May 24, 1948

PC

Gordon Graydon

Progressive Conservative

Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Peel):

Mr. Speaker, I rise to associate the Progressive Conservative party, of which I have the honour at the moment to be the acting leader, with the sentiments which have been so eloquently expressed by those who have preceded me.

I felt when I heard the news of Colonel Ralston's death that it was almost like losing a member of one's own family; for through the war years he had endeared himself to all of us who sat with him in parliament and had anything to do with his department. His courtesy, his friendliness, and, as one hon. member has said, his capacity to hold his friends, singled him out and made him one of the very great men with whom we have had the honour to associate. His courage, his brilliance, his almost indefatigable attention to every detail of the duties at hand, and his devotion to that duty, marked him in the hearts, minds and memories of all of us as one of nature's gentlemen. No greater tribute than that can one man pay to another.

On behalf of the party with which I am associated, Mr. Speaker, I join with other hon. members who have spoken, in conveying to the late Colonel Ralston's widow, and to his son, deep and genuine sympathy in this their hour of sorrow and of loss.

Topic:   THE LATE HON. J. L. RALSTON
Permalink

PALESTINE

UNITED STATES PLEA TO SECURITY COUNCIL- QUESTION AS TO CANADA'S SUPPORT


On the orders of the day: Mr. JOHN T. HACKETT (Stanstead): I should like to ask a question of the government. Will Canada support the United States in its plea to the security council for a declaration that the present situation in Palestine is a threat to the peace, and, in fact, a breach of the peace? Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): Mr. Speaker, I am not prepared at this moment to make a categorical answer to the hon. member's question, because my information is that late Saturday afternoon the security council disposed of both a proposal submitted by the delegate of the United States and one submitted by the delegate of the United Kingdom. Though I have no information as to just what the precedure was, we received an official notification from the secretary general, Mr. Trygve Lie, in a telegram which I think I should read to the house, because, though I have scanned the newspapers carefully, I have not seen its text published. This is the dispatch: Lake Success, May 22, 1948 Have honour to communicate to your government following resolution adopted by security Council at its 302nd meeting held 22nd May, "The security council, taking into consideration that previous resolutions of the security council in respect to Palestine have not been complied with and that military operations are taking place in Palestine; "Calls upon all governments and authorities, without prejudice to the rights, claims or position of the parties concerned, to abstain from any hostile military action in Palestine and to that end to issue a cease-fire order to their military aiid^ para-military forces to become effective within thirty-six hours after midnight, New York standard time, 22nd May, 1948; "Calls upon the truce commission and upon all parties concerned to give the highest priority to the negotiation and maintenance of a truce in the city of Jerusalem; "Directs the trade commission established by the security council by its resolution of 23rd April, 1948, to report to the security council on the compliance with the two preceding paragraphs of this resolution; "Calls upon all parties concerned to facilitate by all means in their power the task of Inquiries of the Ministry



the united nations mediator appointed in execution of the resolution of the general assembly of 14th May, 1948." Draw attention in particular to paragraph two of this resolution. Trygve Lie It is true that there is a report in the newspapers of this morning under the dateline, "Lake Success, N.Y., May 23," which reads as follows: The United States appeared ready tonight to renew its fight for a Palestine cease fire order, voted down late Saturday by the united nations security council which instead appealed to Jew's and Arabs to stop fighting. However, there has been no subsequent proposal, of which my department has any knowledge, of further action since this resolution was adopted. Hon. members realize that the difference between the resolution adopted and the one submitted is that the one submitted called for a declaration under chapter 7 of the united nations charter, which provides for methods of coercion. Canada is a member of the security council. As such our delegation on the security council is responsible not only to the Canadian people but to all members of the United Nations. All I can say is that the whole matter is being, and will continue to be, considered in the most objective light possible, with a keen and earnest desire to make such moves, and take such measures, as will seem to be both practicable and best fitted to bring about a cessation of the terrible situation which, I will not say, exists, because I do not know at this moment whether this resolution has been complied with, but which has been in existence until very recently in the Holy Land.


REPORT AS TO SHOOTING OF BRITISH CITIZENS TAKEN PRISONER


On the orders of the day:


SC

Norman Jaques

Social Credit

Mr. NORMAN JAQUES (Wetaskiwin):

I wish to direct a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs. According to the C.B.C. news at one o'clock, the Jews have declared that they will shoot all British citizens taken prisoner. The question I should like to ask is this: Has the government any information as to whether that would apply to Canadian citizens, or only to those of Great Britain?

Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Secretary of State for External Affairs): The Canadian government has received no information whatsoever of there being any threat by the Jews, as referred to by the hon. member, to shoot British subjects.

Topic:   REPORT AS TO SHOOTING OF BRITISH CITIZENS TAKEN PRISONER
Permalink

RADIO BROADCASTING

REPORTED PURCHASE BY C.B.C. OF BUILDING IN MONTREAL


On the orders of the day: Mr. DONALD M. FLEMING (Eglinton): May I ask the Minister of National Revenue whether the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has purchased a building in Montreal for its offices and other purposes at a price reported to be $750,000?


LIB

James Joseph McCann (Minister of National Revenue)

Liberal

Hon. J. J. McCANN (Minister of National Revenue):

Mr. Speaker, I have not seen the report, but the statement as given by the hon. member for Eglinton is not according to the facts.

Topic:   RADIO BROADCASTING
Subtopic:   REPORTED PURCHASE BY C.B.C. OF BUILDING IN MONTREAL
Permalink
PC

Donald Methuen Fleming

Progressive Conservative

Mr. FLEMING:

Press reports indicate that the Ford hotel building in Montreal has been purchased by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

Topic:   RADIO BROADCASTING
Subtopic:   REPORTED PURCHASE BY C.B.C. OF BUILDING IN MONTREAL
Permalink

P.E.I. CAR FERRY INQUIRY AS TO CHANGES IN SCHEDULED CROSSINGS


On the orders of the day:


LIB

John Watson MacNaught

Liberal

Mr. J. W. MacNAUGHT (Prince):

I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Transport. Are any changes to be made in the scheduled crossings of the car ferry at Borden and Tormentine?

Topic:   P.E.I. CAR FERRY INQUIRY AS TO CHANGES IN SCHEDULED CROSSINGS
Permalink
LIB

Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport):

Yes; decision has been reached to institute a late sailing of the Prince Edward Island car ferry from Cape Tormentine at 10.30 p.m., daily except Sunday, from June 27 to September 7, inclusive; also an earlier sailing on Sunday has been decided upon which will leave Borden at 9.10 a.m. and Cape Tormentine at 10.30 a.m., from June 4 to September 5, inclusive.

Topic:   P.E.I. CAR FERRY INQUIRY AS TO CHANGES IN SCHEDULED CROSSINGS
Permalink

INQUIRY FOR RETURN

NORTH STAR AIRCRAFT

PC

Lawrence Wilton Skey

Progressive Conservative

Mr. L. W. SKEY (Trinity):

Mr. Speaker, in the absence of the Minister of Trade and Commerce may I call the attention of the Secretary of State to a question of mine passed as an order for return on Wednesday, April 28, 1948, with regard to North Star aircraft? I do this because I see on the order paper a question by the hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) which is similar to mine. Now that a month has elapsed since the question was passed as an order for return, may I ask the Secretary of State if I may have an answer to my question at an early day?

Topic:   INQUIRY FOR RETURN
Subtopic:   NORTH STAR AIRCRAFT
Permalink

May 24, 1948