Mr. Gillis:

Shame.

Mr. Gillis:

That is what I said a moment ago; I said he was honestly mixed up. He is doing the best he can with a bad cause.

I think a lot of government members are mixed up concerning the question of the proposed national hospital insurance, which they feel is the cure for the ills described in the subject matter of this resolution. Hospital insurance will not have anything to do with the situation dealt with in the resolution. If the type of hospital insurance that is talked about is brought in it will merely be hospital insurance, and it will have no effect on the question of the exemption of medical expenses for income tax purposes.

Income Tax Act

There is no one in this house who is foolish enough to think you can get something for nothing in this world, or that you can continue demanding more and collecting less to pay for it. Everyone realizes that.

Mr. Gillis:

A lot of people are mixed up but not honestly. I believe the hon. gentleman who just took his seat was honestly mixed up. He obviously did a lot of work on his speech, but I just could not follow his argument. If he is going to run in the next election I would not advise him to use the low Canadian average income as an argument against this resolution. He emphasized several times that over 1,300,000 Canadians work for incomes that keep them under the income tax exemptions.

Mr. Gillis:

Mr. Chairman, I would like to get some further information from the Prime Minister. When we discussed this particular matter at the resolution stage I pointed out and showed by figures that the formula used still retained in paragraph (b) of section 17 the principle that grants to universities were on the basis of student population and their relationship to the provincial population.

Mr. Gillis:

I just want to get this clear in my mind. At the time he introduced the resolution the Prime Minister said the Canada Council would have the authority and would be sufficiently flexible to evolve a system that would bring equality in these grants. I want to ascertain if that flexibility exists.

Mr. Si. Lauren! (Quebec East): When I said that, I was speaking not about the Canada Council but about the national conference of Canadian universities and that is with respect to the $16 million paid over annually to the national conference of Canadian universities. This is to be governed in its division by two rules: one, the provincial share is to be based on the population of the province; and second, within the province it is to be based upon the student enrolment in each of the institutions within that province. When I said that I expected the question as to whether the present formula was the right kind of formula was one that might be studied by the national conference of Canadian universities where universities are represented by delegates appointed by the universities, I meant we could devise no formula which appeared fairer to us than the one I had indicated, but it did produce a per student grant that was lower in some provinces although in none was it lower than in Nova Scotia. Nevertheless it was much larger in some provinces like Newfoundland, which is just entering the field of higher education.

There were some disputed facts governing that. There were some who claimed that the larger number of enrolments in Nova Scotia institutions was due to the fact that students enter university life there after less preparation than is required in some other provinces. I do not know whether or not that is true but it was asserted. It was also asserted that the larger number of enrolments was due to the fact that they received quite a substantial number from Newfoundland and they received a special subsidy from Newfoundland in respect of this, but I do not know whether or not that is a fact. Nevertheless these things can be threshed out in the national conference of Canadian universities. I believe the university representatives are all fair-minded, dedicated men and women and that if they come to the conclusion our formula works out unfairly because of facts that they will have verified and which we have not verified they can make recommendations. The language of that vote is subject to be changed in the yearly estimates. That is what I was referring to when I made the statement of which the hon. gentleman has reminded me today. There is no question of student enrolment in

Canada Council

this bill. Concerning the $50 million, there will be so much apportioned to Nova Scotia because its total population is a certain percentage of the total population of Canada.