PRIVILEGE-MR. POULIOT REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN THE TORONTO GLOBE AND MAIL
Mr. JEAN-FRANQOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): Mr. Speaker, I rise to a question of privilege. The Toronto Globe and Mail published on December 17 last an editorial in which the following sentence appears: How was Mr. Purvis honoured by the Canadian government for the time and energy he gave unsparingly? When his report was under debate in the House of Commons in April, 1938, the Liberal member for Temiseouata created a scene by throwing a copy on the floor and calling it "rotten", demanding the deportation of Mr. Purvis to his native country, England, as an undesirable. Although Hon. Norman Rogers, Minister of Labour, rebuked the irresponsible member, we have no information that Prime Minister King was moved out of his complacency. The Globe and Mail was born of a merger of two respectable papers, one being the Globe, which was a respectable Liberal organ. In its issue of May 24, 1935, the Globe carried an editorial entitled " 'Irresponsible'-Never", which reads as follows: An Ottawa dispatch from the editor of the Globe, appearing in yesterday's issue, contained one of those unfortunate errors generally classified as "typographical", and one which, in this instance, was particularly ridiculous. As written in Ottawa it referred to M. Jean-Frangois Pouliot as "the irrepressible member for Temis-couata"; in print the word "irrepressible" became "irresponsible"! The member for Temiseouata being anything but "irresponsible", the mistake is obvious to those who know him. If "irrepressible" had been changed to "irresistible", indefatigable", or any one of a dozen other words that would apply aptly to M. Pouliot, it would not have been so bad-but "irresponsible" is the limit of absurdity. However, the imp that muddies such things had its way. M. Pouliot is among the valuable members of the house, well informed on all subjects; a tireless worker, who of late has added to his parliamentary duties the difficult task of compiling a sadly needed classification of unemployed persons in Canada, which will be of the greatest value in relief work. The editorial concludes with a quotation from Horace Greeley. The other parent of the Globe and Mail was the Mail and Empire, a highly respectable Tory paper, which in its issue of May 18, 1936, referred to the member for Temiseouata in these words: Mr. Pouliot is just about the most interesting and the most hopeful figure which the present parliament possesses. . . . Likeable and always courteous, sincere and hard-working. Such are the attributes which commend him. . . . The only sure conclusion is that he is definitely one of parliament's significant personalities. It is likely that democracy could not function if every member of parliament insisted on being a Pouliot.
It is also a fact, however, that many of the abler members of parliament would go far towards restoring parliament to its traditional ideal if they fashioned themselves more on the Pouliot model of independence to party domination, and diligence.
Now, sir, just one word. I was mentioning the fact that the Globe and Mail was produced by merging two respectable papers, one Liberal and one Tory; and the result is a still-born shrimp-un avorton mort-newhich is a true emblem of the national government which is advocated by such hon. members as the member for Parkdale (Mr. Bruce).
WAR MUNITIONS AND MATERIALS JOHN INGLIS COMPANY-TABLING OF CONTRACTS AND ORDERS IN COUNCIL
Hon. C. D. HOWE (Minister of Munitions and Supply):
I desire to lay on the table,
as requested by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Hanson) all contracts between the Department of Munitions and Supply and the John Inglis company, and copies of all orders in council passed in that connection.
Subtopic: JOHN INGLIS COMPANY-TABLING OF CONTRACTS AND ORDERS IN COUNCIL
DOMINION-PROVINCIAL CONFERENCE QUESTION AS TO CARRYING OUT OF SOME OF RECOMMENDATIONS OF ROWELL-SIROIS REPORT
On the orders of the day:
Hon. R. B. HANSON (Leader of the Opposition) :
I desire to ask a question of the
Prime Minister. In a return tabled yesterday, sessional paper 103C, being the correspondence between the dominion government and the governments of Manitoba and Saskatchewan with reference to the royal commission on dominion-provincial relations, there appears a letter under date September 23, 1940, from1 the Prime Minister of Canada to the Premier of Manitoba. In that letter appears the following paragraph:
You will appreciate that it may be possible to carry out some of the commission's recommendations without calling a conference in the first instance. So far as it may appear to be in the national interest and that of the provinces so to do, the government intends to proceed accordingly.
Will the Prime Minister be good enough to indicate to the house at an early day what recommendations of the so-called Sirois
Suspension oj Standing Order
commission might, in the opinion of the government, be carried out without the calling of a conference in the first instance, and what action is now proposed by the government with respect to such recommendations?
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING
(Prime Minister): As my hon. friend has been kind enough to ask me to reply to that question at an early day, I shall be happy to do so.
Mr. HANSON (York Sunbury):
Very well. BUSINESS OP THE HOUSE
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 60 TO PROCEED WITH WAR APPROPRIATION MEASURE
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):
It was understood at the time of adjournment yesterday that, if the house would give its consent to-day, the government would proceed with the introduction of the resolution on which the war appropriation bill for 1941-42 is based. To proceed, however, with that resolution will require, as I have indicated, not only the unanimous consent of the house but its consent to waiving standing order 60, which is as follows:
If any motion be made in the house for any public aid or charge upon the people, the consideration and debate thereof may not be presently entered upon, but shall be adjourned till such further day as the house thinks fit to appoint; and then it shall be referred to a committee of the whole house, before any resolution or vote of the house do pass thereupon.
