May 5, 1939

LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

But the comment goes out to the country as such. May I say that last fall I was obliged to take a short rest on account of the condition of my health at the time. That rest was concluded at the end of October, I think it was, and from that time until this-not excepting Sundays-there is no day in which I have not given most of my time, in fact practically all of my time, to the work of the government of this country.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Subtopic:   MOTION FOR SITTING ON SATURDAY, MAY 6
Permalink
?

Charles Stephen Booth

Mr. WOODSWORTH:

If the Prime Minister would permit me to say so, there was no such thought in my mind. My point was simply this, that if we had worked here during the Prime Minister's absence for the last week, we might manage to do so for the next week or so. But I have no doubt the Prime Minister has been exceedingly busy.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Subtopic:   MOTION FOR SITTING ON SATURDAY, MAY 6
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; Secretary of State for External Affairs; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

The fact the hon. member and other hon. members feel the house will not suffer from my absence is one of the reasons which perhaps caused me to be a little less in the house during the last week or two than otherwise I would have been.

I perhaps might remind the hon. member that most of the measures, certainly all of the government measures, which are before the house have been fully discussed in cabinet. With very few exceptions I have been present at all meetings of the cabinet, and have participated in discussions of these matters. I know what the position of the government is to be, and I have felt it perfectly safe to leave in the hands of the minister in charge of a government bill the statement to the house, and to leave to my colleagues the debate on measures of that kind. I do not

Business of the House-Saturday Sitting

think it is customary in any parliament for the Prime Minister necessarily to remain in the House of Commons when bills are being discussed which are in the hands of his colleagues, and particularly in the hands of colleagues as exceptionally competent as those I have the privilege to have around me.

May I say to the hon. member that the motion to sit to-morrow is not for the purpose of driving the house. It is not for the purpose of railroading business through the house, but rather for the very purpose of avoiding both those things. I believe there is a general desire on the part of all hon. members to bring the business of this session to a close, and to see whether it can be done before their majesties arrive or whether there will have to be an adjournment for a shorter or longer time. By giving one extra day for discussion of business I believe we shall be in a better position in the course of the next few days to know whether or not it will be possible to finish the business before their majesties arrive in the city. I may point out that such is the whole purpose of the motion. It is to enable us to see if by giving a little more time to discussion and consideration of public measures and by avoiding the necessity of rushing matters we may, by sitting to-morrow, and perhaps a little longer on some other days, accomplish that end.

Let me make perfectly clear what I said at the beginning of the session. The government. does not intend to crowd this House of Commons with respect to public business. If it is the disposition of hon. members, by arrangement among themselves as to which members are to speak on different measures and the like, so to facilitate business that it may be possible to get through earlier than we otherwise would, of course that will be all to the good in shortening the period during which this house will have to remain in session, either before or after their majesties' visit.

But if ws cannot get through before their majesties arrive here, I am perfectly sure that we shall be doing greater justice to the public business of this country if we take an adjournment until after their majesties have left Canada, and then have the house resume to discuss matters without any sense of either pressure or confusion. From what hon. members have said to me, I am certain it is the wish of many of them to be in their constituencies when their majesties are passing through. I think it will be expected that the ministers of the crown will be with their majesties in different provinces as the king and queen pass through their respective provinces. I am sure that the public interest will

be centred on the visit of the king and queen and the many matters incidental thereto during the period of time their majesties are here. Generally the public will get a much better appreciation of the care with which this house is discussing public matters if that discussion takes place after their majesties have left rather than at a time when the public mind is occupied, as it will be, with their majesties' visit.

For that reason the government has thought it advisable to adjourn, if necessary, over the entire period of their majesties' visit rather than to attempt a short adjournment and continue later. May I say that in asking the house to adjourn for that period of time we are giving evidence of our desire to avoid any rushing of public business or any confusion. May I remind hon. members that when my predecessor was in office and the silver jubilee of King George V took place in England, the house gave its consent at that time to adjourning over the period of the silver jubilee in order that the Prime Minister might be present in London throughout that time. There was an adjournment of a month and the house came back at the end of that time and resumed its business. If it was desirable at that time to adjourn the house for a month for that particular purpose, there is a much stronger reason for an adjournment at this time. I do not know that there is anything further that I need say at the moment, except that I believe hon. members know that my wish has been to try to meet as much as possible the desire of the house. Probably the best way to decide whether the present motion meets with the wishes of hon. members is to leave it to a division.

Topic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Subtopic:   MOTION FOR SITTING ON SATURDAY, MAY 6
Permalink

Motion agreed to.


ELECTORAL DISTRICTS

EFFECT UPON FEDERAL CONSTITUENCIES OF READJUSTMENTS IN PROVINCE OF QUEBEC


On the orders of the day. Mr. JEAN-FRANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata) (Translation): Mr. Speaker, in connection with the recent readjustment of electoral divisions in the province of Quebec, I should like to ask the Minister of Justice (Mr. Lapointe) what action the government intends taking in regard to the redistribution of dominion electoral districts, inasmuch as, according to the Elections Act and the Representation Act, the description of dominion constituencies follows that of the provincial electoral divisions. Would the Minister of Justice kindly tell the house what action he intends taking in regard to federal constituencies whose boundaries may have been modified by the Grain Futures



provincial readjustment particularly in regard to Temiscouata, whose member wishes to get back the parishes taken, from him by the former government?


LIB

Ernest Lapointe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Right Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice) (Translation):

I shall be glad to inquire into the matter raised by my hon. friend. However, I think the Representation Act contains a clause stating that the words or expressions used to denote territorial divisions are to be construed as indicating such territorial divisions as existed at the date of the passing of the act. Therefore, any changes effected since would have no effect as regards the dominion act. In any event, I shall ask my hon. friend to let me examine the matter and take it under consideration.

Topic:   ELECTORAL DISTRICTS
Subtopic:   EFFECT UPON FEDERAL CONSTITUENCIES OF READJUSTMENTS IN PROVINCE OF QUEBEC
Permalink

RAINY LAKE WATER LEVELS

CANADA-UNITED STATES CONVENTION OF SEPTEMBER 15, 1938-CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the senate to Bill No. 72, to carry into effect the provisions of the convention of the 15th September, 1938, providing for emergency regulation of the level of Rainy lake and of the level of other boundary waters in the Rainy lake watershed. He said: The first amendment is to section 4. When the bill passed this house this section read in part: -in the event the commission shall determine that such emergency conditions exist. The senate have added the word " that " before the word " commission." With this amendment this phrase would read:



in the event that the commission shall determine that such emergency conditions exist. By way of explanation of the original text I may say that it followed the language of the agreement itself upon which this particular section is based. The other amendment has to do with section 7, which now reads in part: -make all orders and issue all processes necessary. The senate have changed this to read: -make all orders and issue every process necessary. The only comment I would have to make on this change is that if it were found necessary to change the phrase " all processes " to " every process," I cannot see why it should not be equally desirable to change the phrase " all orders." However, the meaning of the section will remain as it was, and I suggest that these changes be accepted. f.Mr. Pouliot.] Motion agreed to; amendments read the second time and concurred in.


GRAIN FUTURES

TRADING IN FUTURES ON WINNIPEG GRAIN EXCHANGE-CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS


Hon. W. D. EULER (Minister of Trade and Commerce) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the senate to Bill No. 81, to provide for the supervision and regulation of trading in grain futures.


CCF

Charles Grant MacNeil

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. MacNEIL:

Explain, please.

Topic:   GRAIN FUTURES
Subtopic:   TRADING IN FUTURES ON WINNIPEG GRAIN EXCHANGE-CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink
LIB

William Daum Euler (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. EULER:

These amendments are not very far-reaching. The first amendment is to section 5, paragraph (d). This paragraph now reads in part:

(d) requiring every member of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange to obtain from its agents and correspondents such particulars of all transactions in grain futures-

The amendment would make this paragraph read:

(d) requiring every member of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange to use his best endeavours to obtain from his agents and correspondents-*

The senate thought that the section as it was possibly placed responsibility upon a man which conceivably it might be impossible to fulfil. The government has no objection to modifying the section in that way.

The next amendment is to subsection 2 of the same section 5, which reads:

Before any such regulation is made notice thereof shall first be given to the Winnipeg Grain Exchange and the Winnipeg Grain and Produce Exchange Clearing Association Limited, and each of the said associations shall be given an opportunity to be heard in connection therewith.

The insertion after "each of the said associations" of the wmrds "or any member thereof" is quite unobjectionable.

Section 8, subsection 1(d), says that the board may:

-suspend from trading privileges any member of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange if in the opinion of the board such member has been guilty of a breach of this act or of any regulation or order made thereunder and require the officials of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange to exclude any such member from trading privileges, and forbid any other member to accept orders from such member for the purchase or sale of grain.

The proposed amendment is to add:

. . . except for the purpose of closing out then existing trades.

There is no objection to that. Finally, it is proposed to substitute for subsection 2

Agricultural Products-Marketing

of section 8 something which is entirely reworded. It now reads:

The board may, where in its opinion a by-law or rule of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange relating to trading in grain futures operates injuriously to the public interest, after hearing representations, if any, on behalf of the association by order revoke or vary such by-law or rule.

Certain members of the senate had representations made to them, and the fear seems to be that under that clause it might be possible for the board to cancel all the rules of the exchange and thus close the exchange altogether. My own thought is that there is no practical likelihood of that happening, because the whole bill is predicated upon the continued operation of the exchange, and it is intended only to supervise it. However, as it does not conflict with the purpose of the bill, it is proposed to insert this instead of the clause which is there now:

The board may, where in its opinion a by-law or rule of the Winnipeg Grain Exchange has brought about or is threatening to bring about a condition which is prejudicial to the public interest arising from trading in grain futures, after hearing representations, if any, on behalf of the exchange by order revoke or vary any such by-law or rule: Provided, however, that this subsection shall not authorize the closing of the grain futures market or any limitation of future trading other than as set out in subsection one of this section.

As the amendment does not conflict with the purposes of the section, the government has no objection to it.

Topic:   GRAIN FUTURES
Subtopic:   TRADING IN FUTURES ON WINNIPEG GRAIN EXCHANGE-CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink
CON

Ernest Edward Perley

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. E. E. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):

I suggest that these two amendments definitely limit the powers of the board; the supervisor would be a mere visitor to the clearing house or the exchange. A man who has had considerable experience in grain dealing and is much interested in it has made the suggestion that, even under the measure as originally drafted, the supervisor would be just a visitor. These two amendments make the act practically inoperative as a useful measure.

Motion agreed to; amendments read the second time and concurred in.

Topic:   GRAIN FUTURES
Subtopic:   TRADING IN FUTURES ON WINNIPEG GRAIN EXCHANGE-CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink

CRIMINAL CODE

May 5, 1939