December 11, 1962

PC

Michael Starr (Minister of Labour)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Starr:

You are.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin

Liberal

Mr. Martin (Essex East):

The Minister of Labour says that I am. I will let him produce the figures. I do not think I am wrong. But when I heard the Minister of Labour talking to the Canadian Congress of Labour this morning, speaking of the figures of unemployment, I would say to him that the figures which he gave on this occasion were not accurate either.

I was dealing with the nature of the problem which affects this particular board in relation to the rest of the country, and I pointed out that about ten days ago the members of parliament from the constituencies to which I referred, together with three mayors from Sydney, Glace Bay and one other town in Nova Scotia, and mayors from the city of Windsor, Tecumseh and Ojibway, and other places in Essex county, met with the Minister of Trade and Commerce. The Minister of Labour was not present, nor was the Minister of Finance, but the Minister of National Health and Welfare was there as the presiding officer and we discussed a problem that is common to many areas in Canada, especially to the maritime provinces and the many industrial areas of the country. I refer to the problem of runaway industry. We wranted to know what measures the government was prepared to take to deal with this very difficult situation. We wanted to know what fiscal measures the government had in mind. Was the government giving consideration to such things as a town and country act such as they have in England, or to the unemployment act passed in 1960 in England, as a means of trying to relieve the unemployment which resulted from industries moving from one area of high employment to an area of less employment? That is a problem not only common to the maritime provinces, where it attends many constituencies, but it is also a problem which affects many other areas, including the area from which I come.

What is going to be done about that problem? That is what is involved in clause 9(2). If the minister wants us to pass this measure and have us understand it in the terms in which it is presented, then let him tell us how he is going to deal, and how this government is going to deal, with this particular problem. The minister says, let us pass this bill and give it a trial. Of course we want to pass this bill, but we want to pass it with an

appreciation of what the government really intends to do about the implications and the provisions in this clause, which could mean, if properly resorted to, a great deal of relief in the matter of the relocation of industry to which I have just referred.

Mr. Chairman, these are not matters of ordinary concern. These are matters of great moment which affect thousands of people in our country. Surely we have the right tonight to ask the minister exactly what he means when he says that this board is going to work with the national economic development board, the national productivity council, all departments, branches, and other agencies of the government of Canada having duties, aims or objects relating to those of this board. Those are wonderful words. I now call upon the minister to give meaning to them.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

John Robert (Jack) Nicholson

Liberal

Mr. Nicholson:

Mr. Chairman, at the outset of what I have to say I wish to associate myself with the point of view expressed this afternoon by the hon. member for Leeds. He took strong issue with the suggestion from the opposite side of the house that the debate on this very important item of legislation should be confined to the members of the Atlantic provinces.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

That was never suggested.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

John Robert (Jack) Nicholson

Liberal

Mr. Nicholson:

I heard it. It is in Hansard. I wish to identify myself very closely with what the hon. member for Leeds said, as I fully believe the position which he took is the only sound one. Simply because I do not represent a constituency in the Atlantic provinces does not mean that I and other members of this House of Commons have not followed this bill with just as keen interest as have hon. members from the maritime provinces during the course of the debate.

References were made-one by the hon. member for York-Sunbury, as I recall it-* to the migration from the Atlantic provinces to other parts of Canada. Since I am one of the migrants it would be most surprising if my interest in the maritime provinces and the well-being of the Atlantic provinces is not just as keen as that of those hon. members who still live there. It was because of this special interest, not because I intended to take any part in the debate, that I carefully studied Bill No. C-94. I spent a great deal of time on it, especially on the clause now under review, namely clause 9. It was perhaps because of the diligence with which the hon. member for Spadina and I pursued this study that we two joined with the other members on this side of the house in opposing the amendment that was proposed. We felt that the power which the hon. member for Cape Breton South was trying to get already existed. However, it

Atlantic Development Board is one thing to be of the opinion that a board has the power sought by the hon. member for Cape Breton South, that it is already in existence, but it is a very different thing to agree with the government that this bill contains all the objects and powers that are needed to make it the success which the people of the maritimes and the people of the rest of Canada hope it will be.

