Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):

Mr. Speaker, as members of this house I feel we would be remiss in our duty if we did not take this first opportunity to say how sorry we were to get the news last evening of the intention of the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ilsley) to retire from the government. In this house it is inevitable that among the different parties there will be differences of opinion, and that was so in this case. On the other hand I think I can say on behalf of members of this group and hon. members generally that there is no member on the government benches for whom the house as a whole and the country has had higher respect than the right hon. gentleman. He will be remembered in particular for the service he gave this country as wartime minister of finance. Even in that capacity people at times took his name in vain, but the job he did, particularly in the field of price control, will long be a monument to him.

Some of us might hope he could be persuaded to change his mind, but our experience with him has taught us that he is the kind of person who reaches a point where finality must be recognized. If it is definite that he is leaving us, we can only say that we are sorry indeed, but we wish him the very best.

Mr. JEAN FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata):

Mr. Speaker, this is an occasion on which I agree entirely with what has been said by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles). I have known the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ilsley) for a long time. He is an old-timer in this house; and he must feel some comfort in hearing praise that is usually reserved until after a man is dead.

The Minister of Justice is a democrat. It is well known in this city that he does not blush when he gets into a streetcar. He does it naturally, without pose. He is a hard

worker and he is honest. I need not say he is a gentleman, because all hon. members of this house are gentlemen.

Mrs. STRUM:

No.

Mr. POULIOT:

With one exception, which proves the rule. The Minister of Justice is a remarkable debater with whom I have had to cross swords on many occasions. I very seldom agreed with his policies when he was minister of finance, but that has not affected our friendship. It is remarkable the way this house respects freedom of thought and of opinion. We may entirely disagree and yet remain good friends. By the way, the late Colonel Ralston probably never understood why the Minister of Justice and I were friends, and neither could I understand how the minister could be friends with Mr. Ralston; but that did not affect our good relations.

When the Minister of Justice gives his opinion, it is clear cut; and then he has the great merit of acting accordingly. There is no possible mistake about the choice he makes. For a time he had the most thankless job of all cabinet ministers. As minister of national revenue, and as minister of finance in wartime, he was the goat of everybody in respect to his legislation, but no one ever suspected him of having a wrong intention. He meant well, in his own view. Now he is in the Department of Justice, which is supposed to be the kingdom of peace and calm. He is also the Attorney General of Canada, both positions of great responsibility, which he is filling very well. I wish him every success in life. I wish him in the practice of his profession the same success he had in politics, and at the same time I express my very best wishes to his charming wife and to his children.

Mr. GORDON GRAYDON (Peel):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to join in the tributes paid this afternoon to the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ilsley). Long after the days of political differences have been forgotten, the basic foundations which support men in public life will remain. One of the things most of us will never forget is the sterling character of the

4602

Tribute to Right Hon. J. L. Ilsley

Minister of Justice, both in private and in public life, while he has been a member of the House of Commons and of the government.

Character in public men is always remembered. To the minister's attributes of integrity and honesty, and his generally sound approach to the many matters which came before him in his various capacities, the public will pay tribute long after he has left this chamber. Let me say to him that if in his presentations before the bench he adheres as strenuously to his point of view as he has in respect of arguments made by the opposition, I fancy we shall witness either a succession of judgments in his favour, or a series of resignations by judges; because there will be no compromise. His arguments will be clear-cut and well advanced.

When the resignation of the Minister of Justice becomes effective it will be a heavy loss not only to the government but to parliament and to the country. With hon. members who have preceded me, I wish him every success in the practice of the profession to which he is soon returning.

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

Mr. Speaker, if I did not rise first in the house this afternoon to express what I know is the general regret concerning the announced intention of the present Minister of Justice (Mr. Ilsley) to resign his portfolio at the end of June, it is because I felt that, happily, the time for valedictories had not yet come. The minister will be with us for another month at least, and will have further measures to introduce. I hope when he places them before parliament hon. members who have shown their esteem by their words and applause this afternoon will realize how important it is that they recognize his wisdom and judgment in matters of the kind.

May I say however, as I said last night when I was asked by the press to express my views respecting the announced intention of my colleague to retire from the ministry, that I know there will be general regret throughout all Canada that the Minister of Justice has found it necessary to consider retiring from his position as a minister of the crown to resume the practice of law.

To his colleagues in the cabinet, certainly his resignation will mean a very great loss indeed. It is one which will be deeply felt personally, and on public grounds by every member of the government. I cannot express too strongly how deeply I personally feel the loss.

It has been a pleasure this afternoon to realize that what I said last night, to the effect that I believe the minister's proposed retirement would be regretted by all parties

in the house, irrespective of their political affiliations, has already been manifested. I would say more at the moment were it not that, as I say, the time for farewells has not yet come. There is still opportunity for my colleague to change his mind. We on this side of the house would be very happy if he did; and I hope that, should the minister return to the ministry at some later time, hon. members will recall what they have said this afternoon with regard to his exceptional ability, great integrity and fine record of public service, all of which is more than merited so far as my colleague the present Minister of Justice is concerned.

