Gerald William BALDWIN

BALDWIN, Gerald William, O.C., Q.C., LL.D.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Peace River (Alberta)
Birth Date
January 18, 1907
Deceased Date
December 16, 1991
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ged_Baldwin
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=88de9baa-8839-401f-9aa2-55522b62d47f&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister, lawyer

Parliamentary Career

March 31, 1958 - April 19, 1962
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)
June 18, 1962 - February 6, 1963
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)
  • Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister (August 17, 1962 - February 6, 1963)
April 8, 1963 - September 8, 1965
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)
November 8, 1965 - April 23, 1968
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)
June 25, 1968 - September 1, 1972
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)
  • Progressive Conservative Party House Leader (July 27, 1968 - September 20, 1973)
  • Official Opposition House Leader (July 27, 1968 - September 20, 1973)
October 30, 1972 - May 9, 1974
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)
  • Progressive Conservative Party House Leader (July 27, 1968 - September 20, 1973)
  • Official Opposition House Leader (July 27, 1968 - September 20, 1973)
July 8, 1974 - March 26, 1979
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)
  • Progressive Conservative Party House Leader (August 14, 1974 - February 24, 1976)
  • Official Opposition House Leader (August 14, 1974 - February 24, 1976)
May 22, 1979 - December 14, 1979
PC
  Peace River (Alberta)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 1378)


December 10, 1979

Mr. Baldwin:

I deal with the nuts and bolts of the tax situation-the nuts over there.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   INCOME TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

December 10, 1979

Mr. Baldwin:

Mr. Chairman, I have some sympathy with the principle advocated by the hon. member for Winnipeg-Fort Garry. Given the right circumstances, it might be a measure worth adopting. However, I want to point out to him its fatal defect. This is a tax measure, and as such I think it is quite improper to have a situation arise where a tax measure could be set aside by the other place.

The result of what the hon. member proposes might be the following. It is what is known as a positive resolution, and as such the bill would not continue in existence beyond the time stated unless the order in council was approved by both Houses. 1 point out to the hon. member that a situation might occur where this House, representing the people, might vote for the continuation of the measure, while the other place, not representing the public, and representing also-let us face the political fact-a considerable majority of the official opposition party, could vote against the measure and we would find that the other place would then be setting tax policy. I think even my friend, the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre, who has a deep measure of affection for the other place which he manages to conceal quite effectively from time to time, would probably agree with me on this.

If this were in the form of a negative resolution so that the measure continued unless it was set aside by a motion of both Houses, then the hon. member would, I think, be in a much more reasonable position. No doubt the Department of Finance will find ways and means by which this would cause all sorts of problems for the department and the administration. I have always found that department to be most ingenious in performing the right degree of mental and financial acrobatics-at least it did so under the previous government. I think it is much more sensible now. So 1 am not concerned with that. I believe it is not a bad idea to review the situation once in a while, but 1 cannot support this amendment which might put the Senate in a position of setting aside a motion of this kind, which would be quite against the constitutional practices of this Parliament.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   INCOME TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

December 10, 1979

Mr. Baldwin:

Mr. Speaker, I think the Chair should consider the point of order raised by the parliamentary secretary. I know that in the heat of passion generated by a raging debate of this kind sometimes we let our emotions get away with us, and we say things we should not.

Some years ago I myself had occasion to say that some statements made by the then prime minister were a lie, and I was compelled to withdraw it. which I did. I know that the hon. member feels very strongly about this. I admire and respect him as a very bright member with a future. He has some problem mathematically with regard to some of the issues which face this House, but I want to say honestly that Your Honour should give some consideration to the statement

December 10, 1979

Time Allocation

made. 1 heard only part of it-1 was outside-but if he did say it was a lie, then 1 think he should withdraw it.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE
Full View Permalink

December 10, 1979

Mr. Baldwin:

That is a matter of high policy which I leave to my friend, the right hon. Prime Minister.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   INCOME TAX ACT
Full View Permalink

December 4, 1979

Mr. Baldwin:

You do not want us to ...

Topic:   MR. BALDWIN-OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT-IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDING ORDER 43 MOTION
Full View Permalink