June 4, 1951

OLD AGE PENSIONS

AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION


BUSINESS OF THE HOUSERight Hon. L. S. St. Laurent (PrimeMinister): Mr. Speaker, I wish to advise the house that the government has now been officially informed of the passage by the United Kingdom parliament on May 31 of the amendment to the British North America Act respecting old age security. I am sure that hon. members in all parts of the house will share in the satisfaction which I feel at this evidence of the spirit of harmony and co-operation which has marked the joint efforts of the federal government and the various provincial governments in reaching agreement in respect of this important matter. I am sure we would all wish likewise to express appreciation on behalf of the people of Canada, and particularly on behalf of the aged citizens of our country, of the prompt way in which the amendment was enacted by the United Kingdom parliament. The house will naturally be interested to know the steps which the government intends to take, now that we have the constitutional authority to' implement the proposals made a year ago this month by the parliamentary committee on old age security and offered by the government to the provinces at our conference with them of last December. On February 5, of this year, in reply to a question put to me by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Knowles) I stated as follows, as reported at page 72 of Hansard: ... it is and will be the policy of the government to avoid any possible delay when agreement has been reached to have that agreement implemented. In conformity with that statement of the government's position, I wish to state at this time that it is proposed to introduce legislation at an early day to enable the government to make agreements with the provinces to provide old age security to persons in need between the ages of sixty-five and seventy, and to provide authority for the registration of persons over the age of seventy for the universal old age pensions. That legislation would probably also at the same time provide for the continuance of federal assistance in the payment of pensions to the blind. The government wishes to be in a position to commence payment of the universal pension beginning with the month of January, 1952, and we wish also to have our legislation respecting the age group sixty-five to sixty-nine ready for implementation effective in January, 1952, in any of those provinces which will have signed agreement with the federal government for that purpose. The administrative plans for the application of this new old age security program are already going forward. Registration forms with respect to the universal pensions plan are being prepared, and it is proposed to have the necessary supplies of these forms printed within the next few weeks. A small amount of additional staff will very shortly be recruited to deal with applications for the universal pensions which will be administered by the federal authorities. Arrangements are now being discussed with the various provincial governments to take from their present old age pensions records the information which will be required to pay the universal pension after January 1, 1952, to the approximately 300,000 persons now receiving old age pensions under the previous legislation. For these persons, no additional applications for the universal pension will be required. The government wishes to be in a position to commence, as soon as possible after July 1, registration of the others-probably some 400,000 persons-seventy years of age and over who are not at present receiving old age pensions. The Department of National Health and Welfare plans, in the six months between July 1 of this year and January 1, 1952, to deal with these applications through the present family allowance offices with the small additions to staff which are contemplated, and to have their records in shape to enable payments to be made in the first month of the new calendar year. I am sure that all hon. members who recall the initial registration of a much larger number of cases for family allowances in 1945 will share the government's confidence that the same administrative organization, which is now in the process of being adapted to the requirements of the universal old



