July 22, 1960


John Andrew W. Drysdale

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drysdale:

When the Olympic committee has found out the Banff site is inadequate, I wonder if the hon. member would be prepared to support Canada's number one site, Garibaldi, in British Columbia?


Arthur Smith

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Smith (Calgary South):

The hon. member for Vancouver-


John Andrew W. Drysdale

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drysdale:


Supply-Northern Affairs


Arthur Smith

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Smith (Calgary South):

-has provided me with the opportunity for reminding him that a year ago Banff was selected as Canada's site for the 1964 winter Olympic games, and I have no doubt it will be confirmed in 1968. If it is not I would be happy to support any site selected for Canada.


Hédard-J. Robichaud


Mr. Robichaud:

Mr. Chairman, the remarks I intend to make on the first item of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources will be brief. First of all I want to join with the minister and hon. members who preceded me in expressing my regret for the recent illness of our colleague, the hon. member for Mackenzie River, and wish him a very prompt and complete re covery.


Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear.


Hédard-J. Robichaud


Mr. Robichaud:

The minister in his remarks expressed his appreciation for the loyalty and devotion of the employees of the department, and here again I want to join with him and express my appreciation for the loyalty and the devotion of the employees of the department, both in Ottawa and in the field. We understand the difficulties encountered by those employees who are called upon to work in the northern and isolated regions of this country. We know that they require exceptional courage and devotion and we feel that those employees should receive the full protection of the department.

May I be permitted to make a brief reference to the unfortunate incident which was referred to in this house this afternoon by the Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys where two female employees of his department who were lost while working for the department in the Great Bear lake area. The information which we have is that the plane which was supposed to bring supplies to those girls flew in on July 4, again on July 12 and on July 20. Not only was the plane unable to establish contact but the pilot reported that he had not discovered any sign of human life.

I think we should be told as to when the department was informed of the lack of any sign of life in the area. Reports are circulating that there has been negligence somewhere, that the department was not informed immediately and it was only after the second or third flight that attempts were made to search for those missing employees. I urge the minister of northern affairs to take every precaution at this time so that the employees of his department will not be called upon to suffer due to lack of care and precaution.

In the course of the minister's remarks he referred to the total amount to be voted for

Supply-Northern Affairs the administration of his department for the fiscal year 1960-61. He mentioned that there is this year a decrease of $10 million, and he further stated that this decrease was mainly due to the completion of several major projects. This is an admission by the minister that most of those major projects were initiated by the previous administration and have now been completed, and notwithstanding his great vision the minister has been unable to replace this work with new projects, thus providing the employment so badly needed at this time.

The minister also referred to the northern administration branch of his department, and there again he stated that there was this year in the present estimates now under study a decrease of $4 million, and that this was accounted for mainly by the completion of several major projects. There again he admitted in an indirect way that those projects had been initiated by the previous administration and are now completed.

The minister also made reference to last year's meetings and the report of the committee on mines, forests and waters. We know that that committee made a number of recommendations to the department and to the government, and we would like to know before the estimates of the minister pass how many of those recommendations have been implemented. It is not enough that recommendations should be made. These recommendations must be implemented by action.

The minister has referred to the new activities of his department. We all welcome the announcement he made with reference to the conference on resources of tomorrow which in co-operation with the provinces will be held in Montreal in October, 1961, and I know that all Canadians are looking forward to practical suggestions emerging from this conference.

In referring to the roads to resources program, the minister expressed the hope that the province of Quebec may soon join with the other provinces to share in this program. I know that here again every Canadian will welcome the province of Quebec sharing in this program of roads to resources.

Here, Mr. Chairman, may I refer briefly to a request which is of major interest to my own constituency? I believe that in recent months a request was made by the province of New Brunswick for approval under this roads to resources program of the construction of a bridge to link Shippegan island to Miscou island. On the basis of the correspondence tabled in this house during the present session, I realize that the request made by the province of New Brunswick was somewhat weak and on this basis

the minister turned down the application. But I would like to remind the minister that the reason why the construction of this bridge is desired to serve the population of Miscou island is to develop industry. The entire population of the island is presently employed in fishing operations, but we have on Miscou island one of the largest peat beds in eastern Canada and if a bridge were constructed to link Miscou island to Shippegan island the peat bogs of Miscou island could be developed and a new industry would be introduced capable of employing between 150 and 200 people I understand that the purpose of this roads to resources program is to further the development of industry, so I urge the minister to take a new look at this request and give it favourable consideration.

I could not fail to notice that the reference made by the minister in the course of his remarks to the new oil regulations and oil developments were somewhat limited. It was an approach altogether different from that contained in the statements made by the minister only a few months ago. In fact, he failed to mention in any detail this question of oil and gas development. I wonder if this was because he is embarrassed by some of his previous statements made both inside and outside this chamber; I wonder if the minister is not, perhaps, now even more confused than the people he has been confusing by his extraordinary statements in the past about oil and gas exploration and development?

I have here an article which appeared in the Moose Jaw Times-Herald. of October 30, 1959 and it is entitled: "Low Cost Production of Oil in North, Hamilton Urges". I will read part of this report:

Low cost oil production in the north is in the interest of both government and the oil industry, resources minister Alvin Hamilton said today in outlining special considerations that may be given to northern oil explorers.

"We feel that early development of northern oil and gas resources is a major key to northern development and of importance for our national economy/' Mr. Hamilton told a meeting of the Canadian petroleum association.

But low production costs were vital to allow the investor to show a profit and to permit the government to encourage development and thus swell its revenues. Mr. Hamilton said government policy is to protect the public interest and encourage oil development. "If we do not adopt policies to achieve low cost oil, then it appears likely that northern oil cannot be marketed within the next few years," the minister said.

I think the minister should tell this committee what new policies have been introduced by the government or by his department to achieve this low cost oil which he was talking about in Moose Jaw on October 30, 1959.

I also have here an article which appeared on the editorial page of the Albertan dated January 13, 1960 and it has for title: "Mr. Hamilton's 'Low Cost' Oil". I will read one paragraph of this report:

We don't wish to appear as though we are in any way against Arctic oil development. It is a most important matter for the future development of Canada. But until Mr. Hamilton can come out of the clouds long enough to spell out in detail the secrets of his wonderful plan for low cost Arctic oil, we believe he would be well advised to stop talking about it and to refrain from casting aspersions on the methods, successfully proven, by which other governments have solved certain basic problems.

In referring to the reduction of the estimates of his department, the minister did not make any reference to the increase in the cost of departmental administration. As shown in item 265, this amounts to $120,322 more than last year, and I would like the minister to tell the committee why in 1959 there were two economists employed in his department whereas in 1960 three are employed. Perhaps the minister could also tell us why he now has 21 administrative officers as compared with 18 in 1959, and also why he has eight purchasing agents as compared with six in 1959, in the light of the fact that the capital expenditures of his department are this year being reduced by over $10 million. There is no doubt that this great vision of the Prime Minister's which was so strongly supported by the minister of northern affairs is now gradually fading away.

The minister, addressing the business papers editors association here in Ottawa on January 22, 1960, said, and here again I wish to put on record three points which were mentioned by the minister on that occasion; I am quoting from an article in the the Ottawa Citizen of January 22, 1960 which reads as follows:

Mr. Hamilton said there are three ways in which costs can be reduced:

1- Elimination of waste, by both government agencies and private companies, through the highest possible level of technical and administrative efficiency.

The increase in the expenditure on the administration of his department certainly does not correspond with the suggestion made by the minister of that time. The report continues:

2- Effective public investment in the form of roads, airfields, harbours, communications, town-sites and other public services.

3- New ideas by governments, research institutions, companies, consulting engineers, universities and individuals.

I think the minister should tell us what is being done toward reaching the aims which he was outlining in that address to the business papers editors association in Ottawa on January 22.

