March 15, 1926 (15th Parliament, 1st Session)


Alan Webster Neill


Mr. A. W. NEILL (Comox-Alberni):

Mr. Speaker, I am glad by seconding this resolution to be associated with the subject matter of it. If I had any fault to find with it, I would say that it hardly went far enough. It is too academic in its character:
That, in the opinion of this House, a wage sufficient to provide for a reasonable standard of living should constitute a legal minimum wage.
I would have preferred something a little more mandatory, or a little more suggestive of action being taken by the government to carry out the purpose of the resolution. I do not think that any employer or any representative of an association of employers, however reactionary they or he may be, could have any objection to the passage of this resolution worded as it is.
I take exception somewhat to the remarks of the introducer of the resolution about there being some dubiety as to whether its subject matter comes under the jurisdiction of the Dominion or of the provinces, for I think that was thoroughly threshed out some four years ago. The question arose then more particularly in connection with the eight-hour law, and it was, I think, decided on the very best obtainable legal authority that it was entirely a matter for the provinces, coming under that section of the British North America Act which gives to the provinces exclusive jurisdiction in dealing with civil rights.

Full View