Victor QUELCH

QUELCH, Victor

Personal Data

Party
Social Credit
Constituency
Acadia (Alberta)
Birth Date
December 13, 1891
Deceased Date
September 2, 1975
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victor_Quelch
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=ba7c8691-5f1c-4bc4-9ec1-82c0a828db16&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
farmer

Parliamentary Career

October 14, 1935 - January 25, 1940
SC
  Acadia (Alberta)
March 26, 1940 - April 16, 1945
SC
  Acadia (Alberta)
June 11, 1945 - April 30, 1949
SC
  Acadia (Alberta)
June 27, 1949 - June 13, 1953
SC
  Acadia (Alberta)
August 10, 1953 - April 12, 1957
SC
  Acadia (Alberta)
June 10, 1957 - February 1, 1958
SC
  Acadia (Alberta)
  • Whip of the Social Credit Party (January 1, 1958 - January 1, 1958)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 2 of 617)


January 24, 1958

Mr. Quelch:

Does the minister agree with the Prime Minister? The minister seems to be kind of dull today.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE GUARANTEED PRICES FOR CERTAIN COMMODITIES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 24, 1958

Mr. Quelch:

I have asked him the simple question as to whether or not he agrees with the stand put on the Hansard record by the Prime Minister. Does he agree with that stand or does he not? That is all; surely he can say yes or no.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE GUARANTEED PRICES FOR CERTAIN COMMODITIES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 24, 1958

Mr. Quelch:

March 12, 1956. Let me inform the Minister of Agriculture that if the Prime Minister of this country does not have support from the Conservative party for that stand, he has the support of this group. We are 100 per cent behind that. I now ask the Minister of Agriculture to declare whether or not he agrees with the stand taken by the Prime Minister at that time.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE GUARANTEED PRICES FOR CERTAIN COMMODITIES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 24, 1958

Mr. Quelch:

Yes, hoping they would amount to something. They did amount, perhaps, to a little, but not to very much; therefore we were glad to hear the minister say not long ago that he intended to introduce more amendments.

The first question that comes to mind is why the minister should have waited for second reading before amending his bill. Why did he not amend the bill before it was introduced in the house? The minister has stated that he consulted with farm organizations before the bill was introduced. Surely if he had done that he would have realized from their submissions that the bill in the form in which it was placed before the house was totally inadequate to deal with the distressed condition of agriculture.

When he made these changes he told us he was making them because members of the Conservative party had asked him to do so. If this is correct one might well ask why

members of the Conservative party waited until second reading before asking the minister to change the bill. Why did the members of the Conservative party not ask him to make those changes before the bill was introduced in the house? Does this mean that the members of the Conservative party had not seen the bill before it was introduced in the house?

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE GUARANTEED PRICES FOR CERTAIN COMMODITIES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 24, 1958

Mr. Quelch:

Mr. Chairman, I may say I was somewhat surprised at the outburst of the Minister of Agriculture when he closed the debate. Surely after the number of years he has been in this house-13 years, I think he said-he should be a little less thin skinned than he appears to be, and he should be able to distinguish between what I call constructive criticism and what he referred as personal abuse.

Throughout this debate, during the resolution stage and right through second reading, we in this group have tried to be constructive. We have tried to point out the weaknesses of the bill, and we have made recommendations to improve it. For instance, we have made many suggestions regarding a fair cost-price relationship, and that has been our main disagreement with the bill. During the resolution stage we pointed out there was no mention in the resolution of a fair cost-price relationship, of a parity price, or of the cost of production.

Apparently the Minister of Agriculture did take some heed of the criticism which was levelled against the resolution because when he brought in the bill, a very short time after he had begun to speak he announced that he intended to make a number of amendments; and while it is completely out of order for a minister to talk about amending sections of the bill on second reading, hon. members of this house, realizing that the bill was of such an undesirable character as to make such a step worth while, gave unanimous consent to *those amendments being read and subsequently to having the bill reprinted in order to embody those amendments.

Topic:   AGRICULTURE
Subtopic:   MEASURE TO PROVIDE GUARANTEED PRICES FOR CERTAIN COMMODITIES, ETC.
Full View Permalink