February 27, 1933

PRIVILEGE-MR. DUGUAY

CON

Joseph Léonard Duguay

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. J. L. DUGUAY (Lake St. John) (Translation):

Mr. Speaker, the following

news item was published on Saturday last by the newspaper Le Canada:

Air. Duguay went to St. Leon to meet a settler by the name of Jeffrey Levasseur-

I wish to state, sir, that I never met any settler, at St. Leon. Moreover, I have never been to St. Leon. The settler alluded to called to see me at my office. I wish to add that I am amazed at the statement made by the Hon. Mr. Laferte, Minister of Colonization of Quebec. He is entirely wrong in seeking to justify his agents by throwing the blame on me. Within the last ten days settlers from St. Leon-the latter is not in the county of Lake St. John but in that of Chicoutimi-have come regularly to my office with grievances against Mr. Maltais. I

devised edition

24S4

Questions

replied to Mr. Levasseur that he should first communicate with the Minister of Colonization at Quebec.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE-MR. DUGUAY
Permalink
LIB
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

No, he is not; he is speaking to a question of privilege.

(Translation): Mr. Levasseur stated that he had already written to the minister but had not received a satisfactory reply. I finally told him that if he wished to communicate with Ottawa, he was at liberty to do so. I, myself, wrote the dispatch, Mr. Levasseur signed and sent it. I am unaware who paid for this dispatch. The amount of $40 mentioned in the article was paid to Mr. Levasseur after the dispatch was forwarded. Mr. Jeffrey Levasseur admitted to me in the presence of a witness, in my office,. that on his return to Chicoutimi they had made him sign a statement similar to the one which appeared in the newspaper article. I can therefore state, sir, that I acted within my rights, and1 that in the future, under similar circumstances, I shall act the same way. It matters little whether the Quebec Minister of Colonization approves of my conduct, I shall act as in the past.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE-MR. DUGUAY
Permalink

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF

CON

Wesley Ashton Gordon (Minister of Immigration and Colonization; Minister of Labour; Minister of Mines)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GORDON:

I desire to lay on the

table of the house certain orders in council passed pursuant to the relief legislation.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF
Permalink

QUESTIONS


(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).


RAYON INDUSTRIES

UFA

Mr. SPENCER:

United Farmers of Alberta

1. Are the rayon industries in Canada subsidized by the government in any way?

2. If so, to what extent?

3. What profits or dividends have been declared by rayon or celanese products corporations from the years 1928 to 1932, inclusive ?

4. What is the scale of wages paid to men and women employed in these industries?

5. How many hours constitute a worker's week in this industry?

6. What percentage of these products are used for military purposes?

7. How much did the Canadian government buy from these firms from 1928 to 1932, inclusive?

8. Can rayon factories be turned into munitions factories in case of war?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

Mr. Speaker, I should

like to point out that apparently there is an idea abroad in this house that questions may be asked which can be answered only by the government writing to the people concerned.

[M. D'uguay.l

This could be done just as well by the member as by the officials of the government. The fourth question concerns the scale of wages paid to men and women employed in these industries. This is a matter of provincial legislation as well as of contract between the employee and the company and all the government could do would be to write a letter and ascertain what the scale might be. The same could be said of the next question dealing with the worker's week in the industry. This is purely a provincial matter. The custom of asking the government to send out communications to various people in different parts of Canada in order to answer questions is not what is needed to take up the time of parliament. ,

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Mr. Speaker,

I agree largely with the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett) in what he has just said regarding questions which relate to private industries and the obtaining of information by the government when such information can be obtained just as easily by members of parliament, but I should like to know whether the right hon. gentleman's remarks extend to the giving of information with respect to matters related to bodies immediately under the control of the government. I refer particularly, for example, to harbour commissions and bodies of that sort which operate indirectly if not directly under a department of government.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

As the leader of the

opposition had occasion, I think, to indicate some years ago, the truth is that with respect to some of the operations of harbour commissions and other bodies of that character which receive money from the government, the government can exercise some control, being compelled to give approval of certain matters before contracts are entered into, but in what one might call the ordinary administrative side of the question, the government has not any more control of the matter than has someone on the street. I did not, however, in the observations I made a few moments ago dealing with the type of questions to which I referred, intend to deal with those bodies at all. The policy of the government has been immediately to send to the bodies affected the questions that have been asked and to seek from them replies which it tables in the house as indicating the best information available with respect to such questions, and we shall continue to do that.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
UFA

Henry Elvins Spencer

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. SPENCER:

It will be satisfactory

to me if the government cannot give the information. I simply withdraw questions 3, 4 and 5.

Questions

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

With regard

to the reply which the Prime Minister has just made, I understand some questions have been asked with respect to harbour commissions, but they have been ruled out of order. I hope they will be reconsidered in view of the statement that has just been made by the Prime Minister, because I think they are covered by what he has said.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

I dio mot want to take up time unnecessarily, but with respect to the sixth question:

What percentage of these products are used for military purposes?

How can the government answer the question How does it know what the product of any particular factory is amid how can it compare what is used for military purposes with the total output? As regards the seventh question:

How much did the Canadian government buy from these firms from 1928 to 1932, inclusive?

This is a proper question, although it is very general. As regards the eighth question:

Can rayon factories be turned into munitions factories in case of war?

It might be Said with respect to any factory in the world that it could be turned into a munitions factory in case of war.

I dlo not wish the right bon. gentleman to misunderstand me. There are questions which obviously the government would not think it fair to ask commissions to answer. Eor instance: Did John Smith work for the harbour commission and did he receive $2.50? You spend a dollar in time and energy in getting that question answered and the answer cannot be of any real value, nor is it the intention of the government to aisk the commission for it. I do mot, however, think my right horn, friend referred to questions of that character.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I think the

question might be permitted to appear on the order paper in case there should be any criticism of anyone for not allowing it so to appear.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

At the risk of being tiresome, I might point out to the right hon. gentleman that on one occasi on in the house during recent years it was indicated that some discretion must be exercised by the Speaker as to what should appear on the order paper. I fancy the incident to which he refers is one in which the Speaker, in the exercise of his discretion, thought the question should not appear on the order paper. That is as far, I understand, as the matter has gome; that is, the Speaker is responsible for what appears on the order paper.

53719-158J

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

The right hon. gentleman is quite correct, but I think if his honour the Speaker would reconsider the question in the light of the statement as made by the Prime Minister this afternoon, he would allow it to appear on the order paper.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink
CON

Pierre Édouard Blondin (Speaker of the Senate)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPEAKER:

In view of the attitude

of the government at this session regarding questions 'asked as to 'the internal management of harbour boards, certain questions along the same lines have not been put on the 'order paper, the government having announced its intention of not answering such questions. As to question I on to-day's order paper, the first question seems fair enough and depending on the answer to that, questions following might or might mot be properly asked. I should say questions 1 and 7 might properly be asked, the others to be dropped.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RAYON INDUSTRIES
Permalink

February 27, 1933