December 18, 1962


Some hon. Members:


Clause stands.

Progress reported.


Marcel Joseph Aimé Lambert (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

The hour for the consideration of private members' business having now expired, the house will revert to the business which was interrupted at five o'clock.


The house in committee of supply, Mr. Paul in the chair.



Resolved, that a sum not exceeding $330,089,511.93 being the aggregate of- (a) one twelfth of the total of the amounts of the items set forth in the revised estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1963, laid before the House of Commons at the present session of parliament, except atomic energy item 5, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation item 5, finance items 45

Interim Supply and 50, forestry item 11, labour item 40, legislation items 30 and 35, mines and technical surveys items 30, 35, 40, 70, 80, 125 and 130, national defence item 70, national health and welfare item 25, northern affairs and national resources items 10, 45 and 90, public works items 5, 45, 70, 100, 105, 125, 145, 168, 170, 180, 190 and 290, Royal Canadian Mounted Police items 5, 15 and 25, transport items 35, 40, 60, 80, 85, 100, 125, 222 and 225, loans investments and advances item L20 $292,175,958; (b) an additional one twelfth of the amounts of defence production item 25, external affairs item 5, northern affairs and national resources item 105, of the said revised estimates, $1,842,041.67; (c) one twelfth of the total of the amounts of the items set forth in the supplementary estimates (A) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1963, except external affairs item 112a, transport items 213a and 222a, $8,738,178,92; (d) ten twelfths of the total of the amounts of the items set forth in the supplementary estimates (B) for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1963, $27,333,333.34, be granted to Her Majesty on account of the present fiscal year ending March 31, 1963. At six o'clock the committee took recess. (Text): AFTER RECESS The committee resumed at 8 p.m. (Translation):


Jean-Paul Cook

Social Credit

Mr. Cook:

Mr. Chairman, -when I had to interrupt my speech to enable the house to revert to the consideration of private bills, I was giving my general impressions on yesterday's speeches.

I was saying that it was desirable that goodwill should exist first of all within the government itself. I also said that all past governments ran into enormous deficits, and that in spite of their accumulating deficits they never managed to settle the problem of unemployment, and there still is a great deal of hardship in spite of our abundant natural resources.

Mr. Chairman, we speak of national unity. But have we stopped to think, as we consider these supplementary estimates, that they do not provide anything for the eastern farmers. I am pleased to see that the western farmers get all the assistance they need in order to remain on their farms, but I had hoped that the government would take the same attitude with regard to the eastern farmers.

Moreover, Mr. Chairman, coming back to supplementary estimates, I notice that the Department of Public Works gets only $1. I just wonder what the Minister of Public Works will do with an increase of $1 to end this fiscal year.

Let me draw to your attention a few items, from page 4, of the supplementary estimates (A):

Gift offered to the Queen of the Netherlands and Prince Bernhardt on the occasion of their 25th wedding anniversary; $700.

Gift offered to commemorate the independence of Nigeria: $10,000.

Gift offered to commemorate the independence of French-speaking African states; $2,100.

Gift offered to commemorate the independence of Tanganyika: $5,000.

Gift offered to commemorate the 150th anniversary of independence of the republic of Mexico: $4,100.

Mr. Chairman, I know it denotes good will to commemorate anniversaries such as these, but I would fully understand the government giving away gifts-I say "gifts" but it would actually be mere justice-to the citizens of the country, to the unemployed and the mothers who, with their pensions and family allowances so ridiculously low, must be content merely to exist.

Well and good to offer gifts to all the countries in the world, but I think we should start by offering gifts to our own Canadian people.

I also see in the estimates an item amounting to $1,081,000 for a contribution to a world food program; I fully agree that the government of Canada should assist underdeveloped countries. However as the proverb goes: "Charity begins at home".

In our own country, human beings are underfed, I therefore wonder what the government is thinking about when they prepare their yearly estimates.

I also see an item of $179,000 as Canada's dues to world organizations. There again, I am in full agreement with the item, because it may further good understanding among the countries of the world. But, on the other hand, Canadians are having a hard time getting along with one another.

We also find in this budget which contains fantastic expenditures, the following item:

Expenses of the royal commission on banking and finance, $166,630.

If only governments had read and given effect to the recommendations made by the commissions which were set up over the years, we would not find ourselves in the midst of such a depression today. Thousands of dollars are being spent on the establishment of commissions and after the latter have examined certain problems, the government does not even take the trouble of considering their recommendations.

Expenses connected with royal visits: $50,000.

And a little further on:

Gifts for furniture to the International Communications Union, $10,000.

Interim payments under the Freight Rates Reduction Act, $50 million.

Mr. Chairman, a bill respecting that act was adopted yesterday morning in an underhanded manner by a parliamentary committee. Everyone knows that, normally, parliamentary committees never sit on Monday morning. It was well known that at 9.30 on a Monday morning, the members who sit on that committee would not have arrived in Ottawa from their homes where they had spent the week end. The committee sat just the same and railroaded that bill.

Mr. Chairman, there is something wrong with that bill. In fact, under it, shippers cannot choose the transportation means. They have to use the railways. When they use trucks, they do not benefit from the grants.

Mr. Chairman, all previous administrations just as the present government did their utmost to claim they were against monopolies and trusts of all kinds. I think that this Bill C-91, gives proof that the government is practising a form of monopoly or control. Let us not forget that private enterprise built up Canada to what it is now. It is by giving more assistance to private enterprise that we shall succeed in building up a prosperous Canada.

The trucking industry which took 30 years to develop is just about to vanish completely because of certain unfortunate legislation passed by the government. I have never been and even today, I still am not in favour of that policy adopted by the government towards our truckers. I am wondering whether some day our governments will take their responsibilities and give more assistance to private industry, the very basis of our Canadian economy.

I shall not spend any more time on those supplementary estimates and I hope they will be approved as quickly as possible. I should also like to remind the Minister of Finance (Mr. Nowlan) and the Conservative government that, for their own good, they should have something better to show us in their next budget, because, otherwise, I, personally, will support it no longer.

I shall not dwell at greater length on that matter. We had thought since September 27, that the government would bring a solution

Interim Supply

to this country's problems, but, more and more, we realize that, with the present government, we are continually accumulating deficits and that the budgets it is submitting are not solving any problems.

In closing I must say that I feel sure beforehand that the government will take its responsibilities and will wake up soon in order to give the Canadian people what it is waiting for.


Roland Léo English

Mr. English:

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to join with all members who took part in the present debate which has been lasting for a few days. I listened yesterday to speeches devoid of all political partisanship and imbued with really patriotic principles. In fact, the atmosphere in this house has changed completely. We did not hear politicians, but statesmen concerned with the problems facing us.

