May 14, 1965

NDP

Frank Howard

New Democratic Party

Mr. Howard:

I would be glad to comply with the suggestion, Mr. Speaker, except I think the bill has no principle, and neither have its sponsors when they ask this Parliament to take this step to reform an institution which is beyond reform.

The only principle which might by some stretch of the imagination be contained in it is the one that parliamentarians become useless upon attaining the age of 75, useless that is so far as their activities as parliamentarians are concerned. And while it is true the proposal before us relates only to the Senate, none the less if this is the implication behind it, then I submit the same provision should be introduced in this House. So far as the House of Commons is concerned we should make a determination that all Members in Parliament, whether in the Senate or over here, are not eligible to sit as parliamentarians once they attain the age of 75.

One of the other unprincipled parts of the bill is that it will provide for a donation, or a gift, or a grant, or a present to everyone who is now in the Senate, in an amount of $8,000 per year, without their having contributed one single solitary penny toward that gift, in other words a free pension for which an individual did nothing, in other words a sort of a bribe to the Senators to

Retirement Age for Senators give passage to this bill. Speaking for myself and the Members in this party I say we are not in favour of such an unprincipled thing, and if that is called a principle of the bill I want to express opposition to it as well.

Liberal and Conservative speakers have said that they are in favour of retention of the Senate, of retaining it as a haven for political friends, of retaining it as a sanctuary for those who have lived out their usefulness in any other way in political life, of retaining it as a place to deposit fund raisers and the like so that they can be paid a salary out of the public treasury while collecting funds for either one of the two old line parties.

In their reason for the support of the Senate as an institution, as opposed to those of us who seek to abolish it, they are, as I said earlier, in effect expressing their greediness, trying to use public funds for what I consider to be a nefarious scheme. It may well be true, human nature being what it is, that the closer an individual gets either to being appointed to the Senate or to the position where he can make appointments to it, the greater will be the change in his attitude about the Senate.

It may well be true that an individual Member of one of the other parties in the House, if he were the Prime Minister, might have a different attitude about the Senate. It may well be true that an individual would succumb to the greedy instinct in him and say, "Oh, I have changed my mind about the Senate. It is a worthy institution because I might be appointed to it." It may well be true that individuals, through human nature, would have this changed attitude as they got older in years and closer to the possibility of appointment to the Senate.

This is what the Liberal and Tory parties are saying; but all we in the N.D.P. are asking you to do is to be altruistic about this, if you can. We are asking you to put aside the enticing offer of a seat in the Senate, of an early retirement at $15,000 a year. We are asking the Members in the Liberal and Tory Parties to forget the past, to forget the disgraceful way in which appointments to the Senate have been made.

We ask you to look to Canada, to work for it, to look sincerely at the idea of abolishing the Senate, give away the thoughts of greed you have, and think altruistically and decently about Canada and the Senate for a change. That is all we are asking those two old line parties to do in this instance.

May 14, 1965

Retirement Aye for Senators [DOT] (4:30 p.m.)

It may well be we are asking far too much. It may well be it is utterly impossible for the Liberals and the Tories to think in any other way than in terms of political expediency or of manners in which they can use public funds to pay off their friends. If they cannot get away from that thought process they will obviously think in terms of defeating the motion for a six months hoist which I now propose to move seconded by my hon. friend from New Westminster (Mr. Mather). In order that it may be on the record, I will read it. It is:

That this bill be not now read the second time but that it be read the second time this day six months hence.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
NDP

Francis Andrew Brewin

New Democratic Party

Mr. Andrew Brewin (Greenwood):

It was

not my intention to participate in this debate for a variety of reasons. The first was that I felt that, with their usual persuasive eloquence, my colleagues had put the views I myself hold, namely that this particular measure did not provide any real degree of reform for the Senate-that it was trifling and inconsequential in nature; in the second place, that any attempt to reform the Senate was largely a waste of time and that a more radical operation was required. The other reason I was reluctant to enter into this debate was my warm feeling of regard and admiration for some of the individual persons who are Senators in the other place and my fear that by expounding my views on this matter I might unintentionally give offence to persons for whom I have a warm regard; indeed I regard them as personal friends.

But this is obviously a measure of importance and perhaps it is my duty to explain why I support the motion which has been made by the hon. Member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) and why I oppose this particular bill. The main purpose of this bill is to provide for the retirement of Senators at a particular age. But the discussion here has ranged very widely over the merits of the Senate as an institution, its contribution to our constitutional processes and so on. Obviously this has to be considered-whether the institution is one which can be improved by the retirement of Senators at the age of 75 as required. I was afraid that my own feelings of coolness and indifference to the Senate as an institution rather than as a group of individuals might have something to do with partisan bias; I had become so used to passing resolutions to abolish the Senate that I had come to accept uncritically

the validity of those arguments, and to adopt a warped or biased attitude toward that body.

