Errick French WILLIS

WILLIS, The Hon. Errick French, Q.C., B.A., M.A., LL.D.

Personal Data

Party
Progressive Conservative
Constituency
Souris (Manitoba)
Birth Date
March 21, 1896
Deceased Date
January 9, 1967
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Errick_Willis
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=0c0fda8e-3c1b-424b-a8d8-eb24f6463b9b&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
barrister, farmer

Parliamentary Career

July 28, 1930 - August 14, 1935
PC
  Souris (Manitoba)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 5 of 20)


March 21, 1935

Mr. WILLIS:

They have been met on

these obligations according to the statement of the Minister of Natural Resources for the province of Manitoba.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   FURTHER PROVISION FOR CARRYING OUT RELIEF
Full View Permalink

March 21, 1935

Mr. WILLIS:

Their reason for not recognizing it is quite apparent. It is apparent that they should not, at this time, because if they recognized that policy they would be called upon every year for continuous writeoffs. Consequently the municipalities and provinces have not urged that it be done, because it would increase the amount of relief which would have to be paid.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   FURTHER PROVISION FOR CARRYING OUT RELIEF
Full View Permalink

March 21, 1935

Mr. WILLIS:

That is quite the same thing. The hon. member states that the grants are

insufficient. I speak as one coming from the drought area of Manitoba, where in every year for the past while in order to carry on we have had to get grants from the federal treasury. While within the past few months I have not received a statement from the Minister of Finance, so far as the drought stricken area of Manitoba is concerned, I will say that that area has never to my knowledge requested money by way of advances from the federal government for these purposes which has been refused.

It is true that there are many who complain; it is true, also, that there are many who think the relief they are receiving is not sufficient, and there are those who are very happy to go around the country and state that the federal government is to blame. May I at this time mention something which in my own constituency I have had to point out thousands of times. The matter of administration of relief is entirely within the hands of the municipalities and the provinces. The amount of feed or the amount of relief of any kind which a man may receive is entirely in the discretion of the municipality in which he lives. They give him what relief they like; they have sole authority. The question of the money available is one which is arrived at through the municipality requesting the province for advances, and the province, in turn, requesting advances from the federal government. May I say that so far as the area with which I am connected is concerned, those advances have never been refused.

The hon. member for North Winnipeg states that the advances made by the federal government are equivalent only to 25 per cent of the total amount of relief. Again speaking only for my own area may I say, without making any mathematical calculation, that the advances are at least 75 per cent of the amount expended. This condition is due to the fact, first, that you have the direct advance made by the federal government, following which we have the federal government loaning one-third to the province, so that the province may pay its share of direct relief. Then, following that we have the federal government loaning to the province the remaining third, which in turn is handed on to the municipalities for purposes of covering the share payable by those municipalities.

In effect the federal government is, first, paying one-third outright, and then loaning the other two-thirds to the provinces for the purpose of paying the remainder of the relief moneys. The province, in turn, hands on one-half of the two-thirds to the municipality, and

Unemployment Relief

in consequence the federal government assumes the responsibility for the whole 100 per cent. It pays one-third direct; it loans the other two-thirds,-and if you think the federal government will ever get that two-thirds back I am not in agreement with you.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT AND FARM RELIEF
Subtopic:   FURTHER PROVISION FOR CARRYING OUT RELIEF
Full View Permalink

March 12, 1935

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
Full View Permalink

March 1, 1935

Mr. WILLIS:

It is in the dried out area,

and it is also on the edge of the Turtle Mountain forest reserve, one of the best farming countries in Canada. There were no other reasons in connection with the settlement than the fact that the bank realized that by their action they would place this man back on his feet. If the bank had been unwilling to make that arrangement the man would have left his farm and the bank would have had to start foreclosure action. The bank did not want to go into the farming business and so they did a very wise thing. The result is that this man, having now to pay only $2,500 owing to the bank, finds that his other creditors are willing to extend him credit, which they would not do while he owed the bank $9,500. Through the existence of this act, and without making any application, this man is "back on his feet. I could tell of other instances where individual debtors went to their creditors and suggested the wisdom of applying under the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, and forthwith the creditors have got together themselves, not under the act, and made a settlement which was satisfactory to the farmer.

In my area, which includes all the dried out area of Manitoba, the official receiver is exceedingly busy. I have seen him on different occasions at the close of the day and he has said to me, "I have made two, three, five settlements to the satisfaction of creditor and debtor alike." The big advantage of this act as compared with the other acts in the provinces, and foojh have their value, is that this is a debt adjustment act; it is not a debt postponement act as the others are. The acts in the provinces are debt postponement acts and they have their value, even as this act has its value. It depends on what the farmer desires, whether he desires to have his debt postponed or to have it definitely adjusted, as to which he ought to embrace. But while evidence. may foe adduced as to thousands who have been benefited by the act, there are also I should say, hundreds and maybe thousands who have been benefited due to the mere existence of the act, owing to the fact that the creditors realize they must make a settlement lest they come before the official receiver and finally the board of review.

Topic:   FARMERS' CREDITORS ACT
Subtopic:   AMENDMENTS TO FARMERS' CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT, 1934
Full View Permalink