Frederick George HAHN

HAHN, Frederick George

Personal Data

Party
Social Credit
Constituency
New Westminster (British Columbia)
Birth Date
November 3, 1911
Deceased Date
February 5, 1963
Website
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Hahn_(politician)
PARLINFO
http://www.parl.gc.ca/parlinfo/Files/Parliamentarian.aspx?Item=c7ae0236-fd24-4936-904c-ad8d3b4f9214&Language=E&Section=ALL
Profession
business executive, merchant, principal, teacher

Parliamentary Career

August 10, 1953 - April 12, 1957
SC
  New Westminster (British Columbia)
June 10, 1957 - February 1, 1958
SC
  New Westminster (British Columbia)

Most Recent Speeches (Page 2 of 203)


January 29, 1958

Mr. Hahn:

The hon. minister says these figures are the responsibility of the British Columbia government, and that they are in error. I must point out to him, much as I dislike doing so, that he himself was 50 per cent or 100 per cent wrong in the case of 96698-252J

Dominion Succession Duty Act British Columbia only a few days ago, and in respect of this particular figure, if the province did happen to be "out" $20 million out of $650 million, the discrepancy is much less in this case than it was in his.

Topic:   DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS MEASURE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ATLANTIC PROVINCES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 29, 1958

Mr. Hahn:

The minister has made the

point quite clear, Mr. Chairman, in the chart on page 3850 of Hansard-a portion of it, at any rate-where it says:

No stabilization will be due under the amended rate on the basis of 1957-58 figures.

That is in relation to British Columbia. I also have the report of the dominion-provincial conference at Ottawa dated November 25 and 26, 1957. I am interested in a table on page 63 of this report and, on comparing this particular table with the chart on page 3850 of Hansard, I have found some very interesting facts. Possibly the minister would comment on this matter in so far as discrepancies seem to exist.

The figures are practically identical but there is in this chart, as prepared by the government of British Columbia, item 10, which reads as follows:

Estimated present rental payments.

These figures are based on the population and they compare with similar figures in the chart on page 3850 of Hansard. The interesting point in this instance is that in Newfoundland the estimated figure is $16,537,000 and the increase as proposed in the 13-9-50 ratio would be $9,186,000, which is somewhat better than 50 per cent. In the case of Prince Edward Island the estimated present rental payments are $4,136,000 and the increase is $2,500,000, which would be somewhat better than 50 per cent. In comparing the figures I find pretty well the same thing applies in the cases of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.

When we come to Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, I find in the comparison of these figures that they are going to receive just under a 10 per cent

increase as compared with the present estimated rental payments. I find Quebec receiving $184,708,000 and the increase is to be $18,859,000, which is better than 10 per cent. In the case of Ontario they are receiving $224,755,000 estimated, and the estimated increase will be $22,315,000, which is somewhat better than 10 per cent. However, when we come to British Columbia we find that the present estimated rental payments are $58,983,000 and they are to receive an increase of $2,842,000, which would work out to about a 4.8 per cent increase.

In view of the fact that British Columbia is now to be denied the stabilization fund that it has received up to the present time, it would seem to me that it puts that province out of line with the ratio of the increase given to the others.

Topic:   DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS MEASURE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ATLANTIC PROVINCES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 28, 1958

Mr. Hahn:

The people apparently would have the wrong impression, and all I wanted to do was to make sure they understood correctly that this government had overestimated.

Topic:   DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS MEASURE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ATLANTIC PROVINCES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 28, 1958

Mr. Hahn:

I would like to address a question to the minister relative to the figures he has proposed with respect to the province of British Columbia. There was a correction to page 3850 of Hansard of January 27 last as compared with the original statement that the

figure would be $5.5 million, and my question is: Has the province been officially advised as to what the exact figure is going to be, should it take advantage of this scheme?

Topic:   DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS MEASURE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ATLANTIC PROVINCES, ETC.
Full View Permalink

January 28, 1958

Mr. Hahn:

Mr. Chairman, I did not use the term "misled" and I would not want the minister to pretend that I did. The reason for my suggestion was that the article in the Vancouver Sun, of which I had a copy just a moment ago, headlined the fact that British Columbia was going to receive $5.5 million from the federal government.

Topic:   DOMINION-PROVINCIAL RELATIONS MEASURE TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO ATLANTIC PROVINCES, ETC.
Full View Permalink