[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Introduction of bills:	The Minister of
National Defence-an Act to amend the Aeronautics Act.
Hon. D. M. SUTHERLAND (Minister of National Defence):: Mr. Speaker, I ask that this bill be dropped.


Mr. SPEAKER:: By leave of the house, the order will be dropped.
Order dropped.



UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF

Hon. W. A. GORDON (Minister of Labour) :: I desire to lay upon the table orders in council Nos. 1026, 1027, 1028, 1029, 1030, 1050 and 1051, passed pursuant to the provisions of the Unemployment and Farm Relief Continuance Act, 1932, all the orders relating to the expenditure of moneys.
live stock Records
Hon. ROBERT WEIR (Minister of Agriculture) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 73, respecting the incorporation of live stock records associations.


Mr. MACKENZIE KING:: Explain.


Mr. WEIR (Melfort):: The original act of 1901) permitted the formation of live stock record associations. The act of 1912 repealed the act of 1900 and enacted the present statute making provision for a national live stock records board. The present bill is the outcome of administrative difficulties over the past twenty years, and the other change in the bill deals more with formative changes than anything else, grouping together in the act matters pertaining to records, associations, and enforcement.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.

Questions



QUESTIONS

[Stage Direction]
(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk).

Mr. VENIOT:: 1.	Who is postmaster at Churchill, Ontario?
2.	When was the appointment made?
3.	On whose recommendation was appointment made?
4.	Who has the contract for carrying the mail over rural route from Churchill?
5.	When was contract awarded? Were tenders called?
6.	Was the contract awarded to lowest tenderer ?


Mr. SAUVE:: '
1.	E. H. Sloan.
2.	March 1, 1895.
3.	No information.
4.	E. H. Sloan.
5.	July 3, 1920. Yes.
6.	Yes.


LEFROY, ONT., POSTMASTERSHIP
Mr. VENIOT:: 1.	Who is postmaster at Lefroy?
2.	When was the appointment made?
3.	On whose recommendation was appointment made?


Mr. SAUVE:: 1.	Miss Mary Victoria Sloan is in temporary
charge.
2.	July 26, 1927.
3.	A temporary transfer became necessary and the district superintendent, Toronto, made arrangements with Miss Sloan who had post office experience.


HUDSON BAY RAILWAY
Mr. HOWDEN:: 1.	What was the entire cost of the Hudson
Bay railway?
2.	How much of the amount was absorbed by the railway, and how much by the terminal works ?
3.	Has the government taken any steps to obtain an insurance rate that would enable the grain growers of western Canada to avail themselves of the advantages of this railway?
4.	If so, what steps have been taken?


Mr. CAHAN:: 1.	$49,772,506.11.
2.	Railway, $31,904,802.76; Churchill terminals, $11,593,485.47; Port Nelson terminals, $6,274,217.88.
3.	Yes, as regards marine insurance rates on ships navigating to and from Churchill.
4.	In July, 1928, reports of meteorological observations and ice conditions as found during Hudson strait expedition of 1927, which was organized and conducted by the Department of Marine to obtain accurate information in regard to ice conditions and to study the requirements necessary to ensure safe navigation in Hudson strait, were forwarded through the High Commissioner, London, to the Imperial Shipping Committee, then discussing insurance rates for the route to Churchill. Each succeeding year to date additional information as obtained from hydrographic survey and patrol vessels maintained by the Department of Marine in Hudson strait has been forwarded to the Imperial Shipping Committee, as well as reports on aids to navigation established by the Department of Marine in Hudson strait and Hudson bay, namely, direction finding stations at Nottingham island, Cape Hope's Advance, Resolution island, and Churchill.
On the representations made by the Imperial Shipping Committee to the underwriters outlining the facilities afforded, and in view of the fact that a high-powered icebreaker with salvage equipment is kept by the Department of Marine in Hudson strait during the season of navigation, a reduction in the marine insurance rates, originally proposed, was obtained in 1931.
The Imperial Shipping Committee is continuing its negotiations with the underwriters with a view to still further reductions in the insurance rates. More recently information was furnished regarding the visual aids to navigation which the Department of Marine is preparing to establish in Hudson strait this coming season.


EAGLE, STAR AND BRITISH DOMINIONS INSURANCE CO., LTD.
Mr. DUFF:: 1.	Has the Eagle, Star & British Dominions Insurance Company, Limited, complied with Canadian laws with respect to taking out a licence to do business in Canada?
2.	What amount has said company deposited with the authorities, either in cash or in bonds, to protect Canadian policyholders from loss?


Mr. RHODES:: 1.	Yes.
2.	$389,784.


TOKIO MARINE AND FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY
Mr. DUFF:: 1.	Has the Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance Company of Tokio, Japan, complied with Canadians laws with respect to taking out a licence to do business in Canada?
2.	What amount has said company deposited with the authorities, either in cash or in bonds, to protect Canadian policyholders from loss?


Mr. RHODES:: 1.	Yes.
2.	$92,000.

Questions


WESTERN ASSURANCE COMPANY, LIMITED
Mr. DUFF:: 1.	Has the Western Assurance Company, Limited, complied with Canadian laws with respect to taking out a licence to do business in Canada?
2.	What amount has said company deposited with the authorities, either in cash or in bonds, to protect Canadian policyholders from loss?


Mr. RHODES:: 1.	Yes.
2.	$237,841.


CURRENCY ADVANCES TO DANES
Mr. REID:: 1.	What amount of currency was advanced to the banks under the Finance Act, for the months of October, November and December, 1931, and January, February and March, 1932, giving the respective amounts in each month?
2.	What rate of interest was charged to the banks for the advances made to them during these months?
3.	What security did the banks have to put up for the advances made?
4.	Were those advances made by way of loan, and if so, for how long a period?
5.	Did the rate of interest charged the banks vary throughout those months?


Mr. RHODES:: 1.
October. 1931	$ 27,000,000
November, 1931	 56,500,000
December, 1931	 47,500,000
January, 1932	 23,500,000
February, 1932	 25,500,000
March, 1932	 22,000,000
2.	Until October 26, 1931, 4J per cent on advances against all securities other than 4 per cent treasury notes in connection with which 3| per cent was the authorized rate. Effective October 26, 1931, the rate was reduced to 3 per cent on all advances.
3.	Advances to the amount of $178,803,000 were made against Dominion of Canada securities and $23,197,000 against approved provincial and municipal securities as provided for by section 5 of the Finance Act.
4.	Yes. Repayable at any time before May 1, 1932.
5.	Yes. See answer to question 2.


QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN
Mr. POULIOT:: In how many cases, since August, 1930, has a postmaster charged with active political partisanship been replaced temporarily or permanently by a person making the charge or giving evidence against him?
fMr. Rhodes.]


Arthur Sauvé: In view of the fact that it will take some time to prepare the answer, it is recommended that this question stand as an order for return.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. RALSTON:: For a copy of all bills, accounts, cheques and correspondence, respecting logs purchased for or used on the North Sydney breakwater extension, done under the Unemployment and Farm Relief Act of 1931.


Mr. BENNETT:: That could refer only to
such accounts, cheques and correspondence as are under the control of this government.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.

Mr. MERCIER (St. Henri) (for Mr. Pou-liot):: For a copy of all orders in council in connection with aid to farmers, since August 1, 1930.


Richard Bedford Bennett: This is not a motion to
which any adequate measure of response can be given. The returns have already been brought down, under the Unemployment Relief Act, in connection with various sums that were paid out under the provisions of the statute.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: In the absence of the hon. member, and in view of the large number of these orders in council that have already been produced, the motion had better stand.
Motion stands.


ST. ARSENE, QUE., POSTMASTERSHIP
Joseph-Alexandre Mercier: For a copy of all correspondence exchanged between all persons from Riviere du Loup and Mr. Tanner Green, post office administrator at Quebec, from July 1, 1926, to September 14, 1926, and from August, 1930, to date; also all reports or other documents signed by the said Mr. Green in connection with the appointment of a postmaster at St. Arsene, county of Temiscouata, during the same period.


IMPERIAL ECONOMIC CONFERENCE
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Right Hon, W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Leader of the Opposition): The Prime Minister was kind enough to say that when the item respecting the Imperial conference, which is in the miscellaneous estimates, came up for discussion there would be an opportunity to

discuss matters pertaining to the conference. May I ask the right hon. gentleman whether he could conveniently indicate a day on which that item might be taken up and also whether that date might be fixed in the near future instead of being left to very near the end of the session.
Richard Bedford Bennett: I will give consideration to the request of the right hon. gentleman and try to advise him on Friday.


INQUIRIES FOR RETURNS
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day:
Mr. ROBERT McKENZIE (Assiniboia):: On March 23 last an order of the house was passed for the production of a telegram received by the Prime Minister from the province of Saskatchewan, to which he referred in his statement on the farm relief bill on July 29 last. May I ask when this return will be brought down?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I thought it had been brought down.


Robert McKenzie: Not yet.


