1931-04-15

Hon. W. A. GORDON (Minister of Immigration and Colonization):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to lay on the table a list of people admitted to Canada pursuant to P.C. 183 and 534, passed under the authority of the Immigration Act; also a list of people admitted to Canada pursuant to the resolution of the select standing committee of this house dated June 6, 1928.



INTERIM SUPPLY BILL

[Stage Direction]
secured as is now proposed. I fully agree with the condition he has imposed upon consent being given to enable the civil service and other services of the country to be provided for. With respect to the last observation of the right hon. gentleman, I can assure him that we will follow the usual practice. I understand there are some difficulties in knowing just where the line is to be drawn in connection with many matters which will suggest themselves to him. I will make inquiries and whatever has been the practice will be observed, and I will report to the house later.

Right Hon. R. B. BENNETT (Prime Minister) moved:: That the Speaker do now leave the chair that the house may resolve itself into committee of supply.
By consent., of course.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Leader of the Opposition):: Would not the appropriate time be after the orders of the day are reached?
Mr. JEAN-FR ANCOIS POULIOT (Temis-couata): Mr. Speaker, before you leave the chair I desire to bring to the attention of the house a recent decision by the Board of Railway Commissioners with respect to the proposed location of the Canadian National Railways new station at Riviere du Loup. The order of the board, No. 46476, reads as follows:
Order No. 46476.


Richard Bedford Bennett: This is not down as a special order.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Is it the pleasure of the house to adopt the motion?


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Speaker, I rise, not to delay the' proceedings, but rather to have it distinctly understood that in consenting to the grant of any interim supply, it is without prejudice to the rights of members to discuss fully any and every item of the main estimates now presented when they again come before the house; also that the passing of any item does not in any way commit us to the principle underlying any item. I should like to ask my right hon. friend that it might be also distinctly understood with respect to the portion of moneys now to be voted, that except such portion as may be necessary for salaries and other immediate purposes, those moneys do not become available for the purpose contemplated by the estimates until the full amount is appropriated by parliament in the regulat manner.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I had intended when making the motion to indicate just what the right hon. leader of the opposition has said, but I thought it would come more appropriately from him than from me. It is the usual reservation made by the leader of the opposition when interim supply is being
Friday, the 27th day of March, A.D. 1931. The Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada
S. J. McLean,
Asst. Chief Commissioner.
Hon. T. C. Norris, Commissioner.
J. A. Stoneman, Commissioner.
In the matter of the order of the board No. 45205, dated August 9th, 1930, approving proposed location and details of the Canadian National Railways' new station at Riviere du Loup, in the province of Quebec, as shown on plans numbered P-1-12-179-2, 17105-1, 17105-2, and 17105-3;
And in the matter of the application of the said railway company for approval of plan No. 17321-1, dated Moncton, March, 1931, showing proposed renovation of existing station at Riviere du Loup, on file with the board under file No. 36455:
Upon reading the submissions filed on behalf of the railway company, the board of trade of Riviere du Loup, the provincial hygiene service, and the city of Riviere du Loup; and upon the report and recommendation of the chief operating officer of the board

It is ordered that the said plan showing proposed renovation of the Canadian National Railways' station at Riviere du Loup, in the province of Quebec, on file with the board under file No. 36455, be, and it is hereby, approved: and that order No. 45205, dated August 9th, 1930, be, and it is hereby, rescinded.
S. J. McLean,
Assistant Chief Commissioner,
Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada,
Riviere du Loup Station

Now. order No. 45205. This is as follows:
Order No. 45205.
Saturday, the 9th day of August, A.D. 1930.
The Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada
Hon. H. A. McKeown, K.C.,
Chief Commissioner.
C. Lawrence,
Commissioner.
In the matter of the application of the Canadian National Railways, hereinafter called the "applicants," under section 188 of the Railway Act, for approval of proposed new station at Riviere du Loup, Quebec, as shown on plan numbered P-1-12-170-2, 17105-1, 17105-2, and 17105-3. dated respectively January 31st, 1930, July 15th, 1930, and June 12th, 1930, on file with the board under file No. 36455:
Upon the report and recommendation of the chief operating officer of the board, the city of Riviere du Loup offering no objection, although duly notified-
The board orders that the proposed location and details of the applicants' new station at Riviere du Loup, Quebec, as shown on the said plans on file with the board under file No. 36455, be, and they are hereby, approved.
H. A. McKeown,
Chief Commissioner,
Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada.
Order No. 45476 mentions submission filed by the city and the board of trade of Riviere du Loup. I propose to read the resolution which was passed by the board of trade.
At a meeting of the executive of the Riviere-du-Loup Chamber of Commerce, held on Wednesday, 10th April 1929, the following resolution was unanimously passed:
Whereas, on several occasions, representations have been made to the Chamber of Commerce concerning the unsanitary conditions in the railway station at Riviere-du-Loup and the exiguousness of same;
Whereas the present building no longer meets with the requirements of the travelling public and of the ever increasing tourist traffic.
Whereas the Chamber of Commerce has investigated the means of developing local tourist traffic by rail;
Whereas Riviere-du-Loup, including the surrounding district, is a large trade and summering centre;
Whereas the only remedy to the present situation lies in the erection of a new station;
Whereas the present building lias been found unsanitary by the province of Quebec Board of Health, which body reported accordingly to the Board of Railway Commissioners, in Ottawa;
Resolved unanimously by the executive of this chamber that application be made to the management of the Canadian National Railways for the erection of a new station at Riviere-du-Loup and to replace the present station by an up-to-date building that would meet more efficiently with the traffic requirements;
and that copy of this resolution be sent to Sir Henry Thornton, K.B.E., president of the Canadian National Railways; to Mr. W. U. Appleton, general manager of the Atlantic [Mr. Pouliot.I
division of the Canadian National Railways; to the secretary of the Board of Railway Commissioners of Canada; to Mr. Jean-Franqois Pouliot, member for Temiscouata and to the city council of Riviere-du-Loup.
(Signed) L. P. Lizotte,
President.
(Signed) Louis S. Pommet,
Secretary.
There are also the resolutions passed by the city of Riviere-du-Loup to the same effect. One of these was passed on the 19th April, 1929, that is the same day as the resolutions passed by the Chamber of commerce, It reads:
At a meeting of the municipal council of Riviere-du-Loup, held in the city hall, Monday, 22nd April, 1929.
Were present:
His Worship mayor Chs. E. Dube.
Aldermen, J. G. Parent, deputy mayor.
Ad. Marquis.
J. H. Mailloux.
V. Dionne.
L. P. Lizotte,
the above forming the quorum of the said council, with His Worship the mayor in the chair.
Whereas this council has received from the executive of the Riviere-du-Loup Chamber of Commerce a resolution, dated the 19th April, 1929, in connection with the Canadian National Railways station at Riviere-du-Loup;
Whereas the Riviere-du-Loup station has become too small for the requirements of the travelling public, the sanitary conditions of the building are poor and the taxpayers have cause to complain of the present state of affairs;
It is unanimously resolved by this council that it concurs in the application made by the Chamber of Commerce of Riviere-du-Loup for a reconstruction of the present station and the replacement thereof by an up-to-date building more suitable to the requirements of our city;
and that copy of this resolution be transmitted to Sir Henry Thornton, K.B.E., president of the Canadian National Railways, to Mr. W. U. Appleton, general manager of the Atlantic division of the Canadian National Railways, to the secretary of the Board of Railway Commissioners and to Mr. Jean-Franqois Pouliot, K.C., member for Temiscouata.
(Signed) J. Lebel,
Secretary-Treasurer.
(Signed) Chs. E. Dube,
Mayor.
I also have in hand another resolution to the same effect from the city of Riviere du Loup. Those are public papers which I am pleased to lay before this house. The latter resolution was passed on the 3rd November last.
Whereas on the 22nd April last the municipal council of Riviere-du-Loup passed the following resolution:
Whereas this council has received from the executive of the Riviere-du-Loup Chamber of

Riviere du Loup Station
Commerce a resolution, dated the 19th April, 1929, in connection with the Canadian National Railways station at Riviere-du-Loup;
Whereas the Riviere du Loup station has become too small for the requirements of the travelling public, the sanitary conditions of the building are poor and the tax-payers have cause to complain of the present state of affairs;
It is unanimously resolved by this council that it concurs in the application made by the Chamber of Commerce of Riviere-du-Loup for the reconstruction of the present station and the replacement thereof by an up-to-date building more suitable to the requirements of our
Whereas, on the 21st December, 1928. the chief officer of the Provoincial Board of Health submitted to the Board of Railway Commissioners a report following an investigation of the sanitary conditions at the present station, which report concluded as follows: Without fear of being charged with going too far, we must say that the only proper thing to do would be the erection of a new building if the management of the Canadian National Railways really cares to improve this station in a manner satisfactory to the travelling public.
Whereas the letter from the chief officer of the Provincial Board of Health accompanying the report sent to the Board of Railway Commissioners, included the following paragraph*. "The contents of this report shall inform you of the pitiable conditions in which the Riviere-du-Loup station is kept from a sanitary standpoint. This railway centre is the most important between Levis and Moncton and I am at a loss to see why that public place is neglected to that extent."
Whereas, upon representations having been made both by the Provincial Board of Health and the Board of Railway Commissioners, the Canadian National Railways have included in their estimates for the current yearthe amount required for the building at Riviere-du-Loup, of a new station such as would afford the travelling public the proper guarantees as to healthy conditions and comfort.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Louder.


Mr. POULIOT:: I hear the hon. member
for North Huron (Mr. Spotton) whispering.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I must say to the hon.
member for Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot) that if he expects to get into Hansard the material which he is now reading he must read it audibly, because the rule that documents cannot be placed in Hansard en bloc cannot be evaded by reading them in an inaudible tone. It is a physical impossibility for the Hansard reporter to take down what the hon. member i.s now reading to the house. I say this for the benefit of the hon. member himself; if he wants this material to appear in Hansard he must read it audibly.


Jean-François Pouliot: I have a point to make,
Mr. Speaker, but before making it I must lay the foundation. That is my reason for reading these papers which I wish to appear in
Hansard, because I do not believe it would be possible for me to hand them in by unanimous consent.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It cannot go in Hansard
unless the Hansard reporter can hear it.


Jean-François Pouliot: What I wanted to say to
my hon. friend from North Huron when he whispered was that this is the first time in my life I have seen a mountain in labour pains giving birth to a mouse.


Mr. SPOTTON:: Bring on the mouse.


Jean-François Pouliot: It is louder now; it is
no longer a mouse but a big rat.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Louder.


Jean-François Pouliot: The hon. gentlemen do not know how stubborn I am. The more they shout the longer I will stick to it.
Whereas the parliament has voted the estimates of the current year for the Canadian National Railways;	_
Whereas the Canadian National Railways have called for tenders in connection with the erection of a new station at Riviere-du-Loup;
Whereas the honourable Minister of Railways has withheld his approval of the said construction because of its cost;
Whereas, on the other hand, the Canadian National Railways have been empowered to undertake this year works that call for the expenditure of several millions of dollars and that are not more urgent or essential than the erection of a new station at Riviere-du-Loup;
Whereas at the present time unemployment prevails throughout the country the building of a new station at Riviere-du-Loup would help to remedy the conditions in this district;
There is, Mr. Chairman, another reason to the effect that the government should have taken from the unemployment fund a certain sum to cover the difference between the amount voted and the lowest tender.
It is moved by Mr. Lizette, and seconded by Mr. Marquis, and resolved that this council request the provincial Board of Health to make new representations to the Board of Railway Commissioners and to the honourable, Minister of Railways asking the latter to reconsider his decision and approve the erection of a new station at Riviere-du-Loup so that work may be proceeded with without further delay, and that copy of this resolution be sent to Dr. Alphonse Lessard, chief officer of the provincial Board of Health, to the secretary of the Board of Railway Commissioners and to the honourable the Minister of Railways.
I have produced official documents, resolutions passed by the board of trade and city council of Riviere du Loup on behalf of the people of that community recommending the construction of a new railway station at that point. The last order of the railway board mentions that submissions had been filed on behalf of the board of trade and the city council of Riviere du Loup, and these wer*
Riviere du Loup Station

