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

That a select committee be appointed to examine the expenditure defrayed out of moneys provided by parliament for the defence services, and for other services directly connected with the war, and to report what, if any, economies consistent w'ith the execution of the policy decided by the government may be effected therein, and that notwithstanding standing order 65 the committee shall consist of twenty-four members, as follows: Messrs. Black (Cumberland), Cleaver, Donnelly, Dupuis, Edwards, Fauteux, Ferland, Gladstone, Golding, Hill. Homuth, Hurtubise, Jackman, Knowles, McGregor, Nixon, O'Neill, Picard, Pinard, Pottier, Reid, Shaw, Tripp, Winkler, -with power to send for persons, papers and records; to examine witnesses and to report from time to time to the house.

Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, before the motion is put to the house I wish to take a moment to place our position on record. As the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) proposes the constitution of the war expenditures committee, I wish to make it very clear that in so far as our party is concerned we are going to oppose the setting up of the committee. We opposed it last year and we are opposing it this year for the reason that we have felt the committee's ivork has been rendered largely unimportant because it has continuously sat in camera. That being the case, we wish to oppose the setting up of this committee. I wish to caution the government and the house by this reservation. Our members who have been named on this committee reserve their rights to refuse to sit on it if it or its subcommittees decide to sit in camera. That is the reservation which we desire to make. May I say to my hon. friend and to you, Mr. Speaker, that we feel in making this protest and by reserving our rights so far as refusing to sit on the committee if it sits in camera, we are doing something that is worth while in bringing out into the open the whole question of war expenditures in Canada. I make my position clear in connection with this at this time, so that there will be no doubt in anyone's mind as to the stand our party is taking with respect to this question.

Mr. M. J. COLDWELL (Rosetown-Biggar):

I shall take only one minute. We approve the setting up of this committee. We believe it can and does perform a useful function. We share the view that this committee should sit in public except when information concerning the security of Canada or our allies is at stake. Then we believe that the committee itself should decide to sit, not in camera, if you like, but in secret. We want to see things open to

War Expenditures-Special Committee

the public except when something affecting security arises, which I think is not likely at the present time.

Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE:

(Lethbridge): The members of our group are also heartily in favour of the setting up of the committee, but we feel also that the committee should be so managed that a large percentage of its sessions could be open. Those that should be held in camera we feel could be held in camera without doing harm to the war effort, and with no disadvantage to the country.

Mr. E. G. HANSELL (Macleod):

There is just one observation I would make in this connection. I believe that though meetings are held in camera or in secret-there seems to be some difference of opinion as to the terminology or the definition of one or the other-there is a verbatim report made of the committee's proceedings. I believe that that report should be kept in the secretary's office and accessible to all members of parliament. I believe that we could trust the members of parliament just as much as we can trust the members of tihe committee. If that were done, we would not have what we have had in the last couple of days. .

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I shall take only one moment. First of all, I would direct the attention of the hon. members to the fact that the two parties, the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation and the Social Credit party have expressed their approval of having a committee on war expenditures. The Progressive Conservative party propose to vote against the instituting of such a committee. I hope the attitudes will be clearly understood by the public. The purpose of the committee is to assist the treasury in effecting economies in war expenditures. That is the sole purpose of it, as set forth in the motion. But the Progressive Conservative party is unwilling to assist the treasury and the government in effecting economies in war expenditures.

Mr. GRAYDON:

The Prime Minister is not going to put words in my mouth again.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I am making my own statement and I have the right to make it.

Mr. GRAYDON:

Make your own statement, but do not put words in my mouth.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I am not putting any words in my hon. friend's mouth at all.

Mr. GRAYDON:

You certainly are.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

No; I am saying that the leader of the opposition has said

-I believe I am entitled to speak-that his party proposes to vote against this motion.

Mr. GRAYDON:

Right.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

The motion is for the purpose of establishing a committee to effect economies in war expenditures. To do so, the committee is free to inquire into any war expenditures that are taking place in the country. I can draw only one conclusion from that, namely that the party represented in this house by my hon. friend, the leader of the opposition, is unwilling to assist the treasury in effecting economies in war expenditures. That is the purpose of the motion. May I say that I am amazed, inasmuch as hon. members have before them the example of Westminster, and I make no apologies for citing Westminster as an example. The expenditures with respect to war at Westminster are very, very great indeed. When the members of all parties at Westminster are quite prepared to serve in assisting the treasury in effecting economies in war expenditures I can find no reason in the world why hon. members of this parliament should take a different attitude. However, in taking that different attitude they assume responsibility for the attitude which they are taking. While I may question and regret the course his party is taking I am glad that my hon. friend has made it so clear that his party is not prepared to cooperate with the government in a measure intended to effect economies and save waste in war expenditures in Canada on a motion which is identical in every particular with a motion which has been adopted year in and year out at Westminster.

