You looked around at these teenagers and thought of the Massey report which nowhere included athletics as being part of Canada's culture. And then the word of the British empire games com mittee which has to beg its way to send a team to an empire meet, and still fail to the extent that at this stage the chairman is reported to be 'completely disgusted'. We're not disputing the wisdom of the govern ment's attitude towards this 'growing temptation' among individuals to expect the state to take over all society's needs. But it shouldn't be sur prising to find the 'sports fan' Major Davies is counting on to help defray the Empire games expenses doing a little wondering too. I do not want to take up too much of the time of the house on this matter, but it appears to me that this is a problem that MAY 19, 1958 223 deserves recognition by all members of the house. We have been very proud of our athletes in the past, and particularly just recently of the Whitby Dunlops who won the international ice hockey championship. They proved to the world that Canada has some of the finest athletes. However, ice hockey is one matter; track and field, other sports and physical development are still other matters. I know, speaking from experience and on be half of sports fans and sports-minded people of the city of Winnipeg, that facilities for physical training and an all-year-round athletic program are sadly lacking in that province. It has always been my contention that given the proper influence of the spiri tual, educational, social and athletic aspects of our society, the youth of Canada cannot help but make us proud of them in the future. I again urge the attention of all members of this house, and in particular the members of the government, to the immediate problem of the British empire games and to the long range problem of the physical development of our Canadian youth. This session promises to be an interesting one with many subjects to discuss and prob lems to solve. I join with all members in expressing the hope that we may promptly and efficiently discharge our responsibilities to those who elected us and that we shall always uphold the great traditions of our Canadian parliament. Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo): Mr. Speaker, as the debate on the speech from the throne affords the earliest opportunity for private members to give voice to the prob lems and the complaints of their constituents, I feel it is my duty to take advantage of this opportunity and bring to the attention of this house and to the government some matters which are of vital concern not only to the people of my riding but to all the people of my province, matters which are of such an urgent nature as to demand immediate attention. Before coming to those matters may I ex tend to you, sir, and to the Deputy Speaker my sincere congratulations on being unani mously elected to preside over the delibera tions of this chamber. I should like also, at this time, to associate myself with all those who have complimented the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply on the excellent manner in which they made their presentation. The first matter to which I wish to refer is the action of Canadian National Telegraphs in removing the wireless telegraph sets from their offices in Newfoundland and replacing them with radiotelephones. For the benefit of new members, I should explain that wireless The Address-Mr. Carter telegraphy is a particularly convenient means of communication in Newfoundland, espe cially in my own riding where there are many small, isolated settlements, many of which are located on islands far from the land which makes the use of submarine cables prohibitive. There are other communities separated by terrain which is so difficult as to make land lines impracticable and where, in any case, the lack of roads would make maintenance impossible. I should add, too, that because the mail has to be transported over water and there are some long delays between mails, sometimes ranging from one week to three weeks, the people who live in these areas, particularly the business and professional men, are far more dependent upon telegraphic communication than people who live in other parts of Canada. This is particularly true in the case of an accident or in times of emergency. The Canadian National Telegraphs justified their action in replacing wireless telegraph sets with radio telephones on the ground that qualified Morse operators are difficult to ob tain and also that the change-over will result in improved service with a lower operating cost. As far as the first argument is concerned, I believe it is fair to say that the scarcity of Morse operators in Newfoundland is due, to a large extent, to the policy which has been pursued by the Canadian National Telegraphs since confederation. Indeed, three years ago I warned that this would be the inevitable result unless Canadian National Telegraphs policy was changed. My warning is recorded at pages 95 and 96 of Hansard of January 11, 1955, but it fell on deaf ears. Prior to confederation there was never any difficulty in securing qualified Morse oper ators because every operator trained mem bers of his own family in order that they could take over in case of illness or emer gency. In addition, in almost every com munity there is some person suffering from some physical handicap which prevents him or her from engaging in hard manual labour. In the old days these people looked to the operation of a telegraph office as something within the limits of their physical capacity and consequently one of the few means by which they might be enabled to earn a liveli hood. In our isolated communities the change in status and working conditions of post master telegraphers, together with loss of privileges and benefits which resulted from the taking over of telegraph offices after con federation and which are described in detail in Hansard to which I have already referred, discouraged these people from looking to telegraphy as a means of livelihood. It also discouraged operators from training their sons 224 HOUSE OF COMMONS NORAD-Canada-U. S. Agreement and daughters in Morse telegraphy. I am convinced that the shortage of Morse oper ators could be very quickly and easily over come if pre-confederation privileges and benefits were restored. The reduction in operational costs is going to be achieved largely at the expense of the remuneration of the postmaster-telegrapher whose princely salary averages about $135 per month for his combined services to the Post Office Department and to the Canadian National Telegraphs. I have in my file letters which indicate that as a result of this change over the reduction in salary of these people will be substantial. One telegrapher tells me that his salary will be reduced by $500 per year. Another states that his salary will drop from $133 per month to $63 per month. During the past nine years I have com plained repeatedly against the unjust treat ment accorded to that group but all to no avail. I have discussed this problem in detail on several occasions and in addition to the one just quoted detailed references can be found at page 2235 of Hansard of April 20, 1951 and at page 442 of Hansard of Jan uary 23, 1956. The matter of salary reduction primarily is one for the attention of. the Postmaster General (Mr. Hamilton) whose department rents the services of these postmaster-tele graphers to Canadian National Telegraphs. But since this is a human problem affecting the lives and the livelihoods of people who are completely helpless to influence in any way the forces by which their fate is being determined I hope that the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) himself, who so often has expressed solicitude for all the helpless and downtrodden, will take a personal interest and see to it that everything will be done to ensure fair and just treatment to these people. Mr. Speaker, may I call it six o'clock. EX TERN AL AFFAIRS NORAD-REQUEST FOR PRINTING OF INTERGOVERN MENTAL AGREEMENT Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier): Mr. Speaker, may I have permission to revert to motions in order to ask leave of the house to have printed as an appendix to Hansard the intergovernmental agreement tabled by the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Smith) in his speech. Mr. Speaker: The hon. member is asking that the document tabled by the Secretary of State for External Affairs be printed as an appendix to Hansard. Is it the will of [Mr. Carter.] the house that this document be printed as an appendix to Hansard? Some hon. Members: Agreed. [For text of document referred to above, see appendix, pages 241-42.] At six o'clock the house took recess. AFTER RECESS The house resumed at eight o'clock. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY The house resumed consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an ad dress to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amendment thereto of Mr. Pearson, and the amendment to the amend ment of Mr. Argue. Mr. C. W. Carter (Burin-Burgeo): Mr. Speaker, before the recess I was voicing the ::omplaints of a number of my constituents arising out of the decision by the Canadian National Telegraph Company to replace Morse wireless sets by radio telephones in order to effect savings in operating costs. I pointed out that this saving was to be obtained largely at the expense of the postmaster telegraphers whose salaries would be dras tically reduced as the result of the changeover. I should make it clear that these post master-telegraphers have full time jobs; they are not part time people who interrupt their ordinary work to sell a postage stamp or take a telephone call. Canadian National Tele graphs require these operators to be at hand throughout the day from nine in the morning to six in the evening, in consequence of which they are, of course, precluded from engaging in any other gainful occupation. In many centres, too, the instruments are housed in a public building at some distance from the operators' places of residence and this prevents operators from doing ordinary odd jobs around the home. These factors should be taken into con sideration along with the salary reduction to which I have just referred. The savings envisaged as a result of the changeover from one type of equipment to the other will, I believe, prove to be an illusion. There cannot be any great difference in cost between a Morse wireless set and a radio telephone, but there is a tremendous difference in the standard of service provided. The chief ob jection to the radio telephone is the lack of privacy; messages transmitted in this manner MAY 19, 1958 225 can be picked up by every household radio within range. Thus messages of the utmost privacy are made known to the public at large. Canadian National Telegraphs contend that this defect has been overcome by the use of speech inverters which scramble the words and make them unintelligible when picked up on household radios. However, these inverters break down, and when this happens messages are transmitted in the ordinary way. I am informed that one of these machines failed to function about a week after it had been installed, and that in this case messages were transmitted in clear for all the public to hear. This situation lasted for several weeks until the maintenance men could return and make the necessary repairs or replacement. Even when the inverter is functioning properly there is still some lack of privacy because the phones are not installed in sound proof booths and the messages can easily be overheard by anyone standing in the lobby of the telegraph office. I am told that an absolutely soundproof booth is a very essen tial item, and since such booths must be sup plied if the standard of privacy is to be maintained it seems that the cost of a radio telephone plus an effective soundproof booth will together amount to a great deal more than the cost of the wireless set which is to be replaced. The great advantage of the wireless tele graph set is that it ensures absolute privacy both with respect to people who may be standing in the lobby and also regarding interception by radio. The people of New foundland enjoyed this standard of privacy prior to confederation and they have every right to expect it to be maintained. I urge the Minister of Transport (Mr. I-lees) and his colleagues in the government to work out some arrangement with Canadian National Telegraphs whereby the use of these wireless sets would be restored. A second matter which greatly concerns my constituents is the need for improved bait supply and distribution services. The present service was initiated by the New foundland government about 20 years ago and a great many changes have taken place since those days. Many of the largest sup ply depots are no longer conveniently located and thousands of dollars are lost to New foundland fishermen every year through lack of a proper bait supply. The whole service needs to be completely reorganized and modernized. I intend to deal with this mat ter in greater detail when the estimates of the Department of Fisheries come before us for consideration, but I mention it now to 57071-3- 15 The Address-Mr. Carter emphasize the urgency of this question and the necessity for immediate action with regard to this problem. Having called the attention of the govern ment to these most pressing matters, I turn to some of the items included in the speech from the throne. Two of the proposals, namely the extension of seasonal benefits in respect of unemployment and the increased spending of public funds for housing have already been implemented as emergency measures with the greatest co-operation from this side of the house. I will refrain from making comment on the setting up of a standing committee on veterans affairs and a select committee on broadcasting because there will be another opportunity to do so when the resolutions concerning these com mittees are brought before the house. I am sure hon. members are awaiting with interest details of the national development program, the public works program and the public investment program which constitute the government's plan to relieve the unemploy ment situation and reverse the serious down trend in the economy which this country is experiencing at this time. At the present time, as far as the opposi tion is concerned, these proposals are names and nothing more. As w e have not yet been told what these programs consist of, and since the departmental estimates recently tabled shed no light in this respect, it will not be possible to make specific comments until detailed information about them is forthcoming from the government. We all know that communications are essential to the development of our resources, and in a general way we can agree that the building of highroads and railways is necessary to the development of our northland. However, I think it is .fair to point out that the existence of railways and highways will not in any way guarantee that develop ment will take place. There is a striking example of this in my own riding where we have a fresh fish plant which was established through the investment of United States capital and which has now been closed down for nearly two years. The Newfound land government acquired ownership of this plant through a first mortgage and has been trying to sell it for over a year. In June of this year the plant will be put up for public auction and I urge the Department of Trade and Commerce and the Department of Ex ternal Affairs to explore the possibilities of interesting Norwegian and other Scandinavian capital in this venture. I presume there are no immediate obstacles in the matter of ex change controls which cannot be overcome. 226 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Carter Norway is a country which is in many ways very similar to Newfoundland; its fishing in dustry is well organized and forms a very important part of its economy. Norway also has companies whose personnel are highly skilled and experienced in the operation of fresh fish processing plants. I am told that in Norway the fish industry is not sub sidized and that the prices paid to fishermen compare favourably with what our Newfound land fishermen receive. I hope the government will act immediately on my suggestion and will have its trade commissioners explore the possibilities in this respect. There is no doubt whatever about the availability of resources; all that is re quired is investment capital and here is an opportunity to acquire a new, modern and first-class plant for much less than the original investment. If Norwegian or other Scandinavian capital can be interested in Newfoundland fisheries I believe it would be to the benefit of all concerned. At the same time it would be a step toward the strengthen ing of economic ties and the development of economic co-operation between the coun tries of NATO. The flow of investment capital is to a large extent determined by world market conditions and these, of course, are completely outside the control of this government. No amount of capital spent on roads and railways can bring investment capital into Canada if market conditions are not favourable. Government encouragement of investment capital consists almost entirely of the build ing up of the confidence of the investor through wise fiscal and trade policies. Under Liberal administration this con fidence abounded to such an extent that the problem was not to induce it to come into Canada but to keep it within the limits of the available manpower and resources in order to mm1m1ze the possibility of resulting inflationary pressures. Since the present administration took over the absence of any well-defined fiscal and trade policy has tended to diminish the con fidence of the investor and to that extent the flow of investment capital has been dis couraged. This in turn has aggravated the unemployment problem by making the slow down in our economy much worse than it would otherwise have been. Trade is vital to Canada. With our huge productive capacity Canada must trade to survive; the only alternative is unemploy ment and a reduced standard of living. For this reason I support the amendment pro posed on Tuesday last by my leader and the arguments which he advanced at that time. [Mr. Carter.] The people of my province will be very dis appointed that the speech from the throne makes no mention whatever of legislation to implement the recommendations of the royal commission with respect to term 29 of the terms of union; nor did it make men tion of a floor price on fish which the Prime Minister promised when electioneering in our province, although there is a specific refer ence to a floor price under agricultural products. When the Prime Minister spoke in this debate last Tuesday he referred to the speech from the throne in these terms as recorded at page 32 of Hansard: In this speech we did not have His Excellency deal with generalities. We had His Excellency ask parliament to direct its attention to those things which we believe are necessary and are of imme diate importance for the benefit of the people of Canada. I can assure him that the recommendations of the royal commission with respect to term 29 are very necessary and are of immediate importance to the people of Newfoundland. We trust that the omission of any reference to that body does not mean that their report was not expected in time for action to be taken at this session. Before concluding I would like to make some observations about the vision of Can ada which has inspired our Prime Minister and about which he spoke so often and with such great passion and eloquence during the recent election campaign. Mr. Fraser: With results. Mr. Carter: I suppose we have all had visions at one time or another. I am reminded of some of my own visions of Canada which I brought with me when I was elected to this chamber in 1949 and which I tried to com municate to this house. They are recorded at page 2237 of Hansard of April 20, 1951 and again at page 2821 of Hansard for March 10, 1953. Mr. Baskin: Why did the government not do something about them? An hon. Member: It was not liberal enough. Mr. Carter: It has been said that without vision the people perish; it is equally true that if the vision is a wrong one or is inadequate the people will also perish. We mush never forget that we are not the only people who have a vision. The men of the Kremlin have a vision too, and their vision includes Canada because theirs is a vision embracing the whole world. An hon, Member: Whom are you quoting now? Mr. Carter: I make up my own speeches. Not only do those people have a vision, they are pursuing it vigorously and relentlessly. MAY 19, 1958 227 Our vision must be global, too, and not restricted to Canada alone. No man can live unto himself alone and neither can any nation. The whole world today is our neigh bour and any lesser vision than that never can be adequate. The communist vision is based on organized materialism and if we are to survive, ours must be based on something superior because the materialism of the right is no answer at all and no match at all for the militant materialism of the left. Ma terialism can make men slaves but it can never set men free. Our vision must be based on something higher than material prosperity and technological achievement, something more solid than individual or sectional selfishness and greed; otherwise it is likely to turn out to be a mirage. The strength of a nation lies in the charac ter of its people. A nation's greatness is not determined by its technological progress, its material prosperity or its standard of living, but by the idea by which she lives and the quality of her living. There can be no substitute for integrity either in public or in private life. Canada today has a unique opportunity to evolve a new pattern of democracy based on total honesty; honesty between electors and elected, between government and governed, between parties and between nations. In two world wars millions of people, including the flower of Canadian manhood, gave their lives for a vision, a vision of a hate-free, greed-free, fear-free world; a peaceful world; a new world order based on a new type of democracy. The world today is crying out for leadership in translating that vision into reality. The challenge to us today, and particularly to young Canada, is not so much to die for our country as to live for it so as to develop a new quality of national life that will empower Canada to speak with authority to the world because she has found the answer at home. Canada today is called upon to lead, and if she does not lead who is she going to follow? Mr. J. F. Browne (Vancouver-Kingsway): Mr. Speaker, as I rise to speak in this house for the first time, on behalf of the people of Vancouver-Kingsway may I first offer my congratulations to you, sir, on your election to the high office which you now hold and also to the other officers of this house. May I suggest that if the rest of the deliberations of this house are resolved in as wise a manner as our first act we shall have no cause for regret in the future. I should also, of course, like to add my congratulations to the many which have already extended to the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafreniere) and 57071-3-15½ Tne Address-Mr. J. F. Browne to the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) on the very outstanding way in which they moved and seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne. To those of you who are unfamiliar with the riding of Vancouver-Kingsway I may say, that it lies entirely within the bounds of the city of Vancouver. It is a labour riding but differs from some of the other labour ridings in the respect that there is no industry within the bounds of the riding itself. Consequently, our interests are perhaps more general than some of the other ridings and we are de pendent upon the basic industries and the secondary industries of British Columbia as a whole for our employment. It is, of course, in that wonderful province of British Co lumbia where we are celebrating our centen nial and while it is a wonderful place to visit at any time, may I take this opportunity to extend a most cordial welcome to all hon. members to come out and visit us during this exceptional year when so many outstanding events are taking place. Might I suggest that if there is any information or any way that I can be of help to any who would care to make that trip, please feel free to call upon me and I assure you that I shall provide any information or assistance that I can. Now may I get back to the matters at hand. It gives me the greatest pleasure on behalf of the people of Vancouver-Kingsway to congratulate the government on the clear and specific manner in which they have set forth their proposals to deal with the problems facing Canada today. As we have already heard from many of the previous speakers, this is the most extensive and comprehensive program that has ever been laid before a single session of parliament. We have already passed some measures. To run over them briefly, the speech from the throne deals with those things which are needed immediately and which are of an emergent nature. It deals with things such as our public works program which go on a little bit into the future and it deals with those things which go further into the future in the developing of our north and which are already under way. Then it makes provision for the future in the development of the Arctic. Speaking of the clamour we have heard from the other side of the house in regard to unemployment, may I say that if the previous administration of which they were a part had followed such far-sighted policies as are outlined in the speech from the throne which we are examining now there would not be the need to clamour about un employment in Canada and indeed they might still be riding in a private car instead of in an upper berth. 228 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. J. F. Browne The first measure we had before us to deal with the emergency facing us had to do with the extension of the Unemployment Insurance Act, to extend the seasonal benefits for a period of six weeks. Many members rose to speak on it, but no one was in disagreement with it although we heard many discourses on the basic principles of socialism and many other theories. Still they were all in favour of the measure which was designed and is certainly going to help many people in Canada who would otherwise have suffered hardship provided we had followed the same plans as the previous administration and left those people to shift for themselves. The second measure, of course, is one that deals with many problems in the country today. It had to do with the making available of $350 million more under the National Housing Act for the purpose of building more houses. Certainly there is no one in this house who can deny that this is going to have a favourable effect on the unemployment situa tion, as well as having the advantage of enabling a great many more Canadians to be able to own their own homes. While I am not going to go into all of the figures, because many of them are already on the record, the small loans plan which was set up last year under the Conservative administration had the effect of reducing the down payments that were necessary on houses and helping to get them down to the lower income group. It also, of course, has an effect on unemployment because it will create work for those who are producing the materials which will be used in the construction of houses as well as, as has already been pointed out, the furniture and various other things that will be used in connection with them. These are two of the immediate measures which have been taken. To get on with some of the other things, perhaps we should next have a look at public works. Public works are another item about which we have heard a great deal from the other side of the house. We are told that the government's program is not an emer gency one at all and that the projects would have been undertaken even if a Liberal administration had been returned to power. If I may be permitted to do so I should like to relate a rather amusing incident that hap pened during the election campaign. I believe it will throw a great deal of light on the difference between the Liberal program and Conservative policy in this regard. The incident happened at one of those meetings where all the parties were repre sented. The Liberal candidate had just fin ished addressing the people. He had suggested to them that if they would only return a Liberal administration a great national health [Mr. Browne (Vancouver-Kingsway) .] program would be implemented. He said that all hospital and medical bills would be paid and everything would be wonderful. A gentleman at the rear of the audience rose and said, "Was that not in the Liberal plat form in 1919?" The Liberal candidate re plied, "Yes, it was but we could not rush into it. We had to build the hospitals first." I suggest to you that some of these public works may have been undertaken under a Liberal administration but only over the period of the next 20 years and not right away as proposed by the present government. The next matter I should like to deal with has to do with the development of our north and involves the program which was so overwhelmingly endorsed by the people of Canada on March 31. Therefore to some ex tent whatever debating we do on the subject now in the house can only be a repetition of the election campaign at which time the people of Canada considered this very sub ject and endorsed the government's program in such an overwhelming manner. Therefore I think it is quite obvious to everyone present that it must be endorsed by the members of this house. To go over some of the projects that have been put forward, there is the proposal to build a railroad to Great Slave lake, some thing in which I am particularly interested on behalf of the people of British Columbia. I wish to call the attention of the government to the fact that I should like to see provision made for the railroad to commence from a point where it will connect with the Pacific Great Eastern railway of British Columbia, thus making it possible to ship the resources of the northland when they are developed directly to the coast as well as to the prov ince of Alberta. We do not want to do Alberta out of ihe benefit altogether but we most certainly want to see the line linked with the railway in British Columbia because it is most important to the country as a whole that this should be done. There is also the plan to build roads in the northland and of course this will have a major effect on the development of resources in the Yukon and the Northwest Territories and increasing their population to a great extent. Looking farther into the future, we have the proposal to provide funds for re search in the Arctic area with a view to opening up the mineral resources of that area. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, the matters of concern to the people of the constituency of Vancouver-Kingsway are of a very general nature. Therefore it is not going to be possible to deal with each one of them at this time because I realize there MAY 19, 1958 229 are a great many members in the house who, like myself, are here for the first time and are anxious to present the views of their constituents. But I do wish to deal to some extent with the fishing industry which is a major segment of the economy not only of British Columbia but of Canada as a whole . Many pressing problems have arisen in this regard and there are two or three things I should like to ask the government to imple ment on behalf of my constituency. I am sure the government will be pleased to know that, while no doubt there are a great many things that need to be done in Canada's 265 constituencies, the proposals I intend to make will not cost any money so that the govern ment can rest easy in that regard. For a number of years the fishing industry has been faced with the problem of foreign nationals fishing off the coast of British Co lumbia. The problem has been the cause of ever-increasing concern because in some years these people, in comparison with the British Columbia fishermen, have been catch ing over 50 per cent of the fish taken from the waters there. But the great danger that is arising now is brought about by the fact that proper conservation measures have not been taken in the waters of the Alaskan area and therefore there is very great danger that the number of United States fishermen fish ing in the waters off the British Columbia coast is going to increase. Of course, as hon. members know, at the Geneva confere nce on the law of the sea the Canadian government proposed the extension of sovereignty to 12 miles from the coast rather than 3 miles as at present. The people of British Columbia were very disappointed when this proposal was rejected by the con ference even though a majority of the nations voting were in favour of it. I believe that ~5 nations voted in favour and 30 against but a two-thirds majority was required for the proposal to pass. However, I should like to suggest to the government that there are many other means of implementing the proposal and that per haps we do not need to wait for official sanc tion because at the moment we are actually in the position of having no international law with regard to the sea. With the many lawyers in the house perhaps I as a layman am in a rather dangerous position in dis cussing the subject of international law, let alone any other kind of law, but I should like to refer to one declaration which has been made by the United States. President Truman, by presidential proclamation on September 28, 1945, stated that the United States government, in view of the pressing need for the conservation and protection of The Address-Mr. J. F . Browne fisheries resources, proclaimed the right to establish conservation zones in areas of the high seas contiguous to the coasts of the United States. Personally I can see no reason why we should not implement a 12-mile zone at the present time because the decision by the international court in the United Kingdom versus Norway case in 1951 upset the pre vious notion that the 3-mile limit was some thing that was definitely established under international law. Many other nations have declared a 12-mile limit and, as I have said before, I see no reason why we cannot do the same. Failing that, there certainly is no reason why we cannot proclaim what is known as the headland theory. Under that theory a line is drawn down the coast between the outlying points and where there are islands the outer most point is taken and the three miles is measured from there rather than following all the indentations of the coast. I think that the headland"" theory would solve the greater portion of the problems facing the fishing in dustry in that regard and that as a temporary measure perhaps that would be satisfactory to the industry and to the people of British Columbia. The next major problem facing the fishing industry arises from the fact that over a number of years new nets and new methods have been developed that are more efficient than was the case before, but while the number of fish is not increasing the number of fishermen are. Therefore I think it is now clear that there are too many fishermen fish ing for too few fish. Perhaps even as sport fishermen we may have come across that situation sometimes ourselves. In order to solve this situation to some extent the government has adopted conser vation measures. The result of these measures has been an ever narrowing time when the fishermen are allowed to fish. The time has been considerably restricted during the last few years, sometimes being only two or three days a week. I think that throughout the country people perhaps tend to believe that the fishermen's union of British Columbia is a strike-prone organization, but I think we can see some of the reasons for that when we realize that it is becoming more difficult for the fishermen of British Columbia to make a living. I would, therefore, urge the govern ment to give some consideration, in fact early and serious consideration, to some method of restricting the number of licences, thus restricting the total number of fishermen who may be allowed to fish. I realize that this is a very difficult problem to solve. It is not going to be easy to decide whb will be issued a fishing licence and who will be refused. 230 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. McMillan I would point out, however, that this pro blem has been faced in many other industries. For instance, in the real estate business in British Columbia there is a limitation on the number of people who may be engaged in that business, and only those who are en gaged on a full-time basis are permitted to conduct business. Part-time workers are not allowed. I feel that might be one very good principle to apply with respect to fishermen. Perhaps another method of attack would be to place a limitation on the number of licences in existence so that the fishing grounds will not become more overcrowded. New appli cants would have to go on a waiting list until such time as there was room for them. As I said before, I do not want to take up too much of the time of the house. Since I am not one of those who wishes to go on and on, I am going to close by saying once again on behalf of the people of British Co lumbia that we heartily endorse the program laid before us by this administration, and we greatly appreciate that these things which were promised during the election campaign are now going to be implemented with all possible dispatch. Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland): 'Mr. Speaker, at this time I should like to congratulate you on your reappointment to your high office. Even though you called me to order during the last session in the interests of decorum in this house, I must say that you acted very impartially and with ability all during the last session. I should like to congratulate the Deputy Speaker and the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea), both of whom I am sure will give you expert assist ance during this 24th parliament. I want to mention the two hon. members who moved and seconded the speech from the throne. I thought they both did well. I know they will not expect me to agree with all they said, but they expressed their views very well, and taking those views along with the views of all the other members of the house, the people of Canada should receive good gov ernment. I feel that the most immediate and important matter that should come to the attention of this government is that of un employment. This has not been a problem in my particular area in recent years, partic ularly at this time of the year. However, even now with high unemployment rolls, one hears about further layoffs,-I heard of that last weekend when I was home--and the closing of plants for a month or two. One hears also about men with seniority of 20 years or more receiving notices of layoffs. This is almost ' unprecedented in my part of the country at this particular time. It is [Mr. Browne (Vancouver-Kingsway) .] true that there has been a pickup in the employment of seasonal workers, but even here the pickup has been less than expected and less than has occurred in former years. The point is that we have a large number of permanent workers idle for periods of up to one year, and few of them have the vision of a job, let alone the vision of a greater Canada that is yet to be. I know of nothing that breaks the morale of men more quickly than does idleness and the lack of a sense of security that steady employment provides. Many of these people are doubling up in their homes, while others are losing their homes because they cannot keep up their monthly payments. In the days of security of employment many of these people bought cars, television sets and other electrical appliances so necessary in a modern home, on a monthly basis. Seizures of these articles are being made in my part of the country today and equities are being for feited. Every job has many applicants and I cannot recall similar conditions in some of our industrial areas except in the thirties. We would have breadlines and soup kitchens today, just as we had in the thirties, except for one thing. The former Liberal government instituted unemployment insur ance benefits. We know that this fund is now being rapidly depleted. It is difficult to obtain a true picture of the unemployment situation in Canada. The last figures I saw, as of March 15, showed that the number out of work and looking for jobs stood at 590,000, up some 38,000 over the number in February. I am aware that seasonal jobs may have taken up a number, but there have been recent lay-offs and I am sure that the number of unemployed must still be very high. I saw one report which indicated that our per centage of unemployed was greater than that of the United States or that of most other countries of the western world. I read this in the New York Times, and I think the report in the New York Times said that Peru, Bolivia and Venezuela had greater unemploy ment than Canada. The Conservative government will soon have been in office for a year. The unem ployment in my area at least rivals that of the hungry thirties and, so far as I am aware, the government has done nothing and started nothing in the Niagara district to put one man to work. Perhaps this is a misstatement and I owe an apology to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees), because he did put quite a large number of men to work on the Welland canal during the election campaign. I see the minister is not here tonight. I thought, as an employer, he treated his em ployees very well indeed. As an example, I saw 16 men removing snow and ice from one MAY 19, 1958 231 of the bridges crossing the Welland ship canal. One man had a pick and was breaking up the snow and ice. The other 15 men had two shovels between them to toss it into the canal. This heyday for the local labour has now ended. Those whose loyalty was held to be the least in question were soon living either on unemployment insurance benefits or the best way they could. They did not all swallow the bait or probably I would not be here now. The minister seems to be a kindly sort of man, and I regret that he seemed to become less solicitous for the unemployed after March 31 than he was before. It is really too bad that a minister would build up such a good reputation with his employees and then have it dissipated so soon. There is a great need for an overpass or an underpass across the Welland canal in the city of Welland, at Port Colborne and on the Queen Elizabeth Way at Homer. During the election campaign the Minister of Transport was in Welland and, according to the local press, he told the people of Welland that if they would elect the Con servative candidate and send him here to Ottawa, he would tell him what the govern ment's intention was with regard to the crossing over the Welland ship canal. Now that the election is over I do not think the minister should hold the people of Welland in suspense any longer unless, of course, he intends to keep it dangling before their eyes for the next election. He said that Conservative members of parliament attended to their constituencies better than did Liberal members. I would ask him to give me all the help he can in providing these crossings for the people in the Niagara district and not to prevent me from representing my constituency as well as I can. The Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) assured us here in the house the other day that he would give every opportunity to examine all moneys appropriated under Governor General's warrants. No doubt this is true and no doubt that they can show that all expenditures that were made were legal; but the examination of these expenditures now by the house has little meaning when the money has already been expended. Having in mind the fact that the money was appropriated under Governor General's war rant, and the impossibility of the opposi tion's taking exception to these expenditures until after they had been made, I think the government should have shown greater responsibility than they showed in the handling of public funds. I do not think that funds should have been provided by the representative of Her Majesty The Address-Mr. McMillan to keep a large number of casual workmen on the Welland ship canal in order to provide a favourable government vote in that area. After the election was called the only docu ment a man needed to obtain a place on this government political force was a note from the local Conservative chairman. The last truly loyal ones of these government em ployed election forces were laid off by April 30. The excuse given to them was the government had run out of appropriation moneys for the month and that they had no further money with which to hire them. I am sorry that these men were laid off because I would have been glad to help to vote money to keep them on as I understand there is greater need for men on the canal now than there was prior to March 31. In this country in order to have full employment we must have an expanding economy. We have more men coming into the labour market all the time. In March I understand that the number that came into the labour market was about 38,000. To me, what is more ominous than the number of unemployed is the fact that the number of people working is no longer expanding but in fact is dropping. In January, for the first time in many years, the number of people working was 22,000 below that of one year ago. In February 48,000 fewer people had work than in February of 1957; and in March the figure was 58,000. If my district is any criterion I would say the same thing would be true for April and May and most likely f~r June. In the light of these figures, it is difficult for me to share the optimism of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Starr) and the Minister of Finance. They both pointed to the decline in the national employment ser vice job applications. This may be so, but there are many men who do not think it is worth while to apply because there are so many thousands ahead of them waiting for jobs. I know several of those people. When I was home on Sunday a number of the unemployed came to see me. They said that approximately 4,000 people were still unemployed in the Welland area, approxi mately the same number as were unemployed last March. They maintained that only a small percentage would be helped by the recent bill to extend seasonal benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act, and that there was little prospect of much building in that area. They could see little prospect of any of these people moving to jobs in the north country, and they asked me to empha size the necessary government public works projects in the Niagara district. I should like to see the government starting as soon as possible on the rehabilitation of 232 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. S. Fleming the old Welland canal lands. The municipal ities have all agreed, and I think this work should soon get under way. It would help the unemployment situation both in Welland and in the county of Lincoln where the num ber of unemployed is also large. I also think the proposed crossings on the Welland ship canal might also get under way. Traffic con ditions are particularly bad in Welland. In the boom years of 1956 and 1957, when bridges were up there, there was interference with road traffic for as much as six hours out of 24 hours. I might say that I am greatly interested in the proposed tolls on the St. Lawrence sea way and the Welland ship canal. I proposed to the government last year the necessity of having an economic survey made before the final tolls were decided upon. I had in mind that in this way we might arrive at a con clusion less likely to injure our Canadian economy than if we were to leave the matter to a tolls committee who would naturally be interested in considering what the traffic might bear. I hope to cover this question of tolls at a later date this session. Mr. Stuart Fleming (Okanagan-Revelstoke): May I also, Mr. Speaker, extend to you con gratulations on your election to the post to which you have brought such great gifts and which you have held and hold with such great distinction. May I also offer congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the sec onder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. If they in their case felt any trepidation, as I certainly now feel, how much greater was their reason. Yet they showed no sign of it and they acquitted themselves in a manner that im pressed us all. With your indulgence and I suppose that of the house, Mr. Speaker, I should like to embark upon a brief geographical descrip tion of the riding that I represent. It is perhaps justified by the fact that the riding is a relatively new one, having been formed about half a dozen years ago from the south east portion of Kamloops riding and the northern section of the old Yale riding, and is now called Okanagan-Revelstoke. I feel that there may be greater justification for a geographical description on an even wider scale, for on my arrival at the capital two weeks ago I had occasion to cash a traveller's cheque. I took it to a bank in the city. On entering the building I went to the first wicket at which I felt they might have any interest whatever in the modest financial transaction I wished to effect. The young lady looked at my traveller's cheque and said, "Oh, British Columbia; take it to that wicket over there". I did, and my traveller's cheque [Mr. McMillan.] was promptly and courteously cashed. As I stepped away from the wicket I looked up, and there was a sign overhead which said: "Foreign Exchange". I prefer not to believe that this is confirmation of a suspicion some times held by those of us who live west of the Rockies. The riding I represent encompasses in its southern half the wide valleys and the rolling hills of the north Okanagan region. Moving northward it skirts the eastern section of the Shuswap lake district, then east into the Selkirk range of the Rocky mountains. It is a country of great diversity of topo graphical detail and there is a great diversity of interest among its people. Between those resident in the southern parts and those who reside in the most eastern section there is no great community of interest so far as the ways in which they earn their living are concerned. Activity in the southern area is largely agricultural since the region em braces sections of the fruit industry of the Okanagan valley, the dairy industry, a certain amount of beef cattle raising on the high ranges, and then beyond, and in the hills, lumber. In that section also are the rich vegetable growing areas-tomatoes and other field crops. In this particular section of the riding there has, during the last five years, been an evident decline in the income of the people and an evident decline in the acreage under cultivation. The industry has not enjoyed the level of prosperity which it once knew and there are specific and obvious reasons why this should be the case. In the vegetable industry, with respect to tomatoes, asparagus and other specific crops; in the tree fruit industry, particularly with respect to soft fruits, the growers of that region have been subject to competition which is not, we feel, fair competition, competition which has come from south of the border and in particular from the state of California. Importations into the region have entered the Canadian market at prices which make it impossible for our industry to compete. There are many reasons for this. The California vegetable and fruit growers have a far earlier season; their crops come into production and are harvested weeks ahead of ours and during that early period they have access to top prices and secure for the majority of their crop an income entirely adequate to their requirements. But when they are cleaning off their product and sell ing it at what we regard as distress prices our own crop is only just coming into the market. However, those distress prices have tended to establish the price levels at which we sell in the Okanagan region. Those prices MAY 19, 1958 233 bear no relationship whatever to our cost of production, and consequently our industry has suffered, with the result that in many phases of our operations acreage has shrunk and hardship has been experienced. We feel that the industry both in tree fruit and in vegetables, so far as fresh prod ucts are concerned, is entitled to a measure of protection, and it has been a cause of considerable satisfaction to many branches of agriculture in this region that the govern ment has taken cognizance of the situation as it exists. The Agricultural Prices Support Act has already provided a measure of as sistance and, in addition, the government has received delegations from the industry in recent weeks and given a sympathetic hearing to further representations from the industry. We in that region feel that subsidization is not the ultimate answer, and that it will not provide ultimate solution to our problem, but we believe our growers are entitled to equal opportunity to compete on equal terms in their own market. The vegetable and soft fruit production of the region is not adequate to meet the total demand of the Canadian market, and thus there will always be a requirement for some importation, but it is also true, we feel, that our commodity should have first access to the Canadian market at prices which are related to our cost of production. That is what we have sought and what the Canadian horticultural council still seeks, namely the adoption of the principle of minimum fair market value, value for duty as it is perhaps better known. I realize, as perhaps we all do, that the implementation of such value for duty is not necessarily an easy thing owing to the obligation we have under tariff and trade agreements entered into with the United States in former years. The general agree ment on tariffs and trade does not permit the indiscriminate application of value for duty, but we do feel there is an opportunity and a need for the application of this prin ciple in meeting the problems of the tree fruit and vegetable industries of the Oka nagan region. In this respect we feel that there is no cause among the Americans for retaliatory measures, because the industries do not ask either for an embargo or for increased tariff, but only for protection during that period when the Canadian products are being marketed. Once the Canadian product is marketed, then the Canadian market would be open without restriction to the fresh products of other producers. I realize that the same principle cannot apply in the case of processed prod ucts, but in the case of fresh fruit and vege tables we feel it might be applied without 57071-3---16 The Address-Mr. S. Fleming any justification for retaliation on the part of United States suppliers. This is one of the chief problems of the region and, of course, it is a problem which has not been ignored; we know it has been the concern both of the government and of the leaders of the industry itself. Solutions are being sought, but until more adequate solutions are found than exi:st at present there will continue to be a degree of hard ship in my riding. The second major industry, which is located not only in the southern half of the riding but also in the northeastern section, is the lumber industry and the forest prod ucts industry generally. Much of the pro ductio!l from this region of the riding has gone into the export market, particularly into the United States market, and we realize that until such time as the United States economy is able to absorb Canadian lumber to the extent it was doing some time ago there is not too much that can be done by the Canadian government to restore that market. We do, however, appreciate the benefit which has accrued from the housing policies of the government and I know, also, there will be appreciation throughout the lumber industry in my riding of the benefits that will result from the measures endorsed by this house last week. Our industry looks forward with some an ticipation to the trade and economic confer ence which is being held in Montreal later this year because it is realized that the greatest hope for security in the industry is the expansion of our world markets, par ticularly for the products of our forests. We realize that the government is aware of the situation and we do appreciate what is being undertaken but there is at this moment a continuing need for every effort possible to be made to find outlets for the production of this interior region. Within the boundaries of the riding, that is to say the northeast section I have men tioned in the Selkirk range, there are two national parks, one completely located within the boundaries of the riding and the second located in part within the boundaries. Furthermore through the Rogers pass in this region will pass the trans-Canada highway, I trust in the final stages of its completion. We can expect in a matter of a relatively short time that the highway will be completed through the mountains and that new regions which have not been readily accessible to our tourist traffic will become open to a much greater extent than ever before. This is particularly true of the two regions now classified as national parks. Mount Revelstoke national park has a mountain with a summit 234 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. S. Fleming of somewhat higher than 6,000 feet and this park has been developed to a considerable extent and is visited by great numbers of people and has been so visited for many years. However, the volume of traffic likely to enter the park and visit the mountain in the foreseeable and imminent future will be greater than its present facilities can accommodate. Glacier national park, one of the oldest national parks in Canada, lies between Revel stoke and Golden and is very often, I am afraid, confused with the Glacier national park in the United States. That confusion is at least true in respect to people in the west ern parts of our country. It is at present a wilderness park to a large extent, visited by many members of the Canadian Alpine club and other mountaineering groups but acces sible only by rail and not as well known as its attractions would undoubtedly merit if it were more readily accessible. There are within that park mountains of 7,000 and 8,000 feet and higher and also the Nakimu caves which are an attraction from which the public will not be easily kept away once access to the park is made easier. At the present time, however, they are in no condition for public use, in fact they are dangerous. In other words there is a need for con sideration of the very extensive development of these two national parks during the next three years because when traffic reaches them in the numbers in