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

I wish to announce that all advances made by Northern Ontario Pipe Line Crown Corporation to Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited to finance the construction of the western section of the all-Canadian natural gas pipe line have been repaid. Although under the provisions of the Northern Ontario Pipe Line Crown Corporation Act the corporation has been authorized to make loans to Trans-Canada of 90 per cent of the cost of construction of the western section or $80 million, whichever was the lesser, the actual advances made pursuant to the indenture of mortgage dated June 7, 1956, amounted to $49,750,000. The amount repaid to the corporation was $50,716,603.03, made up as follows: advances, $49,750,000; interest at 5 per cent on advances, $880,071.40; costs of the crown corporation relating to the advances, $86,531.63, making a total of $50,716,603.03.

The Northern Ontario Pipe Line Crown Corporation, in addition to administering the loan to Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited to finance the western section, is responsible for the construction of the northern Ontario section of the pipe line which will extend approximately 675 miles from the Manitoba-Ontario border to the vicinity of Kapuskasing.

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

Would the Prime Minister or the Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs let the Canadian people know what stand Canada is taking in reference to the question of the imposition of sanctions? This is now before the United Nations. A decision may have been made this morning. Whatever the decision was, I think it should be brought to the attention of parliament.

Hon. Paul Marlin (Acting Secretary of State for External Affairs):

Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend did not give me notice of his intention to ask this question and I will 82715-105

have to speak from recollection. The Secretary of State for External Affairs was to address the general assembly this morning. He had anticipated doing so yesterday afternoon but the assembly postponed its deliberations in the expectancy that, as a result of negotiations that were then under way, the situation might have improved somewhat.

In the statement which he proposed to make the Secretary of State for External Affairs outlined the desirability of considering the position of all parties involved, and I believe it would be best at this stage to wait and see the result of the suggestions which he proposed outlining in a general way before we make further observations, particularly in the light of discussions that may be taking place now. But, as the Secretary of State for External Affairs himself indicated clearly, Canada thought that before taking final action in this matter along the lines suggested in my hon. friend's question every attempt ought to be made through negotiation to bring about a settlement that would take into account the interests of Israel and other countries.

Right Hon. L. S. Si. Laurent (Prime Minister):

Mr. Speaker, evidently my colleague has not yet seen the dispatch which has just come through and which is a summary report of what took place this morning. Perhaps I might read it into the record. It is the last word we have received from New York:

External Affairs Minister Pearson placed a four-point plan for settlement of the Israeli-Egyptian deadlock before the United Nations today. However, he conceded that it was not completely satisfactory to either side. Russia immediately labelled the plan as pro-Israel and joined Asian-Arab demands for quick action to impose economic, financial and military restrictions on Israel.

It may very well be that others will say it is pro-Arab. We think it is pro-peace, and that was the objective that the Secretary of State for External Affairs was and is pursuing. The dispatch goes on:

External Affairs Minister Pearson's plan to get Israeli troops out of Egyptian territory was suggested today at a meeting of the general assembly. As a solution, he proposed that Israel and Egypt formally abide by the 1949 armistice agreement. Mr. Pearson also proposes that United Nations police units deploy along the demarcation line to prevent raids from either side. He suggested it should be agreed there would be no interference with the innocent passage of ships through the gulf of Aqaba. Mr. Pearson further proposed that United Nations units be deployed in the Gaza strip and that the United Nations gradually displace the Israeli civil administration in the area.

Inquiries of the Ministry

Mr. Diefenbaker:

Mr. Speaker, that still does not answer the question. Provided that this plan is not accepted, can we have the assurance in this house that was given by the Prime Minister of Great Britain that Great Britain will not support sanctions? I asked that question two weeks ago, and the answer given then was that the matter was being considered. What is Canada's attitude going to be? Is it going to accept sanctions or it is going to do that which I believe the realities of the occasion demand, and that is not support sanctions?

Mr. St. Laurent (Quebec East):

I think the dispatch I have just read clearly indicates that we do not think sanctions are justified at this moment. If a plan such as this, which seems to take care of the realities of the situation with respect to both parties, is not accepted by one or the other, that would create a different situation. But we do not think at the present time, with only what has taken place up to this time, sanctions would be justified.

Mr. Alistair Stewart (Winnipeg North):

May

I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Will the Prime Minister inform the house as to whether or not we shall be given an opportunity to debate this matter if Canadian policy is changed?

Mr. St. Laurent (Quebec East):

Mr. Speaker, I think there are not many matters that hon. gentlemen have not found an opportunity to debate since this session started.

Mr. D. F. Brown (Essex West):

Mr. Speaker, may I be permitted to direct a question to the Minister of Labour. Would the minister advise us what the present situation is with respect to the work of the commissioner on the Polymer strike at Sarnia?

Hon. Milton F. Gregg (Minister of Labour):

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member notified me that he intended to ask a question on this matter and also the hon. member for Lambton West (Mr. Murphy) has indicated his continuing interest. Perhaps my reply could provide both them and the house with the information.

A strike deadline in this dispute was set by the union for 7.30 a.m. yesterday and at that hour plant operations started to shut down on a progressive basis as previously arranged between the union and the company in the event that a settlement of the dispute

was not effected by that time. Under this arrangement, the strike does not become fully effective until March 4.

However, by the time the strike deadline had been reached, Mr. Eric Taylor, the commissioner whom I had appointed to mediate the dispute, had succeeded in narrowing down the disputed issues from approximately sixty to seven. This had been accomplished by almost continuous negotiations over a period of several days prior to the strike deadline. Yesterday morning, after an all-night session, negotiations were adjourned until ten o'clock this morning when Mr. Taylor was to make an effort to conciliate the remaining issues in dispute. I have every reason to hope that the full effects of a strike will be averted.

Mr. Clarence Gillis (Cape Breton South):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Public Works. Can the minister inform the house as to what progress was made in his meeting with the premier of Nova Scotia and a delegation that accompanied him, in regard to the future of the town of Westville in Nova Scotia?