Supply-Northern Affairs

I should also like the minister to inform the committee what the situation is with reference to the Pine Point railway. I have here an article from the Edmonton Journal of June 16, 1960, entitled "Peace River MP Says Outlook for Pine Point Railway Good", which reads in part as follows:

G. W. Baldwin, M.P. for Peace River, in a wire to the Journal Thursday said, "There is every reason to believe the federal government will authorize construction of the Pine Point railway soon after the Manning commission report has been considered."

Mr. Baldwin was commenting on a report Wednesday which said "there have been indications that the government may not proceed with construction of the railway link, since the emphasis on mineral exploration has shifted to northern Quebec areas more easily accessible."

In view of the more recent recommendation which was made by members of the Northwest Territories council following the tabling of the report of the Manning royal commission I think the minister should make a definite statement as to the intention of the government with regard to the construction of this railway. We know that the report has been tabled and that it is rather confused. The recommendations have created confusion. This committee and the country have a right to know what will be done by the government with respect to this railway which has been promised.

In his remarks would the minister also offer some clarification with respect to a statement he made as reported in the Windsor Star on February 13, 1958, in a Canadian Press release reading as follows:

According to an editorial in the Globe and Mail of February 14, 1958, resources minister Hamilton stated that his department was considering a road from the Keno Hill mining area in the Yukon to the mouth of the Mackenzie, and another connecting the mineral rich Great Slave lake area with the Arctic.

The program would mean jobs for "hundreds of thousands of Canadians" and would open the way for investment "by Canadian and foreign investors of hundreds of millions of dollars."

Here again we have an example of the vision at work. I hope that before the minister's estimates are passed we will have definite information from the hon. gentleman with respect to these two roads. I will resume my seat now and ask specific questions later on individual items.


Richard Russell Southam

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Southam:

Mr. Chairman, in rising to speak on the estimates of the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources I should like to join with those hon. members who have expressed sincere regret at the illness of our fellow colleague, the hon. member for Mackenzie River. I have sat here on various occasions and listened to the valuable contributions the hon. member has made


Supply-Northern Affairs to our debates, especially those relating to the subject of northern affairs and national resources.

I also wish to take this opportunity of expressing my congratulations to the minister and to his hard-working officials for the very effective work that is being carried on in this department. My constituency is in the neighbourhood of that of the minister in the province of Saskatchewan, and feeling that I am a kindred spirit I take a particular interest in the work he carries on. The minister heads a busy department with a heavy work load and the hon. gentleman is doing a highly effective job with the assistance of his officials.

I was surprised at the shallow, empty and carping criticism advanced by the hon. members for Nickel Belt and Gloucester in relation to the minister and his department, and particularly with respect to the roads to resources program. Perhaps this stems back to the negative attitude hon. members in that party have taken over the years. I think back to the time of William Lyon Mackenzie when we were planning the development of our great country through bringing in the railway. We did that difficult job despite much adverse criticism from the Liberals, but it proved to hasten the development of Canada and has been a lasting benefit to the nation. It has brought Canada the reputation it now enjoys as the bread basket of the world. Now, approximately 100 years later, we have a similar government in office and the minister of this department has a far-reaching vision to develop our great northland. The remarks of hon. gentlemen to whom I have referred can be viewed only as empty criticism.

Last autumn a representative from one of the leading newspapers of the old country came to Canada to examine the Canadian parliamentary system and the work of the ministry. This correspondent spoke highly of all our cabinet ministers but he singled out one in particular. I refer to the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. The correspondent praised him for his vision and the far-reaching leadership he was giving to Canada through the introduction of a great policy for the development of natural resources.

I wish to direct the attention of hon. members of the committee to one of Canada's most important industries, the tourist industry. The attention of hon. members has been directed to this subject on a number of occasions by various hon. members, but particularly by the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources. It was mentioned again this evening by the hon. gentleman when he spoke

of planning for the future. Other hon. gentlemen who have made worth-while contributions on this subject this session include the late hon. member for Niagara Falls, the hon. member for Inverness-Richmond and the hon. member for Calgary South. I believe that my colleague, the hon. member for Nanaimo, also made a contribution in this respect not too long ago in this chamber.

I ask the committee to bear with me for a few moments while I attempt to put the tourist industry in perspective again by bringing hon. gentlemen up to date on some statistics. I have in my hand the proceedings of the standing committee of the other place on tourist traffic dated Wednesday, June 10, 1959. The chairman of the committee was the Hon. R. B. Horner. The witnesses called on that occasion were Mr. E. A. Cote, assistant deputy minister of northern affairs and national resources; Colonel James McAvity, president, Canadian tourist association; Mr. John Fisher, executive director, Canadian tourist association; Mr. Allan Field, director, Canadian government travel bureau, and Dr. J. Lawson Mackel, director of public relations, joint board of Ontario travel associations.

I will read a brief excerpt or two from the evidence in order to present these recent statistics which I believe are of interest. Mr. Cote said:

I do not think there is any need to remind hon. Senators that the travel bureau was established in 1934 as a result of the activities of a committee established by the Senate. A moving spirit in this was the late Senator Dennis from Nova Scotia. In that first year, 25 years ago, the bureau's budget for nine months was somewhat modest, being $100,000. Twenty five years later the budget looks a good deal healthier. It is $2.3 million.

In 1934 travel, as far as Canada was concerned, was an export which amounted to, according to the dominion bureau of statistics figures, $106 million. Today it is reckoned by the same bureau that travel as a Canadian export amounts to $352 million.

The latest figures of the dominion bureau of statistics indicate that this sum has increased to $393 million. I continue:

This is the third highest single export by Canada. While these figures show good progress it is not the whole picture. Last year there was a drop of 3 per cent in the travel export figure, a drop of $11 million.

Mr. Cote went on to say:

That much less money has been spent by Americans in Canada. There was much more money indeed spent by Canadians abroad. There was a $30 million increase last year. In 1948 Canada was reported to have obtained 43 per cent of the money spent by Americans abroad, which amounted to $631 million. If Canada obtained such a high amount at that time it was due to the lack of facilities in war-torn Europe. They could not accommodate tourists. The moment European facilities opened and the moment United States and other carriers increased their activities to Europe, then the unprecedented high percentage of Canada's share of the American tourist trade dropped, so

that today out of a total of 1.6 billion United States dollars spent on foreign travel, Canada obtains 22 per cent. This is obviously inevitable but it does not mean by the same token that we should not strive to obtain more United States dollars in Canada.

This is, I think, a very salient factor and pretty well sums up in toto the whole evidence that comes out of this report, the fact that we have to compete for our tourist traffic. As I have just read, in the war years Canada did not have so much competition but now other countries of the world are realizing the value of this export of tourism.

I might say in passing that in my travels across Canada-and I have also had the opportunity of travelling over quite a large area of the United States-I feel that Canada is a veritable gem so far as tourist attraction is concerned. It is something that we have taken for granted and as a result we are now beginning to find it is costing a little money; therefore, we should take a very serious look at the situation. I should like to give a few more statistics to put in perspective just how unfortunate it is. I hold in my hand "Canada 1959". The following description appears on the fly leaf:

The official handbook of present conditions and recent progress. Prepared in the Canada Year Book section, information services division, dominion bureau of statistics, Ottawa.

I think the figures are authentic and enlightening. It refers to Canada's visitor industry and says:

Tourist travel has become one of Canada's major industries. It is the third ranking source of export income, surpassed only by newsprint and wheat, and has grown to such an extent over the past two decades that the standard of living of every Canadian is affected to some extent by the progress it makes each year. The typical dollar from tourism has a primary distribution as follows: between 31 and 32 cents of each dollar is spent on food and beverages; over 23 cents for lodging and 16 cents for transportation; 7 cents of the travel dollar is spent on handicrafts and souvenirs; 12 cents for other merchandise and about 10 cents for other miscellaneous items. This income is then redistributed through all channels of commerce and taxation in the country. Gasoline taxes, for instance, paid by visiting motorists help build more and better highways, while income derived from fish and game licences does its share in conserving those resources. Because of its tremendous returns, the competition in the field of travel is intense and Canada is today faced with the stiffest international rivalry yet encountered, as European countries and Canada's North and South American neighbours vie for visitors. To stimulate travel to Canada, the federal government and the 10 provincial governments each maintain an active bureau, backed by the transportation companies and by regional and local private interests.

