Mr. Nesbitt:

Mr. Chairman, I shall try to keep my remarks as brief as possible. This, no doubt, will be pleasing to the members of the committee. I have two little matters I should like to bring to the attention of the minister, perhaps to nudge him a little

3522 HOUSE OF

Supply-Northern Affairs bit. These matters have been brought up on previous occasions by myself and by my colleagues, and I would just like to remind the minister of them again.

The first is the question of the upper Thames valley authority in southwestern Ontario, and the second matter concerns Long Point island in lake Erie. I realize that the minister is fully aware of the problem concerning the upper Thames valley authority, and I do not intend to repeat the details for his benefit or for the benefit of other members of the house at the present time. These details are on record.

I should like to say, however, that this project has been started with the construction of the Fanshawe dam at London. It is my feeling, and in fact I would say the feeling of all the people in the area, that this pilot project should be completed. The heavily industrialized and settled areas of southwestern Ontario and indeed parts of Quebec are now beginning to suffer from water shortages as a result of the lowering of the water table and soil erosion. The older parts of Canada deserve some conservation projects, I think, just as well as the new parts. Every spring the Thames river, because of the loss of the forests, floods and in summer of course the river virtually dries up. In the spring there is a flood and much valuable top soil is carried away by the water. If the upper Thames valley project were completed it would protect the top soil which is carried down into lake St. Clair every spring, and which we can ill afford to lose.

Second, as a result of the lowering of the water table in that heavily industrialized and heavily populated area there is a shortage of water in southwestern Ontario. People are having to pipe water in from the various lakes. If this project were completed the water would be conserved for irrigating farms in the summertime, particularly the tobacco farms, and there would also be a maintenance of the water supply for the villages, cities and towns.

Last, but by no means least, the lakes that would be created as a result of the construction of the dams in connection with this scheme would provide much needed recreational areas in this part of the country. For example, in my neighbouring constituency of Perth, which is represented by the Minister of National Health and Welfare, they have the Stratford festival every summer. The cities in that area are small and the facilities for recreation are limited. If the two projects which I and others have in mind were completed in connection with the upper Thames valley program, namely a dam at St. Marys in Perth county and a dam at Woodstock in

Oxford county, they would provide recreational facilities and areas for the largely increased tourist trade in this part of the country.

The federal government's share of this project has been estimated at 37J per cent; the share of the province of Ontario, 37J per cent; and the cities and municipalities, 25 per cent. The province, I understand, is ready, willing and able to put up its share, as are the municipalities. I would hope the minister would reconsider this matter and discuss it with his colleagues and advisers. I have heard it said that it has not been shown as yet that the cost-benefit ratio would justify the expenditure of this sum. Well, I am not so sure of that. It all depends on how you estimate the cost-benefit ratio. If you include the recreational value at the present time and in the future, and this is an important factor, I am quite sure the cost-benefit ratio would go well beyond the limits that have been set.

I appeal again to the minister on behalf of my constituents and the constituents of my colleagues in the area, who I am sure will be speaking on this matter, for immediate consideration of the completion of this project as soon as possible, because of its value from the point of view of water conservation, soil conservation, flood control, and last but not least, recreation.

This reference to recreation brings me to another subject that I have mentioned in this house on previous occasions, and that is the question of Long Point island in lake Erie. This island is a very interesting place. Once again my views in this connection are all on record and I am not going to rehash them. They are there for those who are interested to read. This island is 18 miles long and is in reality a sandbar stretching out into lake Erie. It is considered to have the best bass fishing and duck shooting on the continent of North America. This island was purchased in 1866 by a company called the Long Point Island Company, most of the shareholders of which are residents of the United States.

In the very heavily industrialized and heavily populated area of southwestern Ontario recreational facilities at the present time are limited. People often have to go hundreds of miles to find a place where they can enjoy themselves. As a result of the greatly increased traffic on our highways, this is not only a chore but is actually a hazard to a family going away for a week end. Here we have in lake Erie an island 18 miles long which is easily accessible from these heavily populated areas in southwestern Ontario and within an hour or an hour and a half's drive. We have this area with the

most beautiful beaches I have seen, but nobody can go on them because a handful of people go there for about a week a year for duck shooting and have this island in their control. It is my feeling, and I have repeated this many times, that this island should be made into a national park. There are other national parks in the great lakes district such as Pelee island, Georgian bay, and so on.

These people who have this island under their control have done very well in the matter of conservation for many years. I believe this country should thank them for that. They should be left a number of acres in order to carry on their activities as a way of saying thank you for what they have done. The game on this island is unique on the continent. However, I do not believe these people, who only go there for about a week a year, need a park of about 21,000 acres. This island should be enjoyed by the people in the vicinity. It is needed now, but it was not needed when these people obtained it. These people should be left with 1,000 or

2,000 acres, but let us acquire the rest of it for the use of all our people.

Mr. Roberge:

As you know, Mr. Chairman, I have had the opportunity of serving as a member of the mines, waters and forests committee. I was very interested in the work that was done in that committee. I have heard with interest the statements made by the minister as well as by the witnesses who appeared before the committee. At this time I feel it is only just that I commend the work done by the chairman of that committee, the hon. member for Lambton West. He did direct the work of the committee in a very able manner.

(Translation):

Mr. Chairman, we were reminded this morning by the Leader of the Opposition that the legislation setting up the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources was incorporated into our statutes by the Liberal administration headed by the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent. He also reminded us of the fact that the original holder of that portfolio was the former member for Montmagny-L'Islet, the Hon. Mr. Lesage, whose departure was a matter of general regret in this house. Incidentally, I congratulate him on the sound administration he gave the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and wish him, in his new capacity, every possible success. I hope he may even become the next premier of Quebec.

Mr. Chairman, we have heard a great deal of late about vision. We had heard about it too during the election campaign. I do not think I would be far wrong in stating that

Supply-Northern Affairs the Prime Minister and the members of the government have established a very close relationship between that vision and the public works program of $1,185 million announced by the government.

We are convinced that that public works program in northern Canada cannot solve unemployment, although it was in that particular sense that it was put before the people of this country. Of course, this is not saying that we, on this side of the house, are opposed to northern development, or to the exploration and possible future development of our natural resources, but I do want to emphasize that the government made much of this vision when they described it to the Canadian people during the election campaign.

If the Prime Minister and his colleagues want to keep on saying that they had a vision, that is their privilege. On this side of the house, though, we can say that the former government and particularly its Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources had been both wise and realistic in providing for such steps as appeared necessary for the future development of Northern Canada and in making preparations in that regard. I searched the records of this house on the matter, Mr. Chairman, and I also made a detailed study of the various publications printed for the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, as well as the briefs submitted to the Gordon commission on economic prospects.

In the record of the 1953-54 session, I found some sentences spoken by the then prime minister, the Right Hon. Louis St. Laurent, when he introduced in this house the bill creating that department. This is what he said, according to page 697:

One subject to which such increased emphasis will be given by the passage of this bill is the administration and development of our northern territories.

And he added in the same speech:

Now, it seemed to us that it was becoming increasingly apparent that it would he desirable to alter the situation and to create conditions in which it is clearly indicated that the government and parliament want further attention given to the development of our north country, and I may say that that was further impressed upon us by the fact that there have to be quite a number of non-Canadians going into that territory. We felt that it was very important to have the situation such that, whenever they went there, they realized they were in Canadian territory and in territory that was administered by Canadian authorities.