When I heard the Minister of National Revenue introduce this bill I was hopeful that the government had some well conceived plan of action tied with the plan of action for the national economic development board. I was hopeful that the government contemplated the establishment of a board which could play an effective part in shaping a program that would restore the prosperity that existed in the maritime provinces when my four grandparents settled there well over one hundred years ago. However, a study of the objects and the powers will show that such is not the case. In the first place-and here I think the hon. member for Essex East put his finger on one of the weaknesses, one very important fact. We do not know how this national economic development council is going to function in conjunction with the economic development board for the Atlantic regions. It is quite true that in subclause 2 of clause 9 reference is made to the fact that there shall be co-operation between these boards. However, co-operation is not enough. The C.B.C. and the other great board in our field of telecommunications are supposed to co-operate, but we have seen what has happened there. More than that is needed. What is needed is some form of mechanism that will bring about an effective working arrangement between the boards. It could be in the form of interlocking directorates or common members of the different boards. However, that weakness certainly exists.

I might say that when I first discussed this bill-and I was disappointed when I saw the bill; not when I saw the resolution, but when I saw the bill-when I first discussed it with other members, not just those on this side of the chamber but from other parts of the house, considerable concern was expressed as to why there should be a separate board for only one part of Canada. I might say that I am not one who shares that view. I believe that if an economic development board for the Atlantic region, composed of well informed, courageous and dedicated people-and there are plenty of them in that part of Canada-had an assurance of adequate funds with which to do some of the work that is essential down there, and had the assurance that they would have capital at the right time to correct the economic ills they find, much could be done. My reasons

2564 HOUSE OF

Atlantic Development Board for saying that there should be a special economic development in the Atlantic regions are very simple. It is a known fact that since confederation economic developments, not in all parts but unfortunately in too many parts, of the maritime provinces have lagged behind the rest of Canada. Prospects and economic conditions down there are certainly not nearly as bright as my friend the Minister of Finance this afternoon intimated they were. Whether the figure is 14 per cent as suggested by the hon. member for Essex East or some slightly lower figure, it is still the highest unemployment level in Canada; and something should be done to improve conditions down there.

It is not because of the people of the maritimes that this difficulty exists. Not only have some of our greatest educationists, industrialists, bankers and lawyers but, and by no means the least, some of our ablest politicians have certainly come from that part of the world. However, in spite of the acknowledged ability of these people from the maritimes, the economy has lagged behind that of the rest of Canada. I say that the reason is a simple one. Geographically and economically the Atlantic provinces have closer ties with the New England states than they have with central and western Canada. The Atlantic provinces, however, have very strong ties with the rest of Canada, including ties of sentiment and of blood. These are very strong ties. If these ties had not been as strong as they are, they might have snapped long before this. As I say, in spite of these economic difficulties, the maritimes are still a very important and vital part of this nation. However, they need more than an act such as the one within the framework of this bill.

All of the maritime provinces have untapped resources. Newfoundland has a richness of forest wealth and has an important forest industry that needs help. It has great mineral wealth. We are just beginning to realize the importance of the mineral wealth of this tenth province. New Brunswick has rich forest land. It has valuable fisheries. It also has mineral wealth and a great hydroelectric potential. Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island have great wealth. However, the mineral and the forest wealth of Newfoundland needs more than advice and encouragement. It needs more exploration. It needs more geological work and more research, and it certainly needs working capital. Then I might mention the huge salt deposits in Nova Scotia-many Canadians have never heard of them-and the natural gas wells down near the Tantramar marshes. With the scientific developments that have gone on

in the last 20 years there are great possibilities in this part of Canada, not to mention the province of New Brunswick.

There is an industry there now, but what it needs is working capital. Many people would be astounded at the development that would be possible in the peat bogs of Northumberland county. So, I say that the difficulty under which the maritime provinces are working is this geographical barrier which ties them closer to the New England states than to central Canada. We have a special problem, and that problem needs a special board, an Atlantic regional board to handle it. I feel that this board should have the assurance of the necessary financing behind it. It is for this reason I was disappointed when the very constructive suggestion included in the amendment moved by the hon. member for Charlotte was turned down this afternoon on a technicality.

I do not believe that anyone could seriously quarrel with the reasoning of the chairman when this amendment was turned down. Nevertheless, there is so much merit in the suggestion put forward by the hon. member for Charlotte that I feel the minister who is sponsoring this bill should give it careful consideration. He should see that funds of the magnitude suggested by the hon. member are made available by the government. The fact that there is no provision of that kind in the bill, the fact that we had barely opened discussion of this bill when it was announced the provision for the $3,000 salary would be amended authorizing the government to fix the salary, illustrates the fact that this bill has not had the careful thought and consideration the economic plight of the martime provinces would warrant. This concrete suggestion by the hon. member for Charlotte should receive consideration, and I commend it to the minister. I say that if a private member cannot move such an amendment, there is no reason why the government cannot take it under advisement overnight and come back with an amendment that would cover the situation.

