Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Broadview):
At five minutes to six last night I had risen to discuss the objectives of the motion of the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) now before the house. As I look over the resolution I cannot help but feel that planning is first and social security and the conduct of the war a secondary consideration. Notwithstanding the fact that the war, up to the campaign in North Africa, had been going very badly, we are paying more attention to planning our post-war economy. So far as the war is concerned, -we have never been in a more precarious state and danger than we are at the present time. One would think that the generals who won the great victories in North Africa had been forgotten in Canada as there seems to be only one general remaining here, General Beveridge, and his social planning scheme for the mother country.
As I have said bdfore', in the maelstrom of planning talk the war seems to have been forgotten. Last year we wasted four months of the time of the house which were taken up with politics in a referendum. That is what happened notwithstanding the fact that we had not won a victory on land or sea, that we were still on the defensive. With Bill No. 80 and the referendum four months of the time of this house was wasted. It seems that we are entering another political year at this time.
While we have not been promised anything, I believe an election is coming. Before the vote of five billion dollars is passed I think it is the duty of the opposition to ask the government what are their objectives regarding the conduct of this war and as to a wartime election a second time for political reasons. Is this social planning all you are doing to win the war? I have received a great many letters from our men in England and other parts of the world who are serving their country on the land and sea and in the air and they ask what we are doing here to
urge on the government that something should be done to achieve a total war effort, and prepare for the return of the men of the forces. Not only is the government on trial at the present time but the House of Commons is also on trial before the bar of public opinion in this country for its war efforts, and for what it is doing about after the war conditions. This house has surrendered to a whole lot of bureaucratic boards and controls and subcontrols and planners and modellers who control practically the whole business of the country, so much so that the House of Commons is the forgotten agency of government to-day. At times I have protested against this almost alone for the last three years, but at last the people are beginning to wake up and see the dangers that confront them.
I admit that the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) has done a great deal of work in his day in studying labour conditions and social problems. I have known him . longer I think than any other member of the house. I remember when he was a university student and a young reporter on the Toronto Globe, and when he was reporting the proceedings in the courts. I remember that Colonel Denison then predicted a very bright career for him. But I say to him to-day that not only is his government on trial but so is this House of Commons.
Coming to the text of the resolution, I must say that one of the most important matters that should be taken up by the committee seems to have been forgotten, and that is the question of providing employment. We speak of freedom from want. What does that mean? To rid the masses of fear you must provide them wtih work, but the resolution makes no mention of that. I should like to have a little order, Mr. Speaker, because this is an important matter I am discussing.
I do not interrupt anybody else when he is speaking and I am entitled as a private member to order when I am addressing the house.
I was saying that the question of providing employment for soldiers seems to have been forgotten by the government in proposing this resolution. The government seems to have two principles for curing unemployment. One is the ambassador cure for unemployment, sending ambassadors all over the seven seas, some of whom talk in a way that does great damage to the war effort and to this country. The other principle is the senate cure for unemployment, the appointing to the senate of young men who should be at the war. I would for national reasons suggest the return
of Right Hon. Arthur Meighen to the senate, and that we have appointed to the senate some representatives of the press.
I should like to refer for a moment to the British war victims fund, and to what one newspaper in Toronto, the Evening Telegram, has done in promoting that fund for the people of Great Britain who have had their houses and their homes destroyed and have suffered great losses in this war. Through the British war victims fund there has been brought home to the young people in the schools and colleges of Toronto and Ontario a realization amongst the younger generation of what they owe to the mother country in this war. Through this fund organized by the Toronto Evening Telegram there has been collected already about $2,000,000. Frequently the Telegram will publish pictures of little children in Toronto and in the province who have taken part in organized efforts to secure money for this fund, and other children will go out on the street corners and collect small sums from five to ten or twenty cents for this fund to help rebuild the mother country. I appreciate what has been done in that regard and the good work done by the late founder of the Telegram, John Ross Robertson, and the late editor, John R. Robinson, who has been succeeded by Mr. C. O. Knowles, who is continuing so well this good work. I think we all know of the good work that has been done for the Sick Children's Hospital by its founder, and what has been done in connection with health and welfare matters. I think one of the men who should be appointed to the senate is Mr. C. O. Knowles, editor of the Evening Telegram, for his British war victims fund.