Old Age Pensions age pensions plan, will be able to deal with this new problem in an efficient and expeditious manner. These administrative arrangements are, as I say, already being planned with the aim of pressing them forward as rapidly as possible, and they will be pressed forward as soon as the necessary legislative authority is given to the department to carry out the registration for this purpose. So far as the legislation to provide for the universal contributory old age pension is concerned, the government has come to the conclusion that, in the light of the heavy load of work already before parliament at this present session, it would not be appropriate to ask parliament to deal with this new and important legislation during the next few weeks. Hon. members are fully aware of the heavy load of work which lies ahead of us, and of the necessity we shall shortly face of holding meetings in the mornings, afternoons and evenings in order to deal with the main estimates now before the house and the other items in the government's legislative program already before parliament, as well as old age security assistance and one or two other urgent matters. . If the universal contributory old age pension measure were the only legislative proposal which would remain for consideration, the government would be disposed to ask parliament to continue to sit in July until it had been enacted, in the hope that it would not be necessary for parliament to meet again in the present calendar year. But that is not the situation. In addition to the universal old age pensions legislation, there are a number of important measures under consideration, some of which arise out of the report of the royal commission on transportation. In that regard it is the intention of the government to recommend to parliament the implementation of the recommendations of the royal commission to the fullest practicable extent, and that will require many amendments to the present Railway Act. This amending bill will be a very important legislative proposal, and one which should receive the most careful consideration by parliament because of its long term effect on the Canadian economy. It is intended to recommend that the bill be referred to the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines, and that the committee provide an opportunity for representations as to how the proposed amendments might be expected to affect certain interests and localities. We feel that these proposed amendments should be before the public for study and discussion some reasonable time before they are finally dealt with by parliament. The government in the course of the next few weeks will also have to give consideration to the recommendations of the royal commission on national development in the arts, letters and sciences. This requires some time for careful study by the government, by members of parliament and by the public, though it does not seem unlikely that some legislative provision should be made before the end of this year. There are a number of other legislative proposals to which the government has been giving thought. Some of these, like the revision of the Consolidated Revenue and Audit Act, have had to be postponed more than once. It is intended to introduce that legislation and to have it referred to the public accounts committee, where it can be fully explained in all its details. That is the act which provides the standard for the control by parliament over the expenditure of public fund's, and we think it is one that is deserving of careful consideration. In view of all these considerations, the government has come to the conclusion that it would be preferable to make an effort to complete the work now before the house, to conclude the present session as soon as is consistent with the proper dispatch of that business and to adjourn until the beginning of October, with the proviso that we can meet earlier if circumstances make an earlier meeting necessary. If an earlier meeting is not required by unforeseen circumstances, the government would recommend the prorogation of the present session when we meet in October and the immediate commencement of the new session. There would be plenty of public business-mainly legislative-to require a full session, and we would propose to have the session devoted exclusively to government measures, in the hope of overtaking all important arrears and starting with a clean slate in the regular session of 1952. With respect to old age security, the reason for proceeding with the old age assistance measure in the immediate future is, of course, that it is the part of the old age security program which involves joint action with the provincial governments and we feel that the provincial authorities should know as soon as possible the precise legal basis for the proposed agreements in order to make their own legislative and administrative plans in the light of that knowledge. Of course it is intended' that the old age assistance legislation will come into effect at the same time as the universal pensions. So far as the universal pensions are concerned, once authority has been given by parliament for the necessary registration, it will not make the slightest difference to the public whether the main legislation is enacted in July or October. The government believes more careful consideration is likely to be given to this very important measure if it is held over, and holding it over will not make any difference as to the date on which it will come into force. That in either case will be the earliest date which we consider administratively feasible on the advice of our experts in that field, that is to say, January, 1952. That from the very beginning has been the earliest date on which it was considered that it would be feasible to get this new machine rolling, and that information was given to the provincial governments at the dominion-provincial conference of last December. Moreover, as hon. members know, the universal pensions are to have right from the start a contributory basis. Now, we have not yet completed consideration of the normal budgetary program of the current year, and the government believes it would be an advantage to have a few months to observe the effects of the recent changes in the tax structure before reaching a final decision on all the precise details of the contributory system to be recommended to parliament. It will be recalled that the joint committee made no precise recommendations on that point, because it was recognized that it was the inescapable responsibility of the government. We want to be as sure as we can that we are making the right proposals for a plan which is going to affect, far into the future, the provision for old age security of the whole Canadian population. The government intends to place on the order paper with all reasonable dispatch the proposals required to be dealt with by parliament to give effect, if parliament sees fit to do so, to this program I have just announced.


PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, I am sure that

all hon. members will join in the sentiments expressed by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) as to our appreciation of the speed and courtesy with which the parliament at Westminster has dealt with the request put forward for an appropriate amendment to the British North America Act. Undoubtedly they have co-operated in every way to make it possible to proceed with this extremely important legislation which the people of Canada have been seeking for some time.

The Prime Minister has indicated that it is the hope of the government that this legislation shall become law in time to make it possible to begin these payments by January,

Old Age Pensions

1952. In doing so he has outlined some of the extensive preliminary steps which must be taken to that end. He has indicated the necessity that a period be devoted to registration of those who would be entitled to the universal old age pension to be provided under this new amendment. He has also pointed out that a large number of administrative details must be carefully examined and worked out as between the dominion government and the provincial governments so that this may be done to the satisfaction of the Canadian people generally.