There are a great many more statistics here but I do not want to trouble the committee with them. I wanted, as I say, to put this on the record to bring it into perspective. I hold in my hand the Canada Year Book for 1959 and I should like to read what it says

Supply-Northern Affairs about national parks, how effective and important they are in the national tourist picture:

From 1885, when the first national park was established around the mineral hot springs at Banff, Alberta, until 1958, 18 areas covering more than 29,000 square miles have been established as national parks.

These parks are maintained by the federal government for the protection of their flora, fauna and natural phenomena, for the preservation of their scenic beauty and interest and, in some, the marking of their historical significance in the building of the nation. They are supervised by the national parks branch, Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources and are developed and maintained in such a manner as to provide perpetual inspiration, education and healthful recreation for present and future generations.

The national parks are Canada's greatest single tourist attraction. Accommodation in privately owned hotels, cabins, chalets, lodges and cottages is available and modern cabins have been built in several of the parks by the national parks administration to afford low rental accommodation for park visitors. Recreational facilities include equipped camp grounds, some with trailer prrk facilities; golf courses in superb scenic settings; tennis courts; bowling greens; well equipped children's playgrounds; athletic fields; horseshoe pitches; outdoor checker-boards; and, in some of the parks, heated outdoor swimming pools with dressing room buildings, and amphitheatres where plays, concerts and film shows are held in the open. For winter sports there are downhill and slalom ski courses, ski jumps, ski tows, and, at Banff, a chair lift.

It goes on to give further statistics. I should like to mention for the record a few of the parks that exist in Canada. We have 18 national parks: four of these are in Alberta, four in British Columbia and, I might say in passing, only one in Saskatchewan. I do this to focus your attention, Mr. Chairman, on the fact that Saskatchewan has only one park. In a few moments I shall deal further with that particular aspect of it. There are a total of 14 historic parks in Canada, and Saskatchewan has one of those, in Prince Albert, four miles south of the city. Originally it was an R.C.M.P. post built in 1876.

There are a total of approximately 310 provincial parks in Canada. Of these British Columbia has the largest number, 137; Ontario comes second with 115; Alberta is third with 37; and Saskatchewan has only 10 provincial parks. This brings me to the point where I should like to suggest to the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources the urgent need of further recreational and park development in my province of Saskatchewan. The increased revenue from this developed resource would greatly assist in eliminating the industrial lag in that area of Canada. In passing, may I say I noticed a little article in the Saskatchewan News, which reads as follows:

If you're at all interested in tourism, and about this time of the year who isn't, you'll like a little

Supply-Northern Affairs

gem the Canadian tourist association managed to dig up. It goes like this: attract an extra 24 tourists every day of the year and you'll have the equivalent of a manufacturing plant with an annual payroll of $100,000.

Now, play with the figures for a while the way a good statistician should. See what you get-240 tourists, one million dollars-2,400 tourists, ten million dollars. Get the idea? Tourism is big business.

When you start to think in terms of a multimillion dollar industry, it's not hard to see why Saskatchewan is conducting a vigorous campaign to attract the attention of out of province guests and you begin to realize some of the advantages of holidaying at home. For, according to provincial travel bureau director, a tourist is anyone who travels away from home for pleasure.

It goes on to say here that the:

-travel bureau points out, people are just beginning to realize there is more to "Cinderella" Saskatchewan than wheat stocks and gopher holes.

The fact is, the entire continent, even Saskatchewan herself has just awakened to the undeniable truth that her foot fits the gilded tourist slipper just as about as neatly as you can get.

I fully realize how much importance the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources puts on the tourist business and its relation to the national parks. In a memorandum sent out on March 16, 1960 he phrased it better than I could, and I should like to quote:

The world has a "population explosion" problem on its hands. The 18 national parks of Canada have a problem of the "exploding metropolis''.

As our cities grow and industries grow, they cut progressively deeper into those natural areas which form an important part of the recreational life of many thousands of Canadians. But the demand for outdoor recreational facilities is also sharply growing, with the result that parklands outside cities are now being used by a greater number of Canadians than ever before in our history.

With few recreational parks across Canada to serve the growing public need, inevitably our national parks have become the major centres of attraction for larger numbers of Canadians every year seeking relaxation through healthy outdoor recreation. But visitors often forget that these beautiful areas exist for other important purposes as well. In fact, the parks were founded as "nature sanctuaries"-to be protected as such for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations of Canada.

This, Mr. Chairman, brings me to a subject that is near and dear to my heart, that is my home constituency of Moose Mountain. The name "Moose Mountain" was arrived at to describe this beautiful parkland area in the north, central section of that constituency. I might say there is an elevated area there, about 500 to 700 feet in height and with an average width of about 12 miles and 20 miles in length. In this beautiful parkland area there are a number of lakes, perhaps 10 or 11 of major size, three of which are of particular interest. These three are known as Kenosee, White Bear lake or what is commonly called Carlyle, and the third is Cannington. I might

say that the provincial government has developed an extensive provincial park known as Moose Mountain park in the Kenosee lake area.

In discussing the problem of park development with the authorities we find that today there is such an intense demand in every section of Canada, in every section of each province for parks to be developed that our treasury departments and departments of natural resources are more or less overcome by these demands. They have not the money available to meet the accelerated demands of the public for recreational facilities.

This demand is only a natural result of the higher standard of living enjoyed today, the shorter hours of work; all these things create an increased demand for recreational facilities. If we do not provide them at home, our people will go elsewhere to find them because today they have the economic ability to travel farther afield in pursuit of these recreational facilities. I believe that we will have to take a second look at this situation where possible. As I mentioned a moment ago, Moose Mountain provincial park area is catering to a great many people. We find people coming in from the United States.

I might mention for the benefit of my colleagues that the reason I am so interested in this particular area is its significant geographical location. Moose Mountain park is only 40 or 50 miles from the United States boundary. I might say in that particular section of the United States, the northern section of North Dakota, the eastern side of Montana and the western side of Minnesota, there are no parklands for a long distance. As a result the people of the United States in that area have been commuting back and forth into Saskatchewan and up into the Moose Mountain area. This has resulted in the overcrowding of the facilities there. There is a very strong demand, even from our friends to the south, for the accelerated development of this park area. The people in southern Saskatchewan, our own Canadian citizens who have the same desire for recreational facilities, are making a strong demand for the development of this area.

I have quite a brief in my file right now urging strong support for the development of the area, and I believe the minister is familiar with it. There is a very strong demand for this, even from the constituents of Assiniboia to the west and Qu'Appelle to the north. I know that we cannot have a national park in every area, but when we can have a beautiful woodland area in what is known as a prairie grassland plain, it does appear to me to present a strong argument for further development. I feel that we could get some support from the provincial government. I

have discussed the matter with the provincial minister of natural resources, and he has indicated a willingness to co-operate but he has admitted they have not the financial resources to meet the cost of development.

I might mention, too, that Saskatchewan has only one national park while Alberta has four and British Columbia has four. I think we should take a look at this plan and balance up the economic possibilities against the cost, balance up the fact that Saskatchewan is basically an agricultural province against the fact that the development of this national park would help the tourist industry. We are very pleased, of course, with the response and the action our department of northern affairs has taken in connection with our roads to resources program. I feel that this will go a long way in helping the development of Saskatchewan from an economic point of view because it will increase our economy through the development of other than agricultural resources.

In passing I should not overlook the fact that in the Moose Mountain area we have a large Indian reservation which is a federal responsibility. We, as a government, have been giving a great deal of consideration to the welfare of our first Canadians. We are being widely acclaimed for this in my own constituency. I fully believe that the development of a national park there would also improve the economic condition of the Indians on the reservation. In thinking of my visits to Banff national park, where they also have Indians close by. They are always a source of great interest to the tourists. The Indians take part in Indian dances, rodeos, and there is a museum situated close to the park boundary. The Indians exhibit their handicraft, leatherwork and beadwork, which also attracts the tourists. This is quite a development in conjunction with the national park. I think the same sort of development should be considered in conjunction with the Moose Mountain park.