Before I sit down, Mr. Chairman, there is one other suggestion I should like to put forward, and which I also commend to the government for its consideration. I believe this suggestion would go a long way toward providing a satisfactory answer to the question that has been troubling the hon. member for Essex East as well as other members in this house. I refer to the question, what do we do with two economic development councils and a national productivity council, and how are they going to work together? I suggest this bill might be amended, or perhaps Bill No. C-87 providing for the national productivity council might be amended, to provide for an interlocking membership. At

least the chairman of the Atlantic board should, ex officio, be a member of the national board. This is a constructive suggestion that should be implemented in one of these bills. I am putting this forward merely in the hope that it will be accepted and acted upon in the spirit in which it is made.

(Translation):

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
SC

Lauréat Maltais

Social Credit

Mr. Maltais:

Mr. Chairman, I have only a few remarks to make on clause 9 of Bill No. C-94.

I agree with the hon. members. As a matter of fact, I put the following question a few days ago: What are exactly the duties of all boards that are presently at the service of the government? But I feel that the Atlantic provinces form part of an area which has been overlooked in the past, in the political and economical history of Canada. Now, those provinces, as well as areas such as the one I represent, the lower St. Lawrence and the north shore districts, need a very special board to protect their interests.

On the other hand, Mr. Chairman, I do not agree with the hon. member who was wondering, a moment ago, about the usefulness of winter navigation on the St. Lawrence river.

Like the hon. member for Lapointe, I submit that one region should not be ruined to help another one. One region should not be deprived of what it succeeded in obtaining after years of difficulties and requests, to assist another region.

I wonder if the hon. member, when he asked if it was useful to spend so much money to open up the St. Lawrence in winter, thought of putting the question to the agricultural producers of the Atlantic regions as well as to the potato producers.

I would like an inquiry like that one be made to find out if the money used to ensure winter navigation on the St. Lawrence river really helps potato producers and other producers in the Atlantic area.

Mr. Chairman, those are the few words I wanted to add to the remarks of the hon. member.

(Text):

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
?

Mr, Macquarrie:

Mr. Chairman-

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill

Liberal

Mr. Pickersgill:

Back from the wars.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
PC

Heath Nelson Macquarrie (Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Macquarrie:

I wish that the rules of the house would permit me to comment on that remark by my hon. friend, so I could acquaint him with the results of that war. I should like to say a word about this important matter. I hope the member for Essex East was not suggesting that greater priority should attach to the other boards he mentioned.

Atlantic Development Board

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin

Liberal

Mr. Marlin (Essex East):

I was suggesting the opposite.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
PC

Heath Nelson Macquarrie (Parliamentary Secretary to the Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Macquarrie:

I was not exactly sure what he said, but recalling the record of the government of which he was a member I thought he had put forward the suggestions X have outlined. However, X will take his word for it. I recall quite well that the leader of his party in my province declared the government of which he was a member had not even given my province half a deal.

This forward step is something which we should all applaud. I very much appreciate the fact that members from other parts of the country have spoken on this important matter. As the hon. member for Vancouver Centre, who spoke this evening, said, we are still a vital part of the dominion and we have throughout the years suffered from some political and economic policies which were nationally developed. I feel, therefore, it is high time that a board of eminence and priority was assigned to look upon our region and to assist us to develop policies of selfhelp which will bring our region to a level comparable to the other parts of the dominion. This, I regard, as an essential second step to the kind of direct assistance through subsidies, as well as conditional and unconditional grants, which have come our way in the last five years. The improvement in the last five years is exemplified by the fact that in my own little province these have been increased from $5 million plus to $12.5 million.

I want to say that the suggestion made by the hon. member for Vancouver Centre commends itself to me. I refer to the suggestion that the chairman of this very important body, which I say takes second place to any mentioned by the hon. member for Essex East, might very well be ex officio a member of the national economic development board. This strikes me as being an extremely valuable suggestion. I do not know of any national board which could not profit by the presence of a maritimer, if immodesty may be pardoned.