the submissions. The same order mentions submissions filed by the provincial hygiene service. The other day I read a letter from Doctor A. Lessard, superintendent of the board of health of Quebec, and also a report sent to the railway commission under date of December 15, 1928, signed by Doctor Alphonse Barabe, medical officer of health of the city of Riviere du Loup. This report is quite lengthy. There is also a letter from Doctor Lessard to Mr. Vien under date of December 21, 1928, which I will not read to-day because it was placed on Hansard previously. There is also an answer filed by the railway under date of February 11, 1929, and a second report by Doctor Barabe under date of March 13, 1929. If the house will give unanimous consent I will put those documents on Hansard, but since that consent does not appear to be forthcoming I will read them. The first is a letter dated December 15, 1928.
15th December, 1928.
Dr. Alphonse Lessard,
Chief Officer of Provincial Board of Health, Government Buildings,
Quebec.
Dear Sir,-I beg to submit to you my report on the sanitary inspection of the Canadian National Railways station at Riviere-du-Loup. That inspection was made by me on the third instant, with the assistance of Dr. Chas. II. Dumais, divisional inspector in the district, and of Dr. E. C. Labelle, M.V., sanitary inspector of this unit.
I am, dear Sir,
Sincerely yours,
Alf. Barabe, M.D.
The station building points to the north and south in its larger dimension. The railway track runs parallel to the eastern side. The total length is of 128 feet and the mean width of 27.5 feet. The ground floor is entirely surrounded by an 8 feet wide veranda. The building is of red painted brick.
Starting at the northern end, we find the ladies' -waiting room, marked room A on the sketch. This room measures 23 feet 6 inches by 23 feet 10 inches and by 11 feet 10 inches in height. The lighting is provided by seven large windows and a small one over the door leading to the station platform. Altogether there are sixteen glasses of 18-5 inches by 36 inches, two of 24.5 inches by 17.5 inches and six of 30 inches by 36 inches. The floor area of the room is 560.8 square feet, and its cubic contents of 6,627 cubic feet. The lighting surface is of 124.96 feet, with a ratio of 0.22.
The heating system is composed of three radiators of eight sections each. In the centre of the room, and around a central pillar stands a_ circular table the lower part of which is open. The floor is dirty and it could not be otherwise, every piece of flooring being out of joint and giving way under one's feet. The angles formed at the foot of the wall are rounded with accumulated dirt and the space behind the radiators filled with rubbish of all description. The walls, made of painted boards, are also out of joint. fMr. Pouliot.)
W.C.: next to room A is the ladies' toilet room. The following are the measurements of that room:	13*3 feet by 6 feet and the
height ....


An hon. MEMBER:: Translate.


Jean-François Pouliot: The hon. member wishes me to translate it because he does not understand French. If he were clever enough to follow what I am reading he would find it interesting. Anyway, I am speaking of the place where he should be at present-and he would fill it too.
The area is 80 square feet, the cubic contents, 946-67 cubic feet, its lighting area 7-5 square feet, and the ratio 0-09. There are 3 water-closets which are separated by partitions reaching half way up, they are all of the same dimension, 3 feet by 3jj feet. The height of the partitions is 7 feet. There are three round wash basins sunk in a marble slab with each a cold water tap. The toilet basins are of the Richelieu type, "wash out." The radiator is in three sections. There is a small ventilator of 6 inches in diameter, not in good working order. The flooring is in a bad condition, the angles of the walls are filled with dirt, there is a rat hole above the wash basins. There are no towels, no soap, no hot water, only individual cups without receptacle to receive those which have already been used, the latter are to be found all over the room. One lamp . suspended above the central water-closet provides light at night. The window is above the door communicating with room A, and measures 35 inches by 25 feet 5 inches.


Room B:: This room, although without partition, includes the public waiting room and smoking room. The partition however between the ladies waiting room and room B consists of a large door continuously opened. Owing to its irregular shape and to facilitate the calculation of its dimensions, we have divided room B in five reetangulars. We shall in succession give the dimensions of each rectangular. R-l, 16 feet in length, 10 feet 9 inches in width, 11 feet 10 inches height. R-2, 24 feet 9 inches in length, 18 feet in width, 11 feet 10 inches in height. R-3, 11 feet 10 inches in length, 13 feet in width. 11 feet 10 inches in height. R-4, 24 feet 10 inches in length, 20 feet 8 inches in width and 11 feet 10 inches in height. R-5, 10 feet 8 inches in length, 5 feet 2 inches in width and 11 feet 10 inches in height. The total area of room B is 1,549 square feet and the total cubic contents is 18.325-85 cubic feet. Fifteen windows provide the light in this room, they contain in all 30 panes of glass of 30 inches by 25 inches, six of 14 inches by 13 inches and two of 20 inches by 30 inches, this includes the windows above the doors. The total lighting area is 247-47 square feet giving a ratio of 0-5. Here the flooring is worse and dirtier than in the previous room described. The flooring at the doors is so out of joint that the tongues and grooves do not join, also very -worn out and gives way as one walks oyer it. The angles of the walls are filled with dirt and the space behind the radiators overflows with rubbish of all kind. The main door leading to the street is located opposite to the ticket office wicket. The protecting railings are 8 feet 8 inches distant from the door. In the northern portion of room B there are three night lights. The southern portion, known as

Riviere du Loup Station
the smoking room is particularly dirty, the condition of the floor here is still worse than the other rooms, it is uneven and black with dirt. The boards close to the walls are very out of joint leaving, in many places, an open space between the tongues and grooves. There are benches along the walls capable of seating 49 people, that is for the whole room B. There are two night lights and 4 small spittoons in the smoking room. In the southern extremity of room B is located an opening for a ventilator measuring 14 inches in diameter and entirely closed by a tin cover. There is consequently no ventilation in the room. In the month of December, 1927, 3,753 tickets were sold in that room. There is on an average, $11,000 worth of tickets sold per month.
Water-closet 2: This is the public toilet room. This room measures 13 feet 3 inches in length by 9 feet 3 inches in width and 11 feet 10 inches in height. A window pane 30 inches by 20 inches provides the light. The area is 123-33 square feet, the cubic contents 1,453-07 cubic feet. The lighting area is 12-08 inches and the ratio 0-09. There are three water-closets each measuring 3 feet by 3 feet 10 inches in length, separated by partitions 7 feet in height. On the left of the entrance is located a large urinal, the water reservoir of which has been out of order for a long time. Opposite the urinal are the wash-basins. The marble slab in which they are placed had been cut out for two; one having disappeared the hole was covered with a piece of board, the other has only a cold water tap. The toilet basins are of the Richelieu type "Wash Out"...
An hon. MEMBER (Translation): Like the government.


Jean-François Pouliot: The seats of the three toilets are soiled. Apart from the sanitary cups, there is no soap, no towels and no receptacle for the used cups. The angles of the walls are rounded with dirt. The ventilation system consists of a ventilator of 6 inches in diameter located in the centre of the ceiling, and of an air-hole level with the ground and floor, measuring 12 inches by 6 inches. This toilet room reeks with the smell of ammonia and filth. A lamp suspended to the ceiling provides light at night. One of the toilet basins is broken at the top. Both walls and flooring are very out of joint.
W.-C. 3: This is the smoking room toilet. This room measures 13 feet 2 inches in length by 9 feet in -width. The total height being decreased by the casing of the stairs, what remains has an average height of about 9 feet. Two panes of glass 17 inches by 36 inches provide light. The room area is 118-5 square feet and the cubic contents 1,066-5 cubic feet. The lighting area 8-5 square feet, the ratio 0-06. The ventilation system consists of a ventilator 14 inches in diameter and is vertical, it extends to the roof of the building, being located in the south western corner of the room. Another ventilator of 6 inches in diameter has its opening in the middle of the ceiling. The air-hole consists of a grate communicating directly with outside and level with the floor and ground. The grate measures 12 inches in length by 6 inches in height. This room contains two wuter-closets, an urinal and a wash-stand. The toilets are of the Richelieu type "Wash Out".
Each water-closet measures 34 inches in width by 46 inches in depth. The water tank for the flushing of the urinal is completely dry and has not been in use for a long time. This means that the urinal is particularly filthy. The floor is black with dirt and very uneven. Here, like in the other rooms, the angles of the walls and the cracks in the floors are filled with dirt. There is a public cup, with parts of its enamel gone, attached to the wail by a chain. The sink is of granite and enclosed in a wooden box. There is but one cold water tap; there are no towels, no soap and no receptacles for rubbish.


Room C:: In the centre of room B, facing the east side, is located the ticket office. This room measures 15 feet 6 inches in depth by 12 feet in width and 11 feet 10 inches in height. It contains a safe, a desk, two closets and a large chest. The area which can be utilized is 151 square feet, the total cubic contains 2,064 cubic feet. Light is provided by five windows having
4	panes of glass of 15 inches by 36 inches and 6 panes of glass of 30 inches by 36 inches, giving a lighting area of 60 square feet, the ratio being 0-32. Here the floor is clean as well as the walls, the boards like elsewhere are very out of joint. The radiator has six sections, no system of ventilation exists. Four lamps provide light at night.


Room D:: This room is a hall giving access to the stairs leading to the upper story and to the cellar. It is a room of 8 feet in width by
5	feet in depth and 11 feet 10 inches in height. It is lighted by 4 panes of glass of 19 inches by 35-5 inches and 4 other panes of glass of 13 inches square. The area is 40 square feet and the cubic contents 446 cubic feet; the lighting area is 192 square feet, the ratio being 0-2. This room is in a very dirty condition. The dust and smell from the furnaces penetrate through the door and partition of the cellar. The flooring is in a bad condition and out of joint, the same may be said of the walls.


Room E:: Operator's office. This room measures 16 feet in length by 11 feet in width and 11 feet 10 inches in height. The area is 176 square feet, the cubic contents 2009.33 cubic feet. Light is provided by 4 panes of glass of 17 inches by 36 inches giving a lighting area of 17 square feet The ratio being 0.09. The radiator has seven sections. Three lamps supply light, they must be kept continuously burning. The flooring and walls are in the same condition as the other rooms. No ventilation.


Room F:: Conductors' room. The rooms E and F are divided by a glass partition. Room F measures 7 feet 4 inches in width by 16 feet in length and 11 feet 10 inches in height. Light is provided by two panes of glass 17 inches by 36 inches. The lighting area is 22.2 square feet. The area is 62.67 square feet and the cubic contents 1,248.44 cubic feet. The ratio being 0.4. The walls are in a bad state, the flooring very dirty and also in bad condition. No ventilation.


Room G:: Yard office. This room measures 18 feet 10 inches in length, 10 feet 4 inches in width and 11 feet 10 inches in height. Light is provided by two windows with eight panes of glass of 36 inches by 17 inches and four panes of glass of 12 inches by 18 inches. The lighting area is 40 square feet. The area is 173.75 square feet, the cubic contents 2063.75 cubic feet. The ratio being 0-2.
Riviere du Loup Station


Mr. IRVINE:: Is the hon. gentleman saying his prayers, or just what is taking place?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order, order.


Jean-François Pouliot: I am not saying prayers, but perhaps I should for the benefit of the hon. gentleman who does not understand the French language.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I did not understand what the hon. member for Wetaskiwin (Mr. Irvine) said.


Mr. MACKENZIE (Vancouver):: It was not worth listening to.


William Irvine: I was asking for information; I asked if the hon. gentleman was saying his prayers or what he was doing. I could not nnderstand him.


Jean-François Pouliot: Both languages are official in this house. I do not pretend to speak good English but we French-speaking members pay a courtesy to the English-speaking members when we endeavour to speak in a language which they can understand.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I do not think the hon. member should seek to take 'offense at what has been said; the remark of the hon. member for Wetaskiwin was more in the way of a compliment than anything else.


William Irvine: I did not know that the hon. member was speaking in French; he was mumbling so that it was impossible to hear.


Jean-François Pouliot: After I have completed reading this report I will be glad to teach the A.B.C'S of the French language to my hon. friend. I might call the attention of the hon. member for Wetaskiwin to the fact that on Monday next he will find in Hansard a translation of my remarks. If he will take the trouble to read this report, which is very interesting, I will be thankful to him.
If the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett) or the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals (Mr. Manion) will assure me that an item will be included in the next budget of the Canadian National Railways for the building by the lowest tenderer of a station at Riviere du Loup, I will drop this matter. As there is no answer, I will continue to read: There are constantly 6 employees in this room. The radiators have in all ten sections. No ventilation system. The flooring is dirty and worn. Four lamps provide lighting. The lamp desks are kept lighted all day.
Cellar. The cellar contains, in the centre of the building the furnaces, the coal-bunker and also the wet-battery room. These cover a space of about 40 feet in length by the whole width of the building. The remainder of the cellar is not excavated, the space between the [Mr. Pouhot.l
floor and the ground level is about 2 feet on an average. First story. The floor of the first story-
The cellar is only one-quarter of the floor area, and there is a two-foot space between the ground level and the first floor level. It [DOT]has been found that the sewers offer great danger from infection.


