1932-02-10

Hon. R. J. MANION (Minister of Railways and Canals):: Mr. Speaker, yesterday an hon. member asked about the report on the Mafe-king cut-off. To-day I wish to table the report made by the engineers with regard to the building of the Mafeking cut-off.


Mr. BEAUBIEN:: The line is not completed as yet, is it?


Robert James Manion: No, it is not completed.



CRIMINAL CODE AMENDMENT


[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 7 to amend the criminal code (summary trials).
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. GUTHRIE:: This is a very simple
amendment which is proposed. In 1930 section 774 of the criminal code was amended and a special clause was inserted with regard to the provinces of Manitoba and Saskatchewan. This is the section of the code which permits the trial of certain offences before stipendiary magistrates. The same section was amended last session, but in that amendment the change made in the previous year was omitted through some oversight. The Attorney General of Manitoba and the Attorney General of Saskatchewan have directed our attention to that omission and have asked to have the section restored as it was in the amendment of 1930. That is the whole object of the bill.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



CONVEYANCE OF PROHIBITED ARTICLES BY FREIGHT, EXPRESS OR SHIP

[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 11 to amend the criminal code.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Hugh Guthrie: This amendment is drawn with the idea of preventing the conveyance of prohibited articles by freight, by express or by ship. Such articles are now prohibited from transportation under the Post Office Act, but the Post Office Department points out that they are now sent largely by express, 
and the object of the amendment is to make it an offence to send prohibited articles by express where they are not allowed to go by mail. The amendment relates chiefly to gambling devices and lottery tickets.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



JUVENILE DELINQUENTS ACT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 8 to amend the Juvenile Delinquents Act.
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Hugh Guthrie: The amendment to the
Juvenile Delinquents Act is also very simple. It arises from the fact that the section as it is now in the statute provides that it is an offence for anyone to contribute, promote or procure a child to become a delinquent, but it has been held by certain magistrates in certain courts that while a man may do all in his power to procure a youth to become a delinquent, if that youth does not actually become a delinquent the man is not punishable. At the request of the province of Manitoba, endorsed by six other provinces and by nearly all the childrens' aid societies in the country, it is proposed now to insert a clause providing that it shall not be a valid defence to a prosecution under this section that notwithstanding the conduct of the accused the child did not in fact become a juvenile delinquent.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



JUDGES ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. HUGH GUTHRIE (Minister of Justice) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 9 to amend the Judges Act.
Some-hon. MEMBERS:	Explain.
Hugh Guthrie: This refers to allowances
made to judges of superior and county courts by way of travelling expenses. It is provided that only in cases where it is ordered by the attorney general of the province shall the judges be entitled to receive travelling expenses for holding courts in districts other than their own.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



FISHERIES ACT AMENDMENT

[Stage Direction]
Hon. ALFRED DURANLEAU (Acting Minister of Fisheries) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 10 to amend and consolidate the Fisheries Act.

Fisheries Act
Some hon. MEMBERS:: Explain.


Mr. SPEAKER:: Mr. Duranleau moves
that said bill be now read a first time.


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Leader of the Opposition):: Mr. Speaker,
surely it is the correct order of procedure for an explanation to be given when it is requested.


Mr. DURANLEAU:: The primary purpose
of this bill is to amend the Fisheries Act so as to make its provisions conform to the decision of the privy council, which in 1929 determined that certain portions of the Fisheries Act relating to the licensing of fish canneries, reduction plants, whale factories and so on were idtra vires. It is therefore desirable that these provisions be deleted from the existing act. In addition there are some provisions of the act that are regulatory in their character which should be deleted also. A list of the deleted sections is set out on the back of the bill under the heading "summary".
Apart from this the more important changes may be stated as these: Section 2 of the bill adds definitions of certain terms in the act so as to remove any doubt as to their meaning. Section 8 of the bill amends section 8a of the existing act so as to authorize the cancellation of fishery licences where operations thereunder are not in conformity with the law. Under the present act cancellation cannot be made until there has been a report made by a commissioner appointed under the Inquiries Act. As the main object in licensing those engaged in certain branches of the fisheries is to maintain proper control over them, the requirement of an inquiry by a commissioner nullifies the usefulness of the authority to cancel the licence.
There is also another important change proposed in section 20 of the bill, which amends section 31 of the existing act, having to do with the construction of fishways in power dams and other obstructions. The existing legislation merely enables the minister to require a fishway in such an obstruction after it is built if he deems such to be necessary in the public interest. In certain sections of the country dams are now being built to such a height as to make efficient fishways impracticable, as even if the fish were enabled to ascend them the young fish would be killed in coming back over the dams. The bill provides that in such instances the owners of the dams may be required to establish such fish hatchery facilities as may be necessary to maintain the fisheries.


Mr. NEILL:: Will the bill be sent to the committee on marine and fisheries?


Alfred Duranleau: After second reading
the bill will be referred to the marine and fisheries committee.


Mr. DUFF:: Is it intended to consolidate
the act?


Alfred Duranleau: Yes.


William Duff: Then why was another bill
introduced yesterday? Why are there two bills?


Alfred Duranleau: The bill introduced
yesterday is to amend the Fish Inspection Act and the one introduced to-day is to consolidate the Fisheries Act.
Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.



QUESTIONS

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

Mr. GIROUARD:: 1.	Was Mr. Albert Beauchesne, postmaster at Arthabaska, Quebec, dismissed from his duties?
2.	If so, why?
3.	Was an inquiry held?
4.	If so, by whom?
5.	Was a report made by the commissioner appointed to make the inquiry?
6.	If so, did the government act on that
report?


Mr. SAUVE:: 1.	Yes.
2.	On account of active political partisanship.
3.	Yes.
4.	By Commissioner J. Alfred Powell.
5.	Yes.
6.	Yes.


ARTHABASKA, QUE., PREVENTIVE OFFICER
Mr. GIROUARD:: 1.	Was Mr. Albert Bergeron, preventive officer of Arthabaska, Quebec, dismissed from his duties?
2.	If so, why?
3.	Was an inquiry held?
4.	If so, by whom?
5.	Was a report made by the commissioner appointed to make the inquiry?
6.	If so, did the government act on that report?


Mr. RYCKMAN:: 1.	Yes.
2.	On the ground that the commissioner who made inquiry into the charge found that he was guilty of active political partisanship during the last federal election.

Questions

3.	Yes.
4.	By Mr. Alfred Powell, a commissioner regularly appointed to investigate charges of political partisanship.
5.	Yes.
6.	Yes.


FLYING CLUBS
Mr. WOODSWORTH:: 1.	What amount has the Dominion government paid out in grants to flying clubs throughout Canada since the inception of said flying clubs?
2.	What amount has the Dominion government since the inception of flying clubs spent on equipment which was turned over to the flying clubs?
3.	How many ab initio pilots who have secured their private licences received their instructions through flying clubs?
4.	How many pilots who have received their commercial licences were students of flying clubs ?
5.	How many students of flying clubs during the year 1931 secured their private licences?
6.	How many flying clubs ceased to function during the year 1931?
7.	How many flying clubs throughout Canada are closed down at the present time?
8.	What amount does the government extend to the flying clubs' association for salaries of officers or employees of said association?
9.	What is the cost to the government for each ab initio pilot who has secured his instructions through a flying club?
10.	What subsidies have been extended to commercial companies?
11.	What financial support does the government give to the aviation league?


Mr. SUTHERLAND:: 1.	Grants paid to flying clubs:
Fiscal year
1928- 29	$ 8,630 00
1929-	30	
17,964	151930-	31	
15,973	361931-	32	
9,805	23Total	$ 52,372 742.	The Department of National Defence issued, on loan, equipment to the value as follows:
Fiscal year
1928- 29	$ 135,993 00
1929-	30	
142,706	601930-	31	
61,191	501931-	32	
24,243	00Total	8 364,134 103.	490 members of government sponsored flying clubs who received their ab initio training in the clubs, obtained their private licences.4.	126.5.	110.6.	1.7.	5 clubs are temporarily closed down for the winter months.8.	$5,000 per annum.9.	Under the present agreement the club is paid S100 per ab initio pilot qualified.10.	Nil.11.	Nil.


ST. VALERE DE BULSTRODE POST OFFICE
Mr. GIROUARD:: What was the revenue of the post office of St. Valere de Bulstrode, in the county of Anthabaska, Quebec, for each of the years 1929, 1930 and 1931?


Mr. SAUVE:: Fiscal year	ended	March	31,	1929... .$	221	03Fiscal year	ended	March	31,	1930______ 216	59Fiscal year	ended	March	31,	1931______ 226	05


AIR MAIL SERVICES
Mr. VENIOT:: 1.	What air mail services were carried on from July 1, 1931, to February 1, 1932?
2.	What did such services cost?
3.	How much mail matter was carried and what mileage was covered?
4.	Who were the contractors for various air mail routes, and what was the contract price per mile for each route?

41761-6J


Arthur Sauvé: AIR MAIL SERVICES IN OPERATION From 1st July, 1931, to 31st January, 1932.
Name of service	Contractor	Rate of payment	Mileage covered	Cost during period	Weight of mail carriedAmos-Chibougamau	General Airways, Ltd	$1,200 per annum plus 20c. per lb. for mail in excess of 200 lbs. per r.t. $975 per annum plus 125c. per lb. for mail in excess of 100 lbs. per r. trip. $45,000 per annum	
$232 for trip to Red Lake; $332	2,280 6,426	$ cts. 420 00 993 78	lbs. 470 9,150Fort McMurray-Aklavik.. N arro w-Lake-Sioux	Canadian Airways, Ltd	
Western Canada Airways, Ltd.	67,561 (estimated) 15,226	26,250 00 8,000 75	34,673 (estimated) 23,416Lookout. Peace River-North Ver-	Canadian Airways, Ltd	for trip to Narrow Lake, load limit-400 lbs., for excess over 400 lbs. 12c. per lb., for excess over 700 lbs. 19c. per lb. $3,200 per annum	3,714 (estimated)	1,866 66	9,411 (estimated)milion.	Canadian Colonial Airways...	32,899	41,191 25	10,53617,712	22,140 00	34,163Airways, Ltd. Pan-American Airways Co., Ltd. Canadian Airwrays, Ltd	
Coastal Airways of B.C., Ltd.	1,950	30 80	88Moncton-Charlottetown...	$75 per day	2,260 5,734 6,900	941 67 154 70	(withdrawn after operating 3 weeks) 8,406 4426,470 60	(withdrawn after Sept. 30, 1931.) 8,490Seven Islands-Anticosti... Moncton-Magdalen Islands Learn ington-Pelee Island..	Airways. u a <t a National Air Transport, Ltd..	2,000 " 	
6,000 " 	
$192 per week	1,144	1,344 00	6,70627,623	19,750 00	15,209Montreal - Detroit, super-	Canadian Airways, Ltd	90c. per mile	43,346	39,011 40	9,717seded from August 16,	39,042 40	10,2671931, by Toronto-Detroit	75c. per mile	52,058	Winnipeg-Calgary Regina-Edmonton	
Superseded from August 16, 1931, by Winnipeg-	Western Canada Airways	75c. per mile	63,194 38,580	76,320 12	10,164 2,697Edmonton.	75c. per mile	256,1791	188,611 61	30,899(estimated)	(estimated)	(estimated)
Unemployment Relief-Mr. Reid


UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF
Mr. THOMAS REID (New Westminster):: Mr. Speaker, I desire to ask leave to move the adjournment of the house on a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely, to discuss the situation that has arisen in the municipality of Burnaby in the province of British Columbia, where hundreds of men who have been employed on unemployment relief work have not received wages or payment for work so performed, on account of a dispute between the government of British Columbia and the federal government as to accounts rendered; and further, that these men are going in privation and want and their situation is of a dire and urgent nature.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The motion which the bon. member seeks to make is regulated by standing order 31, which provides:
Leave to make a motion for the adjournment of the house (when made for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent public importance) must be asked after the ordinary daily routine of business (standing order 15) has been concluded and before notices of motions or orders of the day are entered upon.
I think the time has passed, at this sitting of the house, at which the application can be received.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Has the hon. member the leave of the house to proceed?