We all realized that unity was essential in this parliament, if the clarion call for unity is going to be heard, and especially by all the people who live in our beautiful country, Canada.

We are now in a troubled age. We see a combination of facts that prompts us to look farther than ever before.

On each side of us new groups appear, more important than we think, and which could, tomorrow, create a wide chasm between both our ethnic communities.

What are we to do? Are we to declare open war to all new movements? Are we to condemn them? Are we to consider them as undesirable? No, Mr. Chairman, let us rather consider them as our brothers, let us try to understand them. In a word, let us be the apostles of mutual understanding.

Mr. Chairman, no movement is born without a cause. Let us try to find out that cause and the best way to do it is not to investigate, it is not merely to form movements to oppose those already existing, the best way is simply to look at ourselves, English Canadians and French Canadians, and each of us to examine our conscience.

We shall then discover that everyone of us has his share of responsibilities to assume. We shall perhaps find out that we caused unconsciously the spark that started the fire which seems at present to take alarming proportions. Let us stop eyeing each other like divided brothers. Instead, let us consider each other like united brothers. Those movements did not spring up overnight. It might have been possible to prevent them from coming into being if right from the start our politicians had lent a more attentive ear to their claims.

Interim Supply

Let me give you an example. The selection of a name for the C.N.R. hotel in Montreal was not a momentous question; the request made by all social organizations of the province of Quebec could have been granted.

The province of Quebec has always advocated, not only with words but with action, the respect of minorities.

Has the province of Quebec not always had a public education board formed of two committees, one called the Catholic committee and the other, the Protestant committee?

Succeeding provincial governments in the past have always treated those two groups with the same fairness. Subsidies granted for the building of schools were not higher for French schools and lower for English schools. Indeed, those subsidies were the same for both groups.

Mr. Chairman, that is what we, in Quebec, call true fair play. That is what we, in Quebec, call well understood unity. That is what we, in Quebec, call respect of minorities. That is what we, in Quebec, understand by practising what we preach.

Mr. Chairman, I represent in this house one of the finest ridings not only of the province of Quebec, but of all Canada, the riding of Gaspe which comprises 10,700 French speaking families and 1,800 English speaking families. Mine is a united county where it is good to live in peace and harmony. We all look upon each other as brothers, as true people from Gaspe, and true Canadians.

There is no question of race, religion or language. Our French Canadians always made an effort to speak English, and our English speaking Canadians did the same.

Since I have been in the house, I have always defended the interests of the Englishspeaking minority in my county.

For the last few years, the English speaking municipalities in my riding made some representations to me to the effect that they were lacking television service, and asked me to intercede on their behalf with the government authorities. They were right in asking for fair treatment, Mr. Chairman. I did approach the proper authorities on many occasions and appreciate their having acceded to my request.

This is what we find in the report on the matter, established by the board of broad-

oast governors and dated December 4, 1962:

Mont Bechervaise, Gaspe West (Que.)

Licence for the establishment of a new television relay station at Mont Bechervaise, in Gaspe West (Que.) via the Gaspe South Telecasting Syndicate, to pick up programs of station CKAM-TV, of Upsalquitch (N.B.) on channel 12, and retransmit to channel 4 with 5 watt power and directional antenna.

Recommendation: APPROVED.

Reasons: The board thinks that the facilities requested by the Gaspe South Telecasting Syndicate are the only ones that could answer the needs of the English speaking people in the district where the proposed relay station is to operate. The board trusts that it will be possible to collect sufficient funds to build and immediately operate those facilities, and that steps may be taken to ensure the maintenance of those installations.

Is not Gaspe, Mr. Chairman, a magnificent example of unity, which we may quote with pride on any occasion?

This afternoon, I listened to the hon. member for Iles-de-la-Madeleine (Mr. Sauve) when he pointed out that, in his beautiful riding, there were, proportionately speaking, more veterans from the two wars than in any other riding. I entirely agree with the hon. member for Iles-de-la-Madeleine, and I have to tell him that the riding of Gaspe is one of those which have given the most soldiers to our country. In my county, there are three legion branches: one at Chandler, one at Gaspe, and one at Murdochville. In those three areas, there is no difference of class, race or religion.

Those four different communities form a single area where all fair-minded people in Gaspe irrespective of race and religion, discuss under the same roof the common interest of the county of Gaspe, and I am proud to say that this county has distinguished itself. Under the circumstances, I am not surprised about Iles-de-la-Madeleine, because that riding followed in the steps of Gaspe, because it belonged for a long time to Gaspe county.

Mr. Chairman, as united and as rich as it may be through its mineral, forest and fishing industries, through the moral fibre and the courage of its inhabitants, the riding of Gaspe has nevertheless been neglected by all previous governments.

Unfortunately, this great courageous population has all too often been used for purely political purposes.

We have been deprived of high schools and classical colleges far too long. In fact, many children have not had the necessary education because their parents did not have the means to send them to the classical colleges in Quebec city or Montreal. The only university our ancestors had really gone to is that of hard knock.

Mr. Chairman, how can we explain the fact that such a rich country has been left undeveloped for so long? How can we explain that this country, discovered by Jacques Cartier in 1534, had to wait until 1956 to see its first city, Murdochville. However, its wealth had been lying underground for a long time. Providence had put it there so that it could be developed and benefit the whole community.

At this stage, Mr. Speaker, I should like to refer to the Gaspe copper mines financial report, submitted by the president of the company, which clearly shows that the Gaspe peninsula is a rich country. I quote:

Gaspe Copper is going through a prosperous year.

The net profit of Gaspe Copper Mines Limited for the first six months of 1962 will reach-

You will have noticed, Mr. Chairman, that the figure is for the first six months of 1962.

-$2,700,000, compared with $400,000 for the whole year 1961.

This was revealed today by Mr. John R. Brad-field, president of the company, to the shareholders now holding their annual meeting here.

This substantial improvement in the results of the operations of the company is explained by the fact that better prices for copper as well as the Canadian dollar exchange rate have brought about an increase of $500,000 in the revenues of the company. Besides, as was revealed by the annual report sent out two months ago to the shareholders, the amortization of substantial capital and preproduction expenditures has been completed during 1961. Mr. Bradfield also underlined that the company's debt, which amounted to $47 million in 1956 has been substantially reduced. More than $40 million have been paid off, so that the current is only totalling $6,500,000.

