Mr. Reid Scolt (Danforih):

Mr. Speaker, the matter which I wish to raise at this time arises out of a question put to the Minister of Industry (Mr. Drury) on orders of the day regarding the United States auto pact and, in particular, the alleged loss of millions of dollars that is taking place as a result of the proposed cancellation of certain orders of metal stamping companies engaged in the industry.

We raised with the minister today the very genuine fears being expressed by United Auto Workers and their legitimate requests for a tripartite meeting amongst the unions, the minister and the industry involved. As has been the case throughout the history of this agreement, this request has been arrogantly brushed aside by the minister. In my judgment this corresponds with his attitude since the inception of the pact.

When this matter first came before us, we could not get any information. We finally had to write to the United States to get sufficient information. We were unable to get proper answers from the minister. We were unable to have the matter go to a committee where it could be studied. We were merely told that in their almighty judgment they knew what was right.

The minister will recall that we tried to have adjustment assistance for dislocation. Dislocation was denied; but it subsequently took place and a sort of piecemeal plan was introduced. We now have another problem arising out of this agreement, which has been shrouded in mystery since its inception, and that is the dislocation which has resulted to these metal stamping companies.

Once again the trade unions involved are having difficulties which arise out of decisions made by this government in its negotiations between the United States and the manufacturing companies. We think that the rights of the workers ought to be taken into consideration.

[Mr. DiefenbakerJ

I plead with the minister, as I did before, to stop his arrogant treatment of this agreement in this house, his brushing aside of any suggestions put forward by the opposition, his brushing aside of the requests made by the workers involved. They have a big stake in this agreement. They want to partake of it. They want consultation. They do not want to be told that what the government has decided is in their best interests. This has been the history of this agreement throughout.

The minister said this morning that he did not think a tripartite meeting would be useful. I should like to know why. When would one be useful? Why has this very legitimate request of the trade union involved been denied?

Hon. C. M. Drury (Minister of Industry):

Mr. Speaker, I feel somewhat aggrieved at the charge that requests for information have been arrogantly brushed aside.

Mr. Orlikow:

It is true.

Mr. Drury:

In default of there having been an opportunity for a full debate in this house, something I have long advocated and so earnestly hope we will soon have, I say in respect of this agreement that a reply has been provided, both in answers to questions and also in written statements, providing very complete documentation indeed. If the hon. gentleman has not had access to this information I will be glad to see that he is provided with a very substantial volume of information that has been made available; and I hope he will take the time and the trouble-and it will take quite a lot of time and trouble-to read it.

With regard to the request by Mr. Burt of the automobile workers for a tripartite meeting, I did not say, as the hon. gentleman has suggested, that such a meeting would not serve any useful purpose. I did say that there have been on two previous occasions, at the request of the automobile workers, meetings of the character outlined, and that these meetings had not, in my view, been as productive of results as meetings between myself and individual segments of the industry, whether they be the labour people by themselves, or the automobile producers, or the supply people by themselves. These had worked much more satisfactorily.

I will be delighted, as I said earlier today, to meet with Mr. Burt any time he wants and to provide him answers to the information he seeks, and I have so advised him in a telegram.

January 27, 1966

Mr. Lewis:

He wants to take part; he does not want to be told what you have already arranged.

Mr. Drury:

I might point out that the federal Department of Labour has a policy in regard to the establishment of tripartite committees within a company or group of companies, composed of representatives of labour, management and government. The Department of Labour has been assiduous in endeavouring to secure agreement to the formation of a tripartite committee for the purpose of mutual conversation. I suggest this is a more fruitful way to proceed than a global one.

[DOT] (10:10 p.m.)

Mr. Georges Valade (Sainle-Marie):

Mr. Speaker, this morning I tried to obtain some information from the Minister of Labour (Mr. Nicholson) concerning certain facts given to me in connection with the appeal board of the Seafarers' International Union.

As we know, this international union is now under government trusteeship. Now, members whose rights have been encroached upon have no alternative but to deal with the responsible minister, in this case, the Minister of Labour.

Mr. Speaker, French speaking members of the union are complaining that they cannot submit their grievances to the appeal board of the union because all the proceedings take place in English and therefore representations of the French speaking members could not be heard. Since French speaking members cannot understand or speak English, they are therefore deprived of a fundamental right, namely to be heard in their mother tongue by the committee which must pass judgment on them.

This very morning, I tried to obtain from the minister the assurance that he would see that those allegations are substantiated and inform the House of the corrective measures he intends to take in order to remedy a really deplorable situation, if it actually exists, and which is seriously detrimental to all members of that union who are awaiting a decision of this appeal board return to their jobs if such would be the case.

