Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):

No, and I

stick to what I have said without hesitation. The Bank of Canada and the Department of

Finance can exercise a very great influence over the banks if they wish, and they constantly do. Everyone in this house knows that has been done.

Mr. Gillis:

I should like an answer to that question, if I might interrupt.

Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):

I have

answered the question. Will you allow me to go on with my speech, please? I am not going to permit any more interruptions.

Mr. Gillis:

That is quite satisfactory.

Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):

You can come and give me a private audience afterwards.

I should like to quote again from the minister's speech. Comparing the situation today with the price ceiling in 1941 the minister said:

At this time many people expect the reimposition of the same kind of controls and are governing themselves accordingly.

The minister did not leave us in any doubt as to what he meant by "governing themselves accordingly", because he added that they were "all set." I believe that phrase is unfortunate. I do not believe for a moment the minister intended to create the impression that these people were trying to profiteer from the rest of the community. I still think that is the impression which one was inclined to get. Furthermore the minister did talk throughout his speech more or less as if he were talking about the "economic man", and not about a lot of men and women of flesh and blood who are today suffering from the evils of high prices.

I want to go on to say that my guess is that when the Korean situation quieted down in September, October and November, the government thought they were pretty well out of the woods and took a bit of an "easy". Indeed it seems to me that they have rested on their oars.

I believe that the minister's next comment will give very cold comfort to those who are in trouble. He said:

The upward pressure on prices both in Canada and abroad was much less severe in 1941 than it is now.

In other words, conditions are worse, so we do nothing. It seems to me that is implied in that statement. There is the implication too that, not only is the pressure high now, but it is certainly going to be higher.

Then the minister did give us one bit of comfort which I hope may prove to be substantial. He suggested that a good deal of the demand was what he called anticipatory, and I can hope and believe that may be true and that it may have its effect later.

The next thing the minister says is:

I am not ruling out the possibility that sweeping price control measures will be needed, should the

The Address-Mr. J. M. Macdonnell developing situation make action necessary, but it may well be that these measures should be different in form from those that were applied during the last war. Alternative measures are now under active study by the government.

Mr. Speaker, I cannot imagine, and I do not believe anyone else can imagine, anything that is more likely to fan the flames than that statement by the minister, because it seems to me that the very motives which have been driving people to anticipate their requirements, to buy in a big way, will be stimulated further by what the minister said. As a matter of fact, it seems to me that the minister has almost opened the door and that, to use his own words, presumably the people will govern themselves accordingly.

The minister said one other thing to which I want to refer. He spoke about the United States and said:

We earnestly hope our American neighbours will succeed in attaining a reasonable measure of stability . . .

At a later stage he said:

I do not suggest for a moment that we can relax and let the United States solve our economic problems for us.

That, of course, I take for granted.

Then, as I sum up what the minister said this afternoon, it seems to me I can imagine the ordinary citizen saying that the speech delivered by the Minister of Trade and Commerce this afternoon is proof that this thing is going to continue, and indeed is going to get worse. It seemed to me that was the implication in it, unless he has some secret knowledge that none of the rest of us have, and which he does not feel he can divulge.

How long is the great mass of citizens going to stand by and be content with this? The ordinary citizen is not fully informed.

I have before me a speech delivered by Donald Gordon from which I should like to read one sentence. He said:

During the last war this country resorted to widespread controls over prices, wages and physical production and distribution, such as rationing and allocation of available supplies, et cetera. But the relative success of these measures in the midst of a total war for survival should not be taken as proof that the same results could be achieved in the quite different environment of today.

Even if the ordinary citizen reads that address of Mr. Gordon's and feels that since Mr. Gordon knows so much about this subject it is rather dubious that the same measures could be used again, and even if the citizens knew the caustic comment of Mr. Kenneth Taylor, for whom we all have the greatest respect, that price control was like

"trying to cure a fever by fixing the thermometer", nevertheless they would find later in Mr. Gordon's speech the following:

Runaway inflation is so destructive that any method of stopping it, no matter how difficult and clumsy it may be, is surely the lesser evil.

I am afraid the ordinary citizen would be inclined to think that, from his point of view, inflation looks mighty like a runaway inflation. I am not saying it is runaway inflation, because I believe the good sense of Canadians, if properly led, would stop it. Still, I would not be surprised if a good many people would try to argue that it is. The minister himself, of course, speaks of the upward pressure of prices being less severe in 1941 than it is now. In other words, he leaves the impression of a great pressure. He leaves the impression of action still delayed, and to me it seems he gave no reason to suppose, except perhaps the one I mentioned of the excessive anticipated demand, that there would be a turning back.

