Mr. LADNER:

The Prime Minister may not have prepared it himself, but the intended effect of the statement was to be entirely political and to affect the next election.

Mr. LADNER:

The Prime Minister has stated that the differences between the treaties were of minor importance, but he takes great care to expand the degree of difference which exists with respect to every particular clause. Speaking for the members on this side of the house I want to say that their sentiments and desire were to view the clauses of the treaty between Canada and the United States in the interests of Canada, and to safeguard the great industry concerned. Had we been in a state of animated disturbance like my good friend the Minister of National Health (Mr. King), during his speech between last year and this year we might have developed the subject matter of the treaty distinctly along partisan lines. That, however, was not the intention of hon. members on this side of the house. The idea was to produce a sound treaty, and the fact that modifications have been made is indicative that changes were necessary. The fact that the Prime Minister was willing to let the treaty stand last year and bring it up this year during the last days of the session is indicative of the fact that he could not have had a full faith in the soundness of the treaty last year. Perhaps

Cockeye Salmon Fisheries

I should not put it that way, but I may say that at least he must have been satisfied that it could not have been put through last year. I regret the position taken by ithe Prime Minister when he uses this treaty to develop a bias of political partisanship where circumstances did not require and did not warrant such action. After all we are concerned with a public question highly important in international affairs and with the working out of the ideas contained in the treaty. It 'has constructive features and its operation might be beneficial to Canada as a whole, in which we as citizens and members of parliament are interested.

I commend the treaty; I believe the principles involved in both the treaties of last year and this year were sound, and that good will be the result. I reflect the suggestions made by some other hon. members that wisdom, discretion and care should be exercised in the presentation of our case to the commission, because we will not only be faced with important and difficult problems but we will be met by the best brains of the United States.

Section agreed: to.

On section 2-Inconsistent legislation.

Mr. LADNER:

I really wanted the frank judgment of the minister, from a business point of view.

Mr. LADNER:

I rose a moment ago to ask the minister a question in respect to item 316. This provides for an expenditure of $367,000 in connection with exhibitions and fairs. Has the minister any tangible evidence of the result which these exhibitions bring to the country?

Mr. LADNER:

The Prime Minister says no. The fact however is quite evident to those of us who know what has been going on. We can read between the lines of ithe remarks of the Prime Minister, and when we view some of his remarks which have appeared in type and consider the care with which they were recorded, it is clear to anyone who can read and can understand that the intention of those remarks and those recorded documents was of a partisan political nature.