I would like to commend to the minister under clause 9, when we consider the measures to deal with the problems connected with the fostering of economic growth and development, that our ancient industry of agriculture be not ignored. There is a narrow concept of the word "industry" as being something that is symbolized by a factory and belching smokestack. We of course want industries developed in our provinces by the sea, but we also want a greater rationalization of our ancient industry of agriculture.

I would impress upon the minister with all the sincerity at my command that when

2566 HOUSE OF

Atlantic Development Board this board is set up, and I hope it will be set up soon, that an integration, a rationalization and advancement of the agricultural industry be given great consideration. There is much we can do. We are a deficiency area in agricultural products which we produce in the very highest and most acceptable degree.

I would like to say too, and say it very briefly, that naturally I consider that among those projects the feasibility of which need no further consideration is the causeway linking my province with New Brunswick, a project in which a certain hon. member across the way has developed a keen interest of late years. We regard this as a decision which has already been taken, and I rejoice in what the minister said the other day. However there may well be important economic considerations which might be looked at most carefully by this board. One sees an interesting social and economic pattern developing at either end of the Canso causeway, and I would think forward looking gentlemen of the board ought to give consideration to what will happen when other provinces in the maritimes are finally linked to the banner province of Prince Edward Island.

I rejoice in the scope of the bill. I think that clause 9 betokens the kind of co-operation which will be conducive to an improvement of maritime conditions and I am one who is not at all concerned, despite the eloquence of the hon. member for Essex East, about the feasibility of co-operation among various boards. I think a direct application of the finest minds we can gather together upon the problems of the Atlantic region will be conducive to a betterment of our whole national economy.

(Translation):

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
SC

Bernard Dumont

Social Credit

Mr. Dumont:

Mr. Chairman, the member who spoke before me said a few words about agriculture. I would like to add my own comments, tonight, because I do not think it is necessary to have an Atlantic development board, when, statistics in hand, we know that, at the present time, in Prince Edward Island, out of 12,000 farmers, 2,460 have an income lower than $1,200 a year; that in New Brunswick, out of 22,000 farmers, 13,000 do not make $1,200 annually; that in Nova Scotia, out of 21,000, 13,000 have an income of less than $1,200; that in Newfoundland, out of 2,387, 1,857 do not get an income of $1,200.

To solve the agriculture problem in eastern Canada, as I suggested at the beginning of the twenty fifth parliament, we have only to build grain elevators, reduce the price of [Mr. Macquarrie.l

feed grain, to enable the eastern farmers to get products at a better price. It is not necessary to spend more in order to secure votes at the next election. Eastern farmers want lower priced feed grain. They want to sell the products they have on hand.

Let us give the Canadian consumers, those who have children, like our Quebec people, the power to purchase the commodities produced in their own province.

Let us double the family allowances. Let us vote a larger grant to the sports council in order to train young people who, in then-spare time, will develop and become strong enough to come here and claim their rights. Let us stop establishing boards which will bring no benefit to the people of this country.

(Text):

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
PC

Hugh John Flemming (Minister of National Revenue; Minister of Forestry)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Flemming (Victoria-Carleion):

Mr. Chairman, the remarks that have been made by various speakers since the committee resumed at eight o'clock are deserving of a great deal of attention and should be treated with the greatest respect. I have been impressed with some of the speeches that have been made, and at this particular moment I would like to address myself to the points raised by the hon. gentleman from Essex East, because he asked some point blank questions and requested specific replies.

It is not always possible to give specific and categorical replies to all questions, and I would like to suggest to him that he should read subclause (1) of clause 9 and read the objectives of the board as set forth in that subclause. He will find that the objects of the board are:

-to inquire into and report to the minister upon measures and projects for fostering economic growth and development of the Atlantic region of Canada, and, without further limiting the generality of the foregoing, the board may, in furtherance of its objects-

And then it goes on to be somewhat specific. I would like to direct the attention of the hon. member to subclause (1) in its context and by itself, and to consider that it points out the primary duty of the board.

The board has a variety of functions and will deal with a variety of geographical areas to which it must give attention. There will be a variety of questions coming before it, some of which have been mentioned by speakers both tonight and on previous occasions in this debate. These will all have a place in the functions of the board, but I put forward subsection (1) of this clause as being the part of the clause which should be emphasized. In that connection 1 suggest to the hon. gentleman that the points which he has raised

are of secondary significance and not of primary significance so far as the bill is concerned.