Mr. MANION:: What condition was that cellar in during the five years o*f the Liberal regime when my hon. friend was sitting behind the cabinet? Why did not my hon. friend have things fixed up during that five years?


Jean-François Pouliot: I am delighted to have this opportunity to give some information to my hon. friend. If he will be good enough to wait until I have finished reading this report, I will give him a full explanation. I asked the former Minister of Railways and Canals, Mr. Dunning, to modify the law in order to put the Canadian government railways, especially the Intercolonial railway, on the same [DOT]footing as the branches of the Canadian National Railway's, that is, under the jurisdiction of the railway board. Previously, they had been under the jurisdiction of the minister and I wanted them put under the jurisdiction of the board. After I have finished reading this report, I desire to show that my hon. friend not only has interfered with the general policy of the Canadian National Railways but is now interfering with the policy of the railway board.


Robert James Manion: I rise to a point of order; the hon. gentleman makes a statement which is not true. I have not interfered with the policies of the Canadian National Railways.


Jean-François Pouliot: Mr. Speaker, I accept the statement of my hon. friend. The report continues:
Premier etage. L'escalier du premier etage...
While reading his interesting report, Mr. Speaker, I revert to the interjection of the Minister of Railways and Canals who said that he did not interfere with the policy of the Canadian National Railways. In fact,
I admit that it is not he who has refused to sanction the building of the station, and I give him credit for his absence from Ottawa on that date. The other day I asked him: Was the hon. member for Argenteuil (Sir George Perley) appointed Acting Minister of Railways and Canals; and I am glad to see the hon. member here now in good health after he has learned to box the compass on the Atlantic ocean. The Acting Minister of Railways and Canals, the hon. member for Argenteuil, refused to sanction a new station

Russian Coal
at Riviere du Loup; he is responsible for that, and I am very much surprised that the Minister of Railways and Canals did not have him censured for so doing, as the other day he said that the hon. member for Argen-teuil had certainly not been appointed acting minister to refuse to sanction the building of a station at Riviere du Loup. That being said, I continue.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Time.


Jean-François Pouliot: There is no time limit in this case. I wish to show-


Mr. GUTHRIE:: I rise to a point of order. The hon. member has spoken more than forty minutes, and he has not moved any motion.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: According to the rules of the house, the hon. member speaking immediately after a minister moving a government order is not limited as to time.


Hugh Guthrie: The hon. member did
not speak immediately after the minister. The leader of the opposition (Mr. Mackenzie King) spoke immediately after him.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: That being so, then the
hon. member is limited to forty minutes.


Mr. STEWART (Edmonton):: The leader
of the opposition was merely asking for information; he was not making a speech.


Hugh Guthrie: If he rises to his feet, he is making a speech.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Notwithstanding the fact
that the leader of the opposition may in his remarks have asked for information, he was addressing the house. He might, of course, being leader of the opposition, at any time have continued to speak without limit, that being provided for by the rules; but he having spoken, the hon. member for Temis-couata did not immediately follow the minister, and his forty minutes having expired, I rule that he is not in order in speaking now.



RUSSIAN COAL-STATEMENT OF HON. 0. HOWARD FERGUSON

Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: I should like to draw the attention of this house and of the government to some statements made in London by the High Commissioner, the Hon. G. Howard Ferguson, because I think they merit serious notice. As is admitted by practically all hon. members, we have had for the past number of months a serious unemployment problem which has culminated to-day in an appeal at the parliament buildings. I should like to know whether the statement made by the Hon. G.
Howard Ferguson in London to the effect that there was no destitution in Canada, was based on information given to him by the present government.
The other point I should like to draw to the attention of the house is this: when we met at the beginning of the session we were told in the speech from the throne that an embargo had been placed against Russia because her interests were inimical to the social and economic welfare of this country. Mr. G. Howard Ferguson, speaking in London, has, at least according to my way of thinking, quite a different story to tell.


Mr. BELL (Hamilton):: What is the hon. member's authority for that?


Thomas Reid: The magazine Canada, of
London, March 21.


An hon. MEMBER:: Read it.


Thomas Reid: Referring to the Russian embargo with particular reference to its effect on Russian coal, he pointed out that 3,250,000 tons of anthracite coal were imported from Wales in 1930. I would point out that his figures are inaccurate, because Canada last year imported only 900,000 tons of coal, and I suggest that a copy of the report of the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Stevens) be sent to him. This is what the High Commissioner said the other day regarding the Russian embargo:
He found that the Russians were invading the market in Canada, so Canada did not hesitate to put an embargo on Russian coal. That action he described as a distinct practical gesture of an imperial character which was of advantage to Britain alone, and he asked the people of the mother country to take it as an instance of the attitude of the Canadian people towards them.


An hon. MEMBER:: What is wrong with
that?


Thomas Reid: We were told that an embargo was placed against Russia for the distinct benefit of Canada and not of Great Britain.
Motion agreed to and the house went into committee of supply, Mr. LaVergne in the chair.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Resolved that a sum not exceeding $40,199,447.43, being one-sixth of the amount of each of the several items to be voted as set forth in the main estimates for the financial year ending 31st March, 1932, laid before the house at the present session of parliament, be granted to His Majesty on account of the fiscal year ending 31st March, 1932.
Interim Supply


Sir EUGENE FISET:: Does this interim
supply bill include any part of the Canadian National Railways estimates which were distributed the day before last?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have much pleasure
in informing the hon. member for Rimouski that a second resolution is about to be moved covering those items.


Jean-François Pouliot: So it is not included in
this resolution?


Richard Bedford Bennett: No.


Mr. HEENAN:: On perusing the book of
estimates, I do not find anything pertaining to any provision towards, the unemployment situation. I was wondering whether the Prime Minister could tell us now what he proposes to do in regard to the matter, because I understand the $20,000,000 that was voted at the special session of parliament has been exhausted and there is more unemployment at the present time than there was when the government took office. According to the government's own figures, the index of employment in Canada stood at. 118 when the government took office last August, and according to the last report issued on March 1 by the government, the index stood at 100. or eighteen per cent less employed than in August.
Leaving aside altogether letters that I am receiving from all parts of the country, I find that in my own riding 400 men walked to the town hall of Fort Frances last week asking for some assistance. At that time they were anticipating that all the works that had been started at Fort Frances under the unemployment relief measure would be finished within a few weeks. The mayor of Kenora wrote a letter, I think to the Minister of Railways and Canals-he sent a copy to me-pointing out that in all probability there would be about 500 men unemployed all the year in Kenora. I see by the estimates that the Minister of Railways and Canals has secured a public building for Fort William. I congratulate him upon that, because it is needed. It will give employment to men around the head of the lakes. I can assure my hon. friend that I shall support that item and I shall be glad to support a few more items for public buildings or works in northern Ontario if he can get them. I think he might also use his influence to get a few thousand dollars spent in the town of Fort Frances where, for a number of years, the people have been urging that a dike be built to protect certain town property.


Robert James Manion: I might point out that a short time ago I had a letter from the town of Fort Frances. I have been working on this

matter for some time, and I rather imagine that there is going to be some work done in Fort Frances shortly with the Dominion and provincial governments cooperating.


Peter Heenan: That is fine. Now that Fort Frances is being cared for I hope the Minister of Railways will be able to tell us something good about the town of Kenora. Furthermore, what is to be done for the rest of the unemployed throughout Canada? According to the government's own figures there is more unemployment to-day in the manufacturing industries in this country than there was when the government took office. Inasmuch as there is nothing in the estimates to indicate what the government proposes to do towards relieving that unemployment situation, I think the Prime Minister might very well inform the house at this time what his plans are.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I take it that the hon. ex-Minister of Labour is fully aware that there is a balance of the $20,000,000 that was appropriated still unexpended, and that the index figures to which he refers and which have been dealt with in this house on many occasions refer only to those businesses that report and not to casual employment, or unemployment, as the case may be. The figures from the index and the figures as a whole are not to be compared. You could compare index figures with index figures, but not with index and casual unemployment figures together. The hon. gentleman is comparing incomparable things.
The hon. gentleman properly observes that there is nothing in the estimates that deals with the matter he mentions. I take it, Mr. Chairman, that that is the reason why it should not be discussed at the moment. The hon. gentleman also was directing attention to the fact that his remarks were irrelevant, and I suppose that that is the reason why they were irrelevant. But as this is a supply bill I presume it is in order for any hon. gentleman to ask any question he may desire to have answered. I can only say to him, as I said at the beginning of my observations, that until the $20,000,000 has been exhausted the inquiry is premature. Such steps will be taken by the government as the necessity of the occasion demands. That is all that I can usefully say at the moment.


Peter Heenan: The answer of the Prime Minister furnishes a very good reason why the question should have been raised. While it is true that the seven thousand firms which have been reporting to the government for many years show less employment to-day than

Interim Supply
when the government took office, the Prime Minister's remarks with respect to casual labour are correct. There is nothing to show the exact situation, but anyone can see for himself that there is greater unemployment even among casual labourers to-day than there was when the government took office. I think, Mr. Chairman, that this is a very appropriate question to raise when the labour estimates are before us. Even if there were no estimates before us, it would be still an appropriate question to raise because it is a national question. The Prime Minister himself made it a national one. It seems to me very pertinent therefore to ask, what is the government going to do with the many thousand of unemployed Canadian citizens? There is no question but that the $20,000,000 appropriation did provide a certain amout of work. But after all, we can hardly speak of it as work, for the report of the Labour department shows that in round figures, 228,000 men got over three million man days' work since the commencement of the Unemployment Relief Act. That averages about sixteen days' work during the winter since the commencement of the act. Will anyone tell me that that is fit work for Canadian citizens, many of whom received only 30 cents an hour, working eight hours a day, and three days a week, bringing in a maximum of $7.20 a week, out of which six dollars had to be paid per week for house rent, leaving only $1.20 to feed the man, his wife and family of four children, I do not agree that that can be really called work. If any one of those men were unfortunate enough to have a limb broken, necessitating removal to hospital, he would get a minimum of $12.50 a week under the Workmen's Compensation Act of Ontario. It takes more even to keep the prisoners in the jails of this province than the amount allotted under this Unemployment Relief Act. So I think, Mr. Chairman, that the question is a very proper one, and I do not think the Prime Minister is doing himself or his government justice in not dealing with it in a more serious vein.


Mr. WOODSWORTH:: Since this question
has been raised, and I am glad that it has, 1 hope the Prime Minister will not attempt in any way to rule out of discussion the unemployment question simply because no unemployment relief item appears in the estimates. It seems to me that that is a very good reason why we have a right to discuss that question at this time when we are asked to pass estimates for other matters of far less importance. If it is important that salaries be paid to civil servants, as I presume we all agree it is, it is also important that men and
women not in the public service, but at present without means of subsistence should be kept alive. I do not think the Prime Minister begins to appreciate the appalling situation that prevails among tens of thousands of our fellow Canadian citizens.
He referred just now to the fact that there is a small amount of the $20,000,000 still unexpended. If I understand the situation aright, there is a certain amount still to be expended on works which have already been undertaken. That may provide work for a very small number of people. Also, if I understand the situation aright from information received from the department, there may be between one and two million dollars still unexpended that was especially earmarked for direct relief. This money is being expended under a tripartite agreement between the federal, the provincial and the municipal authorities. But we find to-day that a great many of the municipalities are almost insolvent. They have nothing whatever to offer to the unemployed, so that even though there may be $1,500,000 or $2,000,000 theoretically still available for relief, it is not possible to use that amount under the existing agreements between the Dominion government, the provincial governments and the municipalities. In the meantime thousands and tens of thousands of people are walking up and down the streets not knowing what to do. My hon. friend from Acadia has just returned from the west and corroborated information I have received through correspondents about this very matter. He said thait in certain towns he found the town policeman herding men on to box cars to ship them out of town, and a little bit farther down the line the company policeman putting them off the train because they should not be travelling in that way. Last summer I saw scores of men away up towards The Pas attempting to get work on the Hudson Bay line to Churchill, and they were allowed to ride free on and in the box cars simply because the officials of the company dared not put them off. They would have been mobbed and perhaps killed if they had attempted to do so. That was last summer, but the same thing is happening to-day. In a number of our municipalities men have been definitely told-and that is why we raised the question the other day-that relief would be cut off on the 15th of March. Now two weeks have gone by, and every hon. member knows that so far as the west is concerned there is practically no farm or bush work available this year. As a result these men are on the streets, and 1 was not going too far the other day when I said that there were going to be riots-
Interim. Supply


Robert James Manion: Order.


