April 8, 1941

LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

That is a matter for the

Minister of Labour.

Topic:   HOUSING
Subtopic:   REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION OF NEWLY-CONSTRUCTED DWELLINGS FROM RENT CONTROL
Permalink
LIB

Norman Alexander McLarty (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Minister of Labour):

The matter is entirely new to me,

but I shall be glad to discuss it with the

Strike in Schofield Plant

war-time prices and trade board and see if we can ascertain the benefits and disadvantages

of the proposal. It will receive consideration.

Topic:   HOUSING
Subtopic:   REQUEST FOR EXEMPTION OF NEWLY-CONSTRUCTED DWELLINGS FROM RENT CONTROL
Permalink

LABOUR DISPUTE

STRIKE OF HOSIERY WORKERS IN SCHOFIELD PLANT AT OSHAWA


On the orders of the day:


CCF

Clarence Gillis

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

Mr. CLARENCE GILLIS (Cape Breton South):

Mr. Speaker, I should like to address a question to the Minister of Labour arising out of a telegram received this morning from the national secretary of the Canadian Hosiery Workers' Union at Oshawa. I have no intention of reading the telegram; it is lengthy and the minister already has a copy of it. I would refer him particularly, however, to the reference in the telegram to a statement made by Mr. Ainsborough, that the department would forbid the company from paying higher wages than the previous rates. May I ask what action is contemplated by the department with relation to this dispute in Oshawa to have the conciliation machinery put in operation for the purposes for which it was established.

Topic:   LABOUR DISPUTE
Subtopic:   STRIKE OF HOSIERY WORKERS IN SCHOFIELD PLANT AT OSHAWA
Permalink
LIB

Norman Alexander McLarty (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Hon. N. A. McLARTY (Minister of Labour):

The hon. member for Cape Breton

South (Mr. Gillis), as he has said, sent me a copy of the wire he had received. The conciliation service of the Department of Labour has already been engaged in ironing out the difficulties which apparently have arisen and I was advised that all the difficulties had been ironed out as a result of conferences except the one with respect to wages. The company asked for a few days to consider what they should do with a view to meeting the wishes of the employees in that regard, but yesterday morning, without any warning and without any application for a board, approximately eighty employees went out on strike. The Department of Labour has, of course, a definite duty. I understand that there are certain war orders in this plant; consequently it would come under the Industrial Disputes Act and the order in council passed extending it. We notified the secretary of the association that the strike was illegal, and that unless the employees returned to work and put themselves within the law the department had the definite duty to see that the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act were carried out, and that this will be done.

So far as the statement made by Mr. Ainsborough is concerned, I have no information whatsoever on that point. I doubt, however, if he would make the statement that the Department of Labour would not allow the company to increase wages.

Topic:   LABOUR DISPUTE
Subtopic:   STRIKE OF HOSIERY WORKERS IN SCHOFIELD PLANT AT OSHAWA
Permalink
CCF

Clarence Gillis

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

Mr. GILLIS:

But if that statement is true, there is a possibility that it precipitated the situation that now exists in Oshawa.

Topic:   LABOUR DISPUTE
Subtopic:   STRIKE OF HOSIERY WORKERS IN SCHOFIELD PLANT AT OSHAWA
Permalink
LIB

Norman Alexander McLarty (Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. McLARTY:

I do not suppose we

should discuss the matter further now. My information is that the company had asked for a few days to consider the matter and that before the expiration of that time eighty employees simply went out on strike.

Topic:   LABOUR DISPUTE
Subtopic:   STRIKE OF HOSIERY WORKERS IN SCHOFIELD PLANT AT OSHAWA
Permalink
CCF

Clarence Gillis

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

Mr. GILLIS:

The telegram states that the company had refused to consider the question.

Topic:   LABOUR DISPUTE
Subtopic:   STRIKE OF HOSIERY WORKERS IN SCHOFIELD PLANT AT OSHAWA
Permalink

CANADIAN NAVAL COLLEGE

INQUIRY WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHMENT ON THE ATLANTIC COAST


On the orders of the day:


NAT

Percy Chapman Black

National Government

Mr. P. C. BLACK (Cumberland):

Is it the intention of the government to establish a naval college at Halifax or elsewhere on the Atlantic coast? I regret that the Minister of National Defence for Naval Services is not in his seat. I sent him notice of my question before the house opened. Perhaps he will give the information later.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Pournier (Hull) in the chair.

Topic:   CANADIAN NAVAL COLLEGE
Subtopic:   INQUIRY WITH RESPECT TO ESTABLISHMENT ON THE ATLANTIC COAST
Permalink

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE


izz. Special. To providle for payments on reduction in wheat acreages, under conditions prescribed by the governor in council, for administration expenses in connection therewith, and for temporary appointments that may be required notwithstanding anything contained in the Civil Service Act, $35,000,000.


LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of National War Services; Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

Mr. Chairman, last night when the committee rose, I had agreed to take the suggestions of members of the committee back for consideration. I presented them to the government to-day and I have before me at the moment the results of our consideration of the regulations. I had hoped that as a result of the understanding yesterday we would go on with a further discussion of the item which has just been read from the chair, but I understand that some members of the opposition desire this afternoon to discuss the motion of the hon. member for Haldimand (Mr. Senn) rather than this item. It has been agreed, however, that I should at least place before the committee the record of the changes which we propose to make in the regulations. I had hoped that, within the next half hour or so, copies of the regulations would be on the desks of all the members and that I would be able at that time to read into Hansard the completed regulations so that they would

Supply-Agriculture-Wheat Acreages

be available for study by hon. members during the recess, but if we go out of committee and take up some other item before the regulations arrive, I shall not be in a position to do that. I can, however, indicate the changes which have been made.

