Hon. J. G. GARDINER (Minister of Agriculture) :

Mr. Speaker, the position respecting the shipping space for cattle which are now being fed in the province of Ontario is pretty much this. The demand for ocean space for cattle exports to the United Kingdom markets is developing beyond the capacity of the boats now plying between Canadian and British ports, with all boats fitted for the trade and in service now preparing to carry capacity loads. In view of this situation, which has developed during recent weeks, the possibilities of securing additional space for the cattle industry have been thoroughly explored by the dominion government, and it is fully expected that further accommodation for export cattle will be made available.

The chief difficulty is a shortage of hold and package freights, without which boats with accommodation suitable for cattle transportation would incur heavy financial losses on every eastbound crossing. That is to say, there is very little wheat for shipment this year due to the small crop of last year, and for that reason there is very little freight to go into

Feeding oj Western Cattle

the holds of boats, which would make possible a carriage of cattle at the usual rates. Under these circumstances, even guarantees given steamship companies for capacity cattle loads are not in themselves sufficient inducement to bring additional boats into the service. It is quite clear that additional space for cattle is contingent upon the securing of a minimum volume of hold and package freights. The Department of Agriculture and the Department of Trade and Commerce have this matter clearly in mind and are actively engaged in attempting to find a solution.

The steamship companies are anxious to cooperate and have indicated their desire to assist in every way possible. In other words, the steamship companies are quite willing to carry additional cattle, but realize that the carrying of cattle is directly dependent upon securing other cargoes. The opening of navigation on the St. Lawrence will improve all freight movements. An indication of the steamship companies' desire to cooperate is shown in the fact that they have already effected changes whereby additional space has been made available in the boats now in the service.

At present no cattle boats are unloading at the port of London and the possibilities of the receiving of cattle at that port are being thoroughly canvassed. The position is somewhat complicated by the fact that boats unloading at that port are carrying for the most part bacon that is being shipped from Canada to Great Britain, and the placing of cattle upon those boats would necessitate holding the boats over for from twelve to twenty-four hours in the port of London before unloading. It is not considered advisable, therefore, to put cattle on these boats, and thus hold up the unloading of the bacon.

During 1937 exports of cattle to the United Kingdom totalled 9,610 head. The capacity of the boats now in service to United Kingdom ports will accommodate 46,000 head during 1938. That space has all been booked up for the year. Only 46,000 head can be shipped with the space now available.

I think, Mr. Speaker, that members of the house will realize something of the difficulties when I say that in the previous year, that is two years ago, there were some 6,000 head shipped; in the following year somewhere between 36,000 and 40,000 head, and last year 9,610 head were shipped. This year there is a demand immediately for the shipment of probably some 20,000 head of cattle in addition to what there is space for. The fact that there are such variations in the demands made on shipping space between Canada and Great Britain has considerable to do with the present situation.

As to the figures quoted with regard to the number of cattle brought down from the west, I think it will be found on close examination that only about 20,000 head of these being fed in the section of the country immediately concerned were actually shipped under the assisted passage scheme. Others were brought down partly because of encouragement given to shippers to go west. I am told, and we have had investigation made in the countries concerned, that the great majority of the cattle that are creating difficulties because of the prices paid are not cattle that came out of the immediate drought area but are cattle that came off the large ranges, and for which farmers paid a considerable price. Their agents who went west purchased the cattle and brought them down. Most of the cattle that passed through the Carberry pasturage were purchased at prices that make it still possible for the farmer probably to break even, even if he cannot do any better at the moment, and of course any future advance in prices would be to his advantage.

Mr. BENNETT:

What is the matter with the American market?

Mr. GARDINER:

I am not in a position to give details with regard to that, but I know that there was a considerable number of cattle moved out of western Canada and out of the western states into the feeding areas of the United States where corn was plentiful, and those cattle would be coming on to the American market about this time.

Hon. C. H. CAHAN (St. Lawrence-St. George):

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe), in relation to Bill No. 22 respecting the registration of shop cards by labour unions, which was introduced by the Secretary of State (Mr. Rinfret) and is, I understand, a government measure, whether it would not be possible to have the opinion of the Department of Justice before the bill is further proceeded with, as to whether, if passed, it is intra vires of this parliament. I had considerable experience with a similar proposal at the time the Unfair Competition Act, 1932, was passed. It was then proposed that a similar provision should be inserted in that bill, and when the bill was before the banking and commerce committee all the lawyers who appeared before it were, I think, unanimous in their opinion that the provision was

Foreign Policy

ultra vires of the parliament of Canada. I think it would be expedient that we should have an opinion from the Department of Justice as to whether it is intra vires of this parliament, before we proceed with the bill or report it out of committee of the whole. If the Minister of Justice could deem it possible to accede to that suggestion, I think it would be very helpful to us.

