Ambrose Upton Gledstanes BURY

BURY, Ambrose Upton Gledstanes, K.C., B.A., M.A.

Parliamentary Career

October 29, 1925 - July 2, 1926
CON
  Edmonton East (Alberta)
July 28, 1930 - August 14, 1935
CON
  Edmonton East (Alberta)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 3 of 157)


March 11, 1935

Mr. BURY:

Here is the preamble to the bill:

Whereas the Dominion of Canada is a signatory, as part of the British empire, to the treaty of peace made between the allied and associated powers and Germany, signed at Versailles, on the 28th day of June, 1919; and whereas the said treaty of peace was confirmed by the Treaty of Peace Act 1919; and whereas by article 23 of the said treaty the signatories thereto each agreed that they would endeavour to secure and maintain fair and humane conditions of labour for men, women and children, both in their own countries and in all countries to which their commercial and industrial relations extend, and by article 427 of the said treaty it was declared that the well-being, physical, moral and intellectual, of industrial wage-earners is of supreme importance; and whereas a draft convention respecting hours of work in industrial undertakings was agreed upon at a general conference of the internation labour organization of the League of Nations, in accordance with the relevant articles of the said treaty, which said convention has been ratified by Canada; and whereas it is advisable to enact the necessary legislation to enable Canada to discharge the obligations assumed under the provisions of the said treaty and the said convention, and to provide for the limitation of hours of work in industrial undertakings, in accordance with the general provisions of the said convention, and to assist in the maintenance, on equitable terms of interprovineial and international trade.

Topic:   C0A1M0NS
Full View Permalink

March 11, 1935

Mr. BURY:

What I am getting at is that

the whole basis of the present legislation is the treaty obligation into which this country entered, and that in so far as that furnishes the ground of our jurisdiction as a federal parliament to intervene in legislation affecting wages, which in general would come under provincial authority, we must confine our legislation within the general scope of our treaty obligation. We could not go beyond the scope of our treaty obligation without exposing ourselves and exposing this legislation in so far as it goes beyond that scope to the peril of impeachment of our right to pass the legislation at all.

Topic:   C0A1M0NS
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1935

Mr. BURY:

Yes, but it is not there. I

am suggesting that there should be in the bill a provision enabling the commission in such case to sue. If there is no such provision, I am very much afraid the commission will answer that under the legislation they have no power to do so. That provision might be added to subclause 2 of clause 31. After the provision in regard to fine or imprisonment there might be some such clause as this:

And in addition the commission shall be entitled to recover from the employer so in default, as a civil debt the amount of contribution so in default.

I submit that to the leader of the government.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO ESTABLISH AN UNEMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL INSURANCE COMMISSION
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1935

Mr. BURY:

That is a very general clause; that may not be sufficient. There is a specific clause in relation to the suing of an employer who is in default; that is the only provision in the bill relating specifically to the suing of an employer in default, and it is one which only gives to the employee the right to sue. I still maintain that such general provision as is contained in subclause 5 of clause 4 is not sufficient for the particular purpose which I mention.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO ESTABLISH AN UNEMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL INSURANCE COMMISSION
Full View Permalink

March 8, 1935

Mr. BURY:

May I ask the leader of the

house whether the British act has in it any provision enabling the commission to sue employers for contributions in default? In this bill there is nothing of that nature, and what I am afraid of is that in the event of such a default, if the suggestion is made that the commission should sue the defaulting employer, the answer may be: We have

I Sir George Perley.]

no power under this measure to sue him; the only person under it who has power to sue in such case is the workman.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO ESTABLISH AN UNEMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL INSURANCE COMMISSION
Full View Permalink