James Shaver Woodsworth: No, I am in order.


Robert James Manion: I do not think so. Mr. Chairman, I said "order" for the reason that I think that any member who repeatedly makes a statement on the floor of the house that there are going to be riots, as my hon. friend has, is consciously or unconsciously inciting to riots.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Mr. Chairman-


The CHAIRMAN:: I do not think the
hon. member is out of order in stating there may be riots. He takes his responsibility. But he is entitled to express his opinion.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am expressing
my opinion, Mr. Chairman, an opinion based on what I believe to be the existing factors in the situation. I think it is absurd that the Minister of Railways (Mr. Manion) should take the position he does in calling me to order for making a statement of that kind.


Robert James Manion: It is the opinion of many.


James Shaver Woodsworth: If there is danger
of an explosion, and if there is a chance in some way of drawing off steam into innocuous channels, I say it is a good thing that that should be done, and the man who refuses to allow any outlet under the circumstances is himself bringing about trouble. I submit that the Minister of Railways who objects to my remarking that there is danger of riots, and other people who take that position, are the very ones who will be responsible for the riots when they come.


An hon. MEMBER:: Just like the Winnipeg strike.


James Shaver Woodsworth: The Winnipeg
strike! We have gotten a long way from that.


An hon. MEMBER:: You have not got
very far.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Does anyone want
to go into that? He had better not


An hon. MEMBER:: Bring it along.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I do not think I
need to go into that to-day. The Winnipeg strike had a good deal to do with putting one government out of power, and if it is necessary to do it again it can be done again. I venture to say that there are no representatives from Manitoba or the other western provinces who dare say a great deal about the Winnipeg strike if they want to be re-

elected in Winnipeg to-day. I do not think it is necessary to go into that matter further. I am pleading for these men on the outside. Let me say, Mr. Chairman, that it seems to me a curious thing that members can come here representing interests other than labour and present the viewpoint of the banks and of the manufacturers' association, that they can come here and say the country is going to ruin unless they get higher tariffs, that they can come here and make all sorts of alarmist statements, but that when we who have been specially elected to represent the labour interests come here to try and state the viewpoint and needs of labour, immediately certain gentlemen are up in arms and would try to prevent us stating such viewpoint and needs.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I am simply putting forward what ought to be known throughout this country, and it ought to be a matter of concern not merely to the labour people themselves, but to every self-respecting citizen in this Dominion. I suppose a good many members do not receive the type of correspondence that I do.


An hon. MEMBER:: Hear, hear.


James Shaver Woodsworth: Yes, you say, "hear, hear," I have hundreds of letters from poor people on the very verge of starvation.


An hon. MEMBER:: Any from Russia?


James Shaver Woodsworth: No, I have not any from Russia. How some people delight to bring up the Russian business. But there is no unemployment there, as my hon. friend from Bow River (Mr. Garland) reminds me. According to the press 200 people are leaving Toronto for Russia in order to get jobs. I suggest that if any man does not want to have conditions here as they are in Russia, the best thing he can do is to take some constructive action at this time to prevent the further development of unemployment. It was the carelessness, the callousness, the indifference of the people who were highly placed in Russia that brought about the Russian revolution. That is how revolutions have come about in the past. I am one of those- and I think members who have been in this house for the past decade will admit it-who hope that the great economic changes which are absolutely essential can be brought about in this country without the trouble they have had in Russia and some other countries. I have always pleaded for that-that is the reason I am in this house-that we may use the best means available-parliamentary means, publicity means, educational means- to bring about these changes that are due at

Interim Supply
the present time. And yet when after ten years in this house I call attention to the exceedingly serious situation that prevails across this country from Cape Breton to Victoria there are those who would shout "Russia" and suggest that I was trying to incite to riots.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Hear, hear.


Miss MACPHAIL:: That is all they have to say.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I submit, Mr. Chairman, that any man in this country has a right at least to obtain a decent sort of living, and I submit that any man may very well look to whatever government is in power so to arrange the affairs of this country that he has a chance to work so he can obtain a living. I am not one of those who advocate that men get big salaries or wages without working. What we are asking to-day is that every man be given an opportunity to secure work. If a government cannot provide that opportunity-yes, I will take the responsibility of saying it-that government thereby ceases to have any claim upon the loyalty or the obedience of the people. That is a more serious statement than the other-a good deal more serious. No. Men have a right to live, they have a right to work, and there are thousands of honest, decent, self-respecting citizens today throughout the Dominion who have no opportunity to work, and without that they have not an opportunity of living. I did not intend to blame the government for the present conditions; I do not think they are to blame to any great extent. I differ in some ways from my friends to the right because I do not think the tariff is as important as is sometimes made out; but I do believe that we face a world situation to-day, and a most serious situation. The capitalist system, as we understand it, the system under which there is free competition between rival individuals and rival groups-that system is acknowledged by every thoughtful man to-day to be absolutely on trial. It may possibly survive for a few years; there may be such modifications introduced that it may survive indefinitely; I cannot myself see that this is likely, but it may. I say it is on trial. And the capitalist system, producing as no other system ever did, the necessities of life, if this system fails over all this continent and all over Europe to provide for even the elementary necessities of life, then I say not only is it on trial, but it may not survive for very long. I am not talking of that system to-day; I am talking rather of the parliamentary system, which also is on trial.
We have a group of people out in front of this building to-day. I did not intend to say anything about those people. I am not responsible for their being here; as a matter of fact they have been brought here very largely by a group of communists, I believe, and the communists have no use for me or for my colleagues. They have fought us during the elections again and again; they have called us all the names they can think of, but I do not care who champions the cause of the poor people; I have respect for them if, in sincerity, they are trying to provide for the needs of the people. No matter by whom these men are led to-day, I say they represent a situation which we find in the city of Ottawa, for most of the people out here are Ottawa residents. They represent a situation found not only in Ottawa but in Montreal, in Toronto, down in the steel mills in Cape Breton, in Winnipeg, in Sudbury and in every town right through to the coast. I do not think we are justified, as a House of Commons, representing not one section of the community but all sections- theoretically at least-in passing over one of the biggest questions that has faced our country.	,
I think the Conservatives will do me the justice to agree that last year when my colleague and I brought up this matter on the floor of the house we spoke as strongly as we could, although our speaking was not at all to the liking of the Liberal party. I am inclined to think that had something to do with the difficulties which that party experienced during the election. The Liberal party had no program and we, as Labour members, felt called upon to bring the condition of the unemployed before the country. I said to the then government that I did not think they realized the situation which prevailed, and they did not. The Conservatives took advantage of that situation; they said they would cure this unemployment. I did not think they could do so, but that is what they said. They carried out their promises to a limited extent by doing what was never done before in the history of Canada, calling a special session of parliament to deal with the question of unemployment. I give them all credit for doing so. Whether or not it was done along lines of which I approved, it was a big step in advance, because it was an assumption by the government of the responsibility for dealing with this social problem.
What, however, do we find now! Months later we learn that although the preliminary amount of $20,000,000 for direct relief is
Interim Supply

almost expended, under such arrangements that the unemployed could not really secure the direct advantage of it, nothing whatever is being done to meet the immediate needs of this present year. Last summer, when the election was going on, nearly three thousand people were being fed by the municipality of Winnipeg. Do you think any government could stand up against a situation of that kind? I do not know how many we are going to feed this summer. If I ventured to say we will have another three thousand, probably the Minister of Railways and Canals would get up and say I was trying to make paupers, but I want to predict that we are going to have a great many more unemployed this summer than we had last summer, and as my hon. friend from Labelle says, we will have more unemployed next winter than we have at present or had during the last winter.
We have to face this situation, and we shall need more than $20,000,000, in my judgment, in order to tide us over until next fall if we are going to prevent this trouble of which I spoke, if we are going to feed the people who are unemployed, to say nothing at all about the farihers who are in dire straits. I hope before long they will have a chance to tell something of the serious situation, approaching starvation, which prevails among the farmers at this time. I am speaking of industrial workers at the moment.
Then there is this further question, that even although we have provided for their immediate needs by a hand out, a dole if you like, what about the future? I think, Mr. Chairman, that early in this session we ought to have some declaration from the Prime Minister with regard to unemployment insurance or something equivalent.
Unemployment insurance is recognized as being essential in Great Britain, and all parties there say that although the so called dole has been abused, unemployment insurance in some form is absolutely necessary at the present time. What have we here? We are simply going along on this hand to mouth policy. Speaking a few days ago I said that I did not expect the government to come out with a full-fledged unemployment scheme because the contributory features cannot possibly be entered into at the present time. The people cannot lay up a reserve; they have not the money. So we will have to have a temporary scheme of some kind, and I want to see that we make a beginning. I do not hold up unemployment insurance as a cure for unemployment; what we need is work in order that the people can have in some way,

an opportunity to provide for themselves. I do not want to go into the economic situation at the moment, beyond saying that what we need is not so much work as an equable distribution of the things already being produced, but the outstanding fact is that very large numbers of our people are up against it in a very serious way at the present time.
I did not intend to say more than a few words to-day, but I do urge the government <to give us some indication as to how it proposes to meet the emergency which we will find coming upon us within the next few months and how it proposes to handle this unemployment situation during the next twelve months. I feel that since this question has been raised I cannot but make the strongest appeal of which I am capable in support of these men whom I know are suffering. I know very well that if the members of this house realized the situation they would back me up one hundred per cent, but unfortunately they do not realize it.


Mr. GOTT:: No suggestions.


James Shaver Woodsworth: No suggestions?
May I add just one word. I say there sits the government across the way, the government which promised to do this thing. They are the people who should make suggestions.


Mr. BOURASSA:: Mr. Chairman, I just want to emphasize if possible the importance of one aspect of the situation which the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) has pointed out. I want to do it as coolly as I can, with the benefit of the experience I gathered with some friends of mine in the midst of the city of Montreal last winter, when we went from house to house and found families of poor men, women and children who had been on the verge of starvation for the whole winter and who, at the present time, have hardly enough to eat. I can tell the Minister of Railways and Canals, for whom as he knows I have much personal esteem, that if he meant what he said a moment ago he utterly fails to realize what is the situation, not only in Montreal but in every large centre of Canada at the present time, and what it will be next winter.


Robert James Manion: As a matter of privilege,
Mr. Chairman, and because I do not want and to not intend to be misquoted in this house, may I say that what I pointed out was this:	The hon. member for Winnipeg
North Centre made the statement not only to-day but also the other day, when he was speaking, that if we did not relieve all this unemployment-which we appreciate just as much as he does-we were going to have riots

Interim Supply
in this country. He made that statement not once but many times, and I pointed out then-and I still feel as I did at the time- that the repeated statement that if we could not relieve all this unemployment we would have riots in this country was an incitement to riot. And when it comes to sympathy for the unemployed and for the hungry people in this country I take no back seat to either the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) or the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth). Nor does any other hon. member on this side of the house take a back seat to those hon. gentlemen.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: I will not follow the
hon. gentleman in the tone and kind of argument he has been using; I wish to state facts to the house.


Robert James Manion: It would be something
new.