I am not able to agree, however, with the Prime Minister in his statement that it will be just as satisfactory if this bill is dealt with in October. I do not believe that we should leave this house until we have passed the Old Age Pensions Act and made it law. There are very strong reasons why this legislation should be dealt with before we leave this house. The Prime Minister himself suggested a reason why there is a difference between July and October. He pointed out that it was the desire of the dominion government to be ready to make payments in January, 1952, in all those provinces where agreements had already been reached in regard to this measure and the payments under it. I think with that statement all hon. members will be in agreement. But from the very fact that the Prime Minister introduces the qualification that the payment would be made in those provinces where agreements had been reached, it is quite clear that in the mind of the Prime Minister the possibility was contemplated that some of the provinces might not yet have been able to take the necessary preliminary steps to make that practicable and possible.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
LIB

Louis Stephen St-Laurent (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Mr. St. Laurent:

If I gave the impression

that I was saying that a universal pension would be paid only in those provinces where agreement had been reached, I did not correctly express myself. What I was referring to was that universal pensions would be paid in all the provinces and that we hoped to have the sixty-five to sixty-nine assistance part ready for implementation in those provinces with which agreements will have been made-

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

If that is-

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

It is.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
LIB

Louis Stephen St-Laurent (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council)

Liberal

Mr. St. Laurent:

That is clearly the intention of the government. If I did not make that clear before, I wish to do it now.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

I paused only because I was going to say that I think the Prime Minister could explain it much better than a number of those who appear to be trying to explain to me what the Prime Minister said.

Old Age Pensions

I was referring to the fact that the Prime Minister had pointed out the necessity for an extensive discussion of the arrangements which it will be necessary to make for the appropriate handling of payments of this kind. For that reason I think there is a strong argument in favour of dealing with this matter now.

The Prime Minister said that if this were the only legislation to be considered, perhaps there would be no thought given to the procedure he has outlined. It is indicated that there is other legislation which it will be necessary to bring before the house. I would point out that it will be very much easier for the provinces to deal with this matter satisfactorily if the House of Commons passes the legislation, and they know it is to become law, so that they then may be able to give adequate notice of the special sessions they must call for the later months of this year, and, in turn, make the necessary arrangements for implementation in those months.

For those reasons, no matter what view may be held in regard to the other legislation contemplated, I think we should proceed to deal with this legislation while we are still here in Ottawa. The Prime Minister has stated, very properly, that all hon. members will hope and wish that the arrangements made for financing this measure should be given that careful consideration which will assure that the legislation itself and the administrative arrangements are the most satisfactory possible, not only for the older people of the country who are directly affected, but for the Canadian taxpayers generally, who are both interested in the legislation and anxious that it shall be worked out in the most satisfactory way. I do not think there will be any disagreement on that score.

On the other hand I find it difficult to think that this proposal cannot be put before the house some time within the next month, with sufficient knowledge of the general course of the financial position of the government, projected with sufficient accuracy to make it possible to deal with this matter properly at the present time. Later today, in fact, the Minister of Finance will be discussing the bills placed before the house to implement the budgetary provisions, and in doing so will be expressing, I am sure with confidence in the accuracy of his statements, what he expects to be the financial position throughout the remainder of the year. Within the next few weeks he will have still more information. I think there would be adequate information at that time to deal with

provisions in connection with a contributory plan for financing this measure, along with the legislation itself.

As to the time that would be taken to deal with the legislation, I am sure this bill would take very little time when it comes before the house.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Oh, oh.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

I am perfectly sure this bill would be adopted with the same speed that a number of other bills have been adopted, when they were good bills, clearly explained, and placed before the house properly and in an orderly way.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Oh, oh.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

There is complete agreement as to the introduction of a measure and as to the passing of a measure which has now been approved by all the ten provincial governments. There will be the same measure of unanimity displayed in the house in regard to the bill as was displayed in the house at the time the Prime Minister asked that approval be given to a request to be sent to Westminster for an amendment to the British North America Act for this purpose. After all, we were dealing with the same subject then, and I am sure the same attitude will be adopted in all parts of the house in regard to a measure which implements the purpose of an amendment we all support.

There is another reason why I think hon. members should consider the wisdom of the course indicated. The Prime Minister has informed us that there is under consideration legislation designed to implement the recommendations of the royal commission on transportation. He has also indicated the possibility that there might be legislation to carry into effect some of the recommendations of the royal commission which is generally referred to as the Massey commission. He has indicated that other important legislation is under consideration.

