Mr. Speaker:

I have the honour to inform the house that I have received the following communication:

Ottawa, March 29, 1957

Sir:

I have the honour to inform you that the Honourable Patrick Kerwin, Chief Justice of Canada, acting as Deputy of His Excellency the Governor General, will proceed to the Senate chamber on Monday, the 1st April, at 5.45 p.m. for the purpose of giving the royal assent to certain bills.

I have the honour to be, sir,

Your obedient servant,

J. F. Delaute,

Secretary to the Governor General (Administrative)

Hon. W. E. Harris (Minister of Finance):

Mr. Speaker, I have spoken to hon. gentlemen opposite, and I think it has been agreed that notices of motions for the production of papers may stand for today.

Mr. Speaker:

Notices of motions for the production of papers; shall they all stand?

Agreed.

Mr. Howard C. Green (Vancouver-Quadra):

Mr. Speaker, on Friday I asked the Secretary of State for External Affairs some questions about a caution which the United States government had issued to United States shipping concerning the use of the Suez canal, and the minister replied that he was in touch with Washington and that he hoped to give the house a report at a later date. Is it possible for him to give us that report today?

Hon. L. B. Pearson (Secretary of State for External Affairs):

Mr. Speaker, the statement made by a representative of the United States government on this matter last Thursday or Friday to which the hon. gentleman referred

was that ship owners had been advised by the United States government to exercise prudence in the immediate use of the Suez canal. But the United States spokesman added that the state department did not desire to prescribe and prohibit such use at that time. This was interim advice to ship owners which I think might well be accepted by ship owners of other countries. As for Canada, there was no use made of the canal in the 12 months before last July by any ships of Canadian registry.

The question of a more permanent policy with regard to the use of the Suez canal, especially by those countries which are its main users, is now under consideration by the governments concerned, and no decisions have yet been reached by those governments. We are in touch with them on this issue.

Mr. Green:

A press report in today's Globe and Mail is headed, "West Seen Accepting Nasser Terms on Suez." Can the minister say whether or not that is correct?

Mr. Pearson:

No, Mr. Speaker, it is not correct, so far as I know, that the governments of the main users of the canal have yet taken any stand in regard to the terms, if you like to call them that, laid down last week by the government of Egypt. That matter is under consideration and, as I have just said, according to our knowledge no final decision has been reached by any government.

Mr. Green:

What is the significance of the statement by Nasser in Egypt over the week end that Israeli shipping will not be allowed to use the canal unless and until the Arab refugees are allowed to return to Israel?

Mr. Pearson:

I cannot attach any particular significance to that statement, which I have noticed in the press. A statement of that kind, if it were the official position of the Egyptian government, would in our opinion be running counter to resolutions of the United Nations which have previously been passed dealing with free navigation of the Suez canal, and as such certainly would not be approved by us. Also I cannot agree that there is any connection between freedom of navigation of the Suez canal and an appropriate disposition of the refugee problem, important as that problem is.

Inquiries of the Ministry CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION

Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

Mr. Speaker, may 1 direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the disclosures that came out last week following Arthur Blakely's charge of last Monday, will the Prime Minister give consideration to the further charges made by this same gentleman in this morning's Montreal Gazette and inform the house which of his cabinet colleagues have made stiff representations to the C.B.C.?