One other remark the minister made was that alternative measures are now under study by the government. He refers further to a more comprehensive price control bill. Now, if this continues much longer it seems to me we will just be wasting our breath in asking the people to believe that the cure is more production and less spending, though I firmly believe in both. There is not much use in telling people who have not enough money to spend now that they must do less spending.

I also do not believe that controls stimulate production, except in very special and temporary circumstances. I am not telling the government what they shall do. But it seems to me that up to the present time, particularly since last September, they have certainly missed the bus and failed in what should have been done. The minister talks as if there was time to wait while fiscal control measures and, I presume, taxation policies and credit control have their effect. I wish that I could feel he is right, but his speech has definitely increased my concern. What I fear is that they have waited too long; and1 in the light of the minister's speech, I think every day makes it more difficult.

I believe in credit and fiscal remedies. I believe they are better because they are more pervasive, more economical, more democratic and because they do not need a whole army of controls. But unless some fortunate turn of events comes along, I feel that the demand for some other kind of measures will grow and become so strong that it cannot be resisted. Again I say that I am not telling the government what to do. I am pointing

out that what they have done has been destructive and not constructive. I hope that other remedies can be found, as the minister implied. But meanwhile I reiterate that at the moment I think the ordinary citizen will feel that he has asked for bread and has been given a stone.

Mr. Howe:

May I ask my hon. friend one

question? If he places such a high value on controls, why did he spend the years 1946, 1947 and 1948 demanding that they be done away with?

Mr. Knowles:

Why did the government accede to that demand?

Mr. Macdonnell (Greenwood):

If the minister had done me the honour of listening to me a little more carefully, he would have known that I have not demanded controls. I have said that I am afraid there will be an overwhelming pressure for them, unless other remedies, which the minister talked about and which I said in my closing words I hoped were still an alternative, could be made effective much more quickly. I made that clear; as least I tried to do so.

Mr. Howe:

But you did not believe in controls at all.

Mr. Abbott:

I could not tell what the hon. member was asking for.

Mr. Charles Cannon (Iles-de-la-Madeleine):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to add my congratulations to the well-deserved compliments that have already been paid to the mover (Mr. McMillan) and the seconder (Mr. Breton) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I listened with interest to their remarks and I agree with those who have already said that they both are valuable additions to this house.

During this debate, which has dealt at length with foreign affairs, I have not heard any member of this house mention the magnificent effort in Korea of our great neighbour and ally, the United States of America. But I have read the remarks of the hon. member for Beauce (Mr. Poulin) on the subject of what he calls American imperialism. I wish to pay tribute to our gallant American ally who, singlehanded at first, went to the help of the republic of Korea. This admirable action may be compared to that of England and France going to assist Belgium in the first world war or to assist Poland in the second; but it is not the same kind of gesture from a historical point of view. It is the first time in the history of the world that a great nation has gone to war to implement its obligations under a collective international covenant to

The Address-Mr. Cannon outlaw and punish aggression wherever it may take place in the world. I salute this great nation that, from idealistic and altruistic motives, has sent her sons to fight a cruel and difficult war; and I decry and deplore the accusations that have been made in this house that the United States' intervention in Korea is based on imperialism and selfish motives.

The hon. member for Beauce made his remarks in French the other day; and as I wish to answer them, I am going to read from the English translation of his remarks which appears in Hansard of February 6. This is what he said:

The monstrous war budget of $87 billion introduced by the American government and Canada's defence plan calling for an expenditure of $5 billion lead us strongly to believe that a general war is in the offing. The fabulous expenditures, I will be told, are designed to prevent war. As was done last September, the old saying si vis pacem, para bellurn, if you want peace, prepare for war, will be invoked. But history proves this saying to be false; conquerors have always used it as a sham to hide their infamous designs for conquest. History is repeating itself once more.

I may say that evidently the hon. member for Beauce had not learned anything from the experience of the free and democratic nations at the beginning of the second world war when they were caught unarmed and when it took them two to three years to get together the armaments needed to wage a victorious war. I am sure that hon. members of the house will agree with me when I say that the old saying is still true and that the government of our country is right in saying that if we wish to avoid war, we have to arm. The hon. member for Beauce goes on to say:

Besides, we all know that this saying was coined by these same people, these same imperialists who preached a preventive war of conquest with these words: delenda est Carthago, Carthage must be destroyed.

The Roman empire then wanted, in the name of peace, to cross the Mediterranean and destroy the very foundations of the African empire. Today the American empire is picking up the torch from the failing hands of the British empire and wants to cross not only the Mediterranean but the seven seas and use guns, tanks and flame throwers to make the Asiatic people benefit from the blessings of peace. And they want to drag Canada into the venture; We are already taking part in the undertaking as members of the Atlantic pact organization that has been set up.

