April 24, 1934

CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

But the bill will not be withdrawn. It will disappear.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):

No. Read rule 756.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

The bill may be moved to be put back on the order paper, but it disappears from this order paper and it can only be put back upon a motion being made to that effect. When it disappears from the order paper what takes its place? A bill? Oh no; a pious hope that straddles the fence and speaks for both sides. In other words, their principle is: "We want to be on both sides of this measure. We want to say in the country that we have supported orderly marketing. But also we want to say we opposed this bill."

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):

Right.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

The hon. member is perfectly frank, but the rules are not predicated on that assumption. The rules are predicated

on the assumption that members of parliament have opinions and convictions which they are prepared to back up with their votes.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

Cameron Ross McIntosh

Liberal

Mr. McINTOSH:

As the electors of South Oxford did.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

I would not for a moment, Mr. Speaker, miss any pearly word of wisdom. I thought I heard one, but it seems I wSs mistaken. I was about to say that the test is: What would happen if this amendment carried, if it is in order? If it is in order there must at least be something happen in the way of destroying the bill that is before the house. But that is not what hon. gentlemen opposite want to do. They say in the preamble of the amendment: We are for

marketing. Then they go on to say: But we are against this kind of marketing. That means that they are in favour of the principle of the bill, and the principle of the bill is marketing.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

No.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

The right hon. gentleman stood in his place the other night and reproved the hon. member for Macleod because he was asserting that he had a right to advocate a publicly owned bank as one of the principles of the Bank of Canada bill, and he asked; What is the principle of the bill? And he answered, that we have a central bank. The principle here is: Shall we have a

marketing board? Yes or no? You cannot escape your responsibility under our rules by setting up a resolution that lets you support the bill in one breath and oppose it in another. That is what the rule is designed to prevent. It insists that there should be a clear cut division of opinion upon the issue. The issue is a marketing bill-yes or no?

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Is this bill

confined simply to marketing or is it by its

title not also related to export trade?

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

Anything that is incidental to marketing must be dealt with and marketing touches every phase of trade and commerce so defined. The principle is a marketing bill and if the genius of the house evolves better provisions than those that obtain, it is open to the house to suggest what they should be. That is the position at the moment. The amendment is that all the words after "that" be struck out. The motion is that the bill be read a second time, therefore, all the words after " that " are to disappear and in place of those words we are to have substituted a mere safeguard which says: We are in favour of the principle of this bill, namely, a marketing board but we do not like some of the provisions that arise out of the application of that principle. Can that be in order? It is not in order, it is a matter for the committee. The principle of the bill is to be decided on second reading and there is an assertion of adherence to the principle in the first three lines of the amendment now before the house. If this were to be adopted instead of a motion for the second reading of the bill we would have these words:

This house, w'hile prepared to support legislation for assisting the orderly marketing of natural products, is unalterably opposed to the enactment of any compulsory measure-

That cannot be an amendment to this motion because it declares favourably to the principle. The very words read by the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Mackenzie) were, " opposed to the principle of the measure." That is, you can move a resolution opposed to the principle of the motion but you cannot move one that asserts your proud adherence to the principle of it and your abhorrence to the provisions in its details. I submit that the motion is out of

24SU

Market my Act-Mr. Ralston

order for that* very reason.. Yon cannot approbate and reprobate in the same amendment, to use the language of Lord Elgin. Here they approbate by stating that they approve of a marketing board, then they reprobate, not the motion but the details of it. This is the reason why I submit with confidence that the amendment is out of order.

Hon. J. L. RALSTON (Shelburne-Yar-mouth) With regard to the matter of principle to which my right hon. friend (Mr. Bennett) has referred, I submit that he is mixing up the principle with the name of the bill. I do not think he ought to suggest and I do not think he can fairly suggest that because this bill happens to have in its title the word "marketing," therefore that is the only principle or provision in the bill. He cannot by introducing a bill which has the word "marketing" in its title prevent us from moving an amendment to the motion for second reading in order to register disapproval of its many provisions which are not germane to marketing and which may have a much wider significance. My right hon. leader has referred already to the fact that this bill contains not only provisions for marketing but provisions for restricting imports and exports. It contains also provisions to make crimes where no crimes existed before. My right hon. friend is suggesting that by calling it a marketing bill, you make marketing the principle of the bill and that if you are in favour of marketing, then perforce you must let it have second reading and go to committee no matter what other objectionable provisions there are. Reference has been made to rule 755 but my right hon. friend has missed entirely some words which are most important in connection with this resolution, namely, that we can move a resolution declaratory of some principle adverse to, or different from the "principles, policies, or provisions" of the bill. I emphasize particularly the word provisions. That is exactly what we are doing.

