May 14, 1964 (26th Parliament, 2nd Session)

PC

Eldon Mattison Woolliams

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Woolliams:

I appreciate the rules and the narrowness of debate, Mr. Speaker, but I read the debate thoroughly at noon, and with the greatest respect the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, as reported at page 2778 of Hansard, took up two pages, if that can be translated into time, dealing with taking redistribution out of politics. I am just answering his argument. He having opened up the subject I am sure, in all fairness to the Chair, that you would not want me to narrow the debate beyond the limits of the debate at the present time.
Throughout the years the Conservative party has stood for independent redistribution and for taking the matter out of politics. The reason of course is that either in 1953 or just before, the province of Saskatchewan lost one, if not two constituencies, including that of the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Diefen-baker), who was the only Conservative member of the house at that time outside of Calgary in western Canada. So we have had some experience of this kind of gerrymandering, and when we have to rely on the minister who is piloting the particular act in question, and who is behind the drafting of these maps, we are naturally a little suspicious as to what might occur in the future, and have to look into the matter very carefully.
Coming back to the point about the maps, I say that there are maps and that every hon. member in the house who has seen these sketches, or whatever my hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre wants to call them, he himself, as I say, having seen them, will

Electoral Boundaries Maps say that they are maps; make no mistake about that. If they are not maps, then the taxpayers of Canada are paying the representation commissioner money for something he should not be doing, because clause 8 of the bill requires that maps be drawn.
The next question is this. If these maps are going to be withdrawn, what is the secret behind it? Why did the minister in the last debate and during the debate on the redistribution bill, when asked whether there were maps, become white hot? Why does he lose his temper on so many occasions? He loses his temper because he has something to hide, and that is why he is opposing this motion at the present time.

Topic:   MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   MAPS SHOWING ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES
Full View