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Yes.


Hugh Guthrie: I have no objection to the discussion taking place, but I do not think that this motion is of the kind contemplated by the rule. This is a local matter. It comes under the jurisdiction of the province of British Columbia and of the municipality in question-


An hon. MEMBER:: No.


Hugh Guthrie: Well, I take that view and I make that statement. It may not agree with the views held across the floor of the house but that is my opinion. As I say, I have no objection to the discussion taking place but I would make this suggestion. Would it not be well to let the matter stand until to-morrow, when the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gordon) is in his place. He has had no notice of it.


An hon. MEMBER:: Yes, he has.


Hugh Guthrie: He informs me that he has not and I am prepared to take his word rather than the word of t'he interrupter. Tomorrow we can probably have the papers and the facts. However, if the hon. gentleman desires to go on now he may discuss the matter to his heart's content.


Thomas Reid: If I may be allowed a remark, it was not my desire to bring this matter up on the floor of the house. Last Friday I approached the Minister of Labour and informed him that there was a serious situation in the municipality in question. I was promised an interview and I tried in every way to get in touch with the hon. gentleman; I left every opportunity open to discuss the matter with him. As the member for the riding I bring it up now because I believed it to be a matter of urgent public importance.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Go ahead.


Hon. W. A. GORDON (Minister of Labour):: I do not want to take up the time
of the house, but I may point out that my hon. friend spoke to me on Friday last, I think, in connection with a return to be made [DOT]to which reference was made yesterday. With regard to giving me any notice of anything of this character, I have not had any notice whatever from the hon. member.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is not usual for an hon. member to move the adjournment of the house for the purpose of discussing a matter of urgent public importance without giving notice to the Speaker of the house of his intention so to do, in order that the Speaker may have an opportunity of considering the question which is to be put to the house and deciding whether or not it is a definite question of urgent public importance. True, no objection has been taken to the motion for the adjournment of the house for the purpose of discussing the matter in question, but the Minister of Justice has suggested-and in this he is supported by the Minister of Labour- that the matter be allowed to stand until tomorrow. If, however, the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) insists upon proceeding now, he will probably be within his right to do so. Does the hon. member wish to proceed?


Thomas Reid: Yes, Mr. Speaker, I should
like to proceed with the discussion to-day.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Then the hon. member
has the right to go on.


Thomas Reid: At the outset, Mr. Speaker,
may I say to the Minister of Labour that I am sorry a misunderstanding has arisen re-

Unemployment Relief-Mr. Reid
garding this matter. When I spoke to him on Friday last, I can assure him that I mentioned definitely the situation in the municipality of Burnaby. Regarding the returns, I did not mention them, and I am sorry that there should have been this misunderstanding, or that the minister should not have gathered correctly what I said. It was with reference to this situation that I spoke to him on Friday when the house rose.
When the act of 1931 was first promulgated it was distinctly understood that the Dominion government would finance all undertakings, inasmuch as under the relief act of 1930 the municipalities found it difficult to do the necessary financing. It was realized at Ottawa that under the 1931 act it would be impossible for municipalities individually to raise money, owing to the condition of the bond market.
After the commencement of the works program advice was received from Victoria that they would be required to finance the unemployment work for the first thirty days. This was presumably to wait the result of the national service loan. They were advised on more than one occasion that should this loan be fully subscribed their financial worries would be over, but so far they have not received any benefit from this loan. Because of broken promises the municipality was forced to shut down all relief work for one week in December. This resulted in a good deal of local suffering and some agitation among the unemployed.
Following this a delegation from the council attended at Victoria and placed before the Minister of Finance the urgent need for prompt payment. This resulted in their receiving, on December 22, the first payment under the 1931 act made to any city or municipality in the province of British Columbia, although, mark you, the work had been proceeding continuously from shortly before October 1, 1931. On January 26 a pay was due to the workers for the preceding week but it was only after repeated telephone messages and telegrams had been sent that a small cheque was released from Victoria to help to meet the pay-roll. In making up the difference between the amount of the cheque received and the amount of the pay-roll, all the available cash and credit of the corporation was used. On February 2 another pay was due but although every possible representation was made to the federal representative, Mr. McGeough, as well as to the Minister of Finance and his deputy, up-to-date no funds have been forthcoming. The bank is adamant in refusing further advances
and it is impossible for the municipality of Burnaby to meet the pay-roll of the regular staff, which includes school teachers, members of the police department, and so forth, until the two governments pay their share of the expenditures due under the relief act.
Since the inception of this work the municipality of Burnaby has been faced with the most grievous delays on the part of the two governments. These delays have so affected the faith of the bankers that they will no longer trust any written promises but insist upon actual deposits being made. This is an example of the excuses made: Mr. McGeough and representatives of the provincial government were interviewed, at which time Mr. McGeough stated that the delay was due to the fact that no vouchers had been received at Victoria. It was pointed out that the instructions were to file the vouchers at the government office at New Westminster, but the reply was made by the provincial representative that the New Westminster office was acting under instructions from Victoria and were holding the vouchers pending further orders. Not only had the vouchers in connection with Burnaby been held there but they were holding the vouchers for all of the Fraser valley and Vancouver.
The whole council, aroused by the continued delay, attended at Victoria on December 15. They received a letter from the Minister of Finance to the supervisor of the bank stating that the agreement and moneys would 'be forthcoming not later than the end of that week. On the strength of this letter the bank advanced funds sufficient to meet a large payroll, 'but this promise was not kept. As a result, the confidence of the bankers has been so shaken that, as previously stated, they refuse to go any further unless a substantial payment is deposited with them. The bank has treated the corporation with the utmost consideration, but they realize the absurdity of this municipality attempting to finance the share of both the provincial and the Dominion governments.
The registered unemployed in this municipality number 3,332 out of a population of 25,500, or, in other words, fifty per cent of the workers are unemployed. The corporation has put 1,600 married men and single men with dependents to work. According to the agreement the government promised to take care 6f single men and transients, but, as yet, none of this class has been put to work all hough the program is now practically completed.
It is utterly impossible for the corporation to take care of the unemployment situation

Unemployment Reliej-Mr. Reid
by means of direct relief. This is quite apparent from the estimate that it would increase the taxation by two or two and one-half mills per month to take care of the corporation's share.
I would like to quote a telegram received from the Minister of Finance in Victoria. It reads as follows:
Every voucher we received for municipal work up to January 14, 1932, has been passed by us and certificates sent to Ottawa. Directly we receive cheques from Ottawa your share will be forwarded to you.
On forwarding a copy of that telegram to the right hon. the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett) we received in reply the following telegram:
The federal government has no contact with municipalities. We act through provinces. We have already advanced the province of British Columbia in anticipation of the receipt of vouchers large sums of money and if you are not receiving payment you must look to the provincial treasurer for relief.
It is because of that I moved the adjournment of the house in order to discuss this matter. Men are suffering in th-is municipality and the 'buck is being passed by the provincial to the Dominion government and by the Dominion government back to the provincial government. We in British Columbia are in doubt as to who is really telling the truth.


Mr. IRVINE:: The hon. member has stated the position of the federal government; will he now state the position of the provincial government?


Thomas Reid: The claim is that all vouchers have been sent to Ottawa and immediately they receive payment, the municipality will receive its cheque. On February 3 the mem-bets of the provincial house stated that all blame lies on Ottawa, while the Dominion representative, Mr. McGeough, states the province is to blame. I submit that the municipality of Burnaby and the workers should not be made to suffer while these governments decide who is responsible. Teachers and other salaried officials have not been paid and no word has been received of further contributions from Ottawa. No cheques can be issued until additional funds are received from both the provincial and Dominion governments, but the province says: We await payment from the Dominion, and the Dominion government says: There is enough money in British Columbia to meet these payments; look to the provincial government for payment.
(Mr. Reid.]
It is because of this serious situation that I move the ladjoumment of the house. The unemployed have organized and the reeve has advised me that he will not be held responsible should any grave crisis arise.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Mr. Speaker, I regret that this matter has been brought to the attention of the house without some notice having been given, because I believe the house is entitled to all information in connection with the operation of The Unemployment and Farm Relief Act and that information should be available to hon. members without delay. Since this matter was first brought up a few moments ago I have obtained some information which I think will in large measure clear the atmosphere so far as the government is concerned. I am not unmindful, nor do I think anyone is who is familiar with them, of the conditions prevailing in British Columbia. The position in that province is perhaps a little more difficult than in any of the other provinces. The reason is obvious. It is well known that British Columbia is blessed, or perhaps, in relation to a matter of this kind, we should say cursed, by a fine climate, with the result that it gets all the drifters and those who are engaged in seasonal occupation.
Just at this juncture I should like to make an observation-not, I may add, in any critical sense-which I think has a direct bearing on the position in which British Columbia at present finds itself. My information is that a large number of the unemployed in that province are very new arrivals in Canada, and an analysis of the figures shows that within sixteen months prior to the first of August, 1930, about 99,000 adult males were induced or invited or encouraged to come into Canada, presumably to settle on farms. A large number of them did not settle on farms. Through various influences they were urged to come here and a large number of those people either have displaced Canadian labour or are at present unemployed. A considerable number of them drifted into British Columbia.
The government's attitude towards that province is exactly the same as its attitude towards the other provinces, except that greater consideration has been given. I have no doubt the province and the municipalities out there have great difficulties to face, because the population is scattered and distances are extensive. I believe in the main the people administering the affairs of the province and the municipalities have done what they can, but their difficulties have not been

