Mr. STANLEY KNOWLES (Winnipeg North Centre):

Mr. Speaker, may I address a question to the Minister of Justice? Can he say what action the federal government intends to take, either by itself or in conjunction with the attorneys general of the provinces, in respect to the disclosures contained in Mr. McGregor's report on optical goods?

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

The report is being studied with a view to determining whether a prosecution is proper in the circumstances or not. The report has been sent by the commissioner to the attorneys general of the provinces, and if the usual course is followed, and I assume it will be, the attorney general of the province or provinces in which most of the activities took place will be asked whether he intends to prosecute or would prefer that the dominion assume responsibility for the prosecution. The dominion government will decide upon its course in the light of the reply that it gets.

Mr. DIEFENBAKER:

If I may ask a supplementary question, what is the justification for the minister publishing a report such as this, which condemns before the bar of public opinion companies and individuals who may subsequently be found to be not guilty, as were those similarly condemned, namely the dental corporations, in an action taken recently by the department?

Mr. ILSLEY:

The principle of publication of the reports of the commissioner has always 5849-301J

been contained in the Combines Investigation-Act, and the course now being followed is the. course which has always been followed in the past. It is open to argument whether the report should be secret. That point has been debated in- the house in previous years, as many years ago, I think, as thirty or forty, and it has been decided that the public is entitled to know what the commissioner has ascertained. The commissioner is expected to foe careful, and I think is careful, not to make , his report into a brief for the prosecution. He is expected to publish the facts and his conclusions on the fact's. I doubt whether the results of the prosecutions that have taken place indicate that, anybody has- been greatly prejudiced by the publication of his report.

Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport):

Mr. Speaker, immediately following the issuance of March 30, 1948, of Order No. 70425 of the Board of Transport Commissioners for Canada, Canadian National and Canadian Pacific express services increased to 75 cents the minima provided in motor truck competitive express tariffs in western Canada.

The government has received numerous representations in respect of the shipment of eggs which were formerly carried at a minimum of 35 cents. Upon directing this matter to the attention of the railways, it was ascertained that the railways have likewise received many representations and that the question of adjustment of this minimum was under active investigation. I am pleased to be able to announce that as a result of their studies, the railways have come to the conclusion that a downward revision in the minimum applicable to eggs is warranted and that the western Canadian motor truck competitive express tariffs will be revised to provide a minimum for eggs of 50 cents in place of the minimum of 75 cents at present in use.

Tariff revisions effecting this change are to be forwarded to the transport board in the next few days and will become effective on or about the 9th instant.

Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):

May I be permitted to direct a question to the Minister of Justice? Has he any statement to make in regard to representations

Inquiries oj the Ministry

made to him for the disallowance of Bill No. 31, known as the P.E.I. Labour Act?

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

Yesterday afternoon a delegation consisting of representatives of the major labour organizations in Canada, the trades and labour congress, the Canadian congress of labour and the railway brotherhoods, presented to myself and certain of my colleagues a petition for disallowance of the legislation in question. They were assured that their petition would be given careful consideration.

Hon. LIONEL CHEVRIER (Minister of Transport):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the hon. member for Lincoln (Mr. Lockhart) inquired why tourists are not being allowed to approach the Welland ship canal at close range, and more particularly the flight locks at Thorold, which are considered the centre of attraction along the canal. He stated that he had received many complaints. So have we in the Department of Transport. The officers of the department have given serious consideration to the question of relaxing the canal regulations at this time. Their advice is against it, and in view of the circumstances I feel that I should concur in their view. The position therefore is that tourists for the time being at least, will not be allowed to approach the Welland ship canal at close range.