To put it mildly, that is not according to the facts. To say that the United States of America has gone into this war from imperialistic motives or motives of conquest is to make a remark so far from the truth that I feel it should not be allowed to go unchallenged in this house. In the interests of the friendship and understanding that have always existed between our two great countries, I feel that we in this house should,

The Address-Mr. Cannon through my humble voice, express our disagreement with these remarks and our appreciation of the magnificent effort of our American allies in Korea. Again, to put it mildly, Mr. Speaker, these remarks to which I have referred are misleading.

It is the duty of the representatives of the people in this house not only to represent the people but to give leadership. In order to give leadership you have to tell the people the truth. With all due respect, I say to the hon. member for Beauce that in talking in the way he has, accusing the Americans of being imperialistic conquerors, he is using the communist line from Moscow. The best answer to the contention that the United States of America had those intentions is that they withdrew the last of their occupation troops from Korea just a few months before the attack on South Korea took place. If they had had any imperialistic or conquering designs on Korea, they would certainly not have withdrawn their troops just at the time they did.

Canada is taking its part in this action and we have been warned in the speech from the throne that we shall be asked to authorize Canadian participation in the European force to be organized under the north Atlantic pact. When I had the honour of proposing the address in reply to the speech from the throne at the last session of parliament I said, as reported at page 85 of Hansard of August 31, 1950:

This is also the first time that Canada has been called upon to honour Its signature to an agreement to give armed aid to another nation. Are we going to honour our signature? I say, yes. We are not going to tail this first test; and I am sure this house will also answer the question with a resounding yes, authorizing the government to send the special force to Korea or use it to fulfil any of our other obligations under the United Nations charter or the North Atlantic treaty.

The house at the last session gave to the government authorization to send fighting men to Korea, and I am sure that at this session it will authorize the sending to Europe of sailors, soldiers and airmen to fulfil our treaty obligations and to forestall war-because that is what we are doing. We are arming to forestall war and to preserve the peace.

I wish to congratulate the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) upon his courageous and straightforward statement on national selective service. As reported at page 28 of Hansard, he said:

So far there has been brought to my attention nothing that would indicate that the institution of national selective service at this time would be beneficial. On the contrary, the information we have obtained is that it would hamper what is being done at this moment. Now. that does not mean that the situation cannot change, and it does not mean that if and when it does change there

will not be changes in the manner in which our resources will be contributed to this pool of international strength.

I am of the opinion that universal conscription for military service would not be a good thing for this country. It it were applied it would not leave us enough men to reap full benefits from our agriculture and our industry upon which our friends and allies depend, as well as ourselves. But at the same time I deprecate the attitude of the hon. members for Beauce (Mr. Poulin) and Quebec-Montmorency (Mr. LaCroix) who said that they are against the sending of Canadian troops to Europe or Asia. It is now unanimously recognized that the first line of defence is in Europe. The United1 States themselves have promised to send several divisions over there, notwithstanding their commitments in Korea. I think that even the hon. member for Beauce will not accuse the United States of sending those divisions there to conquer Europe, as he has accused them of sending troops to Korea to conquer that country.

If the house and government were to listen to the hon. members who wish us to defend ourselves only at home, and not to arm the country as we wish to do, we would probably see this chain of events develop. If an enemy came to Canada, to my constituency of Magdalen Islands, or Halifax or Vancouver, these people would say, "It is none of our business; let us wait for them here. They are too far away. Let us wait until they come closer to home". If they came to Toronto it would be the same thing-they would wait until the enemy got to Quebec. And even when it got to Quebec city, if the enemy were in Lower Town and these people were in Upper Town, they would say, "Let us wait until it comes to Upper Town". This is a reductio ad absurdum of the theory of waiting for the enemy to attack us at home.

The North Atlantic treaty and our obligations under it are to defend us against communism. Let us not forget that. What are we doing to defend ourselves against communism at home? Although I have not yet expressed my views on that subject in the house, I am of the opinion that we have not done enough, so far. I welcome the reference in the speech from the throne to Canadian citizens who are not loyal to Canada. The reference is as follows:

Appropriate amendments to the Canadian Citizenship Act will be introduced to prevent the retention of Canadian citizenship by persons who have renounced their allegiance or shown by their conduct that they are not loyal to Canada.

I believe that the enemy in our midst is even more dangerous than the enemy beyond our frontiers. I think that methods should

The Address-Mr. Sinnott

be taken to suppress the communist party and to ferret out and punish those members of it who are dedicated to the forcible overthrow of the government and to deprive us of our liberties and of our way of life.