Unemployment Relief-Mr. Gordon
entirely solved. In the month of August last a representative of this government went to British Columbia and explained to the government of that province a tentative program of work, the details of which were to have been submitted by that province within two weeks. Those details did not reach Ottawa until October 28, and they were immediately reviewed. In a conference between the provincial treasurer of British Columbia and the Department of Labour, a program was adopted involving relief works amounting to approximately S6,000,000. This program was made up as follows:
Total	Dominion
expenditure proportion Municipal works.	.	$2,749,746	$1,374,873Provincial works.	.	3,250,000	1,625,000Approximately.	.	$6,000,000	$3,000,000
That is shortly the outline of the program. According to the agreement which was subsequently entered into, the Dominion government was to be supplied with full details on schedule forms to cover the different provincial and municipal projects, but even to this date we have not received from the provincial authorities the full list of the municipal projects. They may have difficulties with which I am not acquainted, but that is the fact.
According to the agreement, payments were to be made on certificates of expenditures referring to the individual schedules approved, but there was considerable delay on the part of the province in forwarding the certificates of expenditure, and as it was in need of funds to finance both provincial and municipal operations, the following advance payments were made to them by the government.
On December 1, the Dominion loaned the province $500,000 to cover the province's share of expenditures for relief purposes. On the same date, the Dominion advanced the province $500,000, being an advance payment of the Dominion's share of unemployment relief expenditures, accounts as received from the province being applied against this advance. On December 23, a further advance of $800,000 was made to the province as an advance payment against accounts to be received from the province for provincial relief expenditures. On January 20, an advance of a further $500,000 was made to the province pending the approval of accounts which, it was understood, were to be rendered to us immediately. In addition to the above, on November 25 the sum of $3,371,664.69 was advanced by way of loan to the government of British Columbia to take care of maturing obligations in New York. The above loans
and advances are secured by treasury notes of the province, so that the house will see that the Dominion government has to the full carried out the agreement with the province.
It will thus be seen that the Dominion government has advanced by way of loan $3,371,664.69 to assist the province of British Columbia in taking care of New York maturities, and has advanced the sum of $2,300,000 against works for relief purposes in that province. In addition to this, during the course of the last week a further $225,000 was advanced to the provincial authorities in order that they might carry on the work in connection with their camps. At the present time the Department of Labour has on hand for British Columbia municipal accounts amounting to approximately $225,000. These accounts are now being checked, and will immediately be credited against the advances already made to the province.
I understand from our representative in Vancouver that they have on hand certificates for provincial works amounting to about $1,000,000, which are being forwarded and which will probably be received by us to-day. When they are received and checked, they will be credited to the advances made. As further accounts are received from the province for municipal and provincial works, they will be passed for payment and credited to the advances made until the advances are wiped out. Thereafter the accounts will be paid to the province. The advance payments against accounts to be received as distinguished from loans to the province for their share of unemployment relief amount to $1,800,000, the other S500.000 being a direct loan to the province to enable it to take care of its share.
One difficulty has arisen between the federal government and the province of British Columbia, which, in the opinion of this government, is not insuperable, and that is the province has apparently been unable to forward its vouchers in accordance with the agreement promptly enough to enable it to carry out properly its financial obligations to the municipalities and to the banks. The federal government has insisted that these vouchers be forwarded promptly in accordance with the terms of the agreement entered into, but owing to the distance from Ottawa to British Columbia and to the fact that the works carried on are in areas scattered all over that great province, certain delays must necessarily occur in assembling, checking and forwarding these vouchers. Recognizing this, the federal government has made these advances in anticipation of the receipt of the
88	COMMONS
Unemployment Relief-Mr. Mackenzie (Van.)
vouchers, at the same time instructing its representative in British Columbia to check such vouchers carefully and to facilitate the work as much as possible.
That, shortly, is the position in so far as the Dominion government is concerned. I am not in possession of the particular facts with respect to the district of Burnaby to which the hon. member has referred, but the federal government has not only carried out its agreement to the full with British Columbia, but made these payments to that province far in advance of the receipt of the necessary vouchers to equate them. I think I can assure the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) that in spite of his anxiety with respect to the locality to which he has made reference, matters are proceeding out there, particularly in the last month or six weeks, in such a way that I anticipate no great difficulty.


Hon. IAN MACKENZIE (Vancouver Centre):: Mr. Speaker, I realize that the
Minister of Labour (Mr. Gordon) really trespassed upon the rule of the house which permitted the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) to refer to a specific instance in a specific locality as a matter of recent occurrence, because we on this side of the house do not intend this afternoon to have a general discussion on the unemployment problem or on how that problem has been grossly mismanaged in British Columbia. The hon. Minister of Labour in the first place practically accused the province of British Columbia of admitting too many people into the province prior to 1930, thereby inferentially-


Wesley Ashton Gordon: Oh, no.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: No, no.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: I welcome the denial of the minister that the inference was not warranted.


Wesley Ashton Gordon: You were Minister of
Immigration when these people were coming in.


Ian Alistair Mackenzie: The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) deserves the thanks of this house and of his constituents for bringing this most serious and urgent problem to the attention of the minister. I could from the city of Vancouver bring a similar problem, only one of far greater magnitude, to the attention of the minister, for they have since the 23rd of September last

received only 812,000 when they were due to have received by the 23rd of January last over 8350,000. Here we have a scheme of unemployment relief work and direct relief, a scheme which was fastened on this parliament, a scheme which was the product of the brains of the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett) and of the present Minister of Labour, and for that scheme they and the administration must accept full and final responsibility.
What has happened in British Columbia? If I followed correctly the figures given by the Minister of Labour, he referred to the sum of 83.250,000 having been given for unemployment relief work in British Columbia. Work was commenced on the 25th day of August and ceased on the 28th day of October. Why? We from British Columbia later on in this session want a full and thorough and impartial investigation made into how every cent of this money was expended in the province of British Columbia. It did not go to the men who needed work. It went into the construction of 210 camps in the province. The very day that I left Vancouver for my duties here there were some thousands of men in the city on a straight dole, men who were supposed to get unemployment relief work from the province of British Columbia. When my hon. friend's own leader (Mr. Bennett) spoke in Calgary in the last election, he said that under no conditions would he stand for the dole as a solution of the unemployment problem throughout Canada, and now this afternoon we have the unique spectacle of the new-fledged Minister of Labour in this administration defending its policies by attacking the policies of a Tory government in British Columbia. The spectacle is unique. I repeat that we insist on knowing how much money went into the construction of these camps, and how much of the taxpayers' money went to Tory heelers and henchmen for the supplying of materials in connection with the work. We want to know all these things. We want a final accounting made to show how every cent was spent in British Columbia, because to-day, as the hon, member for New Westminster said, we have thousands of men idle and suffering privation and want because of a definite lack of cooperation between this government and the government of British Columbia. I suggest to my hon. friend the Minister of Labour that if his defence is to have any weight on the floor of this house, he should administer a severe rebuke to those in British Columbia who are so grossly maladministering the affairs of the province.

Unemployment Relief-Mr. Neill


Alan Webster Neill: There is no doubt, Mr. Speaker, that there is a very bitter feeling existing in British Columbia as regards the administration of unemployment relief. I am not here to attack the Dominion government, but rather to defend it.
I understand that this Mr. McGeough is a Dominion government appointee for the province of British Columbia. I have had no personal contact with him in any way, but those who have come in contact with him speak of him as a man of both ability and integrity, and say that he did his best in a very difficult situation. If there is any blame attaching to the Dominion government, I think it is rather for not having realized sooner the class of government ministers that they were dealing with out there, and in not realizing, as they must now realize, that they will have to take the matter more or less into their own hands before it can be settled.
In September, 1930, when the unemployment relief scheme was inaugurated, I am on record as objecting to the placing of such large administrative powers in the hands of the province. I said that the day would come when we would have complaints to make and would bring them to this house, which is the only place we can bring them, and that we would then be told that the Dominion government was powerless because it had placed the administration of the relief in the hands of the province, and therefore the Dominion government was not responsible. That is exactly what has happened. The Dominion government divested themselves of responsibility for the handling of the money they were giving out. They placed too much confidence and too much power in the hands of the province, and now they are reaping the result. I suggested then that some form of commission should be appointed to control the expenditure, and I am still of that opinion. I do not think anyone in British Columbia, no matter what his politics, will deny that the province has made a complete mess of administering relief. That is the mildest term that even the friends of the provincial government use. Inefficiency is evident at every point. The whole thing reeks with suggestions of graft and corruption. Those are strong words. We in British Columbia have got used to many things in the last few years. We have got used to the idea that if a small settler wants to eke out the scanty living he makes on his farm by a few weeks' work on the government roads, it is highly desirable, if not absolutely essential, for him to join the local Conservative organization. As I say,
we have got sort of acclimatized to those conditions, but by the blessing of God I hope that we shall never have to get accustomed to the idea, that when a man is destitute and his wife and children are hungry, if he wants to get even the trivial relief that may be afforded him, he should join some political association. I have been told that a number of registration forms were sent to a certain place accompanied with very definite intimation that no work would be forthcoming for the men unless they joined the local association.
The government started out with a scheme which if properly organized and properly carried out would have been a good one; that is a system of registration. The unfortunate thing is that it was not carried out properly and it was not done by the right people. Government agents in some places, and in others, the local police, which is a well organized and reputable body, should have had the handling of that matter. Instead, it was entrusted in some cases to political friends, and they did not make the best use of it. In some cases they stood on the sidewalk, like the man in the Bible, and urged the people to come in. "Don't you want to come in and register and get a job?" I have not the regulations before me, but I remember distinctly that they contained a notice that the registrar, whoever he might be, had no option but to register everybody who applied. Mark that! No discretion was given to the registrar to ask if the man were really destitute .-you must remember that destitution is a comparative word and that a man might be in need of work without his last cent being exhausted-I say that no latitude was given to the registrar in that regard. He had to register everyone that applied. The registration form, which I have before me is of such a character, so vaguely drawn, that a millionaire could be allowed to register. One question reads:	Have you got funds in the
bank? Well, a man might have a thousand dollars or a million dollars in the bank, and if he answered "yes" to that question and swore that his answer was correct he was eligible to get a job, and once he registered he got a ticket more or less automatically.
After the work was suddenly shut down, for reasons that I shall explain in a moment or two, a belated attempt was made to check over this list of people registered and to strike out the names of many thousands who should never 'have been put on at all. There were instances of men employed on relief work who had a 'hired man at home working for them. But when this belated attempt was

Unemployment Relief-Mr. Neill
made the "work had already been stopped, and so it was of no use because it was impossible for lack of funds to start the work going again. As my hon. friend from Vancouver Centre (Mr. Mackenzie) has said the government took it into its head to erect a large number of camps throughout the province. One might say they were equipped almost luxuriously with hot and cold water shower baths, electric lighting plants, and I am informed even radios have been provided in some cases. The tools were furnished on a scale never known before in connection with road work. Every man had enough tools to suffice for ten; every man had a wheel barrow; every man had a ten-foot saw, which was entirely unnecessary, and everything was done on a lavish scale. The material, Mr. Speaker, was all bought at the right place, you may depend. We have instances of blankets being bought at gift stores. I take it, sir, that you know what a gift store is, but if by chance you do not know may I explain it is a place where the word gift is terminated with an "e", and where one many buy trinkets for bridge parties, and things of that nature. Blankets were bought at such places for road camps.
The government of the day in British Columbia took occasion to ask this government for an enormous sium of money-something in the neighbourhood of $7,000,000 or $8,000,000. Popular gossip was-and it may have been no more than gossip, but I repeat it for what it is worth-that the intention of the government in British Columbia was, had they received this sum of money, to use it to rush an immediate election, because everybody was going to be working. There was a political straw boss on every four cross roads. An attempt was being made to go on with the Pacific Great Eastern Railway and an election was to be sprung before Christmas. To the credit of this government, (however- and I do not know whether it was through the action of the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett) or his then Minister of Labour (Senator Robertson)-they put their foot down and said, "No, we do not believe that you have 62,000 destitute people in British Columbia"-nor have we, Mr. Speaker. They said "we do not purpose to lend ourselves to anything of the kind; you have spent your money largely on camps; we have agreed to spend pro rata on a fifty-fifty basis for the purpose of relief work. The act suggested and all our regulations suggest that that money shall be spent on relief by giving men work to do. What have you done? You have spent yours, not in riotous living, but on

unnecessary camps; and you have hardly a good day's work to Show for the expenditure except the employment of a few carpenters who have built the camps." The government of the day said, "We will pay our share on the fifty-fifty basis, but it must be spent for some form of work."


Mr. J. E. LAWSON (West York):: Mr. Speaker, I rise-


Alan Webster Neill: The government of the day was in-


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The hon. member for West York (Mr. Lawson) is rising to a point of order, and I ask that he be heard.


