Donald D. CARRICK

CARRICK, Donald D., B.A., LL.B.

Personal Data

Party
Liberal
Constituency
Trinity (Ontario)
Birth Date
September 18, 1906
Deceased Date
February 28, 1997
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Carrick
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=a9c3858c-735e-475f-bf56-bcf201fd7bd1&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
athlete, lawyer

Parliamentary Career

November 8, 1954 - April 12, 1957
LIB
  Trinity (Ontario)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 1 of 23)


February 5, 1957

Mr. Carrick:

Mr. Speaker, this is a bill to amend the act incorporating the Life Underwriters Association of Canada which was passed in 1924. The bill relates to only one matter, namely the removal of the dollar maximum value on the property that the association is entitled to hold. In the act of incorporation a maximum value of $100,000 was set.

The bill arises out of the purchase by the association in 1955 of a piece of property in Toronto at 224-226 Richmond street west.

Private Bills

The property was purchased for $85,000. Since that time there has been a considerable rise in real estate values in many areas in Toronto, particularly in this area; and there are indications that if certain large companies obtain permission to construct on University avenue, which is only one block away, there will be a still further rise.

The bill is not prejudicial or objectionable to the province of Ontario because this association, as is required of all dominion corporations, has obtained a licence in mortmain to hold the land in question. The licence obtained in this case is a specific licence so that no matter what the value of the property may be at the present time, the holding of the property is not invalidated by its exceeding the value on which the fee was based. It only means that if the value of the property goes up, the association will be obliged to pay an additional fee.

Hon. members may note that the bill is retroactive in effect. The reason for this is that it is considered desirable to cover any possibility that the value of the property at the present time exceeds the $100,000 maximum set. No one knows precisely what the value of the property is because there has been no valuation made at the present time but it was thought that it could do no harm to put in the provision which in effect made the amendment retroactive.

Hon. members will also note that in the proposed bill there is no maximum value set on the property that the association may hold. That matter was considered and I think principally for three reasons it was decided to submit to this house the provision which does not fix the maximum value. One reason was that it would provide a little bit of difficulty to know what proper maximum should be set. The association does not wish to be obliged to come back to this house and to make another application, with the expense and time involved. In addition, it was considered that there were sufficient safeguards in the act of incorporation itself to make it unnecessary to fix a maximum. The corporation is limited to holding land required for the actual use and occupation of the association or necessary or requisite for the carrying out of its objectives. It was thought that would effectively prevent the corporation from acquiring land for speculative purposes.

I should perhaps have mentioned the fact that the property in question was acquired for the use of the association itself as an office building. In recent years there have been a number of acts passed by this house in which there was no maximum limitation set on the value of the land to be held. I mention the Canadian Nurses' Association act

Private Bills

of 1947, the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association act of 1948. The latest act which I have been able to find was the North American Baptists incorporation act of 1954. I believe there are other examples that might be cited. If hon. members feel that the bill is not objectionable in principle, it will be referred to the appropriate committee. At that time hon. members will have the opportunity of obtaining any additional information they may desire from Mrs. Helen Tedman who is the solicitor for the association and Mr. Leslie W. Dunstall, the executive vice president and from any others the committee may desire to hear.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   LIFE UNDERWRITERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
Full View Permalink

February 5, 1957

Mr. Donald D. Carrick (Trinity) moved

the second reading of Bill No. 14, respecting the Life Underwriters Association of Canada.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   LIFE UNDERWRITERS ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
Full View Permalink

June 28, 1956

Mr. Carrick:

Mr. Chairman, I would like to say just a word or two at this stage. It seems to me the government has attempted to solve a very real problem in introducing this legislation. All hon. members will remember the difficulty that most of us experienced last year when there was considerable unemployment during the winter season and the people who were entitled to some assistance from either the municipal, the provincial or the federal level were unable to obtain it.

The difficulty in each case was that at that time there did not seem to be any way in which the three levels of government were able to get together and see that assistance was given. This legislation should certainly have the effect of making it impossible for any level of government to say that it is not responsible for the assistance that is needed within the class of cases covered by this legislation.

This legislation has the virtue of abolishing a distinction that has been troublesome throughout the history of the administration of unemployment assistance; that is the distinction which has always existed as between persons who were unemployed and not capable of being employed and persons who were employable.

There has been introduced in this debate some discussion which really turns upon the fiscal relations between the provinces and the dominion. As all hon. members know, there is other legislation before the house at this time which deals with that, and everyone who has endeavoured to ascertain what are the proper payments to make to the provinces and what are the proper sources of revenue is constantly aware of the complex nature of this problem. It is obviously impossible for the government at this time to endeavour to change immediately the traditional relations between the municipalities, the provinces and the federal government.

The hon. member for York West has referred to the difficulties the municipalities have experienced and with which we are all familiar; but this legislation, of course, has to proceed on the basis that that relationship is in existence at the present time, and it is an attempt to take care of a group that is going to need help under the existing relations.

It is inevitable in legislation of this kind that having laid down the general principle as to all persons who will be entitled to assistance, those persons who will not be

Unemployment Assistance entitled to assistance because they fall within the exceptions have to be defined, and it thus gives an appearance to some extent of complexity. However, when it is explained it is really not too difficult. Many of the questions which have been put to the minister arose from the fact that this is a rather complex subject we are dealing with, but I suggest that the legislation has been drawn with reasonable clarity. This may not be the last word on this matter, but it is my submission that the government is to be commended for bringing in the legislation at this time and making a bold attempt to meet a serious problem.

Topic:   EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Subtopic:   S492 HOUSE OF
Full View Permalink

June 26, 1956

Mr. Carrick:

The government has carried out the proceedings in connection with the pipe line bill, including closure, in a way that commends itself to every fair-minded person in this country.

Topic:   SHIPPING
Subtopic:   SUPPLY SHIP "C. D. HOWE"-REPORT ON FIRE
Full View Permalink

June 26, 1956

Mr. Carrick:

The Leader of the Opposition may be under the impression that these personal attacks upon members of the cabinet, officials of the house, the leader of the government in the Senate and the members of the Senate, are winning him some votes. I can tell the hon. gentleman that he is gravely mistaken. Millions of decent men and women in this country object to politics being conducted in that way.

Mr. Pallet!: What is this, a personal attack?

Topic:   SHIPPING
Subtopic:   SUPPLY SHIP "C. D. HOWE"-REPORT ON FIRE
Full View Permalink