Planning, Mr. Speaker, is the new name for socialism. Everybody is a socialist these days, everybody is a planner, and the war seems to have been forgotten as the matter of primary importance. The allies have just begun to take the initiative after more than three years of war. As Mr. Churchill has said, we are at the end of the beginning, and yet there is more talk about planning than about the conduct of the war on the land, on the sea and in the air. I have no objection to planning so long as we do not forget that the most important thing is the winning of the war.
But look at the text of this resolution. The committee is just to make a study and report, and it is a committee of this House of Commons. The Beveridge report was prepared by an interdepartmental committee on social insurance, under the control of a minister of
the crown, Mr. Greenwood. But the work here is going to be done by a committee of the house. This committee is not, as I see it, being given any objectives by the government in the matter. The plan is only half-baked. It is too complicated and uneconomic, in my opinion. Timber, for instance, to rehabilitate the whole of Britain is badly needed and will be needed for reconstruction purposes after the war. Great Britain imports sixty-five million pounds' worth of timber a year, but there is no mention made in the resolution of that trade. Sometimes I think we would get better results in the way of social security and all along the line if instead of having so many professors and high-brows on some of these control boards and commissions, while other brave men are fighting our battles overseas, we had some practical men at work on the problems that lie ahead of us. Those problems are too big for any one political party.
We are proposing to make the most serious leap in the dark which this country has ever undertaken. We are faced with the greatest problems that have ever been faced by the world, and we in this country are the first to start to take a leap into the unknown world that will follow after the war. I believe that we should get men of practical experience to guide us. We should not forget those who were our best customers before the war, the people of Great Britain, upon whom we have had to rely for a market for our products. They should be taken care of. I believe that what should be done after the war is to go back to what we had before, free enterprise; try to build up free enterprise so that means for employment will be created by empire trade as before. In that way you will remove the unemployed from the unemployment seats on to the employment seats. Our raw materials should be made available to the empire and to other nations of the world on an equal basis as far as possible and every nation be given the opportunity of living in a state of freedom.
What caused the war was simply intolerance. I believe that all parties in this house and out of it should be guided by wisdom, restraint, and tolerance, and should not show a lack of ordinary Christian charity towards their opponents with whom they may happen to disagree. As I have said before in this house, it is the little man of England personified by Strube, who is the reflection of the average man who saved the mother country which has suffered so much in this war. These little men who were strong enough to beat off Hitler and
Mussolini will be able to plan the right conditions for the mother country and the empire after the war. As Admiral Southby said in the House of Commons the other day:
There are people who seem to think that the war is being waged in order to destroy a social and economic system with which they do not entirely agree.
Admiral Southby said:
Nothing could be further from the truth than that. We are fighting the war for our bare existence, for the right to live at all.
Then he suggests, speaking of the "little" man:
His victory . . . will have been in vain if, when the war is over, he is obliterated by the state which he fought to preserve. The essence of the evil nazi creed is that the state is greater than any individual. The essence of democracy, as I see it, is that the state is the servant of the individual and not his master. Therefore, let us at all costs, when we are starting to rebuild the world and to improve it, not impose what is not the less a dictatorship because it masquerades under the name of something which is politely called "democratic planning." A great man, who left us not long ago and a friend of most of us in the house, Lord Tweedsmuir, better known to us as plain John Buchan, once made a speech on Abraham Lincoln, in which he said, "The powers of moderation are slow to kindle, but once they are lit they do not go out until they have burnt up much rubbish and opened a path for the advance of mankind to a better world."
I hope and believe that we are willing to advance the progress of mankind to a better world, but if it is to be a success it must be, in my opinion, a world in which there is a square deal. That means a square deal for everybody, not solely for the small man and the sick and suffering and those out of employment, but for those who have maybe a little more substance than some others have. Much of the talk of planning after the war partakes of a plan for robbing Peter to pay Paul. Well, almost everything that Peter has is being taken away from him by two wars and a long depression, with the result that when the war is over Peter will have little or nothing left.
One of the speakers in this chamber yesterday suggested, referring to the Beveridge report, that Sir William Beveridge should be invited here. I think we have enough planners right in the house and out of it without the necessity of bringing Sir William Beveridge over to Canada to tell us what to do. While I am not a Scotsman, I was surprised to hear my good friend the Minister of Pensions speak as though incentive as we had it from capital will probably have disappeared after the war. He referred to "regulated incentive."