The present bill is designed to give more emphasis to the fact that the people of Canada are greatly interested in this northern territory and regard it as an important part of the territory subject to the sovereignty of the Canadian nation.

Supply-Northern Affairs

And I also read on page 700 the following paragraph which has already been quoted this morning in English by the Leader of the Opposition.

We must leave no doubt about our active occupation and exercise of our sovereignty in these northern lands right up to the pole.

In the report submitted to the royal commission on economic prospects by Mr. F. H. Collins, commissioner for the Yukon, I find the following text on page 5:

(Text):

This brief has as its objectives an assessment of the contribution that the natural resources of the Yukon Territory might make to the Canadian economy of the next quarter century and an appraisal of the courses of action which appear to lie open for promoting the achievement of that contribution. It describes in turn the territory's natural resources, its population, and the economic development it has undergone; it then proceeds to assess the future prospects of the Yukon's mining industry and the problems facing future economic expansion. Lastly, it suggests how this economic expansion might be encouraged and why early action along certain lines appears to be justified.

(Translation):

And on page 19 of the same report we see the following statement:

(Text):

The requirements that the next 25 years may bring for the construction of roads are given illustration in those roads which even now would form highly useful adjuncts to the territory's system of development roads.

(Translation) :

The commissioner for Yukon then sums up the works to be done in connection with access roads and what I would call connecting roads. Moreover, he speaks about certain roads already started. It is certainly not necessary for me to read this whole passage since it can be found after the previous quotation.

And then he goes on to say on page 20 of the report:

(Text):

Although these appear now as the greatest needs that the foreseeable future holds for the construction of roads in the territory, the succession in which they may be built is by no means certain, nor is it unlikely that the priority given each individual road will undergo substantial revision. They nevertheless point to the significance that the provision of further roads will have for the developing Yukon economy.

(Translation):

In the brief submitted to the Gordon Commission about the Northwest Territories we again find substantially the same conclusions.

I should like to recall also that it was under a Liberal regime that positive action was taken concerning our sovereignty over Canadian northern territory; may I recall also to the house the trip made by His

[Mr. Koberge.l

Excellency into the Canadian northern territory some two years ago.

The main thing, Mr. Chairman, is to establish a link between central and northern Canada. I hope that this government will carry on the policy established in this connection by the previous government. If I remember rightly, the minister has referred to this in committee. That area must be developed in accordance with a plan as definite as possible and that plan-I am glad to emphasize this once again-was prepared under the old Liberal regime, as pointed out this morning by the leader of my party.

What change did the present government make in the plan? They merely accelerated its implementation, cutting down to five years what the former government had planned to do in 25 years and what economists also estimated would take 25 years to put into effect. We can well wonder whether the government was serious when its candidates stated, during the last election campaign, that an immediate result of those projects would be to cut down unemployment and, I repeat, as I have already said and as others have said: it is not in Northern Canada especially that there is unemployment but in areas already developed where more workers are living.

I would suggest, Mr. Chairman, that there are other reasons to accelerate the implementation of this plan. When the department was created in 1953 the prime minister at that time referred to non-Canadians interested in those northern territories. No doubt he was thinking of those lands located farther north than the Yukon and the Northwest Territories. It was therefore necessary to group under a single administration responsibilities which, until then, had been spread over several departments or divisions.

Since then, we have seen important developments in ballistics and long range missiles. Very recently, we have learned of developments in submarine transport.

During the same period and closer to us, we have witnessed the construction of warning lines such as the Dew Line and the Mid-Canada Line.

If, Mr. Chairman, the government wants to speed up the exploration and development of our rich northern areas because of such events or of future developments which we have reason to dread, we Liberals are all for it. But even without such developments, we are in favour of the opening up of our northern territory, as has been already demonstrated by the Liberal government. It remains to be seen whether the acceleration

of development at this time is desirable economically, considering the urgent needs felt in other sections of Canada.

But, Mr. Chairman, in my opinion, those projects cannot help the unemployed, and yet it was in this guise that they were dangled before the people. How many men are back to work on account of such projects?

As you no doubt know, Mr. Chairman, the functions and responsibilities of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources are not limited to the Yukon and Northwest Territories; section 7 of the Northern Affairs and National Resources Department Act, 2-3 Elizabeth II, Chapter 4, prescribes;

(1) The Minister may formulate plans for the conservation and development of the resources of Canada and for research with respect thereto,

This section also provides that;

(2) The Minister may co-operate with the provinces and municipalities in carrying out any conservation or development plans under subsection (1).

It so happens then, that under the estimates of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources, which are before us at this time, certain grants or subsidies may be made to provinces, and to the province of Quebec in particular. Now, how could the province of Quebec benefit from those contributions put at its disposal by the federal government as would the other provinces?

Well, Mr. Chairman, if I turn to page 403 of the estimates, I find there "contributions to the provinces of amounts equal to one-half of their expenditures for camp ground and picnic area development." I understand this is a two-year plan and that the required amount has already been expended, or almost. I understand too that these camp grounds or picnic areas must be established alongside highways. In Megantic, more particularly, there are three provincial highways crossing the county lengthwise, whereas two other highways cross it breadthwise, at least in part. Along at least three of these roads there are magnificent lakes which could easily be developed, if not from the tourist point of view, at least for the benefit of the young people of adjoining municipalities. This could be done if advantage were taken of these contributions to the provinces.

Contributions are also made to the provinces to help them build access roads to certain resources under the provisions of certain agreements, already in force, or about to become so. An amount of $9,000,000 has been set aside in the estimates in this regard, on page 424 of the blue book.

Supply-Northern Affairs

Intense exploration is going on at this time in northern Quebec, with already highly satisfactory results, especially as regards iron ore. Will the province of Quebec take advantage of these contributions or will it act in its accustomed manner, refusing any part of the necessary or at least useful subsidies put at its disposal by the federal government?

Obviously I am not talking about national parks since no national park in the province of Quebec comes under the jurisdiction of the federal government, although there are historic sites maintained by the federal government as, for example, the Battlefields park in Quebec, and some others.

Our national resources, Mr. Chairman, are not limited to our mines, there is also our forest system which is of interest to each and every province. This year we will be called upon to vote $1,650,000 to help the provinces to take stock of their forest resources, to undertake reforestation and to protect their forests against fires, all this in accordance with certain agreements. I refer now to page 429 of the blue book. Obviously, several provinces will take advantage of that assistance from the federal government and, unless I am mistaken, the province of Quebec may be the only one to do without it.

Roads and access routes to those forests are also necessary. The federal government is offering one million dollars to the provinces in this connection. Once again, what proportion of this amount will the province of Quebec get, if the provincial government of my province clings to the policy of non cooperation it adopted when a Liberal administration was managing the affairs of this nation?

All those amounts which are lost to Quebec are lost because of Quebec's insistence on making political capital with federal-provincial relations, both in the fiscal and other fields, whereas all parts of Canada should be co-operating in the development of our country.

I am convinced that the Quebec government is as anxious as other provincial governments in Canada to develop its own province. Some one will object that national resources come under provincial jurisdiction. I agree; the objection will also be made that if the Quebec government accepted those subsidies from the central government, it would destroy provincial autonomy. The easy answer to that one is that central government contributions will in no way prevent provincial authorities from exercizing that autonomy and from favouring the more particular interests of the residents of Quebec with regard to natural resources.

Supply-Northern Affairs These resources will certainly be neither inconsiderately diminished nor dilapitated if federal aid is acquired by the province.

Over the years, the Quebec government has refused to co-operate with the central authority, on grounds of provincial autonomy, when it suited its purpose, but in other fields saw no disadvantage or danger in doing so.

