Mr. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and ask him whether final disposition has been made of the question of forwarding a petition from the Indians to Her Majesty the Queen. Does the minister intend to follow the course previously outlined of looking into it himself rather than following the traditional policy toward Indians of permitting them to appeal direct to Her Majesty? If that is his view, will he table the petition so that we may know exactly the nature of this petition on behalf of these wards of the Canadian people who, while they have no votes, have rights?

Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration):

Mr. Speaker, having looked at Hansard for the past few days I rather anticipated I would be asked a question about this subject this morning. As I told the house on a previous occasion, since this petition came into my hands I have sought the advice of the legal advisers of the government as to the appropriate disposition to be made of it.

As hon. members are aware, and if they were not aware they were told I believe the day before yesterday by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent), the Queen in Canadian, affairs has only one group of advisers, her Canadian advisers. It is obvious that the Queen as a constitutional monarch can act only on advice. Obviously there would be no purpose served from any point of view by forwarding the petition without some responsibility being taken for such advice.

I have been advised by the deputy minister of justice and I shall read the advice I received from him as the house is perfectly entitled to know what I have received. This advice came to me in the usual constitutional 82715-70

manner through my deputy minister. The document is addressed to the deputy minister and reads as follows:

February 4, 1957.

The Deputy Minister,

Department of Citizenship and Immigration,

Woods Building,

Ottawa.

Dear Sir,

I understand that Mrs. Gorman, barrister, of Calgary, sent a petition addressed to Her Majesty to His Excellency the Governor General concerning proposed amendments to the Indian Act and that His Excellency in turn referred the matter to you.

You have asked my opinion whether the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is required to take any action in respect of the matters petitioned for. In my opinion, he is not.

I might add that it is established practice for the Governor General to refer matters of this kind to the responsible minister. .

Yours truly,

F. P. Varcoe,

Deputy Attorney General of Canada.

I may say that I have examined the petition and it does not appear to me to be in the form prescribed by the rules of the house for submission to the house. Since I am not an expert in these matters I would not wish to express any view of my own, but it does not appear to me that I should offer to table this petition without its being examined in the way prescribed by the rules. I may say, before the Leader of the Opposition gets too excited, that I would not have the slightest objection to the petition being made public; indeed I would be most happy that its contents should be known to every hon. member and to every other person interested, because the petition merely sets out the same arguments as have been made previously in other documents addressed to me and to the officers of my department. There is nothing new in it and there is no difference in substance from those arguments which have been made up to now by Mrs. Gorman, a barrister in Calgary, on behalf of the Indian Association of Alberta.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

Mr. Speaker, does the minister now say that the reason he will not table it is that this petition is not a petition that would be accepted by parliament if it had been made to parliament? Is that the ground?

Mr. Pickersgill:

What I said, sir, was that I have looked up the rules and it did not appear to me that this petition was in the

Inquiries of the Ministry form prescribed by parliament, and that I would not venture to offer to table it without that point being considered by you, Mr. Speaker, or by the appropriate officers of the house.

As to the substance of it, I have not the slightest objection. I would certainly be delighted to make copies of it available to every hon. member. But I do not want to break the rules of the house.

Mr. Stanley Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

I rise on a point of order, Mr. Speaker. My point of order arises out of the statement which has just been made by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. He said the petition should be looked at, and its propriety determined, before he tables it. Is it not the practice according to our rules -and I am looking at standing order No. 70-for a member who has received a petition to table it, and for the decision as to whether or not the petition is in proper form to be made by the clerk of petitions?

Standing order No. 70 provides under paragraph (1) for a petition to be tabled. Without reading all the paragraphs I will proceed to paragraph (7) which states:

On the next day following the presentation of a petition the clerk of the house shall lay upon the table the report of the clerk of petitions upon the petitions presented and such report shall be printed m the Votes and Proceedings of that day.

And so on. I do not think the rest of it is relevant.

My point, Mr. Speaker, is that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is usurping a function of the clerk of the house and the clerk of petitions. The petition may well be in a form which is not proper, but should not the clerk of petitions make that decision rather than the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?

Mr. Diefenbaker:

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to the point of order which has been raised.

This is just another example of the minister taking upon himself, and arrogating to himself, a power of censorship which he does not possess. This is not a petition to parliament. This was a petition to Her Majesty the Queen, and the hon. gentleman, in what appears to me to be a monstrous perversion of his rights, refuses to permit that petition to go to its destination.

Then, when a proper request is made that parliament should at least know what is in the petition, the minister resorts to what I consider to be another subterfuge in order to deny Indians the opportunity of bringing their petition of wrongs before the house. I think Your Honour will agree that the state-

rnent made by the minister at this time, and his latest stand on this subject, show not only lack of knowledge of the rules but a continued desire to act tyrannously toward these Indians.

Mr. Pickersgill:

On the point just raised by the hon. gentleman, may I say that I did not refuse to table this petition, and I am not refusing to do so. I said that I wished to stay within the rules of the house, and that I needed guidance on that point.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

There is no doubt about that.

Mr. Speaker:

With regard to this matter of order which has been raised: In the first place one would have to know to whom the petition has been addressed, because it must be borne in mind, according to citation 584 of Beauchesne, third edition, that a member cannot be compelled to present a petition. And according to citation 593:

Every petition should commence with the superscription: "To the Honourable the House of Commons in Parliament assembled." Then should follow the formula: "The Petition of the undersigned . . . humbly sheweth." Follows the subject-matter on the petition, in the third person through, and commencing each paragraph with the word "That". The conclusion should be the "Prayer" tersely and clearly expressing the particular object which the petitioners have in view in coming before parliament. The petition should close with the formal words: "and your petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray". Here follow the signatures which must be in writing and not typewritten or printed.

Without a prayer, a document will not be taken as a petition: and a paper, assuming the style of a declaration, an address of thanks, or a remonstrance only, without a proper form of prayer, will not be received.

There is no doubt that, according to standing order 70, once a petition is presented by a member, either by passing it over to the clerk or presenting it in the house at the beginning of routine proceedings, the clerk of petitions has the responsibility of examining it and making a report and the Speaker on that report will make a ruling whether or not the petition will be received. But it is up to the member who is in possession of the petition to do what he wishes, and that is the information which I think I might give the minister with respect to the matter. He is not compelled to deposit the petition, as it is said in citation 584, but if he wishes to do so he can leave it with the Clerk, the clerk of petitions will examine it and if it is not in conformity with the requirements of citation 593 the petition will have to be ruled out of order.

Mr. Pickersgill:

I thank Your Honour for this guidance and I will be glad to give the petition to the Clerk at the earliest possible moment.

Mr. D. S. Harkness (Calgary North):

I wish to direct a supplementary question to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration. Since the minister has made himself the final addressee of the petition from the Indian Association of Alberta instead of sending it on to Her Majesty the Queen to whom it was addressed-

Question.

Mr. Harkness:

-has the minister sent a reply in answer to the petition to the Indian Association of Alberta? If so, what is the reply?

Mr. Pickersgill:

Mr. Speaker, perhaps I might begin by saying that it does not surprise me that several members of the Tory party seem to want to go back to the days before responsible government when this country was ruled from London.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

That is just nonsense.

Mr. Harkness:

We do not have responsible government at this time, so perhaps we ought to go back.

Mr. Pickersgill:

Our position on this side of the house is that it is our duty to take our constitutional responsibilities. Now that I have received the advice I sought from the law officer of the government, I intend to make a reply to the lady who submitted the petition.