That is all right if there is not too much regulation. But if we intend to pursue a course in opposition to what made the mother country and this country great, namely, private enterprise and free retail and wholesale business-I mean the system of free enterprise-we shall be trying to do something which the men who come home after the war will, I think, not tolerate. They are not fighting, nor are they willing to fight, for social planning from the cradle to the grave; they are fighting for the right of the people of this country to live; the right to possess private property which is derived from nature, not from man, and the state has no right to abolish it, but only to regulate its use. The position of the wholesale and the retail merchant should be restored to what it was before the war, if we are to create the maximum opportunities of employment. In Great Britain they passed the pre-war trade practices act to put free enterprise and the small retailer and wholesaler back in possession of the rights they held as citizens and business men before the war; and that is the way to build up this country, and release them from some controls.
Reference is made in the report to birth, maternity, old age and burial insurance. Well, after many of the taxpayers have done with the last few budgets I am afraid public insurance will be needed to pay their burial expenses. I can tell you that even some of the members of this house know of citizens who need that aid, and I have known of a few members of this house who left so little that aid was needed to bury them. Hon. members may laugh, but that is the fact. I know some of the undertakers in our city, and they are splendid citizens and men of real public spirit and do a great public health work. It has been my lot, I may say, to attend several funerals in the past two or three weeks, and I know in that city how the people are suffering.
We hear much talk about social planning and this new utopia and paradise which we are to live in. I can tell some of our planners that the new paradise, or part of the health and hospital social service, of which they speak so much started in the city hall of Toronto, with its modern health department. One of my colleagues, the hon. member for Parkdale (Mr. Bruce), was a senior surgeon of the Toronto General hospital, and our city was a pioneer in this social legislation. The late lamented Doctor Hastings built up the most modern health department in North America. He and the
gentlemen who supported him, the men I mentioned a few minutes ago, had to fight with the aid of the Evening Telegram a campaign for health reform and to reorganize the health department and the works department. By their civic efforts an outstanding programme of social legislation was achieved, including a first-class water supply, a modern sewage system, and a modern health and works department. Other newspapers gave aid later.
The hon. member for York South (Mr. Noseworthy) has for some time been, what I can call in a sporting sense, "barnstorming" all over the province of Ontario-I believe he used to play baseball, so that I do not think he will object to the term. But let me tell him that it was the planners of the city of Toronto who gave those services to the constituency he represents; it was the Conservatives of Ontario, Whitney and Beck, at Queen's Park, and the city council of Toronto and officials, who brought in the legislation which supplied cheap light and power to the homes of the province, which provided the services they now enjoy, which initiated the workmen's compensation act and many other social and health and hospital advantages. And what did the city of Toronto do? It was the pioneer of health legislation in its grants to hospitals, in instituting dental and medical inspection of school children, the eight-hour day, the improvement of the waterfront, the buying out of the street railway, the radials, the linking up of the railways and the buses, the facilitating of transportation to enable market gardeners to reach the cities and aiding by transportation the housing situation. These are some achievements of the city and the city council of Toronto. I am proud that we have always had such a splendid city council. We have always been fortunate in having a council which has done a great deal for the people of that city. Shortly before I started as a controller and as a police commissioner, in 1909 the police had only one day a month off; then they got one day a week off; and then the eight-hour day, as did the firemen, and the platoon system'was put into effect and soldiers given the preference in jobs. All the services I have mentioned are municipal and have been given to the taxpayer of Toronto without the aid of one cent from the federal government, showing that this social security came largely from the municipalities, not from federal authority.
Here let me mention that the province of Ontario and the city of Toronto were attacked the other day by the Rev. Doctor J. R. Muteh-mor, social secretary of the United church. I have great respect for that church and for him,
but I would point out-that when Doctor Mutch-mor, with Mr. Fogg, made a Cook's tour of Canada from Regina to Halifax, he seems to have been in a fog night, noon and morning. He criticizes the province of Ontario. He said last Saturday in the Toronto papers:
The banner province of Ontario is in danger of being regarded as the spoiled child of confederation.
