March 3, 1927

LABRADOR BOUNDARY DECISION


On the Orders of the Day:


CON

Charles Hazlitt Cahan

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. C. H. CAHAN (St. Lawrence-St. George):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to ask of the

acting leader of the government a question which I think is of very grave public importance. In view of the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council awarding to

Old Aac Pensions

the Dominion of Newfoundland an immense area of the mainland of British North America which naturally forms a part of the Dominion of Canada, will this government forthwith take into its favourable consideration the acquisition by purchase from the government of Newfoundland of the territory so awarded to the Dominion of Newfoundland, so that Canadian citizens resident in that territory and their large financial investments and other interest therein may continue under the legislative and administrative jurisdiction of Canada?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   LABRADOR BOUNDARY DECISION
Permalink
LIB

Jean-François Pouliot

Liberal

Mr. POULIOT:

Is that for the Bank of

Montreal or the Canadian Pacific Railway?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   LABRADOR BOUNDARY DECISION
Permalink
LIB

Ernest Lapointe (Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada)

Liberal

Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Justice):

I would not like to commit the government to any course at this early stage. The time has not yet elapsed during which unfortunate litigants have the privilege of abusing their judges, and I think the best thing to do is to wait until the text of the judgment reaches us, when it will be time enough to consider the suggestion of my hon. friend.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   LABRADOR BOUNDARY DECISION
Permalink
UFA

Edward Joseph Garland

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. E. J. GARLAND (Bow River):

Perhaps, speaking ironically, it would meet the wishes of the hon. member for St. Lawrence-St. George (Mr. Cahan), if the Canadian government at once mobilized and despatched the Canadian navy to the Labrador coast!

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   LABRADOR BOUNDARY DECISION
Permalink

CALGARY LIVE STOCK INVESTIGATION


On the Orders of the Day:


CON

Richard Bedford Bennett

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. R. B. BENNETT (West Calgary):

May I ask the Minister of Agriculture when we may expect a copy of the report in connection with the investigation of the Live Stock Exchange at Calgary? I have been telegraphed most urgently because it is conceived that a great injustice is being done by this report not being presented, and I should like it to be presented as soon as possible.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CALGARY LIVE STOCK INVESTIGATION
Permalink
LIB

William Richard Motherwell (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Hon. W. R. MOTHERWELL (Minister of Agriculture):

In reply to a similar question

in the early part of the week, I expressed the hope that I would be able to table the report before the end of the present week, and I am still of that hope. The staff is busily engaged now typing out the report.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CALGARY LIVE STOCK INVESTIGATION
Permalink

UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF


On the Orders of the Day:


CON

Hugh Alexander Stewart

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. H. A. STEWART (Leeds):

I would like to inquire from the government, and particularly from the Minister of Labour, whether it is the intention of the government to make any contribution, either jointly with the provinces or otherwise, to municipalities which 32649-534

have expended money during the winter months for the relief of unemployment within their borders.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF
Permalink
LIB

Peter Heenan (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Hon. PETER HEENAN (Minister of Labour):

There have been only about two

applications from the whole Dominion, from cities, asking for relief along the lines suggested by my hon. friend. I have communicated with them, and they have not insisted upon any relief being granted by this government. They will be able to cope with the situation themselves.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF
Permalink

OLD AGE PENSIONS


The House resumed, from February 18th, consideration in committee of Bill No. 70, respecting old age pensions.-Hon. Mr. Heenan-Mr. Johnston in the chair. Section 1 agreed to. On section 2-Definitions.


CON

Horatio Clarence Hocken

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HOCKEN:

I would like to make a

suggestion to the minister and to the government in connection with this bill which I think is well worthy of consideration. I understand that the annuity system that we have under Domnion government auspices is under the control of the Department of Labour. I am not opposed to an old age pension scheme, but it does seem to me, Sir, that if somewhat better conditions were attached to the annuity system it might be taken advantage of by many people who now do not think it is within their reach. For instance, why should we not endeavour to the utmost of our abilitiy to develop that spirit of self-help among the people of Canada? Why should we not encourage the sale of annuities, instead of placing so much stress upon old age pensions? Would it not be a reasonable policy for the government of Canada to add to the payments that are now being made to annuitants under the annuity scheme some further substantial sum, say 25 per cent? My belief is that that would make the annuities much more attractive than they are at the present time. Of course, neither this government nor any other have ever treated the annuity scheme as a serious proposition. They put the act upon the statute book and let it go at that. We cannot develop business, especially in a new line like this, unless some greater energy is applied to make the plan familiar to the people who ought to take advantage of it and give some advantage? that will encourage them to purchase these annuities. I am not prepared to move anything in connection with this bill. I do not know that my proposal comes properly within the purview of the bill. I am merely throwing out

Old Age Pensions

the suggestion, as it seems to me I have reason to do in this connection, for the further consideration of this government, that they should make their annuities attractive, to encourage people of Canada to buy them instead of depending upon the $20 a month payment as an old age pension. Undoubtedly a great deal could have been done to increase the number of annuities purchased if greater publicity had been given to the scheme, and if further advantages had been given to those who might reasonably be expected to provide for their old age in that way. It is a form of insurance which I believe the insurance companies engage in. I think I am right when I say that the government established this annuity system before any of the companies adopted such a scheme. The companies came in afterwards, and if those companies are doing a big business they are taking it away from the government. It is a very proper thing-well, it might be described as public ownership-and it is a most advantageous system for men who have sufficient money to put away a little year by year to provide for their old age, and to maintain their self-respect as they certainly will, better than they can by taking an old age pension at the age of sixty or seventy. I hope the government and the Minister of Labour will go into this, figure it out and at the next session of parliament present some reasonable measure for the development of annuities.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Permalink
LIB

Peter Heenan (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. HEENAN:

We have already under consideration and under way an investigation on behalf of the department of the very matter which the hon. gentleman has spoken of, and I hope our annuity system will be extended so that it will do just what the hon. member proposes it should do and thus make it easier for the workers. I am trying to develop a joint contributory scheme in which employers, the provinces and the Dominion will have a part. It would bear very lightly on the shoulders of the workers, but the provinces, the Dominion and the workers would all contribute.

I do not know whether it will shorten the discussion on the bill now before us, but I may tell the House that the bill we have before us is to provide relief for those who have already reached the age of seventy. Last session the bill was defeated in the Senate. It was discussed during the last election, and I think I am safe in saying that if anything was prominently before the electors of the country the old age pension bill was. This was the bill that was before the electors at that time and we are now submitting it to you in the form in which the House and

[Mr. Hocken.l

the people endorsed it. It is true the bill does not go as far as some of us might desire but no matter what proposition is offered it necessarily involves expenditure. The bill was thrown out by the Senate last year, because it entailed an expenditure of approximately $14,000,000. The suggestions which have been made are good and will be valuable for future consideration, but if adopted by the government, would mean an expenditure of between $60,000,000 and $70,000,000, and I hardly think that would be an inducement to the Senate to accept it, when they did not see their way to pass a measure which would entail a cost of $12,000,000.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Permalink
CON

John Wesley Edwards

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. EDWARDS (Frontenac):

If I understood the minister correctly, he estimated that it would cost the Dominion treasury about $14,000,000.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   OLD AGE PENSIONS
Permalink
LIB

March 3, 1927