James Earl Lawson: Surely the hon. member is wandering very far away from the motion before the house. In the first place, Mr. Speaker, may I point out that standing order 31 is an extraordinary provision to meet an extraordinary condition, namely a matter of urgent public importance. Under this rule a matter may be discussed, so I understand, which could not be brought before the house under the ordinary rules of procedure or in the ordinary course of a session. The hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) has moved a motion; you, sir, 'have ruled that it is of sufficient public importance to merit debate. What is the motion of the hon. member? It is t'o discuss a situation which has arisen in the municipality of Burnaby in the province of British Columbia. I listened to the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Mackenzie) make a speech in which he endeavoured to capitalize politically an apparent difference of opinion or adjustment of moneys between the government of this dominion and that of the province of British Columbia.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order, order.


James Earl Lawson: He did not direct one word to the situation which has arisen in the municipality of Burnaby. The hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) has digressed to tell us about the general administration of the Unemployment Relief Act in the province of British Columbia and the condition in road camps, but I submit that on an extraordinary motion such as this, hon. members should be strictly confined to the subject matter under discussion, in this instance the situation in the municipality of Burnaby in the province of British Columbia.


Alan Webster Neill: Speaking to the point of
order may I say it is a well known rule in this house that if latitude is given to one

Unemployment Relief-Mr. Munn
man it must be given to another. If you say "A" you also must say "B." The Minister of Labour (Mr. Gordon) made a general resume of the situation in British Columbia and I have done no more. I submit that so long as I can confine myself to generalities of that description I am in order, because I am following strictly the remarks and the precedent established by the Minister of Labour.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: I must rule that the
point raised by the hon. member for West York (Mr. Lawson) is well taken. It may be true that the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) is not transgressing the rule any more than others who have spoken to-day. The Minister of Labour dealt with the subject in a general way, and all hon. members who have spoken have followed his example. Nevertheless the point having been raised by the hon. member for West York that hon. members must address themselves to the particular matter raised by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid), the rule must be enforced. Therefore I ask the hon. member for Comox-Alberni and any other hon. members of the house who wish to address themselves to the motion to confine themselves strictly to a discussion of the matter before the house. The discussion must concern a situation which has arisen in the municipality of Burnaby in the province of British Columbia, and may not extend to a discussion of the question of unemployment generally. I ask hon. members to confine their discussion to the situation existing in the municipality of Burnaby, in the province of British Columbia.


Alan Webster Neill: Mr. Speaker, I suggest your
decision may be all right, but it has been made at the wrong time; it should have been made when the Minister of Labour was speaking. I go on, then, under your direction confining myself to the situation whioh has arisen in Burnaby, with the feeling that there appears to be one rule for myself and another for other hon. members.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


James Earl Lawson: I think, sir, to say the
least it is an insult to the Speaker of this house when an hon. member suggests that the Speaker applies one ruling to him and another ruling to other hon. members.


Alan Webster Neill: I did not say "another ruling."


Pierre Édouard Blondin: It is not fair for the hon. member for Comox-Alberni to make such a statement, and if he did I should hope he would retract it.


Alan Webster Neill: For the sake of harmonyand at such an early date in the session we want harmony-may I say that there is but one rule, but it is applied at a different time to different members. If I may be allowed to-


Mr. MALONEY:: In that event I should
like to suggest that you, Mr. Speaker, allow the hon. member to rave on.


Alan Webster Neill: I am sorry to say that I did not hear the remarks of the hon. member who has just taken his seat.
Reverting to the situation as it applies to the situation in Burnaby, and to the remarks by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid), and with the knowledge many hon. members from British Columbia and myself must possess to the effect that the same situation is duplicated in many other parts of British Columbia, I would urge this government to take some really drastic steps to end the situation as revealed by the hon. member for New Westminster. Such conditions cannot be smoothed over in a few days or weeks. It is going to be accentuated, and it will be duplicated in many other parts of the country. I honestly believe that I am speaking in the best interests of the province from which I come when I say to the government that they should seriously consider the appointment of a commissioner with very sweeping powers to go to British Columbia and handle the situation very much as though British Columbia were more or less in the hands of the receiver. I think an able, capable commissioner would put an end to the situation which has been outlined to some extent by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) and myself, and I do not believe anything less will meet the situation. It needs a strong, capable man vested with wide powers from this government, and if the situation is not so handled it will get worse. I earnestly hope the Minister of Labour will seriously consider this suggestion.


Mr. A. E. MUNN (Vancouver North):: Mr. Speaker, I am familiar with the situation in Burnaby, and to my mind it is very serious. Every hon. member of this house should be only too glad to devote a little time to the matter if something can be accomplished. Burnaby adjoins my riding of Vancouver North; there we have the same trouble, and in fact it extends over practically the whole of British Columbia. Just because we have perhaps the finest climate in the world, and because a lot of people have gone to Burnaby and other parts of British Columbia, is no
y2	COMMONS
Unemployment Relief-Mr. Hanson (Skeena)
reason why they should be allowed to starve. Arrangements were made not only in Burnaby but in other parts of the province for thousands of men to do road work, but to-day if you go there you will find that they are not working. Every hon. member here should be anxious to relieve a situation which, to say the least, has become desperate.


Mr. OLOF HANSON (Skeena):: Mr. Speaker, as a member from British Columbia I am also familiar with the situation in Burnaby. I was there about two weeks ago and could not help seeing that the situation is very serious. But, as my colleague from Vancouver North (Mr. Munn) has said, conditions are the same throughout British Columbia. In Prince Rupert the same condition prevails. I have no criticism to offer of the federal government; I think they were sincere last year when they voted money for unemployment relief, but I must agree with other speakers when they say that the money is being misused in British Columbia. If anything I believe this government should be congratulated upon stopping payments to the province of British Columbia, because I think it has been discovered that the British Columbia government is not capable of handling the money. Not only in Burnaby but in Prince Rupert and other places money was spent for the construction of camps while those who actually needed relief could not get work at all. Most of the men in Burnaby and nearby places received only six-teen days employment. Sixteen days in the fall of the year is not sufficient to keep a man for the winter, so I think if a man could be sent to British Columbia to take charge of affairs, as has been suggested, it would be a great help to the country at large, to the province of British Columbia and to the municipality.


Mr. ANGUS MacINNIS (Vancouver South):: It was not my intention, Mr. Speaker, to take part in this debate, but it seems to me that the reply of the Minister of Labour (Mr. Gordon) was extremely weak. Here we have a situation which has arisen because of a dispute between the federal and provincial governments as to the payment of men on relief work in the municipality of Burnaby. It has nothing whatever to do with the climate of British Columbia or with the immigration policies of past governments of this country. It is true that there may be quite a number of transients in the province of British Columbia and also in the municipality of Burnaby, but at present they are not affected by the statement made by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid).

So far as my information goes they are looked after by the provincial government in the camps that were built when the unemployment relief scheme was begun.
The main question is this: These men on unemployment relief in Burnaby are working for very low wages; they are working part time, yet, after having done their work, because of the dispute between the two governments they cannot get the pittance which is coming to them. That is the point of the whole matter, and we wish to get some assurance now that in the future they will not have to wait for their money. We do not want to hear about the climate of British Columbia; we know all about that. We do not care particularly to hear about the immigration policies of past governments; we have always protested against them. But at this time we do want to know that when these people have done their work for their low wages, they will not have to suffer further privation through having to wait for the federal and provincial governments to come to an understanding as to how and when they are to be paid.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: Does the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) wish to reply? If so he will close the debate.


Thomas Reid: Before withdrawing the motion I should like to have had some assurance from the Minister of Labour that this situation would be looked into, because I think it is unique in all Canada.


Pierre Édouard Blondin: The practice is to withdraw the motion at the conclusion of the debate, it being a motion for the adjournment of the house, and the debate having concluded early in the sitting. Under such circumstances it is not usual to put the motion. Is the hon. member prepared to withdraw his motion?


Thomas Reid: Yes.
Motion withdrawn.



[Stage Direction]
On the motion for papers of Mr. Reid:
Pierre Édouard Blondin: Does the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) propose to go on with the motions standing in his name for the production of papers, or does the information given yesterday, and the decision he took then, still apply?

Economic Research-Mr. Speakman


Thomas Reid: I realize that the information will be brought down sometime in the future, but some of the information I require is specific in its character, and I rather doubt that the details for which I am asking will be given as fully as I should like when the papers are brought down. However, I will ask that the motions stand in the meantime.
Motions stand.


UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Mr. VENIOT:: For a copy of all correspondence, reports or other documents relating to the dismissal of the postmaster at Ste Cecile, Gloucester county, New Brunswick, and the appointment of Lazare Lanteigne, as postmaster.
SIX ROADS. N.B., POSTMASTERSHIP [DOT]


Peter John Veniot: For a copy of all correspondence, reports or other documents relating to the dismissal of John Louis Arseneau, postmaster at Six Roads, Gloucester county, New Brunswick, and the appointment of his successor.


LAKEVILLE, N.B., POST OFFICE
Peter John Veniot: For a copy of all correspondence, reports on qualification of applicants, and all other documents relating to the post office vacancy at Lakeville, Carleton county, New Brunswick, received or forwarded by the Post Office Department since June 1. 1931.


OLIVER SIDIXG, N.B., POSTMASTERSHIP
Peter John Veniot: For a copy of all correspondence, reports, and other documents, relating to the appointment of J. A. Boulay as temporary postmaster at Oliver Siding. Restigouehe county, New Brunswick. as well as correspondence and reports relating to the dismissal of Germain Dionne, as postmaster of Oliver Siding. Also all correspondence and reports relating to the appointment of a permanent postmaster at Oliver Siding.


NORTH BATTLEFORD RAILWAY
Mr. McINTOSH:: For a copy of all correspondence, documents, letters, telegrams, papers, reports, exhibits, route maps, plan showing industrial spurs and memoranda in connection with file No. 30356.13, Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada, in which the Canadian Pacific Railway is shown to be the applicant. Also judgment of board growing out of application to Board of Railway Commissioners, dated June 23. 1931, and bearing thereof at North Battleford, October 8. 1931.


Hugh Guthrie: I am not sure that we
have those documents in any department of
the government; I think they are in the custody of the Board of Railway Commissioners for Canada. If we have them we shall be glad to bring them down.


Cameron Ross McIntosh: Perhaps the view of the Minister of Justice is correct, but I thought this would be the proper way in which to get what I required.


Hugh Guthrie: I will have inquiries
made.


SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC RESEARCH
Mr. ALFRED SPEAKMAN (Red Deer) moved:: Whereas; the problem of production has been largely solved, assisted greatly by the application of scientific methods and the results of organized technical research; and
Whereas; the federal government has contributed to that end by the establishment of the National Council of Scientific Research, and by the financial assistance given to that body; and	.	.
Whereas; the problem of distribution, with the kindred questions of purchasing power and the exchange values of agricultural and other commodities, together with their relation to the growing problem of unemployment, are still unsolved, and demand immediate attention with systematized investigation and scientific study; and	.
Whereas; this can best be done at the instance of the state and by men of scientific training enabled to devote their entire time and attention to the study of this important subject;
Therefore be it resolved; that, in the opinion of this house, the government should give immediate consideration to the establishment and maintenance of some organized body for this purpose, which body might be known as the National Council of Social and Economic Research.
He said: It will be readily understood by yourself, Mr. Speaker, and by the members of this house, that in presenting this resolution at this time and under immediate circumstances I am confronted with an unusual and rather unexpected situation. Owing to the early and unlooked-for collapse of the debate on the address, which died as it were almost in the moment of its birth, coupled with the rather striking innovation of yesterday's procedure, I have found myself with but scanty time for preparation. Yet, sir, immediate action is necessary if I am to rescue this motion from the oblivion into which it would otherwise be plunged through the procedure w'hich took place yesterday. Owing to these circumstances I shall be as brief in my address as the subject itself will permit. In this anticipated brevity 1 shall

Economic Research-Mr. Speakman
be following the precedent already set in the first part of this session, a precedent which is a bright and shining example and one which, if persisted in and followed throughout the entire session, will stand as a mark worthy of the emulation of future parliaments and future speakers.
Coming to the resolution itself, I think it will be recognized by the house as identical in purpose and in phraseology with the resolution which I presented a little less than twelve months ago. At that time I went into the question as fully and in as great detail as the forty minutes limitation would permit, and I do not propose at this time to indulge in wearisome repetition nor to traverse the same ground I covered then. Rather, I shall endeavour to bring forward and present some additional arguments in support of the resolution which has now 'been twice submitted.
In presenting the case last year I discussed as accurately and intelligently as possible the situation as it then existed. I pointed out to the best of my ability the enormous strides which had been taken during the past century in scientific attainment and engineering skill, and in our productive capabilities, based upon both. I also, to the best of my ability, paid tribute to some of the fine work done by the present National Research Council, a body composed of trained and distinguished scientists who, under the aegis of this parliament, and financed by the taxpayers of the country, have given material assistance in solving many of the technical problems with which we have been confronted, in improving our methods of production, and in enabling us to utilize more intelligently the vast and valuable natural resources which are found within the borders of the country. I stated then, and I still believe it true, that the problem of production itself has essentially been solved; that is, that while we have still much to learn as to improvement in methods we are now no longer in danger of shortage or famine. No longer is the problem that of a shortage of the necessaries of life. We have at the present time, and we are able at almost any time to produce, all the necessities and most of the luxuries which are required by the people of this country and by the civilized world. Under these circumstances, and having advanced these arguments at that time- those who are interested may read in Hansard what was said last year by various speakers on this subject-I shall confine myself to-day to the additional argument which I think may well be presented and which I hope will overcome the reluctance that at

that time was manifest on the part of the government.
If the subject at that time was of importance, and if the time was then opportune for its presentation, both of which I believe are true, then nothing so far as I can see has transpired during the twelve months that have passed to render the subject of less importance, to make the time less opportune, or to leave the subject matter of this resolution less imperative. Indeed, during those twelve months there has been a progression of events, an increasing severity in the situation itself, a growing tenseness of feeling and opinion throughout this land, which renders it even more imperative that such action as I suggest or some similar action should be taken in the interests alike of this nation and of stable government. One year ago it still seemed possible and many, if not the majority of the people, still thought that this depression was similar, save in magnitude and severity, to those which had passed from time to time over this land. Depressions have come in cyclical succession, they have waxed and waned, and each has been followed almost automatically by a period of relative prosperity. That prosperity again gave place to a succeeding depression of a somewhat similar character.
The present depression has assumed a new and more menacing character. Under former depressions the financial or economic systems suffered comparatively little damage, indeed the systems themselves and their chief devotees and beneficiaries at times were benefited by these depressions. During those periods we found a withdrawal to a large degree of the credit which had been advanced during periods of prosperity, credit which had been advanced to the people of this country at a time when money was comparatively cheap, when its purchase value was comparatively low. This credit was drawn back into the system with compounded interest during the periods of depression when money itself was dear and its purchasing value was doubled or trebled. Therefore those whom I might call the high priests of our economic system might well look with some fortitude, if not with some complacency, upon these depressions.
As I stated before, the present depression has passed this phase. No longer are the only sufferers those who have always suffered during times of depression or deflation. First there was agriculture. Agriculture always suffers first through the crash of price values, through the diminution almost to the vanish-

Economic Research-Mr. Speakman
ing point of its purchasing power and the disappearance of credit. The next to suffer always has been industrial labour which suffers through lack of employment and decreased wage levels. Suffering with them in the natural sequence are the merchants of this country who find their normal sales lessened. The weaker and smaller merchants are threatened with insolvency, while the larger and stronger concerns are threatened with vanishing profits and passed dividends. The present depression is of a changed character or rather it has assumed its true character and its sinister aspects are now generally manifested. Not only the farmer, not only the labourer, not only the small merchant is suffering to-day, but like some deadly paralysis it is penetrating further and further into the system. It is conquering-I will not say destroying-and damaging layer after layer of our industrial and economic structure. Because of the stock market crash we find that not only has the speculator lost his earnings and become reduced to penury, but that the prudent investor, the man or woman who invested in stocks and shares which in normal times were as safe as the Rock of Gibraltar, stocks and shares of sound intrinsic values like the shares of the Canadian Pacific Railway, is suffering from the effects of passed dividends. In many cases such investors have lost their sources of income and without the means of livelihood upon which they depended they have been reduced to peniury. In different parts of the country we find the curious and anomalous situation where men and women with property valued at many thousands of dollars are forced to rely upon relief because their property brings in nothing by way of income. It is a curious, a most significant and sinister situation.
As in the past these periods of depression or of deflation followed one another, many people looked upon them not only as a necessary evil, as perhaps the only imperfection in an otherwise perfect system, but even as a wholesome corrective, a species of economic purgative which cleansed the body politic. They were considered as the result of those bouts of inflation, those orgies of extravagance and over-expansion which we have heard about so frequently. To-day it has gone a little further than that. As I stated, it is creeping through the various layers of society, and everywhere throughout this country, throughout the civilized world as well, men and women are asking for leadership. They are demanding that leadership of those who for the time being are sitting in positions of authority and power. They ask
that they be led from such conditions and be restored to what may be termed normal conditions, to a better and more perfect system of society. This demand for leadership, this cry of distress is not confined at this time to a few agitators, it is not heard only amongst the ranks of agriculture or of labour, it is not heard only in this corner of the house, it is heard everywhere, in our universities, in our great cities, in the centres of industry and of economic life. Everywhere we find groups of students and intelligent and thinking citizens gathering together to study and discuss the situation which prevails. They seek a way out and they look to this parliament and this government for the leadership which they require.
As far as Canada is concerned, the responsibility lies here. To what degree has this parliament and has this government offered that leadership? Have they offered any suggestions or remedies which will bring this country to the plane which it should occupy? I remember, when this subject was brought up a little less than twelve months ago, that objections were taken to the establishment of such an organization. Those objections were two-fold. In the first place, we were told that such an organization as was suggested was entirely unnecessary. We were assured that within the ranks of the government itself or of the civil employees would be found that leadership and knowledge which was necessary and from that source would come the remedy which this country demanded. A year has passed and as far as I can see, and as far as the people of this country who are within my knowledge can see, no single step has been taken along the lines indicated. Up to the present moment two suggestions alone have emanated from this source as tending to restore prosperity and to bring to us victory over our difficulties and distress.
The first suggestion is that of relief. Unfortunately relief is a necessary thing. We all admit that it is essential and we all deplore that necessity. Not even the most optimistic can look upon relief as being in any sense a solution of the difficulty or look upon it as in any sense a factor which will do other than, as time goes on, increase the burden which rests upon us, increase the burden of public debt and make the problem more severe instead of lighter. The other suggestion-and that was brought forward the other day-was that the government itself should reduce by 10 per cent the purchasing power of its own employees. I leave it to the house
96	COMMONS
Economic Research-Mr. Speakman
and the country whether that, though possibly a necessary step, showed any indication of leadership or of the way out.
I have sometimes been accused, when I speak as I do to-day, of being a pessimist. I am not a pessimist, nor do I preach a gospel of despair, for this reason: as I look around this country, surveying the magnitude of its achievements, the wealth of its resources, I recognize that those conditions under which we are suffering are not inevitable; they are not necessary; they are not an essential part of this country's life, but they are the result of human error, of human effort, of manmade conditions and as such they always are and always must ibe susceptible to human control. But to control them, to ride triumphant over the storm, to bring us victory and prosperity, prosperity real, lasting and enduring, we can no longer as a nation, as a civilized world, go on in the same haphazard, ruinous, competitive manner. It is useless, I 'believe, for us to sit down here talking about this and that and solace ourselves with the belief that if we only endure long enough, if we only tighten our belts a little tighter, if we only economize a little more or eat or drink or use a little less, in some mysterious, miraculous way things will right themselves.
I for one do not 'believe that. I believe in these days we require and must have a planned economy. A planned economy may be anything or nothing, but at least it indicates in the words themselves some definite purpose and some definite method by which that purpose shall be attained. We require a wise and intelligent use and distribution, not only of our great producing ability but of the products of our toil, the wealth we can produce. To do this we must first acquire a better, more complete and more accurate knowledge of the situation itself and of its causes, of our present system and of its defects, than we now possess. It is for that purpose I again urge upon the house and the government to consider and to create some such body as is indicated in the terms of this resolution.
We were told last year not only that it was unnecessary, but that if we endeavoured to build up a planned economy, if we endeavoured to set up such a body as might, assist us to that end, we were opening the doors to the dangers of bolshevism and sovietism. Surely it is nonsense to suggest that there is any relation between a council such as is indicated by this resolution and the somewhat ruthless though efficient despotism that we see in another land. There is no relativity there. We ail of us recognize that

such a system as we see in that other country is not one which would be suitable to Canada or to the temperament of its people, but we believe it is wrong to be so blinded by prejudice as to refuse to organize or to plan in order to meet and to solve our own difficulties, to utilize to the best advantage our own resources and intelligence because, forsooth, in some other country they have planned and organized along lines which we do not approve. I should be sorry if we were to show subh complete lack of intelligence as that. Can we not prove here in Canada and demonstrate to the world that an intelligent and organized cooperation of a free people can do more towards the solution of their own problems and towards the betterment of civilization as a whole than the forced and almost controlled obedience of the people of another land? The challenge is thrown out to us and surely we are men enough in this parliament and country to accept that challenge, to plan along our own lines and to prove that our way, our temperament, our freedom and our cooperation are the best. I should like to see us try that.
We are told again that our troubles are the result of world conditions over which a nation with a scattered population of
10,000,000 can have but little effect, can hold but little influence. But what is the world and what are world conditions? The world is composed of a number of single and separate nations and if each one of those nations assumes that counsel of despair, of inert inferiority, sitting there like a rabbit menaced by a snake in paralysed inertia, then world conditions themselves will swallow and destroy us. Surely it is not necessary for us to assume that attitude. Within this country we have many conditions which are within the control of our own people and we can set ourselves to the task, marshalling our forces, intelligence and resources, to meet and to conquer those conditions which are under our own control. Then and not until then, organized in that way, making the best of our own advantages, we are in a position to offer the cooperation which is essential to meet the international problems which must be approached upon an international scale. It is said, to change the metaphor, that in Holland they keep the streets in a perfect state of cleanliness by each householder keeping his own doorstep clean, and if we as a nation, and other nations would seek to remedy our own defects, to take advantage of our strength, each doing that, we would find a clean street.
The main thing, however, is this: are we to wait, to sit in inertia, to hope for something to

