Mr. Langlois (Meganlic):

Mr. Speaker, if the whole motion were read, it might clear up the situation. In the French motion, we have the word "approuve", and our amendment derives from the French copy.

Once amended, the motion would read as follows:

That this house does not regard its vote on February 19 in connection with third reading of Bill C-193, which had been carried, on division, in all previous stages, as a vote of non-confidence in the government.

That might clear up the matter for the hon. member for Ontario (Mr. Starr) and other hon. members because in the French version, we have the word "approuve".

Mr. Raymond Langlois (Meganfic):

Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Minister of Finance. Yesterday when referring to various cut-backs proposed by the government the minister let it be known that the expenditures of municipalities had not slowed down in the past ten years. Is it the intention of the minister to apply this austerity program to the extent of also slowing

December 1, 1967

Inquiries of Ministry

down winter works projects in the municipalities ior the coming year?

Mr. Langlois (Meganiic):

I accept your ruling, Mr. Speaker, and I will consider that as a correction to the official report.

Mr. Raymond Langlois (Meganiic):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege to make a correction in Hansard for Friday, November 24, at which time I took part in the debate on the situation in Montreal harbour, which matter was put before the house by the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot (Mr. Ricard) under standing order 26.

I was interrupted in my speech by the hon. member for Lapointe (Mr. Gregoire) who pointed out to me at that time that there were only three members from the island of Montreal present in the house. You will note, Mr. Speaker, that I did not mention those figures and that it was the hon. member for Lapointe who did so. I did not mention any figures at the time, Mr. Speaker, and I continued as you will find on page 4662 of Hansard:

Mr. Speaker, I had indeed noticed it. I am not as blind as some hon. members opposite who do not see the importance of that problem, etc.-

Thereafter, the Minister of Labour (Mr. Nicholson), as recorded on pages 4673 and 4674 of Hansard, that is 14 pages further on following the dinner recess, said this about me:

There is one point that I do not think should go unanswered. The hon. member for Megantic (Mr. Langlois) said there were no members on the government side from Montreal present during the debate.

I never said such a thing.

I should like to point out that throughout the whole debate my colleague the Minister of Industry (Mr. Drury) was here-

I admit that I also saw him.

The Minister of Justice (Mr. Trudeau) was also here as well as my parliamentary secretary (Mr. Mackasey) who is from Verdun-

I referred to him during my comments and I agree that he was here.

The hon. member for Beauharnois-Salaberry (Mr. Laniel).

He is not from the island of Montreal but from the outskirts of Montreal.

Mr. Langlois (Megantic):

Yes, he was here. And the Minister of Manpower and Immigration (Mr. Marchand) who is from Quebec, was even mentioned.