April 6, 1920

UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Mr. ROWELL:

I shall be very glad, before the Bill leaves Committee, to give my hon. friend the information he desires. I may tell him, however, that the applicant for such a position must be a Master or Bachelor of Science, or a graduate in Arts, who has taken a special course in chemistry. He must he in every way well qualified for the post.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Donald Sutherland

Unionist

Mr. SUTHERLAND:

Do I understand

from clause 10 that in the event of any one believing that some sample of food has been adulterated, it is necessary for them to enclose a fee in order to have that sample analysed?

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Mr. ROWELL:

That provision is in the .existing law. No change is being made in the law in that respect.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Donald Sutherland

Unionist

Mr. SUTHERLAND:

Surely it should not be necessary, having regard to all the facilities at the disposal of the department, for a private person to take proceedings against a vendor for violation of the provisions of this Act. I see no good purpose in compelling any one to pay for an analysis and then to enter proceedings.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Mr. ROWELL:

It is true that the department exists for the purpose of enforcing the law and that all complaints made to the department are investigated in due course and prosecutions instituted wherever necessary. But in addition to that, this provision would enable a man who was not satisfied with the action taken by the department to proceed as outlined. It is simply carrying forward into the present Act a provision of the old Act.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Donald Sutherland

Unionist

Mr. SUTHERLAND:

If a man was strongly of the opinion that the department was lax, it would be necessary for him to pay to" an analysis of the sample by the department.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Mr. ROWELL:

That is the law as it stands to-day.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink

Section agreed to. On section 11-inspectors appointed by councils:


UNION

Edward Walter Nesbitt

Unionist

Mr. NESBITT:

Sections 10 and 11 provide that the offender can be prosecuted as well as the manufacturer, and that raises the question that was brought up by my hon friend (Mr. Fielding).

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Mr. ROWIELL:

As a matter of practical administration I am afraid that we cannot consent to limit the prosecution solely to the manufacturer. The department in every case endeavours to reach the parties primarily responsible. But it is a matter of great importance that adulterated food or drugs which are dangerous to the public health should not be sold; therefore it has been considered necessary that the department should have the right to proceed directly against the parties who sell, leaving it to them to establish their innocence.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
L LIB

Isaac Ellis Pedlow

Laurier Liberal

Mr. PEDLOW:

The minister has stated that the Civil Service Commission would appoint inspectors provided for by paragraph (e) of section 2; but under section 11 the council of any city, town, county or village or other municipality may appoint inspectors. Is there not a conflict of authority here?

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Mr. ROWELL:

Dominion inspectors will be appointed by the Civil Service Commission. There is also the right on the part of local municipalities to appoint local inspectors. In fact, it is necessary that the principal municipalities at least should do so, otherwise we should have to have a corps of Dominion inspectors wtih a consequent unfair charge against the Federal exchequer. The local municipalities must take an interest in the enforcement of this law; therefore every encouragement is given to them to appoint their own inspectors, to initiate their own prosecutions and to get the benefit of the fines. The inspector has no right to give the certificate. He goes about, inspects and makes seizures, but his functions are quite different from that of the analyst.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
L LIB

Isaac Ellis Pedlow

Laurier Liberal

Mr. PEDLOW:

Will the local inspectors have the same duties as the Dominion inspectors?

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNION

Newton Wesley Rowell (Minister presiding over the Department of Health; President of the Privy Council)

Unionist

Mr. ROWELL:

The local inspectors can only exercise the authority that is expressly given them. They may take the sample, but they must submit it to the Dominion analyst, and on the basis of the decision of the Dominion analyst as to the quality of the product a prosecution may be instituted.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
L LIB

Andrew Ross McMaster

Laurier Liberal

Mr. McMASTEB:

I think it inadvisable to have in a Federal Act a statement which makes it appear that this Parliament is giving to a municipality the right to do such and such a thing. Consequently, it seems to me that the phrase, "The council of any city, town, county or village or other municipality may appoint," and so on, is unfortunate. I do not challenge the object which the clause seeks to attain, but it seems to me that it might better be worded: "Inspectors appointed by the council of any city, town, county or village," ;.nd so on. I would not in a Federal Act grant the right to municipal councils to do such and such a thing. This Parliament has no right to direct municipal councils to do or not to do such and such things, because municipal councils derive their power, not from the Dominion, but from the provinces.

Mr. BO WE'LL: I appreciate the point raised by my hon. friend. But this section has been in the law for over thirty years; we are only re-enacting what has been in the statute for a very long time. Frankly, when the Bill first came up, I was under the impression that all we were doing was recognizing the authority of inspectors appointed by the municipalities, but the Act itself goes further. I do not think any difficulty can arise from this. We are giving these inspectors, after they are appointed by the municipalities, certain powers. It is our function to give them those powers,

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
L LIB

Andrew Ross McMaster

Laurier Liberal

Mr. McMASTEK:

Once they are appointed, I agree with the minister that it is quite right for us to give them the powers, but the legislation goes further than that; it says in so many words: " The council of any city, town or village may appoint." I say that we have no right to say to a municipal council: " You may appoint an inspector." The only power that has the right to say that is the power vested in the province. I am inclined to think the minister will agree with me on that constitutional point.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
?

John William Bell

Mr. BO WELL:

I think under certain conditions we have power over municipalities just as we have power over individuals; but I do not think it is necessary to enter into a discussion of that constitutional question at present. The fact is that this has been in the law for thirty years, and the Department of Justice has approved this legislation in its present form. Therefore, I should say we are quite safe in leaving it as it is in that respect.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
L LIB

Daniel Duncan McKenzie

Laurier Liberal

Mr. McKENZIE:

Under this measure will a municipal council have power to dismiss an officer?

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
?

Mackenzie Bowell

Mr. BOWELL:

These officers are wholly under the control of the municipalities. I have no hesitation in saying that had I drafted the law originally I should have provided that where the municipalities appointed these officials, these officials should have certain powers. But I do not think any harm can come from leaving this as it is.

Topic:   THE POOD AND DRUGS ACT, 1920.
Permalink
UNI L

April 6, 1920