Much has been said in the discussion by hon. gentlemen opposite to create the impression that the rights of private members in some way are being taken away because some matters are referred to the committee and because its members sit in camera. May I assume for a moment that there is no committee at all? The rights of private members will remain just exactly what they have been at all times in this parliament. By appointing the committee we are not taking away the rights of a single individual. What we are doing is giving to all hon. members of this house an opportunity to make inquiries into public expenditures, which they would not have but for the existence of the committee which we are establishing at the present time. That I want to have clearly understood. There is no right of an hon. member being taken away by the appointment of this committee. Every hon. member has the same right that he has always had with respect to any matter that

776 COMMONS

War Expenditures-Special Committee

should be investigated. He has the same rights to-day as he had in this parliament before the war began. But if this committee is appointed additional rights will have been given to hon. members inasmuch as there will be a committee which will be sitting in camera and which because of its sittings being in camera will be afforded an opportunity of carrying out investigations wider and broader than has ever been given to any committee in this parliament of Canada.

In regard to sitting in, camera, I am not going to repeat the arguments that I have already given. They are set out in what I have said speaking to the amendment and in what has been said by other hon. members. I should like to bring up one point, however, which has escaped attention thus far, and it is an important one. When a committee begins an investigation in public, instantly the public gets the idea that there is something wrong about the matter which is being investigated. There are, let me assume, a dozen different industrial establishments in Canada that are carrying on similar classes of business, making munitions'and other war supplies, others having to do with shipbuilding and the like. This committee-has the'power to go into all these concerns and investigate them fully, and if they find anything that is wrong they can take immediate steps to have it remedied. But every one of these concerns is surely not to be placed before the public as an institution that has been doing something contrary to the public interest and must therefore be investigated by a government committee. That would be the effect of having sittings held in public instead of in camera.

Honest firms in this country are entitled to the protection of the government when they are serving the country in a time of war. If the government were to take the position that every firm that is assisting in the war effort, conducting its business honestly, doing the best it possibly can, is to be held up for public investigation, I do not know what would become of the industrial establishments of Canada and of the reputation of our industrial leaders. Surely we have a right to begin with the assumption that men are honest, that they are not all dishonest; and being honest that they are entitled to protection until it is shown that they are doing something wrong. That is the purpose of having the proceedings conducted in the way that has been followed. I hope it will be remembered that the businesses that are being investigated are assisting in the winning of the war.

There is a further point to be kept in mind and it has been repeated over and over again

in the old country in many connections. The Prime Minister of Great Britain, Mr. Churchill himself, said to me one day, and he has said the same thing publicly: Until this war is ended, so far as the public is concerned1, do all you possibly can to have them keep their eye on the ball; and the ball that the eye has to be kept on to-day is the winning of this war, the most terrible war in the history of mankind. I say, therefore, that if you begin a series of investigations in public with respect to different war industries before you know whether any wrongdoing has been done, before you have given any chance to concerns that may have taken some steps which they should not have taken, to correct the mistakes they have made and to make amends, and do this at a time when our armies are fighting as they are at the front, and when the war effort of the united nations is at stake, you take a position that cannot possibly be defended.

Investigations by government committees attract no end of public attention. They are the sort of thing that the press naturallymakes the most of in headlines. Begin a series of investigations from now on, conducted in public, and you will have every day the papers of the country filled withsensational headlines whether there is ground for believing that there is any wrongdoing or not, and the people will be reading that sortof thing instead of paying attention to the

war effort of the country.

Mr. GRAYDON:

Do you think the Trueman committee is a bad committee?

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I am not making any comment on what is taking place in other countries, but I say to my hon. friend that when it comes to choosing between the method of carrying on parliamentary business in the United Kingdom and in the United States respectively, I prefer to follow the British practice.

Mr. GRAYDON:

That is what you did not do.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

The hour is late, Mr. Speaker, and I shall not go farther into the matter, but I wish to repeat that we are in times that are very grave indeed, much graver than hon. members have yet begun to realize, and we are heading rapidly into a situation which will be the most desperate this world has known. I say, therefore, that for any body of gentlemen to refuse to assist the government in every way they possibly can in this war effort, in effecting economies, or to ask the government to take a step which

War Expenditures-Special Committee

will confuse the public mind and divert it from the winning of the war, into an effort to win elections and make political capital-

Mr. GRAYDON:

Mr. Speaker-