Patrick Henry once said these immortal words: "Give me liberty or give me death". It is heroic to offer one's life to regain liberty once one has lost it, but it is more practical to take measures to protect it while we still have it. Those measures that should be taken are measures to outlaw and to suppress the communist party and communists in Canada. These measures, I say, are as important as those being taken to prepare our military defences.

The United States were founded on and dedicated to the principle of human and individual liberty; but they have taken steps against the communist party which we have not taken yet. With great respect for those who differ from me, I have never understood those who say that the communist party must not be outlawed because it would be driven underground. We can be sure that its plotting and its plans against our government and our way of life, and its nefarious deeds, are done underground anyway. They are not carried out in the open. I believe we should take steps to defend ourselves from this enemy who is in a position to gnaw at the very vitals of our country.

The speech from the throne also says:

Proposals were laid before the provincial governments for new tax agreements, and for a contributory old age pensions program along the lines recommended by the joint committee at the last regular session.

The provincial governments are at present giving consideration to these proposals and to proposals for constitutional amendments which may require to be submitted to you before the close of the present session.

As a member of the committee that studied old age pensions last year, I am very glad the government has made reference to them in the speech from the throne, and has indicated that steps are going to be taken to implement what was done. One opposition member has said that the government is delaying. I say it is far from delaying. It is taking the steps necessary to pass the required legislation at this session of parliament, if the provinces do their share in facilitating the necessary constitutional amendment.

I was very pleased to see in the newspapers today that the province of Quebec has declared that it is willing to do what is required to allow us to have old age pensions at sixty-five, and to implement the recommendations of the old age security committee. I think also we should underline the fact that the government is showing very great courage

in bringing in that legislation, notwithstanding the enormous expenditures placed on our shoulders because of the war effort to which we are committed in view of present international circumstances.

May I add my voice once again to that of other hon. members who have asked for a pension for invalids who are unable to provide for themselves. They should be helped. They have as much right to our sympathy and our help as have those who are blind.

These are the few remarks I wished to make in the debate in reply to the speech from the throne. In terminating my remarks I wish to assure our great Prime Minister of the continued admiration and loyalty of the electors of the Magdalen Islands, and of their humble representative in the house.

Mr. J. S. Sinnott (Springfield):

Mr. Speaker, it is with considerable reluctance that I, as a backbencher, have finally decided to take part in the debate. However, as the representative of the constituency of Springfield, which holds the key to all the industrial activity of Manitoba, and which supplies all the power to all of Manitoba, and as the member who in 1949 was re-elected with the greatest majority ever recorded in that constituency, I think it is my duty to place before the House of Commons the views of my constituents.

May I offer my congratulations to the mover and seconder of the address in reply. I also take great pleasure in the government's decision to appoint the hon. member for Edmonton West (Mr. Prudham) to the position of Minister of Mines and Technical Surveys. I am sure that his appointment will be most helpful to the government.

I find it gratifying, also, to note that the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River (Mr. Benidickson) has been appointed parliamentary assistant to the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier). I say this, not because his riding is next to mine but because his record in the House of Commons as a member has been one of great assistance. He served in another capacity in the second world war, and his record is unsurpassed. I am sure his added ability will be of great help to the government in these trying and troubled times.

I am sure it will also be proper to say that the appointment of the hon. member for Gaspe (Mr. Langlois) as parliamentary assistant to the Postmaster General (Mr. Rinfret) will be appreciated by the people of Canada as a whole, and particularly by the constituents of Gaspe. This hon. gentleman served a long and difficult period with

The Address-Mr. Sinnott the navy during the last war and suffered many more hardships than most people realize.

Then I must not forget the hon. member for Montmagny-LTslet (Mr. Lesage), who has been appointed parliamentary assistant to the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson). He has shown a keen interest in former debates on foreign affairs and will prove of great value to our already famous minister.

It was also with great pleasure that I heard that the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Campney) had been appointed parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton). Then we have our own prairie member, the hon. member for Regina City (Mr. McCusker), who has been appointed parliamentary assistant to the Minister of National Health and Welfare (Mr. Martin). I am sure that he will be of great help to the minister. The hon. member for Regina City is a "natural", as he served overseas as a medical doctor in both wars and has the record of having the personal ability to get things done.

I turn now to another field, something that is of great concern to us all, the question of national defence and all its ramifications. It is true that the amount of money required for our national defence forces and other Canadian commitments is of great importance, but it will be accepted by the Canadian people as a whole. At this point we must never forget nor neglect the magnificent and determined effort put forth by our navy in world war II. If it had not been for the determination of the navy to protect the soldiers and supplies which were crossing the many seas, the results might have proved to be different. I say to those inside the house and out that it would be well to review the official resume of the battles of world war II in a publication entitled "The Far Distant Ships" by Schull. I know it will have the effect of bringing home the importance of the part played by the navy in the last war.

