FridayuMarch 8, 1968

Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald: Mr. Speaker if I may. These inspectors that you people

had on were not qualified, they didn’t have one thing to show that they were capable of doing the job. (Applause)

Keith's. Harrington: Well, I want to ask the Minister of Agriculture now. Who is qualified, nobody? Or these people that they had there previously?

Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald: Mr. William Sterns is qualified, a Horticulturist, and you can ask the producers what their satisfaction was this year.

Walter R. Shaw: When did he go on?

Ell“. Daniel J. MacDonald: He has been on all year, you will have to wake up, you e ows.

Walter R. Shaw: I brought it to your attention the latter part of the year. Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald: He was on then.

Walter R. Shaw: And you admitted it.

Keith S. Harrington: The Honourable Minister over there said, to my knowledge, that there was a young man in the Department of Agriculture previously who dir- ected these inspectors and gave them instructions and guidance. There was a man, now I am not too sure of his name, I know him personally, yes he was there.

Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald: You mean now?

Keith S. Harrington: Previously, under the previous government, there was a man who directed these.

Walter R. Shaw: Paid by the government.

Keith S. Harrington: Yes he was a government employee.

Hon. Daniel J. MacDonald: If I may, Mr. Speaker, there was not a man when we took over the government. Previous to that, Mr. Speaker, there was a man, but he had

to be a qualified Horticulturist and there was no man, but we were successful in getting him, a good man to have.

Walter R. Shaw: Most of your inspectors on potato work are not qualified horti- culurists.

Several Members: Let the man finish his speech.

Keith S. Harrington: The Minister of Education, I have the information now for you in regard to the question you raised just a few minutes ago whether I was in order in speaking on things that were referred to in the 1967 Speech from the Throne.

Now, I have been instructed by our expert on this side, and I say he is a very highly qualified man, knows these rules extraordinarily well. If you would turn to page 111, at the very top of the page, Part Three, of Section 119, it says there, “Relevancy is not easy to define, a wrong comprehension of it may have a serious affect on the freedom of speech. Members are often deprived of their right to speak on the pretext that their marks are irrelevant and when as a matter of fact they refer to matters past remote yet related even indirectly to the question under de— bate. In borderline cases the members should be given the benefit of the doubt, a great deal of latitude must be allowed in the House of Commons, which is a forum where public affairs can be discussed, and every member has the right to be heard. Even if in doing so he sometimes disregards the rigidity of the Speaker.” (Applause)

Hon. Gordon L. Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I respect the advice of the Honourable Mem- ber from Second Prince in working in conjunction with the speaker who has the floor. I would, however, bring your attention to section 148, which reads as follows: “It is a wholesome restraint upon members that they cannot revive a debate already concluded.” (Applause) I maintain, Mr. Speaker, that the debate on the Speech from the Throne for 1967 has already been concluded and the Honourable Member is try- ing to revive it. (Applause)

—213—