If he knew a little more about Toronto and Ontario, a little more about our social legislation and what has been done by the city and that province for the hospitals, the sick poor, and others, I do not believe he would have made these criticisms; and I resent them. Let me say that Ontario is the milch cow of confederation. I do not like to comment in this fashion because I have always contended for the principle of confederation, in line with the old Cornish battle-cry, "Each for all and all for each." With regard to my hon. friends below the gangway, of the five or six of them I see only the young hon. member for Charle-voix-Saguenay (Mr. Dorion) here now; he made a good speech the other day. They had a good deal to say about a certain pastor. Well, I have referred to-day to another pastor. I did not vote for church union, because I believed that, like union government, it would lead to more disunion than union. I object to remarks of Rev. Doctor Mutchmor, or Pastor Mutchmor, as reflecting on the province of Ontario, which is paying 42 per cent of the cash taxes of the dominion, and which is the forgotten province of confederation.
Doctor Mutchmor goes on to give figures about enlistments in the maritimes, compares them with Ontario, and in the name of social reform criticizes a province which has been the leader for many years past in progressive planning, hospital work, and social services of all kinds. I do not wish to say anything further about the reverend gentleman, who I understand is a very popular man in his church, except that, will all due respect, it seems to me that pastors such as the one to whom I have referred to-day should state facts and exhibit a little more wisdom, tolerance and restraint in their statements in war time in interviews given newspapers, like this interview with regard to the soldier province of Ontario, which has sent more men to the war than any other, and is now' expected to provide one-half of the ten million dollars which is asked for in the Red Cross appeal. I might point out that the reverend gentleman's figures with regard to enlistments are misleading, because soldiers from Ontario are to be found all across Canada from Vancouver to Halifax; they went to all the military districts to answer the call, and I challenge his figures
and remarks as to Ontario. I see here to-day my friend the head of the Canadian hospital association, the hon. member for Renfrew South (Mr. McCann). The doctors and hospitals of Canada are having a very hard time. The Toronto General Hospital was built for to-morrow. I remember when the per diem grant was fifty cents. That would not be a drop in the bucket for this parliament to contribute towards hospital service and relief of the poor and suffering and for per diem patients. There should be' a grant for free insulin for those in necessitous circumstances. Without it many people who are doing useful work would be in their graves. The same applies to tuberculosis. This government will have to do much more than it has done both . for education and hospitals, because the first duty of a government is to look after the health, happiness and prosperity of its citizens.
In 1935 and succeeding years we were given blueprints by our friends to my left about the war. What did they say? Not a dollar for the army; disarmament on land and sea. Knowing what vision they showed at that time what faith can we have in their vision and blueprints now?
Cheap light and power; that is what the Conservatives gave Ontario in 1905 when Sir James Whitney and Sir Adam Beck were in power; they brought cheap hydro power to the artisans and the kitchens and ' farms of Ontario.
Malnutrition; I remember when food was not inspected, when the milk supply of Toronto was not inspected. The city provided all these services without a cent of help from the dominion government, for all this social planning. So do other municipalities. Federal aid is needed for education and hospital work.
The last thing I want to mention is housing. The resolution does not mention that. When our soldiers come home there will be no housing for them. I have asked the Minister of Finance (Mr. Ilsley) about it on several occasions. An order for return was passed last June or July, but the return has not yet been brought down. An order for return was passed on February 22; I asked about it the other day-nothing done, and I can find no statement in the budget. Where are these soldiers to be housed? As my friend the hon. member for Parkdale or any good medical man, such as the late Doctor Hastings, will tell you, bad housing is one of the most prolific agencies for the spread of disease and ill health. Hon. members opposite cannot solve the housing problem in Ottawa, let alone a': Canada. Many soldiers' families are living >
cellars. The government has a big mansion on Crescent road, taken for the navy; a property in
Queen's park was taken, also the old Flavelle property. In the British parliament housing was discussed on the debate on social security and insurance. It was the most popular topic of all these. Sir William Jowitt was the minister, and the main features of the debate was a policy in regard u. 'ousing for soldiers when they come home and for their dependents and the civilian population. But nothing yet is done in Canada except talk about it. Are these people to live out on the street? The government has taken over in Toronto for war purposes many large private houses and given them to the forces; big buildings on the waterfront in Toronto and in Ottawa and other cities. Where are the houses for civilians to come from?