It is true also that Canadian airmen are known the world over as being super in courage and determination and1 have always had the reputation of having done their job well. I must say also that Canadian soldiers were always faithful and courageous in whatever part they played and! are known the world over as real heroes.

I have said that all three services were important in the last war and each did1 a magnificent job, but there was also another group of men and women at home who did a large part in keeping the railroads and war plants going. Families worked long and tedious hours in order to keep the men at the front.

There are not many in this house who realize that a certain group of people called farmers sometimes find themselves to be not nearly sufficiently represented in the House of Commons. The number of farmer members is few in comparison to the other professions in Canada that are represented. When discussions on agriculture take place in the house few of the city members are interested enough to stay in their seats and listen to the debates and therefore they are at a loss to understand the problems faced by the farmer. I hope that in future more interest will be shown.

I come now to something that will have to be decided in the very near future, that is, the final payment on the four-year wheat agreement with Great Britain. It is the allimportant "have regard" clause, a clause which was inserted in the contract at the request of the British government, which we are all concerned about, the farmers in the west in particular. The government in Britain never thought for a moment at that time that wheat would be near the price it is today five years after the war. The "have regard" clause would have given them the great advantage of cheaper wheat had world prices dropped. But their calculations were not carried out and there cannot be too much emphasis on the part of this government that the government of Great Britain carry out the "have regard" clause.

Great Britain has obtained from Canada wheat and bread supplies over a period of five years. Many million bushels of wheat were purchased at prices considerably lower than average world prices. I repeat that the government of Canada must impress on the government of Britain that the "have regard" clause must be carried out. The western farmers and wheat growers cannot and will not be satisfied until a final payment of at least 15 cents per bushel over the five-year period is paid. This is a must; it must be forthcoming if we are to do justice to the wheat growers of western Canada.

I come now to another subject and in this I am repeating the plea I made in the last session of parliament, that something be done for the crippled people of Canada. Many of these citizens are far more deserving of a pension or federal help than many of those already receiving a pension. As reeve of a municipality I am in position to understand the heavy drain on municipal funds or taxes made necessary by caring for this class of citizen. It is beyond the capacity of the municipality to stand this strain. In 1950 it cost the municipality which I represent almost $5,000, which came wholly out of the pockets of the taxpayers, for this purpose.

Therefore, I strongly recommend that consideration be given by the federal government to granting a pension at an early date to these people. There are pensions for the blind, there are pensions for the aged; why not pensions for the crippled who are unable to do anything for themselves?

There has been a great cry from our C.C.F. friends across the house who have advocated a reduction in the cost of living. In my opinion, the C.C.F. cater to one class only, the industrial workers. Mention has been made in the newspapers about the 800,000 cards that have been received by hon. members. There are 47,000 people in my riding and I received 66 cards. Those cards have been coming from the industrial and railroad workers. I have not received one from a farmer in my riding.

The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) is always clamouring for higher wages, more pensions and shorter hours. If the government were to carry out his suggestions, there would be few people in Canada working at all. This kind of propaganda sounds good to many of the voters, but if put into practice would have a demoralizing effect on the country as a whole.

Why are prices rising? Why are young people leaving the farms? There is only one answer-they are finding employment in industrial plants where there are shorter hours, better living conditions and higher wages. If this continues across the length and breadth of Canada the spiral of prices will continue higher. Farm products will be in increasingly scarce supply with a continued shortage of farm labour. Something must be done to encourage young people to stay on the farm. Big business in this country should take note of this fact and their profits should compare favourably with the incomes of the producer and consumer.

(Translation):

Mr. Arthur Masse (Kamouraska):

Mr. Speaker, it was not my intention to take part in the debate on the address in reply to the speech from the throne but, in view of its importance, I cannot shirk the obligation of freely expressing my opinion and that of my constituents.

In view of the tension in world affairs, I will make so bold as to draw certain comparisons between the present and the past.

May I be permitted to congratulate the mover (Mr. McMillan) and the seconder (Mr. Breton) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. Their constituents must surely be happy to have chosen such representatives.

The Address-Mr. Masse

On looking at the international situation, the attitude of certain totalitarian countries comes not as a surprise but as a disappointment. On the other hand, the study of world history brings the realization that, at all times and in all eras, there have been conquerors who thought they could rule the world. I have in mind Victor Hugo's celebrated lines on Napoleon II, written when t'he latter thought himself to be master of the world's destiny.

What did all these conquerors gain from their conquests? A passing glory. And, more recently, what has followed in the wake of two world wars? Instead of looked-for happiness and prosperity, naught but misery, destruction, even the complete wiping out of certain countries. Even in this case, there is nothing new. After other devastating wars what became of once famous cities such as Babylon?