It was suggested yesterday by the hon. member for Battle River (Mr. Fair) that the definition of either "farm" or "farmer" should be clarified. The definition as it reads in the resolutions which were presented to the house yesterday, is as follows:

"Farm" means the total land being farmed by any one farmer.

It now reads:

"Farm" means the total land being operated as a unit.

That, I think, overcomes the objection raised by the hon. member for Battle River, to the effect that there might be two or three different families involved in the operation of one farm or of two or three different farm units. A farm is now defined as "the total land being operated as a unit."

The hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar (Mr. Coldwell) suggested that there should be a change in the definition of "summer-fallow." The definition as it now reads is in these words:

"Summer-fallow" means the cultivation of fallow land prior to and including July 31, 1941, in such a way as to conserve soil moisture or to prevent soil drifting, or both.

Then there was quite a long discussion on section 2 of the regulations, namely, the one providing for payments and for combinations in order to arrive at the acreage for 1940. It has been decided by the draftsmen that it would be better to divide that clause into two. and have a new No. 2 and a new No. 3, reading as follows:

2. (1) For the purpose of these regulations the wheat acreage reduction on any farm shall be computed by deducting the number of acres sown to wheat on such farm in 1941 from the number of acres sown to wheat on such farm in 1940.

(2) For the purpose of computing the wheat reduction acreage.

And then follows the suggestion made by the hon. member for Moose Jaw (Mr. Ross) last evening.

(a) In respect of any farm

(i) on which the number of acres sown to wheat in 1940 is greater, by one-third or more, than the number of acres sown to wheat in 1939, or

(ii) on which the number of acres sown to wheat in 1940 is less by one-third or more, than the number of acres sown to wheat in 1939,

the number of acres sown to wheat in 1940 shall be deemed to be the average number of acres sown to wheat in 1939 and 1940.

That means in effect that, where there is an increase of one-third or more in the acreage of 1940 as compared with 1939, the number of acres sown to wheat in 1940 shall be deemed to be the average of the two years; and where there is a decrease of one-third, the same thing happens.

Then:

(b) In respect of any farm on which no land was sown to wheat in 1940, but on which farm more than sixty per cent of the number of acres under cultivation had been sown to wheat in 1939, the number of acres sown to wheat in 1940 shall be deemed to be sixty per cent of the acres under cultivation on such farm.

That is, it is presumed that, no land on the farm being sown to wheat in 1940, and a large proportion of it-over sixty per cent-having been sown to wheat in 1939, the amount allowed should not be greater than sixty per cent.

Then:

(c) In respect of any farm on which the number of acres under cultivation was increased during 1940 by breaking any part or parts thereof not previously broken, eighty per cent of the number of acres by which the number of acres under cultivation on such farm was so increased shall be deemed ,to be included in the number of acres sown to wheat on such farm in 1940.

That is, four-fifths of all the land which was broken in 1940 is added to the wheat acreage of 1940 before the reduction begins.

Then:

(d) In respect of any farm on which no land was broken prior to 1940, if any land was broken on such farm during 1940, eighty per cent of the number of acres so broken shall be deemed to be the number of acres sown to wheat on such farm in 1940.

That is, the general practice in the west has been, when a new farm is broken up, to sow the greater part of it to wheat the first year. If the farmer is using horses as power, he usually sows only sufficient coarse grains for feeding purposes. We have now stated that eighty per cent of the breaking is to be added to the acreage prepared for wheat this year.

3. (1) The minister may on or after July 1, 1941, in respect of any wheat acreage reduction on any farm, pay

(a) the sum of $4 in respect of each acre which is summer-fallowed in 1941 in excess of the number of acres which were summer-fallowed in 1940.

(b) the sum of $2 in respect of each acre which is sown to coarse grains or grass on or before July 31, 1941, in excess of the number of acres which were sown to coarse grains or grass respectively in 1940.

(2) The minister may pay an additional sum of $2 in respect of each acre, in respect of which any payment may be made under paragraph 1 of this regulation, which was sown to

2264 COMMONS

Supply-Agriculture-Wheat Acreages

grass in 1941 or which was sown to rye on or after August 1, 1941, and is in grass or rye on July 1, 1942.

That is the last one. The method of payment is the new No. 3, which before was No. 2. There is a new No. 6:

6. If by the terms of any contract, agreement or lease, any farmer is bound to sow to wheat any part or proportion of his farm, and if such farmer desires to become eligible for any payment under these regulations, such farmer shall be entitled to reduce the number of acres sown to wheat on his farm to such extent as he sees fit and to sow to coarse grains or grass or to summer-fallow such wheat acreage reduction, notwithstanding the terms of such contract, agreement or lease, but the provisions of this regulation shall not be deemed to relieve him of the performance of any other of the terms or provisions of the said contract, agreement or lease.

The meaning of that is, that where there is a lease which involves the renter sowing a certain amount of wheat, a certain amount

of coarse grains, and a certain amount to be summer-fallowed, the renter may reduce the wheat acreage, contrary to the terms of the contract. He cannot reduce his summerfallowing and he cannot reduce his coarse grains, in accordance with the contract, but he can increase his summer-fallow and his coarse grains in order to make it possible to carry out the provisions of the regulations.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
NAT

Ernest Edward Perley

National Government

Mr. PERLEY:

How about hiring the work done? You do not say anything about hiring, done by labour.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of National War Services; Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

It is not involved in this regulation. This is just where there is a lease which involves certain terms that the renter must fulfil. The labourer would be hire^ by the day and instructions given, I assume, by the owner.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CCF

Thomas Clement (Tommy) Douglas

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

Mr. DOUGLAS (Weyburn):

Will the

regulation which the minister has just read replace what is now No. 5?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink

April 8, 1941