Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

I beg to move:

That on and after Tuesday, the 5th of April, 1927, until the end of the present session, the House shall meet at 11 o'clock in the morning of each sitting day, and that in addition to the usual intermission at six o'clock p.m. there shall also be an intermission every day from one to three o'clock.

Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Leader of the Opposition):

Will my right hon. friend consider the suggestion of including Saturday next in that motion?

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I thought of

holding that in reserve for the present until we see what progress we make by meeting in the morning on and after to-morrow.

Mr. H. E. SPENCER (Battle River):

I

would like on behalf of this part of the House to protest against this motion. Various very important committees are sitting this week right until next Friday, and many of us would like to be in the House and in the committee at the same time. This of course is impossible. It seems to me that if the work is so pressing or if we are so anxious to get away from this parliament, we are not justified, when some of us ought to be attending committees, in starting morning sitttings. For that reason I hope the House will not accept the motion.

Mr. M. N. CAMPBELL (Mackenzie):

I

would like to suggest to the Prime Minister that the House, instead of meeting at eleven o'clock in the morning, meet at two o'clock in the afternoon. That would be a difference

Morning Sittings

of just one hour and I think we would get through just as much business. Every possible effort is being made by members on the opposition benches to assist the government and to facilitate business. In view of that and in view of the rate at which we are getting through business, I see no reason for starting morning sessions at this particular time. Every member has a great deal of work to do other than attending the sessions of the House, and if a member has to sit in the chamber from eleven o'clock in the morning until eleven at night it is impossible for him to do justice to his work-. If the Prime Minister would take into consideration sitting at two o'clock in the afternoon, we would get through business just as well as by sitting in the morning.

Mr. G. G. COOTE (Macleod):

If I had

any assurance that we would have to sit only from eleven o clock in the morning until eleven o clock at night, I would not feel so strongly against this resolution. I have a clear recollection of the last weeks of the previous session when, although we started at eleven o'clock in the morning, we sometimes had to sit in this chamber until six o'clock the following morning. If I were sure that this motion would accomplish the end which we have in view I would not oppose it. On Tuesday last we sat here from three o'clock in the afternoon until five minutes to midnight so that three hon. gentlemen could each make a speech. I do not know how those hon. gentlemen are going to get along when we apply the new rule limiting them to forty minutes. We have spent four days in discussing the Imperial conference report and we have not yet arrived at a decision. As a matter of fact there was no motion before the House to discuss except the motion to go into committee of supply.

I want to voice a protest against what appears to be unreasonable haste to wind up this session. Last year along about the 1st of July I stated in this House that I wanted to go home and many members made a good deal of fun at my expense because I used that expression. I still want to go home when the business of the House is concluded; but last year when I made that statement parliament had been sitting for about six months. This year parliament has been sitting not quite two months. One reason why I am rising in protest against this motion is because I have received numerous telegrams

from ex-service men's associations throughout Canada protesting against parliament proroguing in such a hurry and using that as an excuse for not bringing in some further legislation dealing with ex-service men's problems. Might I quote one sentence from a letter written to me recently by Mr. Lapp, superintendent of the service bureau of the Canadian Legion? He said:

The Canadian Legion of the British Empire Service League now appeals to you in the name of those who were disabled by war service and the dependents of those whose breadwinners gave their lives in the service of Canada, to remain on duty at your seat in the House of Commons of Canada for a sufficient length of time to fully consider these matters.

Many other members have been receiving similar telegrams, and I say, through you, Mr. Speaker, to the members of the Llouse and of the government that it really does not look quite right for this House to make such an effort to conclude its sittings this week. While I am very anxious to return home whenever the work of the session is completed, I do not think any hon. member can contradict me when I say that if this House prorogues this week or even by Wednesday night of the following week, the estimates mast be put through in a manner that will not permit proper consideration.

Mr. MANION:

As they always are.

Mr. COOTE:

My hon. friend says, "as

they always are." I think that is a good argument for something I have often urged in this House, and that is that the estimates be sent to a select committee for consideration, but I have never been able to get the House to adopt that suggestion. I do not suppose that I shall be able to prevent this House sitting morning, afternoon and evening, or even all night, if it wants to do it, but I simply want to make my protest as a member of the House.

Mr. L. J. LADNER (Vancouver South):

I should not be doing what I deem to be my duty if I let this opportunity pass without a reference to one question which concerns me so far as it relates to the adjournment of the House, and that is in connection with soldier legislation. I too have received communications of various kinds, and I have felt, and I feel, that the responsibility is really upon the government for not having brought down this legislation some time ago, and they should not give as an excuse now for not bringing

Immigration Act

it down the desire on the part of members for an early close of the session. As far as I am concerned, and I believe that a great many other hon. members feel the same way, for the fellows and the dependents of those who spent four years in the trenches in France on our behalf, we can well afford to spend one day or four days or a week or a month, if need be, to deal with any soldier legislation that may be necessary, especially in view of the shortness of this session. In that respect, therefore I protest, and I say that the government should deal with that legislation, and should not offer as an excuse for not doing so the desire for an early prorogation of the House.

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

I can assure my hon. friend who has just spoken (Mr. Ladner) that the government's desire in the matter of closing at a certain date has nothing whatever to do with its decision with respect to legislation relating to the returned soldiers. The Minister of Soldiers' Civil Re-establishment (Mr. King) made a statement to the House last week in Which he gave the reasons why the government thought it inadvisable to amend that act this year beyond the one or two amendments that the minister mentioned would be brought in. I can assure my hon. friend, having regard to the number and character of the representations the minister has received, it would not be possible for the government, even if we were to be here for another month, to arrive at a decision different from that already reached in regard to those particular phases of legislation respecting returned soldiers.

I would say to my hon. friend from Macleod (Mr. Coote), who spoke of sitting late at night, that I do not think he will find anyone on this side of the House, certainly not on the government benches, who will desire any more than he does to sit up after eleven at night or midnight. The purpose of starting in the morning at eleven o'clock is if possible to get through by eleven o'clock at night, rather than running on until two or three o'clock in the morning. There does appear to be a general desire on the part of all members of the House, as far as I have been able to gather, to conclude the business by the Easter recess.

Hear, hear.

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

We may not

be able to do that, but I think if we . begin the morning sittings at once, we shall very 32649-115

soon ascertain whether we can or not, and it is with that purpose in view that the government has introduced this motion, which I hope the House will accept.

Mr. COOTE:

Would the Prime Minister

then be good enough to accommodate hon. members who may be attending some committee of the House when some item in which they are interested comes up, by postponing consideration- of it until they can be here?

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

That is an entirely reasonable request. I might say that the government will endeavour in every way to meet the convenience of members of the House, and if they will just speak to the whips we will seek to have the business so arranged as to best suit the convenience of all.