Mr. Chairman, the debt amounted to $47 million in 1956 and is but $6 million today. And these figures were only for a period of six months in 1962, which means that the $6 million current debt will be completely paid off before the end of the year.

Mr. Chairman, there is not only one mine in the Gaspe peninsula. There are several, which are only waiting for mining companies and strong arms to put them at the service of the public. And, merely to prove that the Gaspe peninsula is a rich area and that I was right in asking for the construction of a railway which would contribute to its economic expansion, you only have to look at what is happening at the moment.

Interim Supply

In fact, Mr. Chairman, when the Conservative government decided to consider the fate of the Gaspe peninsula, it realized that it had to do something for its exiled brothers and adopted an act which received the unanimous approval of both houses, an act which finally permitted to give to the Gaspe peninsula what it had been seeking for more than 75 years.

Mr. Chairman, that is a promise which suddenly became a reality. And the reality brought about considerable economic expansion in the Gaspe peninsula.

Until now, companies that owned mining claims did not want to develop them until they had the essential transport facilities to do so.

I also recall that I was asked at the time if I had consulted provincial government authorities to determine whether it would be a self-liquidating project.

1 must say that, at the time, I could not reply, because I was in communication with the Quebec authorities, and I could not reveal information before it was made public by the government itself.

Following the passing of the bill by the House of Commons, the Quebec government granted one company a 32-square mile area in the national park of the Gaspe peninsula. That park had always been closed to mining operations in the past, because it was preserved as a sanctuary.

Mr. Chairman, it is all very well to look after caribou, but I feel it is even more important to look after human beings and, according to order in council No. 616, the provincial government granted Mr. Pierre Beauchemin and his Gaspe associates a 32-square mile area. A short while later, drilling operations began, and the results are most promising. This will allow us to have in the near future, not only one, but at least three mines in operation in the constituency of Gaspe. For that, credit must go to the Conservative government which has made it possible to build that railway to develop that area.


Roland Léo English

Mr. English:



Bernard Dumont

Social Credit

Mr. Dumont:

Mr. Chairman, the hon. member says that the building of that railroad had been promised for 75 years. Does he not believe that the grain elevators in the east will not be erected before 75 years also?

Interim Supply


Roland Léo English

Mr. English:

Mr. Chairman, I must say to the hon. member that if grain elevators had to be built in my riding, I would speak up with as much courage as I did for a railroad in my region.

Mr. Chairman, I seem to remember that at the time the bill concerning that railroad was under discussion, all members agreed. In addition, I remember having read a brief submitted by the north Gaspe chamber of commerce and stating:

The north Gaspe chamber of commerce associates itself with the statements made by Messrs. Hees, Gordon and others on the occasion of the official opening of the Chibougamau railway:

There are two essential prerequisites to our national economy:

1. A large portion of our natural resources is still awaiting means of transportation to be developed: 2. Our railways are still taking the lead and opening new areas to economic development.

This is what Mr. Donald Gordon, president of the Canadian National Hallways, had to say: "In a country such as ours where distance is the determining factor in the cost of goods, natural resources development cannot be envisaged without thinking of the railway".

Mr. Chairman, it is rather surprising that it took him so long to think of the construction of that railway.



Allan Marcus Atkinson McLean


Mr. McLean (Charlotte):

Mr. Chairman, will the hon. member permit a question?


Gordon Campbell Chown (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

The Chairman:

Order. The hon. member for Charlotte wishes to ask a question.


Allan Marcus Atkinson McLean


Mr. McLean (Charlotte):

We know that the Quebec ground is full of gold. Why does the government not raise the price of gold?



Roland Léo English

Mr. English:

Mr. Chairman, I regret having to waste so much precious time because of the hon. member's question.

I continue:

The chamber of commerce also appreciates the foHowing statement made by the Hon. George Marler, former federal minister of transport: "The present opposition in the parliament at Ottawa will never criticize what the Diefenbaker government will undertake to lengthen anywhere the railway branch lines in the mining regions of Quebec and the rest of Canada-"

In our area, we have enormous resources, but, without that vital artery, our economy is anaemic and has not developed on a par with that of the other areas in the province and even in the country.

Three factors are essential to the development of the Gaspe peninsula: an abundance of electric power; enough capital to develop our resources; and the railway. The government of the province of Quebec and our mining companies have already procured for us the first and second factors respectively and only the federal government can give us the third one.

Well, Mr. Chairman, I think I have stated the need of a railway which is only 57 miles long but which is vital to the economic development of the Gaspe peninsula, and the benefits the government brought to that region when it decided to build it.

Mr. Chairman, I have but one thing to ask. I know that the government has shown diligence and I have no blame at all to address to the Canadian National Railways because during the summer, the lay-out was proceeded with and now, that being completed, the plans and the expropriation of land are being looked after.

I am simply asking the government to bring pressure to bear so that the work can start during the winter season. Winter is always a hard time for the Gaspe peninsula, for fishermen, lumbermen and farmers.

Mr. Chairman, if we want our young people to stay home, if we want to prevent them from leaving their native land-at the present time, I note with sadness that people are leaving my riding to seek fortune and work in Montreal because they have heard that a world fair will be held there and will create a lot of jobs-let us work together, without political partisanship, to help that region of the province that has been too long neglected. It is now forgotten because its problems do not resemble those of Quebec city or Montreal, or even those of the agricultural ridings in the rest of the province of Quebec.

I would even say, Mr. Chairman, that that part of the province of Quebec should be brought under the study made by the royal commission set up to examine the problems of the Atlantic provinces, because our difficulties in the Gaspe peninsula are very similar to those of the maritime provinces: fishing, mines and forests.

Mr. Chairman, I apologize for taking up perhaps too much of the time of the house but until now I have been very patient. I was content to listen, and even before you tell me that my time has expired-



Ralph Bronson Cowan


Mr. Cowan:

Mr. Chairman, when the distinguished member for Davenport opened the debate in the House of Commons some weeks ago, he remarked that he was taking part in a budget debate that was not considering a budget and could not be considered a debate. The nearest we are coming to a budget

in this first session of the twenty fifth parliament is on motions for interim supply. As the hon. member for Davenport continued his remarks, pointing out that he was commenting on the financial state of the nation without a budget before him, and intimating that the debate did not have teeth in it because of the manner in which the committee of supply was set up, it struck me that we had here all the settings of a Gilbert and Sullivan light opera. What is more, we not only had the settings, but at that time we had a minister of the crown going to Japan and right on location, intimating to the prime minister of that nation what the province of Ontario could do in the matter of trade and commerce.