But my views have been powerfully supported by two authoritative statements by two distinguished Canadians, each of whom would very likely have been appointed to the Senate in different circumstances. I am referring to Mr. Marcel Faribault, who, I read in the paper recently, is being regarded as the white hope of certain circles in the Conservative Party in Quebec-whether a white hope or otherwise he is undoubtedly a distinguished businessman with a record of great public service-and to Mr. Robert M. Fowler the other author of a book called "Ten to One -the Confederation Wager". Mr. Fowler is an outstanding Liberal businessman who has had a most distinguished career. Starting at the Bar at about the same time as I did in Ontario he had a long and successful career both in business and at the Bar. He has great constitutional knowledge, because he was Secretary to the Rowell-Sirois Commission and often appeared in constitutional cases. He has since then served on many royal commissions and is a very remarkable person. These two gentlemen, Mr. Faribault and Mr. Fowler collaberated in writing this book called "The Confederation Wager". I wish to recall to the House the remarks made by Mr. Faribault and Mr. Fowler who, as I say, are highly regarded businessmen from the older parties and whose views could be taken as being highly objective. They have this to say about the Senate-and I read from page 64 of their book:

Measured either by its achievements or its public repute, the Senate has not been an outstandingly successful Canadian institution.

If Members of the Committee appreciate as I do the reserve and the restraint with which these gentlemen naturally express themselves they will recognize that this is a characteristic understatement and that if Mr. Faribault and Mr. Fowler were to decide to express their views more frankly they would probably say much more than that. They confine themselves to saying "it has not been an outstandingly successful Canadian institution." The paragraph goes on:

For years there have been proposals for its re form, ranging from minor proposals for the compulsory retirement of aged Senators to advocacy of outright abolition. It is doubtful if the Senate has ever fulfilled its original purpose of giving a more effective voice to the less populaced regions of the country.

This was one of the reasons for the establishment and continuation of the Senate-

May 14, 19S5

and it gave an effective voice to those regions. The authors go on:

It is often said that the main duty of the Senate is to provide a "sober second thought" for legislation passed by the House of Commons.

I recall an eloquent and highly humorous speech in this House made a day or two ago by one of the hon. Members for Halifax, I think it was, during which he produced this view that the Senate allowed for a sober second thought. But again Messrs. Faribault and Fowler deal with this argument and say there is no conclusive evidence that the thoughts of the Senate have ever been other than sober. They say:

Too often the second thought given by it to legislation has been more descriptive of the length of time taken to consider important measures than to the degree of original and independent thinking applied to them. There have been some occasions when the Senate stood firm against ill-considered and unfair actions hastily taken by the House of Commons. There have been a number of useful investigations conducted by Senate committees into a variety of economic and social problems. But its record of achievement is not an impressive one.

The failure of the Senate to play an effective role in Parliament was caused by a number of factors. One has been the basis of appointment and the life term of Senators.

I call the attention of Members of the House to this, because it has sometimes been said that we in this party have been unduly harsh in our references to methods of appointment to the Senate. Once again I call on these eminent authors and businessmen to support the view we have taken. They go on to say:

[DOT] (4:40 p.m.)

With some notable exceptions, appointments to the Senate have been based on partisan considerations. There has been a desire to reward faithful party servants or to remove from active politics colleagues who had become redundant or embarrassing. Appointments for life to the tranquil atmosphere of the Senate have created a body with an extraordinary capacity for personal survival and a diminishing average level of individual energy.

These words are couched, as I say, in that delightful restraint which one would expect, but they do fully substantiate the criticisms that have been made by my colleagues who have spoken previously on this question of the Senate. Perhaps I could be permitted a moment or two, Mr. Speaker, to speak of my own experience in connection with the Senate. I, too, as a younger man had heard of the function of the Senate as a defender of minorities. Shortly after the finish of World War II in 1945, the then Liberal Government passed a number of

Retirement Age for Senators Orders in Council providing for the deportation of Japanese Canadian citizens, in some cases solely on the ground of their race. This was supposed to be a war measure, although the war had finished at that time.

We appealed to the courts and to the Government, and those of us who were interested in the matter thought that as the Senate was the defender of minorities we should appeal to the Senate for the defence of the right of Japanese Canadians against deportation. So we did apply to the Senate. Some kindly and zealous Senators told us that the most useful thing we could do would be to have the question of these Orders in Council referred to the most active Committee of the Senate, which was their Committee on Banking and Commerce. Indeed the matter was referred to the Senate Committee on Banking and Commerce and we attended and put before them the arguments as to why an Order in Council for the forceful deportation of Japanese Canadians, who had sinned in no way except in regard to having the wrong race, should not be put into effect. We had a very sympathetic hearing, and eventually I was told that the Committee, after one of its most intensive and controversial discussions, had finally voted 11 to 6, if I recall the figures correctly, to uphold and support the Government orders and take no action in respect of the matter. This caused me to lose faith in the Senate's role as a protector of minorities.

