Mr. J. G. DIEFENBAKER (Lake Centre):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege to bring to the attention of the house a breach of the privileges of parliament by reason of the incompleteness and incorrectness of a return brought down yesterday, sessional paper No. 258, which was passed pursuant to an order of the house dated August 7, 1946.

The order in question reads as follows:

A copy of all correspondence passing between the Department of National Defence, and/or the Department of Labour, and/or the Department of Justice, and between any one or more of said departments since January, 1944, to date, in connection with the improper use of army rejection or medical discharges at Camp Borden, wherein one Arnold (also known as William Horrigan), allegedly along with one Bagley utilized army rejection or medical discharges which had been signed in, in blank, by former Major J. A. Elliott, A. 19, R.C.A.S.C.

A perusal of the documents produced yesterday shows that in spite of the fact that parliament passed the order without any qualifications that any documents should be refused, a number of the letters have been deliberately omitted and the file is in the position of having been stripped and denuded of four known letters, as well as others. The four letters which do not appear in the file are the following:

(1) A letter from Mr. Robinette, K.C., of Toronto, dated March 22, referred to in letter of March 26.

(2) Letter from Mr. Miall to Mr. Anderson, dated the 26th of March.

(3) Copy of letter, October 12, from Mr. Robinette, K.C., sent to Mr. MacNamara, the deputy minister.

(4) Letter of the deputy minister of justice to Mr. MacNamara, dated the 19th of October, 1945.

These four letters are referred to in the correspondence produced, but have not been produced.

In addition to that there is correspondence I know of which shows that the R.C.M.P. found a definite case against Arnold, Elliott and Bagley, and that there was also evidence that the fake medical rejection certificates signed by Elliott at Camp Borden with the name of the recipient left in blank were sold to various persons, one of the recipients claiming that he had paid approximately SI,300 to Bagley.

I say, sir, that when letters in the possession of the department or departments of government are deleted from the record when a return or reply is brought down to this house, it is an affront to parliament and to the privileges of parliament. Parliament is entitled to full information, not to information as selected by government officials, or as to what information government officials consider sufficient for the needs or good of parliament.

This case has odoriferous characteristics. The deletion of a major portion of the record will not down the suspicion that there were reasons why the Royal Canadian Mounted Police report recommending prosecution was departed from on the recommendations of the Deputy Minister of Labour.

What I want to know is this: Where are the rest of the documents, and when will they be produced?

Hon. IAN A. MACKENZIE (Minister of Veterans Affairs): May I say that the

Minister of National Defence, who has been engaged for two or three hours with treasury board, will be here later to-day, and will reply, effectively, as usual, to the allegations of my hon. friend.

Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):

Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to move the adjournment of the house, seconded by the hon. member for Kingston City (Mr. Kidd), under standing order 31, to discuss a definite matter of public importance, namely an order of the privy council passed as amnesty for 20,553 deserters and draft dodgers and including

14,000 deserters and absentees still at large in Canada who are declared never to have served.

The government has no power to pass an order in council such as this, over the head of

Labour Conditions

parliament while it is in session. It is ultra vires and against the provisions of the criminal code.

Mr. SPEAKER:

I have read carefully the hon. member's motion, and I do not see any urgency in it which would warrant a motion for adjournment of the house to discuss a matter of public importance. The estimates of the Minister of National Defence will be before the house, at which time the hon. member will have an opportunity to discuss the matter.

Mr. CHURCH:

Do I understand then that there will be an opportunity to raise this question on the minister's estimates or on the motion to go into supply?

Mr. SPEAKER:

Yes.

Mr. CHURCH:

It is an insult to the glorious dead of two wars.

[Later

Mr. CHURCH:

I should like to ask the Minister of National Defence to table the order in council passed yesterday, and the opinion of the Department of Justice.

Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice): The order in council was tabled yesterday.

Mr. R. R. KNIGHT (Saskatoon City):

I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce. Can the minister give the house assurance that there is sufficient wheat in Churchill to provide a full load for each of the six large ships which are there or en route? I am sorry I did not give the minister much notice of this question.

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

I received notice of the hon. member's question just before I came into the house, and I asked that inquiries be made to enable me to make a full answer. I may say, however, that my understanding is that there has been and is sufficient wheat at Churchill to load all the vessels on the way to that port. I know also that a certain amount of freight has been shipped into Churchill in the hope of exporting it to the old country via that port, but instructions have been issued that the grain shall have priority. I am making further inquiries, and if I get anything additional I shall be glad to give it to the hon. member.

Mr. KNIGHT:

For the minister's information I may say that a wire received from Churchill to-day says that they are 100,000 bushels short of the amount necessary to load these ships.

Mr. A. L. SMITH (Calgary West):

I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Labour, of which I have not given him notice, but it is really a pro forma matter. I understand a gentleman by the name of Card made a report some months ago to the minister with reference to the dispute-in Winnipeg between a newspaper and its employees. I do not think this has been made public and I would ask the minister if he will table the report.