Economic Research-Mr. Lucas
come to pass, brought about by a power outside ourselves, or are we to adopt some means first of searching and understanding the causes of the troubles which beset us and then of using all the strength, wealth and intelligence that we possess, to meet those troubles? Which, I ask, is the better and more manly method of meeting the present situation? Difficulties are anticipated? Of course difficulties are anticipated. I assume one difficulty with which we shall be confronted if we are to consider such a national council, will be its cost at a time like this, a time of shrinking revenue, a time when the most rigid economy is necessary. I agree with the necessity of economy, wise economy, but there is such a thing as very unwise economy; there is such a thing as that economy which, if carried to excess, makes impossible in itself the rectification of the situation. I have heard, for example, of men in business who, because times were hard, cut out at the first their advertising, hoping in that way to remedy the situation. I am not in business, but I imagine that such a course would be the last one to pursue. The expenditure of a few thousand dollars, which is all that would be necessary to start in a small experimental way' a body such as this, would be money well spent if through its researches we had the least light thrown upon the present black and blind turmoil that we call civilization.
There will undoubtedly be many differences of opinion as to the details of such an organization, and it is for that reason that I refrain from dogmatizing at this time. I am simply contenting myself with enunciating a principle, the principle of research, and a method through which it may be carried on. I am not at present concerned as to the particular type of organization established. All I want to see is this, that we have a body of men of fit and proper character, and with the right kind of training, who will be placed in a position where they may devote their energies, their skill, their training and education to this greatest and most overwhelming of all our problems. It might be a body, for example, composed of representatives nominated by different industrial and other groups throughout the country. It might be one sort or another, and therefore I am not dogmatic about it at all. I am prepared to accept, and accept with gratification, any step forward which will tend to bring us out of the morass in which we find ourselves struggling to-day. Undoubtedly this suggestion, as any other suggestion, is open to criticism. The easiest thing in the world is to criticize, to point out defects, but, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the 41761-r
first duty of a critic who points out a weakness in another's suggestion is to bring forward himself a suggestion of a constructive character, which will be an improvement upon the method first suggested. I am willing to accept any suggestion of that sort.
Here we are. The year passes on and we find ourselves not having taken a single step forward. We find ourselves spending huge sums of money for relief, and we find ourselves praying for something to happen in some miraculous way that will relieve us and get us out of this inertia, not now complacent, but helpless inertia, where like Mica/wber we are simply waiting for something to turn up. It is that attitude which I challenge. Undoubtedly part of our troubles are international in character. There is the question of reparations and international obligations, all of which have a bearing on the matter. But it is unnecessary to go beyond the borders of this country to see the part which debts and indebtedness play in the problem which confronts us. I believe that the internal indebtedness of Canada is just as great a handicap and places just as great a weight upon the shoulders of our people as are the reparations which cannot be paid or the international debts which might just as well be forgotten. Within this country we have some control over our own financial affairs and our own interna! indebtedness.
I am simply suggesting lines upon which we might travel. We cannot shield ourselves behind world conditions. We cannot treat world conditions as an excuse for doing nothing ourselves within our own country. Not long ago the Prime Minister (Mr. Bennett), in addressing a great gathering of some religious body, is reported to have said, and to have said wisely and well, that only the grace of God could place Canada in the place which she should occupy. Those words were wise and true, but there is an old proverb, Mr. Speaker, that says God helps the man who helps himself, and I urge upon this government and upon parliament the organization of some such body as is suggested within this resolution as a first and essential step in selfhelp, without which we need not expect and do not deserve the help of either God or man.


Mr. W. T. LUCAS (Camrose):: As the
seconder of this resolution I wish to make a few observations. Let me first congratulate the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Speak-man) upon the very able manner in which he has presented this matter to the house. I think all who listened to his presentation of this question at the last session of parliament and again this afternoon will agree that he



Economic Research-Mr. Lucas
has presented it with such clarity and forcefulness that it is difficult to understand why the house should not at once accept the resolution unanimously.
In my opinion never was the time more opportune and never was the necessity so great for the appointment of a council such as this resolution calls for, if we are going to meet our present situation intelligently. Someone has said that times are improving. Are they? Last year our bigwigs of finance told us that prosperity was just around the corner. A year has passed, and the corner is still elusive. Is there a man to-day who knows just what the future holds in store? We have all read what Sir George Paish has said, and which was printed in the press within the last month or so. Another great economist, Sir Basil Blackett, has warned the world that action is needed to halt the crisis. I quote:
Sir Basil Blackett, British banker and industrialist, warned the world in a radio address from London that it faced a gloomier year in 1932 unless it exercised concerted control of its economic life and forestalled disastrous political troubles.
"There is a kind of optimism inborn in nearly all of us" he said in part, "which tries to console us with the comforting thought that trade depressions always right themselves somehow, and that this one will be no exception. . . . It is just this unreason that makes the prospects for 1932 seem to be so alarming, coupled with the desperately short time that is left for finding and applying the right remedies before it is too late. Both its intensity and its worldwide character make the present depression totally different from any that has gone before. Surely we have suffered enough already to make us face the facts. But are we facing the facts?
"More and more we are getting back to primitive methods of barter. We have forgotten that money was invented in order to be dealt with solely as a means of facilitating the exchange of desirable things. We have taken to using gold not as a standard of value^-but as an everyday means of making and receiving payments.
"How can a farmer expect to avoid bankruptcy if a mortgage of $5,000, which was equal in 1924 to the price of 2,500 bushels of wheat, to him represents in 1931 the price of nearly 6.000 bushels of wheat, and if things go on as they are, may represent 7,500 or more bushels in 1932.
"The first essential to recovery is a rise in wholesale prices, especially of primary products from their present disastrous low level, and then the essential next step is to stabilize the purchasing power of money.
"In the last few years the rise in the purchasing power of money and the disastrous fall in prices have redistributed the ownership of wealth as between the various classes of the community without rhyme or reason in a way that is socially most inequitable and have then gone on to cause a vast destruction of preexisting wealth, and what is even worse, a vast curtailment of the community's production of new wealth."

Our engineers and scientists, Mr. Speaker, readily overcome the most difficult problems, but our political and economical science belongs to the past, and before any real progress can be made and real and lasting prosperity can be restored many of our old ideas will have to be overhauled and scrapped or brought up to date.
Someone has said:
New times demand new measures and new men.
The world advances, and in time outgrows
The laws that in our fathers' day were best.
And, doubtless, after us, some purer scheme
Will be shaped out by wiser men than we,
Made wiser by the steady growth of truth.
To-day, Mr. Speaker, we need men with minds unafraid to travel, even though the trail be not blazed. I wish definitely to state that I am not a believer in communistic doctrines; I believe the Russian people have a problem of their own, which it is their duty to solve. Their problem however is different entirely from what we have in Canada. As the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Speak-man) pointed out we have, at least for the time being, solved the problem of production, our great task to-day is to secure the proper distribution of wealth among those who create it. That is our task, and I care not from what source I get ideas if they will help me out of the difficulty in which I find myself. The Russian people have embarked upon a wonderful experiment; as far as I am concerned I wish them God speed and trust their activities will bring a brighter and happier day to a people who have known nothing but oppression.
I am impressed with the fact that they have a problem and to meet it have adopted a plan, with a definite object in view. How much better would Canada have been to-day had we started out in the development of our great country with a definite plan before us. Speaking recently about the Royal Commission on Transportation Sir Henry Thornton is quoted in the press as saying, "The only thing wrong about the royal commission is that it did not sit forty years ago." Visualize what the difference would have been had we started out with a definite plan of railway development. To-day we are duplicating our railways and highways without any idea of the outcome. In the settlement of the three western .provinces comprising millions of acres, we had no plan. People poured in from all parts of the world and settled where they pleased. We had no plan for the development of our immense pulp and paper re-

Economic Research-Mr. MacNicol
sources with the result that that industry is demoralized, over-developed and millions of dollars have been lost.
Canada, along with the rest of the world, is in the midst of the greatest depression known to civilization. A person sitting on Mars and taking a bird's eye view of world conditions would certainly come to the conclusion that we are anything but intelligent people. My statement may seem paradoxical, but to me the one bright spot on the horizon lies in the seriousness of the situation. Great Britain, with her stubborn pride, refused to go off the gold standard until she was forced to do so. It seems to me that we will do nothing until conditions become so serious that we shall be forced to take action. We are content to cling to old methods which have served their purpose but outlived their usefulness. As the hon. member for Red Deer pointed out, our trouble to-day is entirely man made; we have created a machine of which we have nearly lost control. Control is imperative, however, or we will go under.
One great trouble to-day is the confusion of thought. Everyone admits there is something wrong, but few can agree on real causes and remedies. If our scientists can solve almost any industrial problem placed before them, surely it is not unreasonable to suppose that men with scientific training given the task of finding a solution to our social and economic ills would be able to do something to meet it.


Mr. J. R. MacNICOL (Toronto Northwest) :: Mr. Speaker, from an experience of
twenty-five years in industry I am in a position to tell the mover and seconder of the resolution that many of the great men in industry both in Canada and the United States would welcome any plan whatever to stabilize industry and to make more permanent the period of time employees might be engaged therein.
There is nothing new in the suggestion of an industrial economic council. I believe it was the great Bismarck, who in 1881, first advocated the inauguration of an advisory industrial committee in Germany. Germany did nothing with the suggestion made by Bismarck until after the war, but in 1919 when the German National Convention met at Weimar there was incorporated in their constitution provision for the setting up of an advisory council to assist in the expansion of German industry and to increase the permanency of the employment of all engaged therein. Anything which will assist in keeping our industries operating and in making 41761-71
employment more permanent has my hearty support. The German council consisted of 326 delegates, representing all of the various economic groups into which industrial peoples are divided. There was provision for equal representation by employers and employed, there being 163 representatives in each group. The council met monthly in the year 1920, met again in 1921 and again in 1922. Before the expiration of the year 1922 the German republic found the cost of the council too great, and since that time a smaller committee has been functioning in an advisory capacity. I presume the council discusses various bills pertaining to industry and economics generally, and sends its recommendation to the ministers of the German government under whose jurisdiction these various matters come.
Following the adoption by Germany of the principle of an economic council eight other European countries adopted the principle. Jugo-Slavia followed the example in 1921, and Poland adopted the principle but did not put it into effect. Spain and Portugal both adopted it, but owing to their economic and other troubles they have not operated it as yet. France adopted it in 1925 and Italy and Great Britain in 1930, while during the present year the republic to our south has had a committee meeting at Washington. That committee went further; it sent what was called referendum 58 throughout the United States, and as a result of their work the committee recommended to the government at Washington the adoption of some plan such as an economic council. Each of these countries has a different plan of operation, but only two, France and Germany, have put their plans into effect. The others have not yet shown what an economic council can do, but as I said a moment ago I am convinced that any council or advisory board that can assist industry and, through industry, assist labour, will be welcomed by the hundreds of thousands of men engaged in labour and by those controlling the capital of the plants which provide employment.
Perhaps owing to the present depression, this subject is more or less paramount to-day. Since 1790 we on this continent have gone through twenty-five periods of prosperity, and we are now in the twenty-fourth period of depression. After each of the great wars has come a period of depression. There was the Napoleonic war, the strife in Europe during the sixties and early seventies, the civil war in the United States and later the great war, and after each of those war periods the world experienced two depressions. There was the primary post-war period depression which we
100	COMMONS
Economic Research-Mr. MacNicol
had about 1920-1922, and the secondary postwar depression through which we are now passing. I have made a diligent study of each of those depressions, and I have no hesitation in saying that conditions during the present depression are being grappled with by all countries-and I may say particularly by our own country-in a better manner than was the case at any time during former depressions. It is because of that better handling of the situation that we are not now experiencing the terrible times through which the world went following the Napoleonic wars and the two depressions which came after it, or the conditions which obtained following the civil war in the United States. I want to be fair to all governments; I honestly believe they are doing the best they can under the circumstances to grapple with conditions, and that is particularly true of the government of Canada. I do not like to make narrow, partisan statements, and I would say this if any other party was in power doing the same thing. I believe in giving the present government unstinted credit for the fact that the situation is not much worse in Canada.
Why an economic council? I think as a result of the tremendous upheaval of the war, conditions have arisen that will require the best brains of every part of the country and of every group into which the people are divided. The Great war brought about a condition, particularly with regard to machinery, that did not exist in the world previous to that time. Owing to the terrific demand for man power and for material during the war, all governments encouraged their ablest men, their scientists, their technicians, their business men and their experts all along the line to produce machinery that would do away with a large part of manual labour. I do not want anyone to think I am not in favour of having the best machinery; quite the contrary. The best machinery cuts down the cost of production, and the more we cut down costs [DOT]the more we create a demand for that which the machine produces. But in my time I have seen the hours of labour shortened from twelve hours a day to eight hours a day, and if the machine is to continue to displace man power as it has in the past, then I think perhaps under present conditions-I do not advocate that it should be a permanent change-the machine should not operate too many hours.
Let me give one or two instances. In Milwaukee there was a plant manufacturing frames for motor cars. The capacity of the plant was 10,000 frames per day, and it employed 2,000 people working eight hours a

