February 10, 1942

INTERNMENTS

READING OF PETITION OF CERTAIN PERSONS INTERNED IN HULL, QUE.

CCF

Angus MacInnis

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

Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver East):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask if the petition laid on the table by the hon. member for North Battleford (Mrs. Nielsen) has been examined and found in order.

Topic:   INTERNMENTS
Subtopic:   READING OF PETITION OF CERTAIN PERSONS INTERNED IN HULL, QUE.
Permalink
LIB

Georges Parent (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. SPEAKER:

It has been laid on the table and found in order.

Topic:   INTERNMENTS
Subtopic:   READING OF PETITION OF CERTAIN PERSONS INTERNED IN HULL, QUE.
Permalink
CCF

Angus MacInnis

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

Mr. MacINNIS:

Then I suggest, now that it is in order, that the petition be read, and I so move.

Topic:   INTERNMENTS
Subtopic:   READING OF PETITION OF CERTAIN PERSONS INTERNED IN HULL, QUE.
Permalink

Motion agreed to. (The Clerk Assistant read the petition as follows): Petition to members of the House of Commons of Canada in parliament assembled, at Ottawa Ontario. Ladies and Gentlemen of the House of Commons: We the undersigned Canadians in exercising the immemorial privilege of British subjects to petition the House of Commons in parliament assembled are confident that you will honour this ancient right and practice by hearing sympathetically our representations upon a matter affecting the welfare and safety of our nation, and the liberties of its citizens. WTe humbly beg to draw to your attention the following facts and considerations: 1. That the undersigned Canadian antifascists have been arbitrarily confined, many for as long as twenty months, first in internment camps, together with fascist prisoners of war and, since August 20, 1941, in a concentration camp in Hull jail, at Hull, Quebec, though we have been opposing fascism ever since its evil birth. 2. That we have repeatedly sought to impress persons in authority with our loyalty to Canada and its democratic institutions, our unreserved support of Canada's war effort against the common enemy of our country, and of all free people, Hitlerite Germany and her allies; our abhorrence of and opposition to any and all subversive activities within our country, and our desire for release from detention in order that we may contribute our time and energies to the advancement of these purposes. To this end we have individually sworn affidavits and have dispatched petitions to the late Right Hon. Ernest Lapointe on June 27, July 1, July 14, July 31, August 7, August 9, August 15, August 22, September 3, and September 4, 1941; and to the Hon. Louis St. Laurent on December 18, 1941; and to the Prime Minister the Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King on September 10, October 1, and November 28, 1941. 3. That on November 28, 1941, we dispatched a letter to the Right Hon. W. L. Mackenzie King offering our services in the armed forces, industry or other war work, wherever we may be deemed most useful, followed by individual letters to members of the government stating each person's qualifications and making suggestions regarding his future services. 4. That at this hour of greatest strain and peril to our country it is absolutely imperative that all the Canadian people, irrespective of class, party, religion or race be banded together in unity for the supreme effort and sacrifice in the just war waged by Canada, Britain, the U.S.S.R., the United States of America and their allies for victory over fascist enemies; that in this struggle for victory lies the security of Canada, and the identity of interests of the whole nation; that united effort for maximum military operation and war production stands above all other considerations.' 5. That the continued arrest, persecution and detention of anti-fascist Canadians in concentration camps is justified neither on the grounds of national security, nor of safety of the state, but appears to be a form of persecution based on class and political prejudice, and moreover tends to create doubt, controversy and disunity to the detriment of our country's war effort. 6. That our release from detention and the restoration of our civil rights as Canadians to Wheat



participate in the armed forces and other war services will serve to strengthen public confidence that undemocratic practices are not being allowed to gain ground in our land, and that our government's war effort is truly directed toward the realization and implementation of the eight-point programme enunciated jointly by Prime Minister Churchill and President Roosevelt, and which has become the foundation of the twenty-six united nations agreement, to which our own government has declared its adherence, thus spurring forward the enthusiasm and self-sacrifice of our people in the war effort for decisive victory over the enemy in the shortest period of time. 7. That our release from detention will not only restore us to personal freedom and to our families, and enable us to contribute our abilities, labour and lives to the benefit of our country's war effort, but especially will it enable us, many of whom have considerable public influence, particularly among the workers, to assist in mobilizing the people for the greatest exertions, both in uninterrupted war production and in the armed forces, to assure and hasten the victorious conclusion of the war. 8. That we repeat our solemn pledges contained in our sworn affidavits and our petitions that upon our release all our efforts will be directed loyally, unsparingly and unswervingly to achievement of the fullest national unity for the maximum contribution in all fields of the war effort. We are resolutely and sincerely opposed to any actions which would be injurious to the unity of Canada, the security of the state and the maximum war effort. And your petitioners as in duty bound will ever pray. Therefore we humbly pray of the House of Commons, as the elected representatives of the Canadian people, in whose hands rests the sovereignty of government and the direction of national policy, you institute such measures that will restore us our liberties in the interests of the welfare of our country and its war effort in this hour of supreme test and peril.


