March 3, 1960

COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE

STANDING ORDERS-CONCURRENCE IN FIRST REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE


Miss Margaret Ailken (York-Humber) presented the first report of the standing committee on standing orders, and moved that the report be concurred in. Motion agreed to.


MARINE AND FISHERIES-CONCURRENCE IN FIRST REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE


Mr. L. R. Crouse (Queens-Lunenburg) presented the first report of the standing committee on marine and fisheries, and moved that the report be concurred in. Motion agreed to.


PUBLIC ACCOUNTS-CONCURRENCE IN FIRST REPORT OF STANDING COMMITTEE


Mr. Alan Macnaughlon (Mount Royal) presented the first report of the standing committee on public accounts, and moved that the report be concurred in. Motion agreed to.


MISCELLANEOUS PRIVATE BILLS-THIRD REPORT


Third report of standing committee on miscellaneous private bills-Mr. McCleave.


INDIAN AFFAIRS

PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.

CCF

Frank Howard

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

Mr. Frank Howard (Skeena):

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with standing order 70 I have a petition to present which is that of Carl Hamilton, of 155 McLeod street, city of Ottawa, county of Carleton, province of Ontario, Canada, secretary, one of the loyal subjects of Her Majesty in the right of Canada. Having perused the rules of the house with reference to this matter I find that it is my responsibility to read the petition, which I have done, and I have found that there are no irregularities, no violations of the rules and that it follows the form of petitions in every respect.

Very shortly, the petition relates to a notice of motion now standing on the order paper in the name of the Minister of Citizenship and

Immigration for the appointment of a joint committee of the House of Commons and the Senate on Indian affairs, and relates also to Bill No. C-2 standing in the name of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration and Bill No. C-3 standing in the name of the Secretary of State. It is the type of petition which is a personal one requiring immediate remedy, and comes within the provisions of standing order 70, subsection 8, of the standing orders.

If I may relate the particulars of the petition very briefly before reading the prayer in order to bring it in that way to the attention of the house, they are three in number.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
PC

Daniel Roland Michener (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

Order. The hon. member has the right to present the petition under standing order 70 in his place in the house, but as I read the rule it is not debatable, and I suggest that he present the petition before proceeding any further.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
CCF

Frank Howard

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

Mr. Howard:

It is not my intention to debate the petition, but inasmuch it is of the type requiring immediate action to deal with it I only wish to inform the house of what is in the petition itself. The prayer of the petition, Mr. Speaker-

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
PC

Daniel Roland Michener (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

Before the hon. member proceeds may I refer to standing order 70, which relates to petitions, so we may be clear that the proper procedure is being followed. Subsection 2 reads:

Any member desiring to present a petition in his place in the house must do so during routine proceedings and before the introduction of bills.

Then in subsection 3 it states:

On the presentation of a petition no debate on or in relation to the same shall be allowed.

Once a petition has been presented it is referred to the clerk of petitions and then, of course, is returned under a later section of the rule, to be reported upon.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
CCF

Frank Howard

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

Mr. Howard:

As I pointed out initially, standing order 70, subsection 8, also makes reference to the fact that no debate shall be permitted, as you have indicated, but it also says:

-if it complains of some present personal grievance-

As this one does.

-requiring an immediate remedy-

This is one of those, that is a personal grievance requiring an immediate remedy.

Indian Affairs

-the matter contained therein may be brought into immediate discussion.

I submit that under this rule the matter may be brought into immediate discussion. It is not my intention to discuss the merits of the petition. It is only because it is one of those which I feel fall within subsection 8 of standing order 70 that I wish to give the house an indication of what it says so we may decide whether or not it should be brought forward for immediate discussion. In order to do this I would indicate what the prayer says.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
PC

Edmund Davie Fulton (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. E. D. Fulton (Minister of Justice):

It

seems clear to me on reading subsection 8 of standing order 70 that any debate that can be allowed can only take place tomorrow on the report of the clerk of petitions, and not immediately on the presentation of the petition, if it is a matter requiring immediate or urgent attention. Indeed, subsection 7 says:

On the next day following the presentation of a petition the clerk of the house shall lay upon the table the report of the clerk of petitions upon the petitions presented and such report shall be printed in the Votes and Proceedings of that day-

Then subsection 8 says:

No debate shall be permitted on the report but a petition referred to therein may be read by the clerk of the house at the table, if required; or if it complain of some present personal grievance requiring an immediate remedy, the matter contained therein may be brought into immediate discussion.

It is clear, therefore, that discussion, if such discussion be in order, could not take place today but only tomorrow.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
CCF

Frank Howard

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

Mr. Howard:

With respect to the point of order raised by the Minister of Justice, I would point out that there is relatively little precedent in our rules but there is in the United Kingdom a quite extensive reference to the presentation of petitions and to bringing the matter forward for discussion immediately. I think, sir, a reference to May's "Parliamentary Rules and Practices", sixteenth edition, will show that standing order 93 is comparable to our standing order 70. You will find that the procedure is that which I suggest should be followed here, namely that there should be an immediate discussion allowed.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
PC

Daniel Roland Michener (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

What is the page?

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink
CCF

Frank Howard

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

Mr. Howard:

It is page 1075, and deals with standing orders of the United Kingdom as they relate to petitions. They are comparable to ours and were adopted in 1842. They have been in use ever since. There is also an instance which can be found in our Canadian Journals relating to the petition of the Bishop of Ontario in 1880. I can give the reference

to Your Honour there. It is at page 130 of March 12 of that year. There is a reference to a petition which was presented that day:

And the said petition was read and received: praying that the bill now before parliament, to legalize marriage with the sister of a deceased wife, may not become law at present, but that the various religious bodies of the dominion be allowed an opportunity of expressing their convictions regarding it.

Ordered, that the said petition be printed.

It was discussed and reference was made to it at that time. I suggest this is substantially the position of this petition, in that it relates to the business of the house. It prays that some of the business of the house be speeded up, namely the motion of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, to give immediate consideration to the setting up of that joint committee; and prays, second, that Bills Nos. C-2 and C-3 be not proceeded with beyond the stage which will allow citizens outside the house to appear before the committee and present their ideas. This is substantially the position which existed in parliament in 1880 in the reference that I read.

Topic:   INDIAN AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   PETITION WITH RESPECT TO APPOINTMENT OF JOINT COMMITTEE, ETC.
Permalink

March 3, 1960