Mr. Marlin:

I should like to read the balance of it:

He said the government of Ontario would do everything in its power to see that "this iniquitous legislation" does not go into effect.

Mr. Sinclair:

You heard that before tonight?

Mr. Marlin:

I continue the quotation:

He charged that passing the baby bonus bill and similar measures was an "arrogant usurpation" of powers.

"If the Ontario government submitted to this." he said, "then we would be handing over the rights of this province to a government which has shown only too clearly that it submits to the will of Quebec."

"This," he said, "is the simple issue," and demanded: "Are we going to permit one isolationist province to dominate the destiny of a divided Canada? I hope that each one of you will answer that with a resounding no, which will be heard in every part of the province of Quebec."

"I hope," he said, "that the people of every other province will give the same answer to this question which must be answered one way or the other very soon. And I go so far as to hope that the same answer will be given by many people in Quebec who must have felt heartsick and ashamed that their province has been made to appear before the world in such a shameful role."

The past is the past. What I want to emphasize now is that this measure is supported by every hon. member in this house except I take it the C.C.F. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Thatcher).

Mr. Sinclair:

And George Drew.

Mr. Martin:

Every hon. member now supports this measure. That confirms the wisdom of the measure; that confirms the arguments

Family Allowances Act that were made in this house-and they were strong, stormy arguments, as all of us who were in this house at that time will remember; so much so that one hon. member left this house-

Mr. Sinclair:

One honest Tory.

Mr. Marlin:

-and came back to it only after several days of absence because of an altercation he had with one of your predecessors, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Coldwell:

As I remember it, his was the only voice against it.

Mr. Sinclair:

He was a Tory, and then he resigned.

Mr. Marlin:

But now, every one supports the measure, a measure that is part of our social security program.

There is another argument that I should like to address to the hon. member who introduced this resolution.

Mr. Argue:

Don't talk it out.

Mr. Marlin:

If hon. members sometimes would not take so long in proposing things, the government would not have so much difficulty in bringing forward its reply. The hon. member, in proposing this measure, belongs to the party that says we should not have social security legislation by the piecemeal technique. We must bring in the whole social security program in one piece of legislation to cover every conceivable avenue of social reform. What has he done tonight? He has brought in, in an isolated way, a proposal with regard to one measure which he himself said will cost $192 million.

Mr. Sinclair:

Page the hon. member for Moose Jaw.

Mr. Martin:

We had a parliamentary committee examining a program for old age security that was going to cost over $300 million, and even the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) was one of those who thought that several months of study should be given before we finally decided on the old age security measure that we now have. And so my hon. friend offers this proposal. I say he does not offer it because he wants to demonstrate that he is against the new political philosophy of the hon. member for Moose Jaw since his resolution, as I said a moment ago, has been on the order paper for some time. But I am sure there was no happier man than the hon. member when he realized in the last hour, yes, the last two or three hours, when private members' resolutions were to be discussed, that he would be able to send out to Saskatchewan and to other parts of the country, his view that there should be no means test applied

Family Allowances Act to family allowances as distinguished from the proposal made by the hon. member for Moose Jaw.

I do not attack in any way the sincerity of the hon. member for Moose Jaw or the sincerity of the hon. member who proposed this resolution; but what I do say is that the speech of the hon. member who proposed this resolution is one that gives evidence of the soundness of the government's approach to this whole business of social reform, introduced by the same administration that gave us old age pensions, with opposition in another place; by the same party that introduced the veterans charter; by the same party that introduced unemployment insurance; by the same party that introduced the national health program and by the same party that accepted the recommendation of an all-party committee to bring in old age security.

Mr. Sinclair:

The Liberal party.

Mr. Martin:

All of these measures are costing us, as I say, $1,500 million. That represents a sizeable proportion of the resources of this nation, which can be paid for only, as I say, out of one source, namely, the hard work of the people of this country. And if I judge their temper aright, they do want these measures, but they want us to make sure that we give adequate study to each project before we finally adopt it, and put it on the statute books for all time to come.

Dealing finally with my hon. friend's conclusion, when he said that we should demonstrate to the world that a wealthy and powerful nation like Canada should not hesitate to do all that it could to improve the social conditions of our people, I say that our country is doing that. I do not know of any country in the last three years that has adopted as important and as significant a social security program as Canada, at a time when it is calling upon its people to spend so much of its resources to arrest potential aggression in the world. On reflection, I know that my friend will leave this chamber tonight, go down the dignified pavement of parliament and will say: Well, you know, perhaps it was my-inexperience-my youthful impulsiveness-that led me to suggest that Canada was not leading the way at this time-

Mr. Knowles:

That is not what he will say, and you know it.

Mr. Martin:

-both as to her contribution to national defence and in her contribution to

the building up of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and her support to the United Nations. Also at a time when she is not forgetting to do what she can to improve the standard of life of her people through the veterans charter, through the old age security program, through the national health program, and now through the Family Allowances Act, which we have been discussing, and the amendment which the hon. member has put before us in an interesting way tonight.

Mr. Argue:

There is one minute left.

Mr. Martin:

My hon. friend says that there is one minute left. That gives me the opportunity of saying this. I agree with my hon. friend that this measure has given the mothers and fathers of this country an opportunity to be really tested. There have been abuses in the Family Allowances Act; there has been fraud. But the number of occasions on which we have had to authorize prosecutions is relatively insignificant in respect of a program that is costing us well over $300 million, but which for the purposes of administration is costing us less than $4 million. I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, at eleven o'clock this night that my hon. friend's resolution has served to remind us of the great value of the great social security act which bears the name in this country of family allowances.