June 27, 1972

PC

Gerald William Baldwin (Official Opposition House Leader; Progressive Conservative Party House Leader)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Baldwin:

Will the hon. member accept a question? In view of the reactionary speech he has made I should like to ask him this question. I am pinning a lot of my argument on the word "advancement". As a result of many legal decisions and judicial interpretations the word "advancement" has the very widest meaning, and almost any expenditure would fall within it. I do not want to make a speech so I will ask the question.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Thank God for that.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
PC

Gerald William Baldwin (Official Opposition House Leader; Progressive Conservative Party House Leader)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Baldwin:

Would the hon. member not agree that almost any type of expenditure in respect of the household, the home or the benefits of the same is and must be covered by the word "advancement"? So there is quite a bit of flexibility there which should answer the objection of my hon. friend. I would ask him if he would not accept that the use of the word "advancement" would get rid of his objection?

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
NDP

Stanley Howard Knowles (N.D.P. House Leader; Whip of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

If my hon. friend is saying that the word "advancement" is so broad it has no meaning, then why bother?

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
PC

Gerald William Baldwin (Official Opposition House Leader; Progressive Conservative Party House Leader)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Baldwin:

It has a wide meaning, but not too wide.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
NDP

Stanley Howard Knowles (N.D.P. House Leader; Whip of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

I think I would rather trust the mothers of Canada than the lawyers in the Tory party.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
PC

William Marvin Howe

Progressive Conservative

Mr. W. M. Howe (Wellington-Grey-Dufferin-Waterloo):

Mr. Speaker, I do not want to take up too much time on this motion, but I was prompted to rise by the use by the minister of the words "common sense" a couple of times in respect of this legislation. Anyone who can look at this legislation and say it has been created by the use of common sense has much to answer for because here we are speaking of an amendment to the bill which seeks to do something that has been done before. The minister says it would involve the necessity of policing the mothers of Canada. This is not a new proposal which is being suggested. It was contained in the old act. I cannot remember a single situation of a mother being harassed because she did not use the family allowance cheque in the proper manner. We all know there are probably cases in which a check should be made or in which some organization should be involved in the directing of the spending of the money so that the children involved will receive the benefit. I say that here is an arrangement for the protec-

June 27, 1972

tion of the children of Canada which would not in any way belittle the mothers.

All we need do is pick up the newspapers any day to become aware of cases of children not receiving the benefits. This provision is included to protect the children of Canada. I do not think the hon. member who placed this amendment on the order paper had any idea of belittling the mothers of Canada. He feels that from time to time cases may arise where children will need the protection of this amendment.

This minister is not one who is prone to accept amendments from anybody. We have had experience with him for a long time starting with the Canada Pension Plan when he was a parliamentary assistant. There are other ministers who are much more amenable than he is in respect of amendments. I remember when the legislation in respect of the Canadian Transport Commission was being put through the House. The minister piloting that legislation accepted amendment after amendment. Of course that bill never should have been passed. It was similar to this bill. Here we have an amendment the substance of which has been on the law books of Canada for 20 years. I do not know of any case in which it has been abused. It is there as an assurance in cases where there may be abuse created by the parents, that the children will receive the benefit of the legislation. I think the minister would do well to accept this amendment.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
NDP

William Arnold Peters

New Democratic Party

Mr. Arnold Peters (Timiskaming):

Mr. Speaker, I think I would disagree with the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) in respect of this amendment.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
NDP

William Arnold Peters

New Democratic Party

Mr. Peters:

I am aware of the difficulties which arise-

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
NDP

Stanley Howard Knowles (N.D.P. House Leader; Whip of the N.D.P.)

New Democratic Party

Mr. Knowles (Winnipeg North Centre):

You are not a

Tory lawyer.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
NDP

William Arnold Peters

New Democratic Party

Mr. Peters:

-in supervising the use of the money. I would agree with those who say that money paid under family allowances no doubt in some cases has been substituted for money that should have come from other sources. However, I suggest to the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre that by the time this legislation is in effect the computers which will be developed to handle it will be complicated and advanced enough that they will also be able to make house calls. I think this can probably be supervised in the home by the computers.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
LIB

Gérald Laniel (Deputy Chair of Committees of the Whole)

Liberal

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):

Order, please. Is the House ready for the question?

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Question.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
LIB

Gérald Laniel (Deputy Chair of Committees of the Whole)

Liberal

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):

Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the said motion? All those in favour please say yea.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Yea.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
LIB

Gérald Laniel (Deputy Chair of Committees of the Whole)

Liberal

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):

All those opposed please say nay.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Nay.

Family Income Security Plan

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
LIB

Gérald Laniel (Deputy Chair of Committees of the Whole)

Liberal

The Acting Speaker (Mr. Laniel):

In my opinion the nays have it.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink
PC

Jack Marshall

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Marshall:

On division.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   FAMILY INCOME SECURITY PLAN
Sub-subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE BENEFITS IN RESPECT OF CHILDREN
Permalink

June 27, 1972