March 12, 1935

CON

John Ritchie MacNicol

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MacNIOOL:

I am glad to hear the

hon. gentleman say that. I can assure the house that the average worker in industry sincerely hopes that this bill will be enacted as soon as possible, so that a year hence, if he is unfortunate enough to be thrown out of work, he will benefit. I believe that is the attitude of the large majority of them.

The hon. member for Bow River referred to the police, and to teachers and ministers. Well, the position of the policeman and of the teacher is entirely different from the position of the man engaged in industry. I know that policemen have been ill for six months in the city of Toronto and have received pay from the treasury, and I think they should receive it after having served on the force a certain length of time. The same applies to school teachers, and I do not believe that the average clergyman is not taken care of by his congregation if he is ill for a time. But the position of the worker in industry is altogether different. When he is laid off his pay stops.

The hon. member for Bow River used almost every adjective in the dictionary in denouncing this legislation; he used the words ridiculous, pernicious, weak, ineffective, hopeless, ruthless. If he had had the dictionary before him he might have drawn a few more adjectives from it. He tried to denounce the bill by saying that the man on relief receives more than he would under the unemployment insurance provisions. But there is a difference. The man on relief does not receive cash; he receives vouchers for supplies-at any rate that is the way it is in Toronto-for food and clothing and perhaps an allowance for rent. Under the unemployment insurance measure, on the other hand, he will receive cash.

I dislike the hon. gentleman's denunciation of manufacturers, whom he describes as ruthless. I know a great many manufacturers and I can assure you that the very great majority of them are right-thinking, sympathetic men who do not by any means come within the category of the hon. gentleman's denunciation. I repeat, I dislike the hon. gentleman's almost constant hostility to employers of labour. Those who employ large numbers of men deserve support and not constant denunciation; I do not understand why anyone should call them ruthless, and one name after another.

I understood the hon. gentleman to say that no unemployment insurance act is

solvent. He is entirely wrong there. The British act, now operating under the amendments made in 1933, is solvent as proved by the fact that it is returning to the British government twelve and a half millions a year to pay off the loan which the British treasury advanced to take care of what was commonly called the dole; and it is expected that within forty years the whole of the five hundred millions or more will have been paid.

The hon. gentleman also tried to compare the British act, with all its various amendments, to this legislation, but he does not appreciate the fact that the British act of 1911 is by no means the same act as the British act as it is in force to-day, because it has been subject to many minor and major amendments. My hon. friend's comparison in that respect is therefore not fair. I would point out to him that the Canadian bill compares very favourably with the compulsory contributory acts which are in operation in the eight countries that have passed such legislation. Only two nations, Bulgaria and Italy, have a lower commencing age limit than is proposed in the Canadian bill; in these two countries the commencing age is fifteen years whereas in Canada it is sixteen. But several other countries that have adopted unemployment insurance legislation have fixed the limit at a higher age.

The hon. member also referred to the conditions of benefit. He said that the Canadian employee has to make forty payments in two years. Well, in Bulgaria and Germany the worker has to make fifty-two payments in two years, so that the Canadian bill is better than either of those so far as that is concerned, and the unemployment insurance act in Germany is generally conceded to be a fairly substantial and satisfactory piece of legislation. He also referred to the period of waiting in Canada, which is nine days. Well, in Poland it is ten days; in Germany, fourteen; in Queensland, fourteen; in the State of Wisconsin, fourteen; under the Nema, electrical interests, plan it is fourteen; and under the Rochester plan, both operating in the United States, it is also fourteen days. So that the hon. gentleman has not been fair to the Canadian people in making that comparison.

My hon. friend also referred to the amount of money to be received by the unemployed worker with a wife and three children, but I would point out to him that what the worker in Canada will receive is greater than the amount paid in any other country apart from in the United States under the Nema and

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

Eccles James Gott

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. GOTT:

I was paired with the hon.

member for Kent, Ont. (Mr. Rutherford). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

Robert Weir (Minister of Agriculture)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. WEIR (Melfort):

I was paired with

the hon. member for Melville (Mr. Motherwell). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

Lewis Wilkieson Johnstone

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. JOHNSTONE:

I was paired with the hon. member for Willow Bunch (Mr. Donnelly). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

Robert King Anderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ANDERSON (Halton):

I was paired

[DOT] with the hon. member for Toronto West Centre (Mr. Factor). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

James Houston Spence

Liberal

Mr. SPENCE:

I was paired with the hon. member for Northumberland, Ont. (Mr. Fraser). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

William Ernest Tummon

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. TUMMON:

I was paired with the

hon. member for Hochelaga (Mr. St-Pere). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

Fred Wellington Bowen

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BOWEN:

I was paired with the hon.

member for Assiniboia (Mr. Mackenzie). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

Ernest Edward Perley

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. PERLEY (Qu'Appelle):

I was paired

with the hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Munn). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

John Angus MacMillan

Liberal

Mr. MacMILLAN (Mackenzie):

I was

paired with the hon. member for North Huron (Mr. Spotton). Had I voted I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

George Halsey Perley (Minister Without Portfolio)

Conservative (1867-1942)

Sir GEORGE PERLEY:

It is hardly

necessary for me to say that if I had not been paired with the hon. member for Bona-venture (Mr. Marcil) I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

Arza Clair Casselman (Whip of the Conservative Party (1867-1942))

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. CASSELMAN:

I was paired with

the hon. member for Sherbrooke (Mr. Howard). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
CON

George Hamilton Pettit

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. PETTIT:

I was paired with the hon.

member for Kamouraska (Mr. Bouchard). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
PC

Errick French Willis

Progressive Conservative

Mr. WILLIS:

I was paired with the hon.

member for Lisgar (Mr. Brown). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

George Washington McPhee

Liberal

Mr. McPHEE:

I was paired with the

hon. member for Regina (Mr. Turnbull). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

Cameron Ross McIntosh

Liberal

Mr. McINTOSH:

I was paired with the

hon. member for Winnipeg South Centre (Mr. Kennedy). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I was paired

with the right hon. the Prime Minister. Had I voted, I should on this occasion, have voted with the Prime Minister, namely, for the motion.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

Harry Butcher

Liberal

Mr. BUTCHER:

I was paired with the

hon. member for Portage la Prairie (Mr. Burns). Had I voted, I would have voted for the motion.

Mr. SEGUIN i(translation): I was paired with the hon. Postmaster General (Mr. Sauve). Had I voted, I would have voted for the third reading of the bill.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

Hermas Deslauriers

Liberal

Mr. DESLAURTERS (translation):

I was paired, with the hon. member for Shefford (Mr. Tetreault). Had I voted, I would have voted for the third reading of the bill.

Mr. FAFiARD (translation): I was paired with the hon. member for Levis (Mr. Fortin). Had I voted, I would have voted for the third reading of the bill.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink
LIB

Édouard Lacroix

Liberal

Mr. LACROIX (translation):

I was paired with the hon. member for Dufferin-Simcoe (Mr. Rowe). Had I voted, I would have voted for the third reading of the bill.

Topic:   BET1SED EDITION
Permalink

March 12, 1935