The hon. member for Rosedale has ably covered the subject of the federal government of this self-governing nation allowing provincial governments to intrude upon the federal field of trade and commerce without so much as asking permission or being given a by your leave by the head of that department. We have the interesting situation of a minister of the crown stating that the province of Ontario can conduct trade with a foreign country because the provinces are not governed by international treaty and have no customs tariff. It makes one wonder whether the Minister of Trade and Commerce is aiding and abetting a plan whereby Japanese goods may be brought into Ontario through an all-weather port on Hudson bay, thus short-circuiting the Department of National Revenue. I just refer to this episode, this trip to Japan, where a minister of the crown, on return to this country, said that he found there a tremendous market for western style goods as we have received word from the land of the rising sun that the businessmen of that nation do not favour dressing their geisha girls in ten gallon hats and chaps, as favoured on this side of the Pacific; and if local trade is going to be upset by western styles being forced upon the Japanese market, they feel that they will have to cut off entirely all international trade. But the federal government is not taking any stand on this matter of trespass on any part of the realm of national government, and is abdicating its position in that field, as it has abdicated in so many other fields.

The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, in a speech last night which will probably be the zenith of this session of parliament, outlined the manner in which this parliament is being reduced to the level of a debating society by the actions of the executive arm of the party in power. I regret that the speech of the hon. member 27507-3-177

Interim Supply

for Winnipeg North Centre was not heard last night by all members of this House of Commons, as it was certainly an outline of the ridiculous position into which this parliament has been forced by the present government with regard to the discussion of estimates and budgets for this nation. This is the third time in five and a half years under the present government that we have given interim supply or interim financial statements instead of a budget. Never before has parliament been treated in such a callous manner as at the present time. I would like to see the address given by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre pasted on the face of every copy of the bill of rights hanging on the walls of this country today so that the public could see that the gifts which the government has so ostentatiously given to the citizens is being counteracted by the withdrawal of the rights of parliament.

I regret that in this house of minorities the largest minority should be kept in power by the open co-operation of a smaller section of the house. However, when we consider the irresponsibility of some of their actions and speeches we can accept anything. We have been given five different reasons by the leader of that party why they are voting in favour of a government which they were pledged to defeat. We have been told they had agreed to maintain the government in power only until it had corrected the mistakes of the Liberals. We were told they would keep this government in power until the spring. We were told the government would be defeated unless it brought down progressive legislation. Then we were told in a speech on June 28 by the leader of the Social Credit party: "Let us be frank about it; we do not want an election this year. We want to win the next election and we want time to get ready." This is from a man who, as leader of the Social Credit party, might be expected to know something about credits and debits. Yet we find that on November 5, referring in this house to the Chinese-Indian war, he made mention of the theory that when the government was supplying arms to the people of India it was assisting in the destruction of Canada's creditors. Well, when the leader of that party does not know the difference between a creditor and a debtor we cannot expect too much assistance from that quarter.

I wish to draw the attention of the committee to what was said by our own leader speaking in Sorel on September 22 when he said:

Thus the members who take their seats on the opposition side of the house are on that side because the electors gave them a mandate to manifest their non-confidence in the Diefenbaker government.

Interim Supply

So a member of the opposition could not give a vote of confidence to the present government without being a traitor to the mandate he has just received from the people.

I would draw these words by the Leader of the Opposition to the attention of hon. members on this side of the house. My hon. friend pointed out that those who do not live up to the mandate they received from the electors are traitors to the mandate they received. The greatest betrayal this world has ever seen involved 30 pieces of silver. We are now witnessing the betrayal of 30 constituencies because of sessional silver indemnities.

Now I should like to draw the attention of the committee to a feature of this government's policy which I am sure we all heartily endorse. I appreciate the opportunity given to me tonight to commend the Minister of National Health and Welfare, and I sincerely trust that some of the words I utter in this debate will be spread across Canada at a time when budgets are being set for hospitals from Newfoundland to Victoria. As hon. members of this committee know, the greatest problem which faces hospitals in this country today is the shortage of staff. I have taken the trouble to go through the briefs submitted to the royal commission on health services. I have read them as submitted from one end of Canada to the other. In every province we find the same tenor in the submissions- shortage of personnel. The submission of the government of Nova Scotia given by Mr. Donahoe, minister of health, points out that in the academic field of nursing there is an alarming shortage of teaching personnel. In Newfoundland it was stated by Dr. Leonard Miller, the deputy minister of health, that the total number of dentists in the province was only 44 or one to every 11,000 people. The figure for graduate nurses showed a total of 937 or 2.1 per thousand of the population whereas in Canada as a whole there are four graduate nurses per thousand. In New Brunswick the Hon. Georges L. Dumont, minister of health, commented: "If we had these nurses... it would be a wonderful help in solving the health problem of the province; so there it is.'' A Manitoba submission said the province did not have enough graduate nurses and could do with more of them. So the story runs throughout the ten provinces of Canada. In Ottawa, a statement was made by C. F. Gilhooly, who, speaking for the nurses section of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, stated:

Then their brief moves into the area of shortage of nurses, and they admit from the start that the problem of shortages is extremely complex. It is a continuing problem and there are no simple solutions.

Attention is drawn particularly to the need for qualified mental health nurses.

The great difficulty in securing a larger supply of qualified nurses is the present rate of remuneration. I regret to say that nurses are the most poorly paid of all the professional people in the country. However, the federal government through the Department of National Health and Welfare has been helping to meet this problem in an indirect way and I sincerely hope that they will both continue these efforts and expand them.

I was talking about hospital staff shortages with Dr. Rae Chittick, the lady who is the head of the McGill University School of Nursing. This was last April. The difficulty is that there is not sufficient staff for the hospitals which are already open. As a result, there is a minimum of staff and the number of patients accepted is geared to the number of staff available. Dr. Chittick told me last April that she did not think there would be any solution to these staff shortages until it was recognized that hospital staff should be paid on a shift differential and a day premium basis. I looked at the lady and remarked that I had never heard such a thought advanced before, but I could agree with her wholeheartedly. She remarked to me with some surprise "I thought you were a businessman". To this I answered "You would have to ask my competitors about that". She said "You are the first hospital trustee who did not hit the roof when payment on a shift differential and a day premium basis was mentioned. Then I made a second comment: "Dr. Chittick, I have been engaged in the printing trades for 40 years where we pay shift differentials and day premiums and in that business it is the normal way of life". My father who is 85 years of age is sitting in the gallery tonight. He has been used to paying shift differentials and day premiums, before me, so that is nothing new in our industry. How can I register any objection to bringing this system into the hospital nursing field?

