July 17, 1943

NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

I believe there were a

few questions asked yesterday which the parliamentary assistant said he would undertake to answer to-day. One was: what is the ceiling in Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand; and the other was: which of the associations that put in briefs were for and which were against the extension of the ceiling from $2,000 to $2,400? Would the minister be good enough to give that information to the committee now?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

Which of the various

organizations putting in briefs were for and which were against the extension of the ceiling?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

In favour of no limit there was the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada-

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

You mean even above the $2,400?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

Yes.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

Then are there to be

three categories, those who would hold to the $2,000, those who would go to $2,400 and those for whom the sky would be the limit?

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

Perhaps the hon. member

would let me complete my reply to the question.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

I just want to know what I have to bear in mind when listening to the hon. gentleman.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

The Trades and Labour Congress, Canadian Congress of Labour, the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen and the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees argued for no limit. Those arguing for or proposing a higher limit were: the Confederation of Catholic Workers, $2,500; the Windsor chamber of commerce, $3,000 with insurability for earnings between $2,500 and $3,000 being optional; the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, $3,600. The latter, however, would regard complete abolition of the ceiling as acceptable. Then the following were opposed, because of the effect they alleged on their members: the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and the Order of Railroad Conductors; the Retail Merchants' Association, w'hich I mentioned a moment ago. The following objected because of the fundamental nature of the change: Canadian Manufacturers' Association, Canadian Life Insurance Officers' Association, Canadian Bankers' Association, Dominion Mortgage and Investments' Association, Canadian

Unemployment Insurance Act

Chamber of Commerce, Calgary board of trade and the Hamilton chamber of commerce. These associations considered a slight increase in the ceiling would be permissible to meet the war situation, on the understanding that the $2,000 limit would be restored after the war. In this connection the Canadian Life Insurance Officers' Association suggested a temporary ceiling of 52,200. The Toronto board of trade and the Montreal board of trade made recommendations which dealt only with the war situation, but which implied opposition to permanent raising of the ceiling.

I think that completely answers the question * which my hon. friend put to me yesterday and which I said I would answer to-day.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Gordon Benjamin Isnor

Liberal

Mr. ISNOR:

In other words, there were a great many more objecting to a change than were in favour of it.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

Paul Joseph James Martin (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Labour)

Liberal

Mr. MARTIN:

No, there were not.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink
LIB

John James Kinley

Liberal

Mr. KINLEY:

I think that bears out my suggestion about the reason for the ceiling on the office workers.

Bill reported, read the third time and passed.

Topic:   UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE ACT
Subtopic:   EXTENSION OF PROVISIONS TO EMPLOYEES IN RECEIPT OF UP TO $2,400 A YEAR
Permalink

CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS

PROVISION TO MEET CERTAIN EXPENDITURES AND GUARANTEE OF SECURITIES AND INDEBTEDNESS


Hon. J. L. ILSLEY (Minister of Finance) moved the second reading of bill No. 135, to authorize the provision of moneys to meet certain capital expenditures and capital indebtedness incurred by the Canadian National Railways system during the calendar year 1943, and to authorize the guarantee by His Majesty of certain securities to be issued by the Canadian National Railway Company. Motion agreed to, bill read the second time and the house went into