day. Owing to the war and the subsequent period of expansion, that company found it necessary to manufacture motor car frames much more quickly, so they installed a massive machine which filled the whole plant. To-day 200 men operating that machine turn out 10,000 motor car frames per day, so in that one case we have 1,800 men displaced by machinery. I could give many similar examples, but I will not go further along that line.
Then there is another situation which has developed during the last few years. Prior to 1919 there were many thousands of companies employing five men or less, and the number had been increasing all the time up to that year. But because of the demand for greater production with fewer employees many mergers took place, with the result that after 1919 the number of companies employing five men or less decreased by one-third.
So I say I believe that the best brains of the country should consider these matters. 1 do not intimate for a moment that the government are not capable of dealing with them, but in these serious times it could do no harm to call upon the best brains both inside and outside of parliament.
Let me go a step further along that line. What can an economic council plan for? A great many of the ablest men in the United States, including employers of labour, appeared before the economic committee at Washington and testified along certain lines. During an investigation I made recently I took occasion to discuss the matter with employers of labour and I am glad to say I learned that the great industrialists were all willing and anxious, as they were at Washington, to do anything they could to relieve the unemployment situation and to place the engagement of labour on a more permanent basis. One of the things suggested was a shortening of the hours of labour or the number of work days per week. Whether that is sound or not I am not prepared at the moment to say, but an advisory council could assist in the discussion of that question. Another thing: everywhere I found the employers of labour convinced that the time has come when some system should be adopted whereby men who are unemployed should be able to draw from some fund to which they have contributed and which has been built up partly as a result of their own labours. Some call this unemployment insurance. Call it what you will; I think the time has come when in periods of prosperity, when things are bounding along, industry is running full blast and wages are good, there should be some system of laying

Economic Research

Mr. Stevens
by a fund to tide men over times of depression, because such times are bound to recur. Depressions have followed one another and may continue to do so, but it is uip to the public men of to-day to consider some method of mitigating the distress of any future depression, so that conditions will not be as severe on the people, when a period of depression does come, as they are to-day.
I think an economic council might discuss some plan of re-education for men who are displaced. I have often wondered that for example a machine can be put into operation which will displace eighteen hundred men out of two thousand; and one machine operating in the city of St. Louis required seventy-four men where formerly there were seven thousand, without some provision being made to absorb the displaced men. An economic council could look into a matter of that kind and devise some system of re-education. I learned of two very good examples of re-education in the city of New York. A coal company down there decided to dismiss all teamsters and discard all wagons that had been delivering coal and instead to deliver coal by trucks. The men belonged to a teamsters' organization whose secretary must have been a very wise and able man, because apparently he had saved up enough in the treasury to purchase a truck, and with this he re-educated the teamsters in truck driving, so that when trucks began to be used not a man who could drive one was laid off. Some plan of re-education could be suggested by an economic council or whatever you choose to call such a body. I am not tied up to the name economic council or advisory council, so long as there is a body which will consider keeping men employed and industry in operation.
I am convinced that every man in this house, irrespective of party, is just as anxious as I am to support any plan that will alleviate distress, keep industry going and maintain men in employment. It is not at all a party question; it is a national question, a question in which we are all interested, and particularly the great mass of humanity in the country. I shall be happy to support any plan whatever that will achieve satisfactory results, keeping employees occupied and regulating production and consumption. I know very well that as a result of the war production has far exceeded consumption. The extent of productive machinery has brought that about and we must restore a relationship between production and consumption if we are to stabilize conditions and keep industry going. If the plan proposed by the hon. member for Red Deer (Mr. Speakman) and supported by the
hon. member for Camrose (Mr. Lucas) will bring about such a happy condition, it will have my hearty support.


Hon. H. H. STEVENS (Minister of Trade and Commerce):: Last year the hon. member
for Red Deer (Mr. Speakman) presented a resolution similar to this. It is true, as he stated a few moments ago, that at that time I questioned the practicability of the appointment of such a body and indicated to the house that within the ranks of the civil service of Canada there were men competent to study these problems and to advise upon them. I could possibly stop here and simply repeat the same thing. I do not wish, however, to be discourteous to my hon. friend or to treat lightly the very valuable proposition that he puts forward-valuable from this standpoint, that it is provocative of study and thought. I shall very briefly review the resolution and glance over the remarks so eloquently made by the hon. gentleman in support of his proposal and then, if time permits, I shall make one or two observations of my own on the general theme.
It will be noticed that the resolution postulates certain things and then proceeds to make a suggestion. In the first place, it states that the problems of production are largely solved. In a measure that is true. My hon. friend from Toronto Northwest (Mr. MacNicol) has just indicated from a practical standpoint what tremendous strides science has made along the lines of production. As he observed a moment ago, there is*no news in this; it is something which almost everyone who has been studying economic questions readily recognizes. Production has made tremendous strides during recent years, particularly since the years of the Great war, when it was stimulated by the necessities which arose at that time. As far as the resolution deals with that particular phase I think it can be accepted.
Mention is made of the National Council on Scientific and Industrial Research, and in this connection I agree with the resolution. While I do not believe that Canada has made the progress which might be hoped for and which we expect ultimately to achieve in industrial and scientific research, nevertheless considerable progress has been made and the foundation has been well laid for a research body which will, I think, compare favourably with that of any other country located as Canada is.
The resolution then goes on to deal with certain unsolved problems. It states that the problem of distribution is unsolved, and mentions also the problems of purchasing power,
102	COMMONS
Economic Research-Mr. Stevens
exchange values and unemployment. These are problems imminently before the people, and they are all unsolved. The resolution then proceeds to demand a systematic investigation and scientific study of these problems by the state. The practical point in the resolution is that it calls for an organized body for this purpose.
My hon,. friend has very ably stated his case, and I compliment him, as I have on previous occasions, on the moderateness and eloquence of his language in presenting it. Cheerfully I pay tribute to his statements today. He describes the 'troubles and perplexities of different classes of people. He points out that there is undoubtedly suffering among agriculturists, small merchants and others, and he brings the description of this condition to a very simple head by calling it " the system ", I do not intend to cast reflection upon the remarks of my hon. friend, but may I say: that it is a very simple thing to come before this house or appear before any audience and describe the perplexities and embarrassments with which humanity is confronted. My hon. friend has said that we lack leadership. That is a trite saying which is heard almost daily. There is no question but that we lack leadership. We lack men, not only in this country but throughout the world, who have minds sufficiently colossal to enable them to grasp, understand and analyze these problems and then present a well worked out and complete solution therefor. I get a little restive when I hear a retailing of the problems with which we are confronted, the casting of a reflection because they are still unsolved, and nothing more. My study of history, such as it has been, and my experience in and out of parliament, has taught me one thing if it has taught me nothing else, and that is that the problems, perplexities and difficulties by which we are faced are not overcome by a mere statement of them. They are overcome by the age-old method of line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little, and in no other way. This cry for leadership might be almost characterized as the cry of the helpless. If we are going to cry for leadership, we should exhibit a little practical effort in the solving of these problems. I followed my hon. friend with great care, and while admiring his presentation I listened in vain for one practical suggestion. I ask him to reflect on that.
His final appeal both last year and this year was for the appointment of some body of men to deal with the problems to which he alludes, although he does not say how this body is
[Mr. Stevens. J
to be constituted. In that most elementary step there are perplexities. Does itfhe hon. .member want a body of men chosen from the economic staffs of our universities? Choose from the universities of Canada the most outstanding economists, gather them together and ask them to tackle this problem, and what would be the result? With all respect to the splendid intelligence of these men, many of whom I know personally; with all respect to their genuineness and the value of their researches, I venture this statement: they would labour for months, possibly for years, without bringing forward a practical solution of the problems with which we are confronted. If the objective is to be a short cut to what my hon. friend calls a planned economy; if we are expected to present to parliament or to the country some scheme which is fully worked out in all its detail, then I say to my hon. friend that failure will dog his steps from the very outset. It cannot be achieved in that way.
What does my hon. friend mean by a planned economy? That is a term to play with-I was going to say a term to trifle with. This word "plan" has been almost immortalized by the efforts of the great Soviet republic, and in saying that I cast no reflection upon that republic or its efforts. I have read a great deal in this regard, and I have been appalled at the magnitude of the task undertaken; I have been almost overwhelmed with the mass of detail which is encumbering their efforts in the working out of their great scheme. No one can study this so-called plan, really the only great economic plan before the world to-day, and fail to recognize that in a country like Canada, peopled as it is by individuals who have rooted in their very nature the most extraordinary type of individualism, the demand for free action, the right of freedom of movement from one part of the country to the other and the right to engage in any pursuit, this so-called planned economy would be very inappropriate.
My hon. friend says that in this planned economy he wants a more equitable distribution of wealth. That is an old-time, worn-out observation which I have heard for the last forty years. It is a very nice thing to have as an objective, and it is one to which we would all subscribe. But when we come to study the problem of first the cause, shall I say, using the old term, of wealth, and then the distribution of wealth, we are confronted at once with all the human elements that enter in. We are confronted with such things as human selfishness, one of the most invidi-

