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

Mr. Speaker, in continuation of the question I asked yesterday regarding the unusual situation created by the Republic of France in failing to provide a guard of honour on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary ceremonies at Vimy, has the government, either through the Prime Minister or the Secretary of State for External Affairs, communicated with the government of France to point out that what has occurred is regarded by veterans and their dependants as a slap in the face to Canada?

Right Hon. L. B. Pearson (Prime Minister):

Mr. Speaker, the details of the arrangements are being worked out with the French government, as I indicated yesterday. I have nothing to add to what I said on this matter then.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

Is it a fact that the reason for the stand is as reported in certain elements of the press, namely as a means of indicating to Canada that General de Gaulle does not regard the Queen as Queen of Canada?

Mr. Pearson:

No, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. T. C. Douglas (Burnaby-Coquitlam):

Mr. Speaker, I desire to direct a question to the Minister of Trade and Commerce regarding press reports to the effect that at the meeting in London the wheat importing and exporting countries have agreed by majority

decision that after July 31 importing countries will not be required to take a prearranged minimum quantity of wheat, and there will be no predetermined price range.

Since this was a majority decision I take it there was some disagreement. I should like to ask the minister what position the Canadian delegation took, whether Canada voted in favour of this free market after July 31, and whether this is the government's policy with respect to this matter.

Hon. Robert Winters (Minister of Trade and Commerce):

No, Mr. Speaker. As I mentioned yesterday and as I have said on previous occasions, our major effort is being made through negotiations for a new cereals agreement presently in progress at Geneva. At Geneva we have been seeking a substantially increased price for wheat and an increased price range. Under the circumstances we are unwilling to agree to a continuation of the price and the price range as provided for under the present international wheat agreement. So all we would agree to in the London discussion was a continuation of the framework of the agreement, but not the price structure.

Mr. Douglas:

Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the negotiations in Geneva are not likely to be concluded before the beginning of the new crop year, do I take it that at the London meeting the government voted to have a free market after July 31, and to remove the protective provisions which are contained in the present international wheat agreement?

Mr. Winters:

Under the terms of the negotiations at Geneva they must be concluded by mid-year, so it is entirely likely that the present arrangements under the international wheat agreement will be succeeded by new arrangements under a cereals agreement as part of the Kennedy round of negotiations. So anything that is being done in London now does not in any way commit us to a price structure or a marketing arrangement; it simply keeps in being the framework of the I.W.A. and no more.

April 7, 1967

Inquiries of the Ministry NATIONAL DEFENCE

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

Mr. Speaker, I should like to direct a question to the Minister of National Defence. Can the minister inform us whether at the meeting he attended yesterday in Washington any decisions were taken with regard to the installation of an anti-missile defence system?

Hon. Paul Hellyer (Minister of National Defence):

Mr. Speaker, there was a wide ranging discussion covering all aspects of the possible use of nuclear weapons and their effects, both strategically and tactically. This included a discussion of an anti-ballistic missile system. No decisions have been taken in this respect, but in view of the fact that the meetings are continuing this morning I do not think I should comment further until a communique has been issued officially by the meeting at noon today.

Mr. Harkness:

May I ask a supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Who is representing Canada at these meetings now that the minister has returned?

Mr. Hellyer:

Our ambassador to NATO, Mr. Speaker.