In talking over hospital practices I was indeed pleased to find that in the province of Quebec a shift differential between day, night and evening shifts has been paid for the past ten years in the great majority of hospitals. I spent one day at Notre Dame hospital in Montreal discussing the matter and another with a second hospital in Montreal. I was advised that in that city there is a normal differential of 15 cents an hour or $1.20 a shift as between the evening shift and the day time shift, and that a differential of 10 cents an hour is paid on the night shift as compared with the day shift. To me it was interesting to learn that a higher differential is paid on the evening shift than on the night shift. However, the sisters who operate

this hospital pointed out that the staff prefer to enjoy the social amenities from three o'clock until 11 o'clock in the evening much more than at night, and that it is more difficult to recruit staff for that evening shift.

To find the province of Quebec paying a shift differential was interesting. However, in an effort to locate a hospital paying a day premium for sixth day work, Sunday work or holidays I found the situation was slightly different.

I have in my hand a regular copy of the agreement between the hospital of Notre Dame and the labour union. This agreement was signed on October 16, last. In this contract, when it comes to a consideration of the day premium, we have a clause stating that with regard to holidays, employees will be given a day in lieu of the holiday, within 15 days before or 15 days after it, but that if the hospital fails to give the day off in lieu of holidays, they will pay double time. You therefore have a day premium in the contract involving a Montreal hospital.

In the province of Saskatchewan we have the shift differential between day, evening and night shifts. In British Columbia we again have the shift differential. However, it is impossible to locate any day premium scale set-up in Canada, other than the one that prevails in Montreal, and in that case they reduce the staff rather than pay the day premium. By that I mean that if the holiday is worked they give the employee time off rather than pay double time.

I commend the Department of National Health and Welfare in this matter because of the fact that they go along with these three provinces, namely Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, and they meet the necessary portion of the charges involved by the day premium and the shift differential rate.

I have in my hand the annual report of the Minister of National Health and Welfare under the Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services Act for the fiscal year ended March 31, 1962. On page 10 thereof is found the following:

Generally speaking, shareable costs are the operating costs of the hospital which have been approved by the provincial authority and which have been determined in accordance with recognized and generally accepted accounting principles and procedures .. .

The province is required to review and approve the costs of each hospital and these approved costs form the basis of the federal sharing formula.

We have the federal government, which pays one third of the operating costs of the hospitals today, quite gladly and willingly paying the differential in Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. I sincerely hope 27507-3-177i

Interim Supply

that other hospitals throughout Canada, particularly in the other seven provinces where the differential is not now in effect, will take note of this co-operation on the part of the federal government and that the staffs will appeal to the respective hospital boards for similar treatment.

It is not my intention to occupy the time of the committee by extolling the merits of the riding which I represent, namely York-Humber. The hon. member for Peel stated today that his constituency was the banner riding of Canada. This statement must make mine take second place. However, rather than argue with him, I would extol the qualities of leadership which have been displayed by the board of directors of Northwestern General hospital in Toronto. They are a group of 14 men and women. Included in their number is Mr. W. G. Beech, former Conservative member of parliament in this house and former member of the provincial house in Toronto. Unanimously they have submitted to the Ontario hospital services commission for 1963 a budget which calls for shift differentials and day premiums. The board unanimously has suggested that the premium for the sixth day in the week shall be $6 per Saturday, or sixth day, $8 per shift for work on Sunday, and $10 per shift for work on statutory holidays. I may tell you, Mr. Chairman, that the problem of securing staff for hospitals can be solved only by a satisfactory monetary return and satisfactory labour relations.

In the American Journal of Nursing for November, 1962, at page 62 will be found this comment by Sister Magda Marie, director, school of nursing and nursing service, St. Catherine's hospital, Brooklyn, New York:

Today's hospitals are "big business" and nursing must develop a "big business" approach. More studies and research must be done to find ways and means. Principles of personnel management and practices need to be investigated and applied to nursing. Better and more dynamic administration in nursing service should be developed to keep the profession abreast of the times in order to meet the current health needs of patients.

I wish to commend the day premium rate of pay. I would point out that looking at the help wanted advertisements in the Nursing Outlook and other nursing periodicals to be found in the Department of National Health and Welfare or in our own parliamentary library, one will find advertisements from the Midland hospital of Midland, Michigan, in which it is pointed out that they pay evening, night and week end differentials. You will find advertisements by the Mission hospital, Huntingdon Park, California, emphasizing that they pay day premium rates. In talking with officers of the American hospital association I was informed that in Minneapolis

Interim Supply

and St. Paul, the twin cities of one of the most progressive states in the United States and the site of the University of Minnesota, they have a contract with their hospital staffs in those two cities under which they pay a day premium for Saturday and Sunday work. There is no widespread national pattern to this effect. However, by paying day premium rates hospitals should be able to attract from the ranks of married women the trained hospital personnel who refuse to come out for Saturday, Sunday and holiday work at the present rates of pay.

With a shift differential and a day premium scale I am confident that hospital staff problems can be easily solved. It is the greatest problem facing the hospital world today and therefore the greatest problem facing the Department of National Health and Welfare. Our veterans hospitals administered by the federal government are operating at 11.2 per cent shortage of nursing staff on the establishment. We get these figures from the Department of Veterans Affairs. When we cannot secure help in order to meet the establishment figures of the department, it is time that we looked at the method of payment. I want to commend the Minister of National Health and Welfare for his cooperation with the provinces of Quebec, Saskatchewan and British Columbia in paying the basic charges for shift differential rates of pay for hospital personnel and for the co-operation with the few hospitals of Quebec that now have the day premium rate of pay. I would sincerely urge the government to exert every possible means at their disposal to impress on the other provinces of Canada the beneficial results that can be expected to follow from the differential rate of pay and the day premium.

I am certain hon. members will be interested to know that only last week Riverdale hospital in Toronto, an ; 808 bed institution which will be re-opened in March, came to an agreement with their help whereby they will pay differential rates of pay, not a day premium but a shift differential. They will pay an extra 10 cents per hour on the afternoon shift and 12 cents per hour nights. These figures are interesting because they are paying higher on the night side than on the afternoon or evening shifts. This contract was negotiated by union labour officials who are accustomed to negotiating for a higher differential on the night shift than on the evening shift; but when that hospital opens you can rest assured that in a short time you will find a higher differential on the evening shift than on the night shift.

