February 14, 1929


Penitentiary Act Amendment serve a very useful purpose and lead to prison reform which is badly needed, and to help restore many persons as useful citizens. The grand jury system in England works well, and something of the same nature in the way of jury inspection should be put into practice here. Grand juries should have the power to go to these institutions and report upon conditions. In the absence of the Minister of Justice I would ask that the bill be allowed to stand.


LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Liberal

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

My hon. friend intimates

that he does not expect the house to proceed with the second reading of the bill until the Minister of Justice returns to his place in the house. He has made his speech on the motion; I would therefore move the adjournment of the debate.

Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.

Topic:   PENITENTIARY ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink

POST OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT


Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Toronto Northwest) moved the second reading of Bill No. 9, to amend the Post Office Act (newspaper ownership). He said: This particular bill was before the house last session. There is an amendment which I wish to move. The argument in favour of the bill is familiar to hon. members from the discussions of the past two sessions.


LIB

John Frederick Johnston (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Mr. Church

moves, seconded by Mr. Grimmer, that Bill No. 9 be read the second time.

Topic:   POST OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Thomas Langton Church

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHURCH:

I wish to move an amendment owing to an error in drafting.

Topic:   POST OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
LIB

John Frederick Johnston (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER:

Under the

rules it is not permissible for the hon. member to move the amendment at this stage.

Topic:   POST OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Thomas Langton Church

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CHURCH:

Then I will move the

amendment in committee. This bill is based on the principle of responsible government, and the principle of it has been a matter of law in England for many years; it is also the law in Australia and the United States. That principle is that the people should know who own newspapers. Some of these newspapers the ownership of which is unknown are continually publishing articles in support of certain movements not in the public welfare, and it is in the interest of the public as well as of the freedom of the press that the people should know the ownership of all such publications. I move the second reading of the bill.

Topic:   POST OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink

Motion agreed to, bill read the second time, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Johnston in the chair. On section 1-Sworn statement of names and addresses of editors, owners, stockholders, etc, to be made semi-annually.


LIB

Peter John Veniot (Postmaster General)

Liberal

Mr. VENIOT:

I move in amendment, as

was done last year when a similar bill was adopted by the house, that after the words "six months" in the twenty-third line the following words be omitted:

Provided, that the provisions of this subsection shall not apply to religious, fraternal, temperance, and scientific or other similar publications.

And that after the word "provided" in the twenty-sixth line the word "further" be omitted.

Topic:   POST OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON
CON

Hugh Guthrie

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GUTHRIE:

May I ask if this bill is now identical with the bill passed last year?

Topic:   POST OFFICE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
LIB

Amendment agreed to. Section as amended agreed to. Bill reported.


INSURANCE ACT AMENDMENT


Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Toronto Northwest) moved the second reading of Bill No. 10, to amend the Insurance Act (lapsed policies). He said: This bill was before the house last year, and the recent report of the Superintendent of Insurance is very much in favour of it. In the United States the amount of money confiscated by insurance companies through lapsed policies amounts to millions of dollars each year, and I have a number of letters from poor policy-holders, of whom a great many are returned men out of work, asking that something be done. The object of this amendment is to give the Superintendent of Insurance more power to go into the affairs of these companies, thus protecting not only the government in the matter of revenue, where there is no protection at present, but also the poor policyholder who has lost what he has paid in on a lapsed policy. Through this method millions of dollars have lapsed and are being taken out of Canada and invested in every country in the world, and this is done at the expense of poor Canadians. In some years half the new business written has lapsed before the end of the year; the figures for 1926-27 show that over 30 per cent of the total insurance written in that year was allowed to lapse, and the money went into the pockets of the insurance companies. In that year over 40 per cent of the gross new business was surrendered, and some adequate system of inspection should be inaugurated in the interests of the policyholders. That inspection system should include a government actuary and frequent reports to the department of the amount of business lost through the lapsing of these policies. Insurance Act Amendment



