Legislative Assembly

the effects of this type of program and particularly as it applices to vocational train- ing were not all good. I think it is very easy, and I think we all admit that it has happened in the past. it is very easy on a cost-sharing arrangement to put the em- phasis on the wrong thing. And I am sure this was in the minds of the federal authorities when they decided to change the em phasis from assistance witsh voca- tional high school program to Universities, and I pwould like to quote Mr. ker, with your permission, the words of the Prime Minister on that occasion, “Ungthe system in effect in recent years, a province (and I think this is very true) has a stronger incentive to establish and operate an institution that can qualify under the training agreement than it would have to provide urgently required university facili- ties where there is no shared cost. ” There was evidence in the minds of the federal people that the provinces were putting the emphasis on vocational and technical training, and I am not saying there is anything wrong with this type of training, but they were putting the emphasis on this type of training in order to recover from Ottawa “X” number of dollars. As far as the population of the country was eon- cemed this population was changing from one that needed vocational and technical training to a much larger segment that needed university education. So there was a phasing-out of the vocation and technical training after the federal government had spent something like $400,000.000.00 on a program that I am sure achieved a great deal in this province and elsewhere. But like any other government. there comes a time when you take stock of your program to see whether this is the best type to develop. This phasing-out of vocational training took place and the federal govern- ment decided, according to a formula that is too difficult for me to quote or interpret to this house, to give to the province a certain lump sum of money to be used for post-secondary education which I will try to interpret in a few moments.

It was rather interesting again, Mr. Speaker, with regard to this sum of money wihch this province. and all the others have received, to quote the Prime Minister. and I take the privilege of doing that here. It is a very important quota- tion. “Provinces will be free to use the money for other purposes if they choose. Once it is in provincial hands, Ottawa cannot nor will not impose any views as to how much money should be spent on education or in what way it should be applied."

Watler R. Shaw: Do you agree that is a good thing?

Honourable Gordon L. Bennett: Well, I certainly would not disagree with the Prime Minister of Canada.

Walter R. Shaw: I just wondered what would happen in an election year? You could put the whole darn thing in roads and one thing and another to buy votes.

Honourable Gordon L. Bennett: Theoretically, that would be possible, but I have more confidence in the people on this side of the House than to do that sort of thing with $1,630,000.

Walter R. Shaw: Well after the accusations against me in the last election I haven’t too much confidence in them.

Honourable Gordon L. Bennett: You know we would not do that, Sir. L. George Dewar: Is that the full quotation by the Prime Minister Honourable Gordon L. Bennett: Well I have more I .

Walter R. Shaw: It‘s a pretty expensive document I might say, Mr. Minister, the Prime Minister gave you.

Honourable Gordon L. Bennett: Yes; yes, as a matter of fact it took us two days to .

Wlalter R. Shaw: That is one of the sections I didn’t agree with at all. I think it is a very dangerous one.

Honourable Gordon L. Bennett: I don't have the complete document, in response to the Minister from Second Prince, but this exerpt was contained in a letter that was sent out by the Canadian Teachers’ Federation, and it refers specifically to this particular part.

_432——