which it will reach them, accommodation must be provided to take care of the requirements and at the present time while accommodation is adequate for the time being, it needs to be expanded considerably. This northeast region of the riding is bi sected by the Columbia river. There is a very great consciousness throughout the interior of British Columbia and particularly in the Okanagan-Revelstoke region and the sur rounding ridings of the latent possibilities in the development of the resources of that river. We realize there are many complexities in the negotiations which must be completed before such development can take place but we do urge the government to give every consideration to expediting those negotiations so far as it is able to do so. We know that the future development of secondary industry throughout the southern interior of British Columbia will depend to some considerable extent upon the power resources of the Columbia. Until those re sources are fully realized the potential of the region which we inhabit cannot be fully ex plored and that is why it is of such great significance to us. [Mr. Fleming (Okanagan-Revelstoke).J I am aware that the government has, during the months it has been in office, given this matter serious consideration. I can only urge on the government that this interest be maintained. If I may now turn to a more general ques tion-something which is not at all peculiar to the riding I represent-I would like to state that I am particularly interested in the confirmation contained in the speech from the throne that there will be established a small business section within the adminis trative machinery of government. As one whose business life has been associated with small business during the years in which I have been earning my own living and the majority of whose friends are engaged in small business of one kind or another, I believe this piece of legislation alone will answer a requirement, a need, a desire of many thousands of Canadian citizens. For there cannot, I think, be anything which will reach out and ultimately affect more people and their families than the application of legislation which will give small business its true place in the future development of our nation. The small businessman has contributed a great deal to the development of Canada as a nation but in recent years the tendency has been to admire the accomplishments of giant corporations and great merchandising empires and to overlook or even completely forget the contribution made by our small businessmen over the years. I am not one of those people who believe that the day of the small businessman is over; as a matter of fact I am completely convinced that he stands at the threshold of the greatest de velopment in the history of small business in this country. These, Mr. Speaker, are a few of the points which came to my mind when considering the speech from the throne. There are many other questions and many other problems which confront the people I represent but I feel in regard to the legislation now in prospect that the essential requirements and the genuine needs of all Canadians-not just those in my own riding but in every riding across the country-will be well served during the life of this parliament. Mr. Alexis Caron (Hull): Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to congratulate you upon re suming your post as Speaker of this house. Of the many Speakers I have known you, sir, rate very high and your work during the last session was highly regarded by the opposition. We hope the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefen baker) will not place you on the hot seat MAY 19, 1958 235 as he did at the closing of the last parlia ment. You may rest assured that the members of the Liberal party will abide by your rules and decisions in this house. (Translation): May I also be allowed to congratulate the hon. member for Labelle {Mr. Courtemanche) for the honour which has been tendered him on his appointment to the cabinet. I remember that last year during the debate on the address, I took the Prime Minister to task for not appointing a sufficient num ber of French-Canadian ministers. I suggested there were such members who could well have been appointed at the time and I mentioned more particularly the name of the member for Labelle. I am quite convinced, of course, that the Prime Minister did not take this course in order to please me; nevertheless, I congratulate the member for Labelle. I would also like to congratulate, in his absence-but he can read it in the official re cord of this house, at any rate-the member for Lotbiniere {Mr. O'Hurley). I believe that the hon. minister, since he was first elected to the house, proved that he deserved a higher appointment than that of parlia mentary assistant. He has shown perfect knowledge of the two official languages of this country and demonstrated that he can handle them with marvelous fluency. I am convinced that the experience he has gained as a parliamentary assistant will stand him in good stead when it comes to fulfilling his responsibilities as a cabinet minister. I would also like to congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil {Mr. Sevigny) in his absence, for the honour which has come his way on his appointment as Deputy Speaker. When the member for Longueuil first came to this house-oh! there he is now, and I am happy to be able to say so to him directly-he was preceded by the reputation of his father. This is an extremely difficult situation to be in, when the father was great before the son. However, he has demonstrated that it was not because of his father, but because of himself and of his fine qualities that he has been chosen to be our Deputy Speaker. I congratu late him and I wish him every success. (Text): I am pleased to offer my congratulations to the Prime Minister on the great victory which he won on March 31. He wanted an over-all majority; he has it. I hope he will not use it arbitrarily as does his good friend the premier of Quebec. Speaking of the premier of Quebec, may I say that the influence of his machine, known as the immoral election 57071-3- 16} The Address-Mr. Caron machine, has been felt all over the province of Quebec but not sufficiently to assure the success of the Conservative party,- Mr. Ricard: The hon. member does not know what he is talking about when he refers to Quebec. Mr. Caron: I know that you and your col leagues used the Duplessis machine, and that is why you are here. Mr. Ricard: The hon. member is talking through his hat. Mr. Caron: If the machine had not been used in Quebec the hon. member would not be here. The member representing St. Hya cinthe-Bagot would have been a Liberal, as he was before. I do not think that it was sufficient to assure the great success of the Conservative party. I do not want to take away from the merit of the Prime Minister but in Quebec the electoral methods of Huey Long and of Al Capone were in use in many constitu encies, as in St. Hyacinthe-Bagot and more especially in St. Ann, where people were sequestered, 11 of them, and where a ballot box- Mr. Speaker: Order. I am sure that the hon. member who is speaking does not want to go beyond the confines of this very im portant motion, but I am afraid he will have difficulty in relating what he is now saying to the amendment and the subamendment to the address in reply to the speech from the throne. Mr. Caron: Mr. Speaker, I want to abide by your ruling but I thought I could follow those who are praising the success of the Conservative party all over the country and I thought there were things which could be said even in the House of Commons. I want to say that all the ministers and all the members of the union nationale party were in the fight, even in my constituency, where the minister of public works, who never comes into our county except during an election time, spent 15 days in the county promising everything that was asked, and as he came with an open purse, money was flying all over, and on election day $20 bills were flying. Mr. Grafftey: Do you remember Taschereau? Mr. Caron: You are too young to remem ber that. Mr. Ricard: I did not say anything. That is another insinuation. The hon. member is talking through his hat. Mr. Caron: When I have a question put to me I answer it. I had the pleasure of sitting with Mr. Taschereau in Quebec and I do not think we could find in a hundred years a man 236 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Caron to compare with him. He used honest tactics, unlike the ones you used in the province of Quebec during the last election. I would be glad to sit with a man like Alexandre Taschereau, who was one of the greatest Canadians we have ever had. Mr. Ricard: People from Quebec arc smarter than you are. Mr. Caron: I do not refuse to answer any body who wishes to speak, but I want to know at least where they are and what they say. They should at least rise in their places and put the question and then I will answer. Mr. Denis: Put your question. Mr. Ricard: That is the best contribution you have made in this parliament. Mr. Speaker: Order. It begins to sound more like a chorus than a solo. I suggest that hon. members allow the hon. member for Hull to pursue his course uninterrupted. (Translation) : Mr. Caron: Mr. Speaker, in deference to your wishes, I shall immediately come back to important matters referring to the speech from the throne and federal policy. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Caron: I am happy to have pleased some hon. members on the treasury benches. That will not often be the case. One of the most important matters the Conservative party has tried to minimize in this parliament and during the election was this well-known unemployment issue. Say what you will-sing it if you wish in any key-the fact remains as an hon. member stated this afternoon-that we have a winter depression and seasonal unemployment every year-but it is not each time that we have unemployment as acute as last year, and as there is even today. I shall not look for examples in the other ridings of the province; I shall simply examine the situation in mine. As a rule in May work begins to pick up. Usually, around November and December pulp and paper companies lay off a certain number of men that they take on again in April and May. This year, instead of rehiring their employees, the Canadian International Paper laid off, only a few weeks ago, some 255 employees who had worked most of the winter, thus adding to the number of those already laid off in November and December. It can be said therefore that the unemploy ment crisis is a very delicate one to settle, since being threatened by an economic crisis we are at the same time facing a danger of inflation. I would not say that the matter is exceed ingly easy for the government to solve, but [Mr. Caron.] I say that, however difficult it might be, the government must make a serious effort to remedy the situation. First I believe that a major part of our unemployment has been caused by the well known statement of the right hon. Prime Minister who said: "We are going to take 15 per cent of our present trade with the United States and divert it to the United Kingdom." This was, I feel, an utterly childish statement, coming from a statesman. If he had thought five minutes before utter ing those words, he would have never said them, and I know that he is already sorry for his statement. I know that even if the United States have made no official representations to Canada following that change of policy, some people have been alarmed unofficially and only a few weeks after that statement, we already felt the consequences of trade difficulties existing between Canada and the United States. In the paper industry particularly, paper is being bought, for instance, from Scandi navian manufacturers. Owing to the low salaries paid in those countries, paper can be produced at a lower price and the United States can buy it at about the same price as Canadian made paper, although shipping costs are higher. By thus eliminating part of the American paper purchases in Canada, not only the paper industry but also the forest industry are affected. Thousands of our people are earn ing their living in the forest industry and thousands of our farmers, during the winter months, try to supplement their revenue by working in the forest. This state of affairs is due to a great extent to that unwise and blundering statement and I contend that we must now try the impos sible to correct that situation. In spite of the statements made, I still believe that we have yet in the United States a very important market which we can recover. To achieve that purpose, however, the present cabinet ministers will have to travel and become salesmen. Oh! it is a wonderful thing to become a cabinet minister, but if one does not travel, one does not find the necessary markets. Salesmen, at this time, have to go from door to door to sell their goods. So our ministers should have to go from country to country because we need new markets. If we do not find some, the present unemploy ment situation will continue and will become intolerable. The people are dissatisfied, they are stirred up. Something must be done. Some may say that there is danger of inflation. That is possibly true. Is that why the government did not mention any tax reductions such as had been proposed by the chief of the MAY 19, 1958 237 Liberal party? I believe that it is not necessarily through public works that the unemployment situation can be solved. Of course I am all for public works but we all know that before they can be carried out, preparations have to be made, reports have to be obtained from engineers, plans have to be studied, in short, everything has to be organized and that takes many months. There has been talk of public works since the beginning of the last election cam paign but what public works have been initiated? There is talk of public works which are required in the far north, of railways for the far north. How can construction of high ways in the Northwest Territories be of any assistance to the great number of unemployed people who are mainly in the eastern part of the country? We would have to transfer people and take them away from their families. Jobless or not, these people have feelings and they prefer staying among their own people. Some way has to be found to help our section of the country, and the best way is the one proposed by my leader: tax reductions. I well recall that the right hon. Prime Minister, who himself was in the midst of an election campaign, tried to ridicule the proposal of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson). Well, I see in a New York newspaper that Mr. Harriman ... (Text): Governor Averell Harriman of New York today blamed th£c Eisenhower administration for the reces sion and said it must act Immediately (Translation): He then goes on as follows: (Text): An emergency tax cut. Federal reserve board purchase of "several bil lion dollars of government bonds .. . to increase the availability of credit and further lower interest rates." "A large and diversified program of public works." (Translation): But that comes only in third place (Text): "In my opinion it would be reckless to do little and sensible and safer to take strong measures," Governor Harriman said. (Translation): And later, in the same paper, the Rocke feller Foundation officials were saying: (Text): Tax reform urged by Rockefeller fund. Sweeping reform of the federal tax system to encourage individual incentive and promote the nation 's economic growth has been proposed by the Rocke feller brothers fund . . . Seventeen leading econ omists and businessmen urged an Immediate tax cut to help expand employment and overcome the current recession . . . And the panel empha- The Address-Mr. Caron sized that an anti-recession tax cut should be con sistent with the more important "long-term goals of tax reform." (Translation): That is precisely what the leader of the Liberal party was suggesting and, at that time, he was laughed at. Well, I share the opinion of those American experts who are also feeling the effects of a certain depres sion, perhaps lesser than ours, in view of their enormous population. But, to my mind, we should first lower taxes and then carry out public works. I am indeed happy to note that the speech from the throne refers to all kinds of public works. And then here: (Text): • • . to provide assistance to provincial govern ments for certain agreed types of projects. In par ticular, a large expansion in the construction and equipment of our system of airports and airways will be proposed and an increase in our work on harbours and rivers and public buildings . . . the construction of a railway to Great Slave lake . . . the construction of important roads needed for development in the Yukon and Northwest Territories. (Translation): And so it is all the way. Well, I should be inclined to ask the government to do something which could help our local peo ple, namely the building of a new bridge, since at the last election, the Conservative candidate had promised that if the Con servative party came back to power, the government would build one immediately to replace the old Alexandra bridge and ease the traffic on both sides of the river. When the government prepares its plans for public works to be carried out throughout the country, I would ask it not to forget that bridge which is necessary and for which both cities have been asking since 1935, from all goverru;nents. Since the present government is of the opinion that public works must be undertaken to alleviate the unemployment problem, I would ask it not to forget this particular project which is needed in the Hull-Ottawa area, the inter provincial bridge. I just heard a voice. Would the hon. member be so kind as to get up and put his question? Mr. Martel: Why did the hon. member not ask for this bridge before today? Mr. Caron: That is an intelligent question; it shows the state of mind of the hon. mem ber. I did ask for that bridge but the request was turned down. It had been proposed that the bridge be built by the three govern ments: the Ontario government, the Quebec government and the federal government. The Ottawa government said yes and so did the Toronto government. But Mr. Duplessis said no. 238 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Caron Some hon. Members: Any other question? Mr. Caron: As long as it is not a question like that one, but an important question. Well, it is in the field of public works. True, the government can undertake some public works but it can hardly carry out all the public works necessary in this coun try. That I will admit. Here is what could be done. If the government were to create a fund whereby it could lend money to the municipalities at a very low interest rate it would be a good thing. All our municipalities need money to carry out undertakings which are urgently needed. As a result of the development that has taken place these last few years there is a great deal to do but our municipal governments are almost unable to do anything since they have not the means to find the necessary money. When they do it often happens that the interest rate is prohibitive, which is of no advantage to them. If the government does want to act, let it make several hundred million dollars avail able to the municipalities at a low interest rate. The municipalities could then carry out these undertakings immediately, a fact which would go some way at least to solve the present unemployment situation. If I remember correctly, our chief, the leader of the Liberal party, had a plan to help municipalities carry out these various works. This the present government could do. You know, a policy, whether initiated by the Liberal party or by another source, is not under a copyright. Everybody has a right to use it. So, I urge upon the Prime Min ister, the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) and their colleagues, the reading of the program formulated at the last Liberal con vention and I suggest that they might take inspiration from it for works to be carried out for some time to come. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Caron: There is also a reference in the speech from the throne to financial rela tions with the provinces. Well, I hope the Prime Minister will very soon convene the premiers of the provinces into conference at Ottawa, because I know our provinces are facing great difficulties. I have noted in the papers lately that the premier of Ontario is already beginning to ask for more money. The recession is being felt by the munici palities, but it is also being felt by the prov inces, and the federal government is certainly in the best position to help everyone because fields of taxation are limited. Municipalities can tax real property, provincial govern ments have access to direct taxation only, whereas, according to the British North [Mr. Caron.] America Act, the central government has access to all fields of taxation in our coun try. Well, since the central government is in the best position to collect the money necessary for its purposes and since, if need be-as is recognized by economists-it may resort to deficit budgeting in periods of recession, I urge the central government to open its purse and help municipalities and provinces to undertake public works of their own. I note there is also mention of television. This subject of television has given rise to all sorts of comments throughout the coun try. Some favour state television only, others private television only, while others still fa vour a combination of both state and private television services. I must say, to the credit of state television, that it has made giant strides. The C.B.C. offers well-balanced programs that are often better than anything coming from the United States. I am proud to give the corporation due credit. But this does not preclude the right to authorize private enter prise to set up a television network in other parts of the country. I noticed that an hon. member pointed out this afternoon that there was a population of several hundred thousand who do not have any television programs. Well, if the C.B.C. is unable to extend its network, private enterprise should be authorized to establish its own network. However, like others who mentioned the matter, I think the government should main tain the C.B.C. with an absolute control of programs, whether they are broadcast by private or public stations, because we must not let our programs deteriorate and follow the pace of some American broadcasts that are unfortunately reaching us. I am therefore pleased to ask the government kindly to see to it that some supervision of programs, even private ones, is exerted. There is also talk of hospital insurance. In this connection, I could only pay tribute to the former minister of national health and welfare, the hon. member for Essex East (Mr. Martin). If there is anybody in this house who deserves congratulations for the work done in this field it is certainly that hon. member. However, there is one thing which has been worrying me for some time, if I may say so. As a result of the implementation of hos pitalization plans, such as the Blue Cross, which pay only when the patient is admitted to hospital, we have a new problem, and that is the lack of space in our hospitals. Some way should be found for our sick people who can be treated at home, to receive there the same treatment they receive in a hospital. MAY 19, 1958 239 (Text): Mr. Winch: Stop a moment. Mr. Caron: Excuse me, sometimes I forget myself. I meant that these plans have created new problems. Under the Blue Cross plan and other plans of hospital insurance a person has to be hospitalized in order to obtain the benefits. This creates a new problem, a lack of room 'in the. hospita~s in Canada. We have to build and build hospitals. I feel that arrangements should be made so that those illnesses which can be treated at home under the doctor's care should be treated there and yet the person should be able to receive the same benefits. Mr. Winch: I did not mean stop speaking French, but to stop speaking quite so quickly. I was trying to follow. Mr. Caron: Thank you. (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I will try to contain myself. I think it must be the interruptions I had a while ago which have caused me to carry on at this rate. (Text): Mr. Winch: I am sorry if I threw you off the beam. Mr. Caron: Oh, I am not off the beam. I am reading the speech from the throne to see if I can find anything. (Translation): The speech from the throne also mentions small businesses. It is true that in a depres sion period, small businesses have a harder time than large financial concerns. Well, I believe that here again I must suggest to the government the plan proposed by the leader of the Liberal party during the last campaign, which provided for a reduction of taxes on profits from 20 to 10 per cent on the first $10,000. This would immediately help small businessmen to get out of the difficulties in which they now find themselves. Now, Mr. Speaker, I see that time flies away inexorably, and I want to conclude with an appeal on behalf of our youth. Youth today is probably the element of our population which suffers the most since, in cases of financial difficulty, they do not always find the means to get the money to complete their studies. I may be told that education is a provincial responsibility. Yes, th_e ~onstitu~ion provides that education, or public mstruction, is a provincial responsibility. But there is one thing, for example, that seems to be forgo~ten in certain quarters. It is that the first right belongs to the child since nature has given him the right to the advantages of education and since children should not be made to suffer throughout their life because of gov- The Address-Mr. Caron ernment systems. In a certain field, it is agreed that provincial governments have rights that must be respected but when the federal government goes to the trouble of offering money to help our colleges and universities, I contend that the provincial government has no right to refuse it as if that money were coming from an enemy gov ernment. I hold that the provincial govern ment must accept that money as it accepts the funds of the Rockefeller Foundation and of manufacturers organizations which recently have spent $400,000, in the province of Quebec, towards education. I do not believe that the federal government is an enemy of the province of Quebec nor of any other province. There are millions of dormant dollars wait ing for the province of Quebec to accept them. Recently, Mgr. Lussier complained that the universities were on the verge of bankruptcy and yet millions of dollars are there waiting for them. They are not allowed to touch that money because some dictator prevents them from doing so. Well, we should accept the program of my chief, the leader of the opposition, who during the last campaign, promised that if the Liberal party was returned to power, 10 000 scholarships would be granted to help pe~ple who cannot afford to complete their studies. You know that it costs from $1,200 to $1,300 to follow a university course if one does not live in a university city. Well, when a man has five, six or seven children, how do you expect him, with a salary of three, four or five thousand dollars, to devote $1,200 to $1,300 to the studies of a single memb~r of his family and neglect the others. It 1s utterly impossible. No head of a family would want to take such a risk. Well the federal government which has means 'at its disposal, must find the money it needs to help those people to keep on study ing so that Canadians may benefit from values which are here in a dormant state and ready to be developed. I therefore urge the present government to take over that part of the Liberal program and to do whatever is asked of it to help the Canadian people to develop normally as they have a right to do. I had in mind Mr. Speaker, to deal with the parliamentary system itself, but I believe that I will not have the time to do so. I am only going to make a brief reference to it. Last year, after the June election, we had in this house a minority Conservative group holding power, and an opposition group with a slight majority. I then asked myself how parliament could operate that way and if it was not time for us to think about review- 240 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Caron ing our parliamentary system. Elections held twice in a year cost tremendous sums of money, and paralyse trade and industry, par alyse everything in fact. Therefore, it seems to me that we could consider having a look at the United States system where elections are held at regular dates and where, when a government is in minority the worst that can happen is that a rejected piece of legislation is put aside for one year while things con tinue to go on without the country suffering any hardship. The United States are fairly well administered, I believe, and because our system dates back to the Magna Carta it is no reason why we should keep it till the end of the world. It seems to me that a parliamentary committee should be instituted to study that question so as to avoid the obligation of having an election at any time when the vagaries of an election have divided equally the votes of the electorate between the gov ernment in power and the opposition. I maintain that elections held at a fixed date, and a rule disallowing non-confidence motions, but letting the government go on with its legislation would be of a nature to improve our system. I only mention the matter, because I know I shall lack time to discuss it more fully to-night. Now, I shall conclude my remarks by say ing that I entirely agree with our leader when he says that ... (Text): We respectfully represent to Your Excellency that a high level of employment and prosperity in Canada requires a high and expanding level of international trade, and that this will be promoted more effectively by vigorous measures for the expansion of trade with all countries than by efforts to divert from one country to another. (Translation): I fully admit that we must pass urgent measures to settle the difficulties besetting us at this time. That is why I will vote heartily for the amendment. Even if we adopt the address though we do not approve its principle, we none the less accept part of the responsibility because we want to help the government overcome its difficulties. We are here to cri ticize, of course, but in a constructive way and I believe that, if I have not done so in the first part of my speech, I have tried to do so in the last part. Is that good? Mr. Ricard: It is! Mr. Caron: Having the approval of the hon. member for St. Hyacinthe - Bagot (Mr. Ricard), I will go back home satisfied with the work I have done. Since it is ten o'clock, Mr. Speaker, may we call it a day? (Text): On motion of Mr. Caron the debate was adjourned. BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE Mr. Chevrier: I might ask the acting leader of the house what the business is to be for tomorrow. Mr. Churchill: We shall proceed with the throne speech debate tomorrow. At ten o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order. MAY 19, 1958 241 NORAD-Canada-U.S. Agreement APPENDIX ORGANIZATION AND OPERATION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN AIR DEFENCE COMMAND No. 263 Sir, CANADIAN EMBASSY WASHINGTON, D.C. May 12, 1958. I have the honour to refer to discussions which have taken place between the Cana dian and the United States authorities con cerning the necessity for integration of oper ational control of Canadian and United States air defences and, in particular, to the study and recommendations of the Canada-United States military study group. These studies led to the joint announcement of August 1, 1957, by the Minister of National Defence of Canada and the Secretary of Defence of the United States, indicating that our two governments had agreed to the setting up of a system of integrated operational control for the air defences in the continental United States, Canada and Alaska under an integrated command responsible to the chiefs of staff of both countries. Pursuant to the announce ment of August 1, 1957, an integrated head quarters known as the North American Air Defence Command (NORAD) has been estab lished on an interim basis at Colorado Springs, Colorado. For some years prior to the establishment of NORAD, it had been recognized that the air defence of Canada and the United States must be considered as a single problem. How ever, arrangements which existed between Canada and the United States provided only for the co-ordination of separate Canadian and United States air defence plans, but did not provide for the authoritative control of all air defence weapons which must be employed against an attacker. The advent of nuclear weapons, the great improvements in the means of effecting their delivery and the requirements of the air defence 'control systems demand rapid deci sions to keep pace with the speed and tempo of technological developments. To counter the threat and to achieve maximum effec tiveness of the air defence system, defensive operations must commence as early as possible and enemy forces must be kept constantly engaged. Arrangements for the co-ordination of national plans requiring con sultation between national commanders before implementation had become inadequate in the face of a possible sudden attack, with little or no warning. It was essential, there fore, to have in existence in peacetime an organization, including the weapo_ns, facil ities and command structure which could operate at the outset of hostilities in accord ance with a single air defence plan approved in advance by national authorities. Studies made by representatives of our two governments led to the conclusion that the problem of the air defence of our two coun tries could best be met by delegating to an integrated headquarters, the task of ex~rcis ing operational control over . combat umts ~f the national forces made available for the air defence of the two countries. Furthermore, the principle of an integrated headquarters exercising operational control over assigned forces has been well established in various parts of the North Atlantic treaty area. The Canada-United States region is an integral part of the NATO area. In support of the strategic objectives established in NATO for the Canada-United States region and in accordance with the provisions of the North Atlantic treaty, our two governments have, by establishing the North American Air Defence Command recognized the desirability of integrating headquarters exercising opera tional control over assigned air defence forces. The agreed integration is intended to assist the two governments to develop and main tain their individual and collective capacity to resist air attack on their territories in North America in mutual self-defence. The two governments consider that the establishment of integrated air defence arran gements of the nature described increases the importance of the fullest possible consulta tion between the two governments on all matters affecting the joint defence of North America, and that defence co-operation be tween them can be worked out on a mutually satisfactory basis only if such consultation is regularly and consistently undertaken. In view of the foregoing considerations and on the basis of the experience gained in the operation on an interim basis of the North American air defence command, my govern ment proposes that the following principles should govern the future organization and operations of the North American air defence command. (1) The commander-in-chief NORAD (CIN CNORAD) will be responsible to the chiefs of staff committee of Canada and the joint chiefs of staff of the United States, who in turn are responsible to their respective gov ernments. He will operate within a concept of air defence approved by the appropriate 242 HOUSE OF COMMONS NORAD-Canada-U.S. Agreement authorities of our two governments, who will bear in mind their objectives in the defence of the Canada-United States region of the NATO area. (2) The North American air defence com mand will include such combat units and individuals as are specifically allocated to it by the two governments. The jurisdiction of the commander-in-chief, NORAD, over those units and individuals is limited to opera tional control as hereinafter defined. (3) "Operational control" is the power to direct, co-ordinate, and control the operational activities of forces assigned, attached or otherwise made available. No permanent changes of station would be made without approval of the higher national authority concerned. Temporary reinforcement from one area to another, including the crossing of the international boundary, to meet opera tional requirements will be within the authority of commanders having operational control. The basic command organization for the air defence forces of the two countries, including administration, discipline, internal organization and unit training, shall be ex ercised by national commanders responsible to their national authorities. (4) The appointment of CINCNORAD and his deputy must be approved by the Canadian and United States governments. They will not be from the same country, and CINC NORAD staff shall be an integrated joint staff composed of officers of both countries. During the absence of CINCNORAD, com mand will pass to the deputy commander. (5) The North Atlantic treaty organization will continue to be kept informed through the Canada-United States regional planning group of arrangements for the air defence of North America. (6) The plans and procedures to be followed by NORAD in wartime shall be formulated and approved in peace-time by appropriate national authorities and shall be capable of rapid implementation in an emergency. Any plans or procedures recommended by NORAD which bear on the responsibilities of civilian departments or agencies of the two govern ments shall be referred for decision by the appropriate military authorities to those agencies and departments and may be the subject of inter-governmental co-ordination. (7) Terms of reference for CINCNORAD and his deputy will be consistent with the foregoing principles. Changes in these terms of reference may be made by agreement bE' tween the Canadian chiefs of staff commit tee and the United States joint chiefs of staff, with approval of higher authority as ap propriate, provided that these changes are in consonance with the principles set out in this note. (8) The question of the financing of ex penditures connected with the operation of the integrated headquarters of the North American Air Defence Command will be settled by mutual agreement between ap propriate agencies of the two governments. (9) The North American Air Defence Com mand shall be maintained in operation for a period of ten years or such shorter period as shall be agreed by both countries in the light of their mutual defence interests, and their objectives under the terms of the North Atlantic treaty. The terms of this agreement may be reviewed upon request of either country at any time. 00) The agreement between parties to the North Atlantic treaty regarding the status of their forces signed in London on June 19, 1951, shall apply. (11) The release to the public of informa tion by CINCNORAD on matters of interest to Canada and the United States of America will in all cases be the subject of prior con sultation and agreement between appropriate agencies of the two governments. If the United States government concurs in the principles set out above, I propose that this note and your reply should constitute an agreement between our two governments ef fective from the date of your reply. Accept, sir, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. "N.A.ROBERTSON" Ambassador of Canada. The Honourable John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State of the United States, Washington, D.C. DEPARTMENT OF STATE WASHINGTON, D.C. May 12, 1958. Excellency, I have the honour to refer to Your Excel lency's note No. 263 of May 12, 1958 proposing on behalf of the Canadian government certain principles to govern the future organization and operation of the North American Air Defence Command (NORAD). I am pleased to inform you that my govern ment concurs in the principles set forth in your note. My government further agrees with your proposal that your note and this reply shall constitute an agreement between the two governments, effective today. Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. "CHRISTIAN A. HERTER" for the Secretary of State. His Excellency Norman Robertson, Ambassador of Canada. 243 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tuesday, May 20, 1958 The house met at eleven o'clock. THE ROY AL ASSENT Mr. Speaker: I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following communication: Ottawa, May 20, 1958 Sir: I have the honour to inform you that the Honourable Patrick Kerwin, Chief Justice of Canada, acting as Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber today, the 20th May, at 5.4~ p.m .. for the purpose of giving the royal assent to a certain bill. I have the honour to be, sir, Your obedient servant, J. F. Delaute, Secretary to the Governor General (Administrative) CANADIAN NATIONAL STEAMSHIPS INQUffiY AS TO REPORTED INTENTION TO SELL VESSELS On the orders of the day: Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier): Mr. Speaker, may I direct a question to the Min ister of Transport. Is he aware of the report which has appeared in two recent issues of the Financial Post and the Globe and Mail that the eight ships that were struck by the seafarers' international union, belonging to the Canadian National Steamships, are now to be offered for sale? Has he any comment to make on that statement? I sent the min ister a copy of the question earlier today. Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Trans port): Mr. Speaker, I wish to thank the hon. member for giving me notice of his intention to ask this question. I have not seen the two reports referred to. I will be in touch with the management of the Canadian National (West Indies) Steamships, and I shall report to the house in the next day or so. Mr. Speaker: Order. I think this question already has been asked by the hon. member for Laurier. There is a question on the order paper to be answered orally which I think covers the same ground. Mr. Chevrier: No, Mr. Speaker. If I may say so, it covers the same subject matter but it does not cover the question of the sale of the ships. That is why I directed this question to the minister. EXTERNAL AFFAIRS NORAD--REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION OF CANADA-U.S. AGREEMENT On the orders of the day: Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. I hope this question perks him up. Would the Minister of National Defence assure the house now that he will carry out his undertaking, given on January 4 of this year when replying to the request of the hon. member for Essex East, to submit the NORAD agreement to parliament, by having the necessary arrange ments made so the agreement will be sub mitted to parliament in the form of a regular motion for its consideration? Hon. G. R. Pearkes (Minister of National Defence): Mr. Speaker, I can assure the hon. member that I am bubbling over to answer that question. The note was tabled yester day, and the Secretary of State for External Affairs indicated that there would be oppor tunities for further discussion of the matter. Mr. Mcllraith: No. Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposition): A supplementary question to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister not give further consideration to the possibility of the House of Commons discussing this agree ment in the form of a resolution for approval or disapproval by the house? Right Hon. J, G. Diefenbaker (Prime Minister): Mr. Speaker, yesterday in answer to the question asked by my hon. friend, the Secretary of State for External Affairs said that further opportunity would be given for discussion. The hon. gentleman now suggests that an opportunity might be provided by a general discussion of a resolution in this regard. I have looked over the records, and in view of the fact that this is part of the NATO concept I do not think there is any reason why this matter should be dealt with in that way. Also I would point out that I felt that naturally since the previous govern ment had done all the preliminary work in connection with this matter and had arrived at a tentative arrangement, although it was not placed in the form of notes, there would not be any probability of opposition in the acceptance by the house of the agreement or the notes which have passed between those two countries. 244 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry However, my concept of my position, in view of the disproportionate percentage of government membership in the house, in the opinion of hon. gentlemen opposite, and also because the opposition seems desirous of having a vote in order to show its opposition to the exchange of notes- Some hon. Members: No, no. Mr. Diefenbaker: -is that I would have no objection whatsoever to having a resolution submitted so that hon. gentlemen may have the opportunity to stand up and be counted on this matter. Mr. Pearson: Has the Prime Minister not discovered in his researches on this subject that this matter, far from having been ap proved by the previous cabinet, never came before the previous cabinet for consideration? Will the Prime Minister not agree also that a vote in the house on this question might be very helpful, because it is such an im portant matter, in order to show that the house is unanimously behind the concept of collective defence? Mr. Diefenbaker: As to the first point raised by the hon. gentleman, while I naturally have no right to examine the records of the previous cabinet, everything points to the fact that this question did receive considera tion as revealed by the notes of the staff meetings in this connection. As to the second point, that is why I am so anxious that hon. gentlemen have an opportunity to vote on this question, so we will know exactly where they stand and if they support the action, for up to the present time they have not shown any indication in that regard. Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East): Is the Prime Minister not aware that, having now decided to accept the proposal of the Leader of the Opposition, this agreement involving author ization to send Canadian forces outside Can ada must by separate resolution be submitted to this house if we are to observe the con stitutional and traditional practice of the house? Mr. Diefenbaker: Mr. Speaker, I am not going to enter into any argument in that con nection. I simply say that the Secretary of State for External Affairs has pointed out that this is part of the NATO plan for defence. That being so, any constitutional experience in the past has no application to the present situation. Mr. Martin (Essex East): Mr. Speaker Mr. Speaker: Order. I think this matter has been pursued to the point where it is be coming a debate and, that being so, such a [Mr. Diefenbaker.] discussion should more properly take place at a later time when the matter is before the house. REQUEST FOR TABLING OF PROCEEDINGS OF U.S. SENATE COMMITTEE On the orders of the day: Hon. L. B. Pearson (Leader of the Opposi• tion): Mr. Speaker, I wonder whether the Secretary of State for External Affairs would consider tabling the hearings before the special committee of the United States Senate on Canadian-American relations, in view of the wide-spread interest which I am sure exists on the part of all hon. members in this matter? Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I do not have those papers in the department, and I do not know how I can comply with that proposal. Mr. Speaker: That document is one that is perhaps available to all hon. members from an outside source and is not especially avail able to members of the government. However, the matter has been dealt with, I think. INTERNATIONAL TRADE FAIR BRUSSELS-REPORTED CRITICISM OF CANADIAN PAVILION On the orders of the day: Mr. R. L. Hanbidge (Kindersley): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. I have an editorial from the issue of that great family journal and independent political newspaper known as the Toronto Telegram of Saturday, May 17. The editorial is entitled, "Show Window in Brussels." I should like to ask the minister if he has read the edi torial. Second, does the minister intend to take the advice given him and catch a plane to Brussels to straighten out matters over there? Hon. Gordon Churchill (Minister of Trade and Commerce): Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for giving me notice of this question. I have read the editorial. I would have no objection to going to Brussels im mediately, but at the moment I do not see that any good purpose would be served by my doing so. The Canadian pavilion at the world fair at Brussels was designed and planned about two years ago. When we as sumed office last summer the plans had been completed in final form. I was in Brussels last September. I saw the pavilion in the course of construction, and was given some indication of its general lay-out and the grounds surrounding it. MAY 20. 1958 245 Subsequently, since the exhibition has been opened, statements have appeared in the press and some letters have been sent to me objecting to certain things over there. Objection has been taken to the meals served in the restaurant; there has been a query as to whether the ramp which leads to the second floor is a suitable method of gaining access to the second floor; some objection has been taken to the size of the building, and to the nature of the exhibits shown therein. It is extremely difficult, when you are dealing with a thing like this, to be sure what should be done. There is a dif ference of opinion amongst people with regard to art and architecture; not all people can be completely satisfied with regard to a pavilion such as this. I am no expert on art. I do not understand surrealism or modern painting. I did appreciate, how ever, a cartoon which appeared during the election campaign giving a surrealistic vision of Canada. In so far as this particular pavilion is concerned, I have had a first-hand account from a competent observer who has just returned from Brussels and who spent five days there looking at the various pavilions, the Canadian pavilion in particular. If I have your permission, sir, I should like to report that Mrs. Michener told me yesterday that she made an extensive tour of all the pavilions at the world fair, and that the Canadian pavilion is a credit to Canada. She said that in her opinion the entire Canadian exhibit had been imaginatively planned and that it gives an adequate picture of the country as a whole. This, she said, is not true of the pavilions of other smaller countries. The exhibit of Canadian indus tries and arts is a better representation than that of the United States. She particularly mentioned the excellence of the fisheries exhibit. The automatic fish are so lifelike that a visitor attempted to feed them bread crumbs before she discovered her error. The gardens surrounding the building have been well laid out. Mr. Mcilraith: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker; surely this is not proper procedure by the ministry in answering a question. The minister has transgressed the rules by not being concise and relevant, and has transgressed on some other grounds which you, Mr. Speaker, could not fail to observe. He has transgressed the bounds of good taste as well. Mr. Speaker: The minister has proceeded on his own responsibility. I feel this is not a matter that can be dealt with satisfactorily in the question period, and there will be an Inquiries of the Ministry opportunity to discuss the pros and cons of the Canadian exhibit in the debate that is now taking place. Mr. Churchill: In view of the public interest in this matter and the fact that it is scarcely a subject for debate I thought a factual statement like this would be accept able to the house under the circumstances. AGRICULTURE ASPARAGUS-INQUIRY AS TO DIFFERENTIALS IN FLOOR PRICES On the orders of the day: Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-Coqui:tlam): I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Agriculture. Why is it that aspar agus growers in Ontario are receiving a higher floor price than those in British Columbia? Has the government accepted the principle of establishing regional price differentials under the new act? Hon. D. S. Harkness (Minister of Agricul ture): Mr. Speaker, the reason is that under the stabilization act, as the hon. member will perhaps recall, it was provided that a floor price would be established on the basis of the average price which had been received for that commodity at representative markets across Canada. The average price received for asparagus in British Columbia has been 1 cent a pound lower than the average price received for asparagus in Ontario. It is for that reason that the floor price established in British Columbia is 17 cents whereas the floor price established in Ontario is 18 cents. [Later:] Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West): I would like to ask the Minister of Agriculture a very proper supplementary question to the question asked by the hon. member for Bur naby-Coquitlam. Will the principle of regional support prices also apply to apples and eggs? Mr. Harkness: Mr. Speaker, this is not a matter of regional support prices; it is a matter of carrying out the terms of the Agri cultural Stabilization Act which, as I stated a moment ago, provides that floor prices will be established on the basis of the 10 year average of prices at representative markets across the country, which means, of course, that the floor price in Toronto, we will say, will not be the same as the floor price in Winnipeg. Alternatively, one could take any other two points which are widely separated. This will be the situation in most cases. 246 HOUSE OF COMMONS Inquiries of the Ministry [Later:] Mr. W. H. McMillan (Welland): Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Agriculture. Was not the average price for grade A asparagus in Ontario 22 cents a pound in recent years, and was the floor price set at 80 per cent of that price? I should also like to know if the peach growers can expect a floor price for their peaches this year. Mr. Harkness: Mr. Speaker, the price of asparagus was about 22 cents a pound, I think, approximately two years ago. Last year it was 21 cents a pound. This was for No. 1 grade A asparagus going to processing plants. I have forgotten the exact percentage at which this was set, but I believe it is somewhere around 80 per cent. I am not in a position to make any statement about peaches at the moment. CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS MONCTON-INQUffiY AS TO PROPOSED LAY-OFFS On the orders of the day: Mr. H. J. Michaud (Kent, N.B.l: I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Does the minister propose to take any steps to prevent the proposed lay offs of employees at the C.N.R. repair shops in Moncton? Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport): Mr. Speaker, matters of that kind come entirely under the jurisdiction of the management of the Canadian National Railways. Mr. H. J. Robichaud (Gloucester): I have a supplementary question. Does the minister recall his statement made to members of the press in Moncton, as reported on March 28, to the effect that he had issued strict orders- Mr. Speaker: Order. It strikes me that the hon. member for Gloucester is about to give information, not to ask for it. Mr. Robichaud: Did the minister make a statement to the press in Moncton, as reported on March 28, 1958, to the effect that he had issued strict orders to the Canadian National Railways that no further lay-offs should take place? Mr. Speaker: Order. I am not sure whether the hon. member for Gloucester considers that question to be a proper one to ask on the orders of the day, namely to ask for verifica tion of whether a statement was made some time in March; was it March 28? Mr. Robichaud: March 28, 1958. [Mr. Harkness.] Mr. Speaker: It is not a matter of urgency, but if the minister wishes to answer it he may do so. Mr. Hees: I shall be very glad to answer the hon. member's question. When I was in Moncton I repeated in essence what I had said in the house, which statement the hon. member heard-I think it was in January when I informed the house that the Canadian National Railways were embarking upon a make-work program during the winter in order to ease the employment situation throughout Canada, as it was hoped private industry was doing as well. I made no state ment that the Canadian National Railways would lay off no more employees at any time. [Later:] Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier): May I, Mr. Speaker, follow this up with a supplementary question to that which was asked earlier by the hon. member for Gloucester. I should like the Minister of Transport to tell the house how many men have been laid off at the Moncton shops of the Canadian National Railways, and would he also tell the house what the Canadian National Railways or the government intends to do to find employment for these men. Mr. Hees: Mr. Speaker, as the former min ister well knows, these matters come solely within the jurisdiction of the Canadian National Railways. I will get in touch with the management and will find out what is the situation in that regard. HARBOURS FORT WILLIAM-INQUffiY AS TO FEDERAL APPROPRIATION On the orders of the day: Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William): Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Public Works. There has been considerable disappointment expressed in my constituency- Some hon. Members: Question. Mr. Badanai: All right; the question is this. Considerable disappointment has been ex pressed in my constituency over what appears to be a meagre appropriation for harbour improvements in Fort William. Out of $100 million earmarked for the province of Ontario the city of Fort William, with 42,000 popula tion, can expect a federal expenditure of only $100,000. Some hon. Members: Question. Mr. Badanai: I should like to know whether these figures represent all that the federal government is going to spend in Fort William in 1958. MAY 20, 1958 247 Mr. Speaker: Perhaps the hon. member ,is not entirely familiar with the practice of the house. I think that question would best be answered if the hon. member would put it on the order paper. He can then get his statistical information accurately. (Translation): BRIDGES MONTREAL-STATEMENT ON INQUIRY AS TO NAME FOR NEW BRIDGE On the orders of the day: Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport): Mr. Speaker, last Thursday the hon. member for Laurier (Mr. Chevrier) made a suggestion with regard to the choice of a name for the new bridge over Nuns' island. I answered at the time that I would gladly consider the matter. I believe it highly desirable that the name which will be given to this bridge will recall the history of French-speaking Cana dians of the city of Montreal. I took up this matter with officials of the national harbours board and asked them to get in touch with the Montreal chamber of commerce and other interested bodies with a view to finding the most appropriate name. Hon. Lionel Chevrier (Laurier): I thank the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) for his excellent reply and especially for the encour aging prospect we now have that a French name will be given to the new bridge over Nuns' island. (Text): SHIPPING ST. LAWRENCE SEAWAY-ACCIDENTS INVOLVING SHIPS WITHOUT PILOTS On the orders of the day: Mr. D. M. Fisher (Port Arthur): I should like to address a question to the Minister of Trans port. Could the minister inform the house whether any foreign ships using the St. Law rence system this shipping season without pilots have been involved in any accidents? If so, was the absence of a pilot a factor? Hon. George H. Hees (Minister of Transport): Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the hon. member for his courtesy in advising me of his intention to ask this ques tion. The Department of Transport has received a report of only one accident in which a foreign ship using the St. Lawrence system, without pilotage, has been involved. In this case the German ship Auguste Levers and the Canadian laker Wallaceburg came in gentle contact when feeling their way past each other in the Cornwall canal. On neither ship was a pilot employed, and the resulting damage is said to have amounted to only one bent Inquiries of the Ministry hand rail. Such incidents occasionally occur in the canals when ships are under the direc tion of pilots, and it is impossible to say whether or not, in this instance, the ships would have passed by each other without damage if pilots had been employed. HEAL TH INSURANCE EFFECT OF HOSPITAL PLAN ON TREATMENT OF VETERANS On the orders of the day: Mr. J. C. MacRae (York-Sunbury): I should like to ask the Minister of Veterans Affairs the following question. Can the minister in form this house of the effect the forthcoming provincial hospital insurance plans may have on the hospitalization and treatment of veter ans and upon the operation of hospitals ad ministered by his department? Hon. A. J. Brooks (Minister of Veterans Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the hon. member for giving me notice of this question, the subject matter of which I know is of great interest to veterans all across the country. There is considerable detail involved in the answer; all the details are not in my possession at the present time, and I would therefore like to take this question as notice. TRANSPORT GREAT SLAVE LAKE-REPORT ON RAILROAD CONSTRUCTION SURVEY On the orders of the day: Mr, M. A. Hardie (Mackenzie River): I would like to address a question to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. Has the minister received the report on the survey carried out by the railway companies in regard to the Great Slave lake railroad and, if so, would he table the report? Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources): The report referred to by the hon. member is a report prepared for the railway companies them selves at their own expense, Mr. Speaker, and as a courtesy they have given us a copy thereof. I am not certain, unless I get their permission, that I have the right to table it in this house. However, I will look into the matter and see what can be done. CANADIAN PACIFIC STEAMSHIPS BRITISH COLUMBIA-INQUIRY AS TO STATUS OF STRIKE On the orders of the day: Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena): I have a question which I would like to direct to the Minister of Labour. Can the minister inform the house what progress, if any, is being 248 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Caron made with respect to the settlement of the strike against Canadian Pacific Steamships in British Columbia? Hon. Michael Starr (Minister of Labour): '.\fr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for giving me notice of this question. My reply is that after the unsuccessful meet ings which were held last Friday, May 16, prior to the strike, between the west coast representatives of the Canadian Pacific Rail way Company and the seafarers international union, I advised them that all the resources of the Department of Labour were available to assist them at any time. I have also instructed the west coast officer of the Depart ment of Labour to make his services available to the parties at any time. Mr. Howard: May I ask a supplementary question. I take it from the answer of the minister that so far as he knows there are no further meetings planned under the auspices of his department. Although plans may be being laid, there is no meeting planned for any specific time? Mr. Starr: At the moment, Mr. Speaker, we have no notice of any meeting to be held. INCOME TAX PREMIUM IRON ORES-CANADIAN REPRESENTA TIONS TO U.S. GOVERNMENT On the orders of the day: Mr. W. M. Benidickson (Kenora-Rainy River): Mr. Speaker, I have not noticed the Secretary of State for External Affairs attempting to rise to reply to the question raised yesterday by the hon. member for Port Arthur with respect to the hearings before the United States Senate committee on foreign affairs last Friday. Presumably he proposes to reply at a later date; there fore I would ask him when he is studying the proceedings of that committee whether he would as well look into the interrogation of the United States ambassador to Canada, when he was asked by members of that committee why he had issued a statement saying that the lawsuit brought by the United States treasury against the Premium Iron Ore Company had nothing to do with the United States-Canadian tax treaty. I would also like to know if the Secretary of State for External Affairs would inform the house as to whether or not before the United States ambassador made that state ment, or since he made the statement, the government has made the ambassador aware of the views of this government as presented by the Minister of National Revenue on February 1, that if the United States tax [Mr. Howard.] department was successful in this suit-in the words of the Minister of National Revenue-"we would feel that the convention had been violated." Hon. Sidney E. Smith (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, in reply to a somewhat similar question last week I do not recall the date-I gave that informa tion to the house. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY The house resumed, from Monday, May 19, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amend ment thereto of Mr. Pearson, and the amend ment to the amendment of Mr. Argue. Mr. Speaker: May I, in courtesy to the hon. member for Hull, whom I am about to recognize, advise him that he had exhausted all but one minute of his time when we con cluded yesterday. (Translation): Mr. Alexis Caron (Hull): Mr. Speaker, even though I have only one minute left to me, I will try to make use of it. Yesterday, during the debate, I spoke of this extraordinary business slowdown which displays at the same time inflationary tend encies. I stated my belief that taxes could be cut down, but I had not quite had my say. The objection will possibly be raised that new tax cuts would increase the danger of inflation. My suggestion is this. Extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures, and the government could take them just as it did during the war. At that time, because of the difficulties of the period, the government fixed prices. To my mind, the source of all this difficulty is instalment buying of luxury goods. I am of the opinion that the govern ment could declare a state of emergency and order that no credit is to be allowed purchasers unless they can pay 25 per cent down. Price control could also be established on food, because if we allow the prices of food to go up, workers will apply for raises in salary, followed by further price increases; thereby creating a vicious circle from which there will be no escape. Mr. Speaker, I am sorry that my time is so short. MAY 20, 1958 249 (Text): Mr. Arthur Maloney (Parkdale): Mr. Speaker, I wish the privilege of adding my name to the long list of those who have spoken before me in tribute to Your Honour on the occasion of your re-election as Speaker of the House of Commons, and to comment upon the significance of the fact that your election to this office was made unanimous by a group of opposition mem bers who experienced such impartial, un biased and fair treatment from Your Honour in the twenty-third parliament of this country. I should like also to extend my congra tulations to the Deputy Speaker and to the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea) for the appointments given to them. I wish also to add my name to the list of those who have already extended their congratulations to the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafreniere) and to the hon. member for the Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) for the excellent con tribution they have made to the debate. I take this occasion on behalf of those of us who have been veterans of this house since June 10 to welcome those members who are newly elected since March 31. If they derive as much enjoyment and pleasure out of ser vice in this place as we have who were elected on June 10 they are about to enjoy an enriching and rewarding experience. They will find also that their participation in the proceedings of this house will not only be welcomed but will be encouraged. I should like to comment upon the great contributions that have been made to par liamentary debate in the last few days by those of the newly-elected members who have already spoken on the address. I want to compliment, too, the 50 representatives from ancient French Canada. Their arrival in this house when it opened last week entitles me I think, to call myself a prophet. I refer to what I said on the occasion of my maiden speech in this house on October 21, 1957. In Hansard of that date, at page 202, I am recorded as having said: At this moment on this side of the house there are not as many representatives of my French Canadian friends as I should like to see, but in the expectation that when the first opportunity pre sents itself this situation will be corrected we are holding in reserve as many as 50 places to accommodate the newcomers. At that time I think there were approx imately nine members from the province of Quebec on this side of the house. I continued: Jn the meantime, it will be the proud privilege of all of us on this side of the house to see to it that the ancient rights and privileges of French Canada are jealously maintained and safeguarded. The Address-Mr. Maloney (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I should now like to quote an excerpt from the first speech I made in this house, on October 21, 1957: At the moment, on this side of the house there are not as many representatives of my French Canadian friends as I should like to see but, in the expectation that when the first opportunity presents itself this situation will be corrected, we are hold ing in reserve as many as fifty places to accommo date the newcomers. This proves that I am almost a prophet. (Text): The success of the Conservative party in the province of Quebec was nothing more than confirmation of what we had always contended, namely that we were the party of all of the people of this country, the party of the Anglo-Saxon, the party of the French and the party of all the other ethnic groups in the country's population. I would like at this stage to extend my warmest congratulations to the newly ap pointed Secretary of State (Mr. Courte manche), and the newly apopinted Minister of Defence Production (Mr. O'Hurley). Their past service in this house fully warrants our confident prediction that their service in these new and important posts will be of a very high calibre indeed. I should also like to express my congratulations to the newly named Minister of Citizenship and Immigra tion (Mrs. Fairclough). Those of us who are on the Conservative side of the house are here today in such large numbers for a variety of reasons, and I do not for a moment intend to attempt to ex haust all those reasons. We are here today in the first place because we served our country in the fold of the Conservative party under the leadership of an inspired and dedi cated Canadian, under the leadership of a Prime Minister whose whole background in his profession and as a parliamentarian, has been dedicated to the rights, under the law, of the average, ordinary, humble people of this country. We are here today because of a record of accomplishment and of promises fulfilled that has not been equalled in so short a time in the history of this country, and we can boast of that record since June 10 last. We are here also because of the prominent and the influential role of youth in the councils of our party. In the twenty-third parliament of this country 35 of our members were under 40 years of age; and while I am not sure as to the accuracy of these statistics, I am under the impression that we have on our side of the house today almost 100 mem bers under the age of 40, which gives to our 250 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Maloney party an air of permanence and to the people of Canada a confidence in the country's future under our leadership. I think we are also here today because of the aggressive steps the government has taken to solve the unemployment problem of this country. I should like to say a word about the matter of unemployment, because some of those from the opposition parties who have spoken in this debate before me have seen fit to speak about the question. There has been much discussion of it both inside and outside the house since early last fall. To hear some hon. members, and others who do not have the privilege of being members of this house, you would think we were in the middle of a depression. To hear others you would almost think they were disappointed with the idea that the government might succeed in getting us out of the situation. I do not think any hon. member, regardless of his political party, can fairly deny that this government has done everything that any government could possibly have done. There has been a reallocation of public works funds in order to apply directly and as quickly as possible the full force of an extra $200 million, in addition to the last calendar year's expenditures, to our economy. No one can deny that the effect of this wise and forceful measure has been most positive and beneficial. In housing alone the result has been to more than double the number of starts in the first quarter of the year, 17,360 units this year compared with 8,410 last year. This stimulus has spread through many other facets of the economy, particularly those closely related to housing. As I say, the results are already evident and will begin to show even more powerfully over the next month or so. I am one of those who believe that the policy-and in some places it has been erected into a policy-of viewing with constant alarm does only disservice to the country. It must be apparent to the members of the house, that the employment situation in Can ada now is certainly much more buoyant than the prophets of doom had led us to expect last winter. At that time, when the Minister of Labour assured the house that he was con fident that the natural buoyancy of our economy would reassert itself, he was shouted down by those who wanted to cry havoc! Today there is every indication that his con fidence has been borne out and that their pessimism besides being destructive has neither been a fair nor accurate analysis of the situation. The most recent dominion bureau of sta tistics figure was 590,000. This is a high figure for unemployment, about 10 per cent of the labour force. But people who say this is a depression figure should keep in mind [Mr. Maloney.] that a conservative estimate of unemployment during the depression period was from 20 per cent to 25 per cent. I do not know what a liberal estimate might be; perhaps con siderably higher. Mr. Martin (Essex East): About 3 per cent. Mr. Maloney: Well, you were never very good at arithmetic. Mr. Pearson: He studied it with the Min ister of Finance. Mr. Martin (Essex East): The Minister of Finance and I were classmates. Mr. Maloney: And he got all the A's. A further dominion bureau of statistics report will be made available within a day or so, and then it will be made evident whether this figure of 590,000 was in truth the peak of the unemployment, as we on this side predicted it was during the recent election. According to registration figures of the national employment service, there has been a decrease in registration since March 13 of more than 171,729, which surely is not sug gestive of a depression. National registration figures are being held up at the moment because of the extension of seasonal benefits for a further six weeks. At the end of that time the current rate of decline of approxi mately 40,000 a week should be even sharper. Thus, while there are still problems facing the economy, the picture is not nearly so dark as some of our friends would have had the people of this country believe in the weeks that preceded the election when, in the press and on television, they made the air ring with their sad lamentations. At this point I should like to offer my own personal tribute to the Minister of Labour for his staunch and steadfast demeanour in the face of adverse, uninformed and unfair criticism. I know that various measures of the government have been criticized on the ground that they would not individually solve unemployment. This point is true and well taken but only as far as it goes. These mea sures must be taken collectively and adjudged in their cumulative effect. I have in mind such measures as bringing forward immense public works expenditures, extending seasonal benefits, stimulating housing and construction and embarking upon large development programs in the north. Surely had these not been undertaken our economy would cer tainly not now be showing the buoyancy which is once again becoming evident. And it is certainly true to say that had the application of a tight money policy and high immigration, sponsored by the former ad ministration, been left in effect, combined with the do-nothing attitude shown by that administration under similar circumstances MAY 20, 1958 251 in 1955 then, Mr. Speaker, the general con dition of the economy at this moment might well have borne out the most dire predictions of the prophets of doom. Another reason to account for the large numbers who sit in support of the government in this house is the doctrine of national unity that was preached and practised by the Con servative party. Our philosophy as pro pounded and developed for the benefit of the people of Canada in the weeks that preceded the election of March 31 was the same for every part of the country. All of us who spoke in support of the party prior to the election had no qualms, no apprehensions about say ing out west what we said in the maritimes, about saying in Ontario what we said in Quebec. That was good Conservative philo sophy, and in following this course we were only adhering to the oldest traditions of our party. I think too we must not ignore the rep resentative character of our party. We were prior to the election and are today able to make boasts such as these, boasts of which we are very proud. Ours is the only party that can boast of having the first Chinese member in the person of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Jung), the first Italian member in the person of the hon. member for Hamilton East (Mr. Martini), the first Danish member; of having appointed the first Icelander and the first native Indian to the Senate; the first cabinet minister who is a woman; the first cabinet minister of Ukrainian racial origin. Indeed, we can boast of six hon. members in the house of Ukrain ian origin, and all sitting on the right side of the house, too. These were boasts of which we were proud. These were boasts which the Conservative party was able to voice from coast to coast. In other words, the governing party in this country today is a party of diversity. It is a party whose inner councils are enriched by the contributions made to them by people of all walks of life, of all races, of all classes and of all creeds. It is only right that the governing party of our country should be a party of diversity because the nation itself is a nation of diversity, and it is never tedious to advert to that diversity and to comment upon it. About two hundred years ago there were by today's standards and in contrast a hand ful of French Canadians numbering only 65,000 or 70,000. The pride of that small group of people in their race, their language, their culture, their religion and their customs was so strong that even though they were cut off from all contact and all national ties with the country of their origin they have The Address-Mr. Maloney over a span of two centuries developed such a firm and lasting national spirit that it has not only permeated the province of Quebec but has gone with French Canadians who have migrated to other parts of Canada and to the United States of America as well, and their number in Canada today has grown to at least five million. On the other hand, the political frame work by which the French Canadian was to see the fulfilment of his ambition to retain his own national identity was not his own invention or handiwork at all. Long before the close of the American revolution people of British stock residing in what is now the United States of America, and to whom we refer historically as united empire loyalists, preferred to give up their established homes and to move north so as to be accorded the privilege of continuing to live under the British crown. They were not in this country very long before they voiced their demands for British institutions, an elective assembly, habeas corpus, Magna Carta, trial by jury and all the other adornments and safeguards of the criminal law to which we are so long accustomed. At that stage in our country's history these two great races were living side by side. It suited the French Canadian because he had the assurance of his right to retain what he was so fiercely anxious to retain, his religion, his language, the traditions of his race. In the case of the English they in most cases had given up established homes and busi nesses to come to a country that at that time had by today's standards nothing to offer except the security of the British crown and British traditions. Over long years of trial and error the two races continued the process of living side by side; and as this process of living together continued there was, all the time, developing in this country a nationality that was distinctively Canadian, a nationality that was making us different from any other country and any other people in the world. But that was not to be the end of the story of this country. More was to come; more was to be added to it. Attracted by this complete lack of uniformity, attracted by this diversity which was our national characteristic were thousands upon thousands of people whose racial origins were to be found in the countries of central and eastern Europe and the Baltic states. They brought with them to this country their ancient cultures, their ancient traditions and customs. Each of them in its turn was to enrich our life, to add to it and to make the Canadian nationality something greater, something that it had not been before. 252 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Maloney When I think of some of these people who have come to this country from central and eastern Europe and the Baltic states; when I stop to think of some of the contribu tions they have made to the development of Canada and the richness they have brought to it, such thoughts as these go through my mind. I think of the people from the Baltic states, and I call to mind their terrible persecution as recently as June, 1940, and the frightful mass deportation of the Baltic peoples. They were taken out of their homes and the security of their countries and deported to the slave labour camps of Siberia. Husbands were separated from wives, families were broken up, brothers and sisters were separated, children were taken from their parents, and all were cruelly transported to slavery in Siberia where they now languish, some living only in the hope that their death will come all too soon. When I think along these lines I think too of the Polish people, of the land of St. Casimir, their patron saint. I think of him as not only the patron saint of that country but one who might well be the patron saint of all who aspire to serve in public life, a saint who was the son of a powerful and noble king, a brother of not one but of two kings. On earth he was a young man who occupied a position of power, authority and influence. It is interesting as one reads his life to note that he used his position of power, authority and influence to help the downtrodden, the disconsolate and the poor. St. Casimir of Poland could well be an example to all of us in the parliament of Canada today who attempt to serve the people of our country, particularly the humblest, most ordinary people of the country. I think too of the contributions that have been made to this country by people from Ukraine, bleeding and oppressed Ukraine, persecuted for centuries, never to lose its ethnic identity. I think of the great mass emigration of Ukrainians to this country in the late nineteenth century, their contribu tion to the growth of the west, to the con struction of the railroads. I think of them coming here to escape economic oppression and settling in the west. I think of their piety so great that before they built their homes they built their churches; and they built their churches even before having ministers and priests to minister to their needs. I think of the great Ukrainians who today fill such important roles in our country; the lawyers, doctors, parliamentarians on every level, and I think how greatly our life here has been enriched by them. [Mr. Maloney.] I think of the Hungarians and the fright ful revolution of 1956 when, after ten years of communist indoctrination, even the youth stood up to fight and die as martyrs against the oppression of the Bolshevik tyrants. I think of people like Cardinal Mindzenty, a living martyr in the cause of freedom. These then are some of the people who have come to our country in recent times and have served to enrich our life and culture. I think too of the Czechs, the Slovaks, the Croatians, the Serbs and the Byelorussians and all those people who now live under the heel of communist domination. These people were all given a message of hope when our Prime Minister, last December in Winnipeg, speaking to an audience of Ukrainians said this: I am thinking, too, tonight of Canadians whose origins lie in countries which are likewise unfree to pursue their own aspirations-the Baltic states. eastern European countries such as Poland, Hungary and Czechoslovakia, which live in the shadow of tyranny. Never will we abandon the hope that justice will be done, that the irrepres sible forces of human freedom will triumph. He went on to say: As a guarantee of good faith if the U.S.S.R. would show the sincerity of its protestations for peace, if it would grant free elections in those countries under its captive control and would free the untold numbers who are in slave camps, then the free world could move forward to early discus sions designed to ameliorate the causes of discord and suspicion. These people are teaching us a lesson. They are reminding us of the potential dangers that lie ahead. I can do no better in describing what I now mean than to use the words of the Secretary of State for External Affairs when he spoke a few months ago in Toronto to an audience of Lithuanians. He said this: From the sorrow of those whose freedom has been submerged, from the tragedy of those who are forced to live under serfdom by a government not of their own choice, we have derived a new determination, a sadder but wiser sense of direc tion in our own lives. Ever mindful of the fate of subjugated peoples, we know that in the enjoy ment of our liberties, we must never become complacent, self-satisfied or apathetic. Our democ racy is a virile and creative system, and its spirit is nowhere more alive than in the hearts of those who know only too well the cruel realities of oppression. The election campaign which ended on March 31 was a great adventure in democracy in which all of us here present had the privilege of participating. I can recall numerous occasions when representatives of opposing political parties were invited to mingle with these people in their halls on their national days or to commemorate with them some great event in their history. I can recall how Liberals, Conservatives, and C.C.F. MAY 20, 1958 253 used to foregather there under circumstances that were completely nonpolitical. When we spoke to such audiences they were witnessing something that was unknown in their home land, the representatives of opposing political parties standing side by side. We, in our turn, we who aspired to public life, by being present with them, were reminded of the need to recall the words of the Secretary of State for External Affairs, never to become indifferent or apathetic. When we came to their meetings and joined with them in their national celebrations we were reminded of the real purpose of our democracy and of the great election campaign in which we were engaged. We were re minded of the greatness of our democratic system, with its two mighty arms, the one to govern and the other to oppose; one charged with the responsibility of administer ing the affairs of the country, the other charged with the responsibility of holding that administration up to the bright glare of criticism, examination and scrutiny,-both arms equally important, equally indispensable. It gave to all of us now on the Conservative side of the house who had the privilege of seeing such things a great respect and a great admiration for those who fulfil the important role of opposition. It recalled to our minds words this house has already heard from the Prime Minister, spoken first in days when he was in the opposition and which he reiterated as Prime Minister of the country. When speaking to the Empire club in Toronto in 1949 he said: "Parliament will only remain the guardian of free institutions as long as His Majesty's loyal opposition is fully responsible and effective in the discharge of its functions." Those were words of inspiration to us all. We on this side of the house, numerically more powerful I suppose than any govern ment in the history of the country, are very sensitive to the importance of the role of the left arm of democracy in this place. It is not judged by its quan~ity. It is not judged numerically. It is judged by the quality of the contribution it makes in fulfilling the role of opposition. We have attempted so far to demonstrate our respect for the oppo sition. We have announced that it is our intention to appoint an opposition member to chair the important committee on public accounts. We made no effort whatever to prevent recognition, as a separate group in this house, of the handful of members of the C.C.F. These are some indications of the respect and admiration we have for an oppo sition that fulfils its proper role. In conclusion, may I say that we on all sides of this house can face the future with the mandate of the people fresh in our minds, The Address-Mr. Houck. in the confident hope that working together and each fulfilling our respective functions we will assist in solving the problems that now face the country and look to the future which we all know to be vast and limitless. Mr. W. L. Houck (Niagara Falls): Mr. Speaker, it is an honoured custom not only in this house but in all legislatures to con gratulate the Speaker. I think it is a good custom. I want to say to you, Mr. Speaker, and I am not boasting, that I have had a lot of experience under various speakers. I have the utmost respect for you because of your experience. I have always appreciated your friendship and your leadership, espe cially in the last parliament when at times difficult circumstances arose and you ruled in a very fine way. I want to say as well, Mr. Speaker, that I think you have the qualities that make for a good speaker. You certainly have the ability. You have integrity, and you have leadership ability. You have another quality that I think should be pres ent in every speaker, and that is not only the personal appearance but the good looks that go with a good speaker. I want to say, on behalf of the good people of Niagara Falls, and they are all good people, that we do appreciate the splendid work of our Speaker when he served as a commis sioner on the Rainbow bridge at Niagara Falls. He accomplished a very fine job. I should like also to congratulate the Deputy Speaker as well as the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea) on their appointments. I had the privilege of serving with the hon. member for Spadina for many years in the provincial legislature. I knew, from the experience I gained with him then, that he had many fine qualities and would some time take a prominent part in leadership in another place. I should like as well, Mr. Speaker, because it is an honoured custom, to congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I am not a lawyer, and I am thankful for that, but if I were a legal man I would say that these hon. members made an excellent job of a poor case. I could not help but notice as I entered this house, and I presume most members who were here in the last parliament noticed the same thing, the many new faces we have with us. I must say they are exceptionally good-looking as well. However, it did make me feel a little at home to see the faces of those with whom I had been associated in the provincial legislature. First there was the genial member for Glengarry-Prescott (Mr. Villeneuve). While he served as a member 254 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Houck in Toronto he performed a major job and I realized then he was a valuable member. He served as chairman of some of the important committees and performed a splendid job. Then, Mr. Speaker, I had the honour of servirig with the hon. member for La nark (Mr. Doucett), that good-looking and most eligible bachelor in the house at the present time. I want to say to him, if it will be any incentive, that if he wants to come to Niagara Falls on his honeymoon I will see that he has the honeymoon suite at the hotel with our compliments. I served also with the hon. member for York South (Mr. Beech). I always appreciated the definite interest he took in the problems of the re turned men. He did a very splendid job in that respect. Now, Mr. Speaker, perhaps to bring it a little closer home to my own party, I may say that I served also with our whip, the hon. member for Cochrane (Mr. Habel), who I think is doing a splendid job as whip of this great party. I have listened with great interest to many hon. members tell about their own ridin'gs. What can I say about Niagara Falls? Certainly everybody in the Dominion of Canada, yes in the whole world, knows some thing about Niagara Falls. I would only be wasting the time of this house if I were to try to say something about the falls itself. As I have said previously, and I say it truly again today, we are mighty proud of Niagara Falls, but in no way are we jealous or selfish in any respect. We want to share it with the rest of the world. We are, of course, known as the honeymoon centre of the world; but at the same time we do not hold ourselves responsible for some of those people who unfortunately get fed up on life, come back to the falls and use it as a jump ing off place. I know also that many hon. members, es pecially the new ones, are from distant places in our dominion and, because of circum stances, are forced to spend their week ends in 'Ottawa. I should like to say to them this morning, Mr. Speaker, and I say it sincerely indeed, that I cordially invite them to come to Niagara Falls on any week end. It is only a matter of a 12-hour trip by train. I will see to it, through our good mayor, that they will be royally treated and that the city will be at their command. If perchance they run afoul of the law and are forced to spend a few unpleasant hours in that terrible jail we have in Niagara Falls, I will gladly send them down some of the old Hansards to read so they may feel at home. Seriously, may I say that I think they not only would enjoy themselves but that the trip would be most profitable. Not only could they [Mr. Houck.) view our wonderful scenery but they could go through the new Sir Adam Beck power plant and see the new open cut hydro canal, something which would be well worth their while. I know a great many people are talk ing about the beauty of Niagara Falls in blos som time, but I want to assure hon. members of this house that Niagara Falls is in full dress at any time of the year. I therefore want to say again that hon. members are invited to come down and see the greatest place in the world. I should now like to touch briefly on two matters to which I have made reference on two previous occasions. My first point is with regard to the great obstruction to auto mobile traffic crossing the Welland ship canal which exists at Homer, where the raising and lowering of the bridge impedes the constant flow of traffic. The condition there is greatly aggravated during the summer months by reason of the tourist traffic from the United States proceeding across the river at Fort Erie and at Niagara Falls, and the traffic proceeding from Canada into the United States. Many and long delays occur at this point. One would not have to be an engineer to realize that a permanent cure could be effected only by building an overhead bridge or a tunnel at this point. I believe a very practical suggestion has been made, namely to permit three lanes of traffic across the bridge at busy times. This traffic could be electrically controlled. I think that procedure would avoid a great deal of the congestion at the busier ends of the bridge and would do a great deal to alleviate the trouble that exists at the present time. I have fears-and I am not alone in this respect-that a serious accident will occur at this point and that loss of life might result. I am sure something could be worked out to solve this difficulty. By actual count, Mr. Speaker, the bridges are up one quarter of the time or 6 hours out of every 24 hours during the shipping season. This situation affects the economy of our district. It is a nuisance to our in habitants, and it costs them real money. The local taxpayers must maintain duplicate fire fighting services on both sides of the canal, and they must maintain sewage disposal units on each side of the canal as well. I say without fear of contradiction that the bottleneck to traffic at the Homer bridge is one of the worst in our country. I would be remiss, Mr. Speaker, if I did not say something pertaining to this problem which has been so well discussed on previous occasions by the hon. member for Lincoln and the hon. member for Welland. I would remind the Minister of Public Works and MAY 20, 1958 255 the Minister of Transport that last year through the ports of Niagara Falls and Fort Erie between 3,500,000 and 4,000,000 tourist permits of all classes were issued. On the 4th of July week end at Fort Erie alone, including the four days from July 1 to July 4, over 150,000 cars crossed that one bridge alone. On the 4th of July there were issued at the Fort Erie bridge alone over 13,000 tourist permits. It might be of in terest to hon. members of the house to know that last year at the port of Niagara Falls, 2,214,721 cars crossed and at the Port of Fort Erie 2,108,502 cars entered Canada. We are the greatest tourist receiving centre in Canada, Mr. Speaker, and I think we de serve some consideration in that respect. I often step into the various tourist bureaux at Niagara Falls, which are controlled by the provincial government, and they tell me that one of the complaints they receive from returning tourists-and it is one of the most serious complaints-is the tie-up at the Ho mer bridge and at the Burlington cut-off. I am thankful to the Minister of Public Works and glad to know, according to the Globe and Mail of this morning, that next fall that trouble will be alleviated at Burlington. I am not exaggerating, Mr. Speaker, when I say that especially on a holiday week end -and it will be understood that when the bridge goes up for navigation, shipping has preference over all other types of traffic if more than one boat goes through, if per haps there are two or three of them, I have seen with my own eyes motor cars two abreast extending all the way from St. Catharines right through to Niagara Falls, a distance of 10 miles, waiting for the bridge to go down. Certainly with the advent of the St. Lawrence seaway this congestion is going to be worse than ever. I would therefore suggest to the minister that perhaps the most economical and surely the quickest way to alleviate the situation would be to build a tunnel under this canal. This could be done easily in the winter months, and in a comparatively short time when the canal is dewatered. I hope relief will be given to us in this matter. I know that clergymen, lawyers, doctors or any others who have speaking engagements either at Niagara Falls or at St. Catharines always allow at least half an hour leeway in case they are tied up at this bridge. May I say this seriously indeed, because I know the Conservative hon. member for Lincoln is vitally interested in this matter as well as the hon. member for Welland and myself. I know it is not only our hope but it is the sincere hope and prayer of all mem bers of this house that the hon. member for The Address-Mr. Houck Lincoln will soon be restored to health and have the privilege of meeting with us again. At the same time I want to pay my respects to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigra tion (Mrs. Fairclough) and the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Nowlan) for the very fine officers they have at the ports of Niagara Falls and Fort Erie. They naturally are the first people to greet tourists; and once you leave a good taste in the tourist's mouth upon his entrance to Canada he is going to carry it with him all the way through his trip. In my long years of experience in public life, Mr. Speaker, I never once have had a com plaint from a tourist about being handled in the wrong way by either a customs officer or an immigration officer. I therefore think we can well be proud of these civil servants who are working at those two border points. I well remember, when I was on the gov ernment side of the house, how the govern ment now in power acted when they were in opposition, especially the Minister of Finance, who I thought made good speeches pertaining to the excise tax on automobiles. They were very quick indeed to complain about this tax at a time when it was a sensible measure against inflation. Now that inflation is not a serious problem I say that the special excise tax on cars is not necessary, and that it should be completely eliminated. The present government reduced the tax-and I give them credit for that action-from 10 per cent to 7½ per cent. Now the economic situation justifies a change, and that tax should be abolished. This step certainly would reduce the price of cars and the full reduction should be passed on to the consumer. If this were done it would save the Canadian public about $60 million a year. In the United States alone the automobile industry is at least a $50 billion industry; and proportionately, accord ing to our size, it is in about the same posi tion in Canada. In the United States one out of every five industries has some connection with the automobile industry, and one out of every seven employed men has something to do with this industry. We can well see what a great lift it would be to our economy if this industry could receive some assistance. Certainly the abolition of this tax would in crease sales because of lower prices, which would in turn stabilize employment in the production of Canadian cars and in the sales agencies across our great dominion. As a result the treasury would benefit by higher revenues from the tax on profits of these businesses. I think we have a lack of economic realism not only with respect to this particular tax but with respect to many others, which has 256 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Houck had the result of slowing down business and multiplying the cost of production operating generally to the detriment of the nation's economic welfare. The very jobs of countless workers depend on the ownership of a motor vehicle. For them an excise tax on cars is almost the equivalent of a licence to work. For most city dwellers that excise tax is the near equivalent to a licence to get into the country, while for rural dwellers this tax is a near equivalent to a licence on necessary trips to the shopping centres. I do not believe there is any virtue in a tax merely because it produces revenue, but certainly there is a fundamental virtue in a fiscal system which broadens the tax base and at the same time produces necessary revenue at lower rates. We must consider the fact that in Canada manufacturing as a whole provides well over 2 million jobs. Of this total the automobile industry provides almost 400,000, in short about one job in every ten or eleven of all the jobs in our country. This figure does not include garages, service stations and suppliers such as the textile and steel mills, tire makers, etc. So I say that in a general sense the employees of the motor car industry are recruited in two principal ways. They are hired as either skilled or unskilled persons. The unskilled workers go through the process of training and in most cases become specialists in some type of job. The skilled man is put on the type of work he does best, and remains there. Another aspect of the motor car industry employment field worth emphasizing is the fact that the entire automobile or truck is not manufactured at the motor car plant proper. A high percentage of the content is built by smaller industrial organizations known as suppliers in widely scattered in dustrial towns, and it is estimated that there are several hundred such suppliers. There fore the opportunity to link up with some phase of the motor car business is almost unlimited. Other important branches of the automotive business are the sales and service fields. Every large industrial concern has an extensive sales organization. The man who aspires to be a car salesman in all prob ability will find his entry into the motor car business at some city or town far from the plant. He will be an employee of some dealer or distributing branch. Judging from the fact that there are well over 5,000 automobile dealers, 15,000 in dependent garages and 17,000 service stations throughout this great dominion, it is quite obvious that the sale and service of motor vehicles offers employment in a wide field of occupations, including salesmen, accountants, [Mr. Houck.] partsmen, timekeepers and service managerlj. I could go on at some length, but I am urging again that this government take some recogni tion of these facts and completely eliminate the excise tax. I want to say a few words now about the recession. I think one of the most remarkable factors in this recession is that the people who are employed are as reluctant about the spending of money as are those who are unemployed. Yet the people who are un employed cannot hope to get back to work if those who are emplo.ved do not engage in purchasing. I think the psychological moment is at hand when the federal, pro vincial and local groups should combine their efforts to uplift our economy. There is no doubt in my mind that the consumers who have the money but not the confidence to buy should be encouraged to make home improvements and obtain the goods and services they need. Certainly if the employed people are hesitant to indulge in purchasing, more and more people will be out of work. There is not much point in letting our na tion reach a depression because so many thousands of people are out of work. It is our duty as members of this house to try to help the economy instead of permitting it to grow worse. The big battery of anti-recession pro posals produced not only by the political parties but by other organizations ought to be judged at least in part by the answer to one question: how soon can these proposals be brought into effect? Certainly this gov ernment should use every incentive to spur consumers and businessmen alike to spend. This is not a matter of theory but one of economic reality. It does not matter whether we like or dislike heavy government spend ing; what counts is that governments cannot move quickly in actually undertaking public works. Some projects must be subject to agreement among the various levels of gov ernment; others require the acquisition of land and rights of way, or require drafting, designing and engineering. The real job creating effects of public works projects do not appear until many, many months after the decision to go ahead has been taken. Consumers and businessmen, on the other hand, can start spending quickly. Few house holds in this country exist without unfilled wants; few businesses exist where there is not some plan for growth which could be put into effect if depreciation provisions were favourable. Certainly the fundamental fact of government spending must be that it can only do a little about a recession. The real thing that counts is what people do with their money. It is my firm belief that great assistance could be given by this government to bring MAY 20, 'issa 257 down the price of food in Canada. With 500,000 people out of work I do not see how they can pay for the food they need at present prices. During the depression of the thirties food was cheap; a person could almost live on $5 a week at that time. The situation today is different; with thousands out of work and the cost of living sky high everyone is asking the question, "When is this government going to act?" I would suggest this government give con sideration to a gradual five year cut in corporate and individual taxes to make more money available for investment and industrial expansion. This would create a lot more jobs, and certainly millions of our dollars could be funneled into the private economy through reductions in all brackets of individual income taxes. The prescription for ending a business slump is simply to sell more goods and get production lines humming again. I think one of the basic problems facing the economy is that of moving more goods from the factory to the home. Certainly production capacity has increased at a faster pace than has con sumption. I am glad to say that industry, if I may use the vernacular, is putting the screws on its salesmen to bring consumption up to meet production. Not only automobile dealers but other industries should start going out look ing for customers rather than waiting for customers to come to them. When we consider that 42 per cent of our sheet steel production goes into the automobile industry we can well see that if that business were given a lift it would indeed mean a pick up in the basic steel industry, which in turn would mean a lift to our entire economy. We must never forget that the customer is king. Give him what he wants and needs and he will spend the money to buy it. Certainly the time has arrived when people with money in their pockets are tired of being ignored or kicked around by salesmen, and they now want to be wooed as customers. Too many of our businessmen and salesmen have grown soft and have forgotten how to sell in the post-war period when the seller was king. There is nothing wrong with our economy that a little old fashioned selling will not correct. It is about time the fog and smoke was cleared from our minds and we realized that unemployment has been increasing while national production was decreasing. Let me repeat that if we are going to have a tax cut I think it should be one which will stimulate business and employment. No temporary cut in federal income taxes would put more money in circulation, because most people would not spend it. One of the main causes of our recession today, in my opinion, 57071-3- 17 The Address-Mr. Houck is a buyers' strike. A general price cut would trigger consumer purchasing, which in turn would stimulate business expansion. Cer tainly we cannot say we are out of the woods at the present time, but it would help a great deal if business people would stop talking about their problems and get out and do a job of selling. A tax cut would do more to strengthen our economy at this time than a spending binge that could only lead to a hangover of debt and inflation. However, a tax cut will not do the job unless it is the right kind of tax cut. It must be designed to put money in the hands of investors and job creators as well as in the hands of consumers. It will not do the job if it is used simply to provide a popular political hand-out. It can succeed in its purpose only if it is designed to stimulate more production and more jobs for the Canadian people. I believe we should have a change in our whole national attitude and approach to this matter. Confident action is needed at the present time, not just confident talk to meet the grave challenge to economic strength and leadership. False optimism has no place in our world today. We cannot talk ourselves into a boom any more than we can talk ourselves into a bust, but we can use our heads and decide now whether the urge to buy is sound for our economy and for indi viduals as well as being healthy for our country. My own suggestions for action to counteract this recession would be to first extend and permanently raise unemployment insurance benefits to make purchasing power available, to raise income tax exemptions as far as possible, to stimulate public and private construction, to increase defence spending and to eliminate the 7½ per cent federal excise tax on automobile purchases. It is useless to try to explain to the unemployed that this is a recession and not a depression. To them it is a full-fledged depression, and the most vicious thing about an economic downturn is that it feeds on itself like a snowball rolling down a hill. It is easy to stop before it gains momentum and size, but if you let it get rolling it can flatten you. Experimenting, debating and sitting tight are forms of wishful thinking, and as dan gerous as waiting for a cobra to strike. Action must be taken to apply the quickest solution possible of achievement, and that is to put money in the hands of the people who lost their purchasing power through no fault of their own. This can be done by increasing unemployment insurance payments to an amount near the breadwinner's full earnings, not just to the welfare level. Under those 258 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Houck circumstances the extension of payments is like giving a patient half the dosage. The patient does not die and does not get well but lingers on until complications make a cure impossible. The effect of raising jobless benefits would make adequate purchasing power available to the economy. A small cut in our present income tax system is as out dated as the nickel cigar. It would seem to me that economic justice could be better served and the problem of the unemployed better resolved if a little more attention were paid by our top govern ment officials to their plight and their unequal battle against the ever-diminishing dollar rather than for the officials to be continually listening to the advice of our great industria lists and the so-called politicians telling them what is good for the man on the street. One has only to spend an hour or two in a supermarket and watch a harried housewife trying to stretch her fast depleting dollar to learn something that might be useful to him and to the country at large. I wish to refer again to the remarks made by the previous speaker in this debate, a very fine lawyer from Toronto, considered one of the best criminal lawyers in the province of Ontario. I wish to remind him of the fact that the vast majority of new Cana dians and representatives of various ethnic groups to whom he referred were brought to Canada by this great Liberal party. I certainly hope when that day of days arrives which all the people in Canada are looking forward to, namely budget day, that the Minister of Finance (Mr. Fleming) will announce that the excise tax on automobiles has been completely eliminated. I doubt if any session of parliament has had more re sponsibility placed on its shoulders than has this parliament. What we its members do not only in regard to international affairs but with regard to national affairs as well will have much effect upon the lives of our people this year, next year and for generations to come. We will have to guard our freedom with all the zeal possible, and we must at all costs protect our economic stability. Much will depend on what sort of effort we put forth toward achieving these objectives. One thing is sure, Mr. Speaker. We will have to decide whether we are going to climb the long high road to freedom or stumble down communism's dead end street. It is my sincere hope and I think the hope of all hon. members that our accomplishments here in parliament will do much to help Canada maintain its place among the nations of the world, because under 22 years of Liberal government this great dominion of ours grew to be a nation outstanding and respected by [Mr. Houck.] all other nations. If we conscientiously per form the task before us we should be able to throw back our shoulders and throw out our chests with pride in satisfaction with a job well done. Mr. Nicholas Mandziuk (Marquette): Mr. Speaker, I should like at the outset to extend to you my heartiest congratulations on your election to the high office of Deputy Speaker, and to join with others in expressing my respect and confidence in you to handle the duties of your office fairly and justly. I also wish to extend the same sentiments to Mr. Speaker and the Clerks of this honourable assembly. In offering my modest contribution to the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne I feel obliged to extend my sincere congratulations to the mover of the address, the hon. member for Quebec-Mont morency (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder, the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen). It was a pleasure to listen to the speeches of these two hon. members and to note their complete mastery of the subject matter and their knowledge of our national problems. I wish to point out the distinction the hon. member for Yukon has earned for himself by having to contest three election cam paigns within a period of nine months. This experience has not been duplicated by any other hon. member of this house past or present. Further, I cannot restrain myself from describing to this house some characteristics which distinguish and set apart the constit uency of Marquette which I have the honour to represent and serve. On checking back into history I find that the first election of a member to the House of Commons from Marquette was held in 1871, a year after Manitoba joined confederation. Two gentle men, Angus McKay and James Lunch, con tested the riding each receiving 282 votes. The returning officer did not then as now have a casting vote and both contenders high tailed to Ottawa. The House of Commons after some deliberation handed the matter of representation of the riding to the com mission for privileges. The commission ruled that both men should be declared elected. Both were sworn in, but by the time the technicalities were overcome the federal elec tion of 1872 occurred so that neither took his seat in the House of Commons, nor did either gentleman run in the federal election of that year. Marquette has another distinction, that of having the great Canadian, Sir John A. Mac donald, represent it for four years from 1878 to 1882. After suffering defeat at the hands MAY 20, 1958 259 The Address-Mr. Mandziuk of the electors in Kingston Sir John Macdonald came to Marquette, where received an acclamation. A. hardships, but they gave a start to and built he the foundations which resulted in the present achievements in the constituency. Permit me, Mr. Speaker, to keep on boast ing about this wonderful constituency, which claims another honour, that of having within its boundaries a summer resort second to none in Canada. I do not know how many hon. members are aware of this, but we Manitobans certainly know about it. One hundred and twenty-five miles north of the United States boundary, in the Riding Mountain chain, on a broad plateau 2,200 feet above sea level, is Clear lake, a body of water nine miles long and about two miles wide. On the southern shore of that lake nestles the townsite of Wasagaming, being the Indian word for "clear water". This summer resort, known as Clear Lake, was established by order in council in 1929 and was officially opened to the public on July 26, 1933, 25 years ago. Thus this year it is celebrating its twenty-fifth birthday with a large and very interesting program under the auspices of the local chamber of commerce. Just to give you an idea, Mr. Speaker, of the popularity of this summer resort, 630,189 people went through its gates in 1957. Of those, 27,535 were our friends from across the border, that is American tourists, bring ing along with them American dollars. The surrounding forest reserve abounds in large game such as deer, elk-as a matter of fact one of the largest herds of elk grazes on the slopes of this forest reserve--moose and bear, and there is an enclosure for buffalo which attracts a lot of visitors. The lake itself is most picturesque, and its natural attractions are supplemented by facilities for the enjoyment of outdoor life and recreation. Its buildings are designed to harmonize with the surroundings and it has unsurpassed facilities for swimming, boating, fishing, lawn bowling and golfing. Children's playground facilities are also abundant. I therefore wish to extend an invitation to as many hon. members as could come to spend a pleasant holiday at this summer resort of Clear Lake in my riding in Manitoba. If you come once I feel sure you will have the urge to repeat your visit. My constituency is strictly rural and cannot boast about large cities or industries, but it can boast about being the home of the best farmers in Manitoba. Oh, yes; one can meet in Marquette Canadians of many racial origins. The first pioneers to this riding were of Anglo-Saxon stock, and these still form the bulk of the population. Some came from the British Isles and others from Ontario, trekking into this central Manitoba wood land. They experienced the usual pioneer 57071-3-17½ Next in numbers to come to my riding were the Ukrainians from south central Europe. They came in contact with Anglo-Saxons, Mr. Speaker, a people with different language, different customs, different culture and differ ent political background. The Ukrainians had migrated to Canada in search of land, freedom and opportunity for themselves and their children. They found more than they hoped for but the adjustment to the new ways of life was long and painful. The Anglo Saxons gave the newcomers a helping hand. With them they shared the pioneer hardships, and in spite of early suspicion of each other they soon became good neighbours and as such they became dependent upon each other. About the same time people from other lands came into my riding, namely French men, Poles, Scandinavians and a sprinkling of every race in Europe. Each racial group at first tried to establish a community life of its own, Mr. Speaker; but today I am proud to say-and I speak with authority because I have lived in the pioneer period and ex perienced the changes in western Canada as well as in Marquette-all these people have become integrated into one Canadian com munity. The differences in language, customs and habits have been overcome. Suspicion of each other has melted away, and before our very eyes one can see the birth of a young Canadian race. Each race is contributing the best of its cultural riches to the altar of new Canadianism, and one sees the Canadian of the future embodying the best characteristics of each race. I am happy to note that this is evident not only in my riding but through out Canada, Mr. Speaker. In the meantime each racial group, while adopting the English language as the basis of common understanding, treasures its own lan guage and customs, realizing that if they lose those treasures they will have nothing to place on the altar of true Canadianism. There fore, Mr. Speaker, I consider it a privilege and an honour to represent such people. Marquette is an agricultural constituency dotted with villages and towns whose very existence depends on the welfare of the farmer. For more reasons than one they voted for me on March 31 last. The efforts of the government, under the leadership of the Prime Minister, to give the western Canadian producer a larger share . of the national in come, and its performance during the last parliament proved to western Canada and to my constituents that the Progressive Con servative party keeps its election promises. During the March campaign the opposition. 