Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):

I wish to lay on the table copies of order in council P.C. 6481, passed on October 11, 1945, which provides that effective from twelve o'clock noon to-day, October 12, the dominion government has taken over control of the packing plants of Bums and Company at Winnipeg, Prince Albert, Regina, Edmonton and Vancouver.

Under the order the government has appointed Mr. J. G. Taggart, chairman of the meat board, as controller of these plants. The government made this decision because it was apparent that strike action was contemplated by the employees of these plants for Monday, October 15, and in view of the grave consequences which would result from any interruption of meat shipments to Britain and *other European countries.

The reasons were explained to the management and to Mr. Fred Dowling of the united packinghouse workers of America, CI.O., and to Mr. A. R. Mosher, president of the Canadian congress of labour.

The order in council requires that the company and the union shall proceed with negotiations towards a mutually satisfactory settlement of their dispute without delay, in accordance with regulations.

In all probability deputy controllers will be appointed for each branch plant. Provision for this is made in the order.

Even if Canada succeeds in keeping up the present rate of meat exports, there is a danger of many persons dying from starvation in Europe this winter. Break-down in negotiations between employers and employees in respect to working conditions in packing plants, to the point where it means a stoppage of work, creates a national emergency which under the circumstances I think would be considered by most Canadians as little short of criminal.

I am convinced that both parties to the dispute will accept the intervention of the government and that the plants will continue to operate.

On the orders of the day:

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

Arising out of the minister's statement, may I ask a supplementary question? Were the provinces consulted in connection with the proposal he has made in the order in council? I ask the question because the minister says the provinces are involved in these matters. If the provinces were consulted, what were their replies?

Mr. MITCHELL:

Communications were addressed to the provinces, but at the moment I have no knowledge of their replies.

Mr. COLDWELL:

Has this been done without receiving their replies?

Mr. MITCHELL:

I would not like to speak from memory. Frankly I would say that in view of the gravity of the situation and in the national interest I took the responsibility of making this recommendation to the government.

Mr. HOMUTH:

Then might I interpret the minister's statement to mean that he has not received the acquiescence of the various provinces in the move he has made?

Criminal Code

Mr. MITCHELL:

I will say this to my hon. friend, that this action was taken under the War Measures Act, in the national interest. You cannot afford to fiddle while Rome is about to bum; that is the sensible way of looking at it.

Hon. HUMPHREY MITCHELL (Minister of Labour):

Mr. Speaker, during the debate on the motion to go into supply on Tuesday evening of this week, I stated, as will be noted on page 866 of Hansard, that I had been informed the 9,000 coal miners on strike in western Canada would return to work the next morning. That was the information which came to my office from Calgary.

The latest reports we have in connection with this matter are that following the decision of the district executive board at its meeting on Tuesday to recommend to the local unions a return to work, the members of the board returned to their own districts to place before the locals this recommendation. Meetings were held yesterday and to-day in various points, but no votes on the recommendation have yet been taken and it is not anticipated that these votes will be taken before Saturday or Sunday.

Although it cannot be forecast with any certainty, I am informed there is every indication that work will be resumed next Monday.

Explain.

Mr. BRYCE:

The proposed amendment

deals with appeals from summary convictions under part XV of the criminal code. The present condition of the law works great hardship and injustice in the case of convicted persons who reside and are tried in remote and outlying localities, such as some in my own and other northern constituencies. Because of communication and transportation difficulties it is physically impossible to serve and file the notice of appeal within the statutory period of thirty days. The purpose of the amendment is to give the judge of the court appealed to a wider discretion in extending the time for serving and filing notice of appeal to three months, and in fixing the particular sitting of the court at which the appeal is to be heard, as the extended time may overrun the next sitting. The amendment will thus allow residents of remote areas who feel aggrieved by a conviction to have recourse to an appeal, which reoourse now seems to be barred to them because of the transportation and communication difficulties I have mentioned. The proposed amendments are indicated by the added words underlined in the text.

Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.