In the case of Northwestern hospital in Toronto they are suggesting to the Ontario

hospital services commission 15 cents an hour on the evening shift and 10 cents an hour on the night shift, as prevails in the city of Montreal and in the province of Quebec. I sincerely hope that the benefits that will follow the introduction of such a method of compensation for hospital personnel will be spread widely across this nation so that the greatest problem facing hospitals today may be solved, and I sincerely commend the Department of National Health and Welfare for their co-operation with the three provinces who now pay a shift differential.


Harold Edward Winch

New Democratic Party

Mr. Winch:

Mr. Chairman, this afternoon the leader of this group outlined to the House of Commons a number of matters of such serious import that in the view of this group they should not only be debated in this assembly but there should be definite statements by the government on its policies with regard to the matters to which our leader made reference. It is my desire in the time at my disposal this evening to add a couple of other items to the list which he outlined.

I should like to introduce the first of these items by asking members of this house to remember the clarion call, the challenging call, of the Prime Minister to the people of Canada in 1957 and 1958. I want to be sure that I have his call absolutely correct and to make clear that it was not just a statement made once. Therefore I should like to read from the official record just what this challenging call, this clarion call, was. If hon. members will refer to the House of Commons debates for the 1957-58 session, volume I, page 650 they will see this statement by the Prime Minister:

Private enterprise does not carry with it the right of exploitation. As to foreign capital coming into Canada, it is not the purpose of this government to interfere with that investment. However, we want to ensure-and I think the house generally will agree with that stand-that investment in Canada shall be for Canadian purposes and under Canadian law.

Again, in volumes 9 and 10 of the proceedings of the external affairs committee of 195758, page 275, we find this recorded statement of the Prime Minister:

There is an intangible sense of disquiet in Canada over the political implications of large scale and continuing external ownership and control of Canadian industries.

Again, in the House of Commons debates for the session of 1957, volume 1, page 1155, we find this statement of the Prime Minister:

We did not object to United States investment but we asked for a positive national policy which would prevent foreign investment from furthering the process of continental economic integration and ultimately undermining our national identity,

I give just one more quotation because I want hon. members to remember this challenging call of the Prime Minister. In the House of Commons debates for the session of 1957, volume 3, page 3407, we find this statement by him:

We believe in foreign investment, but we also believe that investment in Canada should provide for Canadian considerations first.

We maintain that what is happening with regard to foreign investment and control in Canada is of such a nature that at least we had a right to expect some action on the part of the government since 1957 and 1958 with regard to this most serious situation, because foreign investment and control have increased under this government since the Prime Minister made these statements in 1957. According to the latest figures of the dominion bureau of statistics, which are for 1959, United States capital has led to that country controlling 52 per cent of Canadian industry. Fifty two per cent of all Canadian industry is now in the control of United States investors. That may not appear to be very important to the government but I was very interested to note that it seems to be of the utmost importance to the Financial Post. In its issue of November 3 of this year the Financial Post pointed out that it had spent many months in exhaustive study of the question of foreign investment and control in Canada, and as a result of their studies and their conclusions they have a message not only for the people of Canada but for this government. I believe I should place on record what the Financial Post thought was so important that they put it in very large black-face type. Here is what they say:

Great issues of growth and trade now beset this nation. But none raises more profound implications for the survival of Canada than the tidal sellout of Canadian companies to foreign owners. On this and the following three pages is the hard evidence of who controls Canadian industry. They show the astounding depth and degree of the invasion by foreign capital. They document a development of immense historic significance for this country.

Most certainly Canada has gained from foreign investment. And most certainly Canada needs an inflow of foreign capital to help maintain a healthy foreign exchange position. But what about Canadian independence? Where is this country going? Is our political sovereignty a pathetic pretence when economic independence goes?

Future generations looking back at the 1950's and 1960's may be able to give an answer. But the reality of the movement is that this is the age of the big take-over.

I say that in the view of this group no truer statement has ever been made. This is the age of the big take-over. This take-over is so pronounced that the information available leads us to believe the vast majority of the underwriting of fire and casualty insurance in Canada is no longer done by Canadian companies.

Interim Supply

We find, Mr. Chairman, that since 1950 an astounding number of companies have been taken over and, in the majority of instances, the take-over has been accomplished in the last four years.

We say this is something about which the Prime Minister and the government have definitely let the country down and are letting it down now. We can only take what was said in 1957 and 1958 as being solely for the purpose of political expediency, statements which they never intended to do anything about if they got government responsibility. This is not good enough, not only in so far as foreign control is concerned but also in connection with what takes place when some of these United States companies take over our Canadian operations.

I want to deal in particular with a matter which I raised the other day during the question period and which, apparently, the Prime Minister did not believe was of any importance whatever. In 1956 Canadian Canners was the largest canning operation in the British commonwealth. In that year the California Packing Corporation bought out two thirds of Canadian Canners for the sum of $14 million. At that time control of the largest canning operation in the commonwealth passed to the United States. What are they doing? They are deliberately adopting a policy of closing down our Canadian operations. About a week ago we had an announcement that the Canadian Canners operation in my own city of Vancouver is going to be closed. This is going to have a direct effect on 200 employees of the canning operation itself, upon 800 people who are employed during the picking season and it is going to affect farmers right outside of Vancouver who operate 700 acres and who have supplied the needs of this packing plant. This policy is going to have a serious effect on the economy because of the loss of wages and purchasing power, amounting to well over $3 million annually. All of this comes about because an outfit in California says so.

I want to say, sir, that this government owes it to the people of Canada to introduce legislation to protect Canadian farmers, Canadian workers and Canadian consumers when control of Canadian companies passes to foreign interests. I want to say, sir, that this policy adopted by California packers as it pertains to Canadian packers, and which I am outlining now, was adopted for one major purpose only, and that was to get the Aylmer brand. When our wives and mothers go shopping they buy according to brand names and the Aylmer brand is well known in Canada. Who-over looks at the tiny print at the bottom of the label? If you do, you will find, and this has been going on for some time now, the

Interim Supply

words, "Produced and packed in the United States". When people think of the Aylmer brand they think of Canadian farmers and Canadian workers.

I say, sir, this situation is an example of the betrayal of the real meaning of foreign investment in a country. I say it is a betrayal by this government when we have been bringing it to the attention of the government for the past four or five years. One day when I spoke I had the whole desk covered with produce I had purchased in Ottawa with the Canadian brand name on it but which had been produced and packed outside of Canada. I say, sir, there is a major responsibility on the shoulders of this government to show that they were not a bunch of confounded hypocrites in 1957, by doing something to fulfil the promises they made at that time. The Tories will say the people did not let them down in 1958. They are certainly letting the people down now, as they found out to a great extent on June 18 of this year. A lot of hon. members sitting here now will not be back again because the people are fed up with promises and no action.