It is not unusual for the house to deal with important legislation. None of these things, however, comes before us with that measure of surprise and urgency with which members of the house were confronted at the end of August last year, when we met in special session. There is nothing to suggest that there is anything to be brought before the house that is not properly to be regarded as regular business of the house. For that reason I find it difficult to understand what justification there can be for the suggestion that we should adjourn, only to meet again for prorogation, and then to have a second session. If it is really necessary to defer any of the business of this house, then I

submit it would be appropriate for the house to adjourn in the usual way and have the session continue in the autumn only for the time necessary to deal with what is left over for further consideration. I am unable to find anything in the explanation given by the Prime Minister that wouldmake it understandable that we should adjourn simply for the purpose of

proroguing later, and then have a second session in the same year to deal with the continuing business of this house.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. Cruickshank:

Why the glum looks behind you?

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

Possibly because the member behind me is looking in the direction from which that voice came.

The business now before the house, Mr. Speaker, can be dealt with, the old age pensions could be dealt with, and the members of this house could decide what course should then be followed. I hope that the government will reconsider its decision, and I hope it will make plans for the remaining business of this session, recognizing that there has been a considerable delay in dealing with the business of this house by reason of the way in which the different subjects have been brought before the house, postponed and then brought forward again. If this house were permitted to deal with each particular subject until it was disposed of, we would go forward much more rapidly than is possible when a subject is introduced, postponed, and new events arise which project a completely new debate. In this way we have two, three and four major debates on the same subject, simply because of the breaks in the consideration of it. For all practical purposes we are about to have a third budget debate this year. This could have been avoided by carrying the debate forward through the various stages, so that when one stage had been disposed of we would go right into the consideration of the same subject in the next stage.

I again urge the Prime Minister, Mr. Speaker, to reconsider the statement he has made concerning the business of the house, recognizing that he has simply placed before us a statement as to what he thinks would be the best manner in which to carry it forward. The Prime Minister has referred to legislation that is extremely important. Everyone will agree with him as to its importance. Whatever his decision and the decision of his colleagues may be in regard to the other matters before them, I can only repeat my request that before we leave this house we proceed to deal with the old age

Old Age Pensions

pension legislation so that the provinces may have sufficient time to call their legislatures together and pass their laws, and so that all the administrative details may be arranged in plenty of time to carry out the hope of the Prime Minister, and the hope of all of us, that these payments will begin in January of next year. .

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
CCF

Major James William Coldwell

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. M. J. Coldwell (Roselown-Biggar):

Mr. Speaker, I am sure all hon. members of the house share the appreciation that was expressed by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) and by the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew) to the parliament at Westminster for having so expeditiously dealt with the constitutional amendment required to make old age pensions universally effective in Canada. I am very happy indeed that the Prime Minister and the government are determined that this legislation shall come into effect on January 1, 1952. It is a matter of very great pleasure to the members of this group, because of the interest we have always taken in this question of old age pensions. My predecessor, the late J. S. Woodsworth, member for Winnipeg North Centre, in 1926 was largely responsible for the introduction of the first old age pension bill. Consequently it is a matter of much satisfaction to us that this legislation has now reached the stage where the senior citizens of this country who have attained the age of seventy may look forward to a pension without a means test as of January 1 of next year. I believe that is in the interests of thrift in this country, because persons who had saved a little something to provide for their old age were penalized because they had made those savings. I am very happy about the changes foreshadowed.

I am glad to note, too, that the Prime Minister and the government are going to introduce the necessary legislation to bring into effect a new allowance for those between the ages of sixty-five and sixty-nine. I was hopeful that the income test which was recommended by the committee last year would be more generous than the present means test. When the bill is before us, that matter will receive considerable attention. I agree with the Prime Minister that this legislation concerning the sixty-five to sixty-nine age group should be introduced now, so that the provinces may call their legislatures together to make any necessary provisions for carrying out their part of the particular measure.

I cannot say that I agree with the leader of the opposition that there is really any particular reason why the old age pension legislation concerning those of seventy and over should be introduced at this session. The

Old Age Pensions

dominion has assumed the over-all responsibility in that' regard, and so long as the legislation is passed by this government and all the necessary preparations are made to enable it to come into effect on January 1, 1952, I am not particular whether the legislation is passed in July or some months subsequently.