260 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Mandziuk both Liberals and Socialists, minimized the efforts of our government; but the voters on March 31 gave unqualified approval of what had been done and, by so doing, expressed confidence in our party and in our leader ship. Hence a full contingent of 14 members from Manitoba are on the government side of the house. The western farmer rejected those self appointed champions of agriculture and in dustry. He rejected those who shed crocodile tears over the plight of the farmer but who strenuously opposed every measure intro duced by this government for the benefit of the farmer during the short session of the twenty-third parliament. Those who fought against cash advances, those who slandered and denounced the agricultural stabilization bill, that famous Bill No. 237, received an answer to their heroic efforts at the polls on March 31. While no one interested in price supports expected that it would be a cure-all, yet most people felt that it was a step in the right direction and, under proper adminis tration, would improve the conditions of Canadian agriculture. Those in this house who try to perform a post mortem on why the Progressive Con servative party won such a sweeping victory at the polls on March 31 would do better to make some soul-searching reflections on why they lost the confidence of the Canadian people. Our Prime Minister, while speaking in the maritimes during the last campaign, said that in ordinary life we judge people by the way they keep their promises, and it is not any different in politics. We listened with interest to the speech from the throne, and I feel that the proposed legislation it outlined is welcomed by the Canadian people. We are happy to note that greater efforts are being made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce to sell our agricultural and fisheries products. According to reports Canada is exporting more wheat than in the corresponding period last year while the wheat exports of our competitors have fallen off. This is an indication of good salesman ship on the part of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. It also indicates that the attendance of the Prime Minister at the London conference last June and the sending of a trade mission to Britain are paying off. The price stabilization act passed by the last parliament and in operation since May 5 is receiving widespread approval. Setting a guaranteed price on a product enables the primary producer to plan his operations without risk of falling prices while the prod uct is being prepared for market. I am pleased to note, Mr. Speaker, that several amendments will be introduced to [Mr. Mandziuk.J the cash advance legislation. Although it was the best piece of legislation placed on the statute books during the last session, certain weaknesses have showed up in its operation and amendments will be welcomed. This type of legislation was asked for by the grain producers for a number of years, to which pleas the former Liberal administra tion turned a deaf ear. It took the Progres sive Conservative party to bring it into force. I have heard nothing but praise for it from farmers, merchants and businessmen, includ ing bank managers. Since it went into force collections have been better. Yet, like all new legislation, weaknesses have shown up in its operation. Among others, may I be permitted to mention the inconvenience and delay in the obtaining of a cash advance by a tenant farmer whose landlord does not reside in the district. Second, there is the inability to obtain a cash advance by the farmer who has shipped a carload of malt barley, although he has sufficient grain in storage to warrant a cash advance. Another weak ness is the deduction made in the case of the farmer who delivers grain for the pur chase of registered seed. I hope, therefore, these weaknesses will be taken care of by proper amendments as anticipated in the speech from the throne. I have no doubt that the Minister of Agriculture, who has this matter under consideration, will bring in such amendments. The anticipated amendment of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act will be welcomed by the farmers of the western prairies generally, including those in my constituency. In its present form the act has proved highly unsatisfactory, and I hope the amendments will remedy the situation. I might suggest that the general feeling in the country is that this legislation should be completely rewritten or repealed in its entirety when some form of crop insurance is put in force to replace it. Our small businessmen no doubt will wel come the idea of the establishment of a small business section within the adminis trative machinery of the government, as the unhealthy state of the agricultural industry has affected them no less than those upon whom they depend, the agricultural pro ducers. I wish to commend the government for appointing the Bracken commission to investigate the problem of box car alloca tion to the grain elevators of western Canada. It is hoped that the commission's findings and their implementation will remedy the grievances of the western producers. MAY 20, 1958 261 Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena): Mr. Speaker, before I proceed with my formal remarks I should like, as all other members have done so far, to extend my personal congratulations to the hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr Michener) on his unanimous election as Speaker of the House of Commons. This is an indication of our individual and personal sup port arising from his ability and fairness in presiding over the House of Commons. Hon. members may recall that during the last parliament I made some reference to the office of Speaker and suggested that it should be a permanent position, as did the Prime Minister some time ago. I am still of that opinion. I believe we could quite properly adopt the proposal I made during the last parliament, that the Speaker of the House of Commons should not have to stand for elec tion in a particular constituency but rather should be elected by the membership of the House of Commons, those members forming the constituency that he would represent. This would permit every constituency in Canada to have someone representing them sitting in the House of Commons with a voice and a vote, someone able to take part vocally in presenting their problems and ideas and to make suggestions as to solutions. Just prior to the calling of the election in Manitoba the premier of that province made a similar proposal regarding the appointment of a permanent speaker for the legislature of that province. He also undertook to institute certain legislative changes that would be required. I hope we will undertake to do something similar so that in the years to come we may have a permanent Speaker established here as in the House of Commons in England, one who would not be connected with politics and who would be able to discharge more fairly the duties of that office. At one o'clock the house took recess. AFTER RECESS The house resumed at 2.30 p.m. Mr. Howard: Mr. Speaker, it seems a rather hollow effort to be participating in this debate when there are so many empty seats. The cabinet is represented by one hon. member, but unfortunately I have no intention of deal ing with the department that comes under his jurisdiction. I should like, however, to make a reference to the $1,185 million public works program which was announced during the election campaign-coincidentally during the election campaign, I might add. All I could find of this $1,185 million that will apply to The Address-Mr. Howard the constituency of Skeena, which incidentally covers an area almost one-third the size of the entire province of British Columbia, is an item for $1.5 million for one project and some smaller amounts for other smaller pro jects. I am going to suggest, therefore, that the Department of Public Works dust off some of the files that are hiding in the back rooms, and they will find countless suggestions and re quests for much needed public works pro jects in that particular riding, ranging all the way from major items like federal build ings in the newly developed community of Kitimat and in Prince Rupert to such things as small wharves on the lakes in the interior part of the riding. One thing that could be placed in the public works program of this federal government, and something which has been advocated by a number of people for many years as well as by the government of British Columbia, is the construction of a second trans-Canada highway. It has been advocated that the fed eral government and the provincial govern ments of the western provinces enter into an agreement for the building of such a route. This project was discussed at some length during the election. We know it was a major item in the election campaign of the Liberal party. We know also that same party, when they were in office, turned a deaf ear to the proposals for just such a second trans-Canada highway. The proposal would be on a 50-50 basis, somewhat similar to the financial agree ment that exists now between the provinces and the federal government with respect to the present trans-Canada highway. If this vision of opening up the north is to be brought to some realization this is one way in which it can be done; or this could be complementary to the opening up of the northern part of Canada. At the moment there are sections of highway along that route that have been built by provincial govern ments, but they are not connected and many of the portions through the central part of Canada could not be properly classed as high ways at all. They are mere backwoods trails following some old logging roads built by the logging companies in that part of the country years ago. Until such time as the federal government is willing to participate with the provinces in building highways, especially cross-country highways, the pos sibility of developing the north is going to be hindered. I hope this government will undertake to review the position taken by the past Liberal administration with respect to these proposals, and will arrange to enter into an agreement with the provinces for the building of such a trans-Canada highway on a 50-50 basis at the earliest possible moment. 262 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Howard All our problems are not domestic, Mr. Speaker. There are some rather serious ones in the international field. I should like to expand upon the thoughts expressed by the hon. member for Kootenay West and the hon. member for Vancouver East the other day, and in doing so to deal with the question of formal and diplomatic recognition of what we call red China, the people's republic of China or the mainland colony of China, what ever you want to call it. During the last ses sion the Southam Press conducted a poll amongst members of the house asking their opinion as to diplomatic and formal recog nition of red China. The results of that poll were published in the newspapers which the Southam Press have under their jurisdiction. Among the representatives in the present parliament who answered that poll as to whether or not we should formally recognize red China, on the Conservative side of the house I can recall that both the hon. member for Vancouver South and the hon. member for Victoria expressed their agreement with the recognition of red China. The attitude of the C.C.F. is well known and has been expressed a number of times over the years. We have been in the past, and still are, in complete agreement with the formal and diplomatic recognition of China. The Leader of the Opposition while he did not express himself quite so clearly on this subject when he was the Secretary of State for External Affairs, nevertheless did express himself clearly when he was relieved of that position. If he expresses the attitude of the Liberal party, then we can logically assume that the Liberal party is in favour of extending this diplomatic recognition. There is one group in the house, Mr. Speaker, whose attitude is not clear. The Prime Minister has placed comments on Hansard concerning the attitude of the gov ernment, but I still submit that attitude is not clear. Probably I should refer to the comments of the Prime Minister when this question was dealt with in the house in November of last year. He was answering some questions on the orders of the day and at page 654 of Hansard for November 1, 1957, he said: The attitude of this government Is unchanged In that direction.- He was speaking of formal recognition. -and until such time as the people's government, the communist government of China, expiates its wrongdoing under international law there certainly w!ll be no justification for the granting of recog nition as we see It. Then o:f course there was some discussion and inquiry as to what the word "expiates" meant. We were told to look in the dictionary. I am going to suggest that the attitude [Mr. Howard.] expressed then by the Prime Minister was nothing but mere subterfuge to cover the real reason this government refuses to take this logical and necessary step. The answer given by the Prime Minister was not the real reason. Canada's position now, as it was under the Liberal administration, is merely one of following and aping the United States, instead of taking unilateral action as the United Kingdom did some years ago. During the election campaign the people o:f this country were asked to follow John-I believe that was the slogan-not realizing at the time, at least in this and other inter national affairs, that the John they were asked to follow was John Foster Dulles of the United States. The previous attitude of the United States government with respect to this particular issue of recognizing China diplomatically was a fiat and unalterable "No; we refuse to have anything to do with it and that is that". But in recent months we find this gentleman John Foster Dulles chang ing his attitude just a little bit, laying the groundwork for an about face on the question of the recognition of China. Previously the answer was a fiat no to any proposal for recognition. Now the attitude as expressed by that gentleman is "We will recognize red China or communist China when it is advan tageous to the United States to do so". That day will not be too far distant. When it happens, with the connected question of ex panded trade, Canada once again will be caught short and will be behind the eight ball in its dealings with that country. Another reason is the attitude of the Prime Minister in saying that China must expiate its sins; and I think we can only assume that he was making reference to its attitude toward Korea during the Korean war. If we follow logically along and that is the real reason this government will not have anything to do with diplomatic recognition, then we can obviously assume that the government's attitude is that we should cut off diplomatic relations with the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics because of what that government did in Hungary not too long ago. It is pre cisely the same thing, where a larger nation interfered with the desires of a helpless nation and dictated to them the way they were going to operate their country. If it is for the political colour and complexion o:f China-with which I do not agree--then we can logically say that this government's attitude is to cut off diplomatic relations with Czechoslavakia, Yugoslavia and many other countries, including Egypt or the united Arab republic, as it is called. Another thing that does not add up, so :far as the attitude of the Prime Minister and MAY 20, 1958 263 this government is concerned on this question of the moral necessity of diplomatically recognizing these nations, is shown very clearly in the attitude he expressed a little over a year ago with respect to a well-known individual in Egypt, as it was then, and his attitude in recent months. I do not like to make too many references to former debates as reported in Hansard, Mr. Speaker, but it is necessary to do so once in a while, as in this case. At page 801 of Hansard of January 30, 1957, the present Prime Minister who was then sitting on this side of the house as leader of the opposition said it was elevating Nasser to a prominent position as the dictator of the Middle East, and as the predeterminator, according to his will and his whim, of the orders made by the United Nations. He called him a grave wrongdoer, a person who had an attitude of international brigandage, and said he should become a law-abiding member of the United Nations. It may be perfectly all right for the Prime Minister to have had those opinions at that time, but we discovered that this government almost fell over itself in its hurry to extend diplomatic recognition to the united Arab republic after it was formed and under the control of this same individual, to whom the Prime Minister a little over a year ago re ferred as a dictator, a wrongdoer and a person promoting international brigandage. Again, I only mention this matter in order to show that the real reason this government refuses to take steps to deal with the ques tion of recognition of China is as a result of the domination or the attitude of the United States in this matter. We have a moral obligation to recognize something that exists, something that is a fact, something that is there. It is a government that is in office. I, for instance, probably do not like the fact that they have a particular govern ment in China any more than I like the fact that we have a particular type of government here in Canada, not that I am drawing any connection between the two as far as political philosophy is concerned. However, I am obliged to accept the fact that the govern ment is here, that the Conservatives are sitting over there on the government side, much as I may not like it. The same gentle men will agree with that statement, yet will refuse to agree with the fact that in China they have a particular government and that we must recognize the fact that that govern ment is there. It is a moral obligation that we have. There is another reason. If you do not want to live up to the moral obligations that exist, it may be that the economic question will have a bearing on it, for certainly our trade The Address-Mr. Howard with other countries is one subject that should command the interest of everybody in this house and everybody in the nation who has the welfare of the economy of the nation at heart. In fact the subamendment that we are now discussing deals with the question of trade. The amendment proposed by the Leader of the Opposition also deals with the question of trade. Throughout the last elec tion campaign numerous references were made to trading with other countries, both by government members and by members of other parties. There seems to be an attitude that trading with a country, selling surplus goods to an other country, has no connection with whether or not you give that country formal and diplomatic recognition. In fact the Prime Minister, speaking in the house last Novem ber, made reference to this matter when it was brought to his attention that the United Kingdom had recognized China in a diplo matic manner. His answer at that time was to the effect that it had not helped the United Kingdom in expanding its trade; that is to say, because the United Kingdom had rec ognized China it had not helped to expand the United Kingdom's trade with that country. That, of course, as I am sure the Prime Minister knew at the time he made that state ment-and if he did not know he should have known-is utter nonsense. Some statis tics received from the United Kingdom in formation bureau here in Ottawa about the United Kingdom's trade with China show that the Prime Minister-and I will give credit where credit is due-was partially correct because during the years of the Korean war the United Kingdom's trade with China did not increase. But following that war we find that it increased by leaps and bounds during 1953, 1954, 1955 and 1956 to a point where it is more than double, and that in a five-year period since the armistice end ing the Korean war. Hence when the Prime Minister said it did not help Great Britain, it was not a factual statement or a true statement; and I am sure that if he had the opportunity now, even though he is not here in the house, he would probably correct that impression. Because the United Kingdom undertook to deal in a neighbourly fashion with the Chinese government, British trade with China has been expanding by leaps and bounds ever since. Therefore if Canada, with all the surplus lumber we have, particularly in British Columbia where probably more than half the total lumber produced in Canada origin ates, and with the wheat surpluses in the mid-western provinces just sitting there 264 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Keays waiting to be moved and exported, were to treat China in a neighbourly fashion and ex change diplomats just as we have with the united Arab republic-of which we were so critical not too long ago-surely we could expect to expand our trade by selling to the more than 600 million people who live in China, thus helping to bolster our lagging economy. In many respects there has been an un fortunate attitude on the part of the western nations which has driven China precisely where we did not want it to go, that is to say into the arms of the Soviet union. Unless we take some steps to reverse that trend our relationships with the Soviet powers are going to worsen, not from a military stand point but from an economic standpoint, which of course is our main concern. As was ex pressed earlier, as sure as we are sitting here at this moment the United States will in the not too distant future do what John Foster Dulles said they would do; that is, recognize China when it is advantageous to the United States to do so, and it will be advantageous to do so pretty soon. Canada once again will find itself behind the eight ball and will suffer accordingly. Canada can do two things in this respect; and these remarks are not confined to our relationships with China but cover the rela tionships between the nations of the western world. The nation of Canada has a prestige in world affairs far beyond what might be expected having regard to its size. In diplo matic affairs Canada is looked upon as being a fair and decent nation with a fair and decent attitude toward other countries, and we should use the prestige we have to pro mote international peace, to promote trade and to promote an understanding among the people of different countries not only with respect to our understanding of other coun tries but with respect to the understanding and appreciation of other countries as to what Canada is and the type of people we have in our country. We should undertake, particularly with respect to China, to send an official group I do not care if it is a diplomatic or parlia mentary group or a delegation of some other nature-but we should send to China a group of people with some official or semi-official status so we can get a first-hand picture of what the Chinese people are like and what their requirements are, so they in turn will get an understanding of us and will find that, after all, we are human beings just as they are. Through such an interchange between groups with official or semi-official sanction we may find a way to improve relations be tween the countries of east and west and at [Mr. Howard.] the same time assist our economy to get out of the state of doldrums in which it is at the present time, laying the groundwork for expanding our trade. In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I would em phasize that there are two reasons why we must take these steps. One is a moral obliga tion to recognize the fact that there is a need here; and if we do not accept the first reason, then there is the straight economic reason that we must expand our trade and keep our industries going. (Translation): Mr, J. R. Keays (Iles-de-la-Madeleine): Mr. Speaker, may I associate myself with all those hon. members who paid their respects to you on the occasion of your election to the high post of Deputy Speaker of this house. I am also happy to tender the same wishes to the Speaker of this assembly. His knowledge of parliamentary rules and his well-known impartiality favoured his appointment. I also take pleasure in extending my con gratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne for the manner in which they carried out their task. First of all, Mr. Speaker, I must express my gratitude to the voters of the Magdalen islands who have chosen me for the next few years, as their representative to this country's government. I shall try to comply earnestly with their wishes, and they may be assured that I will do my best at all times to serve their interests. Magdalen islands are located in the gulf of St. Lawrence, 150 miles southeast of Gaspe and 90 miles north of Prince Edward Island. This archipelago is connected by bridges or causeways, with the exception of Entry island which is 9 miles off. The population, 13,000 strong, depends en tirely on the fishing industry for a living, and I think that this constituency is the only one in Canada to be dependent on a single industry. The people there are hardy and patient; hardy because, being insular, they have to be able to live in conditions very different from those found in the rest of the country; patient, because they have been waiting over the years for the amenities and improvements necessary to the easier survival of their descendants. Mr. Speaker, you will appreciate that when people depend upon a single source of in come, it is imperative that they be given every opportunity of easily providing for themselves. Seaports, wharves, unloading docks and warning lighthouses are necessary along the coasts of the islands. MAY 20, 1958 265 This very morning, I was informed that, in three days, due to unfavourable winds, the people of one of the islands lost a catch of about 100,000 pounds of fish. I therefore believe, Mr. Speaker, that in itself this argument justifies fuller consider ation of the merits of the requests made by the population of Magdalen islands. New fish processing plants would be built in the islands if the companies were certain that improved approaches would be provided. Our riding deplores the exodus of its young men to the industrial centres, and we get numerous requests from those boys who want to come back and try to earn their living at home. I do not think this trend should be dis couraged and the means I just enumerated would take care of this problem. Unfortunately the Gordon Commission had no opportunity to look into the problems of that riding, though they are similar to those of Gaspe and the Atlantic provinces and also deserve the government's attention. I congratulate the Prime Minister for initi ating a price support for agricultural products, and because the fishermen of the Magdalen islands, of Gaspe, eastern Quebec and the Atlantic area as a whole supply a product which is most important to our national economy, I trust that this government will soon introduce a system, whereby our fisher men will enjoy the protection of price support or stabilization. (Text): As aforementioned, Mr. Speaker, the people of the Magdalen Islands are isolated, and I believe it is time they were given treatment equal to that accorded other Canadians. There must be a better system of maritime and air borne transportation, and I could not let this occasion go by without saying how grateful our people are to the Minister of Transport for making funds available to improve the airfield at House Harbour. The Magdalen Islands have given to the armed forces of Canada a large per capita contributions, and as the French and English speaking people there live in harmony and unity I do not wish any hon. member of the opposition to convey to this house the impres sion that the Conservative convictions of Quebec are different from those which prevail in any other part of Canada. Our convictions as well as those of all the people of Quebec are above all Canadian and the majority have endorsed, as recently proven, the policy of our great leader, the Prime Minister. 57071-3- 18 The Address-Mr. Dupuis In Quebec we may have a different outlook on certain matters of customs, culture and education; but as an English speaking mem ber coming from Quebec and sitting on the government side of this house I express the hope that what we now have in Quebec will be preserved in order that the people of that province may contribute further to the unity of Canada and allow our Prime Minister to lead this country to a rendezvous with peace, happiness and prosperity. (Translation): Mr. Yvon Dupuis (St. Jean-Iberville Napierville): Mr. Speaker, I shall begin my remarks in this house by associating myself with all previous speakers in tendering you my congratulations. As I am now addressing the Deputy Speaker, I shall ask him to tell the Speaker of the house that the member for St. Jean welcomes his appointment, because we all know the integrity of his mind, his great efficiency, and the spirit of impartiality he has always shown when guiding the pro ceedings of this house with justice and fairness. Mr. Speaker, this is my first interjection in this house, and I want to say that I very much appreciate the way Mr. Speaker is handling the proceedings. (Text): As my hon. friend well knows, I sat for four years in opposition in the Quebec legis lative assembly, where the speaker is quite different from the one we find here. (Translation): Mr. Pigeon: Mr. Speaker, in my estima tion, those words are unparliamentary. Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I fail to see how the word "different" can be unparliamentary. If my hon. friend takes exception to it, it is surely because he knows what is going on out there. Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish to congratulate you on your appointment as such and as chairman of the house committees. I am aware of your qualities. I know that you have always been fair and loyal, and I am anxious to pay you that tribute. I also congratulate the vice-chairman of the committees, the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Real who deserves not only congratula tions but much encouragement. Mr. Speaker, this morning I heard the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Maloney) say that he was very happy to note that, under the present Conservative regime, there seems to loom in our country a sort of unity which is good to see, unity between different groups, 266 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Dupuis different creeds, in other words, a complete unity through diversity of languages and religions. I listened with much pleasure to the very sensible speech made by the hon. member, a very well prepared and substantial speech; but my hon. friend is far from being well informed of the present political situation prevailing throughout the country. In fact, my hon. friend from Parkdale does not know-and it is my duty to inform him to what extent things are different in the province of Quebec. (Text): I have just been saying, Mr. Speaker, that in the province of Quebec things are different from everywhere else in Canada, and during the last campaign we observed a lot of differences between the Conservatives from other parts of Canada and Union Nationale Conservatives of the province of Quebec. (Translation): Take my word for it, Mr. Speaker, in 1957 you were the man who inherited the most arduous task in public life that year. Seeing to the organization of the Tory party in Quebec in 1957 was far from easy. You would have liked to have the ministers of the Union Nationale with you, but there were not many. You might have wished to find can didates; but they were few, because, at that time, Mr. Speaker, the people in the Union Nationale were not sure of their power, and did not want to run the risk. In 1957, there was nobody in the province of Quebec, except you and a few brave men who were defend ing the thorny cause of the Conservative Tory party in our country- (Text): Mr. Grafitey: Order! (Translation): Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, my hon. friends will have the opportunity to speak after me. What I have to say is nothing but the truth and you know it better than anyone else. Mr. Deputy Speaker: I must ask the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville to confine himself to the object of the debate. I must also point out to him the fact that the recent elections are over. Mr, Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, other members referred to them and I do not see why I could not do likewise. Hon. members op posite have been referring to them since the beginning of the session, as did the hon. members of the Union Nationale sitting on this side of the house, and I should like to ask you respectfully what rule of the house prevents me from referring to the last elections. [Mr. Dupuis.] This morning, the hon. member for Parkdale was speaking of this fine national unity and I must admit that this statement surprised us. Indeed, how is it possible to imagine the entente cordiale among these people who opposed the Colombo plan, the equalization system, federal help to universi ties, the trans-Canada highway, who always criticized the federal Conservative members for their opposition to the appointment of an ambassador to the Vatican, who also criticized some extremists from certain parts of our country for objecting to the recognition of a national anthem in Canada? Indeed, Mr. Speaker, how is it possible to imagine them united with those who oppose the adoption of a distinctive Canadian flag and yet favour a flag bearing the Union Jack? They differ in their way of thinking, in their traditions, in their habits and in their mentality. They also differ in their election methods. (Text): I would speak now to my hon. friends in the other part of the house. Maybe they did not know, but last February, at a time when the newspapers all over the country were coming out with big headlines, something happened in our province of Quebec that they did not realize because they were far from our province. In February, 1958, we in Quebec assisted in a great marriage, a great ceremony. (Translation): Mr. Speaker, this is simultaneous transla tion. The party of the first part, one LeNoblet Duplessis, of Three Rivers, is joined in polit ical matrimony to the party of the second part, one John Diefenbaker of Saskatchewan. And this wedding, Mr. Speaker, has surprised a great many people. How can one explain why it is that this Union Nationale team of Quebec has all of a sudden become enamoured of the Conserva tive Tory party of Canada? True the explana tion is very simple, once the facts are known. However, I believe that some people sitting in this house know very little about the story. I would like to finish at this time. Mr. Speaker, in 1933, in Sherbrooke, a man was elected Conservative leader, Mr. Maurice Duplessis, who has never resigned that post since. He is still Conservative leader ... An hon. Member: Order! Mr. Deputy Speaker: I must once more ask the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville Napierville to deal with the subject matter of the debate. MAY 20, 1958 267 Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I respectfully submit ... Some hon. Members: Order! Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I respectfully submit that I have every right to give exact information on what has happened in the history of my province. If my hon. friends want to understand what I have to say, they cannot do so if they only have heard bits and pieces of the story, which I want to finish. Mr. Deputy Speaker: 'l must ask the hon. member to deal only with those matters that concern the federal government. Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, would you be so kind as to tell me under what section of the rules you can prevent me from dealing with a matter which every other hon. mem ber in this house has dealt with? Mr. Deputy Speaker: It is a general rule. During the debates of this house, it is not in order to discuss anything unrelated to ques tions of public interest coming under federal jurisdiction. Mr. Dupuis: Is it not a fact that the speech from the throne mentions federal provincial relations? Mr. Deputy Speaker: Yes; the speech from the throne refers to provincial federal rela tions but I must point out to the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville that it contains no reference to past elections. I must once again urge the hon. member to confine his remarks to the debate in progress. Mr. Dupuis: I will gladly bow to your ruling. However, I will point out that all previous speakers referred to that subject. From now on I will refrain from further references to it and I hope that other mem bers will do likewise. An hon. Member: Hear, hear! Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I wish to draw the attention of the house to the disappear ance of several worthy men who, for many years, have played here an important part in the service of their country and their fellow citizens. I have in mind several of those people who played a distinguished role in federal politics during the past few years: the hon. leader of the Social Credit party, the hon. leader of the C.C.F. party and several former ministers of the Liberal administration which gave our country an unprecedented prosperity. Indeed, it can be said that today the hon. members of parliament miss them badly. 57071-3-18½ The Address-Mr. Dupuis The hon. George Marler, who was a shrewd minister of transport, is for us, from the Montreal area, a loss that is keenly felt by this parliament. Mr. Speaker, should the Liberal party, now confronted with the Conservative program, feel ashamed of facing its doctrine, of facing its principles, and of conveying to the house its deep convictions? I do not believe so. If fate made it so that our party has become a minority group in this house, it is certainly not because some reprehensible deed or ob jectionable laws could be credited to the late Liberal government and caused it to face popular discontent. The hon. members of the Conservative party are prone to recall, in their speeches, that there is nothing in their history about which they should feel ashamed. And yester day I heard hon. friends opposite say that it was quite untrue to say that when the Con servatives were in power there were years of bitterness, and that the situation was quite different when Liberals were in power, be cause those were good years. Well, I would certainly not say, on my own authority, that things are going that way. But when we look at the achievements of the Liberal party in the field of health insurance, and particularly of social security we see that as a rule the Liberal party has been at the forefront of the social achieve ments in this country. It was the Liberal party which instituted old age pensions, unemployment insurance benefits, family al lowances, pensions for the disabled, for the blind and even for the members of parliament. I ask my hon. friends who will speak after me to mention one single piece of social security legislation which has been initiated by a Conservative administration. They too have been in power in the past. I have here the names of famous people who have been members of that great party. You shall hear those names, Mr. Speaker, and you will readily see for yourself if, to be considered as a party of national unity, in the matter of public administration, the Conservative party must not thoroughly change its policies. The Conservative leaders since 1896 have been: Tupper, Borden, Meighen, Guthrie, Bennett, Manion, Bracke~, Drew and Diefenbaker. If I turn the other page of his tory, I see that the Liberal party, in that same span of years, has given three great leaders to the Canadian nation: Laurier, Mackenzie King and St. Laurent. 268 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Dupuis An hon. Member: Are you forgetting Pearson? Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I ask you to tell me which of these Conservative leaders, in cluding the present Prime Minister, is the one who-- (Text): Who is the Conservative leader in the past who during his administration achieved any thing to help the people, who achieved any thing by way of social welfare that would give something to the people? I ask my hon. friends to answer that question. (Translation): Has there been one item of social legisla tion adopted by the Conservative party? Was there any such thing under Borden? Not at all. Mr. Grafftey: Oh yes, there was. Mr. Dupuis: Which one? Can the hon. member tell me what it was? Mr. Grafftey: I can answer that question easily. Every item of legislation which was introduced by the Conservative government, around 1935, was completely blocked by Mr. Mackenzie King. Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I will leave aside this matter of a blockade, and I will deal with precise facts. The hon. member has not answered my question at all. I asked what Borden had done. If there was obstruc tion, as the hon. member has just claimed, is it not a fact that the government was in power and that it could have had legislation adopted in the social field if it had wished to? Is it not a fact, Mr. Speaker, that, in the past, every time the Liberal party attempted to introduce social legislation such as old age pensions or family allowances, the leaders of the party to which my hon. friends belong were opposed? Is there any need for me to remind the house of what Colonel George Drew said of the family allowances, which he called "baby bonuses for the province of Quebec"? The Liberal government at the time took no account of this systematic obstruction and did implement for the benefit of this country the social security measures now enjoyed by our people. One thing which I find astounding is to hear the C'onservatives boast of giving $9 per month to our old people and attempting to find in this a claim to national fame. But how can we take them seriously? They boast of giving $9 per month in a field in which, in the past, they were always obstruc tive, whereas we gave $40 per month, a fact of which we are proud and from which the old people throughout this country, at this time, derive real benefits. [Mr. Dupuis.] Mr. Speaker, under Conservative govern ments in the past we had total conscription under Sir Robert Borden and, under Mr. R. B. Bennett-and our Union Nationale friends were the ones who complained most bitterly about that-five years of depression. It was always a Conservative government which was at the helm when this country was going through the darkest hours of its history. On the other hand, our country has experienced prosperity under the regimes of Laurier, Mackenzie King and St. Laurent. We gave up power in June, 1957, at a time when Canadian prosperity was at a record high. No sooner had the Conservatives been subsequently returned to power than we had the depression and unemployment began gradually to spread. At this very moment, unemployment has become a constant threat to Canadian labour. Mr. Speaker, what will our friends opposite do to solve the unemployment problem? Mr. Belzile: Where were you in 1930? Mr. Dupuis: And you, where were you at the time of Napoleon? Mr. Speaker, I really think that my hon. friend opposite believes in the existence of Napoleon but he was not yet born at that time. Mr. Belzile: You, yourself, what were you doing at that time? Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I note with you that the moment we speak of unemployment, hon. members opposite begin to stir; it hurts them very much. Well, since the hon. member asked me where I was at the time of the Bennett government, I will tell him. At that time, I w as living in a populous workers' district of Montreal and I remember that my father, who h us been a member of this house, was a Montreal alderman. An hon. Member: And he has now been ousted. Mr. Dupuis: I also remember that every day hundreds and hundreds of unemployed lined up in front of my home begging for bread. Mr. Speaker, at the time of the Bennett regime, I was a small boy ... Mr. Belzile: Where were you on the eve of the elections in 1930? Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker ... Mr. Belzile: The Conservatives were not in power at that time. MAY 20, 1958 269 Mr. Deputy Speaker: I would ask the hon. members of this house to allow the hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville to complete his speech. Mr. Dupuis: Mr. Speaker, I want to help my hon. friends opposite. I realize that on the basis of the theory of their history, or the principle of their party, they will certainly find no solution to unemployment. As a mem ber of a party which has always been good for the people, which has always provided more work for our population, I am going to inform my hon. friends opposite that in the province of Quebec we now have millions of dollars available for the unemployed. The hon. Prime Minister of Canada has only to ask the hon. premier of the province of Quebec, and millions of dollars will im mediately flow into the fund to help our unemployed. Would you know where to find those funds? I respectfully submit that the house should look into the consolidated statutes of the province of Quebec, 1941, chapter 255, para graph 31, and you will see, Mr. Speaker, that the Quebec liquor commission has been col lecting, starting from a certain date, the following amounts: (a) Five cents If the capacity of the bottle Is 13 ounces or less; or (b) Ten cents If the capacity of the bottle is more than 13 ounces but not more than 27 ounces; or (c) Fifteen cents If the capacity of the bottle is in excess of 27 ounces. That tax, to be known as an unemployment tax, is payable by the buyer of alcohols or spirits from the commission which, in that case, is acting as a fiscal agent of the province. Thus, for a long time, the province of Quebec has been collecting taxes on the sale of alcohol to help the unemployed and when one speaks to Premier Duplessis about it, he washes his hands of the matter, according to his custom, and says that this does not con cern him but that it rather concerns Ottawa. Well, if unemployment concerns Ottawa, let Ottawa collect unemployment taxes. If this does not concern Quebec, the govern ment of that province should be prevented from collecting taxes under false repre sentations. Nobody in this house is in a better position than the present Prime Minister and our friends opposite to know very well the present Quebec government and to persuade it to use these funds immediately to bring relief to the unemployed of that province. The Address-Mr. Dupuis Mr. Speaker, we have some work to finish in this country; the Liberal party has been turned out of office too soon. In fact, it had started to implement a tremendous program; it had set an economic policy to maintain in this country a prosperity which the people had always enjoyed under its administration. Unfortunately, all this has been spoilt by the coming of a Conservative government. Among the Liberal projects to be concluded in my constituency of St. Jean, there is, :for instance, the St. Lawrence seaway. You know, Mr. Speaker, being the representative of the constituency of Longueuil, that the St. Law rence seaway is a Liberal undertaking which brought to the south shore a tremendous de velopment and has meant years of employ ment for its residents. Well, I know that it was in the plans of our party, to continue that canal work in order to make of the Richelieu river a navigable river in another direction, towards the United States. And, Mr. Speaker, the Conservative candidate of St. Jean solemnly promised during last election that the deepening of the Richelieu would start as soon as the present Prime Minister would be in office. Well, Mr. Speaker, I respectfully submit that this project had been prepared by a Liberal administration, by a government which has always cared for all the classes of our population. Mr. Speaker, there is another recommenda tion I wish to make to the government on behalf of my constituency. In St. Jean d'Iber ville we have an aircraft company called Aircraft Industries. As another strange coin cidence, the day after the Conservatives came into power, in June, 1957, Aircraft Industries lost important contracts for Sabre jets. I wonder why the Conservative government cannot leave with our industries the contracts awarded by the Liberals in order to give work to our population. Furthermore I wonder why, Mr. Speaker, the Conservative govern ment do not extend now the runway of St. Jean airport in order to allow jets to land on their own airfield, which they cannot do at the present time for lack of space. If the government now sitting opposite can achieve such purposes, I shall be the first one to offer it my thanks. However, the unemployment problem will certainly not be solved by hollow words and by holding a previous government responsible for the causes of the unemployment situation that we ex perience under every administration of a party labelled "Tory Conservative." Mr. Speaker, the present government started on the right foot. It amended the old age security act, a Liberal achievement; that is all to the good. In order to remain 270 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Creaghan on the right track, the government will al ways have to walk in the footsteps of the Liberals, because what these latter did was always well planned and not improvised. A full program had been devised for the wel fare of all classes of society and for all sections of the country. I would respectfully beg the present govern ment to stop showering flowers on itself in saying that the hon. ministers are powerful and competent, and that the right hon. Prime Minister has put up a marvellous fight. We are well aware of all that, but it is hardly by showering fulsome praise on this government that we shall solve the crucial issue of unemployment. We are expecting some action, joint action, and the eyes of the Canadian people are now turned on the Conservative administration which took over in such strength that the opposition cannot be charged with obstruc tionism if promises are not immediately ful filled. The Conservatives wanted absolute authority. What more do they want, when they have reduced the C.C.F. party to eight members and the Liberal ranks to 49 repre sentatives? Now, Mr. Speaker, everybody is looking to the man who was elected to guide this coun try's destiny. We expect immediate action, and if the government does not take any steps in that direction, at the next general election, it will suffer the most humiliating defeat an administration has ever known. (Text): Mr. W. L. M. Creaghan (Westmorland): Mr. Speaker, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to rise and speak in this house, and to join in the debates of the House of Commons for the first time. I express to you, Mr. Speaker, my congratulations, as others have done, on your re-election for a second term to the high office of Speaker of the House of Com mons. I wish to be associated with all the other pleasant remarks addressed to your honour, and to add my congratulations to the members of this house upon having chosen from amongst us one with such ability, skill and fairness, accompanied by a dignity which today is the envy of all of us. As you know, I am a new member of :parliament with a limited experience. How ever, in the short time I have been here I have already formed an opinion that all hon. members will be treated fairly by you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to convey also my congratulations, Mr. Speaker, on the man chosen as your deputy, and I should like to join with other hon. members in extending congratulations to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. [Mr. Dupuis.] It is my honour to represent the con stituency of Westmorland which is located on the east coast of New Brunswick, immediately to the north of Cumberland county in the province of Nova Scotia. Westmorland is a very large riding, having both a rural and urban population of nearly 100,000 people and a most diversified economy. The citizens are mostly of British and French Acadian stock. In fact, the two groups are nearly equal in number. The maritime provinces for a great many years have been looked upon by the rest of the people of Canada as a depressed area. The term "We never had it so good", never applied to New Brunswick or Westmorland constituency. It was only recently, in fact during the 23rd parliament of Canada, that recognition of our needs received long awaited federal approval. This was brought about by the fact that on June 10 last the electors of Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick elected to this house in ever increasing numbers, supporters of the Progres sive Conservative party. As a result of this large representation, and nothwithstanding the short life of the 23rd parliament, beneficial legislation was passed with a view to improv ing the present and future economic outlook for Atlantic Canada. The legislation to which I refer is com monly known as the Atlantic provinces ad justment grants which will have the effect of increasing the provincial treasury of New Brunswick to the extent of $7 .5 million for the next four years. The total in so far as the Atlantic provinces are concerned will amount to $100 million during the four-year period. This aid will definitely assist our economy and it is hoped that at the end of the four-year period it will not be necessary for maritime members to urge the government to bring in further legislation by way of aid. At that time it is hoped that the average income in the province of New Brunswick will be equal to or even greater than the national average. Many thousands of my constituents are employed by the Canadian National Railways. The city of Moncton, commonly known as the hub of the maritimes, is a fast growing community of approximately 40,000 citizens, and in it is the head office of the Atlantic region of the Canadian National Railways. Recent layoffs by the C.N.R. in the Atlantic region and in Westmorland county in partic ular have caused a great deal of hardship and worry to the men affected and in no small way will contribute adversely to the economy of eastern New Brunswick. With our pool of labour I believe it should be possible for Canadian National Railways MAY 20, 1958 271 to build in the city of Moncton modern offices to house the regional staff and to consider forthwith and make plans for the construction of a much needed modern station and, if possible, a C.N.R. hotel. The men employed at the Canadian National Railways shops in Moncton are well trained and competent tradesmen and it should be possible for the government to urge this crown corporation to manufacture freight cars and other equip ment in these shops in order to guarantee permanent work and security for the thou sands now employed by the railway in eastern New Brunswick. Wooden structures and buildings erected years ago which are an eye sore to many communities should be dis mantled and be replaced by modern buildings of masonry and steel. In addition to the large numbers of railway employees I am pleased to report to you, Mr. Speaker, that many other federal agencies are located in Westmorland constituency. The maritime penitentiary, consisting of many large buildings and an ever increasing staff, is located at Dorchester which is the shire town of the county of Westmorland. The De partment of Fisheries and the Department of Agriculture, both of which are beneficial to Westmorland county, each occupy space and have large staffs in the city of Moncton. There is also in this constituency the local and maritime regional offices of the unem ployment insurance commission. I am also pleased to advise the house and you, Mr. Speaker, that the civil service commission maintains in the city of Moncton a regional office which services the constituency of West morland together with the province of New Brunswick. In more recent years Department of Trans port employees in ever increasing numbers have been employed at Lakeburn, the site of the Moncton airport. This department has been occupying rental space in the L'Assomp tion building, together with the staff of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. You will readily appreciate that the accumulation of civil servants has greatly aided the general economy of Westmorland county, and I am pleased to extend to the ministers an invi tation to increase the staffs of their respective departments so as to relocate more and more civil servants in eastern New Brunswick. I am sure that this brief introduction of Westmorland county will help the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Green) to appreciate the urgent need for the construction of another large public building in which to house the present government offices and to take care of the future growth and expansion of these most important federal agencies. The Address-Mr. Creaghan Much has been said in previous parliaments about the proposed construction of the Chi gnecto canal. Many maritimers are of the opinion that this canal should have been built in conjunction with the St. Lawrence seaway. A canal at Chignecto would be navigable at all times. Ships travelling the seaway to South America and the United States would shorten their route by nearly 500 miles. The canal would also be of great benefit to local shipping. Its construction would do much to cure any deficiency in the maritime economy and it is certainly justified as an extension easterly of the St. Lawrence seaway. Probably the cost of construction would be less by several million dollars than the amount that the seaway has already exceeded the original estimates. I appreciate that it will take a great deal of money and planning to build the canal. I merely wanted to mention the project today, knowing that it will be discussed by others at a later date. During the election campaign speakers including myself, stated that the immediat~ construction of the Tantramar dam would be urged on this government. Tenders were called and were opened on May 14. This construction will prevent flooding from the sea of all farm land above the dam and will give permanent protection to severai thousand acres of land. This will have the effect of encouraging farmers in their work. It will also help the general economy of my riding during the construction time. In fact the dam is needed immediately as it will 1 act as a causeway for a small portion of the trans Canada highway between the town of Sack ville in Westmorland county and the town of Amherst in Nova Scotia. The specifications for this dam call for completion during the year 1959. I have been assured that the contract will be awarded in the immediate future. It would appear as if construction of the dam will commence within one month. Much bas been said since confederation about guaranteed transportation between the province of Prince Edward Island and the mainland of New Brunswick. At the present time there is an outdated link. The ferry is modern and up to standard but cannot adequately handle the road and rail traffic between the province of Prince Edward Island and Westmorland county. I am pleased that an extensive survey was recently authorized and I know that all members of this house would join with the four hon. members from the province of Prince Edward Island in urging this government to proceed with the New Bruns wick-Prince Edward Island causeway im mediately the Department of Public Works is in receipt of a favourable report. The Minister of Public Works and the Minister 272 ROUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Creaghan of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean) have already shown keen interest in this causeway and as the approach to the causeway will be from the shore of Westmorland county many of my constituents are very interested in this scheme and, like myself, are anxiously awaiting its completion. The decentralization of the huge national defence expenditure will also greatly help the maritimes. No. 5 supply depot, Royal Canadian Air Force, is located in various localities in Westmorland. The buildings were in most cases erected during the last war and have given good service. I hope during the course of this parliament that the base will be enlarged and that per manent and modern military buildings will be erected. I also urge the government and the Department of National Defence in particular to consider an even more important role for the huge army camp at Gagetown. It is most difficult to mention all the needs of my constituents in this my first speech. As in the areas represented by many other members we have many farmers in Westmorland county who have problems reqmrmg immediate attention at Ottawa. Many of these farmers have negotiated mort gages through the Canadian farm loan board but unlike the western farmers many of our farmers are part-time farmers. It would be of great assistance if the legislation could be amended to permit them to become eligible applicants under the Canadian farm loan board jurisdiction. This would eventually create more full-time farmers in New Brunswick and would encourage improve ments in the area. Like the areas represented by western members, my area contains great fishing industries. Westmorland has many miles of coastline and many of my electors feel that wharf construction was badly neglected in past years. The Minister of Fisheries is well aware of the needs of the fishermen on Northumberland strait and already much has been done by him during his short term of office. Recent estimates of the Department of Public Works provide more generous assistance for the construction of wharves in New Brunswick. I hope that hon. members will not get the impression that I have come to Ottawa with a chip on my shoulder or as a prej udiced maritimer. I represent a seat which invariably elected a supporter of the Liberal party. This pattern has been a continuous one since the election of 1935, notwith standing the serious state of affairs I have mentioned today. I hope that at the end of this parliament and that, as a result of action the previous election trend will be reversed. [Mr. Creaghan.] (Translation): Mr. Adrien Meunier (Papineau): Mr. Speaker, my first words will be to con gratulate you on your appointment to the speakership of the house. I have known you for a number of years and I am well ac quainted with your sense of justice and your impartiality. I can say that I was deeply appreciative of your appointment. I congratulate also the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) on his appointment to the deputy speakership. We know that he is the descendant of a noble line of ancestors who have left their mark on the house. Knowing his talents, we can be as sured that his term of office will be re warding. I want to express to him every good wish in this connection. Mr. Speaker, I also would like to con gratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne for the magnificent way in which they have acquitted themselves of their task. I would not like either to omit mentioning the appointment of the hon. members for Lotbiniere (Mr. O'Hurley) and for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) to their respective functions of Minister of Defence Production and of Secretary of State. All of us know the energy and the qualifications of both those gallant members who have become ministers of the Crown. We believe and hope that their energy and their talents will be used to promote the welfare of all their Canadian fellow-citizens. Mr. Speaker, I take this opportunity to thank the electors of the constituency of Papineau whom I represent in this house for the third time. I thank them for this mark of esteem and appreciation which they have given me by electing me again. I can assure them that I will always serve them with loyalty and devotion and that I will protect their interests together with those of the Canadian nation. The speech from the throne announces some steps to alleviate the present problem of un employment. It announces a program of pub lic works as well as amendments to the National Housing Act and to the Unemploy ment Insurance Act. These measures will not be sufficient to cure unemployment, as they are but a temporary remedy. However, I say this incidentally, without such measures our economy would fall into chaos, and we would be back to the years 1930-35. The social security legislation, that is the Unemployment Insurance Act, the Old Age Security Act, the Old Age Assistance Act, the MAY 20, 1958 273 Disabled Persons Act and the Blind Persons Act, initiated by the Liberal party, support in some measure the purchasing power of the population and save our people from poverty and want. There is deep uneasiness in the country and the government does not seem to realize it. On the one hand, we have a great number of unemployed and, on the other hand, the cost of living continues to rise. What does the government propose to do to remedy that situation? We see nothing in the speech from the throne to lead us to expect a solution to this state of affairs. We believe that the government will finally have to follow the example of the United States where the economy suffers from the same evil as ours and where a senate committee recently recommended that salaries and prices be frozen at their present levels. Amendments to the National Housing Act will not solve the unemployment problem because houses built with the money we voted are beyond the reach of three quarters of the wage earners. Moreover, in Montreal, the metropolis of our country, builders are slowing down their undertakings because they have trouble finding buyers for their houses or even tenants at the rentals they have to ask because of building costs. I also wish to mention incidentally that the price of avail able building lots doubled since 1953, so that housebuilding is becoming too costly and the small wage earner cannot afford to own his home. Labour unions are claiming higher wages for men in the building trades and no one knows where those requests will end unless the government sees to it and freezes salaries at present levels. However, Mr. Speaker, it seems to me there is a remedy for the province of Quebec which would reduce unemployment, at least tem porarily, as it would put some money in the taxpayer's pockets. This remedy consists merely in taking out of the coffers of the federal government the money that is kept there at the disposal of the province of Quebec and which its dictator, Mr. Duplessis, a friend of the Conservative members from Quebec in this house, never wanted to accept under the pretense of preserving autonomy. Incidentally, may I say to my Conservative colleagues from the province of Quebec that they have shown little gratitude and loyalty toward their provincial leader. A number of those who have spoken in this house have congratulated the Prime Minister of the country, that is to say their leader here, on his brilliant victory, forgetting meanwhile to thank their Quebec chief for having taken part in the victory they gained on March 31 The Address-Mr. Meunier last. In those elections we saw the high powered Union Nationale machine in action in our constituencies, we heard promises of bits of roads and bridges, we saw money flowing all around. We even saw employees of the provincial government do their bit by working in close co-operation with Conserva tive candidates. And we do know that some Conservative candidates were chosen in the office of the premier of Quebec himself. Since my Conservative colleagues do not dare praise their provincial leader publicly, but prefer to have very close private rela tions with him, they could possibly convince him that he could help the people of Quebec by finding work for them. I believe that the hon. Solicitor General (Mr. Balcer) who is looking at me at this time could be a good agent to negotiate with the Premier of Quebec and to come and col lect here for the benefit of that province, the money at present held for it in the federal coffers. These gentlemen might possibly convince Mr. Duplessis to accept some 50 million dol lars from Ottawa for the Trans-Canada highway. Mr. Duplessis might well put aside his false sense of autonomy and, for once in his life, call for tenders for the undertaking of this work and comply with federal stand ards required for the inspection of work, more ,particularly with reference to the thick ness of asphalt surfacing. But Ottawa has always been for Mr. Duplessis the capital of a foreign country and it is only since the Conservative party has come into power that he has found out that it actually is the capital of his country. My Conservative friends could also con vince Mr. Duplessis privately that he should accept university grants so that these institu tions could embark on some undertakings and achieve their objectives. Everybody knows, and the Conservative members of the province of Quebec as well as anybody else, that the universities of Laval, McGill and Montreal have deficits, that tui tion fees are high and that the university is now open only to the well-to-do. Some will possibly say that the province of Quebec is not in a position to accept those grants to universities, because those grants represent an infringement in the field of education which is a provincial responsibility. In that case, how is it that the province of Quebec has been accepting federal money for vocational and technical training, with regard to the construction of vocational schools? And this has been going on since 1937. With reference to these university grants, may I ask if the federal government intends 274 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Meunier to impose curricula, or if these grants are not granted unconditionally? These grants are granted by the present government, with no strings attached, and the Conservative members for Quebec especially, should at tempt to find some formula which would bring our universities out of the stagnation and uncertainty in which they are plunged at this time, since the Conservative govern ment, of which they are a part, does not seem to have any wish to change what has already been done. Another way in which my Conservative friends from Quebec could use their influence with the present leader of the government, as well as the good offices of Mr. Duplessis, would be to see to the implementation of what they have preached during the election campaigns of 1957 and 1958, and that is to reduce the aid which the government gives to underdeveloped countries under the Colombo plan. You will remember that over the last two election campaigns, you as well as other Conservative speakers have claimed that the Liberals gave money to underdevel oped countries, to foreign countries, and that Mr. Duplessis, at that time used the slogan "Duplessis gives to his province and the Liberals give to foreigners". It is time, now that you have a majority in this house, that you put an end to this state of affairs instituted by the Liberal party, continued by the Conservative party and in which the contribution has been raised at the beginning of this year by the present government. You cannot ignore what you have preached as a means of stir ring the Quebec population and I repeat that now is the time for you to do some thing in line with what you have said. If contributions to the Colombo plan were too high, if you preached that we should not help underdeveloped countries, now is the time for you, the Conservative members from Quebec, to raise your voice in this house in order that your stand be known and that we should see whether you are going to support the theory you preached in the province of Quebec. Health insurance is another field in which you could put your efforts to good effect to convince your Quebec leader. Mr. Duplessis said time and time again that he would agree to health insurance as long as the constitution was respected, and his province given its due. Your leader, Mr. Duplessis, always accused the Ottawa government under Mr. King and Mr. St. Laurent of spoliation and usurpation and it is only since June, 1957, that his voice is no longer heard on this point. [Mr. Meunier.] Well I think it is time that Conservative members do something to give effect to all the suggestions I made. This would give millions to the province of Quebec, millions of which the province has been deprived for several years. And, now that you are in sufficient numbers in this house, it is up to you to find a solution to the problems out lined so that Quebec may benefit from its share of the federal treasury. I regret that there is no reference in the speech from the throne to federal-provincial financial relations because, there again, Con servative members from Quebec would have had a fine opportunity to give back to the province of Quebec what was taken from her according to Premier Duplessis. When Premier Duplessis accepted equalization pay ments in 1956, he stated that the province of Quebec was given only part of the money that was taken from her, but that he would be satisfied when Ottawa returns to the province of Quebec the taxation rights that were taken away from her. Premier Duples sis never understood, under a Liberal regime, that the federal government and the provinces have concurrent rights in matters of direct taxation but, now that the Con servative party is in power, he seems to have changed his understanding and his views on provincial autonomy are more restricted. He never realized that the equalization formulas help distribute the national wealth all over the country and give a chance to the poorer provinces. He has always preferred to indulge in petty politics instead of behav ing as a true Canadian concerned about the interests of our country. I am now going to deal with another item close to the heart of Quebec Conservatives, an item for which they campaigned vehe mently during the last election and of which not a word has been spoken since they are in this house. I refer to the matter of an ambassador to the Vatican. They charged the Liberals with doing nothing, and if I raise the matter, Mr. Speaker, it is because Con servative members themselves have raised it. That does not mean that I agree with them, for they have accused the Liberals of having done nothing in this respect. They did this without a full knowledge of the question and without wondering whether such an appoint ment would be welcomed by the religious authorities of the country or of their prov ince. For them that matter was nothing more than an electoral platform to arouse the people, and now that they can implement what they have advocated, they consider the matter as a dead issue. MAY 20, 1958 275 In concluding, Mr. Speaker, I will say to my Conservative friends from Quebec that they must clearly state whether they agree with the doctrine of the Conservative party to which they belong, or whether they follow the doctrine advocated for many years by their provincial leader. To be consistent, they should dissociate themselves from their party if they object to the policies of the present government, which adheres to the main points of the Liberal administration policy and has not yet disavowed any of their laws including, as I have mentioned before, social measures like the assistance to under-developed coun tries, assistance to universities, federal provincial relations and health insurance. All those acts and measures passed by the Liberal government, Mr. Speaker, have contributed to the prosperity we have known in this country until June, 1957. Those acts and measures have been enacted for the people of Canada from coast to coast and have been enforced on the same basis everywhere. Now that I have raised those matters, which are all in direct relation with the prov ince of Quebec, I would ask the Conservative members from Quebec, of whom we have only heard a few so far, to state what policy they intend to follow about the matters I have raised. Mr. Speaker, I also express the wish that the present government will follow in the footsteps of the Liberal administration, so as to maintain in this country national unity of which the right hon. Louis St. Laurent has been a great champion and upholder both in word and deed. He spared no effort to prove to the Canadian nation that two great races and cultures could live together in Canada in understanding and harmony. I hope that all the members of this house will be inspired by the ideal which has been the guiding principle of that great Canadian. Mr. Berni Paul (Berthier-Maskinonge-Dela naudiere): Mr. Speaker, sincere and deepest gratitude impels me to say to the electors of Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanaudiere how thankful I am to them for the confidence they showed me at the election of March 31st last. They can be sure that I will devote all my energy on their behalf so that, as all the other citizens of Canada, they may enjoy the blessings of a sound .Conservative adminis tration. Honour to whom honour is due; I interpret, here, Mr. Speaker, the feelings of my electors in congratulating you for the mark of unani mous confidence given you by this house The Address-Mr. Paul when you were again elected as its Speaker. No doubt your experience will permit you to direct proceedings of this house even more efficiently. No doubt, in your paternal kind ness, you will forgive us the few mistakes which new members like myself are bound to make. I extend my most sincere congratulations to the hon. members for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) and Spadina (Mr. Rea) who have been chosen respectively Deputy Speaker and deputy chair man of committees of the whole. The hon. members for Lotbiniere (Mr. O'Hurley) and for Labelle (Mr. Courtemanche) have been entrusted with portfolios and we know, there again, that their experience, their devotion to duty and their sense of responsi bility will help the government in its efforts to solve the serious problems which now face all Canadian taxpayers. When we read in the newspapers that the mover of the address in reply to the speech from the throne would be the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafreniere), the electors of Berthier-Maskinonge-Delanau diere felt deeply honoured, since the hon. member is an excellent citizen of the parish of Maskinonge; and those who had placed their legitimate hopes in him were rewarded by the tact and the eloquence with which he has delivered his speech. The hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) also deserves congratulations for af fording us the opportunity of getting to know a part of our country about which we had been unfamiliar, and he has also helped us gain a better insight into the great projects which the government is contemplating for that area of Canada. Mr. Speaker, other hon. members have re ferred to a problem which I have much at heart, as a representative of an industrious working class. I should like to touch briefly upon the textile and knitting industries. The hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Allard), the hon. member for Joliette-L'As somption-Montcalm : I should like to ask a supplementary question. I am sure the minister will agree that this is not a new policy but is the continuation of a policy that was formulated when the hospital in surance act came into being in 1957. Mr. Brooks: That is not a question, and I that the new arrangements will mean a les sening of cost to the department for hospital care of veterans, would the minister consider widening the regulations to allow entrance to departmental veterans hospitals of the many veterans at present denied admission? Mr. Brooks: Mr. Speaker, that would in volve a change of policy, and is a matter that may be taken up later. SPEECH FROM THE THRONE CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY The house resumed, from Wednesday, May 21, consideration of the motion of Mr. Robert Lafreniere for an address to His Excellency the Governor General in reply to his speech at the opening of the session, and the amend ment thereto of Mr. Pearson, and the amend ment to the amendment of Mr. Argue. (Translation): Mr. Noel Dorion (Bellechasse): Mr. Speaker, yesterday afternoon, after pointing out that the constituency of Bellechasse partakes structurally of the three physiographic re gions which characterize the area in which it is comprised, I gave a brief description of the first of these regions, referred to as the St. Lawrence plain, calling the attention of the Ministers of Public Works and of Transport to the urgency of certain undertakings. Beyond this St. Lawrence plain, and again in a southerly direction, we find the central plateau whose mean altitude, over a distance of 20 miles is between 1,000 and 2,000 feet, the highest point in the area being the St. Magloire bonnet, which has an altitude of 2,700 feet. The surface of that second area is not as flat as the first and gives the gen eral impression of being a rolling plateau. The soil is rocky, difficult to work, and its productivity is relatively low. do not altogether agree, either. Finally, in the extreme southern area, be- Mr. Martin (Essex East>: May I ask the yond the Buckland and St. Philemon minister in what particular my statement of crests, the ground flattens once more to form fact is incorrect. a large plain. This is called the St. Jean ramp, after the river towards which it slopes. Mr. Fleming (Eglinton): In the usual re- The soil there is better, not as rocky as spects. on the central plateau, and more suited to Mr. Brooks: I am sure the hon. member large scale farming. himself knows in what particular. Mr. H. W. Herridge {Kootenay West): I should like to ask the minister a question. In view of the fact that the great majority of veterans prefer to go to the departmental veterans hospitals, and in view of the fact [Mr. Brooks.) In any event, in these latter two regions, the farmer is not always able to live by farming alone. In the winter time a number of them must work in the bush and cut wood for sale to companies. Others operate woodlots on their own land, as on nearly half MAY 22, 1958 343 the other farms in the province. According to recent statistics prepared by the Catholic Farmers' Union, out of 134,336 farms in the province of Quebec, there are 63,546 whose occupants have to supplement their agricul tural revenue with outside work, to a vary ing degree. To a large extent this supple mentary income is provided by the operation of woodlots on the farms themselves. The pulp and paper industry is one of the foremost resources of the province of Quebec. Indeed, statistics show that, for the years 1948 to 1951, the average consumption of pulpwood was 5,206,000 cords annually. Now then, though the greater part of it comes from land owned by the companies or from thP. working of crown lands, none the less an average of 700,000 cords annually during the same period, came from farm woodlots, representing 13 per cent of the whole supply. This gives us an idea of the importance to the farmer of the province of Quebec of the pulp and paper industry. Unfortunately, it must be said that the treatment the farmer receives from the com panies which buy his wood is by no means always in accordance with the standards of equity and justice. On the basis of rather detailed studies, the Catholic Farmer's Union maintains that unless he receives at least $20 a cord for pulpwood, the farmer cannot cover his costs taking into account his labour and a small interest on the capital repre sented by his farm. In 1955, prices paid the settlers and farmers varied between $10 and $17 a cord. Even this year the price being lower than production costs, selling is slow because of the considerable supplies which the companies took care to pile up. Unfor tunately, there are at present thousands of cords of pulpwood from farm woodlots along the roads of the constituency of Bellechasse. The situation is all the more serious be cause, when they buy, paper companies wait for the right time, for instance in late spring, when the farmer has no choice but to sell, so as to have a little cash to pay his taxes and buy fertilizer or seed. So, while timber cut on crown lands costs the companies upwards of $30 a cord by the time it reaches their mills, they manage to reduce to a third of that sum the price they pay to the farmer. The report just issued by the Restrictive Trade Practices Commission constitutes an appalling indictment. It shows that certain companies deliberately and systematically The Address-Mr. Dorion resorted to illegal and objectionable practices in purchasing pulpwood from settlers and farmers, and did so in accordance with a concerted plan, in a clearly unfair and in human fashion. Such procedures should not be tolerated any longer. If I remember well, the hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. Fulton) has, in any case, informed the public that this report was under consideration and that he had the firm intention of taking action if the facts established did come under the pro visions of the Combines Investigation Act. I commend him warmly on it, and I may add that repressive measures would be in sufficient to correct the situation. Like some other provinces, two years ago the government of Quebec passed an act called the agricultural produce act. It is, in a way, a transposition of the industrial relations act on the agricultural level. According to this law the producers of each area may form associations, enter into agree ment with the buyers of their products and establish yearly terms for their marketing. Dairy farmers, maple and pulpwood pro ducers are now developing this system. The fact remains that sales depend on the market demand and that prices may vary from one area to the other, or even from province to province. I am asking the hon. Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Harkness) if it would not be possible to submit this issue to the federal price stabilization board. By com bining the advantages of the provincial and federal acts, we may succeed in helping in a large way that significant group of rural people who have woodlots on their farms. At the same time, we would stress the basic fact, which has but too often been ignored by our opponents, that understanding and harmony are best promoted and the greatest progress is made in the interest of national unity when the federal government and the provinces have a mutual regard for their respective laws and powers. Once engaged in this direction, the federal government could also encourage our farmers to protect their woodlots and to practice forestry. We have in Quebec technicians trained in our forestry school upon whom the government could draw in order to help create experimental farms for the main purpose of preserving and developing our forests. The southern part of the constit uency of Bellechasse would welcome such an undertaking. Our young people would be more inclined to resist the attraction of the cities and would find happiness and prosperity on the farms. 344 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Dorion The speech from the throne expresses the government's intention to establish a small business agency. Such an initiative is the more welcome since it can still be of great advantage to our rural population. In the past, handicrafts, in a great variety of forms, were flourishing in the rural areas. They have been almost wholly eliminated by mechanical progress, concentration of capital, and the establishment of joint-stock companies in the larger centres. Nevertheless, there is still room, particularly in our rural areas, for the establishment and development of small businesses. In Bellechasse, we have a few small concerns using hardwood for the man ufacture of furniture and kitchen utensils. Mr. Speaker, the Quebec farmer is an ele ment of resistance and of permanency on which the nation can count. A celebrated French economist, Andre Siegfried, once wrote: The relations between employer and em ployees are such as to guarantee social peace. There, people are still devoted to craftsman ship, so admirably sung by Peguy, and to that art of workmanship which is as an ex tension and most concrete expression of human personality. Those small businesses are very beneficial to our rural population. Not only do they pro mote the local development of our raw materials, offer markets for some farm products, give employment to many workers and allow the use of local savings for the economic development of the area, but they help maintain a middle class which might become a great bulwark against subversive ideas. They keep in our small communities those who, in time of prosperity, would be dazzled by the great cities and those who, in time of depression, would increase the num ber of people looking for employment. Thus, by favouring the maintenance of an economic balance and the decentralization of industry and trade, they contribute to the accomplish ment of a social work indispensable in a democratic country. I humbly suggest to the government to give to that proposed board the most extended powers so that it may carry its investigations in our rural centres, find out what could be profitably produced there and bring con clusions whose implementation could promote the establishment of new businesses and the development of existing ones. Why not con sider also the establishment of rural in dustrial credit which could supplement agri cultural credit? As early as 1929 Belgium instituted a credit system of this type which contributed very efficiently to reducing the incidence of unemployment and maintaining the remarkable economic equilibrium which that country enjoys. [Mr. Dorion.] By origin and by a tradition to which he remains faithful, he is a true countryman, devoted to the soil, retaining a sense of nature, whether it be a matter of cultivating the soil or of breaking new land. It is in his person that we may find the old Canadian type preserved from outside contamination. He is rooted to the soil, through love of it as much as necessity. He wants to live on the land and from the land, to bring up his family there and perpetuate his name. He is an element of stability and order, he perpetuates tradition, a culture, a philosophy of life which constitutes an un surmountable obstacle to Americanization in all its forms. When in 1867 those who drafted our con stitution agreed to form a confederation rather than a legislative union, they thought that in order to ensure the vigour and strength of the Canadian nation, it was necessary that the human type peculiar to our land should remain and perpetuate itself. He needed a legal frame work in which he could realize all his poten tialities. They thought further that the prov ince he lived in should be endowed with institutions whereby he was to feel perfectly at home. That is why the 1867 constitution has such deep meaning for him that in the guarantees which it offers he finds the very condition of his existence, and that is why he is attached to it by all the fibres of his soul. This is for the Canadian nation a source of inexhaustible wealth. It is in this way that our country has peculiarities and general characteristics which have made of it something unique and incomparable. It has contributed to making it finer and greater. In one of the brilliant talks which he gave at Oxford around 1926, Sir Robert Borden spoke out vigorously on this matter: (Text): -it was futile to expect in Canada the absorption of a virile people deeply attached to their language, their religion, and their traditions. Nor was it In the least desirable that such a fusion should take place. The qualities of the French and the English temperaments are in many respects complementary. Each is capable of distinctive service to the state and each has given it. Not in fusion but through co-operation the highest service of the two races can best be given to Canada. (Translation): Faithful to this principle, the present Prime Minister expressed the same thoughts in the MAY 22. 1958 345 course of the last election campaign before an audience in the metropolis of Canada, when he said forcefully: I know that one of the great forces of our country is that it can draw from the two greatest cultures of the modern world: the French culture and the English culture, to create a true Canadian spirit. And he added those particularly significant words: When I look at the great events of our history, I see no majority nor minorities In Canada but only equal partners engaged in the same undertaking, that of working for the welfare and progress of the country as a whole. This philosophy, which is at the very source of the alliance which we Canadians of French culture and Canadians of English culture concluded in 1867, explains the attitude of the province of Quebec in the last elections. After listening for too long to the voice of discord from a few of the very ones who then came here and professed to be cham pions of national unity, the province heard a voice which spoke words akin to its own ideas, its own feelings and its own aspira tions. That voice preached precisely the kind of national unity which is dear to our hearts, the kind of national unity we must cultivate, the only one that can assure our country peace, stability and greatness. It was the spirit of Sir John A. Macdonald and Sir Georges-Etienne Cartier which blew again in the sails of the Conservative party, this spirit which fits in so well with the virtues of faithfulness, moderation and com mon sense characteristic of the people of Quebec and which, undoubtedly, will lead us to the realization of the ardent wish that, on the evening of election day, the Prime Minister expressed in French in the follow ing words: Together, French-speaking Canadians and English speaking Canadians, we will write a new chapter of the history of Canada. In the pursuit of this task to which the leader of the government called us, we Canadians of French culture believe, like the Prime Minister, that we have an essential part to play. Rooted in the soil for the past three and a half centuries, heirs to a cul ture which neither conquest, nor internal struggles, nor outside threats were able to uproot, descended by blood and spirit from one of the greatest civilizing nations of the world, we could not remain deaf to this call and stand aloof from the government of a country where we represent more than a third of the people. We, Conservatives from the province of Quebec, have come here, therefore, in all The Address-Mr. Roberge confidence and loyalty. In the very words of the right hon. Prime Minister, we want to be with our compatriots of English culture and language partners in the man agement of the country, in such a way that the rights and liberties of our two ethnic groups be respected and safeguarded, that our political institutions be pervaded with the spirit of the one and of the other and thus achieve at last this national unity for which all Canadians of good will have been yearning for so long. Mr. Gabriel Roberge (Megantic): Mr. Speaker, it is with a mixed feeling of appre hension and satisfaction that a new member of parliament rises to take part in his first debate: apprehension because he does not know exactly what to expect and because he is not well acquainted with the atmosphere of the house; satisfaction because as you know, it is the achievement of a very legi timate ambition of whoever represents here his fellow-citizens. I would ask you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, to convey to Mr. Speaker my most sincere con gratulations on his election to the position he now occupies. I was not here last session, but I was able to follow the debates in the official report. I was able to appreciate the fairness and honesty of the decisions that Mr. Speaker made with such an adequate sense of humour. If such qualities were required during last session, I am convinced that they are even more needed in the present parlia ment to preserve the rights and privileges of the members of the opposition who sit to the immediate left of the Speaker. I would be remiss if I did not mention, Mr. Deputy Speaker, your appointment t'O that post, as well as that of the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Rea) to the post of deputy chairman of the committees. I knew you personally many years ago when we both were students of the revered seminary of Quebec where you earned your first laurels. We met again later when you were serving in the Canadian army and later again when you were seriously wounded. The eagerness with which you fought for liberty on the battlefield is a sure guarantee of the eagerness with which you will discharge your parliamentary duties. The hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafreniere) must be commended for the speech he delivered in proposing the address in reply to the speech from the throne. You 346 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Roberge will, no doubt, appreciate, Mr. Speaker, that if a Liberal may admire the rhetoric of the proposer, this does not mean that he agrees with his reasoning and some of the political principles he stated. I also wish to congratulate another young member, the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen). I realize that like his leader, the Prime Minister, he had visions, but I am afraid that many a Canadian now settled farther south, and who is furthermore unem ployed, will not be willing to follow the paths leading north. Before making the few remarks I have in mind, may I, Mr. Speaker, put on the record a word of thanks and gratitude to the electors of my riding which I have the great honour of representing here. I want of course to thank particularly all those who, directly or indirectly, have assured my election to the House of Commons. I wish to add, however, that my ambition is to represent here not only the Liberals, but all the electors of the Megantic constituency without any distinc tion between parties or political creed. I will be constantly at their disposal, and I pledge them again my fullest devotion. During the election campaign, Mr. Speaker, and since the beginning of this session, we have heard much about unemployment and about recession. Of course, statisticians and still less political speakers do not agree as to the number of unemployed in Canada. The fact is however that through last winter, their number was, and still is, much greater than at the same time in years past. It seems to me that their number is not decreasing as much as we would like. Many steps have been advocated to bring about a sizeable reduction of the number of unemployed. Without ignoring the public works program announced by the right hon. Prime Minister, I believe that the idea of a tax reduction advocated by the hon. Leader of the Opposition, and particularly its implemen tation, would be much more likely to reach that goal. As a matter of fact, if we have a look at the list of those public works, we can see readily, as has been pointed out by many previous speakers, that they are regular and normal public works provided for in the yearly estimates. The Conservatives are certainly not the ones who started the tremendous works of the St. Lawrence sea way and much less the Trans-Canada pipe Une, to name just those two. The carrying on of those projects and the start of others [Mr. Roberge.] cannot, I feel, help solve the problems com pletely, although the right hon. Prime Min ister stated on several occasions, as was so pointedly mentioned by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill), that nobody would suffer from unemployment as long as he would head the Canadian government. As we mentioned during the last election campaign, Canadians as a whole spend what ever is contained in their pay envelope. It is therefore imperative to increase the pur chasing power of the Canadian taxpayers, and we believe that a huge cut in taxes would answer that purpose. If people buy mOTe consumer goods, an increased produc tion of such goods would necessarily follow, and as a consequence, there would be more jobs and a greater stability in employment. The riding of Megantic, which I represent, Mr. Speaker, is partly urban and partly rural. As in all other parts of Canada, there is unemployment there, particularly, as you will understand , in the urban areas. I have not been able to get the accurate figures from the unemployment insurance officers, because part of the riding is served by the Victoriaville office, which is located in the riding of my hon. friend, the representative of Drummond ville (Mr. Boulanger). Several parishes are under the jurisdiction of that office, so that it is not possible accurately to determine the extent of unemployment in my own riding. But I have before me the figures published on May 13, 1958 by the office in Thetford Mines, which serves a population of approxi mately 45,000. There are exactly 2,204 men an::l women looking for jobs, which is a very large number for this season. What public works does the government favour to check the recession and create employment for at least part of these twenty-two hundred job less people? Thanks to the former govern ment, amounts have been earmarked for the extension and improvement of the Thetford Mines post office. The work is now mostly finished and I must congratulate the govern ment for implementing a project put foward by the former Liberal government. I am aware also that the Liberal govern ment of the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent had appropriated some money for the build ing of a post office in Plessisville. The land was bought and tenders were called. According to some information which, I be lieve, is in the record of the debates of the last session, the contract had been granted MAY 22, 1958 347 but later withdrawn, the latter event having occurred in the course of October. The session of last fall went by, the election was held and during that whole period nothing was done, as far as I know, toward the construction of that building during the winter unemployment period. It is only recently that new tenders were called. Judging by recent events, work will not start until next fall and yet this is the very time where unemployment is most serious, where construction workers find themselves without a job in that part of the constituency. But what are the other public works which the government has in mind for the con stituency of Megantic? I have heard nothing or seen nothing which can give me an inkling of its intentions in this regard. You will allow me, Mr. Speaker, to put forward a few suggestions for the appropriate department's consideration. In co-operation with the municipalities and in full and frank co-operation with the provincial government, the present feder al government should estab lish a municipal lending fund which would help municipalities carry out important and useful public works. I know many municipalities in my riding which would welcome that government assistance. I suppose that, now that political relations are closer between the federal government and the provincial government, co-operation will be easier than it has been. To give a concrete example, the govern ment could study the possibility of provid ing the constituency of Megantic either with an airport or with an helicopter station. As a matter of fact, Megantic stands about mid way between Quebec and Sherbrooke, about 150 miles from Montreal. Major public works would help, at least partially, to alleviate unemployment and would contrib ute to the development of means of trans portation in that area. We have already dealt during this session with unemployment insurance. I do not wish to criticize the stand taken by the govern ment in connection with some supplementary benefits, but I find in the speech delivered by His Excellency on May 12 last that the government intends to bring other amend ments to the Unemployment Insurance Act. I would like to offer a few suggestions one of which in particular has been submitted to me by some electors of my riding. As a general rule, ordinary or seasonal benefits are now paid to workers who are The Address-Mr. Roberge on the labour market looking for work. Such benefits have been extended by the former Liberal government to those who, while they were without work, fell ill. It seems to me that we should consider extending benefits to those who lose their job on account of illness; then their families would not have them to worry about the difficulties they have to go through in such circumstances. I also believe that unemployment insur ance benefits should be extended to another group of people. According to the existing legislation of m ost of the provinces, the widow and children of a workman killed on the job are entitled to a pension but when this workman dies from illness or from any other kind of accident, to my knowledge no legislation provides for a pension to his surviving dependants. In many cases, the workman has paid unemploy ment insurance contributions for several years and never had to draw any kind of benefits. A sys.tem of unemployment insur ance could be instituted whereby the widow of a deceased workman could draw benefits on behalf of her deceased husband for a certain time, at least until she has adjusted herself to her new conditions. In my opin ion, the government should take this problem under serious consideration, as it could affect a certain proportion of the people, and provide a solution in the sense I have just indicated. Without criticizing the legislation concern ing the extension of unemployment insurance seasonal benefits, I must point out that those who stopped receiving benefi ts before May 17, 1958, do not draw any more money under the new legislation. I suggest that the gov ernment remedy the situation when the other changes announced in the speech from the throne of His Excellency are submitted to the house. (Text): Having now dealt with the unemployment situation in Canada, Mr. Speaker, and the situation in that respect in my own constit uency, I would like to say a few words about those who are not yet ready for employment. I refer to the children of our country. If I now address you, sir, in the other official language used in this country, it is probably due to the fact that the simultan eous translation system has not yet been introduced in this house-as far as I can see, anyway. During the recent election cam paign I heard over television the Solicitor 348 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Roberge General declare that his government had caused an act to be passed in this regard. I would very much like to know the refer ence to that act, if the hon. member for Three Rivers (Mr. Balcer) would care to give it. Coming back to the children of this coun try, I would like to point out that the gov ernment has done nothing since it took office with regard to the question of family allow ances. If the cost of living has risen for the elderly people, the crippled and the blind, I cannot see how it did not also rise for the children of the country, and more particularly for those responsible for them. (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I suggest that the government should improve family allowances in favour of our children, not only those who are very young, but those who are old enough to attend school. Since the adoption of this family allowances system by former Liberal gov ernments, many improvements and additions have been made to it, without in any way upsetting the budget. It is to be noted, how ever, that this field of social legislation seems to be the only one about which the govern ment did not think at all. I believe it is imperative that the government should think about it. In what proportion should these family allowances be increased? That is up to the government to decide. I should like to draw particular attention, however, to one category of young people in this country who do not benefit at present from family allowances. I am referring to those children of both sexes who continue to attend school after age sixteen, and who do so until they are eighteen. These young people were, as was advocated by the Liberal party, to receive family allowances in the same way as those who now receive them, and at least on the same scale. Several of these young people, when they reach eighteen or pass their B.A. want to continue their studies at the university level. I know I am broaching a delicate issue, particularly with regard to the province of Quebec which keeps a jealous watch of its prerogatives in the matter of education. The problem may now seem easier to solve and the co-operation between the central gov ernment and the Quebec government might be more efficient in view of the active proof of friendship we recently witnessed. The right to education belongs first of all to our children and should not depend on the [Mr. Roberge.] financial means of their parents but on the young people's talent and future opportunities. With regard to this right there is, of course a corresponding obligation on behalf of parents to provide this education. The state however should play a supplementary part, which belongs in the first place to the provinces. However, in 1958, when science is fast developing, when artificial moons circle around the earth, when long range missiles can be launched farther and farther, educa tion is becoming more and more an intercon tinental problem, and at least an interprovin cial problem. I do not see any reason why the central power should not contribute its share in this field, without infringing upon the rights of parents and of the provinces. If we must give assistance to the children who want to go to university, it is also imperative to assist our universities them selves, which at the present time all com plain of lack of funds. In this respect, the Liberal government of the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent had provided a sizeable financial help to univer sities; but, unfortunately, the universities of my province have been able to benefit from those grants only once. The Prime Minister said in Saskatchewan, not so long ago, that his government would assist the universities of that province. I figure that his statement was not a restricted one, and that, as a consequence, all Canadian provinces can take for granted that their universities will receive their share. I hope that the Quebec universities will be able at last to receive what they are entitled to, and I urge the Prime Minister, as well as his colleagues from the province of Quebec, to see that the governmental authorities of my province co-operate at last towards the solution of this national problem, in the future, and thereby contribute to the welfare of our universities. As far as the children are concerned, the federal government could, while respecting the autonomy of the provinces as well as the rights of the parents in the field of education, as I have already said, give substantial assist ance to those who have talent, as well as the will to succeed and to prepare adequately for the future. This government help could well be implemented through the agency of the national conference of Canadian univer sities. The government would then have no control whatever over anything save over the amounts which it could put at the disposal of that conference. MAY 22, 1958 349 Here, Mr. Speaker, are the Liberal party suggestions with regard to these student scholarships and loans. 