I hope that these few remarks will bring these matters to the attention of the minister and that the department will give consideration to them. I think, as I said before, that the whole tourist industry is becoming so important to Canada I would go along with the suggestion of the hon. member for Nanaimo that we should seriously consider the establishment of a department of tourism in conjunction with the department of northern affairs. I was very pleased at the practical look which our government took at the lumber and timber industry which resulted in the opening up of a department of forestry, thus taking some of the responsibility off the shoulders of our hard-working minister. I think the tourist industry is becoming so

Supply-Northern Affairs important we should consider the possibility of establishing a tourism branch, thus bringing to culmination the prosperity of this great tourist industry, which is now the third ranking industry in Canada.


Harold Edward Winch

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. Winch:

Mr. Chairman, we have listened to a most interesting discourse from the minister when introducing his estimates. He ran the gamut from northern visions, geographically speaking, in the land of the aurora borealis, to the vision of the north end of a bear going south with his posterior painted red. This was undoubtedly an interesting gamut and an interesting vision. I am not going to speak about the land of the aurora borealis or bears with their rear ends painted red. I leave those subjects to those who know more about them than I do.

The main feature I want to ask information on at the present time is, of course, the question of the minister's attitude on the future of that area in British Columbia on the lower mainland known as Garibaldi park. We have heard and read a good deal of recent weeks and months of an offer being made to the federal authorities to take this area over as a national park. Questions have been asked of the minister upon several occasions by those of us who represent the lower mainland of British Columbia. Up till now at least we have been told that there is nothing official because there has not been anything official from the province of British Columbia. At least that was the last information that was received when questions were asked on orders of the day.

Personally I am rather ashamed of the way in which this matter has been handled- as I understand it, at least, from the press- by those who should be responsible officials in the government of British Columbia. I think they have been absolutely irresponsible, from all my information, in the fact that they do all their talking in the press or to the press-and there is nothing wrong in doing that-but do not say anything of a specific nature so as to bring this matter to a head so that we know just what is going on and whether or not British Columbia is sincere.

As far as all of us from British Columbia are concerned, irrespective of party, we are sincere in our belief that Garibaldi park, if developed, would make an excellent site for the winter Olympics in 1968. From our understanding and knowledge of that area we are also sincere in our belief that, if developed, it would undoubtedly be one of the greatest tourist attractions all the year round in this section of our country and in the western area of this continent. I say it would be an all year round attraction because it is not only attractive from the viewpoint of skiing but it has one of the finest Alpine gardens-that is a


Supply-Northern Affairs natural Alpine garden-in the world and it would be attractive from every point of view.

However, I am not trying to sell Garibaldi park to the minister just because I come from British Columbia. I think the time has arrived for a definite statement from the minister as to what he needs from British Columbia on this project; whether there is anything official; and, if not, just what he requires as the minister in charge of northern affairs and national resources in order to be able to give consideration to the development of Garibaldi park as a national park.

A few moments ago I mentioned the irresponsibility of those who are now running the province of British Columbia. The other day I read in the Vancouver Province a report under date of July 5, 1960. The article was headed "Garibaldi Action up to Ottawa". The article is dated at Victoria and it states as follows:

Nobody here has offered in writing to turn Garibaldi park over to the federal government- and nobody intends to do so.

Recreation minister Earle Westwood made it clear Monday that he is not writing to confirm the verbal offer Premier Bennett made at Squamish recently.

The premier said then that if Ottawa will promise to develop Garibaldi to winter Olympic standards by 1968, B.C. will turn it over for a federal park.

Mr. Westwood said Monday that the next government move is up to Ottawa. He said that the premier arranged-

I would ask you to take note of this, Mr. Chairman.

-that the Squamish board of trade would make the offer to Ottawa through William Payne, M.P.

"We expect that Ottawa will then write us, setting out in writing what it is prepared to do in the park," Mr. Westwood explained. "If it meets our suggestions we will then turn it over."

In 20 years in the provincial legislature and seven years in this House of Commons I have never heard or read of anything quite so fantastic as is the situation we have here where a cabinet minister in British Columbia will state that the premier of British Columbia had arranged that the Squamish board of trade would have a federal member of parliament make an offer to Ottawa to turn over Garibaldi park as a federal park and that then, that having been done-whether or not it has been done, I do not know-it is up to Ottawa to say what they intend to do about it.

As I say, Mr. Chairman, it is the most fantastic method of handling a matter of this nature that I have ever heard of.

I should like to ask the minister whether that is the way in which this matter is being handled, whether he has heard from the Squamish board of trade or whether the local member has now conveyed to him the official desire of British Columbia that Garibaldi park

be taken over as a national park. If so, will he state what were the terms conveyed by the Squamish board of trade or the local member to him as to the requirements of British Columbia and whether or not, if this has been done, he has now notified the premier of British Columbia or the Squamish board of trade of the conditions upon which he will take over this park.

I have put the matter this way because to me this is the most fantastic and ridiculous situation I ever heard of in connection with a serious matter or a serious proposition. If that is the way in which the provincial government is dealing with this matter I think it is time the minister here in Ottawa made a forthright and definite statement as to the interest and attitude of the government at Ottawa and on what is necessary if consideration is to be given to Garibaldi park being turned over as a national park, and the basis upon which his department would be interested in taking that action.

May I add to what I was saying a few moments ago, Mr. Chairman, that to my mind it is one of the greatest potential developments in British Columbia. Garibaldi park now, of course, can be reached only by expert hikers or by helicopter. I have gone over it a number of times by air. Without doubt it has one of the greatest potentials of any section of North America. If developed, it is just about two hours or two and a half hours by car from the lower mainland of British Columbia which contains over half the population of British Columbia. In addition, add on two or three more hours, and within five to six hours you have 1.5 million population in the state of Washington just south of the border interested in all year round attractions, recreation and development.

I have to speak somewhat up in the air because we do not know exactly what the proposition is from the government of British Columbia. I understand that the minister this past year has been in, shall I say, a little bit of turmoil in trying to arrive at a policy across Canada whereby more attention and development can be given to our national parks so that they are to a considerable extent placed on a self-sustaining basis.

I have read enough to know that he may have been up against some difficulties in this regard, but I want to say, personally speaking, that if the minister is interested and will take action if he gets the necessary confirmation from British Columbia to develop Garibaldi as a national park, he need not be disturbed by the fact there may be criticism from the rest of Canada because it would require somewhere in the neighbourhood of about $28 million to $30 million

to put it into operation and provide the proper facilities for the winter Olympics of 1968. I am absolutely convinced, having lived nearly all my life in the city of Vancouver, the the expenditure will be worth while, and I believe that the people of the lower mainland who would patronize that area to a great extent would not have any objection to certain reasonable charges being made on the basis, not of a recovery of capital expenditure but to maintain the recovery of the operating cost of national parks in their utilization throughout the year.

I believe that is a good fundamental basis upon which to operate. I want to stress that because I can understand criticism coming from hon. members in other provinces if a heavy expenditure was made of a capital nature on Garibaldi if it were just done on the basis of doing something for only six weeks in 1968. I want to assure hon. members that such will not be the case if Garibaldi is developed. It would be something on an all year round basis and one of the greatest attractions in western Canada, and I am certain we would all agree to a policy whereby annual operating costs were a charge on those who use the park and benefited from its recreational facilities and its own natural beauty.

I will not say any more, but I hope the air will be somewhat cleared when the minister replies to all the questions and suggestions which have been made and that he will state what he knows the situation to be, whether he has heard officially from British Columbia, and whether, if he is put in the position to make any definite recommendations to the cabinet for the development of this area, he is able to say what expenditure of capital moneys is required.