Economic Research-Mr. Stevens
ous and difficult elements of human nature to deal with or to overcome. My hon. friend will find this: plan out a scheme that on the surface may appear to be perfect in form, equitable in all its aspects, and yet the minute you come to put it into operation there springs up the human element with its selfish and other tendencies. Therefore it is an easy thing, I say, to present to the house a demand for leadership, for equity, for this, that and the other thing, but I notice there is a strange dearth of useful and practical suggestions of how these things can be achieved.
A word or two, if I may, regarding the general scheme. The problem is not by any means simple. My hon. friend complains that since last year nothing has been done towards the achievement of the ideals that he enunciates in the resolution. I am not so sure that my hon. friend, with all his ability and his time, has spent any more thought or energy on the study of this very problem than I have. I know I have spent many anxious hours trying, in the administration of a department over which I happen now to preside, dealing with trade and with commerce, to find out how we can influence the movement of commerce so that there may be an easier and more equitable flow of goods from one part of the world to another, and, indeed, from one part of the country to another. That is only one tiny phase of the problem, if I may say so; yet one is confronted with terrific difficulties wherever one moves. I have spent hours and days on perhaps one little item or one little detail. I could cite a dozen of them this afternoon. Let me take one problem which just occurs to me, that of the marketing of potatoes from the maritime provinces. My hon. friends from that section are aware they have certain grievances which probably they will air in the house during the next few days. I just cite that. In the department over which I preside, able officers, experienced men, are daily addressing themselves to that and to scores of other problems in the hope that they may solve them.
My hon. friend suggests-scarcely suggests, but insinuates by the very presentation of his case, that there is possible the formation of a general, broad plan which will override all those little difficulties and which will give to this country easy, smooth sailing. I confess to him frankly that I see no possibility of any such thing. At the present time-and by the way, my hon. friend rather emphasizes the existing depression and the economic conditions of to-day-there enter into this question world factors which are far beyond anything with which Canada can deal. He has already cited that. He says that will be advanced as an excuse. I do not advance it as an excuse; I advance it as a very real, definite obstacle in the way. Let us take, for instance, the question of international exchange, the present value of the moneys of the different countries of the world, something over which we have no control, something which is influenced by other factors with which I shall not deal this afternoon but which are very real. Australia, for example, has its currency at a discount of 25 per cent of Great Britain's, approximately 40 per cent of Canada's and 50 per cent of the United States. I cite just that one country as an illustration. Is it not at once apparent what an immense problem presents itself in the movement of trade among even those four countries where you have four, definite, distinct values of the currency of the country in order to make settlement for the interchange of goods? If you step outside of that realm and take, for instance, the orient, there vou have an exchange situation fluctuating hourly, which definitely makes or breaks the movement of goods over a period not of days but of hours. So one has but to cast one s vision over the world for a moment to recognize the fact that the problems confronting us are not of a character that are lying dormant, waiting for some supermind to come along and outline a scheme which will furnish a solution and the problem will immediately vanish.
I said a moment ago that these things will come, not by some plan or scheme, but rather by our tackling them step by step, day by day, and hour by hour and working them out in that way. I am not unmindful of the fact that there are certain great world economic problems that call for study and solution. For instance, the question of a stabilized world currency is undoubtedly one of the problems facing the world. I agree with my hon. friend to this extent, that unless and until something in the nature of stabilization of world currency is achieved, there will not be a condition of stabilization in the movement of commerce. In other words, you may have a market one day and lose it the next by virtue of fluctuations in exchange in countries other than the two doing the trading. But I repeat that I recognize fully that some of those problems must be faced.
Let us take, for instance, another problem, the question of shipping, of transport. We have in the last twenty years made tremendous strides in the matter of transport. As

Economic Research-Mr. Stevens
from day to day I study the problems with which one is faced, it is amazing to me to be suddenly confronted with the fact that certain ships, which in my memory I look upon as recent, are to-day absolutely obsolete, and I am told that the reason certain trade avenues are, shall I say, dropping off in their efficiency, is simply because those ships have not been replaced by modern ships. Those ships are only ten, twelve or fourteen years old. While in transport there have been tremendous strides, great developments, nevertheless the rapidity with which we are demanding the movement of goods constitutes a very real problem and that carries with it the further problem of the control, the direction of transport, whether it shall be subsidized or state owned. These are the practical problems which are confronting not this nation alone, but the nations of the world, and which are calling for solution.
Let me come now more directly to the resolution itself. My hon. friend asks, to use his own language, for some body of men and I think he said for some body of intelligent men. I have studied this question; I have approached sympathetically the kernel of his resolution, namely that we should make researches in this direction. In fact, last year, before the resolution was on the order paper at all, I had in mind that something of the character might be done. But I state to him again now that if we were to adopt this resolution and start to-morrow to organize this body, we would be confronted with a very grave difficulty and I should like to have heard from him or to hear from some other member who may yet speak upon this resolution,, some suggestion of the constitution of this body. I would not be satisfied simply with some body of intelligent men unless there was on that body representatives of practical commerce and industry; for instance, representatives of leaders of industry. I do not say that with any reflection on the workers in industry, but because the men who know the problems are the men who are actually confronted with them and are seeking solutions for them within the ambit of their own activities. Then also you would have to have leaders of commerce, leaders of shipping, and theoretical economists, men who have studied economics from a theoretical standpoint. All of these might be on such a body, and at once you recognize, when I have stated that, that we are getting an unwieldy body. I say to my hon. friend that it is very nice, very convenient sometimes, to suggest that these things should be done, but it is a very different thing to bring together a

body of men who will give practical results from their investigation.
I said last year that we had in the employment of the government, in the ranks of the civil service, some very able men. Let me briefly refer to that. In the Bureau of Statistics, for instance, we have some very able economists, men who are daily studying the movement of trade, and compiling figures and giving to the country a very excellent service in that regard. We have in the Department of Agriculture men who have been trained in agriculture and who are acquainted with the producers' standpoint and also with the marketing end. In my own department we have, in the commercial intelligence branch, men who have been trained for years in studying questions relating to the markets of the world, and so forth. In my estimation it is quite possible that we have within our own ranks to-day the intelligence and the experience necessary to give adequate study to this problem. I will go so far as to say this to my hon. friend: I will add to the studies I have already given to this question, and they are not slight, further study with a view to seeing if we cannot give effect to the idea of the resolution by utilizing those that we have in the government service, without disregarding for a moment such trained economists as may be engaged in the various universities or assisting in industry or finance and other branches.
I do, however, wish to impress upon the house that if we start out to form a body such as is called for in this resolution there i-s_ a grave danger that we will do either one of two things: Erect a body which to be representative must be so large that it will be cumbersome and useless, or have a body composed of theorists without practical experience whose utterances would have no sanction in the way of practice either by the government or by the country. That danger is there and it is very real. I do not raise these points simply to create obstacles in the way of carrying out the suggestion which has been so ably presented by my hon. friend from Red Deer, but simply because from a long and considered study of the problem I am very conscious of the difficulties which do present themselves.
It is doubtless correct to say that in these times through which we and the whole world are now passing we approach the study of economic and sociological problems in a manner different from that which we were inclined to adopt in years gone by. The rapidity of communication and transport has made of this world a very small entity. Not a day passes but one can pick up his news-

Economic Research-Mr. Mackenzie King
paper and in fifteen minutes by glancing over the headlines get a fairly good picture of the activities of the world. Not only that, but countries that one could name by the score, which ten years ago had no influence in world affairs at all, are to-day standing forth and impressing upon other countries of the world the significance of problems peculiar to themselves-countries which had no recognition whatsoever a few years ago. So we must approach these problems differently.
Then we do not look upon industrial problems to-day as we did ten or twelve years ago. We have completely outgrown the old method of conflict between employer and employee. True there are remnants of that still with us, but my hon. friends who represent labour in this house will be bound I think to acknowledge that tremendous progress has been made in that regard. Not that the whole problem has been solved, not that every man engaged in labour to-day is able to enjoy comfort and ease. Certainly that has not been achieved, but the time has passed when, in considering the problems of capital and labour, they were approached from the standpoint that one was the enemy of the other. I think that the thinkers of the world, whether they be in politics or in economics or other branches of educational thought, all recognize that it is through the spirit of cooperation that we are going to achieve the greatest successes. I do deprecate the suggestion that all we have to do is to trot out the present system and condemn it in one sweeping gesture, and suggest the replacing of it with some other system, and that that solves the problem. That is not the case and will not be the case in my estimation. There are in the system so called that we have today, many things that are good and that are worthy of being maintained and preserved, and these ought to be carefully guarded and not recklessly swept aside. On the other hand, there are no doubt grievances, inequities, faults and weaknesses which ought to be and must be corrected as rapidly as possible. But again, I submit, progress will be made in these matters more by attacking these problems day by day and step by step rather than by seeking some new and great theory that will replace the so-called theories of the present. I would suggest this to my hon. friend. If he will accept this reservation, that the suggestion contained in the resolution is presented to the government for their earnest and sympathetic study-I assure him that so far as I am concerned it will receive that, and there will also be a very genuine
effort on my part to achieve something commensurate with the ideas expressed in the resolution-if my hon. friend will accept those assurances and be agreeable to letting the resolution pass in that form, we will accept it.


William Lyon Mackenzie King: I imagine that
there is no doubt about the mover of the resolution (Mr. Speakman) accepting the suggestion the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Stevens) has made, but in connection with what the minister has said I would like to repeat a remark or two I made on the last occasion when this subject was under discussion in the house.
The object of the resolution is twofold: first, affirmation of the necessity of research in social and economic questions; second, the setting up of an organized body for that purpose. Last year I pointed out to the mover of the resolution that so far as an organized body for the purpose mentioned is concerned, that body is already in existence. It would require, of course, some enlargement of point of view on -the part of the ministry to give to the existing body the additional scope which the moveT of the resolution has in mind, but we have already in existence a National Research Council. This is the abbreviated title as given in the revised statutes. The act creating the council was passed at the time of the war. Provision was made for a council for scientific and industrial research, and the act was drawn in sufficiently broad terms to enable the ministry to make use of that body for any purpose that came within not only the terms scientific and industrial research, but social and economic research as well. My recollection is that the act provides for a committee composed of four or five ministers who constitute a committee on scientific and industrial research. That committee may refer to the council anything it wishes in the way of research and in turn the council has authority to make provision for the research work referred to it.
The minister has said that the mover of the resolution has not made a practical suggestion. May I say to him that last year I made t.he practical suggestion that the government should refer to a group of expert economists or social workers the great question of the relief of unemployment, and that the body in existence to which I have referred might very well be the agency under which, for a period of at least a year, such a group might function. That suggestion was along practical lines and was one of which the ministry might
106	COMMONS
Economic Research-Mr. Mackenzie King
well have taken advantage. They have not appointed a commission to investigate unemployment relief; everything was left to a minister of the crown who has broken down through the strain and stress of his duties. We have been spending millions of dollars of public money on unemployment relief and have nothing to show for it except an increase in the public debt. On the other hand, if there had been a body of trained and interested minds working on this question the ministry might at this time have been in a position to go forward with just the sort of further action the mover of the resolution has in mind. Some practical scheme laid before this parliament relating either to unemployment insurance or to some more effective means of cooperation between the provinces and municipalities, and the Dominion government would have been a vast help in dealing with existing conditions.
I do not wish unduly to prolong the debate but I repeat that if to-morrow a bill were brought into .this house to create a national council on social and economic research such as my hon. friend has in mind, the bill would be framed on lines identical with the legislation providing for scientific and industrial research. I feel there would be no advantage in a duplication of legislation, but I do think the present measure might well be enlarged, and that the ministry might make use of the body already in existence by assigning to additional individuals the duty of research along social and economic lines.
The minister has said he would not be satisfied with certain people. May I say to him that the statute authorizes him to name whom he likes. A committee of the cabinet has the power to say who shall constitute the advisory committee of the industrial research council, and the act provides for the appointment of fifteen men. Surely the government could find in this number a sufficient number of members of a research council to serve their purposes. Did I not think the government, under the statute already in existence, could deal with social and economic questions I would support a separate act of parliament to provide as my hon. friend from Red Deer has indicated. At this time however the less there is by way of additional expenditure the better.
I am heart and soul with him in his desire to 'have social and economic questions investigated, and more attention given to them by the government of the day. Attention up to the present has been given almost exclusively to questions having to do with the increase of material wealth. Let us realize that

times are changing, and that problems affecting human life and well-being are infinitely more important than those having to do with the increase of national wealth.


[Stage Direction]
At six o'clock the house adjourned without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Thursday, February 11, 1932