Mr. JOHN VALLANCE (South Battle-ford) :: Yesterday I called the attention of the Prime Minister to an order which was passed by the house for a return I asked for about three weeks ago, and he said it was answered in a return asked for by the hon. member for Assiniboia (Mr. McKenzie).


Richard Bedford Bennett: A question.


John Vallance: A question, yes. Looking up the answer I find that it is not complete. I would again direct the attention of the Prime Minister to the matter.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Speaker, I tried to explain to the hon. gentleman that the directions with respect to the acquisition of options for wheat were given verbally when Mr. McFarland was here and the options were turned over to the milling companies at a price of 53 cents. Subsequently the amount was cut down from some 300,000 odd barrels to 250,000 barrels, the quantity of wheat required being reduced and the options being reduced accordingly. The answer given to the hon. gentleman was obtained by making inquiries of the milling companies as to how the distribution of orders was made. The original order was given to the secretary and not to the individual millers.
Companies Act


UNEMPLOYED IN NORTHERN ONTARIO
[Stage Direction]
On the orders of the day.
Mr. J. A. BRADETTE (North Timis-kaming):: Mr. Speaker, may I direct the attention of the government to the possibility of there being a substantial trek of unemployed into northern Ontario this summer, and ask the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gordon) to do his utmost to discourage any such pilgrimage.


COMPANIES ACT AMENDMENT
[Stage Direction]
Hon. C. H. CAHAN (Secretary of State) moved the second reading of Bill No. 69, to amend the Companies Act.
Motion agreed to.
On the order for third reading of Bill No. 61
Hon. C. H. CAHAN (Secretary of State):: Mr. Speaker, the law officers of the crown have suggested that bills numbered 61 and 69, which are really slight amendments to the Companies Act, had better be consolidated into one bill by adding the first section of Bill No. 69 as the fourth section of Bill No. 61. Therefore, I move, seconded by Mr. Ryckman:
That Bill No. 61, to amend the Companies Act be not now read a third time but that it be referred back to the committee of the whole with Bill No. 69, to amend the Companies Act, with instructions that the committee have power to consolidate said bills into one bill, bearing No. 61.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee, Mr. LaVergne in the chair.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: Mr. Chairman, I move that section 1 of Bill No. 69 be added as section 4 to Bill No. 61, and that the words in the new section 4, "Companies Act, chapter twenty-seven of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1927" be struck out and the words "principal act" be inserted in lieu thereof.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Section 4 agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Tuesday, May 3, consideration in committee of the following proposed resolution-Mr. Gordon-Mr. LaVergne in the chair:
Resolved, that it is expedient to bring in a measure to authorize the governor in council to enter into agreements with all or any of the
2636	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
provinces respecting relief measures in such province or provinces; and to pay out of the consolidated revenue fund such sums as in his discretion may be required to meet the obligations created by such agreements; to provide for special requirements in the national parks and in the drought stricken areas of the province of Saskatchewan; to assist in defraying the cost of the sale and distribution of products of field, farm, sea, river and mine; to loan money to any province on such terms as may be agreed upon and to guarantee the repayment of moneys borrowed by such province and to assist any province in any way that may be deemed necessary or advisable to provide for the relief of distress and the support and maintenance of those requiring assistance, and to loan money to and guarantee the payment of money by any public corporation or undertaking.
Mr. CASGRAIN:: Mr. Chairman, I should like to direct the attention of the minister to certain questions I put to him on April 28 when this resolution was before the house. I asked the minister if, under this legislation, farmers in the province of Quebec in need of seed grain would be able to obtain it by applying either to his department or to the Department of Agriculture. As I stated on that occasion, I have received a great number of requests from farmers in my constituency who are in need of seed grain. In the past certain privileges have been granted to the farmers of the west in connection with seed grain and I do not see any reason why the farmers of Quebec should not be granted similar privileges. At that time the minister stated that it was not within his knowledge that the provincial government, through its premier or minister of agriculture, had received requests from fanners who were in need of seed grain. The hon. member for Quebec East (Mr. Lapointe) then addressed himself to the minister as follows:
My information is that the Minister of Agriculture of Quebec last year made application to the Department of Agriculture for seed grain and was told that there was nothing for him.
Since this debate took place last week, in view of numerous requests I had received from my people, I addressed to the Minister of Agriculture a letter of which I have a copy in my hand and to which I have not yet received a reply from him. This letter is as follows:
Ottawa, April 29, 1932. Hon. Robert Weir, P.C., M.P.,
Minister of Agriculture,
Ottawa, Ont.
Dear Sir:
I have received within the last few weeks, several requests of certain electors of my county, asking me to obtain seed grains for them, for seeding this spring.
They claim that on account of the bad financial situation in which they are at the
IMr. Cahan.]
present time, they cannot afford to buy said seed grains. I know that in the past, certain special privileges have been granted to western farmers in such a way as to enable them to obtain such seed grains to help them in their seeding operations.
I shall be very much obliged to you if you could let me know what can be done for the farmers of my county to obtain said grains.
Yours very truly,
Pierre F. Casgrain.
Before this resolution passes, I think it is the duty of the minister to tell the house and the country at large what would be, under this legislation which we are called upon to adopt, the standing of the farming community, not only in Quebec but in the eastern provinces. Last year a bonus was given on wheat to help the western farmers, and people in our province requested the same treatment in connection with the dairy and, particularly, the butter industry. During the course of the provincial election last year some promises were made by members of the federal government who were helping the opposition in Quebec in their fight against the local government, but nothing material was enacted by this government to help the farmers of my province.
During the debate on the budget the hon. member for Dorchester delivered an admirable speech wherein he stated that it was time for the government to lay down a policy for assisting the farmers of eastern Canada as those of the west had been helped in years past when they were in need. Without saying too much about the people of Quebec being in dire necessity to-day, I think the farmers of my province-and I know I am safe in say-' ing this as regards those in my county-are really suffering and in need of help from the federal government. What policy has the minister to enunciate along the lines I have just mentioned, in order to help the farmers of Quebec to buy seed grain for the present seeding season?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The interrogation of the
hon. member is very fair and proper. As is well known, advances for seed grain for farmers were made at the instance of a number of provinces and the federal government assisted with respect to funds to pay for the same. If there is in Quebec a condition that would seem to the local government to be beyond their capacity to take care of as a province, and a submission is made to the federal government, I have no doubt it will be taken under review and justly dealt with.


Mr. HEAPS:: I wish to refer particularly
to the question of lien notes which were submitted by the provincial governments and municipalities to persons who were recipients

Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
of relief. As I understand the matter, the federal government was not a party to the demand to sign notes, made upon those individuals who were so unfortunate as to require relief, but I believe this action was taken by provincial governments and certain municipalities. According to the arrangement made between the federal government, the provincial governments and the municipalities, one-third of the cost of direct relief is paid by the province, one-third by the municipality and one-third by the federal government. The federal authorities, so far as I understand the situation, have not requested that their share of the money be refunded to them. Therefore, it appears to me that the provinces and the municipalities who are demanding the return of the federal share of the relief obtained are asking for more than is coming to them; that is, they are attempting to collect funds which were a contribution of the federal government and to which they are not entitled. I should like to have a statement from the Minister of Labour as to whether it is legal for the provincial and municipal authorities to attempt to collect funds which they have not been asked to collect and which do not belong to them.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I believe the taking of
these notes from people who received assistance in western Canada sprang from a desire on the part of many people, particularly in the drought stricken areas of Saskatchewan, who through that great misadvanture, found themselves, through no fault of their own, in that situation, not to accept a gratuity even in their time of distress. Many of them insisted on giving a note, and in doing so I think, they exhibited a degree of courage that is highly commendable. I believe it was on account of that fact that the practice was invoked to take a note from everybody.
As regards the repayment of, these notes, if they are repaid, this is a question merely of adjustment between the federal authorities and the province concerned. But I think I can frankly state to the committee that the federal government has no intention of taking advantage of the necessity of the situation in order to enforce payment of the notes which the parties give for relief accorded to them. I intend to inquire carefully into the matter that I may acquaint myself more thoroughly with the reason for taking these notes, although I think the one I have given is correct. Certainly the matter should not present any problem difficult of adjustment.


Abraham Albert Heaps: In certain parts of the
country, the giving of relief is contingent upon the individual signing a note, and where he
refuses to do so, I understand no relief is obtained. Has the federal government been a consenting party to demanding these signatures from recipients of relief? Further, does the minister think it is legal for the provinces and municipalities to demand the payment of money which does not belong to them?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I am advised that the taking of these notes in Manitoba was as a result of a conference betwen the provincial authorities there and the municipal authorities of Winnipeg. I cannot state it was the suggestion of the provincial authorities, but it was with their approval and concurrence that the notes were taken. The local authorities may have been inspired ito take the course they did because there are people who are inclined to take advantage of the situation. At any rate I am advised on good authority that the notes itaken in Manitoba were taken at the suggestion or with the approval of the provincial government and the municipal authorities of Winnipeg. I can only reassert that I will inquire carefully into the situation to see that hardship and injustice do not follow.