Charles Ronald McKay Granger


Mr. Granger:

Mr. Chairman, as hon. members know, my riding includes Labrador, one of the great northern areas of Canada. That is why I have such particular interest in the estimates of the minister's department, and why I have always been interested in the northern vision.

I am not one to scoff at vision. I believe quite literally what the scripture says, that where there is no vision, a people perish. But I do think that I should criticize, if I may, what I may think to be a limited vision or a narrow vision, and my chief criticism of the northern vision is that it is not beamed wide enough. It does seem to me as if the beam heads northwest and fails to take in the northeastern part of Canada, and I do not think it is fair that a large section of the north should apparently be left out of plans for northern development.

Supply*-Northern Affairs

Labrador is a great Canadian treasure house. In recent years particularly, its wealth has been recognized, but it is still to a large extent an unknown land. Labrador has been very fortunate in this respect, that the premier of the province of Newfoundland sensed long ago the need for Labrador's development and the development which is taking place there now is a fulfilment of Premier Smallwood's vision. For developments are taking place in this land which even now is largely unknown and which not too log ago was almost completely unknown.

I would like to mention the hydro power development at Twin Falls on the Hamilton river by the British Newfoundland Corporation and the transmission line being built to the iron ore deposits in the Carol lake and lake Wabush area. In the former we have the Iron Ore Company of Canada and its associates even now developing iron ore mines, and in the latter the Pickands Mather Company and its associates are planning mining development. The time will come when not only the iron ore of Labrador will mean much to the Canadian economy, but the almost limitless power of the Hamilton river may supply power outside the confines of Labrador.

In addition to iron ore and water power there is last, but by no means least, the great resources of the waters off the coast of Labrador. The Labrador fisheries have for many years provided a livelihood for many people and are nowadays becoming of increasing importance, and I venture to say that before very long these fisheries will be absolutely vital to Canada.

But Labrador-and this is where I would invite the minister's especial attention-is so vast and has such potential wealth that it is obvious, at least to me, that a road building program is needed there. It seems to me equally obvious that only an agency like the federal government can build the roads which Labrador needs; a road from Goose Bay to the iron ore area and on down to Seven Islands. I might say that the town and seaport of Seven Islands itself, although not in the province of Newfoundland, has undergone rapid growth and expansion and this affects the Canadian economy in general. The growth of Seven Islands has been largely due to the development of the north. The time will come when I believe it will be plain to everyone that federal roads in Labrador are a necessity. Sometimes too much time can be lost waiting for development. It is often wise to do the planning now in readiness for what the future may require. I would like to see roads not only in the interior of Labrador but along the coast. As a secondary item,

Supply-Northern Affairs tourism in Labrador will undoubtedly add much to the tourist intake in dollars in Canada.

If I may speak of tourism for a moment I should like to point out something which I know is not new. The car ferry operating in Newfoundland, the William Carson, is proving to be very successful but it cannot handle the traffic that is offered. Sooner or later another car ferry operating from the east coast of Newfoundland will be required if the tourist possibilities of the island are to be realized. I do not overlook for future development a linkage of the road system of the mainland with the road system on the island by a causeway or tunnel or ferry across the straits of Belle Isle. Of course, some of these things must wait for future development, but the beginning of roads to known resources in Labrador is something which should not be delayed and I would ask the minister to keep in mind the development of Labrador by provision of federal roads there.

In concluding these brief remarks I should like to make a suggestion that the minister might consider in connection with the original inhabitants of what is now Newfoundland, the Beothic Indians who unfortunately ar.e today extinct. These early inhabitants have disappeared. The last survivor, Mary Marsh, died years ago, and I should like the minister to consider whether it would not be appropriate in connection with historic sites and monuments to provide a monument in an appropriate place to the last of this tragic race.


Robert Simpson MacLellan

Progressive Conservative

Mr. MacLellan:

Mr. Chairman, the fact that this is the third occasion in the period of a little over two years since I first entered this house in which I have arisen to deal specifically with the development of Fortress Louisburg, illustrates the vital importance which I attach to this subject. I should like to thank the minister of northern affairs very sincerely for the interest he and his department have shown in Louisburg since our first conversations concerning it in 1958 and would like to express my appreciation to the Cape Breton associated boards of trade and to the people of Louisburg for their representations to the minister on behalf of the development of Louisburg as a prime historic site.

The general interest in Fortress Louisburg as one of the foremost historic monuments of this continent was aptly demonstrated at the bicentenary of the final siege of Louisburg on July 27, 1958 when some 40,000 people visited the old fortress to remember for a moment one of the most outstanding chapters in Canada's history. Indeed, the interest of not only Canadian, but also of American

tourists is shown by the increased registration at the museum every year. Last year, for example, there was a 25 per cent increase in visitors over 1957-58.

At present at Louisburg there is a good museum which displays many of the exhibits and mementos of the days when Louisburg was a thriving, self-sufficient, French community, and in particular an excellent scale reproduction of the old fortress town, showing the location of the various gates in the fort, the moat and private and public buildings.

As a result of the minister's interest in a long range development plan to show Louisburg as it should be shown he sent Mr. Russell Harper, an outstanding archaeologist, to Louisburg in 1959. Mr. Harper and his wife both worked very diligently, with the labour which comes from keen personal interest, and made a comprehensive and very useful report to the minister. It is noteworthy that Mr. Harper, before commencing his work at the site, devoted some time in the French archives at Paris to studying some of the old documents and maps of the fortress and harbour which are preserved there, and also checked the information available in our Canadian archives. I very much hope that Mr. Harper will be able to return again to continue some of the excellent archaeological work of last summer.

There can be no question in anyone's mind that Louisburg is a prime landmark of the chapter of strife between England and France out of which this nation was born. It was built by Louis XIV at so great a cost that it is said he expected to see the spires of Louisburg rising in the western sky from his palace in France. It was the only completely walled city in North America, and as the guardian of the gulf of the St. Lawrence, was the foremost sentinel of France in North America. After Louisburg had fallen in 1758 it was possible to lay siege to Quebec in 1759, and no chapter of Canadian history is complete without the pages devoted to the battles and diplomacy that swirled about Louisburg.

The interest of the New England people in Louisburg can be quickly understood from the fact that there are buried there many young men of the expeditionary force of four thousand that successfully lay siege to the town in 1745, augmented by eight warships. I think that it should be impressed upon all young Canadians that Canada's future was determined on the 27th of July, 1758 when men who were enemies at the dawn joined together at sunset to lay the foundations of this great British and French nation.

Apart altogether from its historic importance, and from the very obvious necessity

of its being developed on that score, I would like to point out that an investment by the minister in Louisburg would be of paramount economic importance to my constituency and indeed to all of Nova Scotia. Over the past three years our tourist industry has grown at an unprecedented rate.

However, one of the difficulties we encounter in Cape Breton is that tourists, brought to the island by the magnificent scenery of Inverness county and the Cabot trail often visit the trail and then leave via Baddeck without visiting the southern part of the island. If Louisburg were built into the tremendous tourist attraction which it has the potential to become it would serve to bring tourists from Baddeck, after visiting the Cabot trail, to Cape Breton and Richmond counties. Indeed, I hope some day that the traffic to the fortress of Louisburg will be such that a major highway can be built along the south shore of Cape Breton and Richmond counties through Gabarouse, Framboise, Grand River and L'Ardoise to St. Peters, so that tourists could make a circular drive around Cape Breton island and have a chance to see the very beautiful scenery on the Atlantic coast of Cape Breton and Richmond counties.

In these days when the government is making a special effort to find a solution to the unemployment that has arisen as a result of the headlong plunge into automation by Canadian industry in its effort to meet world trade competition I would suggest that there could be no better means of providing employment for jobless persons than in expediting development of some of our national parks and historic monuments.