Joseph Henri Napoléon Bourassa: No. If the hon. member would keep his cool senses-perhaps he has some remorse because of old times-he would follow better what I have to say. However, that will not affect my sentiments towards him; I am too old now to be moved in that way. The hon. gentleman twenty years hence will have gained that advantage.
Now, what I wish to say first of all is this. Canadians, whether of French or of any other origin, are human beings, with the same nature as all other human beings on earth. And the history of mankind teaches us that revolutions or riots are caused generally by two things: first is the selfishness of the enjoying classes, whether their enjoyment is political or economic, whether they are kings, aristocrats or plutocrats; and, secondly, the blindness, wilful or unintentional, of weak governments who have no courage or strength of mind to face a situation as it is.
Heaven knows I do not wish for riots either in Montreal or anywhere else, but I know that last winter we had the beginning of riots among people whom the Minister of Marine (Mr. Duranleau) knows as well as I do-I point to him because he is nearest me-good French Canadian fathers of families, the most peaceful people you could imagine, but who saw their wives and children starving all winter and who nearly broke into riot when they saw some people who had come to this country in the last twenty years were getting work while they themselves could not. There was no more reason in them. They said, "We are sons of the soil. Our wives and children are starving, and we don't want these 'Polacks,' or Scotch, or Germans to take our place." Of course the feeling was wrong, but it was a natural one.
Now what is the situation to-day? I repeat, we have gained some experience from last winter. Not having anything to do with the fate of any party, not caring very much for the destiny of either the Liberal party or the Conservative party, in our small local sphere, the humble paper of which I have the honour to be director not only started an inquiry, but began to give help to various voluntary institutions organized in the city of Montreal to come to the rescue of poor people. One of the first things we did was to organize work for the relief of the foreigner, because we realized that the instinctive, may I say the animal, reaction of the French Canadian of Montreal against the foreigner would be such, under the circumstances, that it behooved us to do something in that regard.'For years we have endeavoured to create some degree of national pride among our compatriots; therefore we felt that we should not allow them to go beyond the limit. We did our best to help some Polish and German and Hungarian families, and families of various other extractions starving in Montreal, who had not yet any charitable or parochial organizations such as were serving our people, or the Irish Catholic or Protestant communities in Montreal. We did some little good, and the little we did helped us to realize the depth of the abyss. And had it not been for that special work I should not be in a position to say what I am now saying; perhaps I should fail, as the Minister of Railways fails, to understand my hon. friend to my left, and conclude that he is simply provoking popular upheaval.
When one knows what the situation is, it is one's duty to speak the truth and endeavour to open the eyes of those who hold responsible positions. During the short session last year I did not take much part in the debates, and I do not think I can be accused of having thrown obstacles in the way of the government. Even my good friend here (Mr. Woodsworth) took me to task in a friendly way because he thought I was disarming in the hands of a victorious government, pretty much in the same way as the Liberal party has disarmed in England before either the Labour government or the Conservative party. I was not doing so; but I thought we should give ample liberty to the government, freshly elected, to try its hand. Like my friend here, I believe they have done something. I trust that everyone will believe me when I say that I do not wish to introduce into this unexpected debate any thought of party success or party advantage. This government could

Interim Supply

not, any more than its predecessors, be in a position to solve the problem immediately. The greatest fault of hon. gentlemen opposite is that through their preelection campaign and speeches, they created in the minds of the people hopes and expectations which cannot be realized. Of course we all know that. And far better would it be on their part to confess their impotence, far better would it be on the part of the Liberal party to offer a helping hand to the government in an endeavour to solve this problem, than it is for the party in office to stick to its small, ridiculous position of professing to be able to solve in six months a problem which is baffling the genius of the statesmen of all the most civilized countries on earth, and the findings and experience of the greatest economists and most practical business men. Far better also would it be, so far as the opposition is concerned, not to try to take a small, petty revenge at the expense of the men who defeated them at the polls. Let the ablest men on all sides endeavour rather to demonstrate to the people of Canada that, before looking to the success of one party or the other, we all care for the fate of the suffering masses of the nation.
Let me assure you, Mr. Speaker, that in what I am about to say there is no spirit of boasting; I am merely trying to show that personally I am doing the best I can. Since I have learned of the condition of the poor people in my own city I have told my children that we must spare money to help other people. I have ceased travelling in Pullman cars; I travel in the common care either on the Canadian National or on the Canadian Pacific Railway. When the common people are talking I listen to what they have to say and at times I hear things without their knowing that a fairly well dressed bourgeois is overhearing them. And there I can realize the truth of what m3' neighbour said a moment ago-what ferments of hatred are growing in the hearts and minds of Canadians of all races. I am not going to discuss whether farmers or labourers are suffering more. Heaven knows I am rural. My hon. friend the Postmaster General (Mr. Sauve) knows it. Although I have been brought up and have lived most of my life in the city, I have always represented a rural constituency, because I have always believed and still believe that rural Canada is the mainstay of our polity and social organization. Nevertheless, when I visited my rural constituents last summer, I told them that although they might have to suffer somewhat, I did not intend to ask either the Liberal government
!Mr. Bourassa.]
or the Conservative government, if they should happen to be successful, to starve the people in the cities in order to help the fanners in getting better prices for their butter or meat. I told them that they at least had an inch of soil which they could call their own, they had a hovel or house above their heads, and they could obtain from their farm that with whieh to live, but the position of hundreds of thousands of labourers and their families in the cities was such that they did not know from day to day whether or not they had a home, or whether or not they would have something to eat and drink.
I remember reading some forty >'ears ago the report of the commission which revealed to the British public the state of the slums in the great city of London. I can assure this house from personal experience and from that gathered by my associates during this last winter that the situation of the slum dweller in the city of London of sixty years ago was not any worse than is the situation of thousands of families to-day in the city of Montreal. Because of the blindness and carelessness of our municipal authorities, thousands of dwellings have been built, not fit to 'be inhabited by Christian and civilized (families. One room is built in the front, called the parlour, another room is built in the back, called the kitchen, and two other rooms are placed between containing no apertures whatever for light or air, other than the front and back doors. Up until (the present year, one family occupied such a four-roomed apartment, but to-day thousands of these uninhabitable apartments are being used by as many as four families. In ever3' parish of the city of Montreal, every charitable institute, every convent, every school for bo3js and girls, was distributing last winter hundreds of meals. The other da3r I was passing down Bleury street in what might be called the bourgeois and fashionable ward of the city of Montreal, and in front of St. Mary's college -I believe that is the college where the hon. Minister of Marine (Mr. Duranleau) received his education; two of my -boys are receiving their education there to-day-I saw two or three hundred labourers waiting at the door to receive free soup. Upon making inquiries I found that soup was being distributed ttvice a day at -that college by the fathers. The same thing is being done at sixty or eighty institutions in the city. That provides just enough to keep alive those individuals who gather -there, -but the pregnant, woman is unable to go there, the woman who has a suckling babe cannot go, the man crippled by rheumatism cannot go; they -have to rely upon

Interim Supply
charitable people, clerical or lay, who are willing to go to the homes and give food to the suffering peoiple who are not capable of going to obtain their daily ration of soup.
I can assure the hon. Minister of Railways and Canals that a feeling is growing in the hearts and minds of these men and women similar to that which I heard expressed the other day on the train running between Montreal and Ottawa. Three good French-Canadians in expressing themselves said: "All right, we stood it last winter, we were able to keep the woman and the kids alive, but next winter if it does not improve we will see that we get something more." It may be provoking to say so, but I think it is better to know these things than to ignore them. It is better to prepare for them than to go on blindly and say: Oh, well, these things will adjust themselves with the working of the tariff and other measures. No tariff or fiscal policy can do it.
I have one suggestion to offer, that the government adopt a similar measure to that adopted by the government of the colony of Kenya. That government, realizing the state of the people in the cities to be more desperate than the state of the people in the rural district, sent out agents to ask the farmers if they could give food and shelter to one or two people from the cities. They were told that if they could afford to give that, the government would employ its funds in paying such people a small salary. I do not claim that that is the best remedy to be adopted, but I do say this: if urgent and practical means are not taken during this coming summer to prevent, I will not say starving people, but people in difficult circumstances in the small towns of this country where work is practically stopped, from flocking to the cities, the result will be disastrous. The more we advertise our charitable institutions and the means we take to alleviate the sufferings of the people in the large cities, the more we will have individuals from the smaller centres coming to such places as Montreal, Toronto and Winnipeg. They figure that because of such organizations there may be a chance for them.
While travelling in a second class smoking car a fortnight ago a man came to me who knew me by sight. He had some connection with the constituency which I represent in this house and he told me of the situation existing in the town of Hawkesbury, not very far from here. This town, like many other towns in Quebec and Ontario, has been built up and sustained by one industry, and that industry is now stagnant and no one has any work to do. [DOT] The hon. member for Prescott (Mr. Bertrand) can correct me if I am wrong.
This man told me that half of the dwellings which had been erected by the small merchants, the professional men and even by some of the labourers were now empty, and these small capitalists found themselves to be paupers because they had no revenue. The town has a debt of $750,000 which it is unable to pay. The labourers are leaving, but where are they going? Going to another small town of the same size? No, they are going to Montreal or to Toronto.
While travelling a short time ago with a professor of Macdonald college, a man possessed of knowledge, he told me about the situation existing in the town of Granby in which he had been a few days previously. He told me of an incident which happened in a factory there. This factory is working only part time, and a girl worker collapsed about ten o'clock in the morning. The other girls gathered around and asked her if she was sick, but she replied: No, but this is my fasting morning. She then went on to explain that in her family consisting of eight children, four fasted each day, alternately, so that the other four could have a cup ol tea and a piece of bread. They were not all employed; what was earned by two or three members of the family was not sufficient to give a crust of bread to all the children. Those are things which have nothing to do with politics, which have nothing to do with theories, but which are hard facts. It seems to me that the duty of parliament is to see first-and that was the only suggestion I made last fall-that some little work is given to all those men who used to work in the small towns or in the lumbering districts so as to keep them at home, and if necessary, to adopt means so that the railway companies and other agencies of transportation will not bring those people next winter to the large centres; because, if the danger pointed out by my hon. friend to my left arises, it will be on account of the rivalry between those people and the old-timers of the cities, the men who have been born and brought up, who have lived many years in the urban centres and who will see the unemployed from the outlying districts coming to the cities and competing with them either in the small amount of work that will be given or in the distribution of charities and alms which will not be sufficient to alleviate all sufferings.
I think I have presented the case without any idea of embarrassing the government or anybody else. This appeal I make as the father of a large family and as one knowing the fate of large families not only in the city of Montreal but even in the good old
Interim Supply

happy city of Quebec. The other day, passing just five minutes' walk from that great, shall I say, monstrous and scandalous castle of wealth and parvenu-ism, the Chateau Fron-tenac, I saw about 150 labourers who had come up from St. Malo and St. Sauveur, hanging around the door of the Salvation Army quarters on St. Louis street, waiting for a crumb of bread while American, English and French millionaires were feasting at the Chateau Frontenac, five minutes' walk away. This is another aspect of the question. I appeal to every man who has wealth or who knows men who have wealth, first, to create in their own minds, and then to endeavour to stimulate in other people's minds, a true spirit of Christian charity; or, if they cannot bring themselves to that standard of humanity, let them at least have the decency to conceal their debauchery of wealth and luxury, because in addition to the two causes that I pointed out as having produced revolutions and riots in every country, whether Teutonic or Latin, the third cause is this cynicism of the wealthy who, not content with throwing thousands of dollars on the streets, are bent on showing, on advertising their wealth and, thanks to the sensational papers, the radio and all the other means of publicity, bringing to the minds of millions of starving people the extravagances of the worldly and the selfish.
Last winter I was spending a few days of rest in the south of France, one of the happiest corners of earth with which God has blessed humanity, where most of the people have a modest but happy life. One evening, talking quietly in the resting room of a modest provincial hostelry with a good southern Frenchman, as far away from any idea of bolshevism or communism as my hon. friend the Minister of Railways and Canals or as myself, maybe, I saw him growing red and with the quickness of a southern Frenchman he took his paper and threw it on the floor, exclaiming: "Do you not think, sir, that is enough to make decent people revolutionary?" I said: "What is it?" It was a piece of news cabled from New York, announcing that a certain magnate there, some vulgar individual, gilt-edged with millions, whether earned or stolen 1 do not know, had just married off his daughter, that the nuptial breakfast had cost, no less than S200,000 and that each invited guest present had received an automobile as a souvenir. I give this advice to wealthy men and wealthy institutions of Canada:	If you cannot bring
yourself to the point of partaking with the poor, at least conceal your indecent wealth and the indecent use you are making of it.
fMr. Bourassa.]


Mr. MULLINS:: In regard to the speeches that have been made from the other side of the house, let me say that I represent in Manitoba a -rural constituency. I have just travelled over that constituency, and I find that no such conditions exist as the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre has indicated. I have every respect for him because he was my preacher in the early days in the province of Manitoba, but I cannot understand why he should include the rural parts of Manitoba in any such statement as -he has made on the floor of the house; his statement does not apply to the rural parts.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I am sure the hon. member will pardon me; I was speaking of the industrial centres.


Henry Alfred Mullins: The hon. member included the farmers.


James Shaver Woodsworth: I said that a great many of the farmers were in a similar condition. That is true of large areas of Saskatchewan.