I had further experiences, Mr. Speaker. I was told that the Senate was an admirable instrument for the revision of legislation. It happened in the course of my professional carreer that I was assisting one who is now a distinguished, retired Judge, Mr. Justice McRuer, who had been employed by the Government of that day to assist in the revision of the Combines Investigation Act and make it more effective. To the best of my ability I assisted him. I had occasion then to find out what the Senate had done in its sober second thoughts on combines legislation. I discovered that the hon. Members of the Senate had indeed made some amendments to the Combines Investigation Act, but the effect and purpose of each one of those amendments was to make the enforcement of the Act that much more difficult. I found, therefore, that the Senate, in its only legislative contribution of which I had had any knowledge at all, was in fact erecting barriers to the effective carrying out of the law passed by this branch of Parliament, the

1322 COMMONS

Retirement Age for Senators House of Commons, for the purpose of effectively dealing with combines acting against the interests of the consumers. So, Mr. Speaker, all these experiences, plus the study of such erudite and balanced works as those of Messrs. Faribault and Fowler, to which I have just referred, led me to the conclusion which I still hold, I hope with sobriety and restraint, that no useful purpose in our legislative process is performed by the Senate.

If, as my colleague the hon. Member for Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands (Mr. Cameron) has said, there is need for a convenient place to send distinguished people or those whom the Government deems, in Mr. Fowler's language, to be redundant or embarrassing, and if there are any active, political colleagues who have become redundant or embarrassing, there should be some more effective means of dealing with them than sending them to a legislative chamber which still has co-ordinate jurisdiction with this elected chamber. Therefore with some reluctance, Mr. Speaker, and in spite of my great personal regard, as I said before, for many of those who are in the Senate, as an institution I can see nothing worthwhile that can be said for it. If it is radically unsuited in this modern, democratic age, why continue with the institution? I point out that every province with the exception of Quebec, I believe, has got rid of its second chamber; and Quebec is in the process of getting rid of, I presume, or at least substantially cutting down the authority of its Legislative Council. With this process I have every sympathy. In many other democratic parts of the world it has been found that a second chamber is no longer needed. We have ample officers in this House to carry out revisions. We proceed with the utmost deliberation and caution on almost all occasions-except on Friday afternoons-and I see no reason whatever for thinking it necessary to have an expensive institution, which does not represent the people, with the power of life and death over every piece of legislation that we in this elected House of Commons pass.

It is for these reasons, Mr. Speaker, and with, as I say, some personal reluctance but a great deal of conviction, that I feel obliged to support the motion made by the hon. Member for Skeena (Mr. Howard). Indeed, I do so for not only the reasons I have stated but also for the very cogent and compelling reasons advanced by my other colleagues.

DEBATES May 14. 1965

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
LIB

Donald Stovel Macdonald (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Mr. Macdonald:

Mr. Speaker, I wonder if I could put a question to the hon. Member before he resumes his seat. With his usual generosity he expressed his personal admiration for some individual Members of the Senate. His colleague the hon. Member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) said in his remarks that the primary motivation of people interested in the Senate, whether Government Members or Members of the Senate, was that of greed. Would the hon. Member for Greenwood (Mr. Brewin) agree with the hon. Member for Skeena in that respect?

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
NDP

Francis Andrew Brewin

New Democratic Party

Mr. Brewin:

Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member for Skeena and myself have been colleagues for a good many years. We nearly always agree about important matters; sometimes we disagree about unimportant matters. I must frankly confess that, perhaps because I am a relatively new Member of the House and have not had the experience of my colleague, I am inclined to a rather more naive faith in the motive of the Members of the Senate than apparently he has. It is my personal view that a good many Members of the Senate accept appointment out of a sense of personal duty, out of a sense of personal obligation. It is also my view that many of them do their very best to perform their functions in the Senate with ability and with devotion to their duties. That is my own personal opinion.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
NDP

Francis Andrew Brewin

New Democratic Party

Mr. Brewin:

On the other hand, I do not in any way withdraw from the view which I expressed-and I know it is shared by the hon. Member for Skeena-that the partisan nature of the appointment, and so on, and the whole nature of the institution is such that inevitably, unfortunately, the motives of those who are appointed are apt to be mixed and the performance of those who are appointed is apt, despite their devotion, not to be that which one would think to be ideal. For example, if one could be sure that only eminent scientists, historians, shall we say, scholars, distinguished industrialists, and so on, were appointed, then I think one could assume that the quality of performance in the Senate would improve.

[DOT] (4:50 p.m.)

