David Arnold CROLL

CROLL, The Hon. David Arnold, P.C., Q.C., LL.D.

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Spadina (Ontario)
Birth Date
March 12, 1900
Deceased Date
June 11, 1991
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Croll
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=16a359f2-d18b-45d6-be33-975d6e117d7c&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister, lawyer

Parliamentary Career

June 11, 1945 - April 30, 1949
LIB
  Spadina (Ontario)
June 27, 1949 - June 13, 1953
LIB
  Spadina (Ontario)
August 10, 1953 - April 12, 1957
LIB
  Spadina (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 4 of 132)


June 20, 1955

Mr. David A. Croll (Spadina):

Mr. Speaker, I am sure the house will not expect me to follow in length the speech which has just been made. I am not joining in the filibuster; consequently, I shall not be so long. On this side of the house many will say I have made more sense than has the hon. member who just sat down.

In so far as the bill is concerned, I took the hon. gentleman's advice over the week end and I re-read the bill mainly because I was intrigued with his description of it as a socialist measure. When I found the bill standing in the name of the Prime Minister, I hardly thought that he could be referred to as the greatest socialist in the Dominion of Canada. If the opposition is attempting to sell that bill of goods to the people of Canada, they have a hard task ahead of them, because this very bill has been on the statute books for four years with all the present powers, and the people of Canada have been glad to accept its benefits.

I welcome C.C.F. support and I expected Tory opposition. The C.C.F. are right for the wrong reasons and the Tories are wrong for the wrong reasons. As I understand the position of the official opposition, and I had occasion to reread the speeches of the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker), the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green) and the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell), they agree that the department should be established; they do not quarrel too much with the powers of the department but they then say that the chief objection is that the powers are given in

perpetuity, and they ask that there be a review after a period of two or three years. That, in my opinion, is a tenable position and I intend to deal with it in due course.

When the opposition speak of abrogating the rights of parliament, and the denial of the rule of law, they are much beyond this bill. Let me say to hon. members, and particularly to those who are wont to use the term "perpetuity", nothing is irrevocable. Parliament gives and parliament takes, and what parliament can do parliament can undo.

Topic:   DEFENCE PRODUCTION ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENTS RESPECTING SALARY OF MINISTER AND EXPIRY OF ACT
Full View Permalink

June 20, 1955

Mr. Croll:

We want the right to exercise them. Of course we will have the power if this bill is passed.

Topic:   DEFENCE PRODUCTION ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENTS RESPECTING SALARY OF MINISTER AND EXPIRY OF ACT
Full View Permalink

June 20, 1955

Mr. Croll:

In this instance I think fidelity to the country and fidelity to the party are

fully compatible. I recall some words once said by Sir James Barrie. He said that God gives us memory so we can have roses in December. Time and time again the minister, in his statements, in his views and in his predictions has been proved right. The minister thinks that in this present emergency we need these powers and that the opportunities for review are adequate. Those views I share with him, and for that reason I support the bill.

Topic:   DEFENCE PRODUCTION ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENTS RESPECTING SALARY OF MINISTER AND EXPIRY OF ACT
Full View Permalink

June 20, 1955

Mr. Croll:

It is unfortunate if they have lost hope of gaining power. As an individual I merely say they must have hope of reaching power. If they have not faith in themselves, they cannot ask the Canadian people to have faith in them.

This is their theme song. All they are doing today and all they have done for some days is to play an old record which is a little more cracked than it used to be. It is the same record they played for the War Measures Act and the Emergency Powers Act. They spoke of abrogating the rights of parliament and the denial of the rule of law. Today we hear the same old story without even a new twist to it. I should have thought they would be up to something new after all these years.

Topic:   DEFENCE PRODUCTION ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENTS RESPECTING SALARY OF MINISTER AND EXPIRY OF ACT
Full View Permalink

June 20, 1955

Mr. Croll:

They may on that, too. Parliament is sovereign and the Leader of the Opposition gave us an example. I remind you of it, too. When the Labour government came into office in Britain they nationalized steel. At that time the Tories said, "When we come into power we will denationalize steel." They went to the country, they were elected and when they came back into power they denationalized steel. I wonder whether the opposition ever hopes to gain power in this country.

Topic:   DEFENCE PRODUCTION ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENTS RESPECTING SALARY OF MINISTER AND EXPIRY OF ACT
Full View Permalink