1. Establish a large scale national scholar ship program for university students. These scholarships would be granted through a public competition held in the two official languages of this country, under the control of the national conference of Canadian universities. 2. To supplement this scholarship pro gram, a national fund would be set up so as to allow students to obtain loans in order to pursue their university studies. This government should study the advis ability of carrying out this program, thus solving at least in part a very important problem. Before concluding, I wish to express the sense of deep satisfaction I felt seeing my leader carry an electoral campaign with such vigour under very trying circumstances and not more than fifteen days after his election as our party leader. I noted with great pleasure that during this campaign he showed special concern for our university students, meeting them in their universities to discuss their problems with them. I offer him my special congratulations for this solicitude toward those who are pre paring Canada's future while preparing their own. (Text): Mr. J. S. Speakman (Weiaskiwin): Mr. Speaker, I consider it a real privilege to add my congratulations to yourself and to your deputy, and also to congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I should like heartily to endorse the remarks made by the hon. member for Yukon, having spent some considerable number of years in the Yukon myself. The constituency of Wetaskiwin, which was established in 1905, for 37 years sent repre sentatives to Ottawa who sat on the wrong side of the house. This is the first time in its 53-year history that this constituency has sent a Progressive Conservative member to parliament. The constituency which I have the honour to represent is essentially agricul tural, although in the past 10 years we have risen to the position of producing over 25 per cent of Alberta's oil. Our principal agricultural products are, however, diversi fied, so much so that the disposal of surplus grain presents no problem in this constituency. To turn to oil, the present import restric tion imposed by our neighbour to the south has, of course, created some unemployment. The Address-Mr. Speakman Those engaged in our oil industry are for the most part young men proud of their ability to work. However, these young men feel a high degree of confidence that this govern ment will do all that lies in its power to bring about an easing of these restrictions and thus provide for continuous employment. At the present time the markets for our agricultural products are very good and prices are very high. Increased livestock production in my constituency has led to the ending of the problem of surplus grain, because we feed not only our grain but to a considerable extent grain produced in adjoining constitu encies. Dairying is one of our major activities in these constituencies. Our Wetaskiwin branch of the northern Alberta dairy pool is a consistent winner of prizes for butter pro duction. Our surplus dairy products go, in the main, to the central Alberta dairy pool plant at Red Deer, a condensory which is continually increasing its output. Production from this condensory fluctuates seasonally, and during the period of heavy production a surplus is built up at the plant. We feel that some support should be given to this product in order to keep production at a high level and enable the plant to compete in the export market with the larger producers. I would like to read figures to show the importance of this industry to central Al berta. The quantity of evaporated milk we have for export would be equal to approxi mately 500,000 pounds of skim milk powder and 250,000 pounds of butter. This govern ment has put price supports on both skim milk powder and butter. I would suggest to the government and principally to the Min ister of Agriculture that he give considera tion to placing a support on the price of evaporated milk, which would permit this plant to compete with the larger producers in the export market. As in other agricultural constituencies our agricultural population is decreasing, and we welcome this government's suggested amendments to the Canadian Farm Loan Act. A large portion of my constituency is in the marginal and submarginal soil areas where an expansion of farm credit will do much to assist in the modernization and developing of the farms and thus keep our young men on the farms so they will not swell the ranks of the unemployed in the urban centres. We have in Canada today a well-trained staff immediately available to implement any amendments brought in to the Canadian Farm Loan Act, in the field staffs under the Veterans' Land Act. In my opinion no country has such a highly trained staff in agriculture so immediately available. It is in my constituency that the Hobbema and Ma Me O Indian reserves lie. Doubtless 350 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Badanai the word "Hobbema" will have a familiar ring to the hon. member for Bonavista Twillingate, the former minister of citizen ship and immigration. The acceleration of educational and other facilities to hasten the eventual integration of these people into full citizenship in Canada will be welcomed in this constituency and amongst these bands. I must at this point mention the admiration I feel for the churches in the work they have done in educational and other matters amongst the Indian bands. It is a matter of great pride to me to have come to this house as an elected represen tative of some of the people of Alberta. My constituency of Wetaskiwin adjoins the constituency of Red Deer from which my uncle was elected to this house in 1921. It is my sincere hope that I can give to the people of my constituency, the people of Alberta and the people of Canada the rep resentation that was given by my late uncle, Alfred Speakman, to his people whom he served for 15 years between 1921 and 1935. Mr. Hubert Badanai (Fort William): Mr. Speaker, in my first contribution to the debates of this house I should like to exercise the degree of modesty becoming a new mem ber, a modesty which will not overlook, how ever, certain facts concerning the constituency which I have the honour to represent. My words are not words of wisdom; they are simply the voice of a student rather than that of an expert. It may not be necessary, there fore, for me to take up the whole 40 minutes allotted to speakers on the speech from the throne. As a matter of fact, if I may express an humble opinion, these speeches could be limited to 20 minutes save and except by leave of the house or when circumstances warrant a longer period, such as when the Prime Minister speaks, or the Leader of the Opposition. At the outset I wish to extend my personal congratulations to you, sir, for being selected for the most important position in the house, because we believe you represent the very embodiment of fair play so necessary in the conduct of this honourable parliament. I also wish to congratulate the mover (Mr. Lafre niere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne for their excellent presentations, and especially do I wish to congratulate the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Pearson) for the masterly way in which he presented the viewpoint of Her Majesty's loyal opposition urging the government to adopt a policy designed to increase the level of international trade by introducing vigorous measures for the expan sion of the exchange of goods and services with as many countries of the world as possible. [Mr. Speakman.] This is a sure way of helping, if not cur ing entirely, our present unemployment situa tion, which notwithstanding all the oratory we have heard to the contrary continues to loom as a serious problem. I have just received a telegram from the director of the national employment office at Fort William confirming the fact that there are still 2,445 unemployed people in that city. Had it not been for the work of the winter employment committee which conducted a successful "do it now" campaign throughout the winter months the figures of unemployed persons would be much higher. I wish to pay tribute to all of those who served on this committee. Lest I should unwittingly convey a pes simistic outlook concerning the future of Canada I hasten to assure the house that there is no depression in my vision, but I do wish to say there is much room for improvement, and the government has the power and the opportunity to bring about measures which will be beneficial to Canadians everywhere. I believe this can be accomplished if the government will act on suggestions coming from this side of the house, for let it not be said that all the brains of the country are confined to the right side of Mr. Speaker. During the past few days we have had the pleasure of listening to several fine addresses. They were, by and large, notable com mentaries which reflected the thinking of many widely separated areas of Canada, and I in turn am very appreciative of the oppor tunity of bringing to the attention of the house some of the problems besetting my riding as well as our hopes for better days. In his speech on the address a few days ago the hon. member for York West (Mr. Hamil ton) made the following statement, as found at page 49 of Hansard of May 13: May I say that I hope the day of the personality cult in connection with the administration of our foreign affairs is over ... If there has ever been a personality cult in evidence in Canada, Mr. Speaker, I respectfully submit that the present Prime Minister would certainly be head and shoulders above any other candidate because of the admiration showered upon him by his supporters as though he were a Caesar. In fairness to the Prime Minister, I believe it is quite possible that he is a victim of his own popularity, which was exploited rather successfully by his party during the last election campaign. (Translation): As it appears to be in order for English speaking members to say a few words in French, one of our two official languages, I undertook this agreeable task with the help of some friends. MAY 22, 1958 351 I am very much impressed by the friendly attitude of all hon. members, to whatever party they belong. I am beginning to realize that, if the teach ing of French was mandatory at the various levels of our schools, it would be a wonderful thing for Canada. I venture to hope that this will come about in the not too distant future. (Text): The speech from the throne foreshadowed a busy agenda for this session of parliament. It contained some excellent suggestions, with many of which I am in full accord, espe cially the one dealing with the establishment of a harbour commission for the lakehead cities of Port Arthur and Fort William and the preparing of that harbour to handle ocean going ships. I had hoped that the speech would at least contain a reference to the plight of the municipalities with regard to the difficulties they face in obtaining loans for municipal improvements at low rates of interest, especially in view of the submission made to the government on February 7 last by the executive of the Canadian federation of mayors and municipalities. The borrowing capacity of municipalities is necessarily limited, and it is therefore im perative that if they are to continue to provide essential local services the federal government should establish a national loan fund-thus being of inestimable assistance from which the municipalities would borrow at the federal bond rate of interest to finance projects approved by provincial municipal boards. These boards are the watchdogs of municipal expenditures, serving as a pro tective force against unwise spending on non essential projects. With respect to housing, the speech con tained the promise of a vigorous program of house building. However, the legislation adopted in the house last week did not go far enough. My own view is that the government should subsidize interest rates on mortgage loans for houses costing less than $12,000. Anybody who is able to afford a new house costing over $12,000 should be able to meet the going market interest rate. Houses, in cluding site costs, under $12,000 are today in the low cost category and a subsidy of say 2 per cent would bring the effective rate of interest to about 4 per cent. One of the crying needs of the moment is houses for rent. In our municipality we have taken advantage of the former government's housing scheme introduced in 1950 or 1951, and I was pleased to see that the present government is carrying on with the same for mula of 75 per cent federal investment and 25 per cent split between the province and The Address-Mr. Badanai the municipality. The only trouble is that the scheme, while good, should provide for an increase in the federal government's share of the cost of acquiring and clearing sub standard areas for low rental housing projects. I sincerely hope that the Prime Minister will convene a federal-provincial-municipal conference some time during 1958. Such a conference could accomplish much to solve the problems involved in the growth and development of our urban communities. The municipalities cannot be ignored by the fed eral government. The complexities of our modern age demand a reassessment of the field · of responsibilities of all levels of government. The speech from the throne, Mr. Speaker, did not make any reference to government policy on immigration, and this is a rather important omission. In view of Canada's economic prospects for the future, as fore cast by the royal commission, and even accepting the fact that Canadian women are doing their duty by maintaining the birth rate at a high level, there is substantial evidence to indicate the desirability of selec tive and steady immigration if Canada is to achieve its destiny as a truly great nation, to say nothing of the great vision of the development of the north so dramatically portrayed by the Prime Minister during the election campaign. In this connection I wish to submit for the consideration of the government a proposal to establish a policy of bringing in emigrants from any land who will qualify as farmers and who will settle on the land, especially in undeveloped areas such as northwestern Onta rio. Specifically I mean in the area adjacent to the city of Fort William, where we have a vast potential of good land for mixed farming. These prospective settlers would be required to sign an agreement to remain on the land for at least five years, and if they should fail to live up to the contract they would be subject to deportation. This policy would prevent crowding of the labour market and would thus create more jobs for indus trial workers, who would be kept busy pro ducing and manufacturing for these new con sumers. In order to make such a scheme succeed the government should establish a loan fund from which these immigrants would be able to borrow for long terms and at a low rate of interest. This loan fund should also operate for the benefit of established farmers who wish to improve their holdings. The speech from the throne indicated a desire to assist small business. With this I am in full agreement, and I would add that this classification should include tourist oper ators, who should be allowed to participate in any loan fund legislation the government 352 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Badanai introduces to assist small business. At the present time it is almost impossible for a tourist operator to keep his establishment up to the standard desired by the department of travel and publicity because he is unable to obtain a loan from banks, mortgage com panies or government sources. The tourist business is considered the third largest business m Canada, pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the country an nually, yet there is practically no form of assistance to it. One large operator in my city recently stated to me that under certain conditions a farmer could get a loan to instal a water system for his pigs, but as motel operator it was not possible for him to borrow sufficient funds to put respectable washroom facilities in his establishment for human beings. Some of you may ask why I am so interested in the tourist business. The reason is that Fort William and the lakehead area is a real vacationland paradise. The splendor of the scenery is such that I have heard Scottish people say it was a constant reminder to them of Fort William, Scotland, and of the gorgeous bonnie Prince Charles country. This region was practically free of polio even before the advent of the Salk vaccine, and it is a wonderland for hay fever sufferers. There are hundreds of inland lakes, many yet unfished by white men because of a lack of access roads. This lack of roads presents the government with an opportunity to imple ment promises made during the election campaign. From time to time, Mr. Speaker, Fort William received assurance that considera tion would be given to the construction of a new armoury. The site was made avail able by the city and arrangements made for the use of the land occupied by the old building. The present armoury building has been condemned as a fire hazard by the fire chief, whose action was supported by the fire marshal of Ontario. Is it the intention of the Department of National Defence to construct a new armoury in Fort William, or must this old building, which was once an arena, continue to be a menace to the business section of the city? We are somewhat disturbed over the amount of protection the lakehead area can expect in the event of a nuclear war. We cannot agree with the designated role of our cities as a "stand fast" area. We have co-operated in every way possible with civil defence authorities, but always with the reservation that Fort William and Port Arthur are not being called upon to protect the vast food supplies that are stored there. Sufficient thought is not being given to the [Mr. Badanai.] proper protection of a vital area. We are in agreement with most cities that civil defence preparedness is not realistic, that the federal government is encouraging apathy amongst the general public and, more important, is actually discouraging a large nucleus of important key personnel from doing a job. A tidal wave of paper is being turned out by the queen's printer which is filled with vague promises and contradictory and misleading suppositions. Civil defence is the most important service we can provide for the protection of our people, if proper leadership and guidance are given. We are not alone in the civil defence field. Other countries have made far greater progress, why can't we? Surely it is not too costly to provide a proper warning system for every city in Canada. Pumper trucks should be provided by the government for every isolated area, and indeed for all mutual aid areas. Many municipalities cannot afford to provide this equipment, yet it is essential that protection be given. The government should regard civil defence as first-line defence, and be prepared for anything in this nuclear age. The development of a deep sea harbour at the lakehead is vital to the growth and prosperity of the whole of Canada. For years Fort William and Port Arthur fulfilled their role as the breadbasket of the world. Millions of bushels of grain and millions of tons of iron ore from Steep Rock iron mines have been shipped through the lakehead harbours annually. As far back as 1655 Fort William played an important role in the economy of the nation. At that time the French explorers Radisson and Des Groseil liers visited the area. In 1678 Daniel Greysolon Dulhut established a fur trading post, and now this whole region stands on the threshold of huge expansion. It was no surprise to me to hear in the speech from the throne the recommendation that a harbour commission for the lakehead be established. The lakehead is important to the economy of the North American con tinent because it is a natural gateway to the west and in the centre of the whole con tinent. Its destiny has been portrayed as the Chicago of the north, and I am sure that destiny will be achieved. The amount of shipping through lakehead ports exceeded that of Toronto and Hamilton by over one million tons in 1957. I was glad to see, as my hon. friends must have seen, an editorial in the Globe and Mail of May 20 referring to the lakehead. It is headed "New Look for the Lakehead", and reads: A weak spot in Canada's St. Lawrence seaway planning until recently has been the lakehead ports -Fort William and Port Arthur. It has been obvious from the beginning that if the project was MAY 22, 1958 353 to fulfil its great economic promise to the nation as a whole, and to western Canada in particular, the lakehead ports would have to undergo great improvements-organizational and physical. The lakehead harbours are 1,250 miles from Montreal by water or 2,250 miles from the open Atlantic ocean. The impact of the seaway will be stimulating to trade and in dustrial expansion, and will increase the lake head importance as a distribution centre. However, in order to accelerate this develop ment it is essential that the extension of the breakwater be undertaken by the Department of Public Works as soon as possible. Ocean ships are not unique at the lakehead. They have been calling at these ports for many years, but the deepening of the channels and the seaway will permit much larger ships to penetrate the heart of the Canadian hinter land. It will mean cheaper rates for export grain and will eliminate cargo transfer be tween the lakehead and Montreal. The estimates are that this may mean as much as 5 cents a bushel. Natural gas, which is now available at the lakehead, will provide employment for thousands. Notwithstanding all that was said in the famous pipe-line debate of 1956, had it not been for the courage and determination of the former Liberal government to put the bill through this gas would still be under the ground or going to waste instead of enrich ing our economy. The availability of gas will make it possible for an iron ore processing plant to be established in the lakehead area. The processing of iron ore by gas is a revolutionary new method. Such an iron ore processing plant would make Canada in dependent of other countries, particularly the United States, and I understand that iron and steel products are largely responsible for our large trade deficit with that country. I would suggest that the support of the federal government to establish an iron ore processing plant at Fort William would be beneficial to the whole country. As a prophet, Mr. Speaker, I am not in the same class as some of my hon. friends on the other side of the house. However, I venture to predict that within the next 25 years the lakehead area will witness dynamic development into one of Canada's greatest, a mighty pillar supporting the economic progress of our nation. The Prime Minister has not misplaced his confidence in recognizing the need of preparing the lake head for the coming of the seaway. With the exception of the newest members of the house, every one here knew my good friend and distinguished predecessor, Rev. Dan Mcivor, who for 23 years represented the riding of Fort William in this house. 57071-3- 23 The Address-Mr. Stewart I am sure this chamber has seen many members endowed with ability and honesty of purpose, but I doubt whether anyone has ever occupied one of these chairs who could even approach the humanity of the former hon. member for Fort William. I know you would want me to convey to him on your behalf greetings and best wishes for a long, healthy and enjoyable retirement with Mrs. Mclvor, a gracious and beloved lady well known in Ottawa. Finally, I wish to express my deepest gratitude to my constituents for the privilege and opportunity to serve them here. I wish to conclude with a legend concern ing an old Indian chief. This chief was growing very old and, feeling that the end was near, he wished to select someone among his braves to succeed him. So he called all the braves of his tribe together and from among them he selected four whom he thought worthy to carry on the traditions of his forebears. To them he said, "Tomorrow morning at sunrise you will climb yonder mountain: you will climb as high as you can, but you must return at sunset". The following morning the four braves started out and at sunset they returned. Of the first one the old chief asked, "How high did you climb?", and the brave answered, "I saw the spruce". Of the second the old chief asked, "How high did you climb?", and the brave replied, "I saw the pine". To the third the old chief put the same question and the answer came, "I saw the alpine brush". Finally of the fourth the old chief asked, "How high did you climb?" Proudly the brave answered, "I saw the sea". After confederation 91 years ago, under the great Sir John A. Macdonald Canada climbed to the spruce. She climbed to the pine under the great Sir Wilfrid Laurier. Under Borden and Meighen she climbed to the alpine brush; and under the inspired leadership of Mackenzie King and Louis St. Laurent she climbed until she saw the sea. God grant that during the next four or five years under the Prime Minister, John Diefenbaker, Canada may continue on the road to development, prosperity and security for all Canadians. Mr. R. D. C. Stewart (Charlotte): Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege, and I consider it a great honour, to be the first Conservative member to represent Charlotte in 23 years. I approach my parliamentary duties with a great deal of humility, but as I made no promises during my campaign I have no sins 354 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Stewart to answer for. All I intend to do is serve the people of my constituency to the best of my ability. I want to join with others in extending to you, Mr. Speaker, my sincere congratula tions on your election as Speaker of this House of Commons. Although a newcomer to this house I have read with great interest the proceedings of the short parliament, and I could not help but be impressed by your mental dexterity and ability in conducting the affairs of the house. As has been pointed out, the Speaker of this House of Commons occupies a unique position and, I suggest, one peculiar to the British system of government. He represents all the parties in the house and though he is usually nominated by the prime minister of the day, it does not necessarily follow that such will be the case. With your ability, your fairness and your sense of duty I am sure the affairs of this house will be con ducted now, as in the past, in fairness to all with the approval of the whole house. At one o'clock the house took recess. AFTER RECESS The house resumed at 2.30 p.m. Mr. Stewart: I would like at this time, Mr. Speaker, to extend a word of appreciation to the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. Although separated by a great distance geographically these two gentlemen have two things in common, youth and a manifest desire to assist the people who have sent them to this parliament. As one of the members from New Bruns wick I would like on behalf of the people of that province and the people of my own constituency in particular to voice our appre ciation of the magnificent work done by the Minister of Veterans Affairs. He has at all times lent a very sympathetic and considerate ear to our problems. I would also like, on behalf of the people of my constituency, to voice a word of appreciation of the work of the Department of Public Works in my area during the past few months, for the work that is contemplated and for the work that will be done in the next year or so. I was rather surprised to find that some of the members of the opposition were opposed to the program of public works outlined. It is very significant that the great republic to the south is now engaged on such projects to assist in the current unemployment situation. I can speak with some authority, as during [Mr. Stewart.] the period 1944-45 I was engaged as an en gineer by the Department of Public Works, operating out of the Saint John office. At that time we were engaged in what was known as the post-war planning development. Unfor tunately that scheme was dropped, so that when this depression or recession came about we had no shelf of public works available to us. I know that it is not possible to start public works projects overnight. Surveys must be carried out, plans must be made and esti mates obtained, all as preliminary steps to the actual work being started, and had the Liberal government prior to June 10, 1957, established such a shelf of works, then I am sure we would not have had the difficulties we experienced during last summer. I do not wish the Minister of Public Works or the Minister of Transport to become too complacent about this matter, because I am sure they will find there are still many projects awaiting their attention in my con stituency, and if I should be insistent and impatient I hope they will realize I am only trying to better conditions for the people I represent. I would also like on behalf of the people of Charlotte to renew our pledges of loyalty and devotion to the Prime Minister. My words are most inadequate to express to him our feelings for what he has done for our con stituency and for the people of New Bruns wick generally. While my predecessor was in this house and during the period between the second world war and the 1957 election nothing was done to assist the maritime prov inces or the province of New Brunswick in particular. When we asked for power or the money to develop power we were told that we did not have any industries requiring power. When we asked for industries we were told the reverse, that we had no power with which to provide industry. The present Prime Minister, however, realized the inequalities under which the maritimes area was operating and very gen erously persuaded his government to make additional grants over and above the amounts called for under the tax rental agreements, and I am sure that was greatly appreciated by the people of my constituency. He has, Mr. Speaker, in my opinion blazed a path of hope across the face of the maritimes which neither time nor political fortunes will ever erase. He has given to the people of the Atlantic area a new hope, a new courage for the future, and I am sure those people, along with the people of the rest of Canada, will join with him in bringing to fulfilment his national policy for our country. I represent a small constituency in terms of population. It is bounded on the south by MAY 22, 1958 355 three islands and the bay of Fundy, on the west by the state of Maine, on the north by York-Sunbury and on the east by Saint John-Albert. Although the great majority of my people are fishermen or are engaged in the fishing industry, and for that reason require special consideration, I want to tell this house that they are among the finest people in the world; and I can say that without blowing my own trumpet as I am not a native of Charlotte. It has been my privilege during the past 18 years, however, first as an engineer during the war and then as a practising lawyer, to live among them; and I can assure you, Mr. Speaker, that I speak from the bottom of my heart when I say I am proud to represent these people in this house, and that I know they are deserving of better consideration than they have received in the past. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Stewart: During the period since the second world war several economic changes have taken place in my constituency which have been very detrimental to the peace and security of the people there. I do not entirely blame these changes on political considera tions, but it is significant that since 1945, when my predecessor came to this house, great calamity has descended on my con stituents. First there was the closing of the Pennfield airport, which in my opinion was closed entirely for political reasons. Then prior to the 1957 election there was the closing of the textile mill at Milltown. I want to bring to the attention of this house the plight of the people of Milltown. They will shortly run out of all unemploy ment insurance benefits, and we will have approximately 600 families out of work in that town. I was rather interested to learn that within the last few days the province of Nova Scotia has decided to build a textile mill in the depressed area of Pictou county, costing approximately $100,000, which they will rent to a textile firm from Italy for the purpose of carrying on manufacturing. Surely this government, in co-operation with the government of New Brunswick, can do something for the town of Milltown, and I am bringing this matter to the attention of the Minister of Trade and Commerce and also to the attention of Mr. Pichette, minister of industry and development in the province of New Brunswick. We had a third change, also. That was the closing of the army camp at Utopia. During the last campaign that camp was a major issue in the election, but my worthy opponent and my predecessor knew that 57071-3-23½ The Address-Mr. Stewart when the decision was made by his govern ment to make a permanent camp of Camp Gagetown, camp Utopia as an army base would be closed. I have hopes that the facilities and buildings of that camp can still be used for the betterment of the people of my constituency, and plans are now being discussed with the province of New Bruns wick whereby this camp may be utilized, thereby avoiding it being a total loss. I have referred to these three things as affecting the economy of Charlotte county. In 1931 the number of people in New Bruns wick living on farms amounted to 44.1 per cent of the total population, but in 1956 this dropped to 23.3 per cent. In 1931 the farm population in New Brunswick was 180,000, while in 1956 in round figures it was 128,000. A corresponding decrease was noted in my constituency where the farm population now stands, according to the latest available figures, at 1,872, occupying 469 farms. According to the latest available figures from the department of industry and develop ment of the province of New Brunswick, the gross value of manufactured production for 1954 was $287,350,000; and in the breakdown of that table, Mr. Speaker, we notice that the fish processing industry consists of 166 plants employing 2,742 people with a gross value in 1955 of approximately $23 million for the whole province of New Brunswick. Many hon. members of this house will re member the opposition voiced by my pre decessor when the province of New Brunswick obtained the loan toward the Beechwood power development. Whether or not the Beechwood project is sound from an engineer ing viewpoint, it was certainly not part of my predecessor's duty to oppose it, because it was certainly for the benefit of New Brunswick. There is another field in which I am vitally interested, and that is the field of education. At the present time I hold the position of president of the New Brunswick school trustees' association. During the last 10 years the cost of education has increased in Char lotte county by 128 per cent, throwing an enor mous burden on the municipality. This is a very important consideration for this govern ment, and I am hoping that in some way the Dominion of Canada may see its way clear to advancing additional grants to the province of New Brunswick and to the various munici palities so the burden may be removed from, the tax-ridden local authorities. The speech from the throne indicated some of the proposed legislation, but it is not all inclusive, and other proposals beneficial to, the dominion could be introduced . I was. 356 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Stewart very interested, as a practising lawyer, in the contemplated bill of rights. As I mentioned before, I have been practising law for 25 years, and in some instances I have found that individual freedom and liberty has been curtailed under our new system of jurispru dence. I think there should be a return to those fundamental rights which were granted to our forefathers and enjoyed by our pre decessors; that no one should be dispossessed of his land or punished without a fair trial by his peers. These are matters which cannot be expressed in terms of dollars; they go to the very root of democracy and are the very lifeblood of civilization. I am pleased to note that an amendment has been adopted extending the period of seasonal benefits under the Unemployment Insurance Act. May I suggest to the Minister of Fisheries that a further amendment be made to provide greater benefits to the fisher men of the maritime area, particularly to those men who are fishermen as well as ~wners. The making available of funds under the National Housing Act is also a step in the right direction, because without homes people cannot live. May I suggest for the consider ation of this house that we should also estab lish small industries in various municipal ities and communities so that people will be encouraged to enter those communities and live there, setting up homes and raising families. These are some of the problems facing the people of my constituency. These people do not wish me to come before this house begging; we are not asking for anything we do not deserve. We are asking that we be included once again within New Brunswick and within Canada. My worthy opponent, my predecessor in this house, told Upper Canada, when speaking here on one occasion, that the people of Charlotte were nothing but a bunch of smugglers. That is hardly true. We live, it is true, near the United States border and to some extent certain American influence bears upon the islands. But, as I said before, these are the finest people in the world and they are only asking that they be treated as human beings. We have great potentialities in Charlotte. We have many tourist attractions, and all we need is a little assistance and help. We now have a great power development in the process of investigation, the Quoddy project, by means of which the tides of the bay of Fundy will be harnessed to make cheap power. We have also, on Campobello island, the old home of the late Franklin D. Roose velt, which could be made into an important tourist attraction. [Mr. Stewart.] I mentioned earlier that we had three islands. One of these islands will shortly be joined to the state of Maine by a bridge which will give to the people of Campobello some of the benefits enjoyed on the mainland. However, the island of Grand Manan is des perately in need of a new ferry with adequate facilities for the transportation of automobiles and cargo. These are matters which will be mentioned in this house and brought to the attention of the government. All we ask is that we should receive co-operation and assistance so that together with the other maritime areas we can go along with the Prime Minister in his policy of developing the national economy. Mr. Lucien Cardin (Richelieu-Vercheres): Mr. Speaker, may I join with other hon. members on both sides of the house in ex tending to you my sincere congratulations upon your re-election to your high office. I was delighted to hear the Prime Minister mention your name when it came to the ap pointment of a Speaker. I am sure that all hon. members who were in this house last session were impressed by the manner in which you presided over our deliberations. There may have been other Speakers who were, perhaps, more technically-minded than yourself, but I am sure there was no Speaker who was more fair-minded or more human and understanding than Your Honour, and it is with pleasure that I offer you my con gratulations and best wishes. (Transiation): Mr. Speaker, I also want to congratulate the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. Lafreniere) on having moved in such eloquent terms the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I also imagine that the hon. member does not expect me entirely to share his political views but, even while not sharing them, I may at least say that I respect them. I am happy to wish him a long and brilliant career in our parliament. (Text): I should also like to extend my congratu lations to the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen) on the way he seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I listened with interest to the very interesting speech he made on the northland, and I hope the house will have an opportunity to listen to him often this session. Now that the election campaign is over and the dust has settled somewhat I indeed want to congratulate the Prime Minister and the members of the government on having won the confidence of the Canadian people and on having obtained not only a mandate but a great majority in the House of Commons. Such a vote of confidence is certainly an MAY 22, 1958 357 enviable tribute, of which any Prime Minister and any political party might well be proud. But of course, underlying this tribute of the Canadian people there is the feeling of great expectation of things to come, and I sin cerely hope the government will be successful in implementing all its policies and promises and that the policies themselves will prove to be effective and in the best interests of the Canadian people. As a result of the last election the House of Commons has lost from the three opposition parties a great number of sincere and com petent, and in some cases brilliant, parlia mentarians who have made indelible marks in the political, economic and social struc ture of our country, and to whom Canada owes a great debt of gratitude. It might be timely to remind the Canadian people that there is nothing shameful, nothing disgrace ful and nothing personal for a man in public life to experience defeat in an election cam paign and it would indeed be wrong not to pay tribute to those hon. members who have gone down to defeat after many years, in some cases after a lifetime, in the service of their country in the very exacting, largely misunderstood and frequently thankless posi tion of member of parliament. Canada apparently is now witnessing the end of a political era and the beginning of another, and I feel quite sure every hon. member on either side of the house in looking back over the last quarter century of our country's history will feel justifiable pride in the rapid and extensive steps Canada has taken in its march toward nationhood. I feel quite certain that no country in the world can boast of having developed so much in such a short time. The jobless and poverty stricken people of Canada of the depression era now enjoy the second highest standard of living in the world. From a practically ex clusively agricultural country we have devel oped an efficient and powerful industrial machine and have become the world's fourth largest trading nation. No country in the world of 17 million population enjoys as extensive and comprehensive social legisla tion as does Canada. In spite of world war II, the economic difficulties of the post-war years and the Korean war the Canadian economy did not falter. Prosperity and em ployment continued at reasonably stable levels, and there was no serious and lasting post-war recession. In the international field where world trade, international diplomacy and world peace affect our country more than at any other period of our history, Canada evolved from an internationally isolated and unknown country to take the lead among the middle sized nations of the world. As a matter of The Address-Mr. Cardin fact Canada as a middle-sized nation has not only effectively supported peace organizations such as NATO and the United Nations, but Canada actually was instrumental in avoid ing a third world war during the Suez crisis. I am indeed proud to remind the house that it was the present Leader of the Opposition in his capacity as secretary of state for ex ternal affairs who through his tireless, cou rageous and timely negotiations succeeded in maintaining peace by establishing the United Nations emergency force in the Middle East. With all due respect to the Minister of Trans port may I say that the present Leader of the Opposition accomplished this without the estimable help of the present very capable and versatile Prime Minister. As Canada enters a new political era under a Conservative government the House of Commons presents a practically new slate of members with an average age group appar ently lower than it has been for many years. I feel confident, however, that the new mem bers will be able to pick up and carry on where the older and more experienced mem bers of the house left off. There are, of course, new standards to be achieved, new adjustments to be made and new solutions to old problems to be tried out, as more par ticularly set forth in the government's policy platform and promises. One of these main problems to my mind will be an economic readjustment. I am afraid that Canada will face much stiffer competition in the world and the home markets. Somehow there will have to be a halt to the continually rising prices in our country if we expect to sell our products at home and abroad and maintain the stable economy we have known until now. There will also have to be some serious readjustment of Canada's trading position in view of the probable creation of economic blocs such as the European customs union which I believe will characterize the new era as the political and military bloc charac terized the last decade or so. I strongly sus pect that the battles between east and west will be fought in the economic and scientific fields rather than in the military field. All this, of course, will not make it any easier for anyone charged with the administration of the country's business. It might be useful to remind ourselves that it is the earnest desire, the ardent hope and indeed the duty of each member of the house to do his best to ensure that the legis lation passed during this present parliament will meet successfully the various problems of these times and will result in even greater economic, political and social stability and progress than we have known in the past. It is quite clear from the speeches and policy declarations made during the campaign that 358 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Cardin we will not always agree on the best way of achieving a universally desired objective, and of course under our parliamentary sys tem members of the opposition have not only a right but an obligation to be constructively critical of the government's actions in such a way that the public may be informed of as many solutions to the problems as possible. During this parliament the government with 208 members has an overwhelming majority over the 57 total official opposition members, but this in no way should imply a diminution or decrease in the rights and privileges to which the opposition is entitled by the constitution, the traditions and the rules and practices of this house. The rights and privileges that were claimed by hon. members opposite when they were the official opposition are equally justified today, and I believe they should be guarded more jealously and more scrupulously than at any other time in our history precisely because of the government's record majority. It is certainly to be hoped that the attitude taken by the government during the last session is not an indication of what the opposition is to expect during this parliament. In his speech on May 13, as recorded at page 35 of Hansard, the Prime Minister said: Having done something to restore parliament in the measures which we have in mind- And so on. I must say I am a little con cerned about the measures the Prime Min ister may have in mind. Of course there can be no question of not bringing down a regular budget this year, no matter how great a deficit the government may have incurred; and surely the measures the Prime Minister has in mind will continue to give parliament the right to have a debate on the budget, to scrutinize, to question and to vote on all the estimates of all the departments of gov ernment. As hon. members know, that was not done during the past session and hundreds of millions of dollars worth spent by gov ernor general's warrants without bringing the estimates of the majority of the departments before the house, leaving an unprecedented gap in the budgetary history of our country. When the Prime Minister speaks of having done something to restore parliament, I wonder whether he has in mind the extra ordinary procedure followed by the govern ment in dissolving parliament last February. Those who were in the house or in the gal leries that day will realize that there was much more stage setting and more theatri calism than there was respect for the rights and traditions of parliament, or even fairness in the manner in which the house was dissolved. [Mr. Cardin.] Even Hansard could not record the at mosphere that was voluntarily built up around the dissolution of the house-the mystery surrounding the Prime Minister's flight to Quebec, the tension that was allowed to mount in the house from three o'clock on, the time when the Prime Minister arrived from Quebec, the photographers' flash bulbs as the Prime Minister entered the govern ment lobby, his grand march into the House of Commons, the politically tinted valedic tory speech he made at that time, and finally the solemn announcement that the members of parliament had been sitting for nothing because His Excellency the Governor Gen eral had already dissolved parliament. Nor could Hansard record the vehement and justifiable protests of the leaders of the opposition groups against having been ruth lessly and unfairly cut off from saying one word in reply, contrary to all the customs and traditions of the house. Even Your Honour could not rule on the legality or fairness of the procedure that was followed in dissolving the house because there was no longer any House of Commons for Your Honour to preside over. This type of procedure, I submit, may be interesting at Stratford on Avon and might even be justified and useful in a criminal court, but it has no place in the parliament of our country, and is all the more shocking coming from someone who such a very short time ago spoke so eloquently and so forcibly about the necessity of preserving the rights and dignity of this parliament. This incident, of course, did not win the election for the Conservatives and lose it for the Liberals. The Canadian public made their choice and I abide by it. But I feel certain that the people of Canada do not approve of and did not vote for government by tyranny or by drama, no matter how great majority they may have given the present government. I also wonder, Mr. Speaker, whether the Prime Minister considered he was doing something to restore parliament in his recent attempt to ignore what has always been the accepted traditional and constitutional procedure of the house when dealing with international agreements of the importance of the NORAD pact which, as hon. members know, involves the stationing of Canadian troops abroad. Never before in the history of our country, and I am quite certain the Prime Minister was well aware of this, has Canada entered into an international agree ment involving the stationing of Canadian troops abroad without introducing such an agreement in the house by way of a resolu tion and having the agreement ratified by parliament after a full and formal discussion MAY 22, 1958 359 in the house; and this, Mr. Speaker, I sub mit, regardless of whether there was or was not unanimity on the particular agreement. Never before has any prime minister seen fit to alter the customs and traditions fol lowed by the house even on matters far less consequential than the NORAD pact simply because the prime minister presumed the opposition would be in favour of the agreement or because he considered the opposition not sufficiently strong or numer ous to make a difference in the final outcome of the vote. As hon. members know the Prime Minister finally decided, after press ure was put on him by the Leader of the Opposition, to introduce the agreement by way of a resolution. It is, however, difficult to recognize the great defender of parlia mentary rights in the words and the magnanimous manner in which the Prime Minister permitted members of parliament to talk on the NORAD pact. Permit me, Mr. Speaker, to read from Hansard what transpired the other day. The Leader of the Opposition put the following supplementary question as found on page 243 of Hansard of May 20: Will the Prime Minister not give further con sideration to the possibility of the House of Com mons discussing this agreement in the form of a resolution for approval or disapproval by the house? In answer the Primer Minister said: Mr Speaker, yesterday in answer to the question asked by my hon. friend, the Secretary of State for External Affairs said that further opportunity would be given for discussion. The hon. gentleman now suggests that an opportunity might be provided by a general discussion of a resolution in this regard. I have looked over the records, and in view of the fact that this is part of the NATO concept- May I interject here that that is certainly a debatable point. -I do not think there is any reason why this matter should be dealt with in that way. This to my mind, Mr. Speaker, is the important part. Also I would point out that I felt that naturally since the previous government had done all the preliminary work in connection with this matter and had arrived at a tentative arrangement, although it was not placed in the form of notes, there would not be any probability of opposition in the acceptance by the house of the agreement or the notes which have passed between those two countries. I ask you, Mr. Speaker; have we arrived at a point where because the Prime Minister presumes that the opposition will not object to certain legislation, the Prime Minister can do away with what has always been the practice and the tradition of the house and refuse to bring before the house in the proper manner agreements as important as The Address-Mr. Cardin the NORAD pact? On page 244 the Prime Minister continued with these words: However, my concept of my position, in view of the disproportionate percentage of government membership in the house, in the opinion of hon. gentlemen opposite, and also because the opposi tion seems desirous of having a vote in order to show its opposition to the exchange of notes- May I also interject that that is a gratuitous statement. If the opposition is to decide to vote for or against, it must first of all have had the opportunity of studying what exactly is involved in an agreement as important as the NORAD pact; and I might say, Mr. Speaker, that the whole question of NORAD since its introduction into the house has been a source of confusion increased only by the inability of members of the opposition to obtain precise, definite, logical and non contradictory answers from the members of the government. The Prime Minister con tinued: -is that I would have no objection whatsoever to having a resolution submitted so that hon. gentlemen may have the opportunity to stand up and be counted on this matter. Well, Mr. Speaker, it is incredible that these words should come from the present Prime Minister after all the speeches and promises he made concerning the restoration of the sovereignty, dignity and prestige of parliament, and concerning the rights of members of the opposition. What the Prime Minister is saying in fact is that after trying to short-circuit parliament he has no objection to following the long established and invari able procedure in dealing with international agreements of paramount importance to Canadians as a whole. The Prime Minister, of course, is trying to create the impression that he is doing a favour to the Leader of the Opposition and to the members of the opposition by letting us understand that he is now condescending to have this resolution brought before the house as a matter of generosity. It is not a matter of generosity or con descension, it is a matter of right. Mr. Montgomery: That is a debatable point. Mr. Cardin: The opposition has a right to try to find out exactly what is involved in this particular agreement. I submit also, Mr. Speaker, that if this government had not finally decided to introduce a resolution on this matter, then the government would have been involved in an extremely serious and unprecedented transgression of the sovereignty of this parliament. I respectfully submit, Mr. Speaker, that this is a far cry indeed from doing something to restore parliament. I cannot help but say here that there have been more attempts at infringement of the rights and sovereignty of parliament in the 360 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Cardin last 12 months than there had been in 22 years of Liberal administration. Mr. Murphy: You had better put closure on the record too. Mr. Cardin: If it was wrong at that time, then closure is still wrong under a Conserva tive government. I must turn now to a subject which is uppermost in the minds of all Canadians and that, of course, is unemployment. The fact that the government recently felt compelled to introduce additional emergency unemploy ment measures is a clear indication that the government feels the country is facing, even now, something more than seasonal unemploy ment. However, references to unemployment were conspicuously absent from the throne speech. In his speech the other day the Prime Minister tried heroically to create the impression that if unemployment existed at all, it was merely of a temporary or seasonal nature and no serious problem really existed. If that were so what necessity would there have been for introducing new emergency legislation which, in fact, extends seasonal unemployment benefits to seven months out of the year. Hon. members who were in the house at the time will recall how desperately the government tried to ignore unemployment back in October and November- Mr. Murphy: What about March? Mr. Cardin: -and how finally they ran away from the problem altogether in Feb ruary of this year. Surely, Mr. Speaker, the government knows very well that it cannot pull the ostrich trick a second time without leaving itself in a very vulnerable position indeed. We of the opposition do not intend to be hypnotized into silence on that subject by the continual wagging of that part of the ostrich which is not in the sand. Mr. Murphy: You tried to hide from the March report, and that was not in the sand. Mr. Cardin: As hon. members know, at this time of year there should have been a far greater number of unemployed back in the active labour force than has been the case to date. As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, as of April 17, 1958, there were 825,359 unplaced applicants. I admit, and I am very happy to do so, that 