The Minister of Finance told me yesterday if I would put what I want on the order paper I might get an answer from a rental commissioner I never heard of, but I have been here too long to be led astray by any such play as that. The government is spending five billion dollars, but I could point out items amounting to twenty-four per cent not for the war at all, and they have not a cent for houses. I looked all through the budget speech for it. The Toronto members were requested last Saturday to attend a meeting with the board of control of that city and the city council that has done so much for hospital and health services for the public. Starting at fifty cents a day the rate went to $1.75 a day for city patients, and yet they had the same operations for nothing as the wealthy man would pay in some cases up to $1,000 for. The hon. member for Parkdale was chief surgeon when I was on the board for seventeen years with Mr. P. C. Larkin and Sir Joseph Flavelle. But bad housing causes more disease than any other agency. Toronto has not been treated right by this parliament. There is no bigotry or intolerance in that city; its principle and that of its citizens is equal rights to all and special privileges to none. Our city has not had much federal aid for years. The province of Ontario which pays so much in taxes has not been dealt with generously or fairly here or by the interprovincial report. The Minster of Finance is not going to get away with the housing failure or his controls any longer; there is no use in telling me to put something on the order paper, and I will not do it any longer. Housing is forgotten in Canada. The families of some soldiers overseas have been evicted by the bailiff.
I have asked for a national system of insurance for the soldiers; I hope the committee will look into it. The first thing is to take care of the soldiers and their dependents for three years after the war and keep them
from being evicted from their homes so they will not be worried. A national life insurance sytem for all soldiers should be set up, to include provision for their dependents for three years after the war. If we are to be left at the mercy of a real estate board and a rent board, no wonder there is no housing. There is no incentive to anyone to build a home with this farcical rent control. Houses are wanted, not talk. We were twenty-five thousand houses behind when the select committee on housing was appointed in 1935; we made our report, and the new government came in and spent nearly $80,000,000 on small houses, yet to-day not a cent of the five billions for war expenditures is for that work.
I have a large industry in my riding, Lever Brothers. I have never been in the plant. They have published a monthly pamphlet on the problem of unemployment in which they say:
It has been easy and cheap and popular to get on the social security bandwagon. In some form or other social security apparently is here to stay as a perpetual political promise leading eventually to good or bad performance. But it has been discouraging in Canada to see how enthusiastically many members of parliament and other public men have leaped forward to embrace large plans of social security without apparently having an adequate idea or asking how they are to be paid for out of increased production, or what the cost in taxation will be.
Then there is a reference to the social reconstruction plan of the James committee and the civil service committee for providing employment in the post-war period. All that is not mentioned at all in the report. It goes on to say:
... it studies and states the parts which governments and industry can play in the elimination of mass unemployment; and it bases those conclusions on a study of what causes unemployment and of what monetary and budgetary policies by governments would most contribute to the productive capacity of each nation being used continuously and increasing steadily without restrictions being imposed either from the side of manufacturers or of labour. That is indispensable to eliminating distressing totals of unemployment.
The government should consider what should be done regarding trade with the mother country and the empire. Britain cannot exist without export and import trade, which will create employment here in providing these goods. In the city from which I come sixty-five per cent of the working people own their own homes, but what incentive is there to any working man to own his own home today? We have had two wars and a long depression in a generation; all the small savings of these people have been eaten up, and now the government will call upon them
to make even further sacrifices for 1943. There has been quite a reaction among the working classes, I believe, and I do not think they will wish to give generously to other schemes which are only half-baked, on reconstruction, and social planning, with their taxes already a burden.
We have had planning before, but the planning of the past remains as a warning to us now. It has been all based upon the principle of robbing Peter to pay Paul, and now the process has been completed because Peter has nothing left. I remember when Mr. Sydney Webb proposed that the coal mines in England be nationalized, and he even went so far as to publish a book entitled "How To Pay For the War." In that book he stated his confirmed opinion that coal could be delivered to the household cellar at a total cost of a shilling a hundredweight or a pound a ton. Out of this price, on paper, he satisfied all the demands of the miners and in addition provided money with which to pay for the war. Yet sensible people are still prepared to listen with patience to nonsense about planning. I am not objecting to all the planning in the world, as long as we do, not forget the war until it is won; but when housing is left out of the planning and when the municipalities are not given consideration, any scheme is bound to fail. No doubt planning is necessary, but it should be reasonable and proper. I have every respect for the views of others, but I believe the time must come when we will have to consider whether the appointment of this committee is the best way to deal with this question. Would it not have been better to have a day's debate to chart our course and declare what is to be our policy particularly toward the British empire, which has been our best customer, and with regard to all those other matters which should be thought out first? In my view no amount of planning, and not even victory, can bring about the millenium, nor can any planning ever change the law of supply and demand. I believe there will be nations as long as the world1 lasts, and there will be trade barriers, and quotas and trade agreements, as resolutions like the one placed on the order paper the other day by the Minister of Finance show. The party in Ontario to which I belong has had a glorious past in labour and social legislation, and I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that as long as I have known the Conservative party it has always taken a forward view with regard to the working classes in that province. It had no utopian ideas; it did not dwell in the clouds; it provided reforms in Ontario; it
got down to brass tacks and did all the things I have mentioned. It encouraged and aided municipalities to go forward in a concerted plan of social work for the good of all the people of the country. It believes that any planning should be done for all the people, not just for some of the people.
