Mr. Browne (St. John's West):

What is the amount of revenue collected for (a) customs; (b) excise; (c) other sources, in Newfoundland. for the six-month period ending September 30, 1949?

Right Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (Prime Minister) moved:

That on Monday, October 17th instant, and every Monday thereafter to the end of the session, government notices of motions and government orders shall have precedence over all other business except introduction of bills, questions by members and notices of motions for the production of papers.

He said: In moving this order, Mr. Speaker, I should like to take the opportunity to express what I believe to be the feeling of most members of this house, namely, appreciation of the interesting debates we have had so far this session on private members' notices of motions and public bills. More time for these debates was made available by the fact that we disposed of the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne in much less time than it has occupied in any other session since I first came to this house. Several hon. members have indicated to me that in their opinion the debates on these motions were much more interesting than a protracted debate on the address would have been. Personally I should be inclined to agree with that view. I suggest to hon. members that they think the matter over and ask themselves whether it would be a more interesting use of the time at the disposal of the house to have at the beginning of the session these opportunities for debating the various subjects dealt with in the notices of motions placed on the order paper by private members. I am sure that the debates we have had so far have been interesting and valuable, and I should like to extend my compliments to those who have participated in them.

Several days have been devoted during this session to private members' motions. As hon. members know, there is a large volume of

public business that must be dealt with. Even though we have devoted several days to the consideration of estimates we have not yet disposed of one department in its entirety. It has been found also that discussion of the estimates gives hon. members an opportunity to bring before the house matters which they feel are deserving of consideration, and that it would be well to be able to proceed with the estimates in a more leisurely fashion than is possible at the very end of a session. For this reason I hope that the motion will commend itself to the house, and that, before the business of the session can be considered as completed, ample opportunity will be given to hon. members to deal with matters which appear to them to be of public interest.

Mr. Gordon Graydon (Peel):

I think that hon. members will agree with much that the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) has said. There is one matter that I should like to mention, Mr. Speaker. It arises out of what the Prime Minister said with respect to opening up the estimates of the departments. On previous occasions the government has first settled upon two or three departments only, and often the estimates of many departments are left until the closing days of the session. The item of departmental administration gives hon. members an opportunity of discussing in a general way the policies and details of the department concerned. I suggest to the government that in this session, and in future sessions, if it meets with their convenience-I am sure it will meet with the convenience of hon. members generally-we have a wider distribution of departments, from the point of view of the estimates presented so that at least the item of departmental administration may be discussed in leisurely fashion. This would meet the wishes of many hon. members who desire not to be rushed at the very last minute in discussing major items. I should like the Prime Minister to take this suggestion into consideration, if he will. It would improve the whole standard of debate.

Mr. Angus Maclnnis (Vancouver East):

I do

not think there is any objection from this group to the motion which has just been moved by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent). We are all appreciative of the opportunity we have had this session to discuss private members' resolutions on private members' days, which it was not possible

Business of the House to do in other years, particularly during the war years and the years immediately following, because of the urgency of government business which resulted in the curtailing of private members' days. But I hope that I did not understand the Prime Minister to suggest that in future if we want to have private members' days we would have to curtail the debate on the address. As a matter of fact, private members' days are provided for under the rules of the house, although there is no guarantee as to how many there shall be. At least, under the standing orders of this house, we are entitled to some, and I do not think we should be told that if we are good boys we can have them, but that if we are not, they will be taken away. What happened this year was that the debate on the address was completed in time to give us Thursdays, which we would not have had if the debate had continued for four weeks, as sometimes happens. Subject to these comments, may 1 say that we are quite agreeable to the Prime Minister's motion being adopted.

Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):

I should like to add one word to what has already been said. We shall have no objections at all to the passing of this motion, but I should like to say to the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) that we have appreciated the opportunity to discuss private members' resolutions, some of which have been on the order paper since last spring.

I understand that prior to the war, when sessions were carried on in a more leisurely manner, private members' days were greater in number than they have been since. As one member of this group I welcomed the return this session to a greater number of private members' days early in the session. I do not know whether that came about simply as a result of the shortness of the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne. But we have appreciated it, sir, and in future sessions I should like to see even greater recognition of the right of priyate members to discuss their resolutions as fully as possible. However, I think the time has come in the present session when we should pass this motion.

Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):

I want to make one observation. I hope the adoption of this motion will enable the government to expedite the bill to amend the National Housing Act. 1 think many hon. members have regretted that there should have been any delay in the introduction of that important measure. May we have some indication as to when that measure will be introduced?

Mr. St. Laurent:

With respect to the remarks made by the acting leader of the

FMr. Maclnnis.l

opposition (Mr. Graydon), may I say that I shall be glad to have my colleagues give consideration to suggestions made at any time by representatives of any of the groups as to bringing forward one department instead of another, so that there may be an opportunity for discussion on the item of general administration. We appreciate the fact that when these matters are brought forward it is desired by hon. gentlemen sitting opposite that we make better progress than we do, and for this reason, if for no other, we shall be glad to give sympathetic consideration to any such suggestion.

I did not intend to suggest that I was asking hon. members to behave in any special manner. What I was referring to was what the hon. member (Mr. Maclnnis) himself agreed to. It is only the first four Thursdays that are private members' days. In previous years the debate on the address has taken up those four Thursdays; therefore there were none available for private members' notices of motions. During this session we have had three of these Thursdays available for discussion of private members' motions.

Mr. Knowles:

Just two.

Mr. St. Laurent:

With respect to the introduction of legislation, we do wish to bring forward at the earliest possible moment all of the legislation announced. The housing legislation would have been ready at the very first day of the session had it not been for the correspondence that is still going on with representatives of provincial governments. The Minister of Reconstruction and Supply (Mr. Winters) wished to get as clear a statement of the views of the provincial governments as possible before bringing in a printed bill; otherwise the provincial administrations might believe it to be too late to make any further suggestions.

Mr. Church:

Will any appropriation be included in the coming budget for the cost of these private members' motions?

Mr. St. Laurent:

Yes, but it would be only the item which provides generally for the cost of legislation.

Mr. G. K. Fraser (Peterborough West):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce. This morning's press carries the following headline: "Mothball fleet grows; 72,000 tons of

shipping idle in Halifax; no cargo; federal aid only solution."

Canada Forestry Act CANADA FORESTRY ACT