May 29, 1935

UFA

Donald MacBeth Kennedy

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):

I would like to invite from the Minister of Justice an expression of opinion as to a point I raised a little earlier in the discussion, namely, whether with the aid of complementary legislation from the provinces it would not be competent for the federal government to set up boards of conciliation to settle industrial disputes whether they came exclusively within provincial jurisdiction or not.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GUTHRIE:

It would be competent to set them up and they might do good service, but if they were challenged in the courts, I do not think they would be worth anything.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
UFA

Donald MacBeth Kennedy

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):

Would it not be desirable as a step forward to broaden this amendment instead of limiting it to industries subject to the legislative jurisdiction of the parliament of Canada, a provision which puts the clamps on it and confines it? These words were not in the legislation before; they now confine these matters subject to the legislative jurisdiction of the parliament of Canada. In my view they rule out the possibility, even with complementary legislation passed by the provinces, of investigating industrial disputes that come exclusively within provincial jurisdiction. So I suggest to the minister that the scope be broadened and that there be no limitation to matters coming exclusively within the jurisdiction of the parliament of Canada. If cutting out that provision does not add to our jurisdiction, yet it does not limit it, and we find, if we do not limit it to matters coming exclusively within federal jurisdiction, the provinces will be glad-this may be a pious hope and I may be too optimistic-to cooperate in passing complementary legislation under which, as the Minister of Justice has indicated, much good service may be rendered to industry. If it is held upon challenge to be unconstitutional, then we shall know definitely whether it is an amendment to the jurisdiction as set forth in the British North America Act that we should press for.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
LAB

Humphrey Mitchell

Labour

Mr. MITCHELL:

That is already covered in the act. Section 3, paragraph (d) reads:

Any dispute which is within the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of any province and which by the legislation of the province is made subject to the provisions of this act.

Criminal Code Amendment

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
UFA

Donald MacBeth Kennedy

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):

But section 65 has inserted in it the provision:

Subject to the legislative jurisdiction of the parliament of Canada.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

I have followed with interest what the hon. member for South Winnipeg (Mr. Kennedy) has said and I gather he is suggesting that a provision such as this be inserted after the word "Canada" in the second line of the section:

Or which is subject to the legislative jurisdiction of any province and declared by the legislature of that province to be subject to the provisions of this act.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
UFA

Donald MacBeth Kennedy

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):

Exactly.

Mr. ILSLEY. The section would then read as follows:

Where in any industry subject to the legislative jurisdiction of the parliament of Canada or which is subject to the legislative jurisdiction of any province and declared by the legislature of that province to be subject to the provisions of this act-

And so forth. I would call the attention of the Minister of Justice to that so that he may give it consideration and see whether it would effect the end desired by the price spreads commission and by the hon. member for South Winnipeg. If he would like to move it I will second it.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
UFA

Donald MacBeth Kennedy

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):

I realize in a Saskatchewan case-I think the Minister of Justice is familiar with it-that was recently decided, it was held that a province could not, by declaring a matter within its exclusive jurisdiction to be federal, make it federal; in other words, a province could not detract from its own jurisdiction and hand it over to the federal government, or vice versa. But I do not know that that is the final word on the matter. While that is a weakness, yet I think we make progress only by meeting these difficulties when they arise, and if it will do no harm to broaden the scope of this act and if there is a possibility of real service being rendered to industry, to employers and employees in the community, it is well to do so.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink
CON

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

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GUTHRIE:

My fear is that if we pass that amendment we take a very serious chance on the whole clause. We have submitted to council a clause that we believe will stand the test. I would not like to weaken it now by inserting something that is highly controversial and that in my opinion would render the clause useless.

Section as amended agreed to.

Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Topic:   INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Subtopic:   POWER OP MINISTER TO BRING ACT INTO OPERATION WITH OR WITHOUT COMPLAINT
Permalink

CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT


Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice) moved the second reading of Bill No. 73 to amend the Criminal Code. Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Morand in the chair. Section 1 agreed to. On section 2-Sections 1035 and 1081 not to apply.


CON

Albert Joseph Brown

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BROWN:

I understand the purpose of this section is to make it obligatory upon a magistrate to impose a gaol sentence upon anyone driving an automobile while under the influence of liquor. Is the minister satisfied that this section will accomplish that purpose? I understand that sections 1035 and 1081 refer to exceptions that may be made in the imposition of gaol sentences and that this clause does away with those exceptions so that the imposition of a gaol sentence will be obligatory. I think this offers an opportunity to bring to the attention of the committee and of the country a very serious condition of things. To my mind the man. who operates a motor car while under the influence of intoxicating liquor is a potential criminal. I am fully in sympathy with the law being applied to the utmost in imposing a gaol sentence upon a man who causes an accident while driving an. automobile when he is under the influence of drink. But there is a serious aspect to the matter which I do not think the public as a whole considers; that is it has never yet been decided how to determine when a man is drunk and when he is sober. So long as this confusion prevails the evil resulting from the use of intoxicating liquor is not going to be remedied. I saw a statement the other day to which I think the committee should give serious consideration, that so long as the idea prevails that a man is not drunk so long as he can stand on his feet, just so long will the statistics concerning the connection of alcoholic liquors with motor accidents be valueless. They are entirely useless because of that attitude on the part of magistrates. That is the situation which confronts us. It has been proven by scientific test that the first drink is the dangerous one.

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh.

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Albert Joseph Brown

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BROWN:

I know this becomes a subject of ridicule, but that has been proven, that the first drink of alcohol incapacitates a man from acting quickly.

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink
UFA

Donald MacBeth Kennedy

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):

Does the hon. member speak from his own knowledge?

Criminal Code Amendment

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Albert Joseph Brown

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BROWN:

A man loses his ability to come to a quick decision. We know that an accident may happen or be avoided within a few seconds of time. It is not a matter of minutes but of seconds, with the speed at which motor cars travel now. While I am perfectly satisfied that the intention of this legislation is good I do not think it will accomplish the desired end so long as many magistrates take the position they do, that a man is not drunk so long as he can stand up. I say again that scientific tests have proven that a man's ability to come to a quick decision is seriously affected from the time he takes his first drink.

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON
CON

Albert Joseph Brown

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BROWN:

At the moment I have not got the information at hand.

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink
UFA

Michael Luchkovich

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. LUCHKOVICH:

May I ask the hon. member whether the first drink ever had that effect on him?

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Albert Joseph Brown

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BROWN:

I have not taken the first drink yet, if the hon. member wants to know.

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT
Permalink

May 29, 1935