But I do not think it is rational to anticipate, human beings being what they are, that we shall ever have appointments on any substantially different basis from that which Mr. Faribault and Mr. Fowler set out, which is that of purely partisan appointments. I

May 14, 1965

think that this does diminish from the dignity and performance of those who are appointed to the Senate.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
NDP

Frank Howard

New Democratic Party

Mr. Howard:

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. My question of privilege relates to when the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Macdonald), by posing a question, grossly misinterpreted what I said. Perhaps for the sake of clarification I should point out to him that what I said was that it is in this Chamber amongst the members of his own party and the members of the Conservative party that the strongest advocates of the retention of the Senate are basing their advocacy on the basis of greed, because they themselves are perhaps in a closer position in regard to going to the Senate. I did not make reference to whether or not Senators themselves who are in the Senate at the moment were greedy or operated because of any base motives. Perhaps with that clarification the hon. Member will have a much deeper appreciation of what I was getting at and will thereby support the idea which I proposed that the bill be given a six months hoist.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
LIB

Donald Stovel Macdonald (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Mr. Macdonald:

Just on that question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, if I misinterpreted what the hon. Member said in his remarks I certainly had no intention of doing so. I will see what he said when I read his remarks on Monday, but I will be glad to accept his explanation in the meantime.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
PC

Gerald William Baldwin

Progressive Conservative

Mr. G. W. Baldwin (Peace River):

Mr. Speaker, I have not too much to say, particularly as I observe that other Members of the party of the hon. Member who moved the motion are prepared to speak, thus preserving the life of this unfortunate Government for some period beyond today, giving them a further chance for repentance. In view of the fact that the amendment as moved indicates the desire of the hon. Member who moved it, and presumably his party, that it should act as an expression of their view that the Senate should be abolished, I find myself in the position of being unable to support the amendment which has been proposed.

I am not going to go into the merits of the other place, which has been the subject of a very exhaustive and excellent debate on the part of those who have preceded me. My own personal experience of the Senate, which is limited to serving on various joint committees with hon. Senators, has been that they bring a faculty of deliberation, understanding

Retirement Age for Senators and experience which has been very useful indeed. In addition to these investigative and examining facilities which they have developed through a number of committees which they have established, plus the continuity of service of those in that Chamber, they have the legislative faculties provided them under the constitution.

It may be there are valid criticisms to be made of the procedure of their appointment. I think we recognize that even our own Chamber is not free from criticism, the Government having moved recently to bring in some very substantial changes to our rules. I think that this admission that there is room for improvement does not necessarily mean that at this time we should be prepared to accept the view that the Senate should be completely abolished.

I suggest that there is a reasonable element of virtue in almost any political organization or group. Even my hon. friends sitting to the left in the N.D.P.-even though there may be some who doubt this- given sufficient time in this House and the opportunity to listen to the words of wisdom which fall from those who sit in this part of the Chamber may yet at some time in the future come to a state of grace. I have my doubts, but I give them the benefit of the doubt and I say that it may happen.

I only wish I could say the same of those on the Government side, but I am afraid that in this case it is not at all likely. Even though they are frequently drenched with oratorical fertilizer, I fail to see that this strikes any spark of life in hon. Members sitting opposite. So I draw this exception.

Coming back to the motion and descending from the Government to the Senate, I think that with the changes in appointment that time will bring, and with the more specific role which experience has indicated is essential, there is no reason at all why that august body cannot continue to make very useful and reasonable contributions to the public life of this country. Having in mind that the amendment proposed is one which will kill the bill, its being an indication of the views of the party which has moved it, I feel that I cannot support this amendment.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
CCF

Thomas Speakman Barnett

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. T. S. Barnett (Comox-Alberni):

Mr. Speaker, looking at the clock I realize that I have not very much opportunity today to present views about which I have given such deep consideration in relation to the whole question of the Senate as an institution, and the application of those views to the motion

May 14. 1965

Indian Affairs

placed before the House by the hon. Member for Skeena (Mr. Howard). During the first years I was in the House, as you yourself, Mr. Speaker, will recall, I listened to the then Official Opposition spokesmen expressing at great length and with considerable eloquence at times what they would do to reform the Senate when they took office. I should point out that this was nearing the end of the period of the 22 years of Liberal administration, which the members of the Official Opposition at that time very well knew in their own hearts might continue for yet another number of years as far as their own chances were concerned. The views they expressed then I waited with considerable interest to see put into action during the four years that I was not a member of this House, and I must say that in the light of what they said then and their attitude now when they are now back in opposition, I find it rather astonishing that they do not, according to the hon. Member for Peace River (Mr. Baldwin), propose to support the motion which is now before us.

