June 1, 1965

PRIVILEGE

MR. ASSELIN, NOTRE DAME DE GRACE-COMMENT IN MONTREAL "STAR" RESPECTING COURT PROCEEDINGS


Mr. Edmund Asselin (Notre Dame de Grace): Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of personal privilege affecting my honour and the rights and privileges of all Members of the House. The question of privilege arises from an article which appeared on the editorial page of the Montreal Star, Friday, May 28, 1965, entitled "The Asselin Judgment". The editorial refers to a judgment rendered May 25, 1965 by the Honourable Mr. Justice Paul Trepanier in a case before the Superior Court, Province of Quebec, district of Montreal, No. 660-374 and to a transaction which I had with the Protestant School Board of Montreal in 1960 and 1961, before I became a Member of the House of Commons. This editorial says that I am not fit to sit in this House because, and I quote from the article: Mr. Asselin's dealings in this case were called into question by two inquiries. Mr. Justice Paul Trepanier's judgment, while dismissing the action and assessing costs against the school board, rejects out of hand the allegation that I was in a position of trust or an agent or a mandator of the board, in these words-and I quote from the third paragraph of the judgment on page 12: For the foregoing reasons the Court has come to the conclusion that the Plaintiff- That is the school board. -far from proving an express or a tacit mandate, has rather confirmed the allegations of the defence. That is myself. His Lordship deals with the other allegations in these terms. First I will quote from the last paragraph of page 12 of the judgment: However, because of the publicity surrounding this matter and because of the allegation of subterfuge attributed to the Defendant and the obtaining of confidential information which might have a damaging effect on the reputation of the persons concerned in this matter who hold public offices the Court considers itself justified in glancing at these allegations. Then at the bottom of page 13, after having rejected the allegations of subterfuge and having looked at the allegation of obtaining confidential information, he rejects both, in these words: Here again this allegation is absolutely contrary to the evidence. His Lordship, in summing up in the fourth paragraph on page 14 of the judgment, goes much further; and I quote again: On the whole, the Court has searched in vain for some motive to cast any blame whatsoever upon the Defendant or upon the officers of the Plaintiff- That is the school board. -in this whole transaction. Mr. Speaker, if the Montreal Star's proposition were allowed to stand, then any Member of this House whose actions, even before he became a Member of this House, were called into question by an inquiry would ipso facto become unfit to sit in the House of Commons, even though the only basis or premise on which his actions were questioned was later declared by a properly constituted court to be unfounded and contrary to the evidence. [DOT] (2:40 p.m.) If such were the case, Mr. Speaker, then any Member against whom unfounded accusations were levelled would be unfit to sit in this House, even though a judge of the Superior Court declared that there existed no impropriety and no reason to cast any blame whatsoever on that Member. The Montreal Star's editorial denies the right to equality before and recourse to the courts for all Members of this House who have or who might be subjected to unfounded accusations, particularly with regard to their conduct as private citizens before being elected to this House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.


MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER

PC

Robert Carman Coates

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Robert C. Coates (Cumberland):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege affecting all hon. Members of this House. On March 11, 1965, I placed on the order

June 1, 1985

Civil Aviation Policy

paper the question which now stands as question 1 under date of April 5. The last session concluded without this question being answered and I therefore transferred it to the order paper for this session. On March 18 I placed on the order paper the question which now stands as question 4 dated April 5. The last session concluded without an answer and it was also transferred. On May 6 I posed an oral question to the Secretary of State (Mr. Lamontagne) requesting a statement of Government policy related to parolees, and some ten days later posed a further question to the Secretary of State requesting an answer and was told the information was not available as yet from the Civil Service Commission.

Mr. Speaker, it should not require anything like three months to obtain the information requested by my written questions, and my oral question was not such as to necessitate a full month's preparation in order to provide an answer, if the Government does in fact have any policy in this regard.