I must congratulate the government of my country for its sane attitude in seeking peaceful settlement of the conflict now plaguing the world. To my mind there are no better ways of relieving such tense situations than conciliation or negotiation.

However, without adequate defence preparations, it would be a mistake to leave the door open to negotiations. A strong defence acts as a check on those who crave for domination. The experience of the last war should make every Canadian realize that we should not wait till the last moment to make defence preparations.

I heartily endorse the stand taken by the Prime Minister of Canada (Mr. St. Laurent) in his statement in this house on the form of our war contribution. The immediate organization of our territorial defence and our civil defence seems to me very wise. Civil defence deserves special attention for, with modern transportation facilities, distance is no longer a consideration.

It is high time we prepared our civilian population to face any possible danger that may arise through no fault of our own but which we must expect all the same.

Our government's wish to share adequately in the Colombo plan pleases me very much, because if we give sympathy and hope to those distressed populations, communism will not appeal to them.

I am not one of those who think that the whole of Asia puts unlimited trust in the communist regime. I prefer to believe that the people of Asia accept that way of life

The Address-Mr. Masse in the hope that it will lead them to greater happiness than they have had before. They look to it as a last hope which, until now, has been denied to them under their own governments.

In Canada the government has substantially contributed to the people's welfare by legislation providing for such benefits as family allowances and old age pensions. I trust that the government will also take the appropriate steps to give adequate aid to the needy.

Because of those welfare measures, the people of Canada are more confident. These measures are in keeping with the traditions of my district because my people who were left to themselves on the shores of the St. Lawrence river two centuries ago have been the custodians of our principles and our tradition of mutual aid and fellowship since the beginning of the colony.

As the representative of an agricultural and lumbering district located on the shores of the St. Lawrence and extending to the United States frontier, it is my duty to request the government to maintain the help it has so far given our farmers, particularly through the Agricultural Prices Support Act.

Agriculture is the very basis of our production; to realize this, one has but to read "Canada 1950," at page 109. Consequently, it is necessary that our farmers get all the help and assistance they are entitled to. I am convinced that the more we increase production the sooner agricultural prices will find their normal level while allowing the farmer to draw a reasonable income.

I wish to congratulate also the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) for the task he has undertaken of finding markets for our farm produce. Thus, we may be able to keep on the land our young people who may be tempted to quit it temporarily for prospects of easier income.

It is also my duty to thank and congratulate the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Fournier) for the building of a soil research laboratory at Ste. Anne de la Pocatiere, that cultural centre in Kamouraska county. The laboratory will supplement the existing facilities at that experimental farm. This gesture shows how much the government has the interests of the farming people at heart. The future of the farming class is dependent upon

research and it is the duty of the state to provide the means of undertaking the necessary research work; it is a well-known fact that the progress of agriculture has too often been left to the work of nature alone.

I stated a moment ago that Kamouraska was both a farming and a lumbering district. A glance at the statistics concerning my constituency reveals that 76 per cent of the area is covered with forests. Since the production of pulpwood in the province of Quebec increased from 2,119,183 tons in 1939 to 3,902,072 tons in 1948, according to "Canada 1950," page 142, it is high time to inform farmers or owners of forest land that they should adopt a suitable forestry program in order to increase the value of their property and draw a steady income.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I express the wish that in this holy year the peoples of the world will trust in God, the true King of the universe, to spare us, who still have fresh in our minds a war which is barely over, the horrors of a new conflict that might be more destructive than the two previous ones.

Mr. Henri Courtemanche (Labelle):

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with the custom which exists in the house, may I first congratulate the mover (Mr. McMillan) and the seconder (Mr. Breton) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne on the ease and clarity with which they dealt with their subject matter.

I also wish to congratulate the newly appointed parliamentary assistants. I am delighted that their talent has been recognized and that they now have the opportunity to turn it to account.

I had not intended to speak on the address in reply to the speech from the throne and I have no wish to spin out the discussion any longer than necessary but, because of the principle that is at stake, it is my duty to protest against the decision taken this afternoon by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, who has decided to deport Count Jacques de Bernonville to France.

In defiance of every custom and of the right of sanctuary recognized for centuries, we have just turned over to his communist enemies a man who has been accused of certain crimes, none of which have ever been proved, and who, in my opinion, is guilty only of being a Frenchman and a practising Roman Catholic.

There are other Frenchmen who sought asylum in this country at the same time as

Count Jacques de Bernonville. And yet they have never been the subject of discussion. We hear about other immigrants to whom permission has been granted to remain in Canada even though they entered the country under false passports. Why make it a crime for de Bernonville to have sought refuge in Quebec when not a single voice has been heard in that province to demand his deportation? Could it be that Quebec is not allowed the right to choose the type of immigrants she wants? We, in Quebec, know that the crimes of which Jacques de Bernonville stands charged are pure fabrications, the work of communists or fellow-travellers who have sworn to get him.