Abraham Albert Heaps: Suppose a person was in receipt of $100 worth of relief. Out of that $100, one-third, or $33.33, is contributed by the federal government. It appears from my iiv-formation that the local governments, provincial and municipal, are insisting upon the repayment of that part of the money given by the federal authority as its contribution towards relief. I would like to know what authority they have to collect federal funds.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The taking of notes in the province of Manitoba was not done with the approval of the federal government.


Abraham Albert Heaps: I am glad to hear that.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I can well understand that people might want to give notes or some other acknowledgment of advances made to them. That is not an unusual thing. I feel perfeetly-certain that if I got a gratuity or an advanec from anybody I would like to give some acknodwledgment of that assistance. That undoubtedly may have happened. I am not criticizing the provincial government or the municipality of the city of Winnipeg, but so far as this government was concerned it was not advised that that course was being taken. I can only repeat that I will inquire into the situation to see that hardship does not follow as a result of what has been done.


Mr. CAMPBELL:: I would like to draw attention particularly to that part of the reso-
2638	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
lution which gives the government power to assist in defraying the cost of the sale and distribution of products of field, farm, sea, river and mine. Would the minister give us some idea of what is involved and what it is proposed to do in that regard?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: The language of this
resolution, as the hon. member undoubtedly knows, was used in the bill of last session. I am not at present able to say whether or not an occasion arose where such action was taken or could have been taken. At any rate, the intention is to invest the government with power during the recess of parliament, should the occasion arise, to take any steps that are within the contemplation of the language of this section. I cannot forecast what the future may develop, and therefore I cannoit give the hon. member any further information than that.


Milton Neil Campbell: I want to make clear that I am not complaining of this provision; on the contrary, I am very glad it is there. I know that last year this particular feature of the legislation was used to assist the pools in a difficulty. I was wondering if any such thing as a -bonus on wheat was contemplated under this provision this year.


Mr. LAPOINTE:: The hon. minister in reply to my hon. friend from Charlevoix-Saguenay said a few moments ago that if proper steps were taken to place before the government a request for help on the part of the farmers of the province of Quebec in Me matter of securing seed grain, it would be fairly dealt with. I said the other day that I had been informed that such a request had been made last year, but was not entertained. I have now the correspondence, and I find that as a matter of fact the Department of Agriculture of the province communicated with the federal Department of Agriculture and after many letters had been exchanged, was informed that they could not get anything. Later on Mr. Guimont, deputy director of unemployment relief for the provincial government, also had communication with Mr. Hereford, the dominion director of unemployment relief, with regard to this question, and there again he was informed that no help would be given so far as seed grain was concerned. The minister says that if proper steps are taken the request will be dealt with fairly. I would like to know from the minister just what he requires. What does the government need in order to view favourably the granting of help to the Quebec farmers in the way that such help has been granted elsewhere?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I think the process is not one that is very much involved. If representations are made to the government of the province of Quebec disclosing that a condition exists in that province under which some assistance is required which the province itself is unable to take care of, and if communication is made to this government disclosing those facts, certainly the province of Quebec or any other province will not be dealt with unfairly. The same consideration, I trust, will be given to every province in Canada.


Ernest Lapointe: So the province has first to plead poverty or a state of destitution in order that the farmers within its borders may secure help from this government?


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: No answer.


Mr. KENNEDY (Winnipeg):: I should
like to make a few observations on this resolution, but before doing so I wish to convey to you, Mr. Chairman (Mr. LAVergne), my appreciation as one of the yormger members of this house upon your return, sir, to sit again at the table and preside over the proceedings of the committee of the whole. In voicing my appreciation of your return to health and to your labours in this house, I believe I express the feelings of hon. members on both sides of the house.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: 
Mr. VENIOT:: I direct the attention of
the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Kennedy) to the fact that in discussing the races which make up our population he left out one very important race.


Donald MacBeth Kennedy: I am indeed very happy to include that magnificent and gallant race, the French.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: The French Canadians,
the vanguard of Canada.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: Mr. Chairman, I
happen to live in the constituency of the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre, so in one sense he may be considered to be my representative in the house. He has undertaken to read me rather a mild lecture with respect to a speech I made in Winnipeg during Easter time. It is not my intention to take more than a few moments to discuss this matter. In commencing his speech, the hon, member called attention to some misrepresentations which the Free Press had made recently in connection with the attitude taken by the Minister of Immigration (Mr. Gordon). Possibly he will realize that the newspapers might not fully represent my own position. The Minister of Justice (Mr. Guthrie) has stated that we ought not to take the press too seriously. I do not suggest that the press has misrepresented me, but when it undertakes to condense a full speech into a paragraph, one can readily understand that that paragraph may not contain all that was said during the course of an hour's address. As a matter of fact, a correspondent of the Tribune called attention to some of the statements which had been made, and some time ago I made public in the Tribune my own attitude on the subjects discussed. If I used the term "machine guns," to which exception has been taken, I admitted that I had made an error, although I am not sure whether or not I did use the term. I quoted from the order in council which provided for an appropriation of a very considerable sum to be made for extra police purposes. The Prime Minister himself has said that this extra police force was needed not only for the additional work involved in policing the provinces but for other purposes as well. However, yesterday afternoon I said all that I had in my mind with regard to the increase and centralization of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and I do not need to cover that ground again.
Coming back to the question of unemployment relief, I should like to make one last appeal to the government to reconsider its policy. I have no objection to the authority being sought by the government under the resolution now before us, but I do think that some other method than that apparently contemplated in the resolution should be adopted. The resolution provides for the relief of distress and the support and maintenance of those requiring assistance. It does seem to me that to-day we need not only to provide for those in distress but we need to provide employment. That is the great need of today. Apparently with the exception of the carrying on of works already commenced and with the possible exception of the placing of some people back on the land, the government seems to have abandoned the idea of creating more work. That policy seems to me to be fatal from an economic standpoint because the one thing needed more than anything else in this country is a greater purchasing power. The people must be given more work so that the extra wages will provide an additional purchasing power. I wonder if I may venture to call the attention of the government to a very interesting article which appeared in the Atlantic Monthly of this month. The article is entitled "The World's Economic Outlook," and is by John Maynard Keynes. I should like to quote a few selected sentences. The first one reads:
This is not a crisis of poverty but a crisis of abundance.
I think we must recognize that as being essentially true. The next reads:
Unluckily the traditional and ingrained beliefs of those who hold responsible positions throughout the world grew out of experience which contained no parallel to the present.
I take it that that is what is fundamentally wrong with nearly all of those who have to deal with administration at the present time. I am not denouncing bitterly the present administration, I think they are largely in line with other administrations, but I do want to point out that the leading economists of the world are telling them that they are on the wrong line, that instead of adopting a policy of rigid economy they should expand industry in some way and thus give more purchasing power to the people. I quote again:
The only way is for us to discover some-
Mr. Keynes emphasizes the "some."
-object which is admitted even by the deadheads to be a legitimate excuse for largely increasing the expenditure of someone on something.
It seems to me that that is the policy which the government ought to adopt, that it should
2644	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
devise some means to enable someone to spend money on something. If we could go through with the St. Lawrence waterway it would be a good thing because such an undertaking would release a considerable amount of money for construction work. However, there are other public works which could be undertaken at this time. I was very much struck with the suggestion of the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Coote) when he urged the adoption of a housing scheme. Many skilled mechanics in our city are receiving relief and under the contemplated legislation they will continue to receive relief for months or years to come. These mechanics might as well be building houses for houses are very much needed in most of our communities. The building of houses would stimulate trade activity all along the line. Such an undertaking should be commenced not only in the interests of the workman and in the interests of the country, but because of purely economic reasons. It would start the wheels of industry going again. I again quote Mr. Keynes:
The voices which-in such a conjuncture-[DOT] tell us that the path of escape is to be found in strict economy and in refraining, wherever possible, from utilizing the world's potential production are the voices of fools and madmen.
That is strong language, but it is not mine, it is that of Mr. John Maynard Keynes. I contend that the voice of an economist of his standing ought to be listened to by those who are responsible for the administration of this country. I urge the adoption of a program of further public works or some other projects which will give employment to the workmen of this country.
I understand the difficulties of the present government. They have all along claimed that unemployment was primarily a municipal or provincial responsibility. Possibly that may be true in theory; I am not very much concerned with the constitutional aspect of the case. In practice, however, we all know that the western municipalities are to-day almost bankrupt. We know the western provinces are so near the line they have had to come to this government for help in connection with the floating of their bonds. That is a serious situation and we can hardly expect those provinces to initiate public works. They have not the funds. Under these conditions I urge that if we are to have additional public works; if we are to have any greatly increased expenditure, the Dominion government will have to undertake the task.
Such a policy is essential from the standpoint of the men themselves. I think of the plight of the unemployed, the large number of single men to whom I referred yesterday and