The people of the province of Quebec are well aware that, for many years, they have lost millions of dollars because of this refusal to co-operate. We hope this deficiency will now cease and that relations between the governments of the same colour, or almost the same colour, on both levels, will help Quebec obtain the amounts of money earmarked for that province as well as for the others.

(Text):

Mr. Herridge:

Mr. Chairman, I am going to be very brief but I rise on this item as the appropriate one on which to utter a few sentences.

I would like first of all to express my appreciation for the interest and industry of the minister, and his serious concern with respect to the development of a policy for our natural resources. I have had the opportunity to have one or two chats with the minister, and have been very pleased after conversations with him to understand his general approach to the whole situation. In addition, I would like to express my usual appreciation of the good work done by the staff of his department with all its ramifications from water resources to Eskimos and caribou.

For some 13 years I have been one of those members of this house who have been urging the standing committee on mines, forests and waters to sit and have an opportunity to examine the estimates of this department and those of the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. I think we must give credit to the minister in that he has seen to it that this committee has sat during the current session and has had the opportunity to hear evidence and to hear a statement from the minister. This is the only part of the minutes which I have had the opportunity to read, but I am very pleased to note in that statement the government's philosophy and its thinking in general with respect to the development of our natural resources.

I am always delighted when I find governments accepting piecemeal and from time to time policies advocated from this corner of

the house. We are always ready to give credit where it is due, and in this respect I am very pleased about two things in particular. First, I should like to quote from the minutes of the committee at page 19, where the minister, as part of his statement, said:

The tenth point is that of conservation. There will be a conservation conference called to plan the most efficient and effective use of the resources of this country at national, provincial, municipal private and research levels, because there is no use, gentlemen, in building roads and finding out the area of energy resources and finding out the area of mineral resources and in putting them together in juxtaposition, planning for the processing here in Canada-there is no use in doing all this work if there is not some thought given to a long range conservation concept of the most efficient use of those resources.

We in this group support that statement by the minister without any qualification, and if this government gives effect to that concept we shall be very pleased indeed.

As you know, Mr. Chairman, for a good many years I have had resolutions on the order paper expressing the point of view of this group with respect to the need for a dominion-provincial conference to establish national principles and policies with respect to the development of our renewable natural resources, and I am very glad indeed, as are the rest of the members of this group, that the minister has made this statement. We know it is not a very definitive statement so far, and we will have to see what the future brings forth, since our fingers have been burned on previous occasions when we have been a little too optimistic.

I have been in the habit of taking people at their word, but then I have lived among lumberjacks and they are very simple and straightforward people, but the statement sounds very well and I trust that without undue delay it would be put into effect. We are very pleased to observe this attitude toward this question because there is no doubt we have got to have an acceptance of national principles and policies with respect to the development of natural resources, and then co-operation between the various levels of government and private industry to put these policies into effect for the advantage of Canada as a whole.

My second point is that I was particularly pleased to see the mention made by the minister in his report with respect to his roads to resources program. I think there was some imagination used, not only in the terminology but in the policy itself. Although the funds which have been allocated for this purpose to date have not been very large, I hope they may become what one could call the embryo of something which will develop into a very substantial policy, because I think

it is very necessary to the satisfactory development of our provinces. First, there should be a policy with respect to principles, and a policy with respect to the development of natural resources as far as conservation is concerned, and then access to these resources.

I rose to mention those two points in the minister's report, in particular. As I said, I have not had the opportunity to read these minutes as they are the sort of thing I pack into my briefcase when I am going home on the train, and read at leisure by way of light reading. I shall not say any more at this time. I shall have something more to say on the water items and on the forestry branch, but I will not detain the committee any longer at this time.

Mr. Muir (Cape Breton North and Victoria):

Mr. Chairman, unlike some other hon. members who have preceded me in the debate, I do not intend to get into a controversy over the merits or demerits of the present minister of northern affairs compared with the previous minister. In any event, I think it is common knowledge that the present encumbent is the most capable individual who has ever held the portfolio. However, I should like to make some brief observations concerning Cape Breton Highlands national park which is located in my constituency.

I should like to commend the minister and the government on the winter work program which was carried out last year. There was a great amount of excellent work done by the workers who reside in the area, under the capable supervision of Mr. J. H. Atkinson, the superintendent of the park at that time, whom I understand has served many years in the parks service. Unfortunately the department has seen fit to transfer him to Newfoundland, but what has been our loss will undoubtedly be Newfoundland's gain. I have no doubt that the present superintendent will continue to carry on the work here in a very capable manner.

There is one point in the annual report under the national parks branch which says that the increase in the number of visitors to the park is reflected in the increased use of the recreational facilities. That is true, and I fully agree with it. To give the committee an example, in 1955-56 we had 75,310 registered visitors to the Cape Breton Highlands park. In 1956-57, there were 116,556 an increase of 41,246. In the year just ended the number went up to 128,397, another increase, of 11,841, and I have no doubt that a new record will be set in the present year.

As I have already stated, a great amount of proper work-I use that term-was carried out in the park last winter with

Supply-Northern Affairs regard to camping grounds, and my attention has been drawn to a newspaper item in the Cape Breton Post some days ago which stated that at Ingonish more than 1,000 visitors jammed the camping grounds on a week end, and that a total of 600 were registered on another particular day. This will give the committee an idea of the extent to which these camping grounds are being used. The article goes on to say that campers have the use of showers, washing machines, tables and parking facilities, all for 50 cents a night a car, regardless of the number of passengers. This is a very good thing. We are doing something here for the ordinary people of Canada-the workers who wish to take their families and their tents and get out among the beautiful scenery that exists on Cape Breton island. I may say that I doubt that any other scenery in Canada can compare with it.

On this same subject, I hope the minister is listening very intently and that in the coming winter we will see another winter works program along the same lines as last winter, because this park could be developed to a much greater extent than it has been developed so far.

There is one other point I should like to mention at this time. Some days ago when we were discussing a bill to transfer certain land from the park back to the province for hydro development I mentioned that I felt the minister and the department should give consideration to expanding the park boundaries. I do not know if the minister was fully aware of what I meant at that time. I felt quite sure he was, but I noticed an editorial in the local newspaper afterwards which stated that it appeared that the minister and myself were unable to get together on this matter, so I should like at this point to reiterate what I have already said. My idea was that the department should give consideration to the inclusion within the park boundaries of all the northern tip of Cape Breton island. The minister did make a statement concerning the difficulties posed by town sites and so on. Well, we do not have any town sites here, only a few villages which do not extend more than a few hundred yards inland. I have in mind that if and when the park boundaries were extended we could skirt these villages and go up into the north country, as I mentioned some days ago, taking in Inverness county and down that side of the county where there are no villages that I can see on this map. I hope the minister will give every consideration to this suggestion. I can understand that there may be problems when there are town sites

Supply-Northern Affairs within parks, but I do not see how any great problem could be created by this suggestion that I am making.

Another matter which I should like to bring to the attention of the minister is one that I mentioned in the debate on the speech from the throne on November 12 last year, namely the discrepancy in the wages paid to employees of the Cape Breton park as compared with those paid to workers in other parks throughout Canada for the same type of work. I do not know just how the authorities arrive at the amounts that are paid to workers in the park, but I understand that they are based on the prevailing rate for the area, and this is difficult to understand as there is no prevailing rate in this area because there is no industry there. I cannot for the life of me see why anyone working in the Cape Breton national park should receive less money than anyone who is doing the same job, let us say, in the Banff national park. I am sure the minister and his officials have already taken up this matter and I sincerely appeal to them to continue to give further consideration to the suggestion that wage rates in this area be placed on a level with wage rates paid in other national parks in Canada.

