Hon. Jean-Luc Pepin (Minister of Industry, Trade and Commerce):

Mr. Speaker, at the request of the hon. members for Calgary Centre (Mr. Harkness) and Edmonton West (Mr. Lambert), and with the leave of the house, I would like to table, in English and in French, copies of the press release of September 19, 1968, prepared following the wheat exporters meeting at Canberra, the Trade and Commerce press release of September 19, 1968 on guide lines concerning overseas investments of non-financial companies, the Department of Finance press release of May 3, 1968 concerning guide lines with respect to operations by chartered banks, and the press release of July 24, 1968 on guidelines for other financial institutions.

Mr. Speaker:

Has the minister leave to table these documents?

Agreed.

Hon. Robert L. Stanfield (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the right hon. Prime Minister. Can he say whether there is any basis in fact to the report that a public servant formerly employed in the directorate of intelligence and security of the armed forces was discovered by the R.C.M.P. eight months ago attempting to sell military secrets to a foreign power. Will the Prime Minister, who was minister of justice at that time, undertake to give a full report to the house?

Mr. Speaker, I have asked the Minister of Justice to look into that matter. Perhaps he has some answers.

Hon. John N. Turner (Minister of Justice):

Mr. Speaker, in answer to the question of the Leader of the Opposition I might say that investigations into suspected unlawful activity are continuously being carried on by the R.C.M.P. and by other investigatory bodies, but in the absence of charges being preferred it would not be proper nor would it be in the public interest to make the results of such investigations a matter of public record. I believe that this is particularly applicable to investigations which may involve the national security.

Under the circumstances, and with the greatest respect, I must decline to enter into a discussion of the allegation referred to.

Mr. Stanfield:

I have a supplementary question. Will the Minister of Justice say whether in fact the case was-to use the words of the public report-"hushed up" by the federal Department of Justice and the R.C.M.P.?

Mr. Turner (Ottawa-Carleton):

If my advice is correct, the case was thoroughly investigated by the R.C.M.P. It was referred to the law officers of the crown and the Department of Justice. It was the opinion of the law officers of the crown, concurred in by the senior officers of the R.C.M.P., that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute.

Mr. Stanfield:

I have another supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the Minister of Justice be prepared to tell the house the basis on which it was decided not to bring this man to trial?

Mr. Turner (Ottawa-Carleton):

No sir, I am not.

Mr. Stanfield:

I have a further supplementary question. Will the Minister of Justice say whether it is a fact that the individual in question continued in his job in the public service after the police report was made, and for how long he continued in the employ of the government after this report was made? Would the Minister of Justice also say whether the individual in question was allowed to resign quietly and waive his right to appeal?

Mr. Turner (Otiawa-Carleion):

Mr. Speaker, these questions are beyond the responsibility of my particular department.

Oh, oh.

September 24, 1968

Inquiries of the Ministry

Hon. Marcel Lambert (Edmonton West):

have a further supplementary question, Mr. Speaker. Would the minister confirm that the individual concerned has now disappeared and that the R.C.M.P. have no trace of his present whereabouts?

Mr. Turner (Oitawa-Carleton):

Mr. Speaker, I do not have the information on which to answer that question.

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

Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary question for the Minister of National Defence. Has the minister or his department carried on an investigation into this case in addition to the investigation carried out by the R.C.M.P.? Did this investigation disclose any other members in the department who might have been connected with this particular individual?