The hon. gentleman has brought up the question of co-operation between other boards, and it would seem to me it is difficult to spell out in detail and in precise terms just what that co-operation will consist of in this case. It is difficult even to explain what one may have in mind because we may differ in our concepts of the detailed way in which this board will function. To the extent of my limited experience in the commercial world of this country, I found that the most important thing in the conduct of a business was management, proper management and management by people with ability. In that connection I found that you did not gain by trying to determine in advance how you should meet every situation. If you did, you might as well have a clerk as a manager. So I suggest to my hon. friend that co-operation with other boards should be the secondary function of this board. The primary function should be to do the very things set forth in clause 9, subclause 1. Perhaps I may read it again:

The objects of the board are to inquire into and report to the minister upon measures and projects for fostering the economic growth and development of the Atlantic region of Canada-

That is the mast on which I would nail this particular flag, so far as the board's primary duty is concerned. I do not think we should allow this board to become impotent, because it might very well be rendered so by putting some kind of a rope around its neck and saying to it, "You must co-operate here. You must co-operate there. Here is another area in which you must co-operate". I think we have to give the board freedom of action with the idea in mind that this is for the good of the country in general. Mr. Chairman, I am sure we will all, as Canadians, face the fact, that a prosperous and favourable economic climate in Canada-and when I say Canada, I mean all of Canada-is just as important, and perhaps more important, to the Atlantic provinces as it is to any other part of this country. So I do not see any conflict here. In fact, quite the opposite; I think there will be definite co-operation. I think the emphasis must be on the Atlantic provinces. That will be the duty of the board. But I see no particular difficulty about cooperation with other boards which will be before this house for legislative enactment in the very near future.

Mr. Chairman, I would like at this stage to associate myself with the remarks made by my hon. friend for Queens in connection with a suggestion made by the hon. gentleman from Vancouver Centre. I see great merit in

Atlantic Development Board his suggestion. I see no reason why it should not be adopted. I have no reason to think that it will not be adopted. I think it is a constructive idea. Various other points have been raised, Mr. Chairman, and I made a note of them. I believe I have dealt with them, although I do not know that I have dealt with the points raised by the hon. gentleman from Essex East to his satisfaction. I have dealt with them to my own satisfaction inasmuch as my own conception of the board is concerned; that is, its primary duty, its secondary duty and the fact that under subclause (d) you find that they even consider matters, not projects but matters, that may be usefully considered. Perhaps I may refer to the subclause:

-consider and report to the minister upon any other matters that in the opinion of the board may usefully be considered-

I consider that could be a variety of things. That can certainly cover the subject mentioned by my hon. friend from Saint John-Albert. It could almost cover the waterfront, so far as that is concerned. In connection with the development of the area with regard to which this board will have a good deal of responsibility, I am quite satisfied that they have the greatest degree of flexibility under this bill. I do not want to get into a discussion about what we started to do in this country 100 years ago, and the fact that we started to work against geography in our concept of building a nation. We were going to have the trade flow east and west instead of north and south because the final concept was that we were going to build a nation. In my opinion the fathers of confederation had no conception of how great this country was destined to be. I believe we have made tremendous progress as a country. The trade must flow east and west to the extent that we can work toward that end in a proper manner and without any great injustice to any part of this great country and the fringe areas. In particular the eastern fringe areas may perhaps be considered by some of us as operating under something of an economic handicap. But I still submit that the advantages we have seen from association with the rest of Canada have been tremendous, and I for one do not regret that almost 100 years ago in 1867 they decided to embark upon this great venture against geography, and build a great nation with the trade flowing east and west.

This is a measure the government have submitted to parliament as their idea of a concrete step that might be taken to contribute to the development of that portion of this great country known as the Atlantic provinces. Every speaker has admitted that the bill is not perfect, and very few bills

Atlantic Development Board are perfect. It would be too bad if it were perfect, because our hon. friends would not have anything to find fault with and they would not be able to carry out their function as the official opposition. In that event I do not know what would happen to the hon. member for Essex East. He would not be able to rise with that eloquence for which he is famous and really sweep us off our feet from time to time, as he does, unless there was something he thought lacking in the legislation before the house.