The communists know that the Catholic church is their implacable enemy and the violent struggle they are waging against the church in Hungary and Czechoslovakia is evidence enough.

We know that Count de Bernonville was convicted in absentia by a communist government in Toulouse, France, but we also know who de Bernonville is.

At the age of twenty he was created a knight of the Legion of Honour in recognition of his gallantry in the field. At twenty-three he became an officer of the Legion of Honour. He is the holder of several citations and was awarded the Croix de Guerre in 1918. He has been wounded several times; the soars of thirty wounds are proof of that. He was mentioned in dispatches and was awarded the Croix de Guerre in 1940. That citation was published in the French Journal officiel.

Those are the crimes on which the communist element of this country has based itself to force from the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a decision he has been refusing for two years.

While testifying in his own defence before the courts in Montreal, in 1948, Count Jacques de Bernonville made a declaration under oath. It has never been denied and no one has been able to contradict that statement.

Far from having caused Canadians to be massacred, as is stated in the indictment preferred against him, he was, on the contrary, instrumental in helping Canadian prisoners of war to escape. Such was the evidence given by Captain Masson during the hearing of the Jacques de Bernonville case in Montreal. And, on February 24, 1949, Mr. Frederic Dorion informed the house of this statement.

In view of the political persecution to which Jacques de Bernonville was subjected, he had the right to seek and secure asylum in another country. This asylum he sought in French 80709-15

The Address-Mr. Courtemanche Canada. Will Canada refuse to harbour this Frenchman who pays us the tribute of believing in Canadian liberty?

The laws of hospitality, the requirements of humanitarianism and those feelings which should come naturally to hearts still moved by appeals to compassion and honour, demand that political refugees should not be extradited. Modern Canada, more backward than eighteenth-century England,, has just given in to bloodthirsty wolves who are after the head of this man whose only fault was to believe in a hospitality he is so shamefully refused. -

History will pass a severe judgment upon those who were accessories to this deed. I dare hope that no Canadian will ever undergo such heart-rending tribulations as those which my country has deliberately inflicted upon a hero who could have expected more kindness from French Canada.

(Text):

Mr. W. J. Henderson (Kingston City):

Mr. Speaker, it is a great honour for me to say a few words in this debate this evening. First, I wish to congratulate the mover (Mr. McMillan) and seconder (Mr. Breton) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. In particular, I should like to say a few words about the mover. He is a graduate of Queen's university. I am pleased to see him here, and I hope that he will attain the height and the prestige in this house enjoyed by a former graduate of Queen's, the hon. Minister of National Revenue (Mr. McCann). It was an honour for me to accompany the member for Greenwood (Mr. Macdonnell) this fall to a special convocation at Queen's, and there to see an honorary degree conferred upon the Minister of National Revenue. I am sure that the university conferred this degree not only in recognition of his work as a minister in this house, but in recognition of his manner of assistance to others, of his services as a medical doctor in his community, and as a statesman of renown.

Tonight I wish to say a few words on a matter of less importance than the national emergency, but of importance to the preservation of the rights and independence of our citizens. I am pleased to see mention made in the speech from the throne of consideration of a measure respecting the abolition of the requirement of a fiat in cases of petition of right. I am sure that many of the members of the legal profession in Canada believe the time is long overdue for a complete reexamination of the crown's position in litigation, and also the special procedural immunities of the crown which should be regulated, cut down and possibly abolished.

The Address-Mr. Henderson

It is my personal feeling, and I am sure it is the feeling in the constituency of Kingston City, that there is an extremely urgent need for the St. Lawrence seaway and power project in relation to the security and development of this continent. It is apparent that any step which this house can take whereby the government can promptly and effectively co-operate with the United States in initiating this construction would be welcome.

In the many speeches in this house members have dealt with the armed forces in terms of dollars and numbers, and have made other references to the armed forces of Canada. For a few moments I should like to deal briefly with the reserve forces from my own practical, personal knowledge both of the district which I represent, and from the point of view of the three services in that area. In my reference to these forces I shall not deal with numbers and dollars, but I shall deal with them in such a way that we can see what is actually being done. It is my belief that the reserve forces are playing an important role, and have developed to the point where they could become a trained nucleus of active forces if called upon. Their commanders, officers, N.C.O.'s and men are exceedingly well trained. For the most part, they are men who have won their spurs in Dieppe, Italy, and the attack on D-day. They are young men still, and will be able to pass on the lessons of their experience to the younger men, N.C.O.'s and recruits. I believe that this is being done.

