December 13, 1945

RURAL MAIL CARRIERS-WAR BONUSES

LIB

Mr. BREITHAUPT:

Liberal

1. What steps have been taken by the Post Office Department to continue payment of wartime bonuses to rural mail carriers?

2. Is any action being taken by the department to embody such bonus in the regular contract of these carriers?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RURAL MAIL CARRIERS-WAR BONUSES
Permalink
LIB

Mr. BERTRAND (Laurier): (Postmaster General)

Liberal

1. Wartime bonuses to rural mail carriers have been paid under the authority of the War Measures Act, where the courier establishes the fact that operating costs have increased due to conditions which could not have been foreseen when he entered into his contract.

With the termination of the War Measures Act, these wartime bonuses must cease, but provision will be made to invite public tenders in each case where the courier is not satisfied to continue at his original contract price.

2. No. Any action to this end would be contrary to the terms of the Post Office Act.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   RURAL MAIL CARRIERS-WAR BONUSES
Permalink

FEED WHEAT

CCF

Mr. McCUAIG:

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

1. How many bushels of feed wheat were shipped from western Canada to eastern Canada in each of the years, 1941 to 1945?

2. What was the price paid per bushel by the eastern farmer in each of the above years?

Senate and House of Commons

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   FEED WHEAT
Permalink
LIB

Mr. GARDINER: (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

1. Bushels

1941 (Oct. 20 to Dec. 31)

2,659,0201942 (Jan. 1 to Dec. 31)

15,062,5911943 (Jan. 1 to Dec. 31)

23,709,3661944 (Jan. 1 to Dec. 31)

22,524,6021945 (Jan. 1 to Nov. 30)

18,908,138

2. Because of different conditions of sale, grades of wheat-whether whole, ground, bagged, et cetera, the price paid per bushel

by all eastern farmers is not assessable.

The cash price for wheat of official feed grade in store Fort William-Port Arthur showed the following range:

High

per bushel

1942

1944

.65i

.801

1.04

1.04

1.04

1942

1944

Low

per bushel 57i 64 74i

1.04

1.04

From September 11, 1942, wheat used exclusively as feed for live stock in eastern Canada

was subject to a rebate of 8 cents a bushel. This rebate was increased on November 11, 1943, to 25 cents a bushel.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   FEED WHEAT
Permalink

EGLINTON HUNT CLUB PROPERTY, TORONTO

PC

Mr. FLEMING:

Progressive Conservative

1. What use is being made of No. 1 I.T.S. property, formerly known as Eglinton Hunt club,

Toronto ?

2. What use or disposal of the property is intended for the future?

3. Is the property for sale?

4. If so: (a) in block or in parcels; (b) at what price and on what terms; (c) through what agency, if any, has it been listed for sale?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   EGLINTON HUNT CLUB PROPERTY, TORONTO
Permalink
LIB

Mr. GIBSON (Hamilton West): (Minister of National Defence for Air)

Liberal

1. No. 1 Composite training school and the Institute of aviation medicine are located at this site. Spare accommodation is used to handle any overflow of R.C.A.F. personnel in Toronto area. Air cadet squadrons have the use of the facilities at this unit in the evenings.

2. Present plans call for the retention of this site for the continuance of the Institute of aviation medicine and also to serve as a urban headquarters for Toronto auxiliary squadrons.

3. No.

4. N.A.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   EGLINTON HUNT CLUB PROPERTY, TORONTO
Permalink

CAPE ISLAND, SHELBURNE COUNTY, N.S., BRIDGE

CCF

Mr. GILLIS:

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

1. What surveys were made in past years, and what reports are on record in connection with a bridge from Cape Island, Shelburne county, Nova Scotia, to the mainland?

2. How much did the government spend on the construction of this bridge, and in what years was the expenditure made?

3. Was work actually begun on piers or abutments?

4. If so, are these still standing?

5. When and why was the work discontinued?

6. What action is the government taking towards building this bridge as a post-war project, or on any other basis?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CAPE ISLAND, SHELBURNE COUNTY, N.S., BRIDGE
Permalink
LIB

Mr. FOURNIER (Hull): (Minister of Public Works)

Liberal

1. This matter has been investigated and given consideration, and it has been definitely established that the project is in connection with highway communication within the province and is therefore a matter for the attention of the provincial government.

