May 29, 1972

ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS

THE LATE DUKE OF WINDSOR

LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Right Hon. P. E. Trudeau (Prime Minister):

Mr. Speaker, it is my sad duty to inform the House officially of the death yesterday of His Royal Highness the Duke of Windsor.

In view of the very great affection many Canadians bore the Duke of Windsor and the enthusiasm with which they always greeted his visits to us as Prince of Wales, I have sent the following message to Her Majesty the Queen's private secretary:

I should be grateful if you would convey to Her Majesty and other members of the Royal Family this expression of sympathy on behalf of the government of Canada and all Canadians on the death of His Royal Highness the Duke of Windsor.

His Royal Highness occupied a very special place in the hearts and imaginations of Canadians who displayed their affections openly during his visits to Canada as Prince of Wales. On those occasions the personal warmth and youthful spirit of the man were communicated vividly to the people of this country. All Canadians and especially those who remember him in that role now grieve at his death.

I humbly request that Her Majesty extend to the Duchess of Windsor our heartfelt condolences on this sad occasion.

Mr. Speaker, I have not the slightest doubt that all hon. members will wish to subscribe to this message of sympathy.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   THE LATE DUKE OF WINDSOR
Sub-subtopic:   EXPRESSIONS OF SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES
Permalink
PC

Robert Lorne Stanfield (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, may I associate myself and my colleagues with the expressions of grief and the condolences which the government has extended to Her Majesty the Queen and to the Duchess of Windsor.

As the Prime Minister has said, the Duke of Windsor had a long association with Canada as Prince of Wales and was held in great personal affection by the people of Canada. I therefore wish particularly to associate myself and my colleagues with the condolences the Prime Minister has expressed on behalf of the people of Canada.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   THE LATE DUKE OF WINDSOR
Sub-subtopic:   EXPRESSIONS OF SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES
Permalink
NDP

David Lewis

New Democratic Party

Mr. David Lewis (York South):

Mr. Speaker, the cable which the Prime Minister sent was so well phrased that it

said everything that needed to be said. I merely wish to join my colleagues and myself in the message of condolence to Her Majesty and to the Duchess of Windsor.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   THE LATE DUKE OF WINDSOR
Sub-subtopic:   EXPRESSIONS OF SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES
Permalink
SC

Charles-Arthur Gauthier

Social Credit

Mr. C. A. Gauthier (Roberval):

Mr. Speaker, we want to join the right hon. Prime Minister and all members of this House in presenting our most sincere condolences to the Royal Family on the occasion of the death of the Duke of Windsor.

Upon someone's death, we attempt a retrospective glance at his life. The memories we do retain of the Duke of Windsor are of his loyalty to his country, the forthrightness of his decisions and above all his sincerity towards himself. Such are the most outstanding qualities which specially characterize him.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   THE LATE DUKE OF WINDSOR
Sub-subtopic:   EXPRESSIONS OF SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES
Permalink
NDP

Alfred Pullen Gleave

New Democratic Party

Mr. Gleave:

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Before we leave motions, is the minister in charge of the Wheat Board not going to make a statement on the announcement of the government that it has decided to purchase 2,000 hopper cars at a cost of $42 million-

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   THE LATE DUKE OF WINDSOR
Sub-subtopic:   EXPRESSIONS OF SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES
Permalink
IND

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Independent

Mr. Speaker:

Order, please. That is not a point of order. If the hon. member wants to ask a question, he may ask it during the question period.

Topic:   ROUTINE PROCEEDINGS
Subtopic:   THE LATE DUKE OF WINDSOR
Sub-subtopic:   EXPRESSIONS OF SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES
Permalink

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS

REFERENCE OF AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT FOR YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1971, TO STANDING COMMITTEE


On the order: Government Notices of Motions: May 25,1972-The President of the Privy Council: That the Public Accounts for the year ended March 31,1971 and the Auditor General's report thereon be referred to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.


IND

Lucien Lamoureux (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Independent

Mr. Speaker:

Pursuant to section 2 of Standing Order 21 this government notice of motion stands transferred to and ordered for consideration under government orders at the next sitting of the House.