The motion to ask the consent of the house to dispense with standing order 60 will be put by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) when he requests permission to introduce the resolution. I am referring to the matter at the outset in order that 'hon. members may appreciate the procedure suggested and comment upon it if they so desire. Hon. members will see that the regular procedure, if one followed the rules literally, would prevent the house having before it any explanation of the war appropriation bill earlier than Thursday of this week; because, while the notice appears on the votes and proceedings of today, to-morrow it would appear under government orders, and at that time the Minister of Finance in giving notice of his intention to proceed would be obliged to advise the house that His Excellency the Governor General had been informed of the subject matter of the resolution and recommended it to the consideration of the house, and that on the day following he would move that the house go into committee of the whole to consider the resolution. To follow that routine of procedure-
which has much to commend it at certain times but would seem rather to impede progress at the present time-would occasion delay and would, I imagine, deprive hon. members getting, as early as they would wish to receive it, the information which the Minister of Finance would give on presenting the resolution.
May I say that the government has no desire to press any of its measures at any stage unless so doing is going to accommodate the house generally. I should like it to be distinctly understood that we will not press for the advancement of the resolution by a single stage, certainly not at this stage of the reassembling of the house. But I do think hon. members will agree that it would be desirable to have some business to proceed with this afternoon. If the motion is carried we will then have the opportunity of receiving at once a statement on the war appropriation bill from the Minister of Finance. How much further proceedings should be carried will be, of course, a matter for the house itself to decide.
Hon. R. B. HANSON (Leader of the Opposition):
I should like to say on behalf
of this party that we are cognizant of all the things which the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has alluded to. Further I would like to observe that probably this is the most important resolution in size or magnitude, measured by dollars and cents, which has ever come before the Canadian House of Commons. The figures which have been spoken of and which will be revealed are almost fabulous to us who deal in small things. Therefore I agree with the Prime Minister that there should not be the slightest move on the part of anyone, least of all the government, to press the matter forward. But I do think it would be a pity if we should have to wait two days formally to get the matter before this House of Commons and to have the minister make his opening statement.
So far as we are concerned we shall be glad to waive the rules with respect to notice and have the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) make his motion this afternoon, and his preliminary speech, on the understanding that the debate will be adjourned in order that I, and everybody else I would hope, may give due consideration to the magnitude of this proposal of the government, having regard to the times through which we are passing. The figures are astonishing. The Canadian people must be brought to a realization of the greatness of the effort as measured in terms of dollars and cents and all that that implies. Therefore, so far as we are concerned, we shall facilitate the introduction of the motion on the under-
War Appropriation-Mr. Ilsley
standing that ample time be given not only for the membership of this house but for the general public, through the medium of the great press of Canada, to understand just what is involved in it.
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
I understand the leader of the opposition to say that he gives his consent to the motion being immediately introduced by the Minister of Finance, on the understanding that if the motion carries and the minister introduces the resolution and makes his speech thereon the debate will then be adjourned.
Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):
That is my understanding.
Mr. MACKENZIE KING:
May I observe that we are perhaps apt to forget that parliament has been already in session for four or five weeks. Hon. members may not recall as clearly as they would had there been no adjournment, what was said during the debate on the address. If the session were being opened now, I should feel that, at the time of the introduction of the war appropriation bill, it would be desirable for the ministers of defence and the Minister of Munitions and Supply to make statements outlining the activities of their departments in relation to Canada's war effort. But these statements, however, have already been made. They appear in Hansard. For that reason the government does not propose to have that particular course repeated at this time.
Hon. members will recall that when the war appropriation bill was introduced at the last session, I made in concise form a statement setting forth the government's war effort programme. Yesterday, speaking on foreign affairs, I took advantage of the opportunity to include in my remarks a concise statement of the government's present programme. There will be no necessity, therefore, to repeat that statement.
I mention these two facts as hon. members, in debating this particular resolution and the bill, may wish to refresh their memories by looking up in Hansard the reviews made by my colleagues and the activities of these several departments and also should they so desire that portion of my remarks of yesterday outlining the government's war programme. For this reason, I agree with the leader of the opposition that it would be in the interests of all concerned to have at this stage of the session, an adjournment after the Minister of Finance has spoken. I share his view that there has never been any measure introduced in the parliament of Canada which has involved as large an expenditure as the bill which will be based upon the resolution which
is to be presented to-day. I believe that the public of Canada will appreciate the desire of hon. members to have as much time as possible carefully to study that statement in all its implications before beginning to debate the resolution. The public will realize that, as we have just come back after an adjournment of several weeks, the only means whereby such an opportunity could satisfactorily be afforded would be to adjourn the proceedings of the house for the remainder of the day so that hon. members might prepare themselves for further debate to-morrow.