I raised another point on a previous occasion and no action has yet been taken in this regard. I trust that the department is giving consideration to the construction of a new club house at the golf course in the Cape Breton Highlands park. We have there, one of the finest golf courses in the country but I am sorry to say the club house is not in keeping with the standards of the golf course.

Although there are other projects which could be undertaken in the area and mentioned now I wish to bring to the attention of the minister and his department and impress upon them at this time only the three most important points I have raised. The first is a request for the initiation of a winter works program for the coming winter. The second is a request for consideration of the expansion of the boundaries of the park. The third is a request for an increase in wage rates paid to employees in the park.

I understand that the period has expired during which the provinces could indicate their willingness to participate in assistance from the federal government in the program of establishing campsites and picnic areas. I urge the minister to give consideration to renewing this invitation so the provinces can further participate in the program. Some excellent work has been done in the province of Nova Scotia as a result of this program and I hope the minister will give sympathetic consideration to the requests I have made in these few brief remarks.

Mr. Rouleau:

Mr. Chairman, all of us realize the importance of the tourist industry in Canada. We had the opportunity to gain further proof of that fact a few weeks ago when we discussed in this house a proposal for joint loans to tourist resort operators. The tourist industry is a big business. It ranks third among Canada's major industries. In 1956 tourists from foreign countries spent $335 million in Canada while in 1957 they spent more than $350 million here.

What about the amount of money spent on travel by Canadians? It is quite impossible to estimate it but I am sure to be not far from the facts when I say that at least the same amount of money must be spent each year on travel by our fellow Canadians. If we look at the statistics we realize that for the past ten years, for instance, the tourist industry has developed at a tremendous pace in Canada. The tourist industry which brought in $270 million in 1948 will probably bring us $370 million in 1958. Since approximately 90 per cent of our tourist business comes from our neighbour south of the border it provides a source of United States currency of which Canada is always in need.

As I just said our best market for the tourist industry is the United States of America. In 1946 United States travellers spent some $308 million in this country while $27 million were spent by visitors coming from other countries of the world. We can increase our market in the United States and at the same time easily create new markets in other parts of the world. We in Canada have everything to offer tourists. The beautiful and diversified scenery of our country from one ocean to the other is second to none in the world.

I am certainly not going to go into detail in an attempt to give a description of every region in Canada. Hon. members with every justification have praised their own ridings in this house on occasion. I wish only to mention the majestic beauties of the province of British Columbia with its mountains, its beautiful cities of Vancouver and Victoria; the grandeur and majestic beauty of the Rockies which are not surpassed by any country in the world; the colourful spectacle of the Calgary stampede; the vastness of the central provinces; the famed Niagara falls for romance; the Queen city of Toronto; northern Ontario and Quebec with their thousands of lakes where fish and game can be found in abundance; our cosmopolitan Montreal with hundreds of attractions of all kinds: the charm of that historic, typical French city, Quebec; the little paradise for tourists which forms the maritime provinces and our St. Lawrence river which is the country's longest inland river.

We in Canada can offer winter as well as summer activities. We have plenty of snow in winter for skiing and the air is invigorating. For the sportsman Canada offers unlimited opportunities for fishing and hunting in the spring, summer and fall when Canadians as well as tourists can take advantage of the thousands of lakes and the rich wooded areas which are found in almost every province. We have all kinds of summer and winter resorts. We have some of the best hotels in the world. In our big cities we have facilities for large conventions. The Queen Elizabeth hotel just completed in Montreal can accommodate small and big conventions as well. We can offer one of the best transportation systems in the world, either by train, plane, car or boat. All that we have to offer we have to promote. The Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources has done a good job in the past, but more should be done. Our national parks which are a big attraction to the tourists should be multiplied and beautified. We should find more picnic grounds alongside our highways, we should find better accommodations for tourists.

According to the annual report of the Canadian travel bureau, which was established in 1934 and which is responsible for the promotion of travel to and within Canada and for the general welfare of Canada's tourist industry, that agency has a staff of 85 to 90 in Ottawa to do the job of promoting Canada. According to the same report there are also offices of the bureau in New York and Chicago with small information staffs, as well as a travel representative at the Canadian consulate general in Los Angeles. At page 1951, of the annual report of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources for the fiscal year 1956-57 we find the following statement:

In 1956, the bureau achieved a new all-time record for inquiries handled during a single year. A total of 538,063 inquiries were received 460,882 by its Ottawa office, 55,181 by the New York office, and 22,000 by the Chicago office. An advertising program at a cost of $974,607 was conducted in 50 magazines and 59 newspapers in the United States. Combined circulation of the magazines used totalled 71,909,759.

As far as I am aware the Canadian government travel bureau is doing a good job considering the small amount of money they are given for doing so.

As I said at the beginning of my remarks, the tourist industry brings over $350 million to Canada every year. That amount exceeds the sum spent by any department of the federal government save the Department of Health and Welfare, the Department of Finance and the Department of National

Supply-Northern Affairs Defence. It is one of our largest industries and we should do the utmost not only to maintain but increase it. Any amount of money spent on it is a sound investment. The government should give consideration to expanding our Canadian government travel bureau and should do even more than is presently being done to multiply and beautify our national parks.

I also wish to suggest that a department of tourist travel and information should be created by the government, under whose jurisdiction would fall the national parks, the Canadian government travel bureau, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, the national film board and any other bodies related to the tourist industry and information in Canada and abroad. I submit that every possible consideration should be given to the suggestion I just made. Its purpose is not necessarily to find an opening for the many candidates there are for government posts, even if it would help the Prime Minister satisfy at least one of the many ambitious supporters of his party in the house.

The sole purpose of the formation of this new department would be to help promote by all means the tourist industry in Canada. It would also put under the authority of the same minister the bodies and corporations which have to work closely together in order to achieve good results, namely national parks, the government travel bureau, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the national film board. If each and every one of those bodies have done a great job so far, they can do better still if they are working under the jurisdiction of the same minister. I hope the government will take this suggestion under serious consideration.

In closing, I should like to ask the minister if he can tell the committee whether the government has any program or plans for the development of the tourist industry in Canada?

Mr. White:

Mr. Chairman, I want to take about five minutes of the time of the committee to say a word or two about western Ontario and the development there, past, present and future. I wish to bring to the attention of the minister the site that was first mentioned and developed by the late John R. MacNicol, a former member of this house. That area was situated in Kent county adjacent to the river Thames on No. 2 highway. This was the site of an Indian village which was destroyed by invading Americans many years ago. The site was lost for many years. Through the efforts of John R. MacNicol and many of the local residents the area has been developed, a small park was provided there and any time that I ever

3530 HOUSE OF

Supply-Northern Affairs drive that way I find the park is in use by tourists and visitors from the United States and the surrounding area. It is my opinion that this could be expanded.

I understand that in the area there are many people who are in possession of Indian relics of one kind or another and that possibly on the site a museum could be constructed which would house-and I know there are many who would contribute-those Indian relics to this museum. There are also some materials which were used by the pioneers which may disappear entirely from the Ontario scene in a very few years. They could well be housed there. I hope the minister will give serious consideration to the expansion of this project because it is situated on a very busy highway and it is a pleasant place for people to stop off at and rest. It should be very carefully considered by the minister.