I should also like to take this opportunity to call the attention of the Minister of Labour, responsible for the trusteeship of this union, to a seemingly obvious anomaly, if one examines the list of members of this appeal

Proceedings on Adjournment Motion board of the Seafarers' International Union: three of the members sitting on this appeal board are apparently members of the executive council of the union.

Since members often have to air grievances which may involve the authorities, that is to say the officers of this union, I believe there is, on that point, an anomaly through which the aggrieved party is deprived of his opportunity to submit his grievances objectively and so to have them objectively and loyally considered by the members of the appeal board.

I ask the minister to investigate this matter which I consider very serious; indeed, last August, that is, on the 25th of August 1965, Mr. Michel de la Chevrotiere who was a member of the appeal committee of the Seafarers' International Union, had to resign because he could neither understand nor speak English. In view of the fact that the evidence is given, and the questioning takes place, in English only, I feel this is surely a flagrant injustice which should be redressed.

Such is the situation within that union.

I ask the minister to take immediate steps to ensure that these people who have been or may be wronged by such an anomaly obtain justice and to inform the House at an early date what measures the government intends to take to give justice to these members of the Seafarers' International Union.

Mr. B. S. Mackasey (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of Labour):

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Sainte-Marie (Mr. Valade) has referred to a question that he says is very important and serious, a description with which I wholeheartedly agree. I think it is inconceivable in this day and age, when the question of bilingualism is so important and foremost in our minds, that a situation could exist, particularly in labour, where French speaking minorities are denied the privilege of speaking in one of Canada's official languages.

The hon. member, however, emphasized on several occasions during the course of his remarks that he is not certain of his facts. Certainly we know the situation exists in private industry and we all regret it, and hope the day is coming soon when it will be fully rectified.

The new Minister of Labour (Mr. Nicholson) is one of the more enlightened gentlemen in this regard. He has been on record as far back as October, 1964, in speaking up at

January 27, 1966

Proceedings on Adjournment Motion Vancouver for the rights of the French speaking minorities in this country. However, I must point out to the hon. member that, on the surface at least, this is an internal problem for the Seafarers International Union. I am sure the Minister of Labour will want to communicate with the union trustees and see, through their normal communications channel, if there is any basis for the allegation.

I would point out that the official publication of the union, the Canadian Sailor, is fully bilingual and, if one might use the expression, appears simultaneously in both languages. I do hope, Mr. Speaker, the day will soon come when these types of problems will be things of the past, not only in private industry but in labour organizations.

Mr. S. Perry Ryan (Spadina):

Mr. Speaker, on orders of the day this morning I directed a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Martin), which concerned the circumstances surrounding the arrest, detention, conviction and sentencing of Mr. Tibor Torma, in Hungary. My question was a lengthy one. I believe it was ruled out of order on that basis because, with respect, Mr. Speaker, I cannot conceive of its being ruled out of order on the basis of its not being of an urgent nature and of national importance.

I feel, and I believe most hon. members would agree with me, that any question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs dealing with the liberty of a naturalized Canadian citizen in a foreign country is an urgent and important one. In any event, the minister was not given an opportunity to give an answer to my very serious pressing question, one which I submit is of the utmost concern to the Hungarian community in Canada, as well as to Canadians generally. I therefore seek the answer now as to whether or not Torma was the recipient of dark-age justice.

I shall give the facts and allegations, as I am informed of them, and I shall leave it to the minister to clarify them where there may be discrepancy.

Tibor Torma is a young man, 28 years of age, who came to Canada in 1956 as a refugee from the Hungarian revolution. He left his home in my riding at 15 Palmerston avenue, Toronto, last fall and went to Hungary intending to visit his relatives and stay for a few weeks. He secured a Canadian passport, attached to which was the customary warning

to register and advise Canadian authorities before entering Hungary. He gave no notification in accordance with this warning, but in the past very few tourists to Hungary have been in the habit of doing so.

On November 10 last, M.T.I., the Hungarian telegraphic agency, reported that Tibor Torma had been arrested for creating a disturbance in a coffee house. He was apparently taken outside Budapest and held incommunicado. He was later secretly tried and convicted for a "political offence" against the security of the state and sentenced to 18 months in prison. An appeal has been filed and dismissed.

The news of his arrest was carried by several Canadian newspapers and it has created great consternation in Hungarian circles. Hungarian organizations and newspapers were flooded with telephone calls and letters protesting against this arrest and whisking away. Many Canadian Hungarians who planned to visit Hungary have subsequently cancelled their reservations, as a result of this case.