the almost equally large number of married men with families depending upon them. The ordinary mechanic or unskilled man to-day cannot himself initiate things. It must be remembered that we live under a system which for years and years past has given the initiative to the group that we call the employers. They have been responsible for providing work. The men have looked to them; the country has looked to them to organize our industries, our commerce, our finance. They have in some way or another failed in the job. The result of the general depression means a failure to those at the helm properly to size up the whole situation and organize in harmony with the recent developments. These men have failed and now in the stress-the almost panic of the time-we are expecting the poor individual workman to initiate something for himself. This cannot be done. Moreover, during the last two or three years he has been just on the edge of things and- has used up what little capital he had, so he has nothing with which to start. Many a man cannot even buy a railway ticket to travel fifty miles to some place where he might get work. He has not anything with which to provide for his family while he is away; he has nothing with which to buy fuel. A great majority of mechanics have been working in factories where the tools are the large machines. They have no tools of their own; they could not buy supplies; they could not provide themselves with raw material; they could not go out on a piece of land because the land is already appropriated. I should like to impress upon hon. members the dreadful conditions under which most of the unemployed find themselves today. If any sort of employment is to be provided, we must not expect the poor unemployed individual to provide it; we must look upon someone in an authoritative position to undertake that work, and under conditions as they prevail to-day this must be the Dominion government.
Further, may I point to the demoralization of the men that is taking place at the present time? I do not think those who are not closely in contact with the poor or with the unemployed quite realize the extent of that demoralization. It is all very well to say: "We have a fine people." I agree with that. "We come of a good stock." I agree with that. It is all very well to say: "These people took their share in times past whether in peace or war." I agree with that. But they are losing heart to-day; you can hardly expect them to keep up their courage when they are half-nourished and, worst of all,, v/hen they have lost any immediate objective,.

Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
any hope of getting out of their difficulties. I cannot go into a group of unemployed men without feeling sick at heart. Here are these men, without hope in the world, dragging out an existence through charity day after day, week after week and month after month. What prospect is there for them?
May I refer to one consideration that may not be considered very proper-to hundreds and thousands, and, in the aggregate, tens of thousands of these men being forced to live celibate lives. Any of us who are familiar with logging camps know something of the problem connected with that type of life, where great bodies of men are concerned. Those who have had anything to do with men who have been at the front know something of the problems arising out of that kind of life. Those were men living active lives, very often full of excitement, of interest. But take thousands of men who have nothing of the normal satisfactions and responsibilities of home life and can you imagine the effect of month after month and year after year of that type of existence? I do not think any hon. member who has any knowledge of the world or who has relatives who possibly are in a plight of this kind, can very well contemplate with equanimity the continuance of such a condition.
I wonder if I might mention an incident that occurred only to-day? I was in a little restaurant at noon and a man who had been an employee of this government came over to the table where I was sitting. He told me that he had been up against it for a long time, ever since he had lost his position with the government; that he had tramped the city; that he had done everything in his power to obtain work; that he had gone out as an agent and, as the depression went on, failed to make a sufficient commission to pay his expenses and that he had determined that the only thing for him to do was to leave Canada and seek, if possible, to enlist in the service of a foreign country. But he said: "The thing that worries me, that breaks my heart, is that I have four children whom I must leave behind. My wife is dead and I have four children depending upon me, I have a small pension that is about equal to keeping those children and two or three of them are in a school while one is with its grandmother." There were perhaps only two or three people in the restaurant, but it is a public place and yet the poor fellow broke down and cried at the thought of leaving his family and going to a foreign country. He would have to enlist for two or three years and leave them in Canada, but this was the only thing left
for him to do. There is no one in this house but must be touched by a case of that kind. Every one of us would be willing to give a few dollars to help an individual, but such money would be of little real service in such a case. My acquaintance was not asking me for money. He was simply telling me of his struggle. His case is typical of that of thousands throughout the country.
In making this appeal I am not talking party politics, but I would urge that there rests upon the federal government, as representing the country a responsibility to see to it that a man of this kind is not forced to leave Canada or to live a life of crime or to abandon his children; rather, we should so arrange our affairs that in some way he can be found work. Nothing less is sufficient for us; that is our responsibility to-day. That is the reason I am making this last appeal, that the government adopt a broader, more constructive policy and not merely provide for handouts to the provinces and municipalities for actual cases of distress, but undertake to provide real employment so that these men may maintain their self-respect.


Mr. MOTHERWELL:: Even at the risk of seeming to delay the resolution at this stage, I should like to draw to the attention of the minister one or two matters so that he may give me the information, although not necessarily to-day. I am not going to ask him for that, but I should like him to be prepared to give it at the next stage of the bill, preferably on the second reading.
Before raising those questions, may I remark that this is the second time a bill of this kind has died by the efflux of time. The original measure died on March ,1, and remained dead for a solid month, the government apparently operating without any authority during that period.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: During that month the government spent no money whatever.


William Richard Motherwell: True, the new bill that came into force about the first of April was made retroactive and of the same force and effect as if the old measure had never died. We can excuse that once, but why have the same thing repeated with the new bill? This is the fourth of May by the calendar. Does the minister as a lawyer think it is good legislative practice to be constantly having retroactive legislation invalidating other legislation, any more than we can absolutely help? It looks as if the government was quite satisfied with slithering along with tail-end legislation. That is what brings ridicule on this government. I have been in government
2646	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
a long, long while, and I know that if I had done what my hon. friends opposite are doing I would never have heard the end of the ridicule that would have been poured on me not only in this house but in the provincial house. But my hon. friends opposite are inviting that very thing. Now we are dealing with a resolution preparatory to a new bill which may be called, and I say so without any irreverence at all, the second resurrection of this bill, the second coming of the unemployment and farm relief measure. Why leave us open to that kind of ridicule? My hon. friends act very strangely. If there is a wrong way under heaven of doing a thing they will cross the street in order to go about it the wrong way. They are quite irregular in their ways. But what is the use of complaining? There seems to be no capacity for improvement in them. I hope, however, that it -may never occur again, and may I hope that if we require this legislation to be reenacted the third time, they will take time sufficiently by the forelock to introduce their new measure before the old one expires? I hope that we shall not require it again because some parts of the country that were up against it during the last two or three years have good prospects of a crop this year, and that may possibly help all along the line.
There are two or three questions which I wish to bring to the minister's attention, of which I would like him to make a mental note or a little memo if he likes. Some time in March the question was brought up as to the suggested bonus of one dollar per acre on the seeded acreage in Saskatchewan and other parts of the west where there was no crop It will be recalled that where there was a good crop a bonus was given by the government on the basis of live cents a bushel, and that was generosity itself compared with the way that those settlers fared who had no crop at all. I am not complaining at all of the bonus that was given to those who had a crop or that it was a bit too much; not at all. The total amount granted by way of the five cents a bushel bonus was around eight or ten million dollars. But why such a violent contrast between the treatment of those who had a crop and those who had no crop, in favour of the former? The Minister of Agriculture in a very nice and fairly well reasoned out speech some time in March pointed out that the government had been quite generous with the west in the matter of the five cents a bushel bonus, what is called the compensating adjustment bonus, and he argued that inasmuch as the government had been generous, the house and the country generally might very well trust

the government to do the right thing with regard to the proposed dollar an acre on the seeded acreage in the south where there was no crop. So far as I know, that is the way it stands at the present. I was unavoidably absent yesterday, and possibly somebody else asked this question. If so, the minister does not need to answer it a second time. He can just refer me to the page of Hansard where I may find the answer. I submit, however, that the time has come when the minister, after consulting his colleagues, should give to the petitioners who presented that request a definite answ'er whether they may expect anything along that line or anything to correspond to it. That would only be fair.
The minister knows that this is the first time that I have spoken on this measure in committee. He knows that I have taken up a number of labour problems with him in personal interview and in writing, and I can testify that in each case he has dealt with them quite satisfactorily. Because of that I hope and expect that he will deal with these questions, if not satisfactorily, at all events to the extent of giving us the government's policy, preferably on the second reading of the bill. That is one question, the proposed bonus of one dollar an acre on the seeded acreage.
The other question is this. As the minister and the house know, Saskatchewan has been hit pretty hard in the matter of those needing relief and employment. We are sorry for ourselves and for the dominion as well because of that. Saskatchewan has always been looked upon as the outstanding wheat province of the dominion, for many, many years growing more wheat than all the rest of the dominion put together. I do not know whether that is something to be proud of or not, but it is a fact anyhow. Saskatchewan is handling her relief in cooperation with this government on a different basis from any other province. I am not criticizing that. Some have taken the ground that the whole business of relief should have been handed over to a commission. At all events, we have a commission handling relief in the province of Saskatchewan. I am not going to criticize that relief commission just now; I have in the past, but not to-day. Now I am in the humour to get information, which I hope the minister will give on the second reading of the bill after he has had an opportunity of discussing these questions with his colleagues.
I would like to know if the government hold themselves in any way responsible for the treatment that is being meted out to the Saskatchewan farmers through the medium

Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
of the Saskatchewan relief commission. Sometimes the Prime Minister will say: "We hold ourselves responsible for the administration of these moneys that we are giving to the provinces." At least we understand him to say that. But then when we put questions to him at close range or make complaints he will say:	"That is a matter for the province.
They are handling this through a commission." The house will recall that when this matter was up before the hon. member for Weyburn drew the attention of the Prime Minister for the first time to the fact that for every little mite of assistance that was given to the farmers they had to sign a promissory note in advance. I call that a loan policy, but it was called a relief, and the Prime Minister did not know anything about that until the hon. member brought it to his attention. Later on it was my duty to call his attention to the way in which seed grain relief was being given to the farmers, with a seed grain lien being taken on the coming crop to be realized on, if thought advisable, by the middle of August this year or at any time thereafter. I drew attention to the nature of that seed grain lien. I never saw such an exacting one. It tied the farmer up so tightly, as if with a logging chain, that he could not blink an eyelash or wiggle a toe. That may be necessary, but when everybody else apparently is getting his contribution free with no provision for the return, for instance, of the five cents a bushel bonus, why is there this provision for the return of every rag that is put on the backs of these people by the relief commission, or a promise to pay at all events? Is that to continue? The government has announced that it cannot afford any longer, and the provinces cannot afford any longer, to go on with relief works to provide employment. I am not going to criticize that to-day either. That was the inevitable result of the government's policies in connection with other matters to which I shall not now refer. If these conditions lasted long enough the government was bound to reach the point that they have now reached, that of giving direct relief. That can be done with less money. Nevertheless, it is the dole. I have no right to speak for the -other two western provinces, but there are parts of Manitoba and Alberta that are in the same position that a very large portion of Saskatchewan was in, and I would ask this question:	Is it
the policy of the government, through the Saskatchewan government, and in turn through the relief commission, again to have everybody between now and the coming of the next crop sign a promissory note before he is given any more assistance? If they
want to put in winter rye and require seed rye, will more seed grain liens be registered against their property?
I think my questions have been fair, and I hope hon. members opposite will not suggest that thej' have been asked in an improper spirit. I do not think the minister takes that view. I have asked my questions earnestly and when we reach the second reading of the bill, I will expect a reply as full as the min ister is capable of giving. If we are to have a dole for all of Canada, why should these prairie areas which have been so distressed be exempted from the dole, and promissory notes imposed upon them? I believe that is a fair question. However I do not wish it to be thought that we are ungrateful for what has been done, because that is not so. I do not know what would have happened to thousands of people had they not had assistance. They have had assistance many times in the past, too, I am sorry to admit.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: When were seed grain loans first started?


William Richard Motherwell: Oh, it was before
my time.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Away back in 1876, I think.


William Richard Motherwell: I believe that is
right.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: And I think they are not paid yet.


William Richard Motherwell: I know it was away back in the seventies before my time. We could go back to the Selkirk settlers who, I believe, received loans from the home government. The same thing happened in Ontario. Away back in the early days of the last century, shortly after the year 1800, they received all sorts of equipment from the home government and from friends in the old land to begin their settlements in the bush. I am very sorry the practice has had to be continued so long. The fact is, however, we are living in a country which forty or fifty years ago was not considered at all favourably, and there was a feeling that western Canada was nothing but a buffalo run. That country has been reclaimed through the efforts of hardy pioneers, and development has been accomplished only through great labour and risks taken by those early settlers. At intervals they have had to have assistance. When it comes to the disposition of the government's assistance, we do not want to be discriminated against, as we believe we have
2648	COMMONS
Unemployment

Agreements with Provinces
been discriminated against. We do not wish that condition to continue.
The last time relief measures were under consideration the government sought to hide behind the excuse that we were delaying the bill, and consequently delaying seeding. I remember the hon. member for Regina (Mr. Turnbull) said, in a very pathetic manner, that we were gambling with the crop, and in fact, doing everything that was bad. On this occasion the seed has been provided, and there can be no further ballyhoo about interference or delay. The present measure has not been long before us, because discussion began only yesterday. This is the first time I have spoken on the measure, and although I did not see the clock when I began I think I have been talking only about twelve minutes, and have no intention of speaking longer at this time. I should like the minister to get some definite information as to seeded acreage bonus proposal and I should like to know if this government is going to hold itself responsible for the treatment meted out to Saskatchewan farmers by the relief commission of that province.


Mr. MOORE (Ontario):: Mr. Chairman, I have listened with a great deal of interest to the hon. members for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Kennedy) and Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth). The last mentioned gentleman referred to the impossibility of boiling a half hour's speech into one of only a single paragraph. I would suggest that he give the benefit of the doubt to the chief commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to whom he referred the other evening. That gentleman happens to come from my constituency, and we know him as a very able and successful man. I doubt veiy much that he was accurately reported.
I do not intend to take much time of the committee, but I accept the invitation of the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre to make a cooperative contribution. Hon. members have heard a great deal about unemployment and the distress arising from it. I assume the government, and no one more than the Minister of Labour, is fully informed concerning unemployment and distress. Further, I assume he is anxious to have the condition remedied. I have a suggestion to make, and I hope it is constructive. The hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre referred to the necessity for public works. Public works, however, mean taxation, and sometimes very heavy maintenance charges. A year or so ago I had the honour to send a memorandum to the predecessor of the Minister of Labour in which I drew attention 
to the desirability of having the wires of the telegraph, power and telephone companies placed underground. Throughout our towns, and particularly in those towns on the main highways, poles and wires create disfigurement, and are dangerous. I assume further that they involve heavy maintenance expenses. The city of Oshawa is in my riding, and suffers from a particularly grave condition of unemployment; I regret to say there is very serious distress. I cite the condition in Oshawa, however, simply as an example because there are many other towns in the same position. I suggest to the minister that serious consideration be given to the suggestion of loaning to public corporations, such as power, telegraph or telephone companies sufficient sums of money at a low rate of interest to enable them to place their wires underground, and that this work be conducted in a way to give the maximum amount of employment.


Mr. REID:: Mr. Chairman, I should like
to say a few words to the committee and the minister regarding the position of many municipalities of the province of British Columbia, and before taking my seat I shall direct two questions to the minister winch I hope he will be in a position to answer.
A serious condition of unemployment has obtained since the year 1930, and municipalities have, I believe, been carrying loads even heavier than those borne by provincial or federal governments. Since 1930 they have been carrying this load of unemployment and expenditures for the unemployed. Municipalities are closer to the people; the unemployed can reach the reeves, the mayors, or the councillors; they can also form in bodies and walk to the municipal authorities. On the other hand federal or provincial governments cannot be reached so readily by those in distressed circumstances. In spite of the fact that information was given to the house yesterday that unemployment was decreasing, I state that in some of the districts of British Columbia it is increasing. In one municipality of that province over fifty per cent of the workers are unemployed, and have registered that they are destitute and have no means with which to keep themselves. That one particular municipality, namely, Burnaby, has about 25,000 or 26,000 inhabitants.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: When did that condition
first exist?


Thomas Reid: That condition started probably in December, 1930, but it was not so pronounced then as it is to-day. Up to January of this year they had 3,500 registered unemployed, which has since increased to 4,000.

Unemployment.-Agreements with Provinces


Wesley Ashton Gordon: If I caught the hon. member correctly, he said the unemployed were destitute.


Thomas Reid: No. They registered as being destitute, having no funds and no work. The municipalities in the first instance have had to bear the financial burden, they have had to go to the bank and borrow money for relief purposes, at from 6 to 6i per cent; then they had to wait until the provincial and dominion governments reimbursed them. That was an extra load they were asked to carry. Last year the tax collections in the municipalities decreased very considerably, due in great measure to unemployment, and many properties have been and will be sold by the municipalities to pay for arrears of taxes. I am speaking particularly of British Columbia. Many people who a year ago were not asking for relief are to-day in this position. They have used their resources and are looking for work or assistance. The strain of the last few years has brought many municipalities to the verge of bankruptcy. They would not be in this distressful condition had it not been for the undue burden placed upon them by the unemployed seeking relief. But the serious point to which I wish to direct the attention of the minister is that in British Columbia the banks have now assumed a dictatorial attitude towards the municipalities notifying them that they must balance their budgets or not one cent will be advanced by the banks for relief purposes. One municipality whose ordinary program of unemployment relief work was $40,000 has been told by the bank to cut it down to $22,000. I think the government would be well-advised to note this attitude of the banks, because it is only going to increase the burden of the municipalities.


Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):: Was not this government told by the banks to balance its budget?


Thomas Reid: I think the banks have taken even a stronger attitude with the municipalities than they have with this government. I do not think that even this government has balanced its budget if you take into account what is intended to be spent to relieve the destitute.
At a meeting recently of the executive of the Union of British Columbia Municipalities they passed a resolution dealing with the unemployment question. I will not quote the whole resolution, but I think these paragraphs should be brought to the attention of the minister:
Federal intervention to check dictatorial methods of banks toward British Columbia municipalities was urged at a meeting of the 41761-167
executive of the Union of British Columbia municipalities in the city hall here to-day. . . . The executive went on record as opposed to the federal government's direct relief policy, but in event of its adoption urged that it be financed on a fifty-fifty basis by the federal and provincial governments. Municipalities, it was said, have no taxation powers to provide for unemployment relief this year.
Banks instead of shouldering their portion of the national burden of unemployment are actually making more money to-day than ever before by soaking governments and municipalities higher rates of interest. ... If it was not for unemployment and social service costs, all municipalities would be able to balance their budgets this year.
I might point out that the municipalities in British Columbia are carrying the highest bonded indebtedness per capita of any municipalities in the dominion. I do not say whether that is good or not, but the per capita is something like $252.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: What is the reason for that?