The delays in providing information in respect of these examples would not indicate the type of attention that would ensure confidence in the minds of Members of the Opposition that rule changes presently proposed would be of value and benefit to those charged with the responsibility of determining the merit of Government action. I have been discriminated against by the Government and prevented from obtaining the information I have a right to, and which they have a solemn obligation to provide.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Permalink
LIB

Maurice Lamontagne (Secretary of State of Canada)

Liberal

Hon. Maurice Lamontagne (Secretary of State):

Mr. Speaker, I have been provided by the Civil Service Commission with an answer to this question. I am informed that parolees are afforded the same consideration that is provided under the Civil Service Act to all other candidates.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Permalink

AIR TRANSPORT

LIB

John Whitney Pickersgill (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Hon. J. W. Pickersgill (Minister of Transport):

Mr. Speaker, on April 24, 1964, I announced three principles which had been accepted by the Government as a basis for civil aviation policy. Since that time the main attention of the Government has been concentrated on working out the international aspect of civil aviation policy.

The first principle stated that, in the international field, air services provided by Canadian air lines should serve the Canadian

interest as a whole; that these services should not be competitive or conflicting, but should represent a single integrated plan, which could be achieved by amalgamation, by partnership or by a clear division of fields of operations.

In applying this principle, the Government decided to ask Air Canada and Canadian Pacific Airlines to see whether they could agree themselves, after consultation, upon a basis for its application. The two air lines have agreed that the most effective way to carry out this policy would be by a clear division of their fields of operations so that outside Canada neither air line would serve any point served by the other. After considering many possible divisions of the world between the two air lines, it was finally concluded that the simplest approach would be to agree that each line should continue to serve all the points now served by it and that the geographical areas now served by each should be defined and extend so that practically the whole world be open to service by one air line or the other.

As a result, it has now been decided that Canadian Pacific Airlines will serve the whole Pacific area, the whole continent of Asia, Australia and New Zealand, southern and southeastern Europe and Latin America. Air Canada will serve the United Kingdom, western, northern and eastern Europe, and the Caribbean. The only exception to the clearcut division is that Canadian Pacific Airlines will continue to serve the Netherlands. This division accounts for the whole of the world except Africa and the United States. For the time being, neither air line is contemplating service to any part of Africa and the question of service to Africa will be left aside until some practical question arises. In the case of the United States, we continue to hope that negotations for a new bilateral will soon be completed. Once they have been completed a decision will be made as to which of the new points is to be served by each of our national air lines.

The Government has undertaken to regard Air Canada and Canadian Pacific Airlines as its chosen instruments in the areas of the international operations allocated to each. The Government will pursue vigorously with the governments of other countries negotiations for extensions of Canadian service in their respective areas of operation. Negotiations have already been undertaken with several countries and as soon as these ne-

June 1, 1S65

gotiations are brought to a successful conclusion a further report will be made upon them.

Agreement has already been reached between the two carriers regarding sales and agency relationships. The agreement provides that in the international field each carrier is to represent the other to the best of its ability. The sales activities of both companies are on a basis of mutual assistance; sales personnel endeavour to meet the wishes of any customer by selling transportation over its own air line and, wherever feasible, over the other Canadian air line, so that passengers are encouraged to travel to their ultimate destinations by Canadian air lines. Other measures of co-operation between the two companies will be maintained. These include joint advice to the Government on bilateral air negotiations and joint servicing and support arrangements where appropriate.

The second principle announced on April 24, 1964, related to domestic main line services. In that announcement, competition was not rejected but the Government made it clear that any development of competition should not compromise or seriously injure the economic viability of Air Canada's main line domestic operations which represent the essential framework of its network of domestic services. In other words, it was stated that there must not be the kind of competition which would put Air Canada into the red; and, in the event that competition continued, the Air Transport Board should ensure an opportunity for growth to both lines above this basic minimum.

The Government has decided to employ a special aviation consultant to advise whether the growth of domestic main line service would now permit some further degree of competition on that basis and, if so, to recommend a suitable procedure for working out, from time to time, such extensions of service. Steps are being taken to secure the services of an outstanding international aviation consultant for this purpose.

