Mr. MILLER moved :
That the quorum of the Select Standing Committee on Banking and Commerce be reduced from 21 to 11 members.
Mr. LENNOX.
Explain.
Mr. BURRELL.
Mr. MILLER.
At the last meeting of the Banking and Commerce Committee, a resolution was passed asking this House to authorize a reduction in the number of the quorum. It was then urged by a member of the House who is also a member of the committee that, perhaps, the discussion which took place at that time would lead to a larger attendance at the meeting of this and other committees. The Banking and Commerce Committee was called for business for last Friday morning at 11 o'clock. We had no quorum. The committee was called again for this morning at 11 o'clock, and, although there was present a solicitor interested in one of the Bills to he up for discussion, and though that solicitor endeavoured to drum up a quorum, he failed to do so. I understand that the new Banking Act will be referred to the Banking and Commerce Committee this session. If so, there will be a large number of meeting's of the committee, and I think it is very important that (business be not impeded, and, with that view, that the quorum be reduced, to a possible number. It has been urged, as the members of the committee number 132, that 21 is not an unreasonably large quorum. But I would point out to you, Mr. 'Speaker, and to the House, that while there are 221 members of this House, 20 constitute a quorum. It does not seem unreasonable that we should have the same proportionate quorum on committees of the House.
Mr. SPROULE.
When the committee proposed the reduction of the quorum, their recommendation was that it should be reduced from 21 to 15. The chairman (Mr. Miller) now proposes that it should be reduced to 11. I think that number is low, and especially in view of the very important Bill likely to come 'before the committee, the general banking Bill. I think that the quorum of the committee to consider so important a Bill should be more than 11 members. It seems to me that 15 would he a reasonable number, but quite low enough.
Mr. BLAIN.
I do not think that the House should make -any change in the quorum of the Banking and 'Commerce Committee. My hon. friend from South Grey (Mr. Miller) spoke of the meeting this morning. Well, this morning, three different committees were called for the same hour-eleven o'clock ; Public
Accounts, Agriculture and Banking and Commerce. If the chairman of committees are not more careful in seeing to it that committees are not called for the same hour and day, they cannot expect members to attend in such numbers as, I am sure, my hon. friend from South Grey would expect in the case of a committee that has to deal with such important questions as those which come before the Bank-
ing and Commerce Committee. I rather think that, when any change is made with respect to the quorum of these committees, it should be by a change in the rules of the House, and not by selecting one committee for change while leaving the others as they are. This is a matter that ought to receive very careful consideration by the House, and should not be done in this sudden way of simply passing a resolution. Perhaps it would have been all right to pass a resolution of this kind even with respect to the Banking and Commerce Committee at some other time, but my hon. friend knows that there is to come before this committee the
most important matter that will come before any committee this session,
the change in the banking law. 1 think that the committee should not take up the consideration of these very important enactments without at least 21 members out of the 221 members of this House present. I suggest to the chairman that he leave this over for further consideration and for more thorough discussion in the Banking and Commerce Committee itself. Surely he will not wish to press a matter of this kind now. I think that when the discussion was on in the House the other day the general expression of opinion was in apposition to the proposal to reduce the quorum of this committee.
Mr. FIELDING.
I was not able to be present at the meeting of the Banking and Commerce Committee at which this matter was considered. Personally I should be willing to accept the judgment of the committee and its chairman orTTKbr subject ; at the same time, unless there is something like a general concurrence of view in the House, it would not be desirable that the change should be made. If there be any considerable difference of opinion, I would suggest-though I agree with him on this subject-that it would be better to withdraw the resolution for the present, and let it be further considered in the Banking and Commerce Committee,
Mr. HUGHES.
It was not considered in the Banking and Commerce Committee this morning?
Mr. FIELDING.
No.
Mr. LENNOX.
I rise with some diffidence to discuss this matter as I am not a member of the Banking and Commerce Committee, but I desire to be heard because this is a very important time in connection with the work of this committee and it is a very important committee, and its action affects the interest of all classes of people in Canada. It seems to me that the difficulty pointed out by the chairman of the committee (Mr. Miller) is not overcome by his motion. Did I understand him to say that when the committee was 114
called to meet a few days ago no one attended?
Mr. MILLER.
I said that not a quorum attended.
Mr. LENNOX.
I understood him to say that no one was present. And how many were present at the meeting called for this morning?
Mr. MILLER.
About eighteen or nineteen.
Mr. SPROULE.
There were nineteen present at one time.
Mr. LENNOX.
That, I presume, was after the drumming up referred to by the chairman. This difficulty arises out of a general condition of things, and not out of anything connected with this committee specially. I have taken the liberty more than once of calling the attention ot the Prime Minister (Sir Wilfrid Laurier) to thi3 subject, No matter how good and active a member of parliament a man may be, he cannot be in two places at the same time. Nor can the member of parliament do his work properly by trying to divide his attention between two committees that are meeting at the same time. The trouble arises through summoning a number of committees for the same day. And The reason for that-which may be regarded as another difficulty-is that we do not summon committee meetings for Monday or Friday.
Mr. TAYLOR (Leeds).
Yes, the Public Accounts.
Mr. LENNOX.
-I am corrected as to the Public Accounts Committee. I venture again to suggest to the Prime Minister that it would be better if we had committees meeting on Mondays and Fridays as a regular thing. There is no reason why members should be encouraged to absent themselves from attendance on their public duties on these days. If the suggestions I make were adopted, and if the membership of each committee were reduced to a reasonable number, the difficulty we are now discussing could not arise. Now, the special reason why I speak at this time is that a most important matter is supposed to come before the Banking and Commerce Committee this session. I have heard the rumour that the government does not intend to introduce and pass the Banking Act this session. I trust that is only an idle rumour.
Mr. BORDEN (Halifax).
It has been introduced.
Mr. LENNOX.
I said ' introduce and pass.' I have heard, since the Bill was introduced, that the government does not intended to move forward and pass it.