Work on the Louisburg fortress, for example, would have to be done almost entirely by hand as the use of machines could very well destroy valuable mementos and relics that it would be necessary to preserve. A large scale plan for redevelopment of the fortress would also coincide very well with the need for employment for persons engaged in seasonal industry. In the Louisburg area the prime employment is in fishing. The fishermen very badly need some ancillary form of employment which they can turn to after the lobster season is over, and in the fall of the year when seas are too rough to permit safe sailing. There are many men available for work of this type after the fishing season, and I would most heartily commend to the minister an immediate program at Louisburg to develop it into a foremost Canadian tourist attraction and as a by-product, to provide much needed employment in the area.

The possibilities for development at Louisburg are limitless. The old cobblestone streets


Supply-Northern Affairs covered with earth and rubble should be cleared so that tourists can walk upon the same ground as did some of the first Canadian settlers. A typical dwelling of the period should be restored and possibly one of the public buildings such as the chapel. The original altar of the old French chapel is still on the island of Cape Breton and in use in a church not far from Louisburg. I also think the King's garden should be restored with the original flowers and a large scale model of the fort and town should be constructed so that visitors who come to Louisburg can see the story of this town portrayed in a graphic and dramatic manner.

I know that the minister has studied very carefully the brief of the associated boards of trade which I had the honour to present to him on behalf of the people of Cape Breton island last year. It contains very many excellent practical suggestions for the restoration of Louisburg. I again commend it to his attention and submit that for purposes of providing employment, and for the development of our vital, expanding, tourist industry, and for the preservation of Canada's most important historic landmark a major redevelopment program should be instituted at fortress Louisburg as soon as possible.


John Whitney Pickersgill


Mr. Pickersgill:

Mr. Chairman, would the hon. member permit a question?


Robert Simpson MacLellan

Progressive Conservative

Mr. MacLellan:



John Whitney Pickersgill


Mr. Pickersgill:

I listened attentively to what the hon. member said. I wonder if the hon. gentleman would tell us if automation has now taken the place of the Liberal inheritance in the Tory mythology of the explanations of unemployment?


Robert Simpson MacLellan

Progressive Conservative

Mr. MacLellan:

Mr. Chairman, I would say that perhaps one of the chief reasons for unemployment at the moment, is the rampant inflation that the Liberals allowed in this nation after the last war.


Douglas Mason Fisher

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. Fisher:

Mr. Chairman, I wish to take the minister to task for something rather petty to start off with. In his remarks the minister referred to the committee on mines, forests and waters as not being a political committee. I wish to say in general terms that I would like to see the hon. gentleman and other ministers drop the habit of using the word "political" in a dirty sense. What is the matter with being political? How are we going to get the game of politics to become something meaningful and something of which we can be proud if ministers are going to roar around saying that to be political is dirty and unclean. The minister was loud in his praise of the committee because he thought it was not a political committee. This is a petty point but since the minister tends


Supply-Northern Affairs to be one of the idealists on the Conservative front benches I wish he would make the elevation of the words "politics" and "political" part of his credo.

The report the minister made indicates that the department has moved toward meeting the recommendations of the committee that reviewed the department rather fully last year. He indicated especially that the department was taking action with reference to two branches, the tourist bureau and the forestry branch and the provision for expansion there. We welcome both moves, as the minister knows, especially in relation to forestry.

After spending a day in the travel bureau watching the system they have built up of tracing and developing contracts by direct mail I was very much impressed by the almost scientific means the bureau now has for determining the kind of advertising that is effective in drawing people. With all respect to those hon. members who are anxious to have more travel bureau offices located in the United States, my own conclusion after looking at the system thoroughly was that perhaps a more effective return for the money would be in making sure that the travel bureau and more money for its direct mail contacts that follow newspaper, magazine and television advertising, especially magazine advertising. The system of punch card sorting the bureau has is so intriguing in the results it brings forward that I only wish it could be applied to more aspects of the government service.

The minister is very proud of the conservation conference which is now called resources for tomorrow. I want to know why it is being held in Montreal? Montreal does not strike me as being a particularly good location. I can think of others such as Toronto or Winnipeg which seem to me to offer a more natural location in view of the leading role of the federal government is playing in this conference.

I also wish to know from the minister more details about the preliminaries to the conference. We have so many conferences, conventions and panels that one grows sceptical about them. I understand that the largest conference held here in recent years was the one on education. I have yet to meet anyone who took part in that conference who was not dissatisfied with it because there were too many meetings, too many papers and too little opportunity to get an over-all point of view.

I want more details on how the conference planning group will bring the major problems into focus. Is it planned to have some of the preliminary papers printed and publicized several months in advance in order to give

the people attending the conference some introductory information to enable them to play a vital role? The minister has stressed that the conference will deal with the multiple use concept. That is a phrase something like the phrases "sustained yield" or "integrated management" or "conservation of resources". It sounds very good and most people would accept it but I want to know how the concept will be approached by this particular conference.

The reason I am so sceptical is that we have had conservation conferences in Canada before. We had a rather mighty one back before 1920 as a result of which all kinds of books were published. You can find them on some old library shelves. They went into such things as forest fire losses, the danger from bugs, the need of research, and these are things which I suspect will come up again.

I want to know from the minister how this conference is going to be planned in order to get the maximum amount of co-operation and value out of it. We do not want this to be one of those conferences where a bunch of experts get together and dazzle each other with their particular science and the whole thing fades away. I want to know what the goals of the conference will be and what is going to be achieved at the end of the conference. Conferences to me are somewhat suspect these days unless we know fairly certainly that something will come out of the meetings.

Another reason I am suspicious about conferences is just because the minister has indicated that the co-operation from the provinces looks pretty rosy. If the minister's servants have reached the stage where they have all of the provinces co-operating beautifully for this resources program I suspect it must be a pretty bland conference because there are enough differences in outlook and lags in approach in the various provinces to make one wonder if we are not going to get something of great mediocrity.

I do not want to push criticism of the conference too far. I feel that some good could come out of it but I also entertain some suspicion in my mind about it because of the rather grandiose way the minister proclaimed it without giving too much in the way of detail as to how it will be worked out. Since he has had his corps of experts going on this for several months, I should like to know a bit more about it. I should like to know the kind of papers that are going to be prepared. Are they going to be largely scientific; are they going to be popular papers? Is there going to be an aspect of the conference designed for the popular person, or the person

who must have a popularized approach? These are all things I think we need to know about.

Another point I wanted to mention to the minister was that he began his remarks with a very praiseworthy reference to all his civil servants. I wish some day we would get the minister to stand up here and tell us just what he finds wrong not with particular civil servants but with the civil servants that work under him. The suspicion that many of us had in the committee last year, and one of the reasons why its recommendations were so extensive, were that many of the minister's advisers, while they were quite beautiful workers and went by the book, were strongly lacking in imagination. I should like to get from the minister some examples to show that there was some imagination on the part of his officials. I know when I look at the incident of the Rousseau case I wonder about the imagination of some of the senior officials. I should like to get from him some examples of how these civil servants of his are really kicking through with the imaginative leadership. I know some of them are quite good at dreaming up propaganda, because I have in front of me here an advertisement that appeared in the Powell River Digester last year. It is done in colour and is entitled:

Look to the North! By Hon. Alvin Hamilton.

It has a very nice picture of the minister over in the corner and a majestic shot of the Laurentian shield in colour with the focus upon the Northwest Territories and that grand domain where the minister is operating. Let me tell you what makes me skeptical. I want to read the last paragraph of this particular presentation. I think it makes the point. I imagine this is by the minister with some advice from those great civil servants of his. It says:

The time-honoured means of transportation by rail is also to add its quickening influence to the development of the north. The federal government's decision that a railway connection is to be extended to the south shore of Great Slave lake is another good omen for the early opening of a new and exciting chapter in the economic development of Canada's last frontier.

This magazine was published well over a year ago. Judging by the time it takes to produce a blurb like this, it seems to me the minister must have written this late in 1958, almost two years ago. Just listen to this:

-a new and exciting chapter in the economic development of Canada's last frontier.

We wonder about the pace of this development. Another point that interests me is that over two years ago the minister rapped United States control of Canadian mineral resources and especially Canadian iron ore.