I say, Mr. Chairman, that this matter was amply catalogued and indexed by the Financial Post and deserves the immediate attention of the government. All decency and honesty demands that the government provide an opportunity for discussing this issue as soon as possible in this house so that we can have a clear enunciation of government policy. Otherwise, we will be confirmed in our belief that the government has not either policies or principles.

There is one other matter I want to raise and it has to do with something of which the government is essentially proud and about which they do a lot of talking. I refer to the Canadian Bill of Rights. I should like to quote section 2 of the Canadian Bill of Rights:

Every law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by an act of the parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the Canadian Bill of Rights, be so construed and applied as not to abrogate, abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgment or infringement of any of the rights or freedoms herein recognized and declared, and in particular, no law of Canada shall be construed or applied so as to

(a) authorize or effect the arbitrary detention, imprisonment or exile of any person;

(bj impose or authorize the imposition of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment;

(e) deprive a person of the rights to a fair hearing in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice for the determination of his rights and obligations;

There it is, sir, in the bill of rights; words that can be understood by a layman let alone by a lawyer or perhaps the other way around. I am stating that this government not only does not understand this section of its own

bill of rights I have quoted but does not enforce the principles outlined in that section of the bill of rights. I have no sympathy, definitely no maudlin sympathy for a person or persons who are anti-social. If a person breaks the law of this country, then that person should be charged, should be tried and if found guilty should receive the effect of the law in accordance with his degree of guilt.

I believe, too, that the bill of rights as I have outlined it applies to a person incarcerated in an institution, just as it applies to other people. This is not the case in Canada today. It is definitely not the case as I will indicate by an example I am going to give you. This is a case I have been trying to handle through the Minister of Justice, but that course is useless. Right now in Kingston penitentiary there is a man who has been in solitary for 13 months-13 months in the hole -and for what reason? Because of a suspicion he knows something that the authorities want to find out; and because they have not been able to get evidence in any way at all regarding a most serious incident, which I shall tell you about, Mr. Chairman, they are resorting to the torture of the hole to try to force a confession, whether it be good or bad, as the means by which this man can get out of the hole.

I do not know how many hon. members visit our jails and penitentiaries. It might be a good idea if all did, and I can assure hon. members that being members of the House of Commons they cannot only get in but get out, which is unfortunate in some respects so far as some people are concerned.

This man has been in a small cell for 13 months. He is allowed out only for a few minutes for recreation, and in recreation he is not allowed to have his exercise with anybody else. He is just as much in solitary when he is taking exercise as he is in the cell. In his cell he has the canteen privileges; he can send out letters and receive letters. If he could not I would not have got the original letter which gives rise to this. He has the radio, but what else? A bed, but not a normal bed-a bed about six inches off the floor, and he has no table and no chair. During the past three years he has improved his education by about four grades, and he wants to continue doing this. He has been requesting a table and chair to help him, but the answer is always no.

Ten feet away from his cell is the cell where the officials mete out corporal punishment to the other inmates who have to be disciplined. During the 13 months he has been in solitary, this man ten times has had

what you might call a front row seat while other inmates are receiving the paddle.

What is the reason for all this? Let me give it in the words of the minister of so-called justice, and I may say it took me three weeks to get this. The reason this man is in solitary is because of a most unfortunate, disgraceful incident that occurred 13 months ago, not only unfortunate and disgraceful but something we all deplore. A guard was killed in Kingston penitentiary.

Whoever did it should be found and he should receive the penalty of the law for murder, but so far no charges have been laid, and a man is kept in solitary. Why? I quote from the letter of the Minister of Justice written to me on December 11:


The man's name

-was one of the inmates who was in the Kingston penitentiary dormitory in which officer Wentworth was murdered in November, 1961. Since that event Cochrane has been segregated from the general inmate population under regulation 2.30 of the penitentiary service regulations-

He was in the dormitory when this most unfortunate incident of a guard being killed occurred, and he has been in solitary for 13 months for that reason. Why? I have it, not only on the basis of a letter this man got out to me, not only on the basis of a statement from his brother in Toronto, who got in to see him several weeks ago, but also on the basis of a letter I received just a couple of days ago from a lawyer who got in to see him for the first time since he was put in solitary, that the reason is that the authorities had a suspicion he might have murdered the guard.

They had no evidence but they had a suspicion. I understand now they have dropped that, but they still have a suspicion he knows something about it, or that he may know who did it. So, because of a suspicion that he may know something about it, he being one of the inmates who were in the dormitory when the homicide occurred, this man has been kept in the hole for 13 months. He has not a decent bed to sleep on, and he has no table or chair. This is torture, to try to obtain something of which the authorities have a suspicion.

I have no sympathy for those who break the law, but I do say I care not who the individual is, he is entitled to humane treatment and to justice. I say that if the authorities have evidence that this man murdered the guard, then let them charge him and bring him to trial. If they have not got evidence, and if they have not got any definite evidence that he knows something about

Interim Supply

it, that he was a party to a conspiracy, then I say under Canadian justice and the bill of rights which says that:

-no law of Canada shall be construed or applied so as to ... impose or authorize the imposition of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment-

-this is a matter which, in all sincerity, is the responsibility of members of parliament to take up and try to do something about.

I may say I am very grateful to the newspaper in Kingston the editor of which, when he discovered this matter, took such an interest that he was the one who sent the lawyer to the penitentiary to find out what was the situation. That is the reason why we now have this additional information on what has taken place.

Mr. Chairman, my time is just about up.

I do not have time to speak as completely as I would like on these two matters, but in conclusion I would ask that this matter of our Canadian economy and who owns and controls it be considered very soon. As we are a sovereign nation I ask that the government immediately bring in policies to stop foreign companies from buying out our Canadian industries and then closing them down. I also ask that the bill of rights be enforced and, as an example to everyone else in Canada that it should be enforced, that the government give the lead itself.



J.-E. Bernard Pilon


Mr. Pilon:

Mr. Chairman, during the next few minutes, I shall try to make a review of the events that took place since the opening of this session.

Being a new member, I will be very objective about the legislation enacted in the past.

I must tell you that I have had among the best attendance records in this house and that I have been disappointed with the policies of this government and also with the attitude of some opposition groups.

The minority government should not boast over the fact it has remained in office due to a party which not only preaches politics opposed to its own, but also advocates highly irresponsible monetary reforms. They are people who attach no value to the word equity and who have shown, since the opening of this session, no sympathy for our banking institutions which, as we all know, have greatly contributed to the economic development of our country and have made possible the economic operation of several Canadian corporations and which, as a whole, have trained men in all fields of our economic activities.

