It may be that the government subscribes to the words of the poet in this respect, that we do not like anything except what the government elects on this particular point. I do not believe the government necessarily has all the wisdom in the world in this respect, and they should call to a certain extent upon the judgment of individual members. It may be that individual members are not always correct in their assumptions, but at the same time I do not think the government are always correct, either, in their particular assumptions. One notices, for example, that there is a tendency to submit to the government's view on all these questions.
Now, I believe there should be some room for individuals who express their own ideas,, because those ideas are likely to more closely' approximate the ideas of their constituents. We have seen a total absence of this particular element in this debate. Apparently the-government has set out the idea of what shall be true. As somebody has said, it is the idea of the engineer. Engineers, and I noted this was received with applause from the opposite side of the house, are supposed to represent efficiency. Do they always represent efficiency?
Let us take a look at that. They do nof. Individual corporations employ engineers at times, and if they do not like what the engineers tell them they fire the engineers. Perhaps we should fire some of the engineers who tell us what we should do in this house. As a matter of fact I believe that the common sense of the Canadian people will come into play in this respect. It may be, of course, that the government is thinking along the lines of that idea in Gray's Elegy "Full many a Liberal is born to blush unseen and waste his sweetness in the desert air"-that is if a Liberal can blush, which one would be in some doubt about after the performance in the last few sessions in this house.
However, be that as it may, I think the minister would be justified, indeed wise if I may say so, in paying some attention to the representations that have been made from this side of the house on behalf of Canadian citizens. It will not profit the minister very much to force things through on the basis of the majority he possesses. He knows he can do it, and of course that is admitted. The
Navigable Waters Protection Act ultimate effect upon the Canadian public is not going to be good if he chooses to do so. I would advise the minister very sincerely to take cognizance of the representations that have been made to him from the opposition groups, which indicate that the people of Canada actually have some interest in this particular legislation, and he had better listen to them.
Topic: S121 JUNE