The third principle announced on April 24, 1964 stated that a definition of the role for regional air carriers providing scheduled service was necessary, including a relationship with the main line carriers which would give the regional carriers a reasonable chance to operate without Governmental subsidies.

In the discussions with the Presidents of the two major air lines, it has been made clear that the Government expects them to take some responsibility to assist in working out that policy. There are many forms which such

Civil Aviation Policy

assistance might take, ranging through route transfers and route operations, contractual relations and various forms of technical and administrative support. Implementation of this co-operation is not something that will produce major results overnight, but it should have important results over a longer period.

The Presidents of the two major air lines as well as each of the major regional carriers are being requested to prepare special recommendations on measures by which they consider this third principle could be implemented; and on what specific steps could be taken by the major carriers, or by the Government, to improve the position of the principal regional air carriers. It is planned, in this connection, to arrange for continuing machinery of consultation and liaison between Air Canada, Canadian Pacific Airlines, the major regional carriers and the Government to ensure the development of adequate regional air carriers.

The development of Canadian civil aviation in accordance with these policies will provide for improved and more stable service for the Canadian public as well as a better economic framework for the carriers themselves. In the domestic field a degree of competition will remain to provide the public with the advantages that can result from a competitive atmosphere; while at the same time this policy will avoid the excesses of competition which were ruinous to all but one of the main railways of Canada in the past and which can result only in major added burdens for the taxpayer and, because of the inability of carriers to maintain heavy deficit positions, less satisfactory service to the public.

[DOT] (2:50 p.m.)

In the international field, competition with foreign carriers is already extremely keen and the joint approach by the two Canadian carriers will strengthen their position and provide better over-all service to the travelling public and a strengthening to Canada's position in world aviation.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   AIR TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   DIVISION OF FIELDS OF OPERATION BETWEEN TWO MAJOR CANADIAN AIR LINES
Permalink
PC

John George Diefenbaker (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Right Hon. J. G. Diefenbaker (Leader of the Opposition):

I say at once that it would have been most helpful if the Opposition could have been furnished with a copy of the hon. gentleman's statement, which was apparently furnished to the press but denied to the Members of the House. It is a course of action that is not in keeping with the vociferous ideas to make Parliament effective, as the other side of the House would sometimes indicate is the purpose of the amendments to the processes of Parliament. No

181C

June 1, 19S5

Civil Aviation Policy

indication was given in advance that this matter would come up, and therefore it is quite impossible to deal with each and every matter referred to. Suffice it to say at the moment that this question will have to be looked into carefully on the basis of the statement made by the Minister. I believe that a day should be set aside for the consideration of this most important matter. Certainly, Parliament has had no opportunity to give any consideration to these matters.

In so far as international air lines are concerned, apparently the world is to be divided, where Canadian lines are concerned, between Air Canada and Canadian Pacific Airlines. On the face of it, that may or may not be fair and in keeping with the assurance that the very best possible service will be assured to Canadians who use these lines. As to domestic air lines, while giving voice support to competition, to the kind of competition that is near and dear to the hearts of high bureaucrats, we find that there is going to be competition, but the competition will be limited by the fact that no lines shall suffer and that competition will be competition if necessary, but not necessarily competition.

I believe this whole question should be brought before a Standing Committee of the House on railways and transportation in general, so that the whole question can be looked into. It is a plan that is made up of many various facets, and when you come to analyse it in the short time that has been available since the Minister started to speak it seems to be one of those plans designed to meet the immediate situation, but not having in it that security and definiteness that the future of aviation ought to have. If Canada is to gain a tremendous lead in the field of civil aviation, its policies should be clearly defined and understandable and at the same time available for the fullest discussion in the House of Commons. I hope that the matter will be brought before a Committee. Certainly, it is a plan that has all the earmarks of having been designated on the drawing board. Whether or not both presidents agreed is beside the question. So far as Canadian Pacific Airlines are concerned, they have to take what they are given.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   AIR TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   DIVISION OF FIELDS OF OPERATION BETWEEN TWO MAJOR CANADIAN AIR LINES
Permalink
NDP

Robert William Prittie

New Democratic Party

Mr. R. W. Priitie (Burnaby-Richmond):

Mr. Speaker, I would second the words of the right hon. Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefenbaker). It would be very helpful if opposition spokesmen could have advance

copies of a complex policy statement such as we heard this afternoon.