Speaking of the reserve army training at Petawawa this past summer under General Vokes, it was remarkable to see how the commanders, officers, and N.C.O.'s fitted into their roles as in real battle. At this particular period of training new equipment and improved equipment was available for inspection and use. I might say that this was particularly true with respect to the Royal Canadian Corps of Signals. This unit, as you know, has it headquarters at Vimy barracks outside of Kingston. This summer the unit had a divisional signals set-up and was demonstrating the equipment and lessons which had been learned on Exercise Sweetbriar. At first we may not think it important, but they went so far as to demonstrate how they properly winterproofed their vehicles, and their special type of stove in the wireless van so that the operators could be warm and able to function efficiently. These displays and schemes, I suggest, cannot be disregarded. Training of this nature provides an opportunity for the active force to bring the reserve force up to date.

I am pleased that in Kingston and district there is a great feeling of comradeship

amongst the R.C.A.F. veterans in their forming of the No. 416 wing, R.C.A.F. association. There are virtually hundreds of members, and they are associating themselves with the local air force cadet corps, No. 58 squads ron. It is my belief, in common with the member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. Mae-Dougall), that the greatest attention should be paid to the training of boys of high school age. They will be the pilots, gunners and navigators of tomorrow.

Turning to another branch of the service, may I say that the other night it was my privilege to pay a casual visit to H.M.C.S. Cataraqui, the reserve naval training ship at Kingston. It is under the able command of Commander Coleman. There I observed the training of sixty to seventy officers and cadets from Queen's university. This particular night was one of the nights of the week set aside for the university students, while the local corps is trained on the remaining nights. These officers and cadets were being directed in naval terms on the deck by officers who had gained their experience from active duty or in summer cruises, naval war games and manoeuvres. I might say that the instructors varied from highly technical instructors to those whom we called "frogmen". At one time the men were receiving instruction in close-armed combat, and at another they were receiving instruction in the operation of radar. I believe it is important for us to realize what these reserve units are doing today, and how fit these men will be if they are called upon to take their places in active duty. These officers and men would be available to assist in manning Canada's one hundred new naval vessels which were mentioned on Monday by the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton). After observing them train and knowing that they are aggressive and ambitious, I am sure that they will give a good account of themselves. I understand that similar training is universally available to naval reserve units. Those responsible for training of this nature are to be complimented. I am sure it is not a waste of the taxpayers' money.

I should like to discuss briefly our present war effort which results from world conditions. We have listened to the statement by the Minister of National Defence. We have all concerned ourselves with and have read a great deal about the modern machines of war. I am sure that it must strike us that the inventive power of the scientists in the world today is the greatest in history. If we are to win this war against communism, I am sure that one of our most important aids will be the use of these modern machines of war. It must seem to the people that the

The Address-Mr. Henderson

government was wise in not wasting the taxpayers' money on equipment which would now be obsolete, and which would not be in accord with that of our neighbour to the south. Now, through government planning and the purchase of modern equipment, we will avoid waste, and be one more spoke in the wheel in assuring the North Atlantic charter nations of victory with the least possible loss of life in the' event of total war, and at the same time provide a great threat of strength to an aggressor. I am quite sure that those who have read the papers of recent date and have seen the pictures of the explosion of the new bombs will agree that they will be a deterrent factor to any aggressor.

As the subject of the exchange system of the training of officers has been mentioned in this house, I might say that it has been my privilege in my constituency in the outskirts of which is located the Royal Military College, as well as the defence college, the staff college, the signal corps, the R.C.E.M.E. corps and other units, to observe officers from all nations on friendly terms with us, who come to those schools and associate with our Canadian officers. By that association I am sure there is not only the exchange of good will and friendship but the fostering of

better relations between nations in that we are bringing together our armies of the North Atlantic charter nations and moulding them into one, with the same idea. On the streets of our city you will see officers with uniforms quite different from our own going about observing our Canadian way of life and at the same time taking their training with our officers in Canada. There are some from India, some from France and others from Italy. They have dione the clubs and citizens of Kingston the honour of appearing before them and giving speeches about their homelands. Through the facilities provided by the Department of National Defence in this country and the exchange system as outlined by the Minister of National Defence (Mr. Claxton), I feel that we now have a great and strong link with other nations, and I am sure that our nation is the better for it.

In conclusion, may I say it is my belief that we are wise in following a plan such as that outlined by the government, of not losing a war before we have a battle.

On motion of Mrs. Fairclough the debate was adjourned.

On motion of Mr. Fournier (Hull) the house adjourned at 10.55 p.m.

80709-15J

Friday, February 9, 1951