Interim Supply

Mr. Chairman, I am the member for one of the most beautiful and prosperous constituencies on the south shore of the St. Lawrence river. We, of the south shore, like to go ahead, not to mark time.

Farmers and industrialists are to be found in my constituency. The former must get everything from the provincial government. The present acts favour the western provinces for which I have great admiration. We are not opposed to this treatment, but we demand to be treated equitably if not identically. I am pleased to learn that the provincial and federal authorities have reached an agreement as regards ARDA.

We, in the district of Beloeil-St. Hilaire-Rougemont have grown 3 million bushels of apples of all kinds. As a result of the inertia of the federal Department of Trade and Commerce, 600,000 bushels have remained in the orchards for the lack of markets. We have lost $1 million and we hope that the representations of our local farm organizations will be needed and steps taken in order to correct this situation. A commission is required for the finding and opening of markets for our products. We are not asking for grants amounting to $200 per arpent, we are only asking that our voice be heard and our claims taken into consideration.

Negotiations on dairy products should be taken up with the Quebec department of agriculture. The present Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Hamilton) should not be so free in making public statements to the effect that we should restrict our milk and butter production; he sings another tune to the western farmers in connection with wheat. Let us make political capital where we can, seems to be his motto.

I would say, after those who spoke before me, that the province of Quebec will not countenance the austerity program in the federal Department of Agriculture, as regards premiums on hogs.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to remind the house that the province of Quebec has the resources and skills required to make Canada economically strong in all fields. Nothing is being done yet concerning the deepening of the Richelieu river, a project which would go a long way towards improving the economic situation on the south shore of the St. Lawrence. A Liberal government would undertake that project and you can be sure, Mr. Chairman, that it will not give rise to as many disputes and arguments as the Columbia river development.

During the past few weeks, very little has been said about the small companies financ-

ing act. That is also an important part if not the backbone of our economy. If we feel that we owe our success to our skilled workers, let us give them a chance to make a name for themselves both on domestic and foreign markets and to fight against unemployment, this national plague, on which I do not want to dwell now, since matters are going from bad to worse.

With regard to small businesses, we should extend the purpose, define the terms and modify the interest rate; we should also promote the establishment of an agency in order to free the financial institutions from extended and detailed preambles. Such an agency-[DOT] which might be tied in with Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation-could study each case in greater detail and, if need be, advise our businessmen. To come back to C.M.H.C. which I have already mentioned, a great deal has been done through this organization created by the Liberals but under the Conservative government fewer people could take advantage of it because without warning the interest rate has been raised from 5| per cent in 1957 to 6f per cent in 1961, and then brought down later on, to 6J per cent. Such a step taken by this government will cost the Canadian taxpayers about $3 million in the next 30 years.

After all, Mr. Chairman, this government did not take wise and responsible administrative action. I grant that the ministers have done their best, but they worked only with the tools given them by the Prime Minister. If the latter had more ideas of a practical nature, we would not be where we are now.


In closing, Mr. Chairman, we on this side of the house are and should be very constructive critics, and we have the right to ask this government to contemplate our problems on a national scale and with a non-political outlook. We as Canadians have acted so as to keep the structure of our country in one piece. The effort, if we might use that expression, was made years ago. Our party builders have maintained the prestige of Canada at its highest peak for many years. This duty is now cast on this new and younger generation. This is the challenge which the Liberal party is dedicated to meet, believing that our greatness must be found in a united Canada.



Mr, Ouellei:

Mr. Chairman, I understand that the measure before the house seeks to grant the government the amounts it will require to pay its bills up to January 31.

Hon. members have spoken of just about everything. One dealt with nurses' salaries, another with jails. In my opinion, if we keep on like that, we will all be thrown in jail before long.

Mr. Chairman, I can hardly understand why so much time is taken up to achieve practically nothing. The estimates the government is asking us to vote will be appropriated to the payment of expenses made under certain legislation already passed by this parliament. Even though we might extend this debate for 15 days, I feel that we would have to meet those expenditures. I find it difficult to explain the attitude of certain members. As a matter of fact, people claim that we are not serious and frankly, I do not know whether it is due to my inexperience, but I am under the impression that I should be at a loss to answer, because I think that they may be right in the end.

Mr. Chairman, we have been here for three months and we have done so little that I feel we should make up for lost time on the occasion of Christmas, so as to prove to the Canadian people that we can be serious when we want to.

In my opinion, the house should vote the funds the government needs to meet its obligations. In fact, if we keep on like this, there will not be enough money to pay our parliamentary allowances for the next month. It is high time we took action since we have discussed about everything except the supplies which the government has asked us to approve.

We should show a sense of responsibility and discuss the supplementary budget to determine whether we approve the government's way of spending public funds. There is nothing to be gained by lengthy discussions since most of the relevent bills will be submitted to the house for consideration.

I might add that those who may be trying to get some publicity out of this have chosen a very bad time for it because, right now, Canadians are much more interested in buying Christmas gifts than reading our speeches.

That is why I feel this debate should be postponed until after the holidays.



John Maxwell Roxburgh


Mr. Roxburgh:

At this point I should like to speak on a subject which is of the greatest importance to this nation, and that is the physical fitness program which has not yet 27507-3-178

Interim Supply

been dealt with in this house. The importance of this program is possibly greater than hon. members realize.

On August 25, 1961, the Prime Minister at the opening of the hockey hall of fame promised $5 million for a physical fitness and athletic program. He went on to say that such a program was vital to mental and physical health in a demanding world and for purposes of national prestige in the fight against communism. That is fine.

I am glad to see that the Minister of National Health and Welfare has come in. It has been my privilege to have travelled with Canadian hockey teams not only throughout Canada and the United States but throughout Europe. It has been my privilege to be with Canadian hockey teams in Russia and in the city of Moscow. In that city, which contains between six million and eight million people, they have ten recreational parks established at a cost of a million dollars a year to the city. The smallest park extends over 250 acres, and the largest is approximately 2,000 acres. In each one of those parks there is every known facility for the development of physical fitness and an amateur program. While I was there I read some Russian sport magazines and in those magazines full credit was given to their physical fitness program for the success of Russian athletes in world competition. And I will tell hon. members this, that in days of peace the performance of our athletes in world competition creates the prestige which other countries go by. Do not let us forget that.

I think we were all ashamed, and every Canadian in this house was ashamed at the reports which came back during the last two world wars of the physical unfitness of so many of our young men who went to serve in the armed forces.


December 18, 1962