Mr. LUDGER DIONNE (Beauce):

action again. I note that the government has lent money to different devastated foreign countries in order that they may buy the necessities of life in the Canadian market, and I congratulate them upon this effort. It is a constructive move to provide additional markets, and I hope no effort will be spared on the part of the government to continue this policy of attracting additional customers to Canada.

As for the citizens of Canada, who are against the loan and who would use this argument for political purposes, I believe the times are too serious to adopt such an attitude. Rather I would ask these people to suggest practical means of coping with the situation. I am in favour of constructive criticism. No national problem has ever been solved by appealing to the passion of the masses through the medium of destructive criticism.

I imagine some people will not appreciate the ideas I have expressed, but I thought it my duty to submit these remarks for the consideration of the government. I would ask my colleagues to remember that it is a much easier job to watch the flock than to be watched by the flock. By this I mean that I could have let the resolution or motion go through without offering my ideas for the consideration of the people of Canada. But the very first act I was called upon to perform upon my entry to the House of Commons was to swear that I would be loyal and faithful to my country, so that I feel under obligation to join in the debate and express my thoughts, even though some people may not share my views. Even if I am wrong, I hope they /will give me credit for being sincere. In other words, if I favour this loan it is because I think it is in the interests of Canada. Even if the failure of England were at stake I would try to help, but not at the expense of Canada. But if England' fails and Canada has to follow the same course, then it becomes too serious to take any chance.

Mr. LUDGER DIONNE (Beauce):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to say just a few words to justify my attitude in regard to bill No. 15. Having received letters from many people in my constituency who do not approve this bill, I should like to point out publicly the reasons why I am in favour of it.

Before going any further I admit that I do not like any more than anybody else these orders in council which give or delegate powers to a bureaucracy who are not in any way responsible to the people. On the other hand, everybody will admit that we are facing a situation which has practically no precedent. The present session is getting near its end. We cannot expect the members to stay in continuous session to take care of any emergency which may arise from time to time. So

National Emergency

authority of some kind must be delegated to some body to deal with the matter in the absence of the members.

I shall confine my remarks on the bill to its essence or spirit, without going into the details of the sections. At present, as everybody knows, there is such an acute shortage of goods not only in this country but all over the world that if there were no controls at all, prices would reach a ceiling never thought of. What would happen then? The poor people would be deprived of the necessities of life. What I have said regarding prices of goods applies as well to wages.

It has been said in this house that this bill No. 15 jeopardizes the rights of the provinces. But if we had to wait for the provinces to take action in the matter and control the situation it wrould certainly take a long time, during which the people of this country would suffer.

I will admit that drastic legislation such as that outlined in this bill is not agreeable to the people of this country, but action must be taken to protect the people, even if they do not like to be protected. It is the duty of the authorities to do it. When a person has to undergo a surgical operation he does not stop to think whether he likes it or not; it simply has to be done. I consider that the government has to perform a surgical operation presently for the benefit of the people of Canada, and if the government did not take the proper means to do it, it would not be justifying the confidence which the people have put in their representatives.

I would respectfully draw the attention of hon. members of this house to the fact that these remarks of mine are against my own interest. If I had my personal interest in mind I should vote against the bill, because the foreign markets are interested in buying certain goods that are made in Canada, and I could dispose at a premium of the goods which are produced in factories in which I am interested. As a matter of fact I could sell in the United States and South American countries many times the quantity of goods which I manufacture and of which the export is now prohibited. This goes to prove that it is against my own interest to favour legislation such as is outlined in bill No. 15. But I understand that as a member of parliament I must forget my own interest for the benefit of the public at large. That is the reason why I shall vote in favour of bill No. 15.

Before taking my seat I am proud to pay a tribute of admiration to the hon. Minister of Justice (Mr. St. Laurent) for acting in such a virile manner in presenting this bill under such adverse circumstances.