This motion, Mr. Speaker, as we all know, would delay passage of second reading for six months. It is really designed to kill the bill, and I think the fact we have moved it indicates that, in our view, the main bill which we have before us should be treated by the Members of this House with the contempt it deserves, as something which does nothing really effective for those who have in mind some reform of an institution, which many of my colleagues have already suggested is really hopeless to attempt.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Question.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
NDP

Frank Howard

New Democratic Party

Mr. Howard:

Five o'clock.

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink
LIB

Herman Maxwell Batten (Deputy Chair of Committees of the Whole)

Liberal

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Batten):

It being five o'clock the House will now proceed to the consideration of private Members' business, as listed on today's Order Paper, namely public bills and private bills.

[DOT] (5:00 p.m.)

Topic:   THE SENATE
Subtopic:   ESTABLISHMENT OF RETIREMENT AGE FOR SENATORS
Permalink

INDIAN AFFAIRS

ARTS AND CRAFTS-ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIVE CULTURAL COUNCIL

NDP

Frank Howard

New Democratic Party

Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena) moved

the second reading of Bill No. C-4, to preserve and promote native Indian and Eskimo arts and crafts.

He said: Mr. Speaker, having regard to my limited abilities in the field of research, I think that this is the first and only occasion on which a bill such as this one, second reading of which has just been moved by me,

has been introduced in the House of Commons. As the title of the bill states, it deals with our native Indian and Eskimo arts and crafts and seeks to preserve and promote those arts and crafts to the advantage of the native Indian and Eskimo people and to the advantage of Canada itself.

I do not think there is anything that irks an Indian or Eskimo more than to see totem poles, tomahawks, dolls, bead work, quill work and so on appear in stores all across the nation with the words "made in Japan" stamped on these articles. I do not say that in any unkind sense so far as Japan is concerned, but it is a fact that the great bulk of the imitation totem poles, tomahawks and other articles which are basically products of our native Indian and Eskimo cultures are imported from Japan. I have looked in many shops and stores for arts and crafts of this kind and many of these items are cheap and shoddy. They are poor imitations that do nothing but tend to destroy any understanding of the beauty of our native Canadian arts and crafts. Our curio shops and souvenir stores are filled with articles of this type which do nothing more than prostitute the artistic expression of our native Indian and Eskimo people. They are ugly mass-produced copies, and grave distortions of the originals, which do nothing whatever to enhance the art of the native Indian and Eskimo people or to enhance the stature of Canada in the eyes of those visitors who come here from other lands and want to take home with them a souvenir of Canada. When they do so, many times they do not take home a souvenir of something made in Canada but rather something made in another country and imported into Canada which, as I said earlier, is nothing more than a cheap and shoddy imitation of the real thing.

The object of the bill is to preserve and promote native Indian and Eskimo arts and crafts by the establishment of a Native Cultural Council of Canada. Sections 2 and 3 of the bill seek to permit the appointment of an 11 member Native Cultural Council of Canada with five members to be chosen from the Indian population of our nation and at least three from the Eskimo population of Canada. I would hope that the remaining three seats on the Council could be filled very easily with people learned in the anthropological field, or in other fields of culture, in such a way that their knowledge would be an adjunct to the knowledge of the native Indian and Eskimo people on the Council.

May 14. 1965

Section 4 of the bill sets out the objects and powers of the Council. May I say at once that the objects set out in section 4 of the bill are based upon the objects of the Canada Council. They have been adapted to apply to native Indian and Eskimo arts and crafts, but in substance they are the same as those applying to the Canada Council, which I am sure we all agree is a very worth-while body with laudable objectives. With regard to the objects of the Native Cultural Council I read from the explanatory note:

The objects of the Council will be to preserve and promote the arts and crafts of our Indian and Eskimo people by, without limiting the Council's broad objectives, co-operating with other organizations with similar objectives, by providing grants and scholarships to Indians and Eskimos for research and instruction in the arts and crafts, by making awards for accomplishments in the arts and crafts, by arranging for exhibitions and publications, by transmitting information to other countries about arts and crafts and by exchanging information about arts and crafts with other countries.

The bill further provides for the Native Cultural Council of Canada to co-operate and work with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. I might say that similar authority is also contained within the powers given to the Canada Council.

Under section 5 of the bill it is proposed that the Council have the authority to make bylaws regulating its proceedings and generally for the conduct and management of its activities. I wanted to ensure that the Council would have as great a degree of freedom as possible in managing its own affairs. Therefore the bill is deliberately vague and general and consequently gives to the Council full authority to manage its own affairs, to establish the mechanics by which it will operate and to lay out the details with regard to anything in which it becomes engaged. We want the Council to be free and unfettered in its objectives of preserving and promoting native Indian and Eskimo arts and crafts.

