Mr. Paul E. McRae (Parliamentary Secretary to Minister of National Health and Welfare):

I am not so sure I see the connection between saccharin and tobacco on this point. The banning of saccharin, except for diabetics under certain conditions, is the result of one of the best studies that has been done by any group in this country. It has been accepted in the United States. I would like to say that some time during the next week we hope to have a briefing by department officials for all members of the House who would like to go into this in more depth and to understand its implications.

Mr. Halliday:

Mr. Speaker, acknowledging what the parliamentary secretary has said, acknowledging the concern and apprehension which people in general have about cancer and acknowledging also the concern expressed today by a New York cardiologist which, if translated into Canadian terms suggests that as a result of the ban on saccharin Canadians will gain an extra 60 million pounds of weight and as a result have an extra 2,500 heart attacks per year, could the parliamentary secretary tell the House what plans the minister has to combat both the psychological hazard and the cardiovascular hazard in addition to the unknown cancer hazard which Canadians will now face?

Mr. McRae:

Mr. Speaker, the decision to ban saccharin was not arrived at lightly. There will be constant consultation with medical officials and people representing medical associations. Perhaps other sweeteners will come along, but we have to accept the fact that there has been consultation, and these concerns have been discussed. We will always be trying to develop alternatives.

Mr. Bill Clarke (Vancouver Quadra):

Mr. Speaker, I have a question for the President of Treasury Board. The Standing Committee on Public Accounts has heard evidence that the Auditor General was dropped as auditor of Polysar because Polysar ceased to be a Crown corporation, in spite of the fact that the Auditor General presently audits some non-Crown corporations. Polysar still appears in the schedule of Crown corporations in the Financial Administration Act, in spite of the fact that the Minister of Justice stated that the government's position in 1973 was that Polysar was no longer a Crown corporation. I would like to ask whether the Minister of Justice can make such action official without the approval of parliament, and will the minister indicate when legislation will be introduced to clarify what are and what are not Crown

Privilege-Hon. Alvin Hamilton

corporations, how many there are and what the audit requirements of Crown corporations are.

Hon. Robert K. Andras (President of Treasury Board):

Mr. Speaker, I will have to read the seven or eight questions which were just asked in Hansard. However, I can give the hon. member the assurance that clarification of what a Crown corporation is, the number of Crown corporations and those which are to be brought under the Financial Administration Act will be made to the House in the very near future by way of some proposed amendments to the FAA and probably to the Crown Corporations Act.

Mr. Walter Baker (Grenville-Carleton):

Mr. Speaker, yesterday at the end of the question period the Minister of State for Urban Affairs offered to be forthcoming with respect to a question put to him earlier by the hon. member for St. John's East. Unfortunately that occurred after the question period. The minister and the hon. member for St. John's East are here, so I wonder if the minister is in a position to answer that question today.

[ Translation]

Hon. Andr6 Ouellet (Minister of State for Urban Affairs):

Mr. Speaker, I shall answer the hon. member for St. John's East by saying that a loan guarantee has been granted under paragraph 6(1) of the National Housing Act. This paragraph gives the corporation authority to issue an insurance policy concerning a loan granted by a lender to promote the construction of a rental housing project.

Hon. Alvin Hamilton (Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege. The Minister of State for Small Businesses (Mr. Marchand)-whether deliberate or not, I do not know-was guilty of misinforming the House in answering questions I asked him this morning. I thought the questions were well put. Yesterday 1 showed the minister a letter from the secretary of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool. 1 showed him Saskatchewan Wheat Pool documents which proved that he was being misinformed. When I asked the minister a second question about whether he would inform the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool that he and parliament did not take lightly the fact that they were being misinformed, instead of answering my question either by saying "yes" or "no" he went on to say that the matter of land measurement-

80010-40/4

March 11, 1977

Privilege-Hon. Alvin Hamilton

in other words, hectares-was a provincial and not a federal responsibility.

I maintain that this was either a deliberate or unwitting misleading of the House. 1 would like to quote from the third paragraph of a letter dated February 25 to the minister from the secretary of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, as follows:

Canadian policy, unanimously adopted by the government of Canada in a white paper, 1970, calls for a planned conversion to the international system of standards known as the metric system.

