Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):

I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Revenue arising out of his answer to the question asked by the hon. member for Kenora-Rainy River. In his reply the minister indicated that various contradictory reports had come out of the United States concerning the action or possible action in Washington by the United States tax department.

I should like to ask the minister this question. If he discovers that the United States tax department is determined to go ahead with the appeal in the Premium case, will he then ask his colleagues in the government to join him in making a stronger protest to the United States government against their action? Because it would indicate, in my judgment, that the aide-memoire which had been sent previously and which this government merely reiterated in its recent note was not strong enough medicine.

Mr. Low:

Mr. Chairman, I hope the Minister of Finance and the Acting Minister of Citizenship and Immigration will believe me

4190 HOUSE OF COMMONS

Supply-Citizenship and Immigration when I say sincerely that the position I took earlier, like the position I am taking now, is not a matter of a sham battle. With me it is not a question of jitters because I am as strong as a summer morning, and I am not worried about anything except the attempt to do something here in a manner different from that in which I think it should he done.

It was not a question with me, of jumping on the bandwagon of the C.C.F. party, though let me make it abundantly clear that just because the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre raised this question there is no reason why I should not support it if I feel he is right, and it is because I feel his case is right and I do support it. When it was said by the Minister of Finance that here was a case of the leader of the Liberal party being led by the C.C.F., I seemed to remember an occasion about two years ago when his party did a similar thing for about two solid weeks.

Mr. Low:

In the earlier part of his contribution to this debate the Minister of Finance tried to bury the real issue in a flood of tears shed evidently for the starving Hungarians. Nobody had denied that the government had the right, and, indeed, the obligation, to pass governor general's warrants for the purpose of taking care of the Hungarian situation in so far as it affected us. Not a single member of the house objected to that, and certainly we did not object because we felt it was right and proper for the government to make a provision by warrant for this expenditure, which had not been provided for in the normal way. But the Minister of Finance did not, at any point in his argument, touch the real issue.

Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the Minister of Agriculture arising out of his reply to the question asked by the hon. member for Vegreville. Will the minister take a more careful look at the definition of "farmer" as it appears in the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, and also at the way in which that definition is interpreted in the administration of the act, to see if it might not be made a more reasonable definition and a more reasonable interpretation so that realistic consideration could be given to many people who are forced to seek employment off the farms during the coming year?

Mr. Low:

I wonder whether I might ask the minister what kind of instrument is used as security for those loans. Is it a treasury bill of some sort? If so, just how is it issued?

96698-255J

Northwest Territories Act