1. Has a farm employment scheme for the relief of single unemployed men been adopted?

2. If so, what is the monthly compensation payable: (a) to the employee, in cash or otherwise; (b) to the employer?

3. What portion of the compensation is payable by: (a) the dominion; (b) the province; (c) the farmer?

4. What provinces have entered into an agreement for the adoption of this scheme?

5. What amount has been paid to each province by the dominion during the current fiscal year to January 1, 1937, under such agreements?

Mr. ROGERS:

1, 2, 3 and 4. Agreements were tabled January 15, setting forth the arrangements entered into between the dominion government and the governments of the provinces of Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Quebec, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and

British Columbia, respecting the farm improvement and employment plan.

5. Nil.

1. What loans have been made to date under the Federal Housing Act, 1935, in the municipalities of Montreal?

2. How many loans and what amount in each municipality?

1. Up to January 15, 1937, 211 loans amounting to $2,071,670 were made under the Dominion Housing Act in the municipalities of Montreal, (i.e. the municipalities on the island of Montreal).

2. Municipality No of Loans AmountMontreal .. 9S $1,059,253Mount Royal.. .. .. 40 396,820Hampstead .. 31 290,076Outremont .. 17 175,880Pointe Claire.. .. .. 7 26,466Westmount .. 4 45,175Cote Ste Luc.. .. .. 4 33,650Verdun .. 3 13,500Dorval .. 2 8,300Lachine .. 2 7,150St. Laurent .. 2 12,000Valois .. 1 3,400211 $2,071,670

1. What number of loans were made under the Farm Loan Act, during the year 1936, in each of the provinces?

2. What was the total amount of such loans in each of the provinces?

Mr. DUNNING:

The following answers are furnished by the Canadian Farm Loan Board:

1 and 2. 1st April, 1936- -31st December,1936. Approved Disbursed No. Amount No. AmountB.C 54 $ 103,150 53 $ 104,573Alta.. .. 343 698,750 377 820,343Sask.. .. 1,069 2,249,575 999 2,203,619Man.. .. 413 895,200 464 1,142,156Ont.. .. 387 790,500 346 678,842Que.. .. 1,573 3,295,500 1,440 2,863,721N.B 64 91,800 66 94,079N.S 147 239,450 127 228,801P.E.I.. .. 109 185,250 107 191,465Total .. 4,159 $8,549,175 3,979 $8,327,599

Questions

1. Was contract for carrying mail between Moose Valley and Kipling advertised or tenders invited?

2. Who held this contract in 1934-35?

3. What amount was paid to the above for this service?

4. Has the contract been terminated? If so, when?

5. Has a new appointment been made? If so, who has been appointed?

6. How many applications were there?

7. What tenders, if any, were submitted, and what were the amounts of same?

8. What remuneration is being paid to the present mail carrier?

1. No.

2. James Farrell.

3. $124 per annum.

4. Contract expired 31st December, 1936.

6. Yes. George L. Taylor.

6. Tenders were not invited. The expenditure involved in this case is under $200 per annum and section 73 of the Post Office Act empowers the Postmaster General in such case to make a new contract without the invitation of tenders.

7. Answered by No. 6.

8. $124 per annum.

1. How many farmers of Brome-Missisquoi, in the year 1936, have applied for a loan under the provisions of the Canadian Farm Loan Act and amendments thereto ?

2. In how many cases were loans granted and actually made?

3. What is the total amount of the loans?

Mr. DUNNING:

The following answer is furnished by the Canadian Farm Loan Board: The records of the Canadian Farm Loan Board are not kept by constituencies and the information asked for is not now available.

1. Since July 1, 1936, has the government of the province of Quebec recommended to the dominion government that the location of the trans-Canada highway from Montreal to Ottawa be changed to serve the actual line of highway No. 8 from Grenville to Hull?

2. If so, what is the date of the recommendation?

3. What was the reply of the government of Canada?

1. No.

2. and 3. See reply to No. 1.

1. During the year 1936, did the dominion government purchase two destroyers for national defence purposes?

2. If so, how was the purchase of these destroyers authorized?

3. What price was paid for each of them?

4. To what service will these two vessels be assigned?