Mr. RINFRET:

My purpose in bringing these figures to the attention of the house is to emphasize the effort made by the Frenchspeaking population to understand its Englishspeaking compatriots and the lack of cooperation given in the other direction. Unilinguism, whether it comes from recognized French or English-speaking portions of the country, will not help union and understanding between the two big races. ,

Mr. Herbert Lank, vice-president of Canadian Industries Limited, born in Great Britain, recently delivered an address in French before the annual congress of the association of the commercial science graduates of the school of higher studies of the university of Montreal. He said:

(Translation):

I like your language and I am proud to be able to speak it. My knowledge of French, however limited it may be, has opened for me the door to your culture and your civilization, which are unfortunately beyond the reach of all too many English-speaking people, while your knowledge of English makes it easier for you to become acquainted with our culture and our civilization. Let us use our respective languages, which are priceless instruments for the purpose of carrying out beneficial exchanges, since the only result can be, on both sides, a higher civilization and culture.

(Text) :

I agree with Mr. Lank, and, with him, I regret that the desire to interchange studies

of cultures and civilization has been unfortunately one-sided, with the French element providing most endeavours and the Englishspeaking practically none.

I have referred to extremists or fanatics. Naturally they are the most prolific in articles and speeches. They speak the loudest, and they are given the most space in certain newspapers and elsewhere. Care should be exercised to prevent utterances unimportant and insignificant in one part of the country from being given undue publicity and thereby being exaggerated, or given credence to, in other parts of the country.

Fortunately for Canada, between the two poles of extreme thoughts that I have indicated lie the big majority of my fellow countrymen, those who have only one country, bounded by the Atlantic on one side and by the Pacific on the other; those who wish to make of Canada, of the whole of Canada, a true, a strong nation. They must unite to fight reactionary groups.

Leaving the anti-Canadians, pro any other country, whichever it might be, to their bifocal mentality, let those in favour of Canada-as a country-as a nation, as a sovereign state, not only wish for the realization of their ambition, but do something about it.

Let us follow the example set by 1'Abbe Maheux, and teach to all Canadians that Canada, in its entirety, is a real entity, a glorious reality, an object worth while cherishing. We must convince them that their hearts are sufficiently big to contain the love of their family, of their town, of their religion, of their province, and above all, of the whole of Canada.

We must teach to all Canadians that their country, as a matter of fact and reality, is a bicultural, bilingual one, that, in order for one section of the country to understand the other it is necessary to learn both languages and cultures. We must teach a common history of Canada, as a means of avoiding errors and horrors of the past, and as an inspiration for the accomplishment of what is advantageous to the homeland.

Finally, we must teach to all Canadians, a patriotism and a civism that will give one a proper sense of his responsibilities towards his country, whereby he will have more respect for his duty than for his privileges.

With these purposes in mind, the naturalization or citizenship act should be amended in such a way as to make us the Canadian subjects of His Majesty George VI, instead of maintaining directly or indirectly the anomalous and paradoxical appellation of Cana-dian-British subjects.

Canadian Citizenship

The election act should also be changed to grant voting rights only to, and restrict eligibility to, Canadian subjects. This would guarantee that no foreign-minded individual would sit in the House of Commons.

What I claim for Canada is a national synthesis, the preservation of the immeasurable wealth that could be accumulated by the contact of the many races and inherited from the various national cultures belong to Canada's people.

I want Canada for Canadians and Canadians for Canada. With the Right Hon. William Lyon Mackenzie King, "I desire to see the largest possible measure of the same ability to unite different religious groups in the support of a single national policy."

I would regret a continued lack of collaboration on the part of certain elements of the population, because in the words of Gabriel Jaray-

(Translation):

A divided Canada, instead of making the weight of her power felt in the sphere of world affairs and playing therein the part of an arbitrator, will find it difficult to maintain true independence, drawn along as she will he to one side or the other by outside pressures and internal oscillations.

(Text) :

Mr. RINFRET:

I was paired wifh the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontanio (Mr. Mac-donnell). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

Mr. RINFRET:

I was paired with the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Mac-donnell). Had I voted I would have voted against the amendment.

Mr. RINFRET:

I was paired with the hon. member for Muskoka-Ontario (Mr. Mac-donnell). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Mr. RINFRET:

Mr. Speaker, I was paired with the hon. member for MuskokajOntario (Mr. Macdonnell). Had I voted I would have voted against the motion.