Right Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice):

Mr. Speaker, I shall be pleased to do what my hon. friend has just asked.

Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the recent statements made by the Prime Minister of Great Britain expressing non-confidence in the League of Nations and foreshadowing a concordat with fascist Italy, has the government of Canada been consulted regarding changes in policy; and, if so, has approval been given by the government?

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

Mr. Speaker, my hon.

friend was kind enough to advise me of his intention to ask this question, and I am therefore in a position to give him an answer immediately, but before doing so I should like to bring his attention and that of other hon. members to the rule of this house with respect to how questions are to be put and answered. Standing order 44 reads:

Questions may be placed on the order paper seeking information from ministers of the crown relating to public affairs; and to other members, relating to any bill, motion, or other public matter connected with the business of the house, in which such members may be concerned; but in putting any such question or in replying to the same no argument or opinion is to be offered, nor any facts stated, except so far as may be necessary to explain the same. And in answering any such question the matter to which the same refers shall not be debated.

I would direct attention also to the citation from May, which appears in paragraph 349 on page 113 of Beauchesne's Parliamentary Rules and Forms:

The purpose of a question is to obtain information and not to supply it to the house. A question may not contain statements of facts unless they be necessary to make the question intelligible and can be authenticated; nor should a question contain arguments, inferences, imputations, epithets or controversial or ironical expressions.

Now may I read my hon. friend's question:

In view of the recent statements made by the Prime Minister of Great Britain expressing non-confidence in the League of Nations and foreshadowing a concordat with fascist Italy, has the government of Canada been consulted regarding changes in policy, and if so, has approval been given by the government?

It was I think unnecessary for my hon. friend in asking his question to say that the statements recently made by the Prime Minister of Great Britain expressed " nonconfidence in the League of Nations and foreshadowed a concordat with fascist Italy." It was not necessary to have inserted those words, and according to the rule of the house I have quoted, those words should not have been included. Also:

Has the government of Canada been consulted regarding changes in policy?

Those words " changes in policy " also raise a controversial question and are not necessary for the information which the hon. member seeks.

Yesterday I was reluctantly obliged to draw attention to a question asked by another hon. member and to point out that it was not a proper question to ask. While the government is most anxious to give the house all the information possible on matters of public interest, it should I think, be recognized that we have to be particularly careful at this time not to ask in this house questions, with respect to what happens in the parliaments of other parts of the British empire or parliaments of any country anywhere, in a form which will be misunderstood and will occasion embarrassment or resentment there or elsewhere. The question should be put in a form which will permit of a direct answer being given thereto. If my hon. friends' question is, " in view of recent statements by the Prime Minister of Great Britain, has the government been consulted regarding policy with reference thereto, and if so has approval been given by the government?"-I believe that covers what he wishes to know-my answer would be, no, the government has not been consulted with regard to the policies referred to, nor has the government expressed any opinion with reference thereto.

Mr. J. R. MacNICOL (Davenport):

On February 17 I asked the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) a question with reference to a letter-I shall now have to be careful in referring to another government-which had

Diversion oj Water

been read the day before in Washington to the United States congress, and which was written by the premier of Ontario, with reference to diversion of waters from the great lakes. I am sure that if the Prime Minister of Canada read the letter of the premier of Ontario he would be astonished at its contents. In replying to my question the Prime Minister said he would this week give the house a white paper containing full particulars of all the correspondence between this government and the Ontario government with regard to the matter which was brought up at Washington. It has not come down yet. May I ask when it will be tabled?

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

I am glad that the hon. member has asked me that question, because at the time I answered the question to which he has referred I fully expected that the white paper would be ready to lay on the table this week. It is possible that it will be ready to lay on the table on Monday; I think I can promise my hon. friend that it will be ready at that time. It is a larger document than was anticipated, and it is being translated and printed in French as well as English; I should like if possible to table it in both languages at the same time.

While we are referring to this matter, may I inform the house that I have delayed going on with the second reading of the export of power bill until the house had before it these various communications, as I believe the house will wish to have that material available for reference in the course of debate. If the correspondence is tabled on Monday I shall hope to proceed with the second reading of the power export bill on Tuesday, unless there is some objection. If there should be desire for a longer delay I would take it up a little later on.

Mr. MacNICOL:

Would it be possible to include in the white paper the remarkable letter that the premier of Ontario sent to Washington?

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

The white paper -I think it ought to be called the white book-is being presented in book form, and I fear that to do what the hon. member asks would involve the opening of the forms and repaging. But what I shall do, if it will meet the hon. member's wishes, is to table with the white book a copy of that particular correspondence.

fMr. MacNkwl.J