Wait a minute-either by word or in writing advocates a change of government by force. Now, what about the discharge by the minister of his responsibility? I am accepting his argument that the law is sufficient today. Why should seven foreign language newspapers in Canada, which go beyond the realm of freedom of speech, some of them advocating openly a change of government by force, be allowed to exist within this land with complete impunity so far as the government is concerned? Why is it that when communists travel the length and breadth of Canada and preach the doctrine of force, the section is not used? Why does it remain in mothballs? If it were used, many of those who with impunity are advocating a change in the constitution and the government of the country by force would be subject to prosecution and conviction. Section 133 as amended places the onus of
Communist Activities in Canada responsibility on the accused. Is it used? In fifteen years it has been used twice. In fifteen years there have been only two prosecutions, while communism continues its work.
Even the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. Pearson) over a year ago said that some change was needed in the criminal law. I am not going to advocate a change in the law.