Someone says, "hear, hear." I do not bring this matter up with the idea of saying that to-day or to-morrow we should immediately go on with the canalization of the St. Lawrence river; but what I do say is that when the Prime Minister of this country receives a message from the United States of America asking his consideration of this great project, the people of Canada should have the benefit of a good and fair debate on the pros and cons of the issue as it was submitted to the First Minister. They should have that debate, so that public opinion could be roused throughout the whole Dominion of Canada, and when that public opinion was sufficiently roused and sufficiently instructed as to the pros and cons and the wisdom of going on with this great piece of engineering work we would be in a position to act on that public opinion. I submit, Mr. Speaker, that it would be in the interests of Canada if some of the academic questions which have been discussed on the floor of this House, such as the single transferable vote, proportional representation, and things of that kind, which do not matter to the same degree as such projects as the canalization of the St. Lawrence, should be put to one side in favour of bigger issues.
The Budget-Mr. Harris
Subtopic: CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATEMENT OF THE MINISTER OF FINANCE