May 18, 1922

LIB

Mr. SEGUIN:

Liberal

1. How many civil servants were in the employ of the Government on the first of January, 1912, and what was the total amount of salary paid to them?

2. How many civil servants were in the employ of the Government on the first of January, 1922, and what is the total amount of salary paid to them?

[Mr. Bureau. 1

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN
Permalink

GRAIN TRADE


On the Orders of the Day:


LIB

Lomer Gouin (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Sir LOMER GOUIN (Minister of Justice) :

I beg leave to make a statement

in reference to the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal for Manitoba in the case of the King vs. the Manitoba Grain Company.

The Board of Grain Commissioners for Canada have concluded, upon the advice of their counsel, to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada from the recent judgment of the Court of Appeal for Manitoba in the case of The King vs. The Manitoba Grain Company, whereby it was held that section 215 of the Canada Grain Act is ultra vires of the Parliament of Canada, and pending the review of that decision

Supply-Railways

by the ultimate tribunal it is not the intention of the Government to introduce any measure to amend the Canada Grain Act based upon the view expressed by the Court of Appeal, and the existing provisions will continue to be administered as heretofore. Obviously if these provisions be upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada no amendment will be necessary. If, on the other hand, the judgment of the Court of Appeal be affirmed, the Government will consider the propriety of introducing such further advisable legislation as may be found to be within the scope of the Dominion powers as interpreted by the court.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAIN TRADE
Sub-subtopic:   JUDGMENT OF THE MANITOBA COURT OF APPEAL,
Permalink
PRO

Thomas Alexander Crerar

Progressive

Mr. CRERAR:

May I ask the Minister

of Justice if he can give the House any information as to when this appeal will likely be heard by the Supreme Court?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAIN TRADE
Sub-subtopic:   JUDGMENT OF THE MANITOBA COURT OF APPEAL,
Permalink
LIB

Lomer Gouin (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Sir LOMER GOUIN:

I could not say

exactly. It may not be until September or October, but in the meantime, I think, the commissioners can carry on with the statute

as it is.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAIN TRADE
Sub-subtopic:   JUDGMENT OF THE MANITOBA COURT OF APPEAL,
Permalink
PRO

Thomas Alexander Crerar

Progressive

Mr. CRERAR:

If that can be done I

think the situation is all right, but if there is any doubt of that, the question is one which should receive the very careful consideration of the Government.-

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAIN TRADE
Sub-subtopic:   JUDGMENT OF THE MANITOBA COURT OF APPEAL,
Permalink
LIB

Lomer Gouin (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Sir LOMER GOUIN:

It is receiving the careful consideration of the Government.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAIN TRADE
Sub-subtopic:   JUDGMENT OF THE MANITOBA COURT OF APPEAL,
Permalink

GRAND TRUNK FINANCIAL STATEMENT


On the Orders of the Day:


CON

Arthur Meighen (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Right Hon. ARTHUR MEIGHEN (Leader of the Opposition) :

There has recently been given to the public the annual statement of the Grand Trunk Railway system. That statement discloses the financial position of the system in such a clear and unmistakable way that I think a synopsis of it with the conclusions therefrom, should be transmitted by the Government in a manner calculated to receive the utmost publicity in the Old Country where, I think, it will have the effect of disabusing the minds of any reasonable people who may have entertained doubts as to the honesty and fairness of the recent arbitration.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Liberal

Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) :

The Government will be very

pleased to consider the suggestion made by my right hon. friend.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Permalink

IMMIGRATION TO CANADA


On the Orders of the Day:


LAB

James Shaver Woodsworth

Labour

Mr. J. S. WOODSWORTH (Centre Winnipeg) :

May I ask the Government whether there is any safeguard against more immigrants coming into this country than can be employed? I noticed in the press a statement that the Department of Immigration and Colonization is making a change in the requirements concerning immigrants entering the Dominion, the change going into effect immediately. Under this change there will be a test to determine the fitness of immigrants and their occupation. In the past, if I understand, the sum which the immigrants brought with him was supposed to keep him until he obtained employment. Is there anything to guarantee that the immigrant on arriving in Canada will go on to the farm and remain there and not drift into the city and become an added charge on the community.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   IMMIGRATION TO CANADA
Permalink
LIB

Charles A. Stewart (Minister of Immigration and Colonization; Minister of Mines; Minister of the Interior; Superintendent-General of Indian Affairs)

Liberal

Hon. CHARLES STEWART (Minister of the Interior) :

Every precaution is being taken with respect to agricultural labourers to ascertain that they are really what they represent themselves to be, and that they will be more than likely to remain in that occupation. I intend giving a very full explanation when the estimates for immigration are considered.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   IMMIGRATION TO CANADA
Permalink

CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS


House again in Committee of Supply, Mr. Gordon in the Chair.


IND

William Findlay Maclean

Independent Conservative

Mr. W. F. MACLEAN (South York) :

I did not happen to be in the House yesterday when the railway question was up for consideration, but I was present some weeks ago when the Minister of Railways made a statement in connection with our railways. In that statement, which was carefully prepared and very complete, the minister disclosed a lot of facts bearing on the railway situation, and also announced that it was the intention of the Government to recognize the principle of public ownership with respect to the railways which we have acquired and, in the administration of those railways, to give that principle a fair trial. Yesterday the hon. member for St. Antoine (Mr. Mitchell) addressed the House on the railway question and took quite a contrary view, although he too declared that he was favourable to giving public ownership a fair trial. Nevertheless the hon. member told the House frankly

has been so successful in the business of transportation. The Canadian Pacific, through the newspapers of this country and in various other ways, has told this House that we must not go into transportation; and yet the people of Canada, through its Parliament, created the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. That is, the creature says that its creator must not do what it desires to do, but must keep out of the transportation business. When we created the Canadian Pacific and these other railways, we did not create them to say to us that we should not go into transportation if the people saw fit to do so and thought that they could get more efficient service in that way. Therefore, for all these reasons, there is no question about the advantages of public ownership. Under public ownership, you can finance railways better, you can manage them better; you can avail yourself of any system as a complementary system in connection with the railways, and moreover, you have freedom in connection with the railways for all time.

It was said yesterday by the hon. member for St. Antoine (Mr. Mitchell) that public ownership had never been a success. Has private ownership, company ownership, in this country been a success? Has the Grand Trunk been a success? Has the Canadian Northern been a success? Have hundreds of railway companies in the United States been successful? They have practically all failed, and as I pointed out in this House some time ago, railways in the United States have made confession that they can not go on. Billions of the money of the people of the United States were put into these defaulting railways to carry them through the war, and they cannot go ahead to-day. What is the good of pointing out to us that public ownership is no good, when we know that private ownership, as experienced, in the United States, has been an absolute failure?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Permalink
LIB

May 18, 1922