While I am mentioning the name of John R. MacNicol may I say that I believe he was one of those who first mentioned the possibility of the development of the South Saskatchewan river dam.

I want to turn now for a moment or two to the Thames river valley authority and to endorse the words of the hon. member for Oxford who preceded me a little while ago. I want to point out to the minister that the work commenced by that authority some years ago is now about half completed. I refer to the major project. The Fanshaw dam has now been in existence for some years and has proven a boon to the community. But there are many other developments on the upper Thames valley which have been contemplated, and I believe considered by the minister, and we are hoping that, as the hon. member for Oxford mentioned, the pilot project will be completed.

The water problems in southwestern Ontario are acute and any development there should take water conservation into consideration. I am one of those who believe that the restoration of our forests is a fundamental part of any conservation program so that any area in the watershed that can possibly be considered as submarginal land should be devoted to forest growth.

Another problem has developed. The Fanshaw dam in the upper Thames valley was sold to the residents of the valley as a conservation measure to ensure a fresh and continuous flow of water through and beyond the city of London. However as soon as the dam was completed the city of London commenced to draw off water for city use. They polluted it with sewage and dumped it back into the river. For 50 years the city of London has also been using artesian wells nearby. Actually

what has happened is that in a sense the city of London has been stealing water from the surrounding municipalities. Those municipalities find this embarrassing and the farmers in the nearby areas not only find it embarrassing but expensive because of the lack of water. It is a detriment to the farms in the community and a financial loss to many of the farmers. Therefore, when we are considering a conservation program, we should have regard for use of water.

A program that I advocated-and I am quite certain I was not one of the originators-at the University of Western Ontario some 13 years ago was to draw a supply of water for the western Ontario area from lake Huron by means of a pipe line. It would supply many municipalities en route to the city. Now with the introduction of the Ontario water resources commission this plan is under very serious consideration at this time. The city of London favoured the plan. I mention this because it has a relationship to the conservation of water and other resources in the upper Thames valley area.

But, strange as it may seem, the public utilities commission which provides the water for the municipalities and have, as I said, secured their supply of water from the adjacent municipalities by artesian wells are inclined to oppose this forward-looking plan of the Ontario water resources commission. The public utilities propose a filtration plant at the Fanshaw upper Thames valley site. The net result will be that there will be less pure clean water flowing down the Thames river through London, Ontario, and more polluted water added for questionable downstream benefits.

The department of northern affairs and all other public bodies interested in this problem should take a long forward look at it, not with a view to ascertaining what the results might be tomorrow but what the needs and results might be 50 years or more hence. I am not against, in fact I am for, the completion of the upper Thames valley authority plan as soon as possible. However,

I want it to be a plan which will serve the greatest number of people in the area and which will give the greatest possible benefits for the dollars spent.

I do not want to take any more of the time of the committee in discussing the upper Thames valley authority. I hope the minister will look favourably upon the plan and consider it when he is compiling his estimates for the coming year.

I do want to say a word about national parks. I was very interested, as I am sure the members of the committee were, in what the hon. member for Oxford said about

the problem of Long Point island. I endorse what he had to say. I should like to refer also to an area called Mitchells bay where United States interests hold a long-term lease. They secured this lease from the former government. I, like the Prime Minister, believe in Canada for Canadians. I hope that when these leases run out they will not be renewed. I hope that the policy of the government eventually will be to create a national park in that heavily populated area.

(Translation):

Mr. Stearns:

Mr. Chairman, my remarks will be brief, but I wish to say something in French, in my capacity as an Englishspeaking member from the lovely province of Quebec.

I wish to congratulate the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources and the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys on the magnificent job they are doing for the benefit of every Canadian.

Mr. Chairman, speaking as a member of the permanent committee on mines, forests and waters I can assure you that the members of that committee have done yeoman service from the national point of view. Indeed, the speeches delivered this afternoon by hon. members of all parties, C.C.F., Liberals and Conservatives, were most complimentary of the work done by both the department of northern affairs and the Department of Mines and Technical Surveys. Once again, then, I congratulate the ministers in charge of both those departments.

(Text):

If I might say just a few words in English, I would call attention to the fact that in the province of Quebec we have a little different problem from that of the other provinces. We look after our own forestry affairs. The only reason we are doing this is that, in the past, we have never been encouraged by the federal government to participate in forestry affairs. Whether or not this was because of politics or for other reasons, I do not know. Perhaps in the future we will be included in the program of the department of northern affairs.

However, we have not done badly in Quebec because we have formed an association called the Quebec forestry association. This association has been the godfather of a system of 4-H clubs. The boys and girls who belong to these clubs are spreading conservation propaganda throughout their towns and villages. This has been going on now for 16 years and the results have been remarkable. The future of our province is just as much dependent on the forests as the future of any other part of Canada. Representatives from

Supply-Northern Affairs a great many of the other provinces of Canada should come down to Quebec to see the way in which the 4-H clubs are managed and the work they do in connection with conservation, the planting of trees and general education.

Mr. Howard:

This vote offers members, especially those from the more remote parts of Canada, an opportunity of expressing their views on the program of the department and making some comments about the general development of northern areas. I hope that other hon. members will avail themselves of this opportunity, as I intend to do, to relate the program of this department to their particular constituencies as well as the overall good of the nation.

I should like first to make a few comments on this so-called roads to resources program. At the outset I would say that, in so far as the roads to resources program is concerned, it means practically nothing to northern British Columbia or to the type of program that was instituted for the building of roads prior to this government taking office. Certainly there have been changes to the original plan. I might say, with respect to the desk pounding that just took place, the former Liberal government had little to do with it, either.

So far as northern development roads are concerned, and particularly the one known as the Stewart-Cassiar road, they were undertaken originally by the provincial government through its department of mines as mining access roads. Just prior to the federal election of 1957 the federal government entered into a 50-50 agreement with the province for the building of that Stewart-Cassiar road. I am pleased to see that even though it has taken a year or a year and a half to put the agreement into concrete terms I believe it has been either completed or is nearly completed. I hope that when the minister rises to make some comments he will undertake to give us a little more detail about the state of affairs with respect to the federal-provincial agreement to build the Stewart-Cassiar road, especially whether or not the contract has been signed or whether it will be signed in the near future and generally what are the provisions of that agreement.

This Stewart-Cassiar road, as I said, was envisioned by many, many people in British Columbia, certainly those living in the area, a long time before this government took office. I am not saying that it is not a good project for federal government participation. I have no immediate personal knowledge of the effect that similarly constructed roads will have on other parts of Canada, but I do

3532 HOUSE OF

Supply-Northern Affairs have personal knowledge of the effect the Stewart-Cassiar road will have upon the development of northern British Columbia. When it is completed it will offer a means of removing natural resources from the sites in which they are located at the moment to a deep sea shipping port.

There are also some other factors that must be taken into consideration. It is true that such a road will have a beneficial effect upon the Cassiar Asbestos Corporation in northern British Columbia. We hope it will have a beneficial effect on the Grand Duke mine which has been discovered in that area and where they have now blocked out more than 26 million tons of a fairly good grade of copper. There are many other mineral deposits under claim in that area that will be beneficially affected by the completion of this Stewart-Cassiar road.

