Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the right hon. Prime Minister. In his discussions with the Russian leader will the Prime Minister be discussing matters that are related to the closing of Canadian ports to Russian fishing vessels, and under what conditions and circumstances will these ports be reopened? Will the Prime Minister also be discussing questions covering the International Commission for the North Atlantic Fisheries and the importance to Canada, as well as to all signatory powers, of Russia's remaining within the agreed quotas?

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

In a sense, Mr. Speaker, the questions are hypothetical, even though I recognize they are very important. I must point out to the House that there are a certain number of bilateral meetings which we are attempting to arrange. I do not know whether at this time I will have any great time with any particular leader. Well, I should not say that; there are some meetings that I know are confirmed, but in the case of Secretary Brezhnev I do not believe any meeting has been confirmed, and therefore it would be premature to talk about an agenda.

However, I would inform the hon. member that I did write to Premier Kosygin last week about this whole matter, and the thrust of my message to him was that we are taking these actions, as I believe we are entitled to do under ICNAF, with a view to ensuring that the fisheries will be there and will not disappear. I believe this is the point of view that the Russian fishermen themselves would be inclined to share with us. The way things are going now, the Minister of State (Fisheries) has made it clear that the species themselves are endangered. They are endangered for us, for our fishermen, and for the fishermen of other nations. That is the point of view that I will

[Mr. Wagner.)

be conveying to him, that it is in the interests of humanity that we exercise discretion in the exploitation of these resources.

Mr. Lloyd R. Crouse (South Shore):

A further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the Prime Minister make available to the House the letters that he mentioned which will be exchanged between himself and the Russian leaders; and will he give an assurance that the 200 mile limit or economic zone will be discussed with someone during his visit to Helsinki?

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

On the

first point, Mr. Speaker, I will not give that assurance. This is correspondence that I had with Premier Kosygin and it would be improper for me to table it, at least without his permission. I have told the House the essence of my message in it. I have indicated a preparedness to have discussions with Secretary General Brezhnev in Helsinki if such an arrangement can be made.

I did raise the question of the 200 mile limit and indicated that in fact our actions now were predicated on the assumption that we were hoping that the 200 mile economic zone would eventually be recognized in international law, that we were acting as trustees, guardians and stewards of this resource so that there would be some for everybody-preferably first for Canadians, but that the resource itself would be there. It was in the context of international law evolving toward a 200 mile economic zone that we were taking our action.

Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Prime Minister arising out of the report of the advisory group on executive compensation in the public service which the minister tabled in the House last Friday. May I ask him why it took four months for the government to table this report, having had it in its possession, I understand, some four months ago; and did it have anything to do with the discussions that the Minister of Finance was deeply embedded in at the time in terms of guidelines for salary and wage increases? Related to that, would the Prime Minister inform the House whether or not any action has been taken yet on the report, having in mind the recommendation that certain salary increases become effective on April 1 of this year?

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

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the hon. member got the figure of four months. I have not been acquainted with the report, and I do not believe the government has, for anything like that length of time. I must say that I took cognizance of the report within a matter of a few days before the budget was brought down by the Minister of

July 28, 1975

Finance. As a matter of fact, the chairman and the vicechairman of the group, Mr. Lambert and Mr. De Grandpre, met with me on the very day the budget was being brought down and they were in the gallery on the night of the budget. I am not saying the report was not ready. It might have been in some other reaches of the civil service, but I did not see it until a few days before.

On the second part of the question, the government has not yet announced any decision on the recommendation. I must say that we have already considered it in cabinet and I hope we will be able to reach a decision very soon.

Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):

Mr. Speaker, with regard to my information about the four months, it came from the date of the report which is March 31 of this year, which would make it four months ago three days from now. In light of the guideline recommendations of the Minister of Finance in his concern about dealing with the problem of inflation, to the effect that no increases should exceed $2,400, will the Prime Minister assure the House that any increases the government might eventually make in the executive category will not exceed this amount?

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

Mr. Speaker, as to the date itself, I gave an explanation. I might add, for the benefit of the hon. member, that the increases we have traditionally made date from April 1 and, therefore, regardless of the date the report is brought down, if there are any increases they presumably would be retroactive to April 1.

As to the size of the increases, while I take note of the recommendation of the hon. member, I would point out that it might be slightly unfair to impose a range of levels in civil service guidelines which have not been generally accepted by the public. Of course, we, as members of parliament, have limited our own increase to 7 per cent, but I must point out to the hon. member that this is not an example which has generally been followed and, therefore, I would not want to give any undertaking of this nature until we have studied the report in more detail and made a decision.

Mr. Edward Broadbent (Oshawa-Whitby):

Mr. Speaker, if the Prime Minister will not stick to those guidelines I would ask whether he will follow the suggestion made by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, that before action is taken he will bring the recommendations back to parliament? In relation to that, given the fact that the advisory committee said that "the rate of growth (in the public service executive category) has been excessive", being some 82 per cent since 1970 compared with a general growth rate in the public civil service of only 27 per cent, will the Prime Minister inform the House what steps the government is likely to take to curtail this significant growth at the executive level of the public service?

Oral Questions

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

Mr. Speaker, I believe that the critique of the Lambert commission is justified. I would point out with some pride that the President of the Treasury Board anticipated by many, many months the conclusions drawn by the Lambert commission, and sometime last fall the President of the Treasury Board announced guidelines as to the rate of growth in the civil service. The figure for the first quarter of 1975 would indicate, indeed, that the rate of growth, which we thought was excessive, has been brought down to a very low figure. I do not have the figure at my fingertips, but the President of the Treasury Board could make it known to the hon. member. This is a justifiable criticism and we have already dealt with it.

Mr. Rene Matte (Champlain):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to put a question to the Minister of Communications.

Could the minister tell us whether since the last meeting of the provincial ministers of communications, he had some dealings with the Quebec premier concerning the federal-provincial dispute on telecommunications generally and more especially on cablevision?

Hon. Gerard Pelletier (Minister of Communications):

No, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Matte:

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary.

Would the minister tell the House whether he has indeed received representations from the Quebec Junior Chamber of Commerce in particular, and even from the Quebec Young Liberals' Association, that are against the minister's position?

Mr. Pelletier:

Mr. Speaker, I have received copies of messages sent to the Prime Minister of Canada and the premier of Quebec, but to the best of my recollection, no communication was addressed to me personally.