74,000 people found employment during the last month. In this morning's Gazette there is an announcement of a decrease in unemployment. I was nevertheless very much concerned about the first sentence in that article. It states: Canadian employment In April moved ahead of the year-before figure, but unemployment remained substantially higher than in April, 1957. [Mr. Cardin.] It is the last part, Mr. Speaker, which I believe is important. Still, there are people who are unemployed who are not considered part of the group usually classed as seasonally unemployed. There is unemployment which is far above the normal seasonal unemploy ment level. Mr. Browne (St. John's West>: So what? Mr. Cardin: So what? What is 820,000 unemployed? It does not matter to you at all. Mr. Browne (St. John's West>: Yes, it does, but they have the same problem in the United States. Mr. Cardin: Let the United States look after their problems. It is up to this govern ment to look after ours. Mr. Baskin: The Liberals did not make a very good job of it. Mr. Cardin: In addition to that, if some thing was wrong during the Liberal regime it would still be wrong now. If members of the government feel they cannot look after these important questions like unemploy ment, then I am sure we can tell them how that can be done. Mr. Murphy: What about March 31? Mr. Cardin: Perhaps if effective action had been taken in October and November of last year, and if parliament had not been para lysed for three or four months in the early part of this year, the situation might not have been as serious as it is today. The prospects for work in my riding, where there has been alarming unemployment for some time, are far from good. Sorel Indus tries are contemplating suspending their operations; Marine Industries will of necessity have to make serious cut-backs in their per sonnel; Quebec Iron and Titanium already have let out some 250 to 300 men, and Quebec Titanium Pigments are extremely worried about the difficulty of liquidating their stocks, so are considering reducing their production. Then, too, the textile mill in Sorel is going through the same crisis as all textile mills in the country. No matter how eloquently or how often members of the government may claim that unemployment has reached the bottom and recession no longer exists, the people in the plants I have mentioned, and indeed in plants throughout the country, will be extremely difficult to convince that there is really no unemployment. Mr. Baskin: What government allowed the textile industry to disappear? Mr. Cardin: If the hon. member wishes to make a speech he can do so when I sit MAY 22, 1958 361 down. Everyone in the house and in the country is very anxious to see the number of unemployed substantially decrease, and that as soon as possible. Canadians have a right to expect that the government will tackle the problem of unemployment and solve it, as the Prime Minister promised he would during the election campaign. I can easily understand why the other day the Prime Minister said he did not wish to relive the last political campaign, during the course of which Canada was made to feel that the Prime Minister really had the only solutions to all the problems. I must say, however, that I was not a little surprised to hear the Prime Minister say, in addressing the house, that he was not going to get into a political argument. Well, Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister does not intend to engage in a political argument in the House of Commons, when does he propose to engage in political con troversy? Surely he does not intend to call another election within a few months? It was only after the Prime Minister did engage in a political controversy, after claiming that he would not, that we realized he was once again resorting to some sort of figure of speech. The attempt at humour which he uses to slip out from under an embar rassing political argument reminds me very much of another political figure, well known in Quebec, who has the habit of evading serious and well-founded political arguments with what he considers to be humour. The Prime Minister was indeed funny- Mr. Chevrier: He generally is. Mr. Baskin: He was not funny on March 31. Mr. Cardin: -when, as reported at page 39 of Hansard he said: My hon. friends who suddenly developed an interest in tax cuts did not develop it until after they were not in a position to do anything. That was indeed very funny. Hon. mem bers opposite thought that was quite a cute statement. But I wonder whether that is any funnier than having hon. members opposite develop a tax-cut complex before the June 10 election and promptly forget about it when they were in a position to do something about it. Mr. Baskin: They made the first major tax cuts in 20 years. Mr. Cardin: We are talking about tax cuts. We are not talking about tax scratches such as what the government did at the last session. Mr. Speaker: Order. I would remind hon. members that it is not necessary to comment on everything the hon. member says. 57071-3-24 The Address-Mr. Cardin Mr. Chevrier: They don't like it, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Cardin: Apparently not everyone is of the opinion that the matter of tax cuts is a laughing matter. As reported in the Montreal Gazette of April 21, 1958 we find the following: A report of the Rockefeller brothers fund called tonight for quick, co-ordinated government and business action-including a major federal tax cut -to end the U .S . recession .. . The Rockefeller report, prepared by a panel of 17 business men, economists and educators. did not specify the size of the proposed tax cut. However, the context of the report made it clear that a reduction of several billions of dollars had been meant. Members of the panel said that a $5,000,000,000 figure had been in preliminary drafts, but had been eliminated from the final version because of disagreement among committee members. Apparently in the United States tax cuts are not considered as being humourous. I might also remind hon. members opposite that tax cuts were not mentioned by anyone in the United States during the fiscal year 1956-57. It is only since the autumn of 1957, when the recession was being felt both in the United States and in Canada, that tax cuts would have been desirable, necessary and effective in combating unemployment and the present recession. All the Conservative government had to do was follow the former Liberal policy of cutting taxes in times of economic instability or, better yet, follow their own policy of tax cuts, the one they were talking about before the June 10 election. In any event, that course would have been far more effec tive and more in the general interest of the Canadian people than that of running away from the problem of unemployment last February. Mr. Baskin: The Canadian people did not think we ran away. Mr. Cardin: Today the government has all the power and all the authority it needs to implement policies which it believes will best combat the recession. As a matter of fact there is really only one thing the govern ment cannot do, and that is this. It cannot make the people of Canada believe that there is no recession or that there is no unem ployment. Mr. Grafftey: Your are going to talk us into one. Mr. Cardin: We would be following your example in 1954 and 1955 if that were the case. But what we are trying to do is to wake this government up and urge it to take the necessary steps it had in mind during the campaign. (Translation): Mr. Speaker, I wish to congratulate the hon. member for Longueuil (Mr. Sevigny) on 362 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Cardin his appointment as vice-chairman of the house. I am particularly glad to offer him my best wishes, our two constituencies being linked geographically if not politically, and because we both have at heart the best interests of the people of that beautiful part of the province of Quebec, the south shore of Montreal island. I should like also to congratulate the hon. members for Labelle and Lotbiniere (Messrs. Courtemanche and O'Hurley) on their ap pointment to important cabinet posts. I shall in no way hesitate to say that the people of the province of Quebec are placing much reliance on those two representatives for the protection of its rights and privileges. I am glad also to wish them good luck and my best regards. Mr. Speaker, I should like to thank the people of the Richelieu-Vercheres riding for the confidence they have shown me at the last election in renewing my term of office. I am very happy and proud of the Liberal victory in my riding; for my part, I shall spare neither time nor effort to look after the welfare of the whole population of Ri chelieu-Vercheres. Among the Conservative members from the province of Quebec here present there are many who bear the mark of the Union Nationale party, with everything which that entails. I shall not refer to the type of electoral campaign which the Union Nationale party waged in the last election, as I am ashamed to think that our province tolerates this type of political manoeuvring which is in the process of destroying all sense of political responsibility and morality among our population. An hon. Member: Order. Mr. Cardin: But when I look around in this house, I cannot help wondering how much it has cost the treasury and the people of Quebec for the presence among us of so many members of the Union Nationale. An hon. Member: Order. Mr. Cardin: I admit, Mr. Speaker, that I am quite anxious to hear these hon. members tell us on what grounds they would have us believe that the present government is less centralizing than the former, when as a matter of fact the speech from the throne forecasts certain legislation that will draw the government deeper into the provincial field. Nor will they find it easy to explain how the autonomy of the province is less threatened than before June 10, since financial relations [Mr. Cardin.] between the provinces and the present government are exactly on the same basis as they were under the Liberal administration. (Text): Mr. Speaker: Order. I am sorry to interrupt the hon. member, but I must inform him that his time has expired. Mr. L. R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg): My first words will be to compliment you, Mr. Speaker, upon your re-election to your high office. Your legal and parliamentary ex perience and knowledge, your sense of duty and good humour commend you as the unanimous choice of this house. I should also like to congratulate the Deputy Speaker and the deputy chairman of committees, as well as the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the sec onder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address. I should also like to take this opportunity of thank ing the majority of the good people of Queens-Lunenburg who honoured me by re electing me to this house. Since the opening of the 24th parliament I have listened with much interest to the many speeches made by the new members as well as the senior members of the Con servative party, and much has been said in which I concur. I have also listened with interest to the remarks made by the survivors of the shipwrecked Liberal party. Some hon. members, as they pop up and down, remind me of a baby whale as it spouts its hot air to the four winds. During the 23rd parliament I was some what amused by the actions of the hon. mem ber for Bonavista-Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) as well as other former cabinet min isters of the derelict Liberal party as, one by one, like a lobster with the bait in its claws, they arrived in this house dragging after them the red book of the Conservative party's promises. Just like the bait that trapped the lobster, that book of Conservative pledges was the undoing of the Liberal party, for every one has been implemented or is in the process of being implemented by the Prime Minister and his party. Mr. Pickersgill: Grimm's fairy tales. Mr. Crouse: We have just listened to the hon. member for Richelieu-Vercheres discuss unemployment in Canada. We are all aware of the unemployment situation which is exist ing in our country today, and there is no member of this house who is not kept con stantly informed of conditions within his own riding, but unemployment is not just some thing which happens of itself. It has causes, and the logical way to deal with it is to search out those causes and try to cure them. MAY 22, 1958 363 From the results of the election of March 31 there appears to be little doubt in the minds of the Canadian people that the blame for the situation does not belong at the feet of this government. Part of it, however, can be laid upon the fumbling and lack of action of the former Liberal administration, who were indifferent during their term of office to the wants of the Canadian people. We have experienced in this country a number of years of war-born prosperity, enhanced by the rapid development of our natural resources and new technological advances. During these years of easy prosperity our production costs, however, have risen faster than the prices we were receiving, and when the time arrived when we had to reduce our prices in order to make sales we found ourselves saddled with costs we were power less to reduce. We seemed to have reached the stage at which the markets could no longer absorb our products at the prices we were asking. We had failed to reduce our costs; we had failed to reduce our prices, and we are failing to sell our products. As our export sales have fallen off un employment has increased among us. We cannot long continue to shut our eyes to the realities of the market and ask that our purchasing power be increased by increasing the number of dollars in circulation. The only way purchasing power can be increased is by increasing the production of those things which can be sold. In the final analysis it is the sale of goods with which we are concerned, for unless we export we perish economical]y. Wage increases are of little value when we consider that all their advantage has been lost because they have caused higher living costs and prices and have brought about a slowing down of sales, increasing unemploy ment throughout the nation. This is a fact which must be impressed upon all union leaders as well as other classes within this nation, for there are many people tn Canada who are unable to increase their incomes by means of union demands. I refer to the unorganized workers, the self-employed, the farmers, the fishermen, the lumbermen, those who are living on their savings and on their pensions. They, in addition to the unemployed, are the greatest sufferers from inflation caused by this continuous increase in wages. It is the responsibility of the government to assist these people wherever possible, and I wish to commend the govern ment for extending the period during which unemployment insurance benefits are to be received. I submit, however, that one of the most important problems facing this government today is the problem of inflation. The incomes and savings of the majority of 57071-3- 24½ The Address-Mr. Crouse our people are defined in stated numbers of dollars, and I believe it is the duty of the government to maintain the value of that dollar at a constant level and make certain that no action is taken or policy adopted which will further depreciate the purchasing power of our medium of exchange. We have heard criticism, and much of it, this afternoon to the effect that no action has been taken to provide work for our people. While I do not believe the government can deal entirely with the situation, it can, working within the framework of industry, provide a stimulus. I have read the speech from the throne, and in my opinion it is the blueprint for progress and expansion throughout every part of Canada from the Atlantic to the Pacific; it is a realization of the economic situation which exists in Canada today and it is a dynamic plan to bring our country out of the economic doldrums and out of the Sargasso sea of uncertainty into which we have drifted in 22 years of Liberal cross currents. I do not believe that Canada is today adrift in a fog. The plan for our future development is embodied in this throne speech for all to see. It outlines the plan for progress which is indicative of the vision of our Prime Minister and the present govern ment. Plans are being made to accelerate the construction of useful public works and encourage the developing and processing of our vast natural resources. The govern ment's plan to promote housing is commend able, for we know from past experience that this will be of great benefit to the manu facturing and building trades throughout the nation. This plan to further assist in the construction of new homes shows an awareness by the present government of the needs of many Canadian citizens. Canada's population today is growing at an enormous rate, and this country is now in the world's most favourable position in terms of numbers of people and the resources with which to support them. Canada's annual growth rate was about 2.1 per cent, the highest of any western industrial nation, between 1946 and 1951, and it then hit an amazing 2.8 per cent between 1951 and 1956. Heavy immigration and a comparatively high birth rate accounted for the spurt in Canada's growth in population, which reached approx imately 17 million this spring. To these citizens new housing loans will be a blessing. Assistance to provincial governments for special projects, expansion of airports and airways, increased work on our harbours, rivers and public buildings, the construction of a railway to Great Slave lake, construction of the South Saskatchewan dam, and new research programs to assist in the mineral 364 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Crouse development of our Arctic islands, all con stitute a broad vision for the better future of Canadians generally. I mention these points, for they seem to have been overlooked by the opposition members when they were making reference to the speech from the throne. I have the honour to represent the con stituency of Queens-Lunenburg in Nova Scotia, which was at one time referred to as "down east". We do not hear this expression a great deal today, but in the days of wooden ships and iron men it was very common and being a down-easter set a man apart as one of the hardy breed who brought wealth and honour to our province and were responsible for many of the Canadian "firsts" belonging to Nova Scotia. At Port Royal, for example, there was the first white settlement of Canada by the French, and at Halifax there was the first English town. Both the first Roman Catholic and Protestant churches were founded in Nova Scotia, as were the first grist mill, light house, coal mine, law court, newspaper, dock yard and school. There Canada's first airplane flight was also made and the first drama to be written and staged, to name but a few. With the passing of wooden ships as the most important means of travel, Nova Scotia did fall behind in the new era of industry and manufacture. A generation brought up in the tradition that our destiny was to carry a large part of the world's commerce appeared to be at a loss when the pattern changed. That was only a pause in our development, how ever, and throughout the whole province a new spirit of progress is awakening. We are looking ahead to see what we can do to make Nova Scotia a worthy home for the people who make up our families, our friends and our neighbours. To this end I commend the government for outlining in the speech from the throne that unremitting efforts will be made to sell Cana dian agricultural and fisheries products in the markets of the world. Our economy in Nova Scotia, and throughout the whole of the Atlantic provinces, is firmly based upon the fishing industry. It is the backbone of our foundries and shipyards and provides work for our wood lot owners who supply the shipyards with native wood for ship con struction, as well as keeping a large number of our people employed in the shore fish processing plants. Throughout my riding, from Mill Cove in Lunenburg county to St. Catherines river in Queens county, many of my people are directly engaged in deep sea or shore fishing. In Queens county the fishermen are mainly concerned with lobster fishing, while in [Mr. Crouse.] Lunenburg county the majority of the fisher men are engaged in deep sea or bank fishing. Due to the size of the Canadian population the bulk of the fresh fish catch, approxi mately 70 per cent, is sold on the United States market. The dried salt cod is still exported to traditional markets in the British West Indies, and in view of these facts all fishermen are deeply conscious of govern ment effort to improve trade relations, not only with Great Britain but also with the United States. We in the Atlantic provinces must export our fish or we die economically. Our market for salt codfish has now become the federation of the West Indies and this federation, faced with grave constitutional and financial problems, is looking to the new world for help. Their aim is to become a self-governing dominion within the com monwealth, but to do this they will need outside help along with hard work on the part of the some 3 million people of mixed origins in 10 British colonies made up of more than 15 islands in the Caribbean. While these islands are a mere 8,000 square miles of land, they are spread over a thousand mile area of the Caribbean. The economies of these islands are similar and, outside of bauxite in Jamaica and oil in Trinidad, are based largely on exports of sugar, rum, ba nanas, citrus fruits and juices, cocoa, coffee, spices, copra and cotton. In my opinion this new federation presents a challenge to Canada. Here is an oppor tunity to provide assistance to a people who are determined to take their place in the commonwealth, whose ideas of government coincide with ours, not communistic but dem ocratic, with a parliament modelled after the British parliament. They must overcome terrific problems, for as separate British colo nies these islands had erected customs and tariff barriers and also immigration bars against one another. These prevented the free flow of goods among the islands as well as preventing the citizens from moving freely from one island to the other. However, they are getting on with the job, and I commend the government for offering to donate a ship which will be built in Canada after the federation decides the type and size which will be most useful. I would further suggest to the government that we investigate the possibility of increas ing our imports from the new federation of bananas, citrus juices and dried citrus pulp, which is a valuable supplement in the feeding of beef and dairy cattle. Our imports of coffee and cocoa should also be stepped up, to say nothing about the traditional liquid we have imported into Nova Scotia for years. MAY 22, 1958 365 This action on the part of Canada, will immediately provide the dollars needed to im port from Canada potatoes, salt codfish and lumber, to name but a few of the items needed by a growing nation. This activity will stimulate our own economy, provide work for our people in the Atlantic provinces and again create industry in ports such as Liverpool and Port Medway in Queens county as well as the ports of Bridgewater and Lunenburg, where for years shiploads of lum ber and fish were carried to the West Indies. Speaking of fish, our great industry in the Atlantic provinces, I should like to refer to recent articles in the Halifax Herald and the Globe and Mail with regard to the quality at present exported to the West Indies. Com plaints were registered by three members of the new West Indies government with regard to the price, quality and flavour of salt cod fish presently obtained from Canada. Appar ently there has been a decline in the quality of fish received from Canada, and some im porters would like to obtain the high quality formerly received from Nova Scotia. In my opinion the reason for this is the fact that Nova Scotia still uses the dory schooner in the catching of cod for the salt fish industry, though their numbers are de clining; only 14 such vessels were in use during last year throughout the maritimes. Their numbers are declining because of in ability to secure crews to go in fishing dories. However, it is an accepted fact that larger, better quality codfish are caught by hook and line than by the dragger method, as trawls can be set in areas where draggers cannot operate. With this thought in mind, I believe en couragement should be given the industry by the government to combine the modern method of long lining, along with the schooner or mother ship. A schooner could accom modate on her deck four long liners, 40 feet in length, which could be loaded by the use of davits. The schooner would need to have a wider beam than usual to take care of the deck load, but this would increase her carry ing capacity. The original cost of this com bined operation would be rather excessive for private industry, but I believe the con struction of a ship of this nature on a trial basis should be encouraged by the govern ment with the hope of re-establishing the cod fishing, as well as strengthening the ship building, industry and all allied industries by providing work in the shipyards of the maritimes. I should like to say a few words at this time regarding the St. Lawrence seaway, on which I understand three-quarters of the work has been completed. This will cost the The Address-Mr. Crouse Canadian people some $300 million, and I question whether this will ever be recovered within the 50-year recapture period or longer, regardless of the tolls charged. I should like to point out, however, the serious effects I believe this seaway will have upon our Cana dian shipping industry. At the present time Canadian law permits ships of commonwealth registry to carry goods between Canadian ports. Under that privilege, ships of United Kingdom registry are rapidly taking over a growing share of Canada's domestic shipping business. In 1953 ships of United Kingdom registry carried five and one-half per cent of the traffic in the Canadian coastal trade, with 36 ships operating here. In 1954 they sent over 44 ships which carried seven and one half per cent of the traffic, picking up an extra half million tons of cargo. In 1955 with 52 ships they picked up 10 per cent of the business with an increase of 1.2 million tons, and again in 1956 United Kingdom ships were up to 14 per cent of the traffic with 56 vessels carrying 2.3 million tons more than in 1955. In 1956 United Kingdom flags carried all the iron ore moved up the St. Lawrence river from Seven Islands; 81 per cent of the coal from Cape Breton to St. Lawrence river ports, and much of the cargo shipped to sub-Arctic regions. The Canadian taxpayer pays part of the freight on Cape Breton coal moved inland under a policy of assisting the coai miner. He also pays much of the freight on cargo going to the Arctic, since it includes supplies used for defence and other govern ment establishments. Yet, the majority of these shipping companies and their em ployees who move that freight pay no taxes in Canada. Unless this situation is changed it will be a matter of only a few years after the opening of the seaway, which is being built at such great cost to the Canadian taxpayer, until the Canadian coastal and inland lake and river fleet goes the same way as the Canadian deep sea fleet, which is out of business. At the end of world war II we had the greatest merchant fleet per capita of any na tion in the world. However, the former Liberal administration gave no thought to maintaining this fleet and sacrificed it through war assets disposal at prices in some instances below the cost of scraping the barnacles from the hulls. It is difficult today to rebuild this merchant fleet, for at the present pre vailing scale of wages Canadian shipbuilders and coastal shipping operators simply can not meet competition from the more cheaply built and operated United Kingdom ships. In view of this situation I would urge the government that steps be taken now to re serve the Canadian coastal shipping business. 366 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Crouse to ships built and registered in Canada. In doing this Canada would be following the example of other highly industrialized coun tries, and I refer especially to the United States. This action would benefit our many shipyards and shipbuilders, not only in my riding and in the Atlantic provinces but throughout the greater part of Canada. I should like to say a few words also at this time, Mr. Speaker, about the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. This crown corpo ration has asked parliament to approve a total expenditure of $61,358,135 for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1959. This is an increase of $19,063,913 over last year, and in my opinion the time has arrived for a closer examination of the operations of this corporation which desires to spend so much of public funds. I am not suggesting that there is any neglect, fraud or mishandling of public funds. However, I submit to you, sir, that the amounts presently required to produce strictly Canadian programs have become excessive when we consider that we are a nation of ,only 17 million people. There is a limit beyond which conscience, or common sense, tells us we cannot go; and if we are to govern this nation on a sound, business-like basis, and continue to provide national radio and television service, I would earnestly suggest that this government place a maxi mum on expenditures of the Canadian Broad casting Corporation. I repeat that $61,358,135 is too much money, by any yardstick to be spent on the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. Some of their productions are very good. Others, how ever, though lavish in the extreme are neither educational nor entertaining. I believe the expenditure by this corporation of $42,294,222 in 1957-58 to be ample and would request that the government give serious considera tion to the reduction of this corporation's expenditures. At this time I should also like to impress upon this house a matter of great interest to all Nova Scotians, especially those of my riding. I refer to the tourist industry. We have on the south shore of Nova Scotia the finest scenery to be found anywhere in Canada. Mr. Pickersgill: Except in Newfoundland. Mr. Crouse: Good highways, excellent salt water bathing beaches at Sommerville, White Point and Crescent Beach to name but a few, the finest of lobster, scallops and other sea food served in cheerful surround ings, the finest of golf clubs and warm sum mer days and cool evenings offer to the tour ist unexcelled opportunity for enjoyment. We are truly Canada's ocean playground, and the fact that the ferry Bluenose between [Mr. Crouse.] Yarmouth and Bar Harbor is filled to capac ity each trip during the summer months is indicative of the number of Americans who have found this paradise of Nova Scotia and desire to visit and enjoy its beauty. There is ample evidence that the Bluenose alone is unable to cope with the demand for accom modation, and this summer a United States company is also planning to operate a steam ship service between Boston and Yarmouth. This is the age of travel, and in my opinion this demand from the travelling public could well be met by the construction of a second ferry which would provide a continuous service between Boston and Shel burne, Nova Scotia. I make the suggestion because there is no assurance that the United States company will provide its service beyond 1958, and I believe this expansion of tourist facilities could be considered on the basis of federal assistance programs provided in other fields of national development else where in Canada. When making my maiden speech on November 13 last I expressed this opinion, and I wish to again impress upon the government the need of establishing this additional service along the south shore. In closing I wish to state that the people of Queens-Lunenburg still have many unsolved problems. We have our share of unemployment and difficulty in marketing our pulpwood. Our shipyards are not as busy as in former years, and the prices for fish to our fishermen have not shown a noticeable increase in the last ten years. Our farmers share the same marketing problems experienced by farmers throughout other parts of Canada. However, our peo ple were definitely influenced and impressed by the program of the Conservative party. They were convinced that here was a truly national policy which would take cognizance of the special problems of the maritimes and of the province of Nova Scotia. I believe that as these policies are implemented we will begin to grow and develop and con tinue to make in the future, as in the past, our contribution to the national economy of Canada. Mr. Crestohl: Mr. Speaker, will the hon. gentleman permit a question? Mr. Crouse: With pleasure. Mr. Crestohl: The hon. gentleman has postulated the theory that Canada's economic and unemployment problems are to a large extent due to the fact that we have lost the export market. I would like to know whether the hon. member believes that we should replace the export market we have lost by a home consumers' market, and if he thinks MAY 22, 1958 367 that the government's policy of closing off immigration will tend to increase the home consumers' market. An hon. Member: You can make your speech later. Mr. Habel: Good question. Mr. Erhart Regier (Burnaby-CoquiUam): Mr. Speaker, may I along with so many other hon. members offer to you, to the Deputy Speaker and to the deputy chairman of com mittees my very best wishes and congratula tions. The people of Canada, in the light of the composition of this house, and in the light of some rather difficult situations we encountered in the past and which we may face in the years ahead, are at this time look ing forward with a great deal of confidence to our Speakers of the House of Commons for the maintenance of the traditional rights and privileges of every individual hon. mem ber of this house. My opening remarks in this debate are an expression of gratitude to the electors of my riding for once again choosing me as their representative. Unlike the hon. member for Charlotte I do not propose to say anything adverse about any of my opponents in the election campaign just completed, or indeed in any other election campaign. Perhaps it is because I come from British Columbia that I am able to say any opponent I have ever had in an election campaign, had he been elected to this house, would have served to the utmost of his or her ability. I always recognize that their intentions in offering their services were just as sincere as mine. I feel gratitude to the people of my riding in a greater degree than ever before in view of the great emotional wave that seemed to sweep across the country on March 31. Indeed, many of us on April 1 had the feel ing that a hurricane has passed over leaving only a few shorn lambs. Nevertheless the harsh realities of the economic uncertainties which are becoming evident in every aspect of our economic structure, including the harsh reality of unemployment, are like cold winds causing a new growth of wool to appear on our backs, and before very long I am sure the people of Canada will be con vinced again that they have in this parliament opposition members who are so essential to good government. I do not feel it desirable to rehash the election campaign just concluded. The deci sion has been made and I offer my congratula tions to the Prime Minister on his accomp lishment. Perhaps I should also extend congratulations to the advertising agency that was employed during the course of the cam paign. However, for the sake of all of us I wish him and his government well. The Address-Mr. Regier I believe it is vital that an opposition mem ber always place the welfare of the Canadian people ahead of the welfare of his political group, regardless of how keenly he may feel that he and his political movement have all the answers. I think it may be fairly said of the C.C.F. movement that while adhering firmly over the years to their fundamental principles its members have always expressed acceptance of the ultimate wisdom of the people. The evolution of our society has for centuries rested on the people making progress by means of trial and error. The very essence of democratic socialism is a faith in man's ability-yes, even in his responsibility-to rule himself, and we propose that man ought to rule himself in the economic field as well. Therein lies the basic reason for our denuncia tion of the principle involved in the rule of either the dictates of capital or the dictates of a political machine. Having said that may I say, Mr. Speaker, that we also oppose government by the dicta tion of an individual regardless of who he is, what he has accomplished or whatever ability he may have. At this point I should like, in all seriousness, to utter a word of warning. I do not believe that either personal or public interest is served by the tendency of the present Prime Minister to decide it all and to do it all. Inasmuch as some 23 Conserva tives have now been admitted as members of Her Majesty's privy council, surely that ought to confer upon each of them a measure of re sponsibility and authority, and should mean a little more than merely being obliged to be the parrot or mouthpiece of someone else's thinking. When the Prime Minister was in the op position first as the member for Lake Centre and later as the member for Prince Albert he used to be very outspoken in his con demnation of what he regarded as the sins of the Liberal government, in that he claimed that they were violating the rights of par liament, the traditional forms and institutions, and were lacking in respect for the crown. I hold in my hand some of the Prime Minister's election campaign literature. I believe this particular piece was delivered to hundreds of thousands of homes throughout the coun try. Under the heading "Man of Action" is a picture of what is supposed to be "The Diefenbaker cabinet". It is of some signifi cance that Her Majesty's privy council in Canada is now called the Diefenbaker cabinet. However, that may be understand able in the heat of an election campaign. But of even greater significance to me is the insult to the crown, in that in the centre of the picture of the Diefenbaker cabinet I see a 368 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Regier photograph of His Excellency the General, supposedly a member cabinet. Governor of that Senior members of parliament can well imagine what the former member for Lake Centre and Prince Albert, now the Prime Minister, would have said in the house had any other political party ever had the nerve to include the Governor General as a mem ber of a particular cabinet. I know, Mr. Speaker, that according to the rules of the house the political leanings of the Governor General are not a subject of debate in the house. Therefore I cannot pursue the matter furth& at this time, beyond expressing the hope that I trust the Governor General will never become a member of anybody's cabinet, not even a member of the Diefenbaker cabinet. The survival of our society, Mr. Speaker without the continuation of the suicidal arma~ ments race is, I believe, a subject of para mount importance to the Canadian people at the present time. There seems to be an air of utter frustration. We seem to be at a loss with respect to where to go from here. Those on each side of the iron curtain are devoting so much of their energies not to the promo tion of life, not to the promotion of happiness, but to the building of ever more horrible weapons of mass destruction. We are doing this in the light of the lessons of history which surely show that an armament rac~ has always ended in war and disaster. The disaster that would be caused by a war at this time would be beyond compare in history. We hate to think of the vast sums of money that we and our allies are devoting to the armament race. In fact when we consider the economies of some of our Euro pean allies, notably Italy and France we begin to ~onder whether we are not hu~ting them p_oss1bly even more than we are helping them, m that the armament race is forcing their economies to the verge of bankruptcy. The western world will find that its money has been very poorly invested indeed if in elections in Italy or France the people should elect communist governments. Our whole concept of western defence would then fall apart like a house of cards. In the opinion of many people we have reached a point where we ought to give this matter very serious consideration indeed. Added to this, Mr. Speaker, are the warn ings issued on many occasions by an ever growing number of leading world scientists about the danger of nuclear experiments and explosions, and the possibility exists that even now we are doing more injury to the human race by these experiments than any wa~ has ever inflicted upon mankind. [Mr. Regier.] The battle for the survival of our society is being waged on three fronts, the military preparedness phase, the economic phase and the psychological phase. We have apparently reached a stalemate in the armament race, since either side has enough nuclear weapons at its disposal to blow the whole world to pieces. Why they want to go on manufacturing any more I do not know, unless they have evil designs on other worlds. We are not sure which side is ahead in the armament race. However, on the economic and phycho logical fronts we are becoming convinced that we are behind, that month by month we are losing the race. We seem to be unwilling to engage in any kind of peaceful competition with the Soviet world. I submit that the reason we are unwilling to engage in peaceful competition with the Soviet world is that this would involve our government assuming a respon sibility which we in this group feel it ought to assume, while those in office are unwilling to have the government involved in that responsibility. We contend that if we are sincere in our expressions of belief that free men are able under a freely elected government to offer more to the people than can be offered under a totalitarian gov ernment, we should be able to produce results for our people superior to those a totalitarian government is able to offer to its people. I often believe there may be a lack of basic faith in the ability of a free government in a free society to offer more to the people than can be offered by a totalitarian gov ernment. Surely the solution is not a continuation of the already overly dangerous armament race. Surely the solution is a new kind of compe tition. By all means let us have competition with the Soviet world, but let it be compe tition to prove to ourselves and to the rest of the world that our type of society is in fact superior. Our finest line of defence and I believe our only real line of defen~e is to prove that we have more to offer, that we are able to do more. There are others in the world who are not yet committed to our way of life or to the way of life of the totalitarian regimes. These hundreds of millions of others in the world are watching us. I am referring here to the psychological war. These people are watching what we do. They are watch ing what we are able to offer. I feel it is our lack of faith in our ability to do more than we are doing that is causing us to lose that psychological war. When those who are watching realize that we had according to the latest dominion bureau of statistics bulletin of May 21, 506,000 people without work in April or 8.6 per cent MAY 22, 1958 369 of our labour force, and another 501,000 or 8.4 per cent of our labour force who worked less than 35 hours a week, how will they feel? What will they think when they read, as I read, that the Minister of Finance on April 21 admitted in his speech in Hamilton, Ontario, that by the end of 1957 unemploy ment as a percentage of the labour force was higher than at any time in the post-war period. Under the influence of seasonal factors it continued to rise until about the middle of last month, March, he said. I wish we could have had that type of realism, an admission of that situation from the Minister of Finance, before the last parlia ment was dissolved on February 1. At that time, however, we were told not to worry; everything would be all right. In fact, as late as March 12 the Prime Minister, speak ing in Exhibition Gardens in Vancouver, thundered to the audience of thousands that despite the statistic-I am paraphrasing his words-"! can assure you we are past the peak". He demanded that the people of Can ada have faith in his words. Yet at the end of April we have the Minister of Finance tell ing us that the Prime Minister was a little less than honest in insisting that the people take his word that we were past the peak. I am not blaming this government alone for the conditions we have today. The im mediate post-war period released a great pent-up demand for consumer goods. This demand resulted in a terrific expansion of our productive capacity in Canada, even at times at the cost of our social needs. We in this group were continually warning the government if necessary to limit this fantastic expansion of our productive capacity in order that our social needs might also be met. However, not much attention was paid to us, and there was this headlong expansion. We had this delayed consumer demand ac companied by the removal of price controls at far too early a date by governments that were willing to appease the selfish desires of those who saw huge profits available to them if they could satisfy these demands and charge all that the traffic would bear. At that time we began to lose our foreign markets. We failed to extend sufficient credits overseas. We stubbornly refused to accept soft currency until we forced the soft currency nations of the free world to learn to get along without us. They have been doing very well by themselves. This is not the result of their desire but the result of our stubborn refusal to accept soft currency or to extend to them the helping hand which they needed so badly at that time. It is absolutely of our making that there is in existence what is known as the European The Address-Mr. Regier common market. It was the United States and Canada who were primarily responsible for the countries of Europe knitting their economies more closely together and learn ing how to get along without Canadian prod ucts. We insisted on relying on the United States for our markets, failing to realize that the United States was a market for us only at such times as there was great expansion within that country and they had urgent need of our surplus production. We blandlJ refused to do any business with many areas of the world. Even today we refuse to see one-fourth of the people of the world naturally I refer to the people living in China-and to share responsibility for those in dire need. We have refused to recognize the growing awareness of our standards of people in other parts of the world, or their desire to attain our standards of living. We refuse to recognize their knowledge that they do not have to continue living on the brink of starvation as their forefathers did for cen turies. Once again I must express my appre ciation of the honesty of the Minister of Finance. When he spoke in Waterloo on May 15 he made reference to our extended productivity. He said: The net effect of all this has been that, between 1946 and 1956, productivity per man-year in the private sector of the economy has risen by nearly three per cent annually. The percentage has, of course, varied from year to year. Last year appears to have been somewhat out of line in this regard, but the Jong-run trend is nonetheless upward. If it was 3 per cent per year for a ten year period, that means an increase of up wards of 30 per cent in our productivity, according to the figures given by the minister. Then later on he said: If account is taken of the increased population, per capita real income has risen by about 10 per cent since 1947, most of the rise occurring since 1950. In other words, labour has raised its productivity by upwards of 30 per cent in a ten-year period, while the purchasing power of labour has been allowed to grow by only about 10 per cent. Karl Marx him self could not ha-ve made a finer analysis than the Minister of Finance did when he spoke in Waterloo. We rob our workers and farmers of their purchasing power by deny ing them the benefit of their increased pro ductivity. This lost the domestic market for us. Yes, for a time we were able to carry on because we extended credit in the con sumer field. The finance companies waxed rich. We offered goods with no downpay ment. However, everything comes to an end, and the day has arrived when the average workingman owes so much he cannot add to his monthly payment burden. As a result we have a decline in his purchasing power. 370 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Regier Added to that we have had high interest rates charged by these companies and others which have robbed the people of purchasing power. We have had the growing taxation on homes and incomes, with no relief over many years. We have had a shortchanging of the short-term small investor by huge corporations, in that they receive less than the corporation net earnings when corpora tions often keep over half the net earnings in the business to the benefit, I will admit, of the long-term investor but certainly at the expense of the short-term investor. This small investor is often supposed to be the real owner of Canada, although he is not. There are many reasons that can be cited as the causes of our depression. However, no solution is being offered at the present time by the government in office. The government with its speech from the throne reminds me of the man with the inner tube. It is an old inner tube with many holes in it that have been patched over the years. All that our present Prime Minister had to offer in this election campaign, when the air was coming out of the inner tube at a dozen different places, was this. He simply had a bigger box of new patches than had the Liberals. In our opinion what is needed is a new inner tube, because the old inner tube has patch beside patch and our whole economic system is being kept alive by putting on more patches; and our speeches from the throne, with little patches here and little patches there, are therefore tending to grow longer and longer. The only other remedy is that of deficit :financing. I hope the government realizes the inflationary danger of deficit financing. Deficit :financing at a time of deflation can serve a useful purpose indeed, but at a time when we have recession combined with inflation, deficit :financing could wreak havoc to the economy of the country. As to the Liberal amendment, we intend to support it; I am inclined to agree with it. I see nothing wrong with more trade. But I read carefully the speech of the Leader of the Opposition and I notice that he failed to offer one single way in which this govern ment might increase its trade. The Liberal leader calls for increased trade but he does not say how it should be increased. The whole system, Mr. Speaker, is rapidly breaking down. I find no less an authority for this than again the Minister of Finance. It is amazing how frank the Conservative gov ernment can become once it is firmly in the saddle. Some of us remember only too well how brutally frank the last Conservative government was in the years from 1930 to [Mr. Regier.] 1935. However, in Waterloo the Minister of Finance had this to say: One of the charges which are levelled against free enterprise is that it admits of times of economic insta bility. There may, of course, be a grain of truth in this, . . . Those are the words of the Minister of Finance, and it is our contention that there is a great deal more than a grain of truth in them. If it is only a grain it must be a mustard seed, indeed which is assuming alarming proportions. We are often asked the question, "What would you do about unemployment?" I think part of the answer is in our subamendment. We realize that it is good for our country to increase international trade. However, we contend that the main market for the products of Canadian labour and Canadian farmers is right at home. It is for that reason that my house leader submitted his amendment to the Liberal amendment. Increased foreign trade is not enough. Our first responsibility is to our Canadian people. On the home front lies our major solution. While recognizing the importance of trade with other countries, we have advocated that Canada be prepared to spend as much as 1 per cent of our gross national production in order to win friends for democracy throughout the world, and in order to enhance the prospect of Canadian trade as well. We have advocated the extension of credits, the ac ceptance in part payment at least of soft currency. I believe we should seriously at tempt to align ourselves with the European common market. I am greatly interested in the Liberal mem ber's resolution on the order paper calling for free trade with the federation of the British West Indies. I note with a great deal of pleasure that the organized labour movement is doing much, through the inter national confederation of free trade unions, to raise living standards in other areas of the world to the end that the workers of foreign countries shall have an equally high standard of living compared with workers in Canada, and not be able to offer the unfair competition on world markets that is being offered. We have advocated export and im port boards and an end to this farce of high tariffs and low tariffs, which to the people of Canada always means high tariffs in effect, regardless of what government is in office. On the home front we have called for a national investment board so there shall be an even development of the Canadian econ omy, so that our social needs will be met along with the need to increase our pro ductivity. We have asked for a curtailment of the activities of huge corporations. I see MAY 22, 1958 371 no reason why we should not be reimposing an excess profits tax in Canada. I feel that no corporation in Canada should be allowed to earn more than 12 per cent on its net capital investment. We have hundreds of thousands of small independent enterprisers and businessmen who would be most happy indeed if they were able to earn 12 per cent per annum on their net investment. We hear the argument made that they are not malting this money. I was greatly in terested in this release put out by the united steel workers of America. I have never yet heard anyone say their research department turned out fictitious figures. I believe they are reliable. I note that the five major steel companies of Canada in 1947 had a net in come of $28,600,000, and that in 1956 this figure had grown to $142,300,000. In 1947 they received as net income 13.2 per cent of every sales dollar. In 1956 they received as net income 20.9 per cent of each and every sales dollar. These corporations are well able to afford the wages they are paying and in many cases they are able to afford a good deal more. Some of them are also able to afford a reduction in prices which the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg mentioned as being necessary. We call for a vastly expanded program of welfare measures, higher pensions for our retired civil servants, for our retired railroad men, retired members of the R.C.M.P. and a fairer deal for veterans. The government still has restored to the veterans only one half of the buying power they have lost through inflation. We call for a national health insurance program. I know the old song and story that you are going to bankrupt the country, that the country cannot afford these things. I was pleased to hear the hon. member for Resti gouche-Madawaska call for higher family allowances the other day. I see, Mr. Speaker, that last year the people of Canada spent over $1,000 million on liquor. It they can spend $61 per capita per annum on liquor they can spend a little more than that on either education or health and welfare. I am absolutely unwilling to accept any argument that the Canadian economy cannot afford decent allowances for senior citizens, :for our veterans, for our retired people and for those who are attempting to bring up families. How long can we afford to operate in our country allowing each branch of industrial enterprise to organize in its own selfish interests without necessarily having any regard for the public welfare? We say the time has come when the people must use the instrument of government to plan their economic welfare. The situation in the world The Address-Mr. M. Smith is grave indeed, and it affects all mankind. We must with determination resolve our course for our very survival. We have to prove to our people and to others that democ racy is worth while. The highest appeals and platitudes will not survive the harsh, cold and cruel realities which dictate the actions of both capital and labour at the present time. If we have the courage to end the exploitation of man by man, if we are aware of our responsibilities and if we will have faith in ourselves and in our people, then the weapon of government will preserve the heritage of the past and may also be used as a mighty instrument for the building of a new society, a society that will make for peace in the world and will make health and happiness for the Canadian people a reality. Mr. Murray Smith (Winnipeg North): Mr. Speaker, may I begin by adding my con gratulations to the many which Your Honour and your deputy have received. I should also like to congratulate my friends the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. La freniere) and the hon. member for Yukon (Mr. Nielsen), who so capably moved and seconded the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I have the privilege of sharing my office space-although he says it is his office space-with the hon. member for Quebec-Montmorency, who is also acting as my French tutor, and be informs me that my French is so bad that I had better not attempt to use it today. This is a memorable moment, but one that makes me, like most new members, nervous. It is a happy moment for me, yet at the same time to some extent it is a sad one, by reason of the fact that one of my best friends and one of the best friends of the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. MacLean) did not live to see this day. He worked tirelessly for us during the election campaign in June and worked with us in succeeding months in establishing an organi zation for our future success. The members from Manitoba and the public of Manitoba will know the name Alf Francis when they hear it. Not since 1921 has a Conservative member of parliament been able to bring greetings from the citizens of Winnipeg North to this house, and I trust that hon. members in the corner to my right will grasp the significance of this statement, and after relating it to certain statements by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. MacLean) will have a clearer picture of what might lie in the future. With the indulgence of the house I would like very briefly to tell you, Mr. Speaker, about the constituency of Winnipeg North. 