However, the vision of this government should not stop merely at Stewart or the other terminus of the road, Cassiar. The government should consider, if it has not already done so, the extensions that must be made to the Stewart-Cassiar road to provide access into and out of the area other than through the deep sea shipping port at Stewart. I would point out that connected with the proposed route of the Stewart-Cassiar road there is a very well defined, broad low level valley extending from Kitimat through Terrace and Aiyansh and northward through that area. In part of that area roads have already been constructed. I suggest that the government should give a good deal of consideration to participating in a similar financial way with the province of British Columbia in order to connect the proposed Stewart-Cassiar road with a road system extending down the Kalum valley to Terrace, highway 16, the C.N.R. line and deep sea shipping ports either at Prince Rupert or Kitimat.

I would also suggest that there are other mineral resources in the area farther to the east that require road access to them. Just north of Hazelton a group of citizens, using their own money and logging equipment, undertook last year to start the construction of a road heading generally in the direction of the Stewart-Cassiar road. They hope to link up that area farther to the east with the area to the north that will be affected by the Stewart-Cassiar road.

What the mineral potential is in that whole northern half of British Columbia may be known to some extent because of exploration work already done by prospectors and mineral claims that have already been established. But in addition, and I am sure the minister will agree with this, there is still a vast potential of unexplored mineral land in that

part of the province. In past years the attitude has been that people should pioneer and develop an area first before the government would consider building roads into it but I hope sincerely that the present government will reverse that attitude and on the general basis of potential mineral, hydroelectric and industrial development in the area will undertake to build roads first knowing full well that they will have to be built in any event. I hope they will undertake to build roads first so as to assist in opening up the country and bring about the more economic development of the mineral resources that we know are there.

I just want to make one or two comments about roads to resources, or whatever term they are known by, in so far as British Columbia is concerned. If the minister wants to go one step further than the former government, and I am sure he would like nothing better than to outdo the Liberals at every opportunity; if he would like to show that so far as British Columbia is concerned this roads to resources program really means something he will not rest content with merely carrying out the program of 50-50 participation in the Stewart-Cassiar road but will exercise his ingenuity and imagination and give expression to what I am sure is his heartfelt desire to open up these areas by taking a look at the road connections which must be made between sparsely settled areas that have a road system of sorts and those areas that do not now have a system. He will enter into immediate negotiations with the provincial government to extend the provincial highway now existing between Kitimat and Terrace, from which point onward to Aiyansh the highway is now being privately constructed by the Columbia Cellulose Company, and for the extension of that road system farther northward until it meets the Stewart-Cassiar road. The area will then have access by road and rail and by shipping. In addition, he should also take into consideration the potential mineral and agriculural area to the east north of Hazelton and also enter into negotiations to provide a connection between the Hazelton area and the northwestern part of the province.

Mr. Cadieu:

Mr. Chairman, in my few brief remarks I first want to congratulate the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources for bringing such a worth-while program before the house, one which is long overdue. The people of my constituency are deeply concerned about northern road development. I must also pay tribute to those people of Meadow Lake constituency who have formed Meadow Lake Freightways and have bulldozed a winter road through to the

south shore of lake Athabasca, thus making it possible to take in freight during the winter months to serve the vast mining area in and around Uranium City. This project has reduced transportation costs by 7 cents a pound. An all-weather road over this route would further reduce the cost of operating in this area by eliminating the necessity of stocking an eight months supply of all necessary commodities. It would open a potential 150,000 square miles of virgin territory to commercial fishing, lumbering, mining and tourist traffic.

Aside from these important facts, all Canada is interested in achieving road access to the huge uranium strike in and around Uranium City. We in the north look forward to making a considerable contribution to Canada's export trade through uranium as well as to our own national development. I look upon this road as a very urgent project and I sincerely hope that the government of Saskatchewan and the federal government will be able to work together to make this worth-while project a reality. I hope it will not be too long before I will be able to announce to the people of Meadow Lake constituency that the surveying of this worth-while project is under way. I have made many trips over this route from Buffalo Narrows to the south shore of lake Athabasca by air. I feel that this is a very urgent road and I certainly hope that we in Meadow Lake will see this become a reality.

Mr. MacLellan:

Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring to the attention of the committee and the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources a matter which I think is of importance not only to my constituency and the province of Nova Scotia but also to Canada. A few days ago it was my pleasure and honour to be present at and associated with the ceremonies that marked the remembrance of the siege of Louisbourg on July 27, 1758. The complete success of the ceremonies and the arrangements made by the bicentenary committee are a great tribute to them and the occasion was very well commemorated.

I should like to express my sincere appreciation to the minister and the other departments of the government and to the provincial government for the co-operation that made the ceremonies in remembrance of this occasion the outstanding success that they were. It was certainly noteworthy as showing the interest of Canadians in Louisburg that approximately 40,000 people attended the three-day commemoration ceremonies.

Good work has been done to date at Louisburg. We have a museum containing a reproduction of the fort and the fortress town as it was in the middle of the eighteenth century and there are also many maps and records which to some extent portray the 57071-3-224

Supply-Northern Affairs story of the town. I feel, however, that Louisburg has been very largely neglected and that its potential as a great national park has been overlooked. I feel that no stone should be left unturned to ensure that it should be seen by every Canadian as a modern record of a most important battleground in the history of our country and so that our people may be able to examine the monuments and records which still exist.

As has been said by others, we Canadians have a responsibility to preserve our great landmarks so that they may be enjoyed by future generations. Every school child on this continent is, I am sure, familiar with the story of Louisburg and the part it played in the history of North America as the guardian of the St. Lawrence and the foremost sentinel of France in the year 1758. I am sure all Canadians would be interested in seeing the historical relics there if they could be assured that the area had been sufficiently developed to illustrate all the interesting facets of early Canadian history. The battles before the walls of the ancient town and those in Louisburg harbour should be clearly illustrated by means of maps, et cetera, and many, many things could be done to restore the fortress itself, which was perhaps the finest fortress of its day in the only walled city in North America. It would be almost impossible to completely restore the area or at least it would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to do it. No one could expect that, but I do believe this government would find it wise to invest in the restoration of some of the walls of the fortress, to outline the main gates and to post signs to clearly indicate where the battle of Louisburg was fought, besides providing roads and better accommodation for visitors.

I believe, furthermore, that a road should be constructed for the use of automobiles so that they may have access to the park because a large number of visitors do come to Louisburg as they did during the recent ceremonies there. I think it is important that the government should consider a long range plan for the town's development so that it may illustrate the conditions back in 1758 and prior thereto. Unfortunately, after 1758 and 1759 construction stopped, probably at the request of the Americans who said that no stone should be left upon a stone. It was such an important point as the watchdog of the great fishing industry and the guardian of the St. Lawrence that it was felt no chance should be taken that it would be rebuilt. If a long range plan were developed and a reasonable allotment provided annually it would, I am sure, be a tremendous investment for Canada.

Supply-Northern Affairs

Nova Scotia regards tourism as a very great natural resource. We live next door to some 40 million people in the New England states some of whom come to the maritime provinces every year seeking relief from the heat and in order to enjoy the scenery for which we are so famous, to take advantage of our summer breezes and the salt water. When they come they expect to see something and more will come when more is provided for them to see. Any investment in this respect will be repaid in tourist dollars.

In the development of any such long term plan it should be remembered that the story of Louisburg is more than just that of a fortress besieged and finally abolished. It is rather the story of one of the great cornerstones of Canadian history when those who were enemies and soldiers, fighting outside this fortress at the dawn of July 22 of 1758, became neighbours and were perhaps the first Canadians by the time dusk fell. Their cannons and swords and implements of war became axes and ploughshares, which were used to build our country, and I think this area should be used as an illustration of what can be done by co-operation and work between two great races. The descendants of these people, both French and English, remember their historical background and this would be a wonderful monument to their history.

