Mr. ILSLEY:

When my hon. friend gets to drafting a bill of rights I think he will have to desist from quite so active participation in debates in the house.

I want to say a word or two about one remark made by the hon. member for Spadina (Mr. Croll). The hon. member made a statement with which I disagree, and I wish simply to state my disagreement without giving my reasons. He said:

There are amongst us many minorities, racial, religious, economic and political minorities, who are profoundly upset at the present state of freedom in Canada. They see a growing spirit of intolerance manifesting itself in not just isolated cases here and there, but in mass action against w'hole groups.

I just wish to say that I think a better case can be made for the proposition that we are becoming more tolerant in Canada than for the proposition that we are becoming more intolerant. And without going into this matter any further, and prolonging the debate, I should just like to say there is a great deal of truth in what was said by the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell) when, in closing his remarks, he said:

You can write these things into a constitution, but putting them on paper and making them law does not preserve them. They are principles of life, and they operate as an organism operates; as life operates. This government is not going to take them from us; perhaps no one in thisliouse is going to take them from us. If you want to write them into law, all right; but that does not preserve them and it does not give them to us.

I think we ought to quit talking as if this were a country' of tyranny and despotism, where people are deprived of their liberties. This is one of the freest countries in the world. Someone has talked about our embarrassment before the united nations by reason of certain laws and regulations we have in this country. We have not any cause for embarrassment in the united nations. One does not wish to make invidious comparisons between this and other countries. But take almost any country in the world you like, and you will have a country where there is far greater and far more infraction of personal liberties, human rights and fundamental freedoms than in this Dominion of Canada.

Why is that so? Because, just as the hon. member for Macleod has said, these principles are principles of life. They operate as an organism operates, as life operates.

Those are the only observations I wish to make.

Motion (Mr. Ilsley) as amended agreed to.

Mr. G. J. McILRAITH (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Trade and Commerce) :

Mr. Speaker, when Bill No. 138, to amend the Export and Import Permits Act was before the house for second reading on April 8, amendments to the bill were indicated. Those amendments are set out in full at page 2769 of Hansard of that date.

Because of the nature and extent of the amendments proposed, some question was raised as to the regularity of the proceedings. That question as to the regularity of the proceedings is one upon which there could perhaps be considerable discussion. There seems to be very little doubt, however, that any question concerning regularity of procedure can be settled by an instruction to the committee. With the unanimous consent of the house, I would now move such an instruction.

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Has the hon. member unanimous consent?

Agreed.

Mr. McILRAITH:

I move:

That it be an instruction to the committee of the whole that they have power to amend Bill No. 138 (Letter U3 of the senate) as follows:

That clause one of the bill be deleted and the following clauses substituted therefor:

"1. Section three of the Export and Import Permits Act, chapter seventeen of the Statutes of 1947, is amended by adding thereto the following subsection:

(2) The governor in council may by order, which shall be published in the Canada Gazette within fifteen days after the passing of such order, establish a list of countries to which section five of this act shall apply, and such list may be amended by the governor in council by order so published.

2. Section five of the said act is repealed and the following substituted therefor:

'5. No person shall export or attempt to export from Canada any goods included in a list established pursuant to subsection one of section three of this act, or any goods to a country named in a list established pursuant to subsection two of such section, except under the authority of and in accordance with a permit issued under this act.'

Export and Import Permits Act

3. The said act is further amended 'by adding thereto, immediately after section six thereof, the following section:

't>A. No person shall, in any application for a permit under this act or for the purpose of procuring the issue of any permit under this act, wilfully furnish any false or misleading information or knowingly make any misrepresentation.'

4. Section seven of the said act is repealed and the following substituted therefor:

'7. The minister, or any person designated by the minister, may issue to any person applying therefor a permit to export from Canada, to such place and in such quantity and of such quality as may be specified in the permit, any of the goods included in a list established pursuant to subsection one of section three of this act or any goods to a country named in a list established pursuant to subsection two of such section and may amend, suspend or cancel any such permit'."

2. That clause two of the bill be renumbered is clause five.

Mr. J. M. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to make

a, few comments on this motion. When the minister introduced it the other night he told us, and I think properly so, that the real change being made was to be able not merely to control commodities, as the act formerly authorized, but to control destinations.

The minister made some interesting remarks indicating just why that required to be done. However I wish to read some of the remarks. I should like to carry the mind of the house back, for a minute, to the real gist of the original control, and then I want to point out what a tremendous additional power this is. It is not small; it is a great power, and we should not take it lighly. I believe we should make sure that everything has been considered before we go so far as this goes.

I should like to recall one or two things which took place at the time of the passage of the original act. It was made clear then, and I think to the satisfaction of all concerned, that there were certain commodities -I believe steel was one of them-which, because of their shortage, needed certain controls. I recall very well the illustrations given to us as to the way in which the control operated.

There would be various manufacturers in Canada competing for steel. There was not enough steel to go around, and the available quantity had to be allocated so that each manufacturer would get his required amount. It was made clear to us by competent civil servants that this had gone to considerable lengths'-and I am not criticizing them; I am only stating what we were told-that the minister's department had had to go to considerable lengths in discriminating not merely as to quantities but as to the claims of one industry against another.