Henry Alfred Mullins: Why mention Manitoba? Why is he bringing in these things and knocking down the price of lands? Such statements are wrong. Our farmers are willing to come back and face the situation. I have just met with them and asked them: What is wrong? This is what they said to me: "I am wrong; I will take the responsibility; I bought three Buick cars when I should have bought Fords." Another one said: "I marketed my grain through the wrong channel and my farm is all tied up on that account. If I were out of it I would be all right." They are willing to meet the situation. These statements are doing harm t-o western Canada and I would ask hon. members to withdraw some and modify others. They are hurting Canada and doing more harm than good by such statements.


Mr. HOWARD:: My remarks wild not be such as to hurt Canada, but I consider certain measures that were passed during the short session made the situation worse than it might otherwise have been. One instance to which I wish to draw attention is this: it was brought forward by a telegram which I received about *twenty minutes ago and a telephone message that I just went out to answer from one of my constituents. The telegram is as follows:
Les arbres souffrent depuis quinze jours. A moins d'avoir un permis d'en prendre livraison immediatement nous aurons a subir un desastre.



S. 0. S.

[Stage Direction]
Louis Gervais.

Interim Supply
This is the translation:
The trees have been suffering for fifteen days. Unless we can get permission to take immediate delivery of them we will suffer a real disaster. S. O. S.
Louis Gervais.
At the short session of parliament legislation was passed that I do not think has been ever known of in Canada before empowering the Minister of National Revenue to fix for duty purposes the valuation of certain articles. That legislation was fought by hon. members who are in opposition at the present time, but in spite of that with the government majority it was passed through the house. Personally I am frank to say that while I realized at the time the seriousness of that legislation, it was not then brought home to me so forcibly as in the last two weeks what an injustice it might do not only to my section of the country but to all Canada. To-day I have the evidence before me, and I want to place it before the house for purposes of record so that the house and the country generally will know what hardships have been brought upon us.
Mr. Gervais for forty years has been in the business of distributing fruit trees through our section of the country. Last year from the month of May until December he went from house to house in that section and sold his trees and fruit bushes for delivery this spring. The duty upon those trees was 3 cents a tree coming from the United States. That has been the duty for the last forty-two years. There was no change made in the tariff with respect to these trees; it was never discussed on the floor of the house at all, and therefore the rank and file of our people knew nothing whatever about any change. But by an order in council in December last the value for duty purposes was raised from 3 cents to 30 cents a tree-I repeat, from 3 to 30 cents. This man's two carloads of tree3 arrived in Sherbrooke, and they are now in the hands of the Canadian Pacific Railway at Sherbrooke. The price he paid for two carloads was $1,179.06. I went to see the Minister of National Revenue (Mr. Ryckman) the other day. This man who imported these trees had come to Ottawa and had seen all the officials of the department that it was possible for him to see, with a view to getting what I would call simple justice, and something that would have been a benefit to Canadians as a whole. But he got no redress. He went to the customs at Sherbrooke to pay his duty, which last year amounted to $644128, and the customs officer at Sherbrooke asked him this year to pay a duty of $3,472,18. The duty had been raised from
$644.28 to $3,47248-something that has never been heard of before. I have been investigating this matter for the past week. This man has not always purchased his trees on the other side of the line. He has purchased from different places. I shall not quote any names in this house because I do not want to do anybody any harm, but last year this man ordered some trees from a Canadian firm at 12 cents a tree delivered in Sherbrooke. Then this order in council was passed in December last, and the price which the Canadian nurseryman asked him for his trees this year was 23 cents, and that was the price quoted by three different Canadian firms whose names I have here. I will go further and say that a member of one of these firms is sitting in the gallery of this house at the present moment. These trees will be ruined if delivery is not given. I go further and say that one of our ordinary, honest Canadians, who has no special fund of money ahead of him, will be absolutely ruined through no fault of his own, but through this legislation, if something is not done to relieve his case. I lay the fault to the government in power at the present time, and I want the people to know it.
Mr. Gervais came to me last week and made this proposition. He said, "Mr. Howard, if the Minister of National Revenue will take all the money I have-I have about two thousand dollars in the bank-and will release the trees, I will make my distribution. and pay the balance of the duty up to $3,472.18 as asked for." But the minister refused that proposition. I tell you, Mr. Chairman, that there is something more for us to do than simply sit here and fill our chairs. We ought to be of real service to the people, and if conditions are such as have been pointed out by the hon. member for Labelle and others, and some of these conditions I know of pensonally, the government in power ought to do something to remedy the situation. Here at least is one chance for the government to do something. There is no reason under the sun why any of this man's propositions should not have been accepted by the minister, who I regret is sick to-day. I say that it is absolutely criminal for our own Canadian growers to have increased their price by almost 70 per cent during the past year, especially when prices of everything else are coming down, and when wages are coming down so low that it is hard for many a family in Canada to maintain themselves. On account of this-I was going to say, rotten -legislation that was put through during the special session last fall this man in my con-
Interim Supply
[Stage Direction]
stituency is going to be absolutely ruined and every dollar that he has saved up in the last forty-two years will be taken from' him. I charge the government with the responsibility.
William Lyon Mackenzie King: I would like
to ask the Prime Minister one question, if I may. I do it because I am sincerely anxious to cooperate with him in dealing with the all-important matter that has been under discussion so much to-day.
Last year, when he was making his appeal to the country, speaking of this question of unemployment, my right hon. friend said over and over again, "Mr. King promises you consideration. I promise that I will end unemployment." I would like the Prime Minister to tell this bouse and the country exactly what he meant by that statement. What did he mean when he said "I will end unemployment.' He also said, in many of his public addresses, that there was no reason at all why any man should go without work in a country such as Canada, and that if he were returned to power there would be work for everyone, not doles but work; and that so far as he and his government were concerned they would secure work for everyone or perish in the attempt. I would ask the Prime Minister to tell us what he meant when he said that there would be work for everyone.
I had expected when the estimates were presented to parliament, the annual estimates dealing with expenditures contemplated for the entire year, that one would find some indication of a labour policy, but I have looked through the estimates and I find nothing whatever different from what has appeared in the estimates of previous years with respect to any matter that has a substantial bearing on the question of unemployment. My right ion. friend will, I think, agree that, in realization of the very serious nature of the statement he has made, I have been particularly careful to give him the freest possible hand to make good the pledge which he gave in the last campaign. I have caused him no embarrassment whatever. To the extent of my ability I did what I could in the special session to see that every measure he brought forward was put through expeditiously. I have cooperated in every way in which my position would permit me to cooperate in assisting the government to remedy this unemployment situation, and I wish to say that I am prepared to continue to cooperate in every way in which I am able to cooperate. But as an assistance to this end I would like my right hon. friend to tell the house and

the country what he meant when he said that if he were returned to power he would end unemployment.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I have to remind this
committee of the fact that we are dealing with an application for interim supply. It can be done only by consent, and this is neither the time nor the place for the consideration of general questions of policy. May I further remind the committee that, under our rules, until the address has been adopted, there is never any discussion of further matters of policy. When that address has been adopted by this house there will be a declaration of the government's policy. About that there need not be any doubt in the world. Anyone who has followed parliamentary institutions knows perfectly well that until the address is adopted, in no parliament in any country in the world where British institutions prevail is any endeavour made to obtain during the course of a debate upon the address an enunciation of the policy of the administration. I intimated that the other evening. Now, by consent, supply is being sought by the government, merely as the instrument of this house to provide pay for the public services to enable them to be carried on. I have sat in my place and seen interim supply voted during the time I was leader of the opposition, some three sessions, and on every occasion, from the moment of the introduction of the motion that the house resolve itself into committee of supply until the third reading of the bill had been given, it went through in something like thirty minutes. That is what happened every time while I at least occupied that position.


An hon. MEMBER:: Conditions were
different then.


Richard Bedford Bennett: They certainly were, and responsible men were preparing for the evils that were seen, while others were not. Those of us who sat to the left of the Speaker at that time and pointed out these facts certainly did not meet with much support from the government of the day. You will find from the records of Hansard a clear indication of this. Those of us who then sat to the left of the Speaker stated what we believed would happen if the policy of the party then in power continued to be followed. And what we then pointed out has happened. I do not think this is the time to discuss questions of policy. I so intimated the other evening, and I do not propose to depart entirely from the rules that govern our parliamentary institutions. But this I will say, no good service is being done to the coun-

Interim Supply
try by the exaggerations made by some of those who have addressed the chamber this afternoon. I say that with a due sense of responsibility.


Mr. BEAUBIEN:: How about last July?


Richard Bedford Bennett: I am quite willing to discuss that too, and I will before I resume my seat. The hon. member for Marquette (Mr. Mullins), having made a close and careful investigation of his whole constituency, has just told us exactly what he found. I have similar information from other members. I know of individual cases of hardship; of course I do. A'ou would think, Mr. Chairman, when listening to the hon. member for Labelle (Mr. Bourassa) this afternoon, that the only sympathy in the world for the unfortunate was manifested by the hon. gentleman when he left this country and spent his money to enjoy himself in France instead of staying at home. He has 'been reprimanding Canadians because they spend their money, whereas the economists of to-day are saying that rich men should spend and so put their money in circulation. Now the hon. member for Labelle says rich men are spending their money lavishly, and the people are getting the benefit of it, and they should not do so. That is one school of thought. The other is the school that says, "Save your money and put it in the bank; it will be safe there and no one will get any benefit from it." These two schools clearly indicate the differences of opinion that prevail with respect to the same matter.
I do not at this moment propose to answer hon. gentlemen opposite other than to say this. I never expected by remedial legislation to undo in a day the wrongs that had been done to this country in ten years. Neither did anybody expect it would be done, nor think it could be done. But this we do say, that within the time that has passed since accession to office no government has ever more fully Implemented its preelection promises *than the government now in power. I will not traverse the case made by the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Howard). The minister who dealt with it as not in his place; he is ill. But we did say that where products were being dumped upon the Canadian market to the detriment of the Canadian producer, whether he be a nurseryman or a factory producer, such dumping was giving work to people outside of Canada that could be done by Canadians at home, and we proposed that Canadians should get that work through the instrumentality of government. Certainly we have no apology to offer for having said that.


Charles Benjamin Howard: Did you not at the same time say that prices would not be increased?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Certainly. It is not a tariff item that the hon. gentleman is speaking of. There was no change in the tariff according to his own statement.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He has stated that there was no change in duty 'but that the value for duty was placed at 30 cents instead of 3 cents. That is what he has said. I am not in a position to determine whether or not the figures mentioned bear some adequate relation to the dumping of goods of a similar character upon this market because I have not the facts before me and did not know the matter was to be raised. Had I known it, I would have had the file brought to my attention.
This I desire to say, Mr. Chairman. Until the address has been adopted it would be wholly foreign to our parliamentary practice for the government to declare its policy. In the present instance the government is not acting as a government, it is simply the instrument to enable the public service to be carried on. Interim supply has been sought by succeeding governments, and it has never been made the occasion to raise questions of government policy, for the very obvious reason that the government cannot then make a declaration of policy, and should not do so. As I said a few moments ago, until the address is adopted it would be wholly foreign to our parliamentary institutions for the government to declare its policy. The best indication of what the government will do is to be found in what it has already done. Hon. gentlemen opposite nod their heads. They are opposed, I suppose, to the $20,000,000 having been voted for unemployment. Let this be borne in mind, that that $20,000,000 involves an expenditure during the next few months of over $75,000,000 on undertakings that, just as soon as conditions warrant, will be carried on. You cannot expect people to yield the wages that are being demanded without getting adequate results. This morning I was waited upon by a delegation urging that all the voluntary organizations that exist in this country to do useful service to mankind, churches, charitable and social organizations, should by statute be prevented from continuing their work. That is what I was asked to do by this delegation. Their slogan was "On the streets on the 15th of April." They came here this morning to urge upon the government non-contributory unemployment insurance. I told them they
Interim Supply