I think if we are to have our two major air lines engaged in overseas business, it is well that there should be some agreement between them. At first glance it seems to me the division of the world is not quite equal and that C.P.A. has a much greater territory than Air Canada. In this connection I would be very much interested to see what traffic volumes there are in the divisions allocated to the air lines.

I believe the Minister said that on certain overseas routes C.P.A. would act as an instrument of Government policy. If this is the case, then I think all Members of the House would like to have the opportunity to question officials of C.P.A. in the Railways Committee, as they can now do with officials of Air Canada. If this company is to be acting for the Government in a certain capacity, then it should be open to question by hon. Members, and in the past we have not been able to do this.

Regarding domestic service, the Minister was not too specific concerning transcontinental runs. There is a suggestion that C.P.A. will receive more of the transcontinental routes than it has at present. I would remind him that for several years past, according to the testimony of the President of Air Canada, part of the losses suffered by that company were as a result of C.P.A. entering the transcontinental business. I hope we are not going to have a situation where competition is going to be allowed whether needed or not. We shall have to look into this very carefully.

Any remarks regarding regional air services we shall leave until there is a chance to study the Minister's statement in further detail.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   AIR TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   DIVISION OF FIELDS OF OPERATION BETWEEN TWO MAJOR CANADIAN AIR LINES
Permalink
SC

Bert Raymond Leboe

Social Credit

Mr. Bert Leboe (Cariboo):

Mr. Speaker, we are interested in the statement made by the Minister of Transport (Mr. Pickersgill) and we too are somewhat concerned about the fact that Parliament has not had the opportunity to deal as fully as it ought with the whole matter of transport policy.

Further, we would be very interested to know more about the regional carriers and where they fit into the picture. Mention was made of the regional carriers as such, and I would point out that the third largest air line in Canada today is Pacific Western Airlines. This air line is one that is giving very good service in the field in which it operates. It is an air line that is growing. It is one that will become more interested in many of the domestic routes presently held by other air

June 1. 1965

lines which provide transcontinental service, and in this connection I refer particularly to C.P.A. and its services on the Pacific coast.

We hope that before too long we will get an opportunity in Parliament to discuss the whole matter of aviation and transportation.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   AIR TRANSPORT
Sub-subtopic:   DIVISION OF FIELDS OF OPERATION BETWEEN TWO MAJOR CANADIAN AIR LINES
Permalink

CRIMINAL CODE

LIB

Anthony Robert Temple

Liberal

Mr. Robert Temple (Hastings South) moved

for leave to introduce Bill No. C-lll, to amend the Criminal Code (abolition of capital punishment).

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   CRIMINAL CODE
Sub-subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO ABOLISH CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Explain.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   CRIMINAL CODE
Sub-subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO ABOLISH CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Permalink
LIB

Anthony Robert Temple

Liberal

Mr. Temple:

Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to abolish capital punishment in its entirety and to substitute therefore in every case a minimum of life imprisonment.

Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   CRIMINAL CODE
Sub-subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO ABOLISH CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
Permalink

HOUSING

LIB

John Robert (Jack) Nicholson (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liberal

Hon. J. R. Nicholson (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) moved

the first reading of Bill No. S-8 (from the Senate), to amend the Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation Act.

Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Topic:   MR. COATES-REQUESTS FOR ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS ON ORDER PAPER
Subtopic:   HOUSING
Sub-subtopic:   ADDITIONAL OFFICERS FOR CROWN CORPORATION
Permalink

DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS QUEBEC-ADDRESS TO HER MAJESTY RESPECTING PROVINCIAL CONSTITUTION


On the orders of the day:


June 1, 1965