In clause 5 as well there is provision for the Council to appoint honorary officers and advisory committees. The reason for this is so that the Council will be able to take advantage of local knowledge among the Indian and Eskimo people about the arts and crafts peculiar to particular groups of these people and which may not be a part of the culture of Indian tribes or Eskimo groups in another part of the country. By way of illustration I point out that I think it would not be correct to ask the people of the Iroquois nation of Indians to advise or make

Indian Affairs

decisions about the totemic art as developed and practised by the Indians of the west coast, because totemic carving and totemic expressions were completely alien to the Iroquois people and they would have no intimate or intricate knowledge of the cultural aspect of totemic carving. So I submit that we must necessarily permit the Council to have advisory committees and to have the authority to appoint honorary officers so that it can draw upon the broad knowledge of all the native Indian and Eskimo people in Canada in the pursuit of the Council's particular goals.

[DOT] (5:10 p.m.)

Under Clause 8 provision is made for the Council to acquire money, gifts, property and the like and to expend that, subject to whatever terms are attendant upon the gift or the donation. While I cannot, as a private Member in this House, introduce a bill which would contain a provision for the Government to make grants or contributions to the Native Cultural Council of Canada, I can express the hope that this would be the case. It is certainly my thought, even though I am prohibited by the rules from putting it in this particular bill, that the Government itself would take the initiative and follow up by making grants and donations to the Native Cultural Council of Canada so it could pursue as completely as possible its goals and its objectives.

Clause 9 of the Bill reads:

No person shall import into Canada any thing passing or capable of passing as native Indian art or craft unless the importer has obtained and produces a certificate granted by the Council in respect thereof.

I foresee and hope that the Council would make bylaws setting up some machinery by which this determination would be made. I would foresee if someone wanted to import into Canada something that would be capable of passing as native Canadian Indian or Eskimo art or craft, he would make application to the Council and that the Council would follow this up by examining the article in question or would consult with its various honorary officers or advisers, and then make a determination of whether or not it was permissible to import the article. I would foresee also they might take the initiative in establishing-again I am prevented by the rules from introducing such a provision in the bill-a means of seeking the payment of royalties or the like on such articles as are imported into Canada, and that the money

May 14. 1965

Indian Affairs

so received would go into the treasury of the Council to finance its purposes and objectives as set out in Clause 4.

There is concern, Mr. Speaker, amongst many native and Eskimo people in Canada about imitations of native Indian and Eskimo arts and crafts which are made in Canada. We would have to deal with this in a different way from that established in this bill. I think offhand particularly of the plastic or fibreglass imitations of argillite totem poles which are made in North Vancouver and which are sold all across the nation, sometimes with the purveyor of them deliberately advertising them as authentic argillite poles, which they are not. None the less the principle is the same. These are productions which are not the original and authentic carvings of the Haida people. I use that only as an illustration. We are concerned about that aspect of it too. I did not deal with it in this bill because we were informed by the previous Minister of Citizenship and Immigration there was ample legislative provision in existence to take steps to deal with that aspect of it. Hon. Rene Tremblay, when he was Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, wrote on April 20, 1964, a letter to me and the hon. Member for Timiskaming dealing with some aspects of that matter. The letter reads in part as follows:

In order to help the buying public distinguish Indian crafts from imitations, the department has designed a distinctive label which will be registered under the Copyright Act for the exclusive use of attachment to Indian arts and crafts. This label will be given nationwide publicity and will offer the buyer in Canada a guarantee that the Indian article is genuine.

We were given, as I say, an indication by the Government through one of its Ministers that it had authority to deal with this question of imitations made in Canada. We felt, therefore, it was not necessary to deal with it in this bill. This does not detract from the importance of that phase of the matter. We hope that if the bill receives the endorsation of the House, the progress of the Native Cultural Council of Canada would influence the decision of the Government to deal with that particular aspect of the problem of Indian arts and crafts and enhance the position of the native Indian and Eskimo people in Canada.

If the bill receives second reading, Mr. Speaker, it would be my thought and hope to move a motion that it be referred to the appropriate Committee of the House. I do this for two reasons: First, because to my knowledge this is the first time such a bill

has been introduced into the Parliament of Canada dealing specifically with this aspect of artistic endeavour and cultural activity. Second, I would do so because it deals with the activities, rights and freedoms of a group of people, and such legislation should only pass after the people affected have had an opportunity to express their point of view upon it, and so that the legislation will reflect as correctly as it is possible to reflect the opinions, hopes, desires and aspirations of the native Indian and Eskimo people themselves. I hope the Bill will receive second reading. If and when it does, as I said, it is my intention to follow it up by a reference to a Committee so that these people affected, particularly the Indian and Eskimo people, may appear and give the Committee the benefit of their views on the bill.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   ARTS AND CRAFTS-ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIVE CULTURAL COUNCIL
Permalink
LIB

Hubert Badanai (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Hubert Badanai (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):

Mr. Speaker, the explanatory notes of this bill indicate that the hon. Member for Skeena (Mr. Howard) is proposing the establishment of a Native Cultural Council of Canada, the chief concern of which would be the promotion of Indian and Eskimo arts and crafts. I commend the hon. Member for his interest in this important phase of Indian and Eskimo activity.