I would like to associate myself with the remarks made this afternoon by my colleague, the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria, who spoke of the Cape Breton Highlands national park in the counties of Inverness and Victoria. The increasing number of tourists visiting the park amply illustrates the value of these parks to the tourist industry of Nova Scotia, as they afford an excellent opportunity to people to examine the scene of Cabot's exploits-the Cabot trail. I, like that hon. member, would like to see a winter works program developed in connection with the park and I would like to thank the minister for the program he instituted last winter which provided employment for local people when the pulpwood industry was not as prosperous as it has been in previous years. This year, once again, employment will be required in the area. In fact, if ever there was a time to find employment for people through the development of our great natural resources that time will be during the coming winter.

I feel that the government should consider the question of wages and salaries paid in this connection. There is no reason why the people who work there should not be paid in accordance with the standard set for mainland workers.

I have emphasized the importance of the tourist industry in Nova Scotia and I commend to the minister the most serious consideration of the value of spending money in developing tourist facilities for the Cape Breton Highlands national park and also the great national landmark of Louisburg.

Mr. Pickersgill:

I have a few observations to make and a few questions to ask of the minister, although I am not going to make a speech. I am sure that will cause hon. members on the other side of the committee to rejoice. The first thing I want to say something about is to remind the minister- I do not need to, I am sure-that when he does reply I would hope he will say something about the treatment of Eskimos in the province of Newfoundland as compared with the other provinces, in addition to what he said the other day.

The second point I should like to refer to is the electricity program and I am speaking about this on item No. 1 because I do not think that perhaps it would be in order on any other item since regrettably in my opinion, and in the opinion of my friends on this side, that program at this time does not include the province of Newfoundland despite very strenuous efforts to have it included.

The minister will no doubt recall that on February 19 of this year the Prime Minister was in St. John's to deliver a speech for the purpose, I judge, of influencing the voters in Newfoundland, and when he arrived he received a letter from the premier of Newfoundland written that same day, parts of which the Prime Minister quoted in his speech, and which he used to a certain effect. I will not bore the committee by going into further detail with regard to what effect, because I am sure the minister would get up at once and say that by quoting the Prime Minister I was out of order. I will not put the minister to the embarrassment of doing that. But this letter did ask the Prime Minister and, through the Prime Minister, the government to give consideration to a request from the government of Newfoundland. Now this letter was produced as a sessional paper on July 3, 1958, in response to a motion which I made asking for this correspondence and apparently it never received any reply except the reply which the Prime Minister gave at the public meeting and over the air on that occasion. I am not going to read the whole letter, but I would like to draw attention to two paragraphs. The second paragraph of the letter reads as follows:

You did not find it possible, apparently, to accede to my request to you that Canadian government financial assistance be given to hydroelectric (or water power) stations in Newfoundland,

and as few if any electric stations operated by coal will ever be built in Newfoundland your present offer in that regard is of no very great importance to this province.

That, of course, was the subject of some rather lengthy debates during the last parliament, and I may add that my view is quite unaltered. On another occasion I will

probably have something more to say about this matter, but I do not propose to hold up the minister's estimates today in that regard. But the premier of Newfoundland made a new request in this letter-a different request -and in the second part of the letter he said:

From your studies of Newfoundland you must be aware that our population, though fewer than half a million in number, are to be found in more than 1.000 different settlements, and that these settlements are situate in the great bays which constitute the 6,000 miles of our coastline. This means that our people are very scattered in settlements that are considerably removed from each other in distance. Even in cases, therefore, where surplus electricity is already being generated, which surplus electricity could be moved by transmission lines to certain bays, there still remains the terribly difficult problem of building distribution lines to link up these settlements; and within the settlements to link up the scattered houses wanting electricity.

There was a reference to a meeting being held, and then Mr. Smallwood said:

I suggest that you announce at this meeting tonight your willingness to ask the parliament of Canada to amend your legislation, passed in January, in such a way as to give the same financial assistance for these distribution lines as you have already so generously offered for transmission lines.

Then there is a different suggestion:

On the other hand, if you are not prepared to make this concession to Newfoundland we would be pretty well satisfied if, by administrative or executive decision, or by amendment to the legislation if necessary, you would provide that when a transmission line is built from the power house to the main centre of a bay, where that same line extends from that centre from settlement to settlement, cove to cove, within that bay or area, the extension itself will be treated as though it were the same transmission line continued from the main point in the bay or area.

That is all I think it is relevant to read from the letter, but I should like to read from Mr. Clark Davey's report of the meeting at which the Prime Minister made this letter public. It appeared in the Globe and Mail. I have a lot of other reports, but this appears to be a pretty accurate one, and here is what the Prime Minister said then about Mr. Smallwood's request. I will not read the other and more political comments he made.

Without really giving away anything, Mr. Diefenbaker said he would take Premier Smallwood's request for federal assistance to power distribution lines, in addition to the high voltage transmission lines already covered, under serious 57071-3-224J

Supply-Northern Affairs consideration. If federal economists think it workable within the general plan, he added, the request would get the most possible consideration in the next parliament.

That, I suppose, was posited upon the Prime Minister's success at the polls which we cannot gainsay and I hope the minister when he replies will tell us what the result of that consideration has been. I know the minister's colleague, the hon. member for St. John's West, has repeatedly said that these distribution lines are already covered. Indeed, he kept saying that all during the election campaign. If that is the minister's view-that they are already covered and that assistance is already being given, as his colleague has repeatedly said-then this matter does not require any further consideration. But it would appear to me that the minister is probably of the same opinion as he was in the last parliament, and that that is not his opinion. I very much hope it is, however, and I would be delighted, and so would almost everybody else, at least in the outports of Newfoundland, if the minister would come forward and say that the government is prepared to give the same assistance for hydro plants as they are prepared to give for thermal plants.

So much for that subject. I want now to say just a word about the roads to resources program that the minister has announced.

And this wasn't supposed to be a speech.

Mr. Pickersgill:

I think this is a good and constructive step, but there is one very great difficulty about it and about every other proposal made by the federal government for a 50-50 distribution of costs. That 50-50 distribution of costs makes it comparatively easy for wealthy provinces with a high taxable capacity, such as Ontario and British Columbia, to accept and exploit to the full, if they wish to do so, the offer of the federal government, without throwing any great burden upon their taxpayers. But in a province such as Newfoundland or Nova Scotia or New Brunswick, or even, to some extent, in the minister's own province of Saskatchewan where taxable capacity is very much lower, these 50-50 offers are really of very much less value in terms of real assistance and in terms of equality and I hope that in time the minister will try to influence the Minister of Finance and the Prime Minister to introduce some formula more nearly resembling the equalization formula in cases where assistance is offered.

This was done in some measure by the hon. member for Essex East when he was in office in introducing the hospital insurance provisions which are not operated on a 50-50

Supply-Northern Affairs basis; some account is taken of the relative taxable capacity of the various provinces. I know it is not within the power of the minister to do this himself and I do not wish to take away from my approval of what he is doing within the policy which has been enunciated. I should think that the minister as the representative of a province that does not have as high a taxable capacity as the one we are now in would himself be rather sympathetic with this argument.