I have here a letter which illustrates the principle. This letter is from a gentleman living in the constituency represented by the hon. member for Lincoln at St. Catharines. He is a returned soldier; he was a major in the army, and writes to support my action in this connection. He says that in 1895 he took out insurance in the Maccabees, a fraternal order, at the low rate of fifty cents per month. That rate was increased to sixty cents, later to $1.50, later to $4.50 and then to $6. This gentleman paid this society over $1,000 in rates before he thought it time to quit, and now he has lost everything he paid in. He considers this most unfair and believes this society should be kicked out of Canada, and he says: I stuck to them during the war; now they have my $1,000 to pay their heavy mortality in the United States. I could keep paying in another $1,000, which would be $2,000, and then die and my heir only get $1,000. Something should be done to protect such policyholders. If we look at the prices of the stock of these insurance companies we find that they have increased tremendously in the last four years. I have in my hand a pamphlet issued by an investment concern in Toronto, in which they include a table showing the growth in value of the shares of the Canada Life, Crown Life, Great West Life, Imperial Life, Manufacturers Life, National Life, Sovereign Life and Sun Life insurance companies. This table is as follows: 1925 1926 1927 1928Canada Life.. .. $700 $800 $1,000 $1,000Crown Life 115 135 330 425Great Western Life. 335 460 550 600Imperial Life.. .. 250 350 400 465Manufacturers Life. 65 190 400 450.National Life.. .. 32 42 65 100Sovereign Life.. . 25 37 55 75Sun Life 300 800 1,825 2,400 I protest against such a policy in this country; we find many millions of dollars put up by the policyholders of Canada being invested in Japan, Bolivia and almost every other country in the world, and a large proportion of this money came from lapsed policies. We have a very sympathetic minister in charge of this department; he is the backbone of the government in so far as the voting power of the country goes for his party, and I hope he will support this bill. I protest against our present policy with regard to lapsed insurance; there should be a special committee appointed to go into the affairs of these companies, because the poor policyholder is not adequately protected at all. This bill will protect the policyholder and prevent many of these companies crossing the border into Canada and finding this country [Mr. Church.1 such a happy hunting ground. They get a lot of money in their exchequers and then go and invest it all around the world. About fifteen or twenty per cent of these companies are provincial in character but the majority are federal and, in my opinion, the superintendent has not the power he should have. Are we going to wait until we have a Home bank among the insurance companies before the act is amended? The insurance law to-day is twenty-five years behind the times. They have been brought up to date in England, Australia and the United States. The legislatures there have been doing something. These companies are not paying the taxes they should pay, but the working classes have been paying the peak of taxation in Canada through their breakfast tables, the clothing they wear, and everything else. All of this is due to the fact that our insurance law has been falling by the wayside for many years, and that the Insurance Act is out of date; parliament seemed too busy to take it up. A statement I have from Washington shows that the lapsed policies in the United States amount to several hundred millions, and that amount of money belonging to the people has been confiscated by these American companies. They are taking action down in Washington as there was a bill before congress during the session before last. They are trying to do something down there to regulate the whole situation. This bill should go to the banking and commerce committee where an opportunity would be given to hear the Superintendent of Insurance. This committee could look into the question of lapse of policies and find out what is being done with the money and also the terms and conditions under which a policyholder may have his policy revived. We are surely here to protect the public, and it is nearly time the policyholders and the government had something to say about this.


LIB

James Alexander Robb (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Hon. J. A. BOBB (Minister of Finance):

The hon. member for Toronto Northwest (Mr. Church), who is always interesting, has made a somewhat rambling review of insurance legislation generally, but he has made very little reference to his own bill. With the concluding remarks of my hon. friend I am quite in sympathy. The government have no objection, indeed they welcome the opportunity this bill affords the banking and commerce committee to go carefully into the question of insurance policies, particularly as applied to lapsed policies.

Bank Act-Mr. Church

Topic:   INSURANCE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
CON

Richard Bedford Bennett (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BENNETT:

Is the minister certain

he is speaking for the government? He may be repudiated a few minutes hence by the gentleman sitting beside him.

Topic:   INSURANCE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink
LIB

James Alexander Robb (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ROBB:

My hon. friend must not judge this side of the house.

Topic:   INSURANCE ACT AMENDMENT
Permalink

February 14, 1929