The Government naturally agrees with the basic objective of the bill. However, protection of indigenous crafts is not a simple matter, and before supporting any proposed legislation in this regard the Government would insist on a thorough examination of all factors involved. In fact, studies in cooperation with the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and the Department of External Affairs were initiated last year, and are continuing to determine legislation and other protective devices used in foreign countries to protect indigenous crafts with a view to recommending effective legislation in Canada.

[DOT] (5:20 p.m.)

However, I should like to point out that the Government has been active in promoting native crafts and arts in various ways, including collaboration with the newly formed World Craft Council whose charter has been designed to become an arm of UNESCO in the promotion of indigenous arts and crafts, and has given every encouragement and assistance to the establishment and promotion of Indian art and craft centres, by establishing organized workshops and distribution centres for the manufacture and sale of their

May 14, 1965

production of various articles; a notable example of which is the very successful Eskimo art, expressed in soapstone, which you will agree enjoys almost world-wide distribution and brings a fair remuneration to the people of our Northland. Soapstone carvings and graphic arts, maintained at a standard of excellence, continue to bring the Eskimos, and Canada too, world-wide recognition.

According to our latest statistical information, in 1962 approximately $100,000 worth of graphic arts was sold by the Cape Dorset Co-operative alone. An increasing number of handicrafts, ranging from small sealskin animals and toys to delicately embroidered duffel coats, were produced to satisfy the growing market in Southern Canada. Although not attracting as much attention as the graphic arts or carvings, co-operatives based on logging, boat building and sealing also provided valuable business experience, employment and wages.

In addition to providing business experience and work opportunities, vital for a feeling of independence, the co-operatives also brought in more than $200,000 cash to northern communities during 1961. This amount was considerably higher, if not doubled, in 1962. Through participation in rehabilitation projects which produce and market a wide variety of goods and services, an additional $175,000 was earned by people in the North during 1962.

Two years ago I had the privilege of travelling through the Yukon and Northwest Territories and I had the unique opportunity of visiting some Eskimo homes and workshops where Eskimo carvings and drawings were made. At Tuktoyaktuk village on the shore of the Arctic Ocean I saw Eskimo women curing thin pieces of sealskin and other hides of various colours, and cutting designs to sew on to parkas, mukluks, gloves, hats and beautiful rugs. These items are manufactured under the direction of the competent officials of the Department of Northern Affairs and are shipped south to the markets of the world.

At Inuvik, the new community in the Northwest Territories, built by the Federal Government at a cost of approximately $42 million, I saw where Eskimo and Indian art found expression in fur, wood and stone. Only recently an exhibition of manufactured articles and drawings was held in Room 601 at the parliamentary restaurant. These articles were on display and orders were taken for future delivery.

This is one of the most helpful economic [DOT] developments in our northern territories,

Indian Affairs

which is developing craftsmen that can and do successfully compete with artists on this continent or those of Europe. I may also add that the Eskimos are experimenting with new techniques and entering new handicraft fields. Nearly every Indian band has an organized souvenir craft manufacturing centre, and though far short of making the Indian people independent, these activities do help their economy.

Mention may also be made of the close collaboration with the Canadian Handicraft Guild with respect to competitions for the best Indian handicrafts produced, and a brochure to promote future competitions.

The undertaking in regard to a distinctive protective label is being pursued initially through a nationwide competition among Indian students for the design of a label. Prizes will be awarded for the best designs and a grand prize awarded for the design chosen to protect Indian crafts produced and sold nationally and for export.

In addition to current efforts, plans are now being prepared for a vigorous five year development program in Indian arts and crafts industries. While details are not yet complete, the program will aim at encouraging craft skills to the fullest extent, fostering Indian owned enterprises through all stages from production to final marketing, and increasing revenues several times over. It is the intention to remove the type of reliance upon government which has been built up over the years and thereby create a fresh environment which will promote the self-help concept among the people concerned. Thorough Indian identification with and participation in the program will be a basic requirement.

The Indian people have a great deal of natural native ability and, as I have indicated, it is the intention of the Government to expand facilities for training. The greatest possible encouragement and incentive is being given, especially to the young Indians. Experimental programs are being undertaken to prepare young Indians for placement and specialized training which includes art craft, and thus create economic opportunities for them.

To indicate the government intentions of proceeding with programs designed to improve the lot of Indians everywhere, on April 6, 1965, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Mr. Nicholson) announced the appointment of Mr. Leonard Marchant a full blooded Indian, as his special assistant. He

May 14, 1965

Indian Affairs

is a member of the Okanagan Indian Band and is the first Indian to be appointed to the personal staff of a federal Minister.

