March 22, 1962

HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATES

OFFICIAL REPORT


.. : .12 . ' . , :



:



Thursday, March 22, 1962


PRIVILEGE

MR. HERRIDGE REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN TORONTO "TELEGRAM"

NDP

Herbert Wilfred Herridge

New Democratic Party

Mr. H. W. Herridge (Kootenay West):

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a question of privilege affecting the rights and privileges of every member of this house. I do so in relation to an editorial of yesterday's date entitled "Time for an election" in the Toronto Telegram. I do not object to the implication in the editorial that the opposition is directing parliament, for I can easily see the validity of this point, but what I do think is a statement in contempt of parliament is the following:

Within the last few days the Liberal member for Hull deliberately provoked the Deputy Speaker-

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HERRIDGE REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN TORONTO "TELEGRAM"
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HERRIDGE REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN TORONTO "TELEGRAM"
Permalink
NDP

Herbert Wilfred Herridge

New Democratic Party

Mr. Herridge:

The word "provoke" means "to rouse the anger of". The Toronto Telegram, then, is clearly implying that the Deputy Speaker acted in anger rather than in justice and according to the rules of the house in demanding that the hon. member for Hull withdraw certain of his remarks on March 16. This is a slight on the Deputy Speaker and therefore on the position of the Speaker of this house, in our opinion.

In these circumstances I move, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver East (Mr. Winch):

That Mr. J. D. MacFarlane, editor in chief of the Telegram, be called before the bar of the house to apologize for this insult to parliament.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HERRIDGE REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN TORONTO "TELEGRAM"
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Oh, oh.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HERRIDGE REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN TORONTO "TELEGRAM"
Permalink
PC

Louis-Joseph Pigeon

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Pigeon:

A good joke.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HERRIDGE REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN TORONTO "TELEGRAM"
Permalink
PC

Daniel Roland Michener (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

Before the hon. member is permitted to place this motion before the house it is my duty to determine whether or not there is a prima facie breach of privilege involved in the editorial of which the hon. member complains. I naturally approach this subject with every intention and desire of protecting the good name of the chairmen and speakers of the house, which of course is essential to do if the house is to carry out its high responsibilities. However, I And difficulty in following the reasoning of the hon.

member when he concludes that the Deputy Speaker is accused of having acted in anger simply from a deduction from the use by the Telegram of the word "provoked". If I may refer to the hon. member's statement of privilege, his objection is to the following words:

Within the last few days the Liberal member for Hull deliberately provoked the Deputy Speaker-

From the use of the word "provoked" the hon. member concludes that the Deputy Speaker is accused of being angry and therefore did not act as he should have acted. Therefore he concludes that the Telegram has accused the Deputy Speaker of acting as he should not have acted. In my judgment the inference taxes one's imagination too greatly to be accepted as the basis for a motion.

I find that the Concise Oxford dictionary says that "provoke" means "to rouse". Therefore the Telegram's editorial might be interpreted as meaning that the hon. member for Hull roused the Deputy Speaker. Other definitions are "to irritate; to instigate; to tempt; to allure; to call forth". I am afraid that although I agree with the hon. member's desire to protect the Chair, I could not accept the words complained of as being sufficient to raise a prima facie question of a breach of privilege of the house.

Topic:   PRIVILEGE
Subtopic:   MR. HERRIDGE REFERENCE TO EDITORIAL IN TORONTO "TELEGRAM"
Permalink

AGRICULTURE

DAIRY PRODUCTS

PC

Douglas Scott Harkness (Minister of National Defence)

Progressive Conservative

Hon. D. S. Harkness (Acting Minister of Agriculture):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform the house of the government's intentions with respect to support of dairy products under the Agricultural Stabilization Act for the year commencing May 1, 1962.

Support for dairy products at the same level presently in effect will be continued for the forthcoming year. In order to increase the consumption of butter, and thus bring consumption and production into closer balance, the agricultural stabilization board will be authorized to lower its buying and selling price for butter from the current 64 cents to 52 cents per pound, effective May 1. This action will have the effect of reducing the price of butter by about 12 cents per pound, which should result in a price of from 56 cents to 59 cents at the retail level.

Dairy Products Support Prices

To maintain support at the present level to dairy farmers who market their milk and cream for manufacturing purposes, and thus whose returns are directly related to the price of butter, these farmers will receive compensatory payments based on the difference between the 64 cents support level and the 52 cents board price for butter.

The price at which the stabilization board will buy cheese will be set in relation to the 52 cents purchase price for butter. Cheese milk shippers will receive the same compensatory payment as is to be made to those supplying milk for butter manufacture.

The revised purchase prices for butter and cheese, plus the compensatory payments, will provide the same measure of support to producers supplying milk for butter and cheese production as is provided under the present support program.

The compensatory payment will be in addition to the 25 cents per hundred pounds subsidy now paid to shippers of manufacturing milk. It will not be paid on milk used in the fluid milk market or on surplus milk from producers shipping to the fluid milk market. The pricing of fluid milk and any control of surplus production in this segment of the industry lies within local jurisdiction in each province. Milk used for the production of concentrated milk products will continue to receive the present subsidy of 25 cents per hundred pounds but will not be eligible for the additional compensatory payment.

The stabilization board has been instructed to enter into discussions with producer and industry representatives with respect to details of the new program, including arrangements for the price transition. Following these discussions a full announcement of the details will be made.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   DAIRY PRODUCTS
Sub-subtopic:   SUPPORT PRICES
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin

Liberal

Hon. Paul Martin (Essex East):

It will be desirable, of course, to await the details which are to be announced later, as the minister has just told us, before making a final assessment of this announcement of policy. However, the general lines announced by the minister follow pretty well the suggestion made by the national Liberal council last January; and, as hon. members will recall, the hon. member for Leeds, who among others during the course of this session, made representations in this house which we are happy to see have been observed by the Minister of Agriculture.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   DAIRY PRODUCTS
Sub-subtopic:   SUPPORT PRICES
Permalink
NDP

William Arnold Peters

New Democratic Party

Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):

We believe the dairy industry itself will be happy that the government has now reached a decision on this matter. I had the opportunity of meeting some of the representatives who

were negotiating local contracts in the city of Ottawa some weeks ago, and they had to adjourn their meetings for several weeks because the government had not made up its mind on this question.

The subsidy and the compensatory payments which are being made amount to even more, I believe, than the federation of agriculture has asked for. On the other hand, is the government giving any consideration to bringing into the pattern of these compensatory payments some benefit for the fluid milk industry itself? It would seem to me that until a relationship is established between the fluid milk industry and butter production-

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   DAIRY PRODUCTS
Sub-subtopic:   SUPPORT PRICES
Permalink
PC

Daniel Roland Michener (Speaker of the House of Commons)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Speaker:

Order. The hon. member should confine his remarks to comment- and brief comment-on the announcement of policy which has been made. He should not discuss extraneous matters, and he should reserve his argumentative approach to the subject until the matter can be debated.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   DAIRY PRODUCTS
Sub-subtopic:   SUPPORT PRICES
Permalink
NDP

William Arnold Peters

New Democratic Party

Mr. Peiers:

The reason this has been mentioned is that the government may find difficulty in putting these compensatory payments into effect unless consideration is given to the fluid milk problem; because this is a butter fat problem, and the suggestion that the prices paid for butter should be lowered affects the whole dairy industry and its interrelated parts. I would only ask the minister to give consideration to this immediately.

On the orders of the day:

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   DAIRY PRODUCTS
Sub-subtopic:   SUPPORT PRICES
Permalink

March 22, 1962