would never get it from any government that I had to do with; that is what I told them; I was perfectly frank about it. Whatever else this administration may lack, there is no lack of decision as to what it will do.
In due time and in the proper place I will answer the questions propounded by the leader of the opposition, not to-day but at the beginning of the short session. He may be desirous of giving us cooperation. Well, a little cooperation of patience in these days might do something; a little cooperation to get the speech from the throne adopted to enable us to settle down to business might be a useful effort. Look at what has happened this afternoon on a pro forma motion for one-sixth supply to enable the public services to be carried on. We have listened to what from the hon. gentleman from Temiscouata (Mr. Pouliot)? He is one of the leading members of the Liberal party as now constituted, one of their front benchers, one of their most trusted lieutenants, one of the gentlemen in whom it reposes apparently the greatest trust, one who is accorded the heartiest applause and the loudest laughter by his colleagues beside him; he is given the cheer that always encourages further hope. This leading member of the Liberal party spent the afternoon reading upon Hansard words not spoken loud enough to be heard by the Hansard reporters, and then he handed them reams of material to be put on Hansard at the expense of the Canadian people, on the principle, I suppose, that money should be expended for the benefit of those who get out Hansard, for certainly it could serve no other purpose that anyone can suggest. My hon. friend from Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) is a student of parliamentary institutions, and he knows perfectly well that this is not the time when the matter that he brought up can be dealt with. These are not ignorant men. If this pro forma motion for interim supply cannot ' be adopted this afternoon, the civil servants will be without their pay to-morrow, and they will know whom to blame for it. There is one party they cannot blame for it-the government.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Chairman, the Prime Minister has just made one statement which I think is entirely correct; he has said that according to the procedure of parliament until the address is adopted any other business should not be taken up, and that if other business is taken up it can only be by consent. May I point out to my right hon. friend that if there has been any occasion 	.
to vary that rule, the fault does not lie with an3'one but himself and the members of his administration. They did not call parliament until very late in the year, and surely the opposition or the country cannot be blamed for that circumstance. They brought parliament into session very late in the year, and naturally the whole public service was threatened with being inconvenienced because supply could not be voted in the regular way. Before the Easter recess my right hon. friend wished to get supply for the public service. We indicated our willingness to give him interim supply. Why did he not present the estimates to parliament before the Easter recess rather than now, on the loth of April? The beginning of the fiscal year is April 1, not April lo, and it was only yesterday or the day before that these estimates were laid on the table of the house. That is not the fault of the opposition; that is not due to any lack of cooperation or to any discourtesy on the part of the opposition. It is entirely the fault of my right hon. friend and his colleagues in not having the business of parliament ready when parliament was called and in being so late in the calling of parliament.
Now may I say this further word. When my right hon. friend requested the passing of supplementary estimates for the last fiscal year and later the passing of interim supply for the present year, it did require unanimous consent to have the right to suspend the regular procedure to allow the house to go into committee of supply to consider the estimates and this the opposition courteously granted. But when, through the courtesy of hon. members of the opposition and in fact of all hon. members of the house, the Prime Minister moved as a result of the consent given that the house go into committee of supply to consider the estimates, that motion carried with it the right, as it always has, whenever supply is considered, to any member to discuss any and every question in the nature of a grievance requiring redress and above all the right to discuss the most important question which is before the people of the country.
The debate on the address has run on for a considerable time, but during the course of the debate how much, may I ask, have we heard from the right hon. gentleman himself, or from a single minister of the crown with respect to the question of unemployment in this country? If the records are looked through from beginning to end it will be seen that we have had no statement from the ministry on that all-important question, a question so important as to necessitate,

Interim Supply
according to the view of the government, the calling of a special session of parliament last fall to deal with it. Under those circumstances it is not only the right but the duty of the opposition to demand from the government on every proper occasion what its policy is on this all-important question, and in doing so to-day we are only discharging the first duty of an opposition in seeking to get from the government some statement of policy.
I do not wish to go further into this question at the present time. I do think it would help throughout the country, in bringing about that better understanding of the government's position, if the Prime Minister would make at once a pronouncement to this house as to what the policy of the government is with respect to the unemployment situation which is so grave in Canada at the present time. I think the best way in which that statement could be made would be for him to give to the house and to the country quite frankly the meaning of his words when he said he would end unemployment. It is all right for my right hon. friend to say now that he did not mean he was going to end in one day the wrongs of ten years. I am not going to enter into any controversy about the wrongs of ten years or even as to how any conditions arose. That question can be debated by itself. My right hon. friend was dealing with a concrete condition of affairs in Canada during last summer, a condition of unemployment. True enough he did blame the then administration for that condition. The then administration was honest in saying that the condition was part of a world condition-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Oh, oh.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Were we not right in that statement?


Richard Bedford Bennett: My right hon. friend said it did not exist.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: No, we never
said anything of the kind. Over and over again I stated publicly that what we were suffering from in Canada was a world condition. I gave, as I saw them, a statement of the causes of unemployment and stressed very strongly the policy which I believed would more than anything else lead to an increase of trade. I stated that increase of trade would lead to an increase of work, and increase of work to a cessation of unemplojunent; that was the whole basis of the campaign, but my right hon. friend, dealing with concrete conditions, spoke of conditions of unemployment irrespective of their causes and said, "Return me to power and I will end unemployment." Now
I ask him again what he meant when he said, "I will end unemployment." It is not a good enough answer to give to the unemployed in this country to-day, or to the country, that he cannot do in one day what may have been occasioned by circumstances covering many years. He has been in power now for nearly nine months, and these estimates purport to deal with the expenditures for the next twelve months. Yet there is nothing here which indicates what is the policy of the administration. I do not intend to pursue this further at the moment, but I do intend to ask my right hon. friend when we take up the estimates again what he meant by the statement which I have just quoted, and I will expect him by that time to be prepared to give the country a satisfactory answer.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Mr. Chairman, may I
say that I think the attitude of the right hon. gentleman as expressed in his closing sentence is eminently fair and proper, and one which I shall endeavour to meet. I believe that to be the time and place to advance criticism and to meet criticism, and of course it is the right and duty of the opposition to criticize. I merely ventured to say I do not think that on any occasion heretofore when the government has been seeking pro forma supply in order to maintain the public service, any debate such as this has been indulged in. That was the point of my observations, and I can assure the right hon. gentleman that we shall endeavour to meet the suggestions he has made, I hope before we again have to consider any similar application such as this.


Mr. VENIOT:: I should like to ask the
Prime Minister, in view of the fact that on the records of the house there are a large number of questions and notices of motion for the production of papers, whether we might have some guarantee that these papers will be produced before we take up the main estimates.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I can assure my hon, friend that while a number of these returns are voluminous, all those we believe should be properly brought before the house are in the course of preparation, and as soon as the address is adopted we believe we will be able to answer the questions without further delay.


Mr. YENIOT:: Then there is another point to which I should like to refer, in connection with the matter brought up iby the hon. member for Sherbrooke. I refer to the matter of dumping. In discussing that point the right hon. Prime Minister said there was no increase in duty, but that these articles were being dumped on the Canadian market and
Interim Supply

therefore the dumping duty prevailed. If the matter is carefully looked into it will be found that at the very moment during the special session when parliament gave power to the Minister of National Revenue to apply the dump, so to speak, the price of the articles which would be affected in that way went up in Canada.


Eccles James Gott: Not all of them.


Peter John Veniot: But the hon. member must admit that the prices of some articles went up.


Eccles James Gott: No.


Peter John Veniot: The hon. gentleman is always ready to interrupt, but he does not know7 what he is talking about.


Eccles James Gott: Yes I do.


Peter John Veniot: Let the hon. gentleman
possess his soul in patience 'for a few moments. All he can do in the house is interrupt. Last session the hon. gentleman took up all his time in-I will not use that unparliamentary word "obstructing," but I mean that just the same. He took up the time of this house with very, very serious objections to certain ways of'carrying on the administration of some of the departments. Now he has taken up the time of the house interrupting speakers on this side. Let me say to him that we on this side of the house are not looking to him for any advice as to how we should proceed in matters of this kind.


An hon. MEMBER:: You are not running the country.	[DOT]


Peter John Veniot: No, we are not; nor is the government running this side of the house. We are running this side to suit ourselves. Perhaps the hon. gentleman who speaks about running the government is a little offended himself, a little sore because he was not taken in to run the government. There may be something in that if current rumours have any foundation at all. Now let me come back to the question of dumping. In this case the very moment the power was given directly to the minister to apply the dump the price of nursery stock in Canada went up, and on the increase of price the Department of National Revenue fixed the figure at which the dumping clause should apply.


Armand Renaud La Vergne: Order.


Peter John Veniot: How am I out of order?


Armand Renaud La Vergne: Come to the item.


Peter John Veniot: I am coming to the item. The Prime Minister spoke on this item.


Armand Renaud La Vergne: Everyone has been out of order all afternoon.
[Mr. Veniot.)


Peter John Veniot: Then I am not going to
be called down, surely. You are not going to make an example out of me when you allow everyone else to discuss it. I can stand on what I consider to be my rights, with all due respect to the chairman of committees. I was going to say that while the duty on nursery stock was not increased at the special session, nevertheless the fact that the minister had power to apply the dumping clause gave the producer in Canada the idea of increasing almost 80 per cent the price of nursery stock as it stood in August, 1930. That is how the injustice was done which, the hon. member for Sherbrooke spoke about.


Charles A. Stewart: I trust I
shall not be out of order inasmuch as what I am about to say affects the civil service. During the last two or three days I have been bringing up the question of the disposition of civil servants in the Department of the Interior who of necessity must either be placed in some other departments or be dismissed altogether. I wish also to correct an impression which some hon. gentlemen have, that nothing was done by the previous government to assist as far as humanly possible in transferring these civil servants. I am not going to take up the time of the house; I sympathize with the Prime Minister in his desire to get this interim supply through. But I do think that these people, some 150 or so, are entitled to know whether or not they are definitely out of the service, or whether the government is going to make some provision to place them in other departments when vacancies occur. I wish to make my position perfectly clear in this respect. I am not suggesting that the government paj' salaries while these men and women are not actively engaged in the civil service, but that they simply be kept on a reserve list and given preference when vacancies occur, over both promotions and entries to the service.


Mr. CAHAN:: Does the hon. gentleman
suggest that, when a vacancy occurs in a department, all subordinate officials in that department who have been waiting fifteen or twenty years for advancement should be kept back while someone is taken from another department, such as the Department of the Interior, and put into that vacancy, over the heads of those who have been working in the department, who are familiar with its duties, and who are anxious for advancement therein?


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, I do
suggest that. If my hon. friend will look up the Civil Sendee Act he will see that

Interim Supply
frequently when examinations take place for promotions, they are not entirely confined to the department in question; other civil servants of similar standing may have an opportunity of competing for that position Now I quite appreciate the difficulties that arise in departments over matters of this kind, but I say that this is an exceptional situation and one which it is likely will never occur again in the history of the service, and I see no hardship that can occur to individuals who have to wait for perhaps a year for promotion, and more particularly to entries into the service.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I can call attention to cases
where they wait five and ten years.


Charles A. Stewart: I am quite
aware of that; but my hon. friend will agree that men who have fifteen or twenty years of service to their credit-and creditable service, may I say-are surely entitled to the same chance as an individual in a department. And indeed, in my own opinion, under the circumstances-
Mr .CAHAN:	The hon. gentleman suggested preference, not the same chance.


Charles A. Stewart: Yes, I do suggest a preference.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: I just wish to understand the hon. gentleman.


Charles A. Stewart: That is my position; I wish to make it clear. And I wish also to make clear the fact that as far as possible junior members of the staff were transferred, foreseeing this difficulty. I wish only to be helpful and not critical; I have not offered one word of criticism. I know the difficulties, the serious difficulties, that arise when you undertake to transfer civil servants from one department to another. I quite appreciate that, but I do say that this is a very exceptional situation which is not likely to arise again in the course of many years.