Topic:   PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
Subtopic:   REFERENCE OF AUDITOR GENERAL'S REPORT FOR YEAR ENDED MARCH 31, 1971, TO STANDING COMMITTEE
Permalink

QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER


(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)



May 29, 1972 Questions


VICTORIA WOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-LEASE OF LAND

PC

Mr. Ryan

Progressive Conservative

1. Was a lease obtained for 7.8 acres of CNR land at the Southeast corner of Danforth Avenue and Main Street in Toronto and, if so (a) how was the lease obtained (b) what was the date of commencement of the lease (c) for what purpose was the lease obtained (d) who obtained the lease?

2. (a) Did the lessee pay a lump sum for the right of obtaining the lease (b) what were the original terms of the lease (c) have any assignments and amendments been made and, if so, what are they?

3. Did Victoria Wood Development Corporation Limited sign a document that gave it lease-rights for the land on which Main Square Development is located and, if so, on what date?

4. Is the lease renewable and are the terms of the lease re-negotiable upon the initiative of the CNR?

5. Did CMHC put a value on the lease held by Victoria Wood and, if so (a) what was the value (b) who determined the value (c) what criteria determined the value?

6. (a) Did Victoria Wood apply to CMHC for a loan for its Main Square Development and, if so (i) what was the date of the application (ii) on what date were indications given that the loan would be approved (iii) on what date were the loan commitment papers signed (b) was an existing building mortgage registered against the land by any private interest or was any commitment to make such a loan outstanding (c) in calculating the amount of the loan, what amount of equity, apart from the lease, did CMHC consider Victoria Wood to have in the project and what was the form of this equity?

7. What were the construction costs for Victoria Wood's Main Square Development?

8. What stage of development was Victoria Wood's Main Square project at when it applied for assistance under the innovative housing program and what were the criteria upon which the corporation was made eligible for assistance?

9. What stage of development was Victoria Wood's Main Square Development at when the commitment papers for its loan from CMHC were signed?

Topic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   VICTORIA WOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-LEASE OF LAND
Permalink
LIB

James Alexander Jerome (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Mr. J. A. Jerome (Parliamentary Secretary to President of the Privy Council):

I am informed by Canadian National Railway and Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation as follows: 1. (a) In January 1966 the Railway, pursuant to its usual practice, invited proposals by public advertisement for the development of 7.848 acres of railway land at Danforth and Main Streets, Toronto, (b) January 1, 1968. (c) A high rise apartment development with commercial element, (d) Victoria Wood Corporation Limited.

2. (a) No. (b) It is not the practice of the Railway to disclose terms and conditions of transactions with other parties, (c) No.

3. Yes. January 1, 1968.

4. The lease is not renewable but the rental thereunder is subject to review by the Railway at various periods throughout the lease term.

5. Yes. (a) $1,000,000. (b) The valuation resulted from an appraisal made by a private firm of professional appraisers and was supported by a CMHC appraisal, (c) Normal appraisal methods and techniques were applied in determining the leasehold interest of Victoria Wood.

6. (a) Yes. (i) December 10, 1969. (ii) Statement of intent to make loan issued May 22, 1970. (iii) July 16, 1970. (b) A building mortgage was not registered against the Main Square land at the time the CMHC solicitor searched title

prior to registering the CMHC mortgage, nor was CMHC aware of any prior commitment by any other lender to finance the project, (c) Victoria Wood equity consisted solely of its leasehold interest in the land.

7. CMHC estimated the building costs to be $13,892,460.

8. At the time of the announcement of the innovative programme, the Main Square Development had not proceeded beyond the stage of presentation of plans in support of its application to CMHC for a loan. The Major criteria considered by CMHC were: (a) Good location in relation to public transportation and amenities, (b) Favourable rental structure, (c) Comprehensive nature of development which includes residential, commercial and recreational elements, (d) Early start capability.

9. See 8 above.

Topic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   VICTORIA WOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-LEASE OF LAND
Permalink

CMHC-STUDIES BY PROFESSORS CHARNEY, CARREAU AND DAVIDSON

PC

Mr. McCleave

Progressive Conservative

1. What terms of reference were given to Professors Charney, Careau and Davidson of the University of Montreal by Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation or by any task force set up by that Corporation?

2. What were the qualifications of each for the assignments they undertook?

3. What payments have or will be made to each?

Topic:   QUESTIONS ON THE ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   CMHC-STUDIES BY PROFESSORS CHARNEY, CARREAU AND DAVIDSON
Permalink

May 29, 1972