Mr. J. H. BLACKMORE (Lethbridge):

Mr. Speaker, at a time like this it is important that we have at the head of affairs in the country and as members of the House of Commons men of wide experience and proven character. Because of these two considerations, among others, we in this group regret that the Minister of Justice (Mr. Ilsley) has found it necessary to withdraw from the government. We wish him the greatest success, and trust that the work upon which he is about to enter will not prove such a heavy drain upon his physical strength as the duties of the offices he has occupied during the last few years.

Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Justice is a great public servant. While those from my native city of Toronto may not have agreed with everything he has done, let me tell him that he has the admiration and respect of the people of that large commercial and industrial city. Speaking personally, I have found the minister most courteous in any contacts I have had with him. He is a man of sincerity, of modesty, and of great ability. I wish him well in the years ahead.

Right Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Justice):

Mr. Speaker, I am most grateful to hon. members for the kindly sentiments they have expressed this afternoon. Naturally I had not expected that anything of the kind would occur in the house. Nevertheless I should like to express my gratitude to the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) for his remarks at the outset, and I deeply appreciate the words of my old friend, the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot), who was in the house when I became a member of it in 1926, and with whom my relations have been on the friendliest footing ever since.

I appreciate too what has been said by the hon. member for Peel (Mr. Graydon) and

Flood Relief in British Columbia

also what he said last night in his message to the press. May I express my pleasure at the few words uttered by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King), by the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) and by my old friend, the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church).

Naturally it is with feelings of regret that I sever my connections with the House of Commons, where I have been a member for twenty-two years, and thus terminate an experience which, on the whole, has been a pleasurable one.

As the Prime Minister has said, I shall be in the house for another month, and the time for valedictories has not yet arrived. Nevertheless may I say again how pleased and how touched I am by the remarks made this afternoon by hon. members from all parties in the house.

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

Mr. Speaker, I should like to say a word to the house about the government's position with respect to flood conditions in British Columbia.

Yesterday I was asked a question by the hon. member for Kootenay East (Mr. Matthews) with respect to the financial assistance which the government might be prepared to give to a certain municipality which he named. The hon. member had sent me a notice of his question in advance, and I had an answer prepared dealing specifically with the point he raised, namely, financial assistance by the government to a municipality.

I notice from accounts which appear in some of today's papers that an interpretation has been placed upon my answer which is not at all justified in the light of what the government has been doing, and is prepared to do with respect to meeting the very serious situation in British Columbia. I would refer hon.

5849-292J

members to the question which appears in Hansard and to my reply thereto. They will see that my reply was directed solely to a matter of procedure and of method. I made it quite clear that what I said related solely to financial assistance. I stated that if there were need for financial assistance to British Columbia or any part of that province, the request for assistance from the dominion should be made through the government of the province. A municipality should make its needs known to the province, and the province would make its representations to the dominion. I shall read the last paragraph of my statement. It will be found on page 4553 of Hansard, as follows:

I assume that if the situation is such that the provinces in which these disasters occur would feel the necessity of financial assistance from the federal government, the government would be so advised by the provinces themselves. I do not believe we would be expected to act on communications received from municipalities. Municipalities would communicate with provinces in the first instance, and our action would be taken in the light of representations that might be made by provinces concerned.

I want to make it quite clear that my reply was to a question which was handed to me by the hon. member for Kootenay East. His question was supplemented by one from the hon. member for Kamloops, asking me to reply in reference to the situation generally. My reply was in reference to the situation generally in so far as financial assistance to municipalities was concerned. I had no other thought in my mind but to deal with the specific matter of financial assistance by the federal government to municipalities which had suffered injury.

May I say that from the beginning of the disastrous floods, our government has taken action, and that on a considerable scale, in co-operation with the government of British Columbia. Possibly the best manner of informing the house as to what has been done would be for me to have my colleagues who have been in touch with the premier of the province and with the situation there state to the house exactly what has been done by their respective departments in the last few days, and what the government is prepared to do.

Let me make this quite clear. From what I have been able to ascertain, I am sure the flood conditions in British Columbia constitute a very serious and grave situation. The federal government should be and is prepared to co-operate to the utmost with the province and help to meet it. We are prepared so to do, but in so doing we must seek to avoid confusion with respect to matters which will come up for subsequent settlement with respect to financial outlays involved.

Flood Relief in British Columbia

For example, hon. members will have seen that the premier of the province has been giving directions to different branches of the armed services. That action would be altogether irregular and impossible under existing conditions without the consent of the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton). I think I should ask the Minister of National Defence, in the first instance, to indicate to the house what has already been done by the armed forces, and then I should like my colleagues in some of the other departments to state just what has been done by their respective departments jp to the present time.

May I make it perfectly clear that with respect to any request that comes to us from the province, that request will be immediately considered. The government of Canada is prepared to do all that it possibly can do in the way of co-operation with the province to meet the appalling situation that exists at the present time and which I am afraid may grow even worse.

Mr. GRAYDON:

Before the Prime Minister calls on the other ministers, may I ask him to comment on the question which was raised in the house yesterday with respect to the suggestion made by the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) when he was out there. I think the Prime Minister was going to look into that.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

As my hon. friend knows, reference was made to some remark which the Minister of Trade and Commerce had made. I have not been in direct touch with the Minister of Trade and Commerce since, and I cannot say whether he was correctly reported. I am not in position to answer that.