Last December 14, as a result of this reaction, the Hungarian embassy in Ottawa, through its first secretary, Mr. Istvan Varga, said in an interview given to the Canadian Press that "it is quite safe for anybody to travel to Hungary" and that "Torma will soon be tried, probably charged with disturbance."

[DOT] (10:20 p.m.)

More than a month went by and nothing was heard of Tibor Torma, or his trial. Apparently neither the Canadian ambassador in Prague, nor the British minister in Budapest received any satisfactory explanation regarding his arrest, his whereabouts or his trial, until finally after his secret trial Mr. Bow, Canadian ambassador in Czechoslovakia, who is also accredited to Hungary, was granted an interview with Mr. Torma. Only then did we learn that he had been convicted of a political offence, and sentenced to 18 months in prison.

We still do not know whether he was properly arrested, whether he did create a disturbance in a coffee house, or even if he did commit a political offence against the security of the Hungarian state.

After his arrest, he was spirited away, held and tried in secret. I would like to know from the minister if we can be assured that the allegations against Torma are fact, or has he been framed? Is a grudge or an old injury being pressed against him? Think of the consequences this man will have to suffer, if

January 27. 1966 COMMONS

and when he returns to Canada, if he has been falsely charged and convicted.

Under the circumstances I should like to know from the minister if it is possible to obtain from the Hungarian government a transcript of the evidence at his trial, and to have the witnesses against him interviewed by our representatives abroad.

On the face of it, his sentence of 18 months seems harsh, but how are we to judge accurately if we have no idea of the truth and the degree of the evidence against him?

I believe that arrangements have been made to, at some time in the future, set up a [DOT]Canadian embassy in Budapest. I could see some reasonable delay in gaining access to Torma in Hungary by reason of a lack of an embassy, but a delay of more than two months would seem, under the circumstances of this case, to be inordinate.

One cannot help but feel that the background of Torma's arrest is far more serious than the charge of creating a disturbance would warrant. I would ask the minister if the Hungarian government is implementing a new policy toward tourists. Apparently on November 21 last the Prime Minister of Hungary spoke in the Hungarian parliament and stated that not all overseas visitors to Hungary are welcome. Is this a new policy of the Hungarian government, and has it been followed by police persecution toward some visitors?

I would like to know from the minister if he can tell us whether the Hungarian government has spelled out any class of visitors to Hungary who are not welcome, or has given any indication whether it has or intends to make up a proscribed list.

From all this arises the further question: Is the Hungarian government serious and sincere in its assurances to Hungarians abroad, that they shall have free and undisturbed travel to Hungary?

Hon. Paul Martin (Secretary of Stale for External Affairs):

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Spadina has I am sure served his constituents and this particular constituent a great service. He has pressed this matter on me privately, as the hon. members for Parkdale (Mr. Haidasz) and Rosedale (Mr. Macdonald) have done.

Tibor Torma, a naturalized Canadian citizen of Hungarian origin, was arrested in

DEBATES 371

Proceedings on Adjournment Motion Hungary on November 7 following an incident in a public place as the hon. member for Spadina, has just pointed out. I am not in a position to make a judgment about the validity of the charges, of what have been described as "political offences", which have been laid against Torma by the Hungarian authorities and on which he has recently been convicted to 18 months imprisonment.

The Canadian government has taken and will continue to take every appropriate step to extend assistance to this Canadian citizen and, in doing so, it recognizes the understandable feelings of the Canadians of Hungarian origin. Since the fact of Torma's arrest first became known to us on November 11, our ambassador to Hungary, who is resident in Czechoslovakia, has been actively pursuing this matter with the authorities in Hungary. He has repeatedly pressed for a clear indication of why Torma was being held, and for normal consular access to interview him in the place of his detention.

On December 29 our ambassador was able to report to me that he had managed to secure a promise from the Hungarian Foreign Ministry for permission for a Canadian representative to visit Torma in January. In fact, the ambassador was not permitted to see him until January 22, and it was on this occasion that he first learned that Torma had already been tried and convicted.

As soon as I received word of this conviction I instructed our ambassador, who is now in Budapest, to present a note to the Hungarian government requesting them to exercise clemency with a view to the early release of Torma from prison and his departure from Hungary. Moreover, the Under Secretary of State for External Affairs, on my instructions, called in the Hungarian charge d'affaires in Ottawa yesterday and reiterated to him our views on this matter. Some of the questions which have been asked by my hon. friend must await a reply from the government of Hungary following yesterday's interview. I may assure my hon. friend that we are pursuing this matter closely, and I hope we will secure the action which is warranted in this case.

Motion agreed to and the house adjourned at 10.30 p.m.

Friday, January 28, 1966