2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. Answered by No. 1.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   CAPE ISLAND, SHELBURNE COUNTY, N.S., BRIDGE
Permalink

SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS


Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister) moved that the house go into committee to consider the following resolution. That it is expedient to present a measure to amend the Senate and House of Commons Act to provide for payment of an allowance to every member of the Senate and House of Commons for expenses incidental to his duties as a member at the rate of two thousand dollars per annum for the period during which he is a member, payable at the end of each calendar year and subject to a deduction equal to one-half of the amount of deductions, if any, from the member's allowances in respect of sittings of the house of which he is a member during such year, and to provide that in the case of ministers of the crown, of the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons, and of members of the Senate the amount of such allowance shall be deemed to be taxable income; and to provide further that such measure shall be deemed to have come into effect on the sixth day of September, one thousand nine hundred and forty-five. He said: As my colleague the Minister of Veterans Affairs (Mr. Mackenzie), in leading the house last night, announced at the close of the session, in bringing forward this particular motion I desire to substitute it for one which is already on the order paper as order No. 7. Hon. members will notice that order No. 7 relates only to members of the House of Commons. The resolution now .presented is in more complete form and has reference to members of the Senate as well as members of the House of Commons.



Senate and House of Commons May I say a word with respect to the circumstance that the resolution should have appeared on the order paper in the first instance with reference only to members of the House of Commons. When the resolution was placed on the order paper in the form in which it was it represented the only decision which had been arrived at by the government up to that time with respect to allowances to members of parliament for expenses incidental to their duties as members of parliament. It was obviously desirable that there should be discussion with members of the senate before deciding on what should appear in resolution form with respect to members of that house. I did not have any opportunity to have a discussion with members of the upper house before leaving for England, and subsequently visiting the United States. When my colleagues in the government saw that I would be returning sooner than was expected at the time I left, it was decided by them to leave over discussion w'ith representatives of the senate until after my return. When I returned I found a great many matters demanding urgent attention, and it was not possible for me to arrange to see representative members of the senate immediately. I took the first chance I had to discuss with some of the senators the position of members in the other house in respect to the expenses incidental to the discharge of their duties, and I have since gone more fully into the matter with representative members of that house. The measure which I now bring before the house is one which in its more complete form will, I think, commend itself to members of both houses of parliament-at any rate, I sincerely hope that that may be so. At this late stage of the session, Mr. Speaker, I may have to ask the house for its unanimous consent to allow me to proceed a little more rapidly with consideration of the motion now before us than might otherwise be the case. When the orders of the day are reached I shall ask that the house allow the motion No. 7, which is now in its possession, to be withdrawn and the order to be discharged. I make that intention known immediately so that we may be in a position to discuss the resolution that now appears under government notices of motion. With respect to this notice of motion I would say that His Excellency the Governor General, having been informed of the subject matter of this resolution, is pleased to recommend it to the consideration of the house. With the permission of the house, I would now ask that the necessary steps be taken to proceed at once in committee with the resolution in order that I may have an opportunity of introducing the bill immediately. I should think that all the discussion that may be necessary can be had on the second reading of the bill. If the house will give its unanimous consent to this procedure, I shall see that the bill is introduced this morning with the understanding that discussion upon it will not take place before tomorrow.


PC

John Bracken (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. JOHN BRACKEN (Leader of the Opposition):

Mr. Speaker, with respect to

the remarks of the Prime Minister in regard to the discharge of item No. 7 on the order paper, may I say that this party will be very glad to approve of its being done. With respect to the further procedure regarding this new resolution, may I ask the Prime Minister if he desires to proceed further to-day than reaching second reading?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOWANCE OF $2,000 TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT FOR INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

I have just

indicated that we would go on with second reading of the bill to-morrow. All I desire to do now is to introduce the bill and have it given first reading.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOWANCE OF $2,000 TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT FOR INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
Permalink
PC

John Bracken (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. BRACKEN:

Then, Mr. Speaker, I

understand the Prime Minister desires that we should get past the several stages of this resolution this morning and up to second reading of the bill.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOWANCE OF $2,000 TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT FOR INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
Permalink
LIB

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

Liberal

Mr. MACKENZIE KING:

Yes.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOWANCE OF $2,000 TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT FOR INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
Permalink
PC

John Bracken (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. BRACKEN:

In the event that the

house approves that procedure, and since the members have not seen a copy of this bill, I respectfully suggest that we might proceed up to second reading without being expected to take part in any debate.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   SENATE AND HOUSE OF COMMONS
Sub-subtopic:   ALLOWANCE OF $2,000 TO MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT FOR INCIDENTAL EXPENSES
Permalink

December 13, 1945