Thomas Reid: In a young province like British Columbia roads had to be built and various improvements .made for the settlers; all this has necessitated heavy expenditures, and of course there has been also a heavy outlay for improved motor highways and for educational purposes.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: British Columbia is an older .province than Saskatchewan or Alberta, by many years.


Thomas Reid: I am not going into the merits or demerits of the bonded indebtedness. I am merely stating that the per capita bonded indebtedness of the British Columbia municipalities is the highest in the dominion. For instance, in New Brunswick it is only $50.38, as against $251.98 in British Columbia. It is now being urged that the dominion and provincial governments assume 100 per cent of direct relief. Many municipalities are unable to take care of the unemployed who are already registered.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Are we not doing that now?


Thomas Reid: My information is "no." If you are doing it I shall receive the information with great pleasure.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Well, if we have been doing it, it won't help you much apparently.


Thomas Reid: I should like to know that you have, because my information is to the contrary. Some of the municipalities have been clamouring for cheques for direct relief.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I have reference to the provincial direct relief.

2650	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces


Thomas Reid: Not municipal. It was understood last year that transients who came into municipalities would be taken care of by the provincial and dominion governments. That burden has not been assumed by the provincial governments. The municipalities had, first of all, to pay out all the relief, and then they were told by the provincial government they would receive only one third. The municipalities to-day are asking if the policy in the future with respect to direct relief should not be that the provincial and dominion governments assume 100 per cent of it. I do not think under present circumstances that that is too much to ask.
I desire to ask the minister these questions: First: Are the municipalities who wish to carry on public works, and who are in a position to submit a program, to be encouraged in the same way as last year by the provincial and dominion governments assuming a share of the cost? Second: What financial assistance will be given to municipalities who find themselves unable to meet any share of the cost of direct relief? It was said last year that the dominion government has no direct contract with the municipalities, that they must appeal to the provincial government first, which in turn appeals to the dominion, but I think it important that that should be known. I think a definite statement should also be made in regard to the land policy particularly as to British Columbia, because I notice in the Daily Province of April 29, this statement with regard to placing men on the land:
British Columbia to Place Men on Land Government had urged Ottawa to include settlement in relief plans.
Aid for farmers.
Greatly encouraged by the federal government's plan to put unemployed Canadians on the land, the provincial government hoped to-day to be able to go ahead with some of the land settlement schemes which it has been developing for some months.
Announcement in parliament that the federal government would include land settlement under its new unemployed legislation followed strong pressure from British Columbia in favour of this important new departure. Hon. R. W. Bruhn, minister of public works, took the matter up personally with Premier Bennett in Ottawa recently, explaining that British Columbia feels that many unemployed could be far better placed on the land than on roads or idle in relief.
I think it is desirable that a definite statement should be made that the federal government are boosting this along. I have already received letters asking what assistance will be given the farmers. Is the minister in a position to give an answer


Wesley Ashton Gordon: It must be obvious to the hon. member that assistance of the kind outlined must, of necessity, be the subject matter of an agreement between ourselves and the province, and until this legislation passes I do not propose to try to prophesy what the terms and conditions of such an agreement will be. I cannot say anything further. It seems to me to be obvious. With respect to the works which the municipalities in British Columbia may wish to carry on as in the past, I. have this observation to make. If the municipalities in British Columbia have so conducted their business, as has been suggested by the hon. member, that they find themselves now the most highly taxed people, per capita, in Canada, then I should say that they ought to be very careful about embarking on any scheme of works that will add to the burden of their municipal taxation. Any scheme which the municipalities may have in contemplation, for which they seek help from the province and the dominion, must of necessity, again, be a term of any agreement that may be entered into. These are matters absolutely dependent upon the necessities of the provinces as reflected through their own governments and conveyed to this government for review. That must be obvious.


Mr. BUTCHER:: I wish to ask one or two questions. I do not know whether the first one is in order or not, but I shall ask it. Will the relief commission be continued in Saskatchewan? If the minister is in a position to answer that question, I shall be glad.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Just here I would offer
this tribute to the relief commission in Saskatchewan. I have heard only great commendation for the work these men have been doing. I stand to be corrected, but I am told that they are public-spirited men representing all shades of political opinion, who have given their time without charge in the interests of their province.


Milton Neil Campbell: The three sides oi
politics.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I hope there are three
sides. That commission is a creature of the provincial government; it was set up by the province. From what I have heard of its work, I trust that the commission will continue its efforts; and, I believe, acting as they have been acting, purely with a desire to serve their province and, by serving their province, serving their country, and having the experience of the past year behind them, if the members of that commission continue

Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
in the work, should their services be found necessary, they will be able to function even better in the future by reason of the lessons they will have learned from the mistakes of the past-because no one's activity, no matter what direction it takes, is quite free from error at times. Personally, I can say no more about the Saskatchewan relief commission, except that it was set up by the provincial government.


Harry Butcher: With reference to Mr. Percy Gordon, who has been referred to two or three times during this session, can the minister tell me the nature of the office that Mr. Gordon holds and the remuneration he receives? I have a motive.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I am advised, and I believe it is correct, that Mr. Gordon of Regina is giving his services without charge. I am so advised and, I believe, correctly. I will inquire to see whether he is being paid at all, and if he is I shall be glad to give the information to my hon. friend, although I do not believe he is getting any pay whatever.


Harry Butcher: In what capacity does he serve?


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I am instructed that he is chairman of the commission.


William Richard Motherwell: Oh no.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Then the hon. gentleman
knows better than I.


William Richard Motherwell: Mr. Black is chairman.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I do not know the setup of the commission; I do not know even the members or their names.


Harry Butcher: I want to refer to this
gentleman because he has already been referred to on two or three occasions during this session. He was first referred to by the hon. member for Melville (Mr. Motherwell), and with the remarks of that hon. member I certainly see no particular reason to find fault, because I am not in a position to say whether they were correct or not. Further reference was made to Mr. Gordon by the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Beynon) and also by the hon. member for Regina (Mr. Turnbull). I want to make some reference to him myself from a different standpoint.
Mr. Gordon has been a personal friend of mine for the last eighteen years. I know him, perhaps, a little more intimately than, I might say, any other member in this house does, and I feel I owe it to him to say what 41761-167J
I am going to say with regard to him at this time. I may say, in case there should be some misunderstanding, that there is no rift between the hon. member for Melville and myself in connection with this matter. What I say, I say with his approval. I am going to say it because I feel it is due Mr. Gordon. The hon. member for .Moose Jaw, when referring to this gentleman, asked, "Who is this Percy Gordon"? I propose to ask the same question and to answer it from my own standpoint. He is a brilliant lawyer of the city of Regina, a most estimable man from every standpoint, a man of irreproachable character and of the utmost integrity. He is a king's counsel and was appointed king's counsel by the former Liberal administration in Saskatchewan. Certainly he is a Conservative; I am a Liberal. I did not know he was a Conservative until he had been my personal friend for eight or ten years, and he about the same time discovered that I was a strong Liberal. It made no difference to our personal friendship, and I rise to-day to pay my tribute to Mr. Gordon's character and to his reputation, and to say that I believe he is a man absolutely above reproach. I do this because I feel that friendship is worth but little if one cannot stand up and uphold the good name of a friend in his absence as one would in his presence. But I want it to be clearly understood in this house to-day that there is no rift between the hon. member for Melville and myself, because he heartily approves of this statement I make to-day as a personal statement, made because of my knowledge of Mr. Percy Gordon.
Having said so much, I want to say a few words with regard to the resolution. When speaking to the resolution that led to the revival of chapter 58 in March, I said I had three or four suggestions which I should like to make inasmuch as I thought they were constructive suggestions with regard to work that might be given the unemployed. For what they are worth, I make those suggestions now; I could not make them then because time did not permit. I want to support the suggestion made by two or three hon. members that assistance might be given the farmers not only of the west but of the east, farmers who have no means to employ necessary help. Assistance might be given by providing them with men who are. out of work, paying the unemployed a small wage for their services. I also support the suggestion made by both sides of the committee that homes should be built for those at present living in wretched hovels. This would be a good service to perform and would provide work for the
2652	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
unemployed. The unemployed could be used in forestration and reforestation work. The men could be employed in useful occupations and good would accrue to the country not only for the time being but also in the future. This is all I propose to say at this time but I hope to make further remarks when the bill itself is. under discussion.