372 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. M. Smith It includes the north part of the city of Win nipeg as well as that part of Winnipeg known as Elmwood; it also includes the city of East Kildonan, a city of some 20,000 citizens, and West Kildonan, an area which is rapidly approaching the size of a city. This constit uency includes Canadians of almost every racial background and religious belief; Ger mans, Ukrainians, Poles, Jews, Czechoslova kians, Anglo-Saxons and others work together in community projects, and at the same time each group maintains its own clubs and portrays its own cultural heritage. I can do no more than pledge my best efforts in representing these fine Canadians in this parliament. Before I proceed I would like to refer to a couple of statements made by the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate who spoke yesterday afternoon. He mentioned that he thought most of the voters in Canada were blinded by the vision. I would like to assure him that such was not the case in Winnipeg North. Many voters in my constituency were not born in Canada, and it is quite likely that certain statements made by the former Liberal minister of citizenship and immigra tion had a great deal of influence in their voting. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Pickersgill: I am sure, Mr. Speaker, that the hon. member did not wish to misrep resent what I said. I suggested that the majority of members in this house had been blinded by the vision. I meant no reflection on the electors. Mr. Smith (Winnipeg North): With regard to his comments on the cost of the campaign and perhaps he will have a comment on this also-it is common knowledge that in 1957 the Liberals of Winnipeg North spent approximately $30,000 for the privilege of losing their deposit. This year we spent just over $4,000 to win. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear. Mr. Smith (Winnipeg North): It has been said that the speech from the throne is one of the best ever presented to this house, and I am certain that the citizens of Winnipeg North will heartily concur in this statement. Many of them will derive benefit from the extension of the unemployment insurance benefits, and many more will benefit from the increased funds available under the National Housing Act. Many of the people in my constituency have been requesting a bill of rights, and the small businessmen will certainly be glad to hear of the small business section to be established within the administrative ma chinery of government. The opposition in [Mr. Smith (Winnipeg North).] this house may say what it pleases, but many of the items contained in the speech from the throne are things which the people of Winnipeg North have wanted for some time, and they realized that the only way to get them was to put a Conservative government in power in Ottawa. I would now like to heartily endorse what my hon. friend the member for Winnipeg North Centre advocated with regard to those persons who have physical disabilities and handicaps. His remarks in this regard may be found at page 222 of Hansard for May 19 last. I was very privileged to have several physically handicapped people on my cam paign committee. I know they do not want charity; all they want is a chance to show that they can do as good a job as anyone else. I strongly urge this government, there fore, to consider employing a physically handicapped person in every employment office, whose duty it would be to find jobs for others who are physically handicapped. During the election campaign prior to June 10, a campaign in which as a newcomer my committee firmly entrenched me in third place, just a mere 13,500 votes behind the winner, I found that many people in Win nipeg North were keenly interested in the field of education. In November last, when the Soviet union successfully launched two earth satellites, this interest increased tremendously, as it did, I am sure, in the whole world. This interest has not yet subsided in Winnipeg North, for it was one of the main subjects I encountered during the election campaign. Therefore as the representative of some 60,000 electors, the majority of whom are interested in education, and as a member of parliament well under 30 years of age and hence not long out of university, I feel I should speak for a few moments on the subject of education. I do not propose to give advice to educators, for one of my former professors occupies a seat on the other government side of the house, nor do I propose to give advice to students. But I do propose to make a few suggestions to the government with regard to this matter. I have observed that a few hon. members have spoken on this important subject, and I trust that the opinions of others will be forthcoming either during this debate or on another occasion. In order to realize the importance of educa tion in our society today, one needs only to look at the tremendous and almost unbeliev able advances which have been made in the last few years in one small part of this field, namely the field of science. Man, through his unquenchable thirst for knowledge, has brought the threshold of space before us. He MAY 22, 1958 373 has brought it together with such exciting and, as yet, almost incomprehensible ideas as space travel which are only a moment away in this eternity of time. He has intro duced, too, the shattering prospect of a global nuclear war which could result in the exter mination of all forms of life from the earth or the obliteration of our planet from the universe. A vast amount of knowledge and research has been required to bring us this far, and an even greater amount will be re quired to take us further. What are other governments of the world doing about education? First let us look at the U.S.S.R., the power which at the moment appears to lead the world in certain tech nological aspects and which, therefore, must lead the world in education in those aspects. In Russia education is still controlled by the government. It is regimented education. I do not propose for one moment that this government or any provincial government should tell our youth what to learn and how to learn it, but it is interesting to compare education in the U.S.S.R. with education in other countries. Indeed, the government of the United States is already doing this. President Eisenhower has made several tele casts on this matter, telecasts that were car ried in Canada. Also, the Prudential Insur ance Company produced a lengthy program entitled, "Where Do We Stand?", which com pared at length the two educational systems together with the curricula and results. Periodicals are also making comparisons. I hold in my hand a number of publications containing articles comparing or dealing with the two systems. First is an article in the December 6, 1957 edition of U.S. News and World Report. It is entitled "A Size-Up of What's Wrong With the American Schools" and is written by Rear Admiral H. H. Rick over, of the United States navy. The second is an article entitled "Education in the U.S.S.R.", which appears in the January, 1958 edition of School Life, published by the United States government. The third publi cation, The Reporter, is a New York publica tion and I refer to a contribution in the February 20, 1958 edition in which there are two articles: first, "Are Soviet Schools Better Than Ours?" and second, "A Scientist's Im pressions of Russian Research". The fourth publication is the March, 1958 edition of Reader's Digest, which contains an article entitled, "Russia Rings the School Bell", which is condensed from "Inside Russia To day", written by John Gunther. Life maga zine fur March 24, 1958 contains "a vital new series", as they call it, entitled "Crisis In Education" which contains exclusive pictures of a Russian schoolboy and his United States counterpart. The Address-Mr. M. Smith To return, Mr. Speaker, to the book en titled "Education in the U.S.S.R.", this book was published in 1957 by the United States government and is a complete study of Soviet education up to the time of the Soviet eco nomical reorganization initiated in May, 1957. I should like to place certain parts of this work on the record to show the details into which the study goes. At page 67 the study deals with "Curriculum". Paragraph 4 on that page reads as follows: Whereas the Soviet students graduating from secondary schools in June, 1955 had taken courses in physics for five years, astronomy for one year, chemistry for four years. biology for five years and mathematics including arithmetic, algebra, geometry, and trigonometry, for 10 years, less than a third of the American high school graduates had taken a year of chemistry, about a fourth had had a year of physics, and Jess than a seventh had taken advanced mathematics. At page 74 the second paragraph, under the heading of "Arithmetic and Mathematics", reads as follows: The arithmetic cycle is completed with grade V, which includes fractions, decimals, percentages and proportions. Slide rules and arithmometers are introduced at this time. Algebra and geometry begin in grade VI, continue in grade VII, and are studied in some detail in subsequent grades. The next paragraph reads as follows: Mathematics courses continue with algebra and geometry through grade X, and with trigonometry and an introduction to calculus in grades IX and X. At page 81 under the heading "Physics", the first paragraph reads as follows: Physics, introduced in grade VI, relates to the rudiments of mechanics and hydrodynamics. In grade VII the branches dealing with heat, light and electricity are introduced. The teaching of physics includes demonstration and experimentation. The next paragraph reads as follows: Physics courses continue with a more detailed and systematic study of mechanics-kinematics, dynamics and statics-heat, light and electricity in grade VIII; molecular physics and heat in grade IX; and electricity, optics and sound or aero dynamics in grade X . The amount of required laboratory work is considerably increased. On page 82 under the heading "Chemistry", we find the following: Chemistry is started in grade VII, with a short outline of the main chemical conceptions-sub stances, elements, atomic-molecular structure, oxides, salts, Jaws of weight preservation, plus a study of oxygen, hydrogen, air and water. Demon stration and experimentation accompany the course. A systematic presentation of inorganic chemistry is required in grades VIII and IX, and an introduc tion to organic chemistry in grade X. On page 89 under the heading "Homework", we find: In 1952 a special decree, was issued setting maxi mum limits for the amount of homework a Soviet pupil might be assigned as follows: for pupils In grade I, not more than one hour a day; grade II, between one and one and one-half hours; in grades III and IV, up to two hours; in grades V and VI, 374 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. M. Smith from two to three hours; in grade VII, from two and one-half to three and one-half hours; and in grades VIII to X, from three to four hours a day. The study deals also with such questions as schools for adults, schools for work ing youth, evening schools for rural youth, schools for the mentally retarded, blind, deaf or hard of hearing, physical rehabilitation, schools for the exception ally bright, schools for the artistically gifted, and military and naval schools. It also goes into details on extracurricular work and activities, vocational training, semi-pro fessional training, teacher training, and so on. I would strongly urge each hon. member of this house who is interested in education to read this publication and the articles I have mentioned. I do not for a moment sug gest that we in Canada should follow the sys tem which is now being used in the Soviet union, but it is my belief that the government of this country could do more for education than it is doing at present. As a matter of fact, educational activity in Russia may be beneficial to the whole world, for once people learn to think it is difficult to prevent them from going further. It is quite possible that the processes in operation in Russia will produce in time a democratic government in that country. I realize that education is primarily a provincial matter, but as I have suggested I believe the federal government can do more for education than it has done in the past. I suggest that the government set up a com mittee on education. The committee could be a cabinet committee or it could be a com mittee in the Department of National Health and Welfare. It could even be a committee similar to the one to be set up with regard to small business. This committee would not in any way interfere with provincial jurisdiction over education; I want to make that quite clear. I would suggest, however, that it could perform some of the following services. It could act as an information centre and do unlimited research in the field of education. It could investigate and report on education in each province of Canada and in some other countries of the world, including the United States or Russia. It could make public its findings and the facts it gleaned from its investigations. Those publications could be made available to the public at large and especially to the ministers of education in the various provinces. It could be a committee that could be approached by universities with regarding to seeking financial aid. It could be a com mittee approachable by students when seek ing tax cuts or relief from the payment of unemployment insurance. It could seek the [Mr. Smith (Winnipeg North).] co-operation of the press and the home. I believe the press can play a highly important part in the field of education. If the press devoted as much coverage to the success of students who graduate from universities as it does to students who participate in sports we might find an increased incentive on the part of our students in the universities, with the result that we would produce more trained scientists than we are now producing. Education is becoming more complicated and costly every day. One could go on to discuss the cost of building schools, the cost of equipment for laboratories, the salaries of professors and so on. But one must also realize that education is much more than what I have mentioned here. I have dwelt primarily on scientific study, but we could devote much time to a discussion of the arts and humani ties. I do not pretend to be an expert on education, but in our democracy even the man in the street has a right to express his views, and for a member of this house it is his duty. I sincerely hope that I have succeeded today in igniting a spark that will be fanned by the opinions of others until together we will have succeeded in lighting a fire that will brighten the hopes and ambitions of everyone who seeks to better himself in any way whatsoever by that process which we call education. Mr. C. R. Granger (Grand Falls-White Bay Labrador): Mr. Speaker, I should imagine that every new member approaches the duty of delivering his first speech in this chamber with timidity and uneasiness. Unless he were a complete extrovert he would have a feel ing of reserve and modesty when he remem bers how many men of unquestioned ability and experience have been in this house for many years. But I take comfort from the thought that experience and wisdom almost invariably breed tolerance, and I have no doubt but that I will receive a sympathetic and even kindly hearing, and if I should unwittingly essay to be profound I am sure I will be forgiven even if there are some inward smiles. I wish to join with those hon. members who have extended to the Speaker congratula tions on his appointment to his high office. I share with them the conviction that he will discharge his duties with fairness and add to the dignity of this chamber. I would also like to congratulate the hon. member for Queens-Lunenburg (Mr. Crouse) on his speech. I agreed with much of what he said, par ticularly his remarks concerning fish markets and the West Indies. I would now like to say a word about the great riding which I have the honour to MAY 22, 1958 375 represent. To do so is natural, I suppose, but in this case my remarks will be all the more effective because I speak with sincere pride in praise of my riding. Not only is it one of the largest ridings in our nation, but in terms of importance and variety it is one of the greatest areas in North America. From Grand Falls and Gander in the south, all through the district of Green Bay, White Bay south, White Bay north, Labrador south and Labrador north it stretches on to cape Chidley in the far north. It embraces the industrial centres of Newfoundland with their great pulp and paper industry and woods operations, the famous international airport at Gander, the traditional fisheries of Green Bay, White Bay and the Labrador coast, the great military airport at Goose, one of the great bastions of western defence, and the mines and timber and untouched resources and undreamed of wealth of the new and magic world of Labrador. It is a great riding, larger than many nations, almost as big as some continents, with some of the finest people who can be found anywhere, citizens of whom Canada may be proud. A tradition in which courage and toil are commonplace have bred a race of people whose loyalty and dependability are beyond question. I think it is only right that I should mention the industries which are vital to these people, and some of the things they require. Most of the people in my riding are fishermen and loggers; and the fisheries, the traditional industry of Newfoundland, are still of paramount importance. Up to the time of confederation the Newfoundland fisheries continued in much the same manner as they had for hundreds of years. It is true that since John Cabot's discovery of Newfoundland in 1497 the cod trap and the gasoline marine engine were invented, but by and large the system remained virtually unchanged. It is also true that the fresh fish business enjoyed a vigorous start prior to confederation, but this new industry was due for tremendous expansion at the same time that the salt cod fishery was to undergo a revolution, for after confederation the fisheries of Newfoundland underwent a great change. This was due to three factors. I give them not necessarily in the order of importance, for no one can assess which made the greatest contribution, but with confederation several things happened to this ancient industry. In the first instance the return of democratic rule in Newfoundland, as it does everywhere in the world, released energies which hereto fore had been restricted, and the combination of self-government, free enterprise and competitive operation opened new vistas for The Address-Mr. Granger merchants and fishermen alike. Then the federal Department of Fisheries brought to the fisheries of Newfoundland its experience, technical knowledge and the funds with which to experiment, which gave us the laboratory plant always so badly needed, while the provincial government under Premier Small wood embarked on a wise and bold policy of supplying financial assistance to firms which desired to expand. The result was an expansion in the industrialization of fisheries in eight years unequalled during the preceding four and one-half centuries. However, unfortunately for the people of my riding the expansion has been largely to the south, its northern position thus far having precluded it from enjoying much of the benefits of modern progress, although some progress has been made. It may be that this is a geographical handi cap and a difficult one to overcome but simply because it is difficult is no reason for it to be forgotten. One of the great natural resources of Canada is fishing and the waters of northern Newfoundland and Labrador are rich with fish. When John Cabot sailed west he was after gold and ,precious jewels. He did not find them in Newfoundland but he did find waters teeming with fish which proved to be better than precious metals. I know that Canada has undeveloped resources other than those in the waters of Newfoundland and I realize that these other resources require at tention, but I do think it wrong that any great resource should be neglected and despite all that has been done we have merely touched the fringes. If Canada is to be really great all of her resources must be developed, but the inroads made in our fishery markets by foreign com petitors and the multitude of craft flying strange flags in Newfoundland waters today make me wonder if, while gaining wealth on the one hand we are not throwing it away with the other. I am not suggesting that the stranger be deprived of fishing rights but I am suggesting that our way of doing business be so improved as to make it economically undesirable for him to do so. I therefore ask that more serious attention than ever be given to the development, expansion and ex ploitation of the wealth which lies in Cana dian waters. The oldest part of our heritage has been one of our richest and the fishing business can be improved so that it will pro vide an attractive vocation for our people and so that the fishermen will be not only a valuable man but a well paid man. One immediate need in northern New foundland is more adequate bait supplies, more bait depots and a better distribution 376 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Granger agency. This is something that can be done immediately and I hope that the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean) has plans in this direction for early implementation. I have referred earlier to the two great airports which are in my riding. Goose is another military airport and is used ex tensively by the United States air force as well as the R.C.A.F. There is little that I should say here except to make one or two observations. First, I should like to see a higher proportion of Newfoundlanders em ployed at Goose airport, particularly on con struction work. Second, I think it only fair that the town of Happy Valley, where so many of our permanent workers at Goose Bay live, should be allowed to obtain its electricity from the R.C.A.F. plant at Goose. A public wharf at Happy Valley is badly needed but I shall speak of that and other marine works at a more appropriate time. Suffice it to say here that Goose is one of the most important military airports in the western world. Few either know or realize its value but it is one of the great defence fortresses of this age. Gander, of course, is one of the famous air ports of the world. In this air age it is the great gateway to Canada. It is the only part of Canada which millions of visitors ever see. In this rapidly moving twentieth century it already has a long history. The history of Gander is the history of modern aviation. Very few of us have ever had the proper appreciation of Gander's value to the pioneer ing period of yesterday or its great commer cial value today. I think I will be forgiven if I should stress a little here just how im portant Gander was both to the world of aviation and to Canada in particular. Prior to confederation, at the international confer ences in Geneva when routes and landing sta tions on both sides of the Atlantic were being arranged, it was toward the Newfoundland representative that most attention was di rected because Newfoundland, having both Gander and Goose, held the key to the whole over-all strategy. Newfoundland's position was extremely important and her bargaining power was tremendous. Prior to confederation I believe Canada's representatives at those international con ferences attended as observers only. I believe in those days Canada had been unable to receive permission to fly commercial planes over United States territory which would sit down and pick up passengers in competi tion with United States planes. However, confederation gave Canada the key that un locked all these doors. The acquisition of Gander by Canada increased her bargaining power so that she was able to negotiate from strength and from then on she was quickly [Mr. Granger.] able to obtain landing rights in almost every part of the world except Russia. Canada was suddenly transformed into one of the great forces in modern commercial aviation. The impact of this change in Canadian civil air power must have had a tremendous economic effect, the results of which must have been very favourable to the whole Cana dian economy. Certainly with Canadian planes carrying the Canadian flag into far distant places Canada was receiving the best and most potent advertising possible. In Gander today a modern town has grown up with new schools, churches, supermarkets and all the trappings of progressive, modern life. Every so often one hears a murmur as to what is the future of Gander. This is something that I shall ask the Minister of Transport (Mr. Hees) to clarify at a later date, but as I see it the future of Gander is secure. It is true that modern, high speed, deluxe transports carry passengers direct from New York to London or Paris or wherever they are going but these represent only a fraction of the growing business of flying. The great airliners of yesterday are in the tourist trade today. Older planes are carry ing freight and the growth of low cost passenger service and air freight is phenomenal. These planes which carry large loads of passengers and freight need to make :frequent stops for refueling and all in dications are that in the foreseeable future there will be more planes land at Gander instead of fewer and installations at Gander will have to be extended instead of being restricted. I may say it is particularly gratifying to all Canadians to know that the new terminal at Gander started by the Liberal government will be one of the best in North America. As I stated above, Gander is the only part of Canada which many thousands of people see every year. These people will judge Canada by what they see at Gander. To them Gander is Canada and as Canadians we should be satisfied with nothing but the best at Gander so that we shall advertise ourselves properly. Gander is so important today and, indeed, the Department of Transport has such a heavy interest in Newfoundland that I strongly rec ommend that it be made a separate region and not be handicapped by being a part of another region and having to do business through Moncton with all the delays which inevitably result from that situation. Also, Gander badly needs a hotel and the hotel should be built close to the terminal so that passengers arriving fatigued from their trip should not suffer the further exhausting effort of travelling half way around the airport to their quarters. Indeed, they should be able to walk to the hotel. MAY 22, 1958 377 During the latter part of February and the middle part of March a number of dis tinguished Canadians visited Newfoundland and gave some attention to the part of New foundland which was to become my riding. I fear at the time I did not welcome these attentions with unalloyed pleasure nor was my attitude towards their presence what one would expect from a hospitable Newfound lander. However, looking back to these visits from the perspective of today I am glad that the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) and the Minister of Trans port know at first hand what some of the problems at Gander are, and I can assure them that I will welcome their continued attention to them in the future. If I may, I would solicit across the chasm of political differences the interest in these problems of the minister from Newfoundland. As I said, one need at Gander is a hotel and the other is a hospital. In this connection I should like to read from an editorial that appeared in the News of December 12, 1957 which, under the heading "Facilities at Gander", had this to say: So far as we can gather, the Minister of Trans port disclaims all responsibility for the removal of the hospital and the provision of new hotel accom modation at Gander. These things, it is said, are not obligations of the department. In ordinary circumstances, that may be true. But Gander is a special case. It is a Department of Transport town whose whole life is centred around a Department of Transport airport. In the circumstances, responsibility for the provision of essential facilities cannot be easily disclaimed. Take, for example, the hospital which must hold thirty beds available for the use of the department in any emergency. That itself indicates a direct interest of the transport department in the hospital facilities at Gander. I may say that the leader of our party pledged the support of our party for financial assistance to the Gander hospital. I would hope the government would come to see the justice of that proposal. I should like to mention now the desir ability of providing television facilities for central Newfoundland. At the present time a microwave line is being built across New foundland which will bring live television to St. John's and adjacent areas. This micro wave line passes right through central New foundland. Certainly, arrangements can be made under which the thickly populated areas of central Newfoundland can be given tele vision service, particularly in view of the fact the microwave lines carrying live tele vision programs pass through this area. It may be that a station built on the height of land between Bishop's Falls and Glenwood might be able to serve an area extending from Buchans in the interior and Lewisporte and vicinity in Notre Dame bay. Included in this The Address-Mr. Granger area, of course, are such places as Badger, Windsor, Norris Arm, Peter's Arm, Botwood and Point Leamington. However, that is a question for the engineers to settle and if one outlet cannot do the job I think two should be considered. In any event, it is unthinkable to ask an area such as central Newfoundland to do without television facil ities in this modern age, particularly when television circuits are passing right through the area. It is like putting a telephone line through a town and denying the inhabitants the use of it. Mr. Speaker, I have just one or two more subjects to mention before closing, and one has to do with the administration of unem ployment insurance for fishermen. Unemploy ment insurance for fishermen was more than just a boom economically. Its establishment by the Liberal government was the righting of a moral wrong because while the labourers who processed the fish were protected, the men who caught the fish were not. It also did much to preserve the fisheries. The granting of this protection encouraged fisher men to remain at or return to their vocation, and this probably saved it from extinction. However, the actual implementation of un employment insurance for fishermen has not been too satisfactory. In practically every fishing village I have visited there were many instances of fishermen who qualified for un employment insurance but were not receiving it. Quite frequently this was the result of misunderstandings, forms not properly filled out, or errors which had to be corrected at the headquarters in Moncton. It is the firm belief of many people that the Department of Labour should employ fieldmen who would travel from place to place assisting fishermen and labourers with their claims and adjusting those miscarriages of justice which too fre quently have deprived a producer of getting what was legally his. It is felt as well that too much time is lost and too much embarrassment is caused by offices in Newfoundland having to refer doubtful claims to remote headquarters. The opinion of the people is that Newfoundland itself should be constituted a region for unemployment insurance purposes. The addition of fieldmen would do much to off set the embarrassing mistakes which are universal. In concluding, I should like to mention briefly the great northland of which Labrador forms an important part. I am pleased to know the governmen t has in mind the development of the north, and I should like to remind them that Labrador is one of the oldest known and most important parts of Canada's great north. The great iron ore developments, and the water power on the 378 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Macquarrie Hamilton river as well as the tremendous forests to which so much attention is now being directed, all indicate that Labrador is becoming a princely part of Canada's heritage. I should like to read one or two quotations, and the first is by Lord Strath cona: It has been said that power, that empire came from the north. Northern people have always stood for courage and unconquerabl!ity They have the muscle, the wholesomeness of life, the strength of will. The second is from the explorer Stefans son: We should not regard the Eskimos as foreigners but as friends. They are your fellow citizens. Their future ls bound up in our future. If Canada is but a thin southern strip across which plies a shuttle railway we shall have no remarkable future . Labrador is indeed a great part of Canada and when we realize its vastness and its untouched riches we begin to appreciate just how young a nation we are in develop ment, and just how great a nation we are becoming. We realize what a greater nation Canada will be in the days of our children's children, when the power and fame of a mature Canada will make an even greater contribution to the material wealth, the peace and goodwill of the brave days of the future. Mr. Heath Macquarrie (Queens): Mr. Speaker, I happily conform to tradition, and I do so with all sincerity, in congratulating the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. They have fol lowed the high standard which down through the years has been maintained in this par liament. I should like also to congratulate you, Mr. Speaker, upon again being chosen as the first commoner. During the throne speech debate of the 23rd parliament I quoted Sir Robert Borden's criterion that a Speaker must be impartial, firm, courteous, and above all patient. I think our Speaker has displayed all those qualities, plus the saving grace of good humour. I am happy, too, in the choice of a Deputy Speaker because he comes from a distin guished line in the political field. In the 12th parliament his father seconded the address and made such a fine address that the prime minister of that day, Mr. Borden, declared it to be notable and eloquent. His father then went on to occupy the deputy speaker's chair and later the Speaker's chair. It is gratifying to see the hon. member for Spa dina (Mr. Rea), my friend and counsellor, in the place which he occupies and dis charging the duties which he does so well. I might say, in my present congratulatory mood, a word about an hon. member who [Mr. Granger.] spoke just a short while ago. I refer to the hon. member for Winnipeg North (Mr. Smith). Some time ago he was a student of mine when I walked the halls of learn ing at Brandon college rather than the legis lative halls. I believe, sir, you will agree that if I did nothing else, I made a very good job of training and educating him. We take on a new relationship now. Once I was the professor and he the student. Now, he is the freshman and I am the sophomore. I was quite interested in the remarks made by the hon. member for Bonavista Twillingate (Mr. Pickersgill) yesterday. It seemed to me he divided his time between two roles. At one time he was the politician and at other times he seemed to be the professor. I may say that I preferred him in the professorial role. I would not for a moment suggest that he was a better pro fessor than a politician because it might be a suggestion which could rebound on me some day. I was interested in his remarks about the development of Canada's political history. I was interested in what he said and I was impressed by the things which he was able to leave unsaid. I was quite surprised that he could speak even as long as he did speak about Canadian autonomy and nationhood without mentioning the name of the great architect of Canadian nationhood, namely Sir Robert Borden. I noted his comment about the mover (Mr. Lafreniere) and the seconder (Mr. Nielsen) of the address and his suggestion that they have the illusion that there were great gaps in Canadian history, that nothing was accomplished during the days when other than a Conservative adminis tration was at the helm. Later on I noted that he spoke of the parable of the 99 out of 100 sheep. As I listened to him I too was reminded of a parable, namely the one about the mote and the beam. I was interested in his nautical metaphors. I followed him through the various passages, which the ship of state took. Perhaps he has reached that stage of nostalgia about which Lowell spoke when he said: From the days of the first grandfather, every body has remembered a golden age behind him. Perhaps the hon. member looks back to the days when he himself was an officer of the ship of state which went through and passed the reefs which he so well recalled yesterday. I think, however, that it is an extremely healthy sign that members of this house have devoted some time to contemplation of and reflection on Canada's past. It seems to me that it is only recently that many Canadians have awakened to the recognition of the fact that we do indeed have a past in this country. I think it is surely a healthy sign and I have MAY 22, 1958 379 been greatly interested in the comments which have been made in this throne speech debate. On occasion I expected to hear more about a certain recent date in the past, namely the date of March 31. On occasion some com ments were made about it but often it was passed over. On reflection, I think it is per haps just as well. The verdict has been given. I think the members of the winning party are to be congratulated. The fact that they have restrained completely any tendency to gloat over or to boast about what has been done and what has taken place on the elec toral level is to be commended. There has been no castigating and no crying "Aha" over what has happened. Macaulay once pointed to Peel in the British house and said: There you sit doing penance for the disingenu ousness of years . That accusation, of course, could never be made against the party which once sat on the treasury benches of this country. In reflecting upon the election, I find my self in disagreement with the hon. member for Bonavista-Twillingate. I do not think that this past election could be described as a Madison Avenue election. I am rather inclined to think that it is one of the most serious elections which this country has held. I think it has given on the part of the Canadian people a display of intelligent calculation and analysis that is quite unique. I do not say that while projecting my thoughts along to the result. I think there was a particular reason why this election was a serious exer cise of intelligence on the part of the Canadian people. The reason was that it was a quite unique experience. On March 31 the voters of Canada had the opportunity to compare and to contrast two known alternatives. No voter was so young that he could not recall vividly what had been done and what had not been done by the Liberal party in its many years in office. Hence there was no necessity for appraising new panaceas, platforms and programs. The mere exercise of memory was sufficient. The judgment was made and of course we know the result. I also think that there is developing on the parliamentary scene a seriousness of purpose and a realization of the responsibilities that go with power. This is reflected in the speech from the throne; and of all that document contains, the most important and the most imperishable will be those things which reveal the government's determination to avoid that unhappy state when power turns to tyranny and authority becomes arrogance. I think the Canadian people can be thankful that such determination is there and will be main tained. In days past we can remember that The Address-Mr. Macquarrie such was not the case. I had an experience similar to that recalled by the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George the other day, when we observed the use and the abuse of power in this Canadian parliament. I am sure that we all agree, regardless of our party label, that such should never occur again in this country. It is a stimulating experience to hear the speeches of hon. members from all parts of this country. I have listened with great in terest to the hon. members as they described the glories and virtues of their constituencies. Of course; it is easy to paint such pictures about a great and growing country like Can ada. This nation has before it a wonderful future, marked 'by progress and prosperity within its borders and an increasing impor tance and significance in the affairs of the world. But the healthy economic develop ment of Canada requires a degree of pros perity in all parts of the country. It is in the national interest to assure that no region in the country falls noticeably below the over-all level of prosperity. It is possible that one may now anticipate one of these ancient instruments of Canadian politics, namely a speech on maritime rights, that substance on which all maritime poli ticians are weaned and nurtured. As Can ada's history has progressed, the maritime provinces have fallen behind. Sometimes we maritimers-and we are sentimental people at all times-are accused of reminiscing too much about the good old days. Sometimes it is said that a maritimer talks about con federation as if it were an event that had taken place the day before yesterday. But our area once had great prosperity. While perhaps it is easy to confuse coincidence with cause, it is nevertheless true that in economic terms there has been a decline since the time of confederation. This is a theme of great interest to us all. But I happen to represent the province in which confederation was born. In that great city which is in the riding which I represent along with my senior colleague, the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean), namely the city of Charlottetown, confederation was born in 1864. But during the years after that great ideal was put into actuality, confederation seemed to move westward from the land of its birth: "westward the course of empire ever stayed". The hinterland of the old Canadian provinces was opened up. Then the march across the prairies began under the distin guished and inspired leadership of the founder of the Conservative party and its great exten tion was magnificent for Canada, but the gulf between the rest of Canada and the maritimes widened. 380 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Macquarrie The concentration of wealth and popula tion in the central provinces, adverse tariff policies, inadequate and costly transportation, have added to the burdens and increased the disparity. There resulted a further relative depression in the maritime provinces. Our people-among the finest in the land-found it necessary to leave for other parts of Canada and for the United States. Statistics are never popular, but there is one which is so significant that I must ask the forbearance of this house in order to quote it. In the year 1881 the population of Prince Eward Island was 108,900 people. At the same time the population of British Columbia was 49,459. Today our population has suffered an actual decline and there are less than 100,000 people in my province, while in British Columbia there are well over 1,000,000 people. In that simple statistic there is a revelation. During the years that have passed the people of the maritime area have asked the question: "Are the maritime provinces to become a permanently depressed area; are they only to be a quaint and picturesque community with hospitable and charming people, so well beloved of the tourist, but to lose their rightful place in the modern economic life of Canada?" There was a danger that along with the economic depres sion there might develop something far more serious-a mental depression among the people of the area. Happily our outlook is better today. There is a new spirit abroad in the old provinces by the sea. A new feeling of hope, a new sense of purpose and direction are abroad. As the hon. member for Charlotte (Mr. Stewart) mentioned a while ago, this is evidenced by the thinking which found ex pression at the Atlantic provinces' economic council and was further revealed in the Atlantic premiers' conference. The vigour and vision of these two great maritime leaders, Premier Stanfield and Premier Flemming, have served as a source of stimula tion and challenge to all of us. It has been said many times that the administrative costs of four separate governments are very high in the maritimes and indeed have been called simply ridiculous, but there is no possibility of the four little provinces in the Atlantic region cheerfully yielding their identity. They will remain provinces and they will remain distinct, but while they retain their identity there is no reason why they cannot further their co-operative efforts and it is in that spirit that the new developments in the maritimes are progressing. We all welcome the admission of neighbour, Newfoundland. We in Edward Island were particularly [Mr. Macquarrie.] a new Prince happy because we have surplus of the finest agricul tural products and we welcome Newfoundland because there is no one we would more like to have purchase our products. I believe that provincial governments and other groups should stimulate trade between Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland, and I am thoroughly convinced that the possibilities have not been sufficiently tapped or developed. While self-help is important and this is being developed, the assistance and the initiative of the central government is essen tial. Herein lies the explanation of both the economic and the political changes in the maritime area in recent months. As I have said, confederation was born in my province but through the years the centre of gravity has moved westward, leaving the maritimes in the periphery of prosperity. How interesting it is that at this historic stage in our development out of the west should come a national leader who saw the vision and took the steps to redress that balance which had left us to one side. I say the steps he took were in the national interest. Canada is immeasurably stronger today in every way as the result of what this government did in its first few months in office. The Atlantic provinces' adjustment acts, the Beechwood project, the aid to thermal power development and the rest, these brought new hope to our area. Prince Edward Island gained a grant of $2½ million. We are very simple and unsophisticated people down there, and none of us will ever say, "What's a million?" What that million meant to us was one-quarter of our total budget and it was the largest single grant which ever came to our province from the federal treasury. I would like to say that nothing will ever give me a greater sense of pride than to have belonged to the parliament, in a very humble capacity, which in a short time did so much for my province and the Atlantic provinces in general, who have for so long cried out and received not the answer they sought. This explains why the maritime provinces gave their support wholeheartedly and un reservedly to the man who had sufficient breadth of vision to realize that in the in terests of all of Canada this long-neglected region must be given immediate, urgent and ample attention and, if I may be a bit im modest, I cannot help mentioning that my province led the way and that in the election of June 10 Prince Edward Island formed a 100 per cent club of supporters of the Diefen baker government. We were very happy that our neighbour Nova Scotia, that Alberta and Manitoba also joined this club, but we claim the right to reserve the title charter member. An hon. Member: Newfoundland next. MAY 22, 1958 381 Mr. Macquarrie: Newfoundland will be heartily welcomed. I would not be a true maritimer, nor would I be a good representative of the historic con stituency of Queens if I left the impression with you, Mr. Speaker, or with this chamber or with the government that our needs had all been met and that in the maritimes milk and honey flow gushingly. That is still not the case. We appreciate what has been done; it has given us new incentive, but in many ways it is just the beginning. There are many needs which must be met and I was very im pressed in this debate with the way in which members from the maritimes have set forth the needs of the people in that area. There have been many remarks about the fishing industry, the second industry in the province of Prince Edward Island. We feel confident about the future of the fishing in dustry because my long-time friend and col league, the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. MacLean) is assuming responsibility for that important part of our economy. In Prince Edward Island, however, and in the mari times generally, the question of transportation is of the utmost importance. We must have better transportation facilities so that the products of our farms and the sea may be moved more expeditiously to the markets we have developed. Down through the years the men who have preceded me have called the attention of the house and of the government to the inade quacy of the transportation between our island province and the rest of Canada. When Prince Edward Island joined confed eration in 1873, part of the understanding was that continous communication should be maintained between New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island. As the hon. member for Westmorland (Mr. Creaghan) pointed out the other day, we do not at the present time have adequate transportation, and the people of my province rejoice that again in this respect the new government moved rapidly. There is going on today an exhaustive survey of the possibility, in all its aspects, of building the causeway which has been projected between Borden, Prince Edward Island, and Cape Jourmain in New Brunswick. We look forward to the day when history will repeat itself and when a Conservative government will establish the most up-to-date transportation link between our historic province and the rest of Canada. It was the government of Sir Robert Borden which gave us our first car ferry, and we look forward to the time when another Conservative gov ernment will make possible this causeway The Address-Mr. Macquarrie which, some of my more chauvinistic follow ers would say, will join Canada to Prince Edward Island. We feel there are sound reasons for this work going forward. Not only would it facilitate the movement of tourists, but it would simplify the movement of our goods. Prince Edward Island is a mecca for tourists, one of those places to which people return again and again. We want to make these visits easier and we also want to facilitate the movement of goods from our farms. Prince Edward Island is sometimes described as the garden of the gulf. We are blessed with a fertile soil, and the products of our soil command top prices on the commodity markets. There are many items which I could discuss in my present expansive mood, but I do not wish to place too many of the problems of our area before the government at one time. In Prince Edward Island we have one basic problem-the potato. We in this House are still greatly concerned about an industry which was once the leading industry in Canada-agriculture. We are taking a great interest in what has been done for the prairie farmers. What has been done for those farmers deserves to be done. We, in Prince Edward Island and in the east, rejoiced in the legislation providing cash advances on farm-stored grain; we were interested in the Agricultural Prices Stabilization Act and in the assistance given in the matter of freight rates. But we in Prince Edward Island produce another commodity which is our most vital commodity, namely the potato. We feel that producers of the potato should not be in any more precarious a position than are growers of wheat in another part of Canada. Throughout the years the potato industry has been marked by great uncer tainty and wide fluctuations in price. At one point a farmer may get $2.50 a bushel; shortly afterwards he may find it impossible to get more than 50 cents. We call upon the government to take advantage of the Agricultural Prices Stabilization Act to stabilize in the best and most practical manner the price of this vital commodity. The potato is not among the named commod ities mentioned in the act, but at the present time we face a situation which calls for action, and on behalf of the agriculturists in my province I ask that thorough consideration be given to providing stability and security for these very important producers. Mr. Speaker, one always tries to live up to the characteristics of the region from which one comes, and one of the characteristics of our people is brevity. I should be very much 382 HOUSE OF COMMONS The Address-Mr. Eudes out of line if I consumed every minute of the time which is allocated to hon. members who speak in this debate. I will therefore close by assuring hon. members that the small province from which I come-the smallest of them all, but not the least in its contribution-will continue to play its part in this broader Canada. We will at no time ask for that which is not ours by right, but we feel that in this great federal structure we have the right, which we shall continue to assert, to ask for those things which are ours and for those things the granting of which will make for a better and a stronger Canada. Mr. Raymond Eudes (Hochelagal: Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted at the outset of my remarks to associate myself with other hon. members who have already taken part in this debate and to offer to the hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr. Michener) my most sincere congratulations on his election as Speaker of this house. We all rejoice at the high honour which has been conferred on him. His office is one of distinction, but it is also one of great responsibility, especially in the present circumstances when an opposition very small in numbers has to face the strongest govern ment ever elected in this country; strongest, of course, as far as it is considered in relation to its numerical value. We, the members of the opposition, are happy to acknowledge that no member of this house is more qualified than is the hon. mem ber for St. Paul's to exercise those exalted functions. Since his election in 1953, and in the course of the last parliament, he has shown a command of the essential and excep tional qualifications required for the post of Speaker. He has integrity, a sound judgment, a clear and profound knowledge of the rules and proceedings of the house, and, above all, impartiality; qualities which are the guar antee that the rights and privileges of all our members, notwithstanding their political affiliations, will be respected and that the basic principles of true democracy will thus be maintained. The outcome of the last election shows, of course, at first sight a very bright picture of the brilliant victory won by our Conserva tive friends. Nevertheless it might be of some importance to consider the plain truth and to examine that picture more closely so that we may grasp the real expression of the feelings and consciousness of the Canadian people. Approximately 7,287,135 electors voted on March 31-3,911,195 for the Conservatives, roughly 2,500,000 for the Liberals, 700,000 for the C.C.F. and 225,000 for the other parties. Notwithstanding their [Mr. Macquarrie.] smallness in numbers, the opposition there fore represents in this house 3,375,940 Cana dian voters, or 46 per cent of the total electorate. The members of the opposition in this house have a very definite task to perform, one which was clearly outlined by the Prime Minister (Mr. Diefenbaker) when he was sit ting on this side of the house. That task embodies a special concern by members of the opposition to see that under the guidance and protection of the Speaker the voice of that 46 per cent of the Canadian electorate is brought to the attention of the present gov ernment. May I also extend my congratulations to you, sir, as Deputy Speaker of this house. Apart from a common friendship which of course has no bearing whatsoever on the high post with which you have been entrusted, I know that you possess all the required qualifications to fulfil skilfully and in the manner the house expects the difficult tasks with which you will have to cope. I wish also to compliment the mover and the seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. Both have impressed this house with the desire to hear them again. However, those compliments do not imply that I fully agree with every thing that was said by the hon. members as being a complete and true image of our historical background. It is quite true that Sir John A. Macdonald and Sir George Etienne Cartier deserve a special place in Canadian history as fathers of our nation but it is equally true that other great prime ministers have played a useful, brilliant and extremely important part in the building up of Canada. Sir Wilfrid Laurier, perhaps the greatest of them all, William Lyon Mackenzie King and Louis St. Laurent have been successful contributors to the achievement of the aims that have been those of all Canadians who want to live in a country free from fear, disunity, economic hardship and unemployment; the aims of all Canadians who want to live in a country enjoying the complete status of a free and independent nation without at the same time having to sever its intimate cultural and economic links with our mother countries. As to the Prime Minister, the future alone will identify the place he will hold in our history. I should perhaps repeat what I said to my electors on the evening of March 31 that as one accepting the verdict of the Canadian people at large it was therefore my duty to help the Conservative party in whatever measures it brings before this house for the betterment of the conditions of life for the Canadian people but also that I shall oppose and combat any proposals of such a nature as MAY 22, 1958 383 to deprive the people of my country, my province or my constituency of the benefits to which they are entitled. At six o'clock the house took recess. AFTER RECESS The house resumed at eight o'clock. (Translation): Mr. Eudes: Now, Mr. Speaker, I should like to deal with the most pressing problem now facing parliament, that of unemployment. In spite of the optimistic statements of certain government members-and in this connection I refer more particularly to that made by the Minister of Finance

House of Commons Debates Vol 1 May 12 to June 10 1958

Object/Artifact

AVRO Museum

Name/Title

Entry/Object ID

Description

Category

Web Links and URLs

General Notes

Note