Supply-Northern Affairs I am reading from an article in the Montreal Gazette of April 15, 1958. It says:

Hon. Alvin Hamilton, head of northern affairs and national resources, told the annual dinner meeting of the Canadian institute of mining and metallurgy at the Queen Elizabeth hotel that this "outside control" presented the great difference in the ore and finished products industries.

One of the significant things that we heard when the Wabush railway bill was before the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines was that less than $1 in the way of royalty was going to Newfoundland and to Labrador from each ton of ore that poured out of that particular area, while the value of that ore was much higher than that. This would tend to support the argument that for some reason United States control of these particular resources as it works through provincial authorities leads to an inadequate return to the people who own the resources. In view of the ringing speech that the minister made two years ago I should like to hear from him what progress has been made in making the shift. I know in his speech he referred to the new regulations that had been provided in so far as oil is concerned. I have a copy of them here. I believe they were published in the Canada Gazette. I also have some of the Canada mining regulations that were promulgated recently.

While foreign capital is going to have more encouragement to explore, when it comes to the exploitation stage Canadians are going to be protected. Is there any possibility of any of this being done on a retroactive basis? Is there any possibility that the minister and his officials might be able to do something in going around and talking to some of the provinces that have sold so much of their natural resources birthright with no particular return?

If the minister is going to be the great Messiah in the natural resources field, bringing Canadian resources into control and exploitation of Canadians, the place to start is not only in his own particular bailiwick but in offering leadership to the provinces. I should like very much to know whether this resources for tomorrow conference is going to have this on its agenda? Is the resources for tomorrow conference going to consider this question of foreign control of our natural resources, not only for the future but what they control at the present time?

The minister promises to table returns. He indicates that he does not expect to get into the particular jackpot that he did last year when he told us, that as Premier Frost had finished his electoral campaign he could go ahead and give us the information. The agreement with Ontario has been signed. When we


Supply-Northern Affairs get to that part of the estimates will he tell us in detail just what progress has been made?

I want to repeat the question on which I have had some correspondence with the minister. I refer to the particular matter of using the resources funds to develop the connecting link between highways 11 and 17 over the lake Superior north shore watershed, somewhere in the area of Manitou-wadge, roughly between Hornepayne and Hearst, down through Manitouwadge to White River or to Marathon. The minister's last communication to me was to the effect that this road location project had been approved but no furher word of it had been received from the provincial government. I should like to get from the minister at that particular stage of his estimates some information as to how the provinces are responding to this particular program. I should like to know whether Ontario is taking up the full limit of the money that is available under the $15 million program?

The picnic sites grant on the trans-Canada highway is also very interesting; but I under-tand it is just a 50-50 split of $2 million, or the federal government pays up to $2 million. I suppose the provincial governments put up the other $2 million, which make a total of $4 million. The division is going to be on the total mileage of the highway. I should like the minister to give us some idea of the total mileage of that highway. If it is as long as I expect it is in thousands of miles, that $4 million is going to be broken down to a pretty small figure. I could become very enthusiastic about these picnic sites, especially if there were a crash program to do something in the area north from Sault Ste Marie to Marathon. However, the figures seem rather pitiful when we consider the length of the highway.

The water resources branch was very thoroughly investigated by the committee chaired by the hon. member for Comox-Alberni. I do not want to touch on that at all except to ask the minister what part his conference next year is going to play in connection with the question of water pollution. There were no details about that in his speech that I recall, and it seems to me this is one of the areas of crying and nagging concern. We can look at the cesspool outside our door or the one in Hamilton harbour; we can see what they have done in Montreal. We have great problems even in an area such as my own. I think one of the most imaginative things Premier Frost has done has been the establishment of his water resources board and the projection of this very large expenditure of over a billion

dollars in the future to ensure that the urban communities in Ontario have adequate water resources. How much money is the federal government going to put up to help provinces such as Ontario with a program such as this? Is there any liaison at all? Have there been any requests, and what does Ontario want in this particular field? Is this going to be one of the central focal points of the conference?

We are told that our water is becoming so valuable that ultimately we may have tremendous projects to pipe water from the Hudson bay watershed down into the great lakes system in order to provide the United States with water. Actually water can become one of the biggest sale assets to the United States, if this evaluation of the problem is as bad as it seems to be, and if there seems to be a lowering of the water tables across much of North America where there is heavy urban development. It seems to me this should be a very important, almost a contentious point in a conservation conference. I should like to hear from the minister what part pollution is going to play in this particular conference.

The minister gave an indication that the national parks program is going along well and that there is increased usage of these parks. I should like to know whether it would be possible for the federal government to play any larger role in connection with Quetico park. We in the central part of Canada are not very lucky or fortunate in so far as federal national parks are concerned. If there is any possibility of the federal government negotiating with the provinces in connection with any area such as Quetico I think it would be very much to the good. The provincial government again has been doing quite well in its spending on parks, but in our particular region the federal government makes almost no contribution. You have to drive, I suppose, all the way to Manitoba, and well into Manitoba to find a federal park.

The minister gave us some figures in connection with oil exploration. Evidently there were priority bids for some 140 million acres. Now there are actual permit holders with licences to explore in some 45 million acres. I sometimes wish the minister would give those figures in square miles, which would bring it down to something of the proportions that we can understand. I consider that there are in the northwest some 500,000 square miles. I think we would get a much better sense of proportion if we had the figure in square miles rather than in these

grand figures of acres. Acres of moose pasture do not mean a thing, whereas square miles puts it in better perspective.

In connection with the northern part of the minister's statement I should like to read him something that I clipped from the Journal of last year wherein Dr. Maxwell Dunbar of McGill University, an expert on northern living, said that Canada's northern workers were pampered and spoiled. The article reads:

Dr. Maxwell Dunbar, a McGill University expert on northern living, says Canada's northern workers are pampered, spoiled and over-protected.

Far from being the dedicated, happy band of pioneers they are popularly pictured, Dr. Dunbar said Tuesday, most northern communities are "unhappy, torn by petty jealousy, boredom and over-developed egos."

They are this way, he told a meeting of the national federation of financial analysts societies, because companies interested in northern development don't hire the right sort of people.

Dr. Dunbar later went on to say that suitable men could be attracted by the "high moral standard" which used to characterize northern living; quiet, modest people with senses of humour, cynical rather than overoptimistic and without illusions about their strengths and weaknesses. I wonder if the minister has consulted this expert on northern living. The reason I ask is that conversations with a friend of mine, whose name I cannot reveal but I would not mind telling the minister privately, seem to confirm much of the information contained in this clipping. She made a tour of this area last year and indicated that this kind of judgment was a fairly sound one and that, indeed, the northern workers were rather pampered and spoiled and that, far from being dedicated, they were rather unhappy and bored. Indeed, this criticism is a reflection of the kind of development that is taking place in the north. I heard a gentleman over the C.B.C. radio about six weeks ago from British Columbia giving exactly the same analysis. It seems to me that this is a very real problem in relation to the tremendous optimism of the vision that the minister is always preaching. Is it possible that the very over-optimism of people like the minister may create the very boredom and unhappiness?

My views on this are not substantiated particularly, but they are supported somewhat from reading this book I have here called "The Canadian Northwest: Its Potentialities". It is a symposium presented to the Royal Society of Canada and those men who did the various parts are all very distinguished in their fields. I can give the minister a sample of their kind of thinking, which I would suggest indicates that perhaps he has been somewhat over-optimistic. I am reading this paragraph from the section called

Supply-Northern Affairs "Assesment by a Geographer", written by William C. Wonders, professor of geography, University of Alberta. The last paragraph


In conclusion, if we are serious in our oft-stated support of such a policy, we must be prepared to pay for it. Eventually the north may carry itself but we cannot expect this immediately. In 1953-54 the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources was constituted to demonstrate our increasing interest in the north. A capable, efficient organization exists to effect such policy. Yet since the formation of this department, it never has received as much as 1 per cent of the federal budget. For the fiscal year ending March 31, 1957, it received $37 million, or 0.8 per cent of the total, and less than half of this was for northern purposes! At this rate we can hardly discharge our present responsibility in the north, let alone realize the fulfilment of its promise.