One of the illustrations given to us was of a certain industry which was manufacturing here for export, which was considered probably in the nature of a war baby, and which was manufacturing something that had formerly been manufactured chiefly in Holland. It was not thought that industry was likely to be able to continue against foreign competition as time went on, and so it was considered less worthy of receiving steel than an industry in a different line of business which it was thought could continue. I mention that to make this point. It was clear that, just as soon as this power to control imports and exports was given, a wide field would be opened where the authorities had to begin to decide whether this business or that was most entitled. That legislation was passed a year ago. Now the minister comes back and asks for power, as he puts it, to control destination, and he has related that to the coming into effect of the Marshall plan. I should like to repeat briefly what the minister said. His words were:

It is apparent that the continuing world shortages, and the intensified demands that can be expected once funds are available to European countries will entail in Canada as in the United States, the need for directing supplies to those countries whose requirements are most urgent, and in such quantities as to ensure equitable distribution.

One paragraph more I want to read:

I think the committee will agree that in the early rehabilitation of Europe and the United Kingdom lies one bright hope for world peace. It is important therefore, that every shipment we send to European shores contributes directly to this purpose. There is need, however, for machinery to implement this objective, and this amendment, I believe, meets this requirement.

The thing that perplexes me as I think this over is this. I can see that there has to be some correlation, some over-all arrangement, so that the available supplies are sensibly distributed where they are needed. I ask the minister whether there is to be a combined plan in Europe whereby the European nations will agree among themselves as to the allocation of the materials available, or whether there is to be, as I saw suggested, some kind of queue in Washington of the European nations who are beneficiaries under the plan, coming there and presenting their claims and leaving the matter to be more or less haggled out. I go on to make a further point.

Mr. HOWE:

May I interrupt my hon. friend for a moment. He has asked me questions with the Speaker in the chair. Is there any objection to going into committee and putting the questions there? This is just a motion to consider instructions.

Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):

Very well.

Motion (Mr. Mcllraith) agreed to.

Export and Import Permits Act

The house resumed from Thursday, April 8, consideration in committee of Bill No. 138 to amend the Export and Import Permits Act -Mr. Howe-Mr. Macdonald (Brantford City) in the chair.

The CHAIRMAN:

The minister has an amendment to be moved.

Mr. McCANN:

I move, Mr. Chairman:

That clause one of the bill be deleted and the following clauses substituted therefor:

"1. Section three of the Export and Import Permits Act, chapter seventeen of the statutes of 1947, is amended by adding thereto the following subsection:

'(2) The governor in council may by order, which shall be published in the Canada Gazette within fifteen days after the passing of such order, establish a list of countries to which section five of this act shall apply, and such list may be amended by the governor in council by order so published.'

2. Section five of the said act is repealed and the following substituted therefor:

'5. No person shall export or attempt to export from Canada any goods included in a list established pursuant to subsection one of section three of this act, or any goods to a country named in a list established pursuant to subsection two of such section, except under the authority of and in accordance with a permit issued under this act.'

3. The said act is further amended by adding thereto, immediately after section six thereof, the following section:

'6A. No person shall, in any application for a permit under this act or for the purpose of procuring the issue of any permit under this act, wilfully furnish any false or misleading information or knowingly make any misrepresentation.'

4. Section seven of the said act is repealed and the following substituted therefor:

'7. The minister, or any person designated by the minister, may issue to any person applying therefor a permit to export from Canada, to such place and in such quantity and of such quality as may be specified in the permit, any of the goods included in a list established pursuant to subsection one of section three of this act or any goods to a country named in a list established pursuant to subsection two of such section and may amend, suspend or cancel any such permit.' "

2. That clause twro of the bill be renumbered as clause five.

Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):

The question I was asking was this, whether the European nations who are to be beneficiaries under the Marshall plan are going to arrange the distribution, or is there to be a queue of them at Washington? What bothers me is this. The minister said in effect that in order to make this thing work there must be co-ordination between the United States and Canada as the main suppliers, so that there will be a working arrangement as to

how the goods are to be sent. That is no doubt true, but what is not clear to me is why this power, and it is a tremendous power, is needed for that purpose. Perhaps I had better stop my question there and let the minister explain, because what bothers me is that this, as I see it, really puts an end to private trading in this country in respect of a wide range of commodities. We are not told now what the commodities are, but I have before me the report of the board for last year, which covers quite a range of commodities. Nor are we told which countries are to receive these goods. I would ask the minister, with his knowledge of private business, which we all know is great, to explain just where the private individual stands. Just what does this mean? Does it mean that the private firm may just as well forget any connections it has in any of the countries designated? Incidentally I would ask the minister to give us an idea whether the number of countries designated is likely to be small or very large.

I repeat, this should not be regarded as a small or incidental power, but as a very great and far-reaching power.

Mr. HOWE:

To answer the last question first, there are at present sixteen countries on the committee of European economic cooperation qualified to receive ERP aid.

Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):

Does that include any countries beyond the iron curtain?

Mr. HOWE:

No.

Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):

Roughly it includes all those west of the iron curtain?

Mr. HOWE:

Yes, except Spain. That is the situation. My hon. friend has asked whether the countries are coming to Washington to ask for goods, or whether allocations will be made in England and filled from Washington. That is a very difficult question which has not yet been decided. I am just awaiting word from Washington to go there to discuss the matter. I have been invited to be there at the appropriate time, which I assume will be within the next week or so. Private trading is very much restricted in any event in view of the credit risks and exchange difficulties in the sixteen countries we are now discussing.

Mr. MACDONNELL (Muskoka-Ontario):

But you are going to ensure this and make it possible for them to get the goods?