Richard Bedford Bennett: I would not trespass on the time of the committee were it not for the fact that the hon. gentleman who has just taken his seat raised a question of very great public importance, and of much greater importance to the individuals concerned. As long ago as at least the month of March, 1926, this house was told that the resources of the western provinces would be turned over to those provinces, which of course would or should at once mean a reduction in the staff of the Department of the Interior. In order that the committee may have a clear understanding of the situation, I have asked to have prepared a memorandum showing the number of permanent and temporary employees at headquarters in this city in March, 1926, and in the same month in each succeeding year, as well as in Februaiy, 1931, which is the last year for which we have figures. The statement shows the permanent and temporary employees at headquarters and other than headquarters.
In March, 1926, which was subsequent to the date of the introduction of the Alberta agreement-because the house was told in the speech from the throne that the resources were to be turned over to the western provinces-there were employed in this city 1,194 of a permanent staff at headquarters. The figures for this and the succeeding years of permanent employees at headquarters are:
1927
1929
1,194
1,184
1,215
1,230
1,251
My hon. friend the ex-Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) did succeed in one department of the public service. The director took the matter in hand and had a considerable number of transfers made, so that the number actually employed in February this year was 1,177. In other than headquarters, that is, outside the employees here, the figures are:
1927
1929
667
700
717
This year the number is 670, or 3 more than in March 1926, when we were told that the resources would be turned over. The figures for the temporary employees at headquarters are:
1927
1929
67
126
212
This year-if there is any credit to be taken for it-the number is reduced to 145. At other than headquarters the temporary employees in March, 1926, numbered 140. These are temporaries, these are political favourites seeking jobs. The figures for 1926 and succeeding years are as follows:
1926		 140
1927		 153
1928		 188
1929		 203
1930		 235
1931		 139
Interim Supply


Charles A. Stewart: Is my hon. friend including the number of casual labourers?-


Richard Bedford Bennett: No, just the temporary employees. If the casual labour was included the number would be much larger. The total number of employees in the Department of the Interior for March, 1926, when we were told the resources would be turned over, and for the following years, is as follows:
1926		' ..	2,068
1927		 2.132
1928		 2,229
1929		 2.323
1930		 2,415
1931		 2,131
It will be observed that the total number of employees in 1931 is 63 more than those employed in 1926. Some allowance must be made for increasing business and everything of that sort, but had the anxiety that is now being manifested about transfers been shown during the last six years, I -have no doubt that much of the difficulty now being experienced would have disappeared.
The salary list bears the same relation to the total employees. It is as follows:
1926	
$301,330	001927	
308,947	431928	
337,301	931929	
351,135	161930	
364.759	161931	
337,093	65
Because of the very important and unhappy duty which has -been cast upon this government, the resources having been transferred in October last and a large number of the staff not having been absorbed, the pay roll for this year was almost $36,000 more than it was in March, 1926.


Charles A. Stewart: You are
speaking of this year?


Richard Bedford Bennett: February of this year, the last month for which we have all the figures for the outside services. I say this to the hon. gentleman, there is no person charged with responsibility but can feel, shall I say sympathy?-or even more than that, alarm- at the duty which rests upon us. I put this to the committee: can we retain several hundred people without having anything for -them to do? That is the first question.


Charles A. Stewart: I trust my hon. friend is not assuming that I have asked him to do that.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The second question is: what can we do to secure the transfer of these people to other branches of the public service? In my capacity as Minister of Finance I wrote to every one of my colleagues 
several weeks ago and stated: The last report which I have before me shows that you have on your pay list a certain number of temporary employees. I should like if you would be good enough to tell me why. In every instance they gave me a written memorandum dealing with the question whether or not it may be possible, looking to the future, to make provision for those who are engaged in, shall I say permanent places in the Department of the Interior. In the ultimate analysis the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Murphy) has been able to provide for some members of the staff, but I say to this committee and to everyone affected, a very earnest desire has been evinced and will continue to be evinced to adjust the situation in as easy a manner as it is possible for those who are vitally affected, but we cannot and we dare not keep people in positions if there is nothing for them to do. I believe it is unthinkable that it should be suggested that we adopt t-hat action.
I know the former minister will not object to my mentioning the suggestion which he made the other evening. He said that in some instances it might be possible that parliament extend the period of service for the purpose of increasing the emolument which these civil servants .would receive under the Superannuation Act. I am informed that that would involve very serious consideration of the whole actuarial question, but I would inform my hon. friend that his suggestion has not been entirely discarded.
The hon. Minister of the Interior, whose sympathies are known to every person who is familiar with him in private life, has worried-I use that word deliberately-more over this matter than he has over any other matter of public service in his department. This involves the human factor and we do not have to be reminded of the nervous strain of those who are not quite sure of their positions, who are thinking of the morrow, who have obligations to meet and who desire to be in a position to meet them; that is in the minds of all of us.
False statements have been circulated with respect to this matter, and it is in no censorious sense that I draw to the attention of the committee just what pressure, political and otherwise, will do. This committee must realize the task we have had to meet, the difficulties we have had to overcome and the situation which confronts us, and I assure the committee that any suggestions offered will be gratefully received. There is a very earnest and anxious desire on the part of the administration to deal with those who are affected as they would expect to be dealt

Interim Supply
with by those who for the moment are charged with the responsibility of the administration of this country.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Mr. Chairman, there was one expression used by my right hon. friend which I think must have been an inadvertence on his part; either that, or it was made in ignorance of the exact facts. He referred to the temporary employees as being political favourites seeking jobs. My right hon. friend nods his head in assent. May I say to him that any such characterization is most unfair. My recollection is that when the late Liberal administration came into office we found many hundreds, I think I am safe in saying thousands of employees who were classified as temporary. Considerable of the time spent in straightening up civil service matters was consumed in the consideration of the position of these temporary employees, and my recollection is that throughout the time we were in office a very large number of those temporary employees were, to use the technical phrase, blanketed in; that is to say, they were made permanent employees.


Richard Bedford Bennett: By order in council.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: By action of
the Civil Service Commission. What has actually taken place is that many employees who are styled as temporary have been longer in the public service than many of those who are classified as permanent. My impression is that all such were dealt with quite irrespective of their political complexion. They were blanketed into the permanent service because they had served so many years. I am sure that at the present time there are still a large number of civil servants designated as "temporary employees" who have been serving in their positions not for ten year's, but for fifteen or twenty years. I think it is entirely wrong to describe them as being political favourites who are seeking jobs. They are members of the public service of Canada who have been serving the country faithfully and because of a condition which I think might well be described as an injustice they have been carried along year after year as temporary employees when their services have in fact merited their being made permanent employees long ere this.


Richard Bedford Bennett: The right hon. gentleman is both correct and incorrect. In his observation as to their being long-service employees classified as temporary, he is absolutely correct. A considerable number of civil servants in the Interior department-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: And other
departments as well-


Richard Bedford Bennett: -are classified as temporary although, as the right hon. gentleman has said, they have many years of service. Those who have served but six months are in another class altogether, but they are classified also as temporary and they are the ones who for the moment are able to exercise the necessary influence to achieve the desired result.


Charles A. Stewart: They are
casual labourers?


Richard Bedford Bennett: No. The temporary
employees at headquarters numbered sixty-seven in March, 1926. When we took office, the number was 212 and it is now 145. There are two divisions of the temporary employees. I would share to a certain extent the observations made by the right hon. gentleman. I first learned at the treasury board of the matter to which he has directed attention, and I recall one instance of a person who had served for something over thirteen years and was still classified as a temporary employee-


William Lyon Mackenzie King: There are
some who have served twenty years.


Richard Bedford Bennett: My memory does not
carry me beyond the case to which I am referring at the moment. This case is an instance of this class in the temporary list.


Eugène Fiset: Will the Prime
Minister be good enough to elucidate one point? Are all these men who are being retired on superannuation at the present time being treated in exactly the same manner? Are they being given leave of absence in accordance with the Civil Service Act, or are they simply notified one day in advance that they have to quit?


Richard Bedford Bennett: So far as I know, they
are all treated in the same way except those who did secure leave of absence. I cannot at the moment speak with absolute authority about that. My memory is that there is a class that has been given notice that their positions have been abolished; that is, there is nothing for them to do.


Charles A. Stewart: All the land service will be in that class.


Richard Bedford Bennett: Principally in that
branch.


Eugène Fiset: Will the Prime
Minister allow me to cite one case?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Certainly.
Interim Supply


Eugène Fiset: There is a case
of the librarian of the Department of the Secretary of State, Mr. Henry Roy, who is over seventy years of age, who has had forty years of service, who, in accordance with the Civil Service Act, is entitled to at least six months' leave of absence and who, I understand, has been dismissed from the service without a single day's leave notwithstanding the fact that the recommendation went from the department to the cabinet that he be given at least six months' leave of absence.


Charles Hazlitt Cahan: If my memory serves me
aright, no application was made by this librarian for leave of absence until after he had attained the age of seventy years or more, when he was bound to retire. Under the act he had to retire unless I could certify that he had some special qualifications which necessitated a continuance of his employment for another year. I do not wish to discuss the personnel of my department, but I could not give the certificate in that case. The librarian received every advantage that could be given to him under the law.


Richard Bedford Bennett: As the hon. member for Rimouski has raised the question, might I point out that the section of the Civil Service Act states-and I am not responsible for it any more than the other members of the house are-that civil servants shall be retirable at the age of sixty-five, but at seventy they must retire unless their immediate head certifies that because of their peculiar fitness they should be continued in their positions. I did sign such a certificate the other day, but I put this to the committee: there is a gentleman seventy-three years of age and he had had a certificate for three years. It was signed again just as a matter of form, certifying that because of his peculiar fitness he should be continued in his position. What do hon. members think his position was? He was an elevator attendant. I give that illustration to show the difficulty the government experiences in matters of this kind. We did not raise the question, but when it is raised we must deal with it, and the only way you can escape it is to make a certificate of that character. The Secretary of State recalls the instance to which the hon. member for Rimouski refers. I think the hon. member for Rimouski will realize he would not ask the Secretary of State to make such a certificate.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: Was the man of whom the Prime Minister spoke in his office? Mr. BENNETT: No.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Richard Bedford Bennett: This is the second resolution : I move:
Resolved that	a sum not exceeding
$1,887,664.67, being one-sixth of the amount of each of the several items to be voted for Canadian National Steamships and Maritime Freight Rates Act as set forth in the estimates for the fiscal year ending 31st March, .1932, laid before the house at the present session of parliament, be granted to His Majesty, on account, for the fiscal year ending the 31st March, 1932.


Jean-François Pouliot: The Prime Minister knows very well that I like him.


Richard Bedford Bennett: He is not flattered.


Jean-François Pouliot: When he uses sarcasm about my humble self, I admit I feel very humble, but when I compare myself with any one of his ministers except the Minister of Justice who sits to his right, I feel reassured. I wish to continue to read this report.


Armand Renaud La Vergne: The resolution does not cover the railways; it simply covers the steamships, so my hon. friend is out of order.


Jean-François Pouliot: There is nothing at all about the Canadian National Railways in it?
I he CHAIRMAN:	Only the Canadian
National steamships.


Jean-François Pouliot: Everything is so mixed up in the railways that I do not know what to do about the matter.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Resolutions reported.
Jean-François Pouliot: I should like to put a question to the Prime Minister.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: There is no motion before the house just now.


Jean-François Pouliot: It is the reading of the resolution.
Mr. SPEAKER.: The reporting of the resolution is not debatable.


Jean-François Pouliot: I wish to speak to a question of privilege. When the first resolution was introduced, I asked the Prime Minister whether it- had something to do with the Canadian National Railways, and he said that it had not but that he was going to bring in another one that would have something to do with them. The Chairman has just said that the second resolution included nothing in connection with the Canadian National Railways. I do not know whether the Prime Minister made a slip or not, and I would like to be posted on the matter.
Resolutions read the second time, and concurred in.

Debates Translation



WAYS AND MEANS


[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of ways and means, Mr. LaVergne in the chair.
Richard Bedford Bennett: moved:
Resolved that towards making good the supply granted to His Majesty on account of certain expenses of the public service for the financial year ending 31st March, 1932, the sum of $42,087,112.10 be granted out of the consolidated revenue fund of Canada.


Jean-François Pouliot: Does this include something about the Canadian National Railways?


Armand Renaud La Vergne: No, I am sorry.


Jean-François Pouliot: Do not be sorry.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
Resolution reported, read the second time, and concurred in. Mr. Bennett thereupon moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 25, for granting to His Majesty certain sums of money for the public service for the financial year ending the 31st March, 1932.
Motion agreed to, bill read the first and second times, and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. LaVergne in the chair.
On Section 1-Short title.
Jean-François Pouliot: Is this part of the estimates that are included in the blue book of estimates for the fiscal year?


Richard Bedford Bennett: Yes.


Jean-François Pouliot: Item 161 reads:
Canadian government railways: to provide additional car ferry and facilities for car ferry service between the mainland and Prince Edward Island, $1,059,310.
I move, seconded by the hon. member for Vancouver Centre, to reduce that amount to one dollar, and I will speak on the motion.


Armand Renaud La Vergne: We are on clause 1.
My hon. friend can move to amend clause 1, that the title be changed.


Jean-François Pouliot: If there is an amendment that is suitable to cover an explanation of the whole thing, I shall gladly accept it. I will accept any suggestion from the chairman in that respect.
Section 1 agreed to.
Bill reported, read the third time and
passed.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, April 16, 1931