REPORTED SALE TO UNITED STATES BUYERS FOR LATER DELIVERY


On the orders of the day:


LIB

James Angus MacKinnon (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):

Mr. Speaker, a few days ago the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley), as reported at page 128 of Hansard, quoted the following from a Winnipeg paper:

Canadian wheat is being purchased by United States buyers fo,r shipment south of the line after the opening of navigation; that warehouse receipts are being taken by the United States buyers, and that, according to reliable authorities, the wheat is being hedged in the Chicago market.

He then proceeded to ask three questions. At that time I promised to look into the matter and bring down a reply as soon as possible. I should like to reply to these questions now.

Question 1: From whom are these United States buyers securing these warehouse receipts, since it is cash wheat?

Answer: The warehouse receipts are supplied by the seller of the grain to the buyer and are the owner's title to the grain. When grain is unloaded at any terminal elevator a warehouse receipt must be issued to the owner, and only on presentation of this receipt is he entitled to gain possession of the grain that it represents.

Question 2: Why is it being hedged in Chicago?

Answer: If this grain is being hedged in Chicago, presumably it is because the owner wishes to have it hedged there. This is purely a matter for the personal judgment of the owner and it is a fairly common practice for Canadian grain to be hedged in Chicago.

Question 3: What part did the Canadian wheat board play in these trades, and is there any possibility of this wheat coming into competition with the export of other Canadian wheat to the United Kingdom?

Answer: The Canadian wheat board has no direct knowledge of these transactions as their wheat is sold to buyers on the Winnipeg grain exchange. Because the very restricted import quota for Canadian wheat allowed to enter the United States for domestic consumption is full, this wheat will presumably stay in bond in the United States, and therefore remains a part of the visible supply of Canadian wheat and can move into export channels in exactly the same way as other wheat stored by exporters in the United States or Canada.

Topic:   REPORTED SALE TO UNITED STATES BUYERS FOR LATER DELIVERY
Permalink

REPORTED INITIAL PRICE OF NINETY CENTS PER BUSHEL


On the orders of the day:


NAT

Ernest Edward Perley

National Government

Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):

I should like to direct a question to either the Minister of Agriculture or the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Has either of them any knowledge of the broadcast over United States news stations last night to the effect that following the Prime Minister's statement in this house yesterday the Canadian government had decided to set the initial price of wheat at ninety cents per bushel? Why was it announced there rather than in Canada?

Topic:   REPORTED INITIAL PRICE OF NINETY CENTS PER BUSHEL
Permalink
LIB

James Angus MacKinnon (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Hon. J. A. MacKINNON (Minister of Trade and Commerce):

I have no information on the subject.

Topic:   REPORTED INITIAL PRICE OF NINETY CENTS PER BUSHEL
Permalink

PACIFIC COUNCIL

REPRESENTATION OF CANADA ON COUNCIL TO CONCERT COMMON DEFENCE IN SOUTH PACIFIC


On the orders of the day:


NAT

Thomas Langton Church

National Government

Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask the Prime Minister a question relating to a dispatch in to-day's paper from London, England, to the effect

Pacific Council

that the Pacific council meets to-day in London. It refers also to a statement by Mr. Curtin, the Prime Minister of Australia. The Exchange Telegraph reports Mr. Curtin as having said:

That exclusion of Canada is due to the feeling that Canada's position in the Pacific is less urgent than that of the others.

The countries now represented are Great Britain, Australia, New Zealand and the Netherlands. I should like to ask the Prime Minister why Canada is not a member of this Pacific council? I am one of those who for several years past have contended that our people should know the facts about this Pacific question. They should not have to get them from dispatches from Australia and other places. As I say, Canada is as much interested in this matter as Australia, New Zealand and other dominions and allies, yet we gave nothing to the Singapore base, or to an empire shipping conference in 1937, or to the adoption of the Jellicoe report. The public of Canada want to know the real facts. If the Prime Minister cannot give the information to-day-

Topic:   PACIFIC COUNCIL
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF CANADA ON COUNCIL TO CONCERT COMMON DEFENCE IN SOUTH PACIFIC
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Order.

Topic:   PACIFIC COUNCIL
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF CANADA ON COUNCIL TO CONCERT COMMON DEFENCE IN SOUTH PACIFIC
Permalink
NAT

Thomas Langton Church

National Government

Mr. CHURCH:

Why is not Canada represented at this Pacific conference? Why did not Canada give a grant to the Singapore base? The country should know the real facts.

Topic:   PACIFIC COUNCIL
Subtopic:   REPRESENTATION OF CANADA ON COUNCIL TO CONCERT COMMON DEFENCE IN SOUTH PACIFIC
Permalink

February 10, 1942