He is also fully qualified for the position. He received his Bachelor of Science degree in agriculture from the university of his native province of British Columbia. He has also been very active in the promotion of closer relations between Canadian citizens of Indian and non-Indian origin. I met Mr. Marchant and I am very much impressed with his ability and personality. He is a man who is in a position to advise the Minister in the task of helping the Indian people to help themselves, which will include all phases of activities, among which the promotion of arts and crafts will receive utmost consideration.

Only a few weeks ago a gathering of social service personnel, school teachers, farmers, students, civil servants and recreation leaders from widely separated areas of Northwestern Ontario-half of the participants were Indians-held a two day meeting in my constituency for the purpose of creating a greater understanding of the economic problems of the Indian people and how to promote a better climate of opportunities for the Indians, including the extension of training of Indians in their natural talents, which of course include arts and crafts.

The gathering was also addressed by Wilfrid Pelletier, co-ordinator of Indian projects for the Centennial Commission and, as you know, Indians will have an important role in the centennial celebrations. A great national Indian pageant was suggested by the Prime Minister (Mr. Pearson) in September 1963. Indians and Eskimos will have special displays of their arts and crafts at the World Exposition in 1967. In other words, the importance of the subject which Bill C-4 deals with is fully recognized by the Government.

May I also direct your attention to the fact that a national Indian Council does exist. This organization was formed in 1961 and its purpose, among other things, is the promotion of cultural activities including the preservation of the arts and crafts of the Indian people. The Eskimo population of Canada living as they do in the far reaches of the North, and being less numerous than the Indians, are protected and supervised by trained officials of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources.

With regard to the part of the bill dealing with the production of works which are not the genuine work of Indians or Eskimos, I agree with the mover of the bill that it is a matter of concern, and it should be looked into by some competent official to have the fraud exposed so that buyers of Indian and Eskimo works of art will recognize the genuine article from the spurious. The Eskimo carvings are actually protected by their individual labels and initials, and are less likely to be copied by manufacturers. However, I do agree with the statement of the Postmaster General (Mr. Tremblay) when he was Minister of Citizenship and Immigration in April 1964, about protecting the buying public from buying imitations of Indian arts and crafts. As I stated earlier, the Department has organized a competition among Indian students to design a distinctive label for Indian arts and crafts. The new Minister by approving the policy of offering protection from imitations and frauds is continuing the action of the previous minister. [DOT] (5:30 p.m.)

Indian Advisory Councils are being set up through Canada composed of Indians nominated by registered Indians in their districts. The Indian Branch of the Department will consult these councils regularly, particularly in connection with any changes in policy or legislation that may be considered. Indians conduct their affairs within their communities with increasing efficiency and independence.

I might say, also, that Indians are increasing their interest in elections and Government activities and already their influence is felt at the polls. I look to the day-which may not be too distant-when the House of Commons welcomes, as its first Indian member, someone who was elected by a majority of all citizens in an electoral district, and not by Indians alone.

In the matter of the enlistment of Indian and Eskimo leadership we have already instituted programs in this direction and expect the Eskimos and Indians to be in a position to take a much more active part in the policy and management of the over-all services. The Indian and Eskimo committees act as groups of interested citizens in much the same way as the Council of the Northwest Territories who are, of course, at liberty to advise the Government.

I therefore submit that while the intention of this bill is commendable, the action recommended would serve only to duplicate efforts

May 14. 1965

which are already being made toward securing protection of Indian arts and crafts from imitation and fraud.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   ARTS AND CRAFTS-ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIVE CULTURAL COUNCIL
Permalink
NDP

Frank Howard

New Democratic Party

Mr. Howard:

Would the pariamentary

secretary permit a question? I did not quite understand what he said about one aspect of this subject. Did he say that with respect to this distinctive label which is to be used on original, authentic examples of Indian arts and crafts there is presently a competition among school children for a suitable design?

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   ARTS AND CRAFTS-ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIVE CULTURAL COUNCIL
Permalink
LIB

Hubert Badanai (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Mr. Badanai:

That is correct. That is the competition which is now going on. The winner will get a prize and, of course, the label will be known as the proper label for these specific arts and crafts.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   ARTS AND CRAFTS-ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIVE CULTURAL COUNCIL
Permalink
NDP

Frank Howard

New Democratic Party

Mr. Howard:

On April 20 the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the hon. Member for Matapedia-Matane who is now Postmaster General, read a letter in which it was stated that the department had designed a distinctive label and that this would be registered under the Copyright Act. That was in April, 1964. How does the hon. gentleman reconcile these statements? Was the Minister telling us a falsehood on April 20, 1964?

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   ARTS AND CRAFTS-ESTABLISHMENT OF NATIVE CULTURAL COUNCIL
Permalink

May 14, 1965