That statement was made in the letter by the secretary of that organization placing upon the federal parliament the responsibility for passing a law which provides that conversion to the metric system is the law of the land. Mr. Speaker, you know, as well as 1 do, that no government white paper means anything until it is passed in this House by a vote of the parliamentarians present. It is a legislative proposal. In fact, before the metric system can become effective across Canada, 90 statutes of this parliament will have to be amended, and as yet not one has been amended.

The secretary of an organization wrote a letter to the minister and sent copies to members of parliament saying that this is an unanimously adopted federal law. The secretary of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool went on in his letter to say:

At the annual meetings of the elected delegates who represent the shareholders of Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, held in 1974, 1975 and 1976, reports on metric conversion and displays to assist elected leaders to understand the metric conversion process in agriculture, and particularly in the grain industry, were presented.

The secretary states the following in another paragraph:

During all this period, no resolutions were received from the 800 active Wheat Pool local committees or from annual meetings held, or from other membership meetings held throughout the province to discuss issues dealing with the operations or farm policies of this organization.

That paragraph was meant to tell the minister that the farmers were not objecting to the metric system. Yesterday, I sent six Saskatchewan Wheat Pool documents to the minister pointing out that local rank and file members at the district level and subdistrict level had submitted resolutions opposing the metric system. When I asked the minister this morning if he would defend parliament by writing to this secretary and telling him that there was misleading information in his letter and asking for an explanation, his answer to me was that the system of measurement of land in the prairies and all across Canada is a matter of provincial jurisdiction, which begs the question and in effect the minister is supporting that misrepresentation in this House.

Parliament has not passed any laws dealing with the metric system, yet officials of the minister went out to the provincial governments, to these grain companies to private businesses and to consumers' associations and said that this was the law and that they should get ready to put the law into effect by February 1, 1977. I simply point out that federal officials are misinforming the public through grain companies and private companies. The minister has the gall to tell me in this House that the federal government has nothing to do with land measurement in the provinces. I wonder who persuaded the governments of the provinces that this is the law of the land, if

(Mr. Hamilton (Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain).]

it was not the minister's officials. What I am trying to say is that not only are the minister's officials misinforming and imposing upon my privileges as a member of parliament and on the privileges of every other hon. member. The minister is not informing us truthfully because the federal government got this whole thing going without passing a law to make it legal.

I would like to conclude my question of privilege by asking the minister to reconsider his answers and defend this parliament. I would like him to point out to the secretary of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool that as parliamentarians we expect to be told the whole truth, and nothing but the truth-and not to be faced with this type of answer.

Hon. Len Marchand (Minister of State (Small Businesses)):

Mr. Speaker, it will, of course, be up to Your Honour to determine whether there is a question of privilege, but I could answer the hon. member's question very quickly. I think he will find in the record that I said I would write to the secretary of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool and determine whether there had been some misrepresentation. It is my view, however, that there was not any deliberate misrepresentation by the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool or any kind of misrepresentation at all. It is important to note that in the answer I gave, I stated very clearly that if one read the letter in its context there was no misrepresentation in my view. There is no way I would want to see this parliament misrepresented by anyone. I am sure that Mr. Wright, secretary of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, was not trying to misrepresent their position to this parliament or anyone else.

I should like to put on the record again the third paragraph of the letter, on page 2, which begins as follows:

During all this period, no resolutions were received from the 800 active Wheat Pool local committees-

The significant part of the letter refers back to the first paragraph on page 2, which reads:

At the annual meetings of the elected delegates who represent the shareholders of Saskatchewan Wheat Pool, held in 1974, 1975 and 1976, reports on metric conversion and displays to assist elected leaders to understand the metric conversion process in agriculture, and particularly in the grain industry, were presented.

That is the reference back. But to satisfy hon. members and myself on the point I will write to the secretary of the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool for further clarification and pass the information along to the members concerned. On the second part of the question, I must say I do not think anyone is trying to misrepresent anything in this House. Bill C-23 does not refer to land measurement. Land measurement does not lie in the hands of the federal government; it is clearly a provincial responsibility. Any bills to change that would have to be drawn by provincial governments. I repeat, Bill C-23 does not deal with land measurements.

Mr. Speaker:

Order, please. The question of privilege raised by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle-Moose Mountain (Mr. Hamilton) does not have attached to it a motion which would ask direction of the Chair other than the request put through

March 11, 1977

the Chair to the minister who appears to me adequately to have responded to that request at least for the moment.