Mr. Chairman, that is all I have to say at this stage. I believe that all the objections and misgivings that have been raised have been dealt with. With regard to the points made by my hon. friend from Queens, the committee may be sure that since the constituency I have the honour to represent is probably the best agricultural constituency in Canada, those points will certainly not be ignored so far as any influence that I may have is concerned. The points raised by all hon. members who have spoken will receive the greatest degree of consideration, and the misgivings expressed, particularly by my hon. friend from Essex East, I am sure will not be serious to the operation of the statute.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

Lester Bowles Pearson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. Pearson:

Mr. Chairman, I do not wish to detain the committee for more than a moment, especially in view of the last statement of the minister and the spirit in which it was made. We all on this side agree about the objective of this bill within the context of not only regional but national development. But the minister will agree with us that there cannot be satisfactory regional development in Canada unless there is adequate national development. Therefore we are most anxious-and this is one of the sources of our worry about this bill-that a bill of this character setting up a regional development board will not be obstructed or limited in its operation in any way by a national development board which has the same kind of duty and the same kind of function on a national scale.

The minister says that each board must be given freedom of action, and of course that is correct up to a point. He also said it would be unwise, if I understood him correctly, to so restrict the operation of this particular board that it would have a rope around its neck, and of course that is correct. But when the minister says we do not have to worry about the danger of non co-operation between boards which have similar functions in different areas; when he says, I think these were his words, that co-operation of this kind is not of primary significance, I think he underestimates the importance of this question.

[Mr. Flemming (Victoria-Carleton) .1

I recall very well the occasion a few years ago when we were debating in this house the establishment of the board of broadcast governors as part of the reorganization of the broadcasting system in this country. Some of us at that time pointed out the danger of conflict between the two important bodies which had been established in this field. But we were told at that time there was no need to worry about it. It is true the arguments used, though very much along the lines the minister has used tonight, were probably not advanced with the same skill and dexterity; they did not have the soothing quality which belongs to the Minister of National Revenue. However, we said then that the board of broadcast governors would undoubtedly come into conflict with the C.B.C. if steps were not taken at that time to avoid the possibility of such a conflict. Of course, events have proved we were right.

We are worried now about the same thing happening in this field. Our fears are increased because the Minister of Finance, speaking on another subject, the setting up of the national development board, said- and I have his words here: "The national development board will investigate, analyse and report on the medium and long term prospects and possibilities of particular areas." The maritime provinces certainly constitute a particular area. Those are special terms of reference and special functions for this very important board, and therefore it is of first significance to do everything possible to avoid overlapping, to avoid one board getting in the way of another. Surely, this is something which cannot be left to a general feeling that the boards will work out their own processes of co-operation as they go along. It is, I think, regrettable that some provision has not been made to ensure that serious overlapping will not take place. A certain amount of overlapping is inevitable. A certain amount, perhaps, may even be good. But when overlapping results in confusion, confusion will probably result in conflict. Therefore I think it is of first importance that provision should be made in some way-I know it cannot now be made under the terms of the legislation itself-

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
PC

John (Jack) Henry Horner

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Horner (Acadia):

Tommyrot.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

Lester Bowles Pearson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. Pearson:

That is an interesting comment from the hon. gentleman. It is the kind of observation we have been led to expect from him. But, as I was saying, it is of first importance-

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

Let us get on with it.

Atlantic Development Board The Deputy Chairman: Order. I would ask time and places of meetings so as to include members of the committee to give the Leader one meeting at least in Ottawa. Would the of the Opposition the opportunity to com- board have jurisdiction to do that under the plete his remarks on clause 9 of the bill. bylaws?

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink
LIB

Lester Bowles Pearson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. Pearson:

So it is of first importance that the government should take all possible steps that can be taken to ensure, as far as government can ensure, that this overlapping, confusion and conflict do not take place.

We hope the minister is right in his optimistic feeling that this will not happen, but we think it is our duty to warn him that it might well happen within the terms of this legislation.

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink

Clause agreed to. On clause 10-Meetings.


LIB

Leon David Crestohl

Liberal

Mr. Creslohl:

Clause 10 speaks of the times and places at which meetings should be held. This, to me, is simply a matter of bylaws and routine regulations. I should like to ask the minister whether these provisions should not fall within clause 12. If the hon. gentleman will be good enough to look at clause 12 he will see it refers to bylaws. Why cannot what it now contained in clause 10 be dealt with in clause 12?

Topic:   ATLANTIC DEVELOPMENT BOARD
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR DEFINITION OF DUTIES, APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS, ETC.
Permalink

December 11, 1962