Finally, sir, I wish to say a few words about the Terra Nova national park. As the minister is aware this park was established by the federal government when his predecessor was in office. It had barely been established when the minister took over and I wish to give the minister credit for carrying on vigorously and aggressively the work of the development of that park. It has been a God-send to the people of Bonavista bay and that area. In a period when other employment has been exceedingly difficult to get there would have been an enormous amount of distress that has been avoided because of the existence of the park. I wish to echo the words of the hon. member for Cape Breton North and Victoria, the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond and other hon. gentlemen who have spoken about this matter in saying that I hope the minister will have an even bigger winter work program in the parks next winter than he had last winter because my own opinion is we are going to need it more than ever.

In respect of employment within the park the minister brought down a return in response to a motion I made for correspondence with the provincial government concerning employment there. I should like to say a few words about that and these, too, will be words of commendation of the attitude taken by the minister. It so happened it was for quite some time an obstacle to the establishment of the park that there are a considerable number of people living in settlements like Charlottetown, Happy Adventure, Eastport, Sandringham, Glovertown, Traytown, Port Blandford, Musgravetown and one or two others-

Mr. Maclnnis:

You are slipping.

Mr. Pickersgill:

-where it was customary- and perhaps that was true of none more than the little settlement of Canning's Cove-for a certain number of people to make a limited part of their annual livelihood by cutting timber in the park. I wish to express my appreciation to the minister for the consideration he has shown to these people in permitting a limited amount of cutting in the last two years. I understand the policy is still

[Mr. Pickersgill.l

being continued with respect to those people who had done this in the past. I appreciate that in the long run the minister does not want this to continue and I do not think any one else does either. But I also appreciate that the minister has many other preoccupations and I know the difficulties involved in getting new enterprises established and this has been an excellent stop-gap arrangement until the parks administration is in a position to provide through its own activities and forest management policies adequate alternative employment for these people.

But there is one thing I hope the minister will not lose sight of and that is the undertaking he gave in the letter he addressed on July 2 to the minister of mines and resources of Newfoundland with respect to those persons. I shall not take the time of the committee in reading this correspondence but will hasten to explain that the minister of mines and resources had written to the minister and asked him if he would give a preference, which the previous administration rather more through verbal conversations than in any other way implied would be given to people who had previously made their living in the park, in employment in the park. I do hope that preference will be continued because it is really quite a serious thing when through the establishment of this park in co-operation between the two governments the livelihood of these people has been taken away.

I know the minister has shown good will in this matter up until now and I merely urge him to continue to do that. When we come to the item on the national parks there will be one or two other questions which I may wish to put to him about employment not only in the Terra Nova national park but in some other parks and they are questions of detail which I do not think it would be reasonable to put on item No. 1.

Mr. Hamilton (Qu'Appelle):

Mr. Chairman, there are a number of questions which I feel should be answered before the vote carries because they deal with general affairs in the department rather than with individual votes. I am going to take the liberty of dealing with these chronologically as they were put forward and even though this destroys the coherence of my remarks to some degree I think it is the only way I could manage to give the information which the hon. members have requested.

The hon. member for Bonavista-Twillin-gate speaking on Saturday, I believe, raised the question of the reconsideration on my part of the treatment of Eskimos in the province of Newfoundland. At this time I

should like to tell him that I have gone over the records of negotiations between the two governments and the correspondence between departments in the government. I know of his feelings and I appreciate that the agreement was made in 1954 under his signature. At this time I wish to extend to the hon. member my appreciation for bringing this matter to my attention and to tell him it has determined me to take a good look at the considerations affecting the lives of these people in Newfoundland. I coul say much more at this time but I think it would be more proper to do so after we have given it full consideration.

Mr. Pickersgill:

Mr. Chairman, I quite agree with the minister and I wish to make one observation. I feel notwithstanding what may have been done at a previous time there should be equal treatment by the federal government for Eskimos in all the provinces. Of course there may be a difference between the provinces and the territories. That is all I was urging.

Mr. Hamilton (Qu'Appelle):

Yes, thank you very much.

The hon. member for St. Jean-Iberville-Napierville was discussing Fort Lennox. I should like to inform him at this time that we have increased the vote this year with respect to Fort Lennox which is a beautiful tourist attraction with great historic connotations relating to our country. The estimates will indicate that the vote has been increased this year from $10,000 to $45,000 and we have moved a little ahead of the hon. member in that regard.

I should also like to point out to him that neighbouring historic parks and particularly Fort Chambly has a comparative expenditure of $5,000 and another, lower Fort Garry which is somewhat further removed, has a comparative expenditure of $20,000. So on the whole Fort Lennox has received in my opinion rather favourable and friendly treatment from the department this year. I appreciate that this fort needs a great deal of work done on it and I should like to remind him that when we finish the rewiring we shall continue the work in relation to this and other historic sites.

I wish to point out to the committee in relation to historic parks that every Canadian owes a responsibility to future generations to see that these landmarks of our history are preserved.

I know how immense the task is and any person does us a great favour by bringing to light the various historic landmarks of the nation's history so that we can make the first moves to protect them in order that over the years, as the money is forthcoming, we can

Supply-Northern Affairs restore them and do something of a permanent nature so that forever afterwards they will be there as a reminder of what happened in the formation of our country's history.

I would like to add a word in regard to historic parks. Even though we do have a nominal charge for the national parks, we do not make any charges in the historic parks.

The hon. member for Nickel Belt spoke at some length about the French river and its possibilities as a tourist attraction because it lies at one of the historic routes to the west. Every person who knows Canadian history knows that this was the trans-Canada highway of two and three centuries ago. At this time I take great pleasure in telling the committee that the department has decided on and is going forward with a program of marking all these historic canoe routes in Canada, and I am sure there will be a marker close to the Recollet falls and at the other historic landmarks in the constituency of Nickel Belt.

However, in so far as the hon. member's remarks applying to our development program are concerned, I am not too certain. He belittled the program and referred to it as a rocking chair program, and rather spoofed the word "vision". He then went on to make suggestions about roads to resources in his area and asked for information about them. My statement of policy at this time is a repetition of what I told the hon. member for Grand Falls-White Bay-Labrador. The policy is this, Mr. Chairman. Where agreement has been reached between two governments and a letter has gone forward from me giving it informal and tentative approval to go ahead, we can announce the location of some of those roads and as to where the roads will go but while any discussion between the two governments themselves are being carried on, it is part of our policy not to discuss those roads until a final decision is made.

Mr. Pearson:

May I ask a question there? I am sorry to interrupt the minister. Is not it the responsibility of the provinces to initiate proposals or discussions in regard to access roads?

Mr. Hamilton (Qu'Appelle):

I was going to deal with this question of policy with regard to another hon. member and I hope that when I come to his question he will pardon me for answering it at this time, because an inference could be drawn from what was said here in the remarks of two or three hon. members that it was the responsibility of the federal government to initiate proposals to the provincial governments as to which roads should be built. Exactly the opposite is the case.

Supply-Northern Affairs

The resources of the provinces belong to the provinces. They are constitutionally theirs by right and they should be theirs. In view of the responsibility of the provinces we would think it in very bad taste to suggest, and to embarrass any provinces by suggesting, certain roads. We leave it to them to recommend certain roads to us. If hon. members read my remarks to the standing committee they will see I said something along this line, that we do have the opportunity, when they propose a program to us, to point out what our philosophy is on the opening up of new resource areas. Sometimes, in the light of that discussion, the provincial governments do adjust their thinking to some degree. I do not believe there are any instances where we have forced our opinion on any provincial government. It has been done in the form of discussion, and if the proposal does not meet our criteria, then the matter is dropped. I would say in all honesty we have tried to get the provinces to see our side of the question, how we are trying to open up resource areas.

Mr. Hardier On what is the philosophy

based?