My right hon. friend mentioned the central bank legislation. In that case it was distinctly laid down by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Rhodes) that a central bank was the only thing to which we were committing ourselves by that resolution. The questions of share ownership and other possible knotty problems were to be left quite open for discussion. The Prime Minister is now suggestng that we must simply open our mouths and shut our eyes because of the fact that the term "marketing" is in the title to this bill and that we must swallow the whole bill and allow it to go to the committee if we are in favour

tMr. Bennett.]

of marketing. I submit that that is not what the rules provide. They provide that simply because the word "marketing" appears in the title you are not bound to accept that as the only principle of the bill, that you have a right to examine it to find out what else is in it. The rules provide that you may move a resolution declaratory of your non-adherence to some of the provisions which are contained in the bill, even though they are provisions which are not covered by the title. 1 looked up Bourinot just before I came in to find what cases he cites in which amendments have been submitted. The citations are rather old but I found one which referred to an amendment moved in 1882. This was an amendment to a bill to readjust the representation in the House of Commons. I hope the Prime Minister will note that. According to him, if any hon. member was in favour of readjusting the representation in the House of Commons in any way he would have to vote in favour of the motion for second reading and allow the bill to go to committee. The amendment moved at that time showed that the house was in favour of readjustment but was not in favour of the readjustment proposed in the bill. The amendment appears at page 412 of the Journals of 1882. The motion was for the second reading of a bill to readjust the representation in the House of Commons and Mr. Mills moved, in amendment, seconded by Mr. Rymal:

That all the words after "that" to the end of the question, be left out, and the words "in readjusting the representation of the people in parliament, there should be no needless interference with existing arrangements, and the principle of justice and fair play towards both political parties should be observed;"

There was an admission that the house was in favour of readjustment but was taking direct issue with what was regarded as one of the provisions of the bill, namely, the provision which did not give fair play to the parties in the house. The amendment went on to say:

That the bill contains numerous needless changes, and is framed with a view to concentrate large bodies of the Liberal voters in a few electoral districts, and to add Conservative voters to, or remove Liberal voters from, many electoral districts, and thus weaken the effective strength of the Liberal party, and to pack the constituencies of Ontario in favour of the Conservatives.

That amendment shows that on the motion for second reading they were discussing the different provisions of the bill, not just the title. That amendment admitted that there should be a readjustment but it complained of the provisions of the bill. It is cited in

Marketing Act-Mr. Guthrie

Bourinot as authority for rule 755. The house divided upon the amendment but under the circumstances which existed at that time, the amendment was lost. I am pointing out that that amendment is similar to the one we have before us. It went into the heart of the bill, it dealt with the provisions of the bill and made a declaration that certain of the provisions were not acceptable to those who supported the amendment.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

Richard Burpee Hanson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

Was there any point of order raised in connection with it?

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

James Layton Ralston

Liberal

Mr. RALSTON:

No, but I would point out that Bourinot cites this very case as one of the authorities in connection with rule 755. I do not think we could have much better support for our contention that an amendment having to do with the major provisions of a bill is perfetly in order.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

The hon. gentleman will observe that in the amendment to which he has referred there is no substantive approval of the principle of the measure, it is only read into it by inference.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

James Layton Ralston

Liberal

Mr. RALSTON:

I do not think my right hon. friend will adhere to that point. Surely there was a pretty plain inference. This is a bill to readjust the representation. The amendment says that in readjusting the representation-

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

That is provided for by the British North America Act.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

James Layton Ralston

Liberal

Mr. RALSTON:

No, in readjusting the

representation-

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

The readjustment is provided by that act.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
LIB

James Layton Ralston

Liberal

Mr. RALSTON:

Yes, but the bill was for the readjustment as provided for under the British North America Act. The bill was being introduced under the powers which that act gives permitting parliament to readjust the representation. The readjustment was being made under that act. My right hon. friend suggests that this amendment did not approve the principle of readjustment. I say that it could not have approved it in much plainer language when it says that in readjusting the representation, certain definite principles should be observed.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink
CON

Hugh Guthrie (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice):

I do not want to delay the house or Your Honour in your decision of this question, but I have carefully listened to the argument and after giving it the best consideration I am able to bestow upon it, in my opinion, the amendment is out of order. I shall try briefly to give my reasons for the opinion I have just expressed. I do not see

how anyone can argue that this is not purely and simply a marketing bill; that is the main principle of the measure: For the more orderly marketing of certain natural products of Canada. The hon. member for Shelburne-Yarmouth (Mr. Ralston) suggests that the bill goes much further than the question of marketing because it touches on the question of exports and imports. But surely exports and imports of natural products are so related to the general question of orderly marketing that they form part of it.

The next point mentioned by the hon. member was that penalties are imposed for breaches of the provisions of certain of the clauses in respect of marketing. Those penalties are consequential; they appear in all such bills, md in our revised statutes there will be found many acts incorporating the imposition of penalties. One is almost shocked when one considers the matter. I believe in the revised statutes there are no less than one hundred and twenty-five such acts where penalties are prescribed for breaches of regulations. But this fact does not detract from the general principle that this measure is a marketing bill, purely and simply.

The trouble I see with the amendment moved by my right hon. friend is that, as the Prime Minister has stated, it is an attempt to bestraddle the question, to favour both sides of the question, to blow both hot and cold, which is contrary to the rules of the house. The rules provide inferentially and, I think, very distinctly that a member shall express his opinion one way or the other on questions which arise, and, indeed, until recently, a member could be compelled to vote, if present in the house.

Topic:   MARKETING ACT
Subtopic:   ORGANIZATION TO IMPROVE METHODS AND PRACTICES IN MARKETING NATURAL PRODUCTS
Permalink

April 24, 1934