I believe the government would do well to pay heed to the handwriting on the wall. We have been through two wars and a long depression, and if it had not been for the mother country we would not be planning to-day. Hitler after Dunkirk would be in the United States and in Canada, and we would have to make peace with the Axis powers.
Mr. GORDON B. ISNOR (Halifax): Mr. Speaker, I do not propose to follow the arguments that have been advanced by the last speaker (Mr. Church). He referred to the city of Toronto as the forgotten city. The only comment I would make is that as long as the hon. member for Broadview (Mr. Church) occupies a seat in this house there is not very much chance of the city of Toronto being forgotten.
I refrained from taking part in the debate on reconstruction and reestablishment in connection with the resolution introduced by the Minister of Pensions and National Health (Mr. Mackenzie), because I realized that anything I might have to say in that regard could veiy well be said in connection with the resolution now under discussion. The one is closely connected and interlocked with the other; and as the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) so ably presented the reasons for setting up this committee, the general scheme behind it, its functions and purposes,
I felt that the one committee naturally would have to work veiy closely with the other. One is to deal with matters of reconstruction and reestablishment as they will arise at the termination of this war, while the other deals with the study of existing social insurance legislation of this parliament and the provincial legislatures; the social insurance measures of other countries; the most practical measures of social insurance for Canada, including health insurance, and what may be necessary in order to have them included in a national plan; the financial adjustments which will be required for the achievement of a nation-wide plan of social security, and other related matters.
As I listened to the Prime Minister speak of our industrial expansion I decided to take part in the debate, because I represent a constituency on the extreme eastern coast of Canada. I wondered what effect any measures which might result from the work of this
committee would have on my section of Canada, and I think what applies to the eastern coast applies equally to the west.
I propose this afternoon, Mr. Speaker, to confine my remarks as closely as possible to the resolution moved by the Prime Minister. He dealt with many of the matters that must be studied by this committee if it is to achieve the desired result. He outlined certain social measures coming under federal jurisdiction, such as unemployment insurance, pensions for war veterans, pensions for war *widows, war veterans' allowances, pensions for the blind, and old age pensions. All these, as the Prime Minister said, are matters coming directly under federal jurisdiction, though it is true old age pensions are administered by the various provinces. But in addition to these, measures of a provincial nature which I shall mention in a moment at some time or other must come under the direct jurisdiction of the federal government. We have provincial governments dealing with mothers' allowances and workmen's compensation benefits, including sickness and accident. These workmen's compensation benefits are enjoyed in all parts of Canada, but the benefits enjoyed by one province should be enjoyed by another to the same extent, and for that reason all measures of this nature must come under the jurisdiction of this government at the conclusion of the war.
The Prime Minister mentioned yesterday the great expansion which has taken place in Canada since the outbreak of war. When one reads of that development and realizes just what Canada has done in such a short period of time, starting out with practically no large industrial plants before the war, we begin to understand just what Canada's war effort means. When we note the large numbers of men employed in our war plants-=-20,000 in one, 30,000 in another, 50,000 in another, 120,000 in another-it makes us wonder where these men and women came from, and whether they are going to continue to live in the centres in which they are now located. In such event, what effect will that have on the districts from which they came? I rvould impress upon the committee the importance of this problem. I know that the committee is an able one, and I am sure it will consider carefully every question that comes before it.
The committee must consider, too, the great expansion which has taken place in the central provinces of Ontario and Quebec, and the effect it will have on the eastern and western sections of Canada. This accumulation of industrial interests, opportunities for employment and gathering together of wealth will be of much benefit to central Canada, but it will drain other portions of the country which as
a result will be working under a distinct handicap. When considering this problem the committee must provide for some measure of relief for those who live outside the central part of the country.
Subtopic: APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SOCIAL INSURANCE