With regard to the proposed autumn session of parliament, that is a responsibility that the government must assume. Apparently the government has quite a long list of legislation. I discussed it with my colleagues this morning, and they believe that this legislation, which the Prime Minister was good enough to outline to me, warrants the calling of a session in the autumn.

The experience we have had over the last several years, particularly since the beginning of the war, clearly indicates that membership in this House of Commons can no longer be regarded as something in the nature of a sideline to a particular profession or business. Membership in the House of Commons today is a full-time position, and members must devote their entire time, sooner or later, to the business of the country. May I just add the thought that I believe our sessions should be on an annual basis. I do not like this business of having a session in a given year, and then coming back and having another session later in the same year. I believe we should have one session during a period of twelve months. The time of sitting should be more or less determined early in the sessional year. I feel sorry sometimes for the members of the government, who are undergoing a tremendous strain, because in the very nature of things a member must be experienced and therefore not in the prime of youth or early manhood. I think it is in the interests of the country and of the government and the people of the country that there shall be a summer recess. Sitting as we did during the war in July and August taxed the health of the youngest and most robust members of this house. Personally I think the house should consider what other houses of parliament have considered-an annual session with a summer recess, so that we may know exactly how to make our plans, and so that we may understand the responsibilities we are assuming when we accept membership in the House of Commons or seek the support of our constituents to send us to the House of Commons.

We are indeed very happy that the improved old age pension legislation is to be introduced and will come into effect. The government must decide when it is to be

introduced, but to know that it is to be intro- ' duced and is to come into effect on the first of January, 1952, is a matter of great satisfaction to the members of this group.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
SC

Solon Earl Low

Social Credit

Mr. Solon E. Low (Peace River):

Mr. Speaker, it is also a matter of great satisfaction to us that the parliament at Westminster dealt so expeditiously with our request for amendment of the constitution to make it possible for the government to pay universal old age pensions. We also want to congratulate the government on the speed with which they have started the wheels in motion to get ready for the payment of such pensions.

I think that is a matter of great satisfaction to everyone in this house.

The Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) has outlined the program of legislation that is to be dealt with by the house some time this year. I agree that we should not try to push through the summer in an effort to get that legislation completed and made law. I do not see that we could deal properly or carefully with such a program if we were to sit morning, noon and night-as I suppose we shall have to do shortly-through July and August.

My estimate is it would require all the intervening time from now until the end of August to deal with that program as it should be dealt with. For that reason I feel that the government is perfectly justified in asking us to come back this autumn to deal with the program outlined by the Prime Minister. I cannot agree at all with the leader of the opposition (Mr. Drew) that the old age pension legislation should be passed and made law before the house prorogues. I see no particular reason at all why that is necessary. In fact I see some good reasons, especially concerning the financial aspects of the proposal, why the measure should not be dealt with until we have an ample opportunity to study the taxation measures that may be necessary to raise these funds.

I cannot see a chance of giving careful consideration to the financial aspects of the old age pension legislation if we are to sit morning, noon and night and at the same time try to get committee work finished. It just cannot be done, and it is an impractical suggestion to say that it should be done before we prorogue. I agree with the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) that we can no longer consider membership in this house as a sideline. I should like to draw to the attention of hon. members the fact that there are a good many members who have to come from great distances. They cannot get back to their homes to look after their businesses more than once in a session. We must always keep that consideration in our minds. In view

of the fact that some members come long distances and have to remain in Ottawa for a long period of time, it seems to me we have to alter our whole attitude towards the sittings of the house.

I cannot quite agree with the suggestion of the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar that we might consider holding one session a year and specify the time. May I make the suggestion to the Prime Minister that he consider the possibility of beginning the session late in the fall, having a Christmas adjournment, and then coming back possibly around the middle of January and continuing until we finish? That might be the best way out of the situation. In the unusual circumstances in which we find ourselves today it is not unreasonable for the government to consider trying to catch up with the backlog of legislation and calling a special session so to do.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
PC

Donald Methuen Fleming

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Fleming:

Mr. Speaker, would you permit some discussion on the statement of the Prime Minister?

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

No.

Topic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Subtopic:   AMENDMENT TO B.N.A. ACT PASSING OF MEASURE AT WESTMINSTER CONSEQUENTIAL CANADIAN LEGISLATION
Permalink

June 4, 1951