Milton Neil Campbell: Mr. Chairman, I cannot say that I am enthusiastic over the suggested policy of settling unemployed men on the land, but I agree with what was said by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Kennedy) with respect to the carrying out of any such policy. He suggested that privately owned lands or lands other than crown lands be secured rather than putting these men on bush lands, which is the only type of crown lands left in the prairie provinces. I cannot think of anything more disastrous or foolish than to take a lot of unemployed men from the cities and place them in remote districts where there are no roads or school house. A policy of that kind is foredoomed to failure. If anything is to be done in this regard, I say that these men should be placed in settled districts where some land has already been cleared and where there is a possible chance of their making good. It would be much better to place these men on rented lands and give them a little assistance rather than to send them out into the remote bush districts where they would have nothing to work with and where there is practically no land under cultivation. I realize that the placing of men on the land would be the responsibility of the provinces, but if the federal government proposes to back such a scheme with its money, I suggest that the minister should scrutinize very carefully the actions of the provincial governments to see that the money is put to proper use and that the men are placed where they will have some hope of making good.
In my constituency, and I assume the same applies to other constituencies throughout the prairie provinces, there are a large number of immigrants, mostly from Poland, who, for the most part, came to this country during 1927 and 1928. Many of these people are today in destitute circumstances. The local municipalities are utterly unable to look after them and they have no means of securing employment. They came in without any money and have no land, and as they were brought in entirely under the responsibility of the federal government, I think it should assume full responsibility for looking after them. The federal government has assumed 100 per cent of the responsibility for relief

in the drought stricken areas of Saskatchewan, but it takes only a small measure of responsibility for other relief. It seems to me that the federal government should assume full responsibility in looking after these people. The government of Saskatchewan at the present time is unable to do more than it is doing, and I know the local municipal bodies, bankrupt as they are, are not able to do anything. The information I have is that many of these people in my constituency are to-day utterly unable to look after themselves. For the most part they are good workers, but there is no work which they can secure. I wish the minister would look into this particular phase of1 the matter and endeavour to see that a larger measure of relief is provided by the federal government.
While I am on my feet I desire to draw the minister's attention to a question which I asked gome time ago. I asked the minister if there was any possibility of the marketing phase of this resolution being used to continue the bonus on wheat put into force last year. Perhaps the minister can give me a reply to that question.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: I regret that I am not in a position to answer the hon. member.


Joseph Philippe Baby Casgrain: Mr. Chairman, I think I can agree with many of the suggestions made by the hon. member for Last Mountain (Mr. Butcher), but I feel it is my duty to draw to the attention of the minister and the government certain matters which I called to the attention of the government last year. Under the provisions of the Unemployment and Farm Relief Act passed last year I received a communication from the former Minister of Labour (Senator Robertson) asking me to supply a list of public works and other undertakings which might be started in my county to help relieve the unemployed. I sent this list to the minister; I have it before me but I will not take up the time of the committee . by reading it as it can be found in the orders of the day of 1931, part 2, at pages 13, 14,
15 and 16 of June 16, numbers 1 to 32 inclusive. This list covered works which had been requested by my constituents but which were not carried on by the late administration because of the necessity of carrying on other more urgent works. There is no doubt that if these works had been gone on with they would have helped greatly to relieve the unemployment situation on the north shore of the St. Lawrence where there are large settlements of fishermen who are destitute because of the poor fishing conditions which have obtained for the last three or four years. I had occasion during a previous debate to draw the

Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
attention of the house to this matter and I repeat that there are many works which are absolutely necessary from the Saguenay river up to Chateau Richer. The report tabled some time ago of the works carried on under the unemployment legislation shows that only two public undertakings, both small and of minor importance, have been carried out in my county.' The one was at Harrington Harbour, where a sum of not quite $1,000 was spent for the Grenville mission, and the other was at Beaupre, where a few thousand dollars were spent. Other works have been carried out by the provincial government and the different municipalities, but they were not of such importance as some of those to which I am calling attention.
The minister has asked for suggestions from hon. members; he has asked for cooperation, but I do not think he could show a better spirit of cooperation than by carrying out some of these works which would provide relief for the unemployed. This would be much better than direct relief, because that is just going back to the dole. The government apparently is abandoning the policy adopted by the legislation passed at the special session of 1930 and the session of 1931. The proper way to relieve unemployment is to help the people to earn their own living, and not to give a dole. In the resolution that has been introduced there is no definite policy, nothing of a concrete or constructive nature from which we can find out what is really going to be done. This afternoon, when I asked the Minister of Labour as to the attitude of the government towards the farmers of Quebec and when the hon. member for Quebec East supported my request, the information we received was very vague and not of a nature to encourage the farmers of my province.
The resolution reads:
To assist in defraying the cost of the sale and distribution of products of field, farm, sea, river and mine.
Would the minister, before the resolution passes, give to the house some information as to how he proposes to help to defray the cost of the sale and distribution of products of the field, farm, sea, river and mine? Is there going to be in the legislation that will be introduced some provision whereby the government will help the pulp and paper companies, in the part of the country which I have the honour to represent in the house, to give more work to the people who are in need of it in those districts which were settled by these pulp and paper companies? Those little thriving towns were very busy during the last few years, but owing to surplus production and unemployment they are suffering. Will the
minister tell us how he is going to help these pulp and paper companies to dispose of the surplus which they have on hand of pulp-wood and paper and how he will help the fishermen on the north shore of the St. Lawrence, who may have a better catch this year, to dispose of their fish at a more remunerative price?
During this debate the trans-Canada highway has been discussed, and in my county at the last federal election in 1930 this question was brought up. I have not yet been furnished with sufficient information to discover where this highway will start and where it will end. During the last election it was said by my opponent that the trans-Canada highway would go from coast to coast; that developments were to be made in Ontario and other provinces. I saw from the remarks made by the hon. member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) yesterday that the greatest amount was being spent in Ontario for the construction of that highway. But if it is going to go from coast to coast; if such promises have been made as were made in my county by my opponent in the last election, it should start at Blanc Sablon, at the eastern end of my constituency and link up with the highway at Bersimis and St. Simeon at the further end of the county. This promise was clearly made by my opponent who was asking for the support of the electorate, following the promise made by the then leader of the opposition now the leader of the government, that this highway would be built. I contend that this is one more of the broken promises of the present administration. When they were seeking the votes of the electorate in 1930, they were ready to make any kind of promise, but to-day, when they are in office, the promises are not so easily fulfilled and they do not know what to do or where to go to carry them out.
Before I sit down, I want to protest, as many members on this side of the house have done, regarding this legislation, because it is an admission on the part of the government that they have no direct policy to offer. They want once more to have the advantage of a blank cheque with which they may do as they please, and to give direct relief through corporations or associations or public bodies as they see fit. I submit this is not the proper way in which to administer the law in this regard.


Jean-François Pouliot: I entirely concur in what my good friend the hon. member for Char-levoix-Saguenay (Mr. Casgrain) has just said. May I take this opportunity to say a word
2654	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
about the back to the land scheme. Theoretically it is perfect; there is no one who is not pleased to hear that men who were formerly farmers are coming back to the land, or that farmers' sons are leaving the cities to return to the rural districts. Theoretically this is splendid, but practically it does not always work. In fact, when miners or people who have a particular trade are out of work, even if they have been brought up on a farm, if they have left it for several years, they are quite at a loss when they return; they must be well taken care of and given special grants and help in order that they may be successful in their new manner of living. There are some people who believe that people can be taken from the cities and placed in the wilderness in order to form new parishes. This is a mistake, because farmers should be grouped; when they are close together, they are strong, they have their real family life. Where there are farms for sale, they should be bought by some government, either federal or provincial, in order that we may do for the unemployed something like what was done for the soldiers after the war. We must not forget that unemployment must be fought in the same way as the enemy had to be fought during the war and the fight must be well organized in order that success may result. If some government, federal or provincial, takes credit for bringing people back to the farm, that is all right, but what is more important is to keep people on the farm. We must see to it that the farmers do not leave the land in times of distress when farm products are being sold so cheaply. Very few farmers so far have become discouraged, but if conditions do not improve; if they do not get enough money out of the dairy business or the sale of cattle or their various farm products, they will become discouraged and will say: What is the use of staying on the land? People praise our virtues, our good qualities, but we are working like slaves and deriving no benefit. We have no money to bring up our children, to send them to school; we cannot enjoy any of the pleasures of life; we have to work from early in the morning until late at night, and if we consider the low prices that are paid for our products, we are not receiving reasonable wages for our work. That is the main problem.
We cannot expect unemployment to be solved by the Minister of Labour alone even if he gives all his time to his functions. The question will have to be settled by the cooperation of the best brains in the cabinet. The Minister of Labour will have to discuss

the matter with his colleague, the Minister of National Revenue, in order that tariffs may be adjusted to meet the needs of the farmers. I am not speaking of the sittings of the council where all the ministers meet. The Minister of Agriculture will also have a word to say on the subject. Indeed, they cannot .solve the problem by themselves; they will have to get the assistance of the best brains of the heads of their departments in order that some scheme to improve conditions in this country may be evolved. The situation is most serious. At the present employment is being sought by those who are out of a job. Amongst those out of a job are many who formerly lived in the country; for instance, the farm hands who have no home of their own but worked for some farmer who had not enough sense to look after the maintenance of the old homestead. During the prosperous years a farmer who had a very large acreage would hire hands from different places to help him in his work, and particularly was that the case in the west until machinery replaced man power to a very large extent. Many men would go from Quebec and Ontario to Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta to help the farmers at harvest time, but to-day there are very few farmers in the west who are employing help from the older provinces because they use machinery, believing that it is quicker and more economical. The result is that these farm hands are unemployed.
There is another class, as my hon. friend from Charlevoix-Saguenay so wisely mentioned, the lumber jacks with their large families in the province of Quebec, and the situation must be the same in Ontario, particularly in the northern part of the province which had the honours of the evening yesterday. There are many lumberjacks who used to earn substantial wages by working in the shanties in the winter, and afterwards they would drive down the logs and cut wood. Coming down on the river drive there was great festivity, but they earned enough money to pay for the festivity and had enough left to live on for the rest of the year. But now the lumberjacks are getting only one dollar a cord for cutting wood, and they cannot live very long on that. Furthermore, the cut of timber has been very much reduced on account of the very low price paid for it, and these lumberjacks are not now earning enough money to buy good clothes. Their plight is very bad. They must be considered with the farm hands as amongst the unemployed.
In every rural community also there are artisans, carpenters, masons and so forth, who

Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
in ordinary times get work in the building trades. But at the present time, with stock market prices going down every day, as we see toy the papers, and I am surprised that they are not at zero already because for a couple of years stock market prices have been going down, people are very cautious about spending money for building houses or barns, preferring to wait until better times come. In fact, Mr. Chairman, people in the country who had saved money for the purpose of enlarging their house or building a barn or making improvements of one kind or another, or building a house for the son who had just got married, say: We will spend that money for building when the crisis is over. In the meantime these carpenters, masons and other artisans are without a job. They are amongst the unemployed, and the trouble is that people in the country who have no work to do flock into the large cities in order to find work. They say: We will go to Montreal or Toronto or Winnipeg or Vancouver, where there is more work being done. In addition, the style in construction has changed. Lumber used to be used very much in the construction of buildings. But now buildings are largely made of cement and steel, or brick and stone, and we do not see wooden buildings being put up in the cities nowadays. They are constructed in the rural districts, and as I said, the people in the rural districts are very much afraid of starting to build at the present time. The consequence is that many men formerly employed in the building trades are now out of work in the large cities.
The Prime Minister mentioned one day that he trusted very much to private charity to help the unemployed. Private charity is a wonderful thing. Sometimes people with very small means are very, very generous in proportion to their means. They do like St. Martin, cut their coat in two in order to clothe a poor man with one-half of it. The unemployed who pass through the small towns and villages in the country are always sure of getting food and shelter at the hands of private charity. That is admirable, and these people, in addition to supporting their compatriots, have to support other people who have been brought into this country from central Europe by the two big railway systems, the Canadian Pacific and the Canadian National, and every member of the house will testify that that is being done in every constituency of this country from Halifax to Vancouver. But, Mr. Chairman, if we want private charity to continue to help the unemployed, the farmers must make a little
more money, and that is why I ask the Minister of Labour, with his colleagues the Minister of Agriculture, the Minister of Finance, and the Minister of National Revenue, to see that the tariff is adjusted in order that the farmers may obtain better prices for their products.
To sum up, Mr. Chairman, I come back to where I started. May I say where I stand in regard to the back to the farm scheme. Theoretically I am in favour of it, but first of all the governments, federal and provincial, should stand together to protect the farmers, to encourage them and induce them to stay where they are now. Then in the case of those who are brought back to the land, see to it that they are not isolated but are put amongst a community, which is essential to the welfare of these settlers themselves and of the country at large.
I am not going to repeat what I suggested the other day when I asked the minister to be kind enough to have an inventory or classification made of the employed in this country, with the story of each one. I would ask him if he will do that. I believe that is a fair question, and I am sure that the minister will give me a fair answer.


Mr. LUCHKOVICH:: I thought I had a few very valuable remarks to offer to the committee but in view of the fact that the front benchers have taken up most of the time I am not going to deliver the speech I originally intended. Instead I will devote a few minutes to some of the remarks that have been made by the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre and the hon. member for Mackenzie.
It appears that the hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Kennedy) said something in reference to those immigrants who unfortunately were not born in the country whence most of the residents of Canada have sprung. I hate quoting, Mr. Chairman, but I have before me an article which is very relative to the matter brought up by the two hon. gentlemen. It reads as follows:
Foreign-Born Fraternity
Tragic figures in the streets of Ottawa, as in other Canadian cities, are the destitute men of foreign birth. They seem to get the least consideration in periods of unemployment. Man's inhumanity to man is .to be seen particularly in the stirring up of racial animosities against the foreign-born when the fear of starvation is abroad in the land.
It would hardly be surprising to find communism spreading through this destitute army of unemployed, but actually the labourers from foreign lands are no more class-conscious than are the native sons. They have an extraordinary capacity to suffer in silence. They do so suffer privation with dumb patience.
2656	COMMONS
Unemployment-Agreements with Provinces
Against the communist drift, there is an organization in the United States to promote a better fraternal spirit among the foreign-born. One aim is to eliminate the barriers of prejudice, first of all between settlers from the different European nations, so that along with this fraternal advance there may come consciousness of being American.
In the younger generations the barriers of race and creed are less pronounced. Language distinctions are modified. Some traditional prejudices may remain. There are home influences worth preserving; but the greatest gain would be to improve social conditions in Canada so_ that the homes of the workers can be maintained on a fair standard of comfort irrespective of where the breadwinner may have been born.
I assure the minister that although I have some few further remarks I shall not speak beyond five minutes to six o'clock. I should like to say a few words concerning foreigners. Most hon. members were bom in the old country or have been descended from parents who came from the British Isles. Therefore it is possible that most of us cannot view this matter from the standpoint in which it is regarded by the foreigner.
_ People in this country look upon foreigners in two different ways; one view is rational and the other mystical. The rational view is that in which the Christmas spirit obtains, the spirit of that time of the year when we are disposed to forgive and give presents to our worst enemies; briefly, the reasonable, charitable spirit. The mystical view is the one we take towards foreigners in times like these. It smacks of discrimination and prejudice. I think that view is based more or less upon the so-called vulgarity, the crudity or oddity of the foreigner in question. Recently I received a communication from Edmonton in which was the statement that there was a movement afoot to deport a number of unemployed from Canada to the land from whence they came for no reason other than that they have become a charge upon the country, and are starving to death.
One of the hon. members for Winnipeg mentioned something about communism. In view of the circumstances under which most of these people live I wonder why we have not more communists. I believe the editorial in the Ottawa Citizen of May 3 places the facts very clearly. Because those people came here on the invitation of the government and as bona fide future citizens they should be given careful consideration, and we should keep them in mind when we are considering the resolution now before the house. In my view the only way to handle the foreign situation in Canada is by extending a helping hand to foreigners, by meeting them half way and [Mi - Luchkovich.]
giving them a square deal. There is no doubt in my mind that if we do that they will make as good citizens as we could wish.
The suggestion is made that a large proportion of foreigners are communists. I venture the prophecy that if one hundred Anglo Saxons-English, Scotch or Irish-were placed in any one of the old countries and had to live in the conditions obtaining in those countries there would before a great length of time be a revolution led by a group of communists composed of the aforementioned Scotch, English and Irish.


Mr. QUINN:: Especially if the Irish were there.
Mr.LUCHKOVICH; I think we should take a charitable stand, so far as the foreign element of our population is concerned. I hope the government will re-consider the matter of deportations, and that as a result none of these men will be deported simply because they are hungry, through no fault of their own. They have descended from a virile type. They have come from countries about which Goldsmith has written:
Til fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates, and men decay:
Princes and lords may flourish, or may fade;
A breath oan make them, as a breath has made;
But a bold peasantry, their country's pride,
When once destroyed, can never be supplied.
These people are of peasant stock and make the best farmers and citizens. We in this country do not take the proper attitude towards them; our text books are not written about the lives of people in Canada. I think we should adopt the suggestion set out in Upton Sinclair's book called "The Jungle" of writing our literature around the lives of our own people. If that were done we would do much toward dissipating the present prejudice existing towards the foreigner.
I have still a few remarks to make concerning the back to the land policy. I do not believe that policy can be successful until we put men at the head of the farms who have had wide experience. So far as the foreign races are concerned, given the least help there is no doubt they will be able to stand on their own feet. They spring from a virile, frugal and hard working class of people. The only way to make a success of the back to the land movement is to divide some of our western country into huge government farms, and to put experienced farmers at the head of them. To place on government farms men who have never had farming experience would be folly and suicide. If

Canada Shipping Act
there is to be a back to the land policy let it be one such as I have suggested, namely with large farms controlled by the most experienced men in the country.
Resolution reported, read the second time and concurred in. Mr. Gordon thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 72, respecting relief measures.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Friday, May 6, 1932.