The minister has given some indication that spending in his department has gone up. I should like to know how much expenditures for the north are expanding in relation to the total Canadian budget. Are we up above the 1 per cent mark yet? One of the last articles in this particular book is one written by a man by the name of D. B. Turner and it is called "The Resources Future". He has the interesting argument that the development of the north will be a rather temporary one. He argues that a century from now there will be no more people in the north than there seem to be at the present time. He argues that the potentialities in terms of various agricultural soils are not enough to support a large population, that the climate is against a large population or a larger population and that the only interest in the north-that is, the economic one; there are no cultural reasons that he can particularly see-would be the exportation of mineral resources.

This interest is I think the rather obvious one and the minister has geared his northern administration to move in this direction. But the question I keep hearing from the people in my own particular region is this. Why is this government so intent on the north and the northwest when we have closer at hand so many mineral resources that are not exploited at the present time? Here again is a subject with which I should like to see this conservation conference deal. This is a question of priority in exploitation. If we have copper mines that are not even functioning in northern Ontario; if we have base metal resources in northern Manitoba that we are not even touching; if we have huge iron ore deposits along the southern fringe of the shield, what priority should we give to mineral resources in the north?

I cannot give any answers to the minister but I would suggest that here again a priority schedule or a discussion of a priority schedule


Supply-Northern Affairs of development will be of fundamental importance to this conservation conference. I can think of it in these terms because I think we have to go into it in these terms inasmuch as the minister has indicated what this government is going to spend in the north in order to lay the groundwork for private development.

Private development,-that is private risk capital, as I understand it-because of great government expenditures in the north, may go in there to develop it; and yet it is perfectly arguable, in the light of our resources and proper economics, that that particular capital might be much better spent or much better directed into resource development in the southern fringe of Canada's shield. One cannot be too dogmatic about anything like this but it is a matter that I should like to see considered by this conservation conference.

In concluding my remarks may I say that I should like to hear from the minister about his claim for the littoral, in so far as the regulations are concerned. I should like to know whether he has yet heard from any of the provincial organizations. I should like to have a bit of elaboration on what the continental shelf means to him and what distance is involved. If there was a discovery of oil, say, out in James bay, in the relatively shallow waters, who would have the right to exploit that oil say within the 10-mile mark or the 12-mile mark, in terms of jurisdiction? Are these new regulations an indication that the provinces have rescinded their rights in this particular field or is there something to be worked out? I do not think this is a great matter but it could be a contentious one. I should like to say that our particular view is that we are glad to see the federal government make this particular claim.

In conclusion I should like to thank the minister for the pleasant treatment I have had from him, his executive assistant and most of his officials. I have always insisted to many members of this House of Commons that the Minister of Northern Affairs and National Resources, is one of the most underrated ministers in the cabinet. I should like to say that, in my opinion, if there is any member in the cabinet who stands out in terms of sincerity, he is that minister. While I can find a great deal to criticize about his administration, I think he deserves at least that expression of opinion at the conclusion of what have been largely critical remarks.


Armand Dumas


Mr. Dumas:

The minister devoted some part of his remarks to this important national undertaking, namely the conservation conference which is to be held in October of 1961. We were told by the minister that in 1958 and 1959 meetings were organized with

representatives of the various provinces and that the provinces had shown their desire to do everything they could for conservation. It was decided that this national conference would be limited to renewable resources. I think that is fair enough because even at that it will cover a large part of our natural resources including agriculture, forestry, water, wildlife and fisheries. The minister also mentioned recreation. I think those who will participate in this conference will have a great deal to do. I think this conference can be a good thing. I hope that good results will flow from the conference next fall.

Contrary to what has been said by the hon. member for Port Arthur, I think that Montreal is an ideal place in which to hold this conference. Montreal is the metropolis of a province which is rich in natural resources. We have immense forests and tremendous water power resources of which only a small part has been already harnessed. Montreal is definitely the place in which to held this conference. The availability of good hotels should recommend Montreal. Good accommodation would be an assurance in advance of the success of the conference next fall.

Another part of the minister's statement this morning covered the road to resources program. I would have hoped that the minister would say more about this program. Last year he had an extensive statement which was mostly made up of promises. This year his statement was short. Of course he repeated that this was one of the major development programs used by this government and that there was an offer by the federal government to share the cost on a 50-50 basis with the provinces to a maximum of $15 million over the length of the various agreements.

He also mentioned that agreements had been signed with all nine participating provinces, meaning that already nine provinces are participating. It will be interesting to know what amount of money has been spent to date. In the blue book for 1958-59 I notice that the government has spent $1.75 million on this program. For 1959-60, of course, we do not have the final figures. However, the blue book shows that to December 1, 1959 the government has spent $349,000 and there was an estimated amount of some $8 million to be spent during 1959-60. It would be interesting to know if this amount has been spent; I suspect it has not.

The minister told us last year that this program could not start as quickly as he would have liked. However, we can say that it is not what everybody was led to understand, that millions and millions of dollars would be spent on roads to resources. We have had lots of time for this program to



be expanded, and I notice the minister mentioned that the province of Quebec is working out with the federal government a plan to join in the roads to resources program. As early as July 9 there was an article in Le Devoir to this effect: (Translation): The Lesage administration has already approached the Diefenbaker government with regard to possible sharing in the roads to resources program and the provision of picnic and camping grounds. Such was the information being passed along the corridors of the House of Commons, yesterday, in Ottawa. (Text): I also understand that the minister has received a visit from the Quebec minister of mines, and I hope that following this visit the minister will be in a position to tell us that everything will be done by his department so that Quebec will be able to go ahead with this program of roads to resources in a very short time. Actually, in Quebec the province is building a road about 110 miles long from the town of Amos to the lake Mattagami mining area and this road should be built under this program. Unfortunately the previous government of Quebec did not want to participate in this program with the result that already some money has been spent in the construction of this road, money which should have been spent by the federal government. I sincerely hope the minister will see his way clear to let the province of Quebec take advantage of this very important program of roads to resources, especially for this road going from the town of Amos to the lake Mattagami mining area. I understand the cost of the road has been estimated at $4 million and the province of Quebec instead of coming here and trying to co-operate with this government to share 50 per cent went and constructed this road by themselves. But they were not shy to go to the mining companies and ask them to participate in the cost of this road. I already mentioned in this chamber that I was against asking the mining companies to participate in the cost of building a road of that kind, if it is a hard road leading to a definite point where you have only one mining company. The minister has already explained his department is ready to participate even in the construction of those roads on a 33 per cent basis; the provincial government would put up 33 per cent and the mining company interested would put up 33 per cent. That is all right, but in the matter of constructing a road which will be utilized by maybe 100 companies engaged in exploration and by other people interested in the lumber and pulp Business of the House industry, a road like this should be the responsibility of the provincial government and the federal government. I hope the minister will answer these questions: How much money did we spend in 1959-60? We know that in 1958-59 we spent $1.75 million on roads to resources. I would also like to know what we spent in 1959-60 and the amount the minister really expects his department will spend for the year 196061. In the estimates there is the amount of $8 million while last year it was $9 million. Of course these figures do not mean anything, because as I said before during the last fiscal year we did not spend the full amount of $9 million. Another matter in which I am interested concerns the construction of roads in Yukon and the Northwest Territories. Last year an amount of $4.1 million was spent in the Yukon and $6.9 million in the Northwest Territories. This year we are supposed to spend $3.4 million in the Yukon and $4.1 million in the Northwest Territories. This is a difference of $3.5 million, meaning that this coming year we will spend $3.5 million less. Is that because roads are not necessary or is it because the program is not such that plans are ready to construct those roads? Because I understand the government had a program of $100 million to be spent in the Yukon and Northwest Territories during the next seven years. Resolutions adopted in committee of supply this day reported and concurred in.


July 22, 1960