Mr. Speaker:

I think it would be the wish of every hon. member that I express the pleasure of the house at seeing the hon. member for Vancouver-Kingsway (Mr. Maclnnis) back in his place again.

Mr. Angus Maclnnis (Vancouver-Kingsway):

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am glad to be back. As far as I am concerned this is home.

Hon. Stuart S. Garson (Minister of Justice):

Mr. Speaker, while I was absent in Alberta last week, the hon. Leader of the Opposition asked the following question, and I quote from page 4813 of Hansard:

In the absence of the Minister of Justice, Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Prime Minister. In view of the fact that the Conrad Hilton chain is now operating under a contract with the publicly owned hotel which is in process of construction in Montreal-in the absence of the minister the Prime Minister may prefer to take this as notice-has consideration been given to the effect under the Combines Investigation Act of the agreement made between the Canadian National Railways and the Conrad Hilton chain from the point of view of the restrictive practices outlined in that agreement?

May I say, Mr. Speaker, that the answer to the hon. gentleman's question is as follows. The combines branch has noted the reports about a management contract between the Canadian National Railways and the Hilton hotel group. Since the information before the branch does not indicate that the Hilton group has other hotel interests in Canada, any such contract would not appear to give rise to inquiry under the Combines Investigation Act.

Inquiries of the Ministry In other words, in so far as Canada is concerned this would seem to be a case of substituting one independent management for another, rather than a combination or merger between two groups already in the country.

There is also doubt that hotel accommodation could be considered an article or commodity, within the meaning of the anticombines legislation, which refers to combinations and mergers in respect of articles and commodities.

Hon. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, supplementary to the reply just given by the Minister of Justice, might I ask if it is not correct that there is an agreement between the Conrad Hilton group and the Canadian National Railways to the effect that no agreement shall be entered into by the Canadian National Railways with any other hotel chain that might compete with the Conrad Hilton group?

Mr. Garson:

Mr. Speaker, not having seen the agreement, I am sure that I could not say whether a clause of that kind is in it or not. In any event I do not know whether that would affect the validity of the answer I have just given.

Mr. Drew:

Mr. Speaker, might I ask, if the Minister of Justice does not know what is in the contract, how does he know whether it infringes the Combines Investigation Act?

Mr. Garson:

Mr. Speaker, I thought my answer made this very clear. In case the import of my answer has not sunk home, perhaps I had better repeat it:

Since the information before the branch does not indicate that the Hilton group has other hotel interests in Canada, any such contracts would not appear to give rise to an inquiry under the Combines Investigation Act. In other words, so far as Canada is concerned, this would seem to be a case of substituting one independent management for another rather than a merger or combination between two groups already in the country. That is to say, in order to make it abundantly clear, if the contract simply relates to the management of one hotel and is not an understanding as to prices to be charged between two competing hotels, there would not seem to be any possibility of conflict with the statute, regardless of any clause contained in the contract, such as that referred to by the hon. Leader of the Opposition.

Mr. Drew:

May I ask the minister if he does not recognize that he has just raised a question as to competition between units of the Conrad Hilton hotels. That is not what we have in mind. It is restriction on the

(Mr. Garson.]

right of the Canadian National Railways to enter into other contracts with other organizations which may compete with the Conrad Hilton hotels. If that is not restriction I do not know what it would be. I must confess that I do not know how the minister can express an opinion if he does not know what the contract says.

Mr. Donald M. Fleming (Eglinton):

Mr. Speaker, may I ask a question of the Minister of Trade and Commerce? Has the government given consideration to the new regulations issued by the United States treasury with respect to the establishment of fair value on imports in relation to dumping, and also to the bill that was produced in congress last month on the same subject? Is the government satisfied that these measures do not contravene the provisions of the general agreement on tariffs and trade? If the government is of the opinion that they do, what action is the government taking in the direction of making representations in regard to either the regulations or the bill before congress?

Right Hon. C. D. Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce):

Mr. Speaker, I shall take that question as notice. I shall need to consult my officials before I give a reply, but I shall try to reply tomorrow.

Mr. E. D. Fulton (Kamloops):

May I ask

the minister whether, with respect to the Brent case,-that is the case involving a deportation order which was raised in the house last week-he is in a position to say whether a decision has been taken to appeal; and if so, whether he expects that appeal will be dealt with in the near future?

Hon. Siuari S. Garson (Minister of Justice):

In reply to my hon. friend's question I may say that preliminary steps have been taken toward the launching of an appeal. We anticipate that the appeal will come on for hearing at the October sittings of the Supreme Court of Canada.