April 25, 1944

LIB

Roy Theodore Graham

Liberal

Mr. GRAHAM:

My point of order is this.

The particular matter we are discussing comes before the committee as a result of a motion of the Prime Minister that Mr. Speaker leave the Chair to permit us to go into committee to consider this report from a special committee. Has a member of this committee the right to do more than reject, to vote against the recommendations of that committee, or to move that the report be referred back to the committee for further consideration?

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The CHAIRMAN:

The report could be

amended.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
LIB

Jean-François Pouliot

Liberal

Mr. POULIOT:

This is exactly what has happened before. The hon. gentleman's question refers to the proposed subamendment to standing order 9. It is exactly the same as before, when I moved to dispense with the preamble or introduction or prologue contained in the first three pages. I was told it was not before the committee; but whether any motion is made by any member of this house, whether he is Prime Minister or a backbencher, makes no difference. The committee has the right to reshape it as it sees fit. It is the rule of the majority that governs in spite of what is said in this pamphlet-may I call it that-about the rights of minorities. I am ready to submit to the rule of the majority, the majority of this committee, and I am not bound by what has been decided by a special committee. They were appointed to report to us and they have reported to us. Are we or are we not satisfied? If we are not satisfied we have a right to tell them so. We can accept what they recommend to us or we can reject or change it. We have that right and that is done by the majority. That is why I appeal to the majority of the committee to get rid of the report, not to hear any more about it, because these changes would not improve the debates in the house, but would be a source of trouble and would deprive members of the rights they have. When I think of what the hon. gentleman has said, it is a matter of great concern to all of us at the present time. It is suggested by the subamendment that members shall not be obliged to vote. That is right. But there is something else. It is the basis of that recommendation, which is the three first pages, these invisible pages, which we cannot get rid of because they do not seem to be before us. If they are the basis of the report, then they are not only the basis of this subamendment, but they are the basis of each one of the subamendments and can be discussed on each one of the subamendments. Is it not better to get rid of it right away? To show how wrong the basis was for each one of the subsequent amendments, we might as well dispense with it

right away by unanimous consent and say that it is made clear that these three pages are not before the Chair at the present time.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
NAT

Thomas Langton Church

National Government

Mr. CHURCH:

After to-day's debate, Mr. Chairman, I suggest that we leave the rules alone until the rules of Hitler are beaten.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
CCF

Angus MacInnis

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

Mr. MacINNIS:

I was going to suggest that the amendment is out of order since it is a direct negative, but in view of the fact that you have accepted it, Mr. Chairman, and said that it is in order, all I can say is that it is about as crazy an amendment as I have ever heard of, because we are sent to this house to carry on the business of the country; the business of the country is decided by the votes of the members and all that the amendment says is that although we are sent here to carry on the affairs of the nation, we need not do so when we come here.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
LIB

Ian Alistair Mackenzie (Minister of Pensions and National Health)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):

A reductio ad absurdum.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
CCF

Angus MacInnis

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

Mr. MacINNIS:

What I was going to say might not be parliamentary, but we have here a good demonstration of about as nice a filibuster as I have seen in a long time to prevent anything being done.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
LIB

George Ernest Wood

Liberal

Mr. WOOD:

I feel it would be my duty to vote against this amendment. We have frowned upon the apathy of the public in not registering their votes, and it would be a good example to the public if they could say that even members of parliament are not obliged to vote. In consequence of that I am going to vote against the amendment.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:

Call it eleven

o'clock.

Progress reported.

Topic:   CONSIDERATION IN COMMITTEE OF REPORT OP SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF STANDING ORDERS
Permalink

At eleven o'clock the house adjourned until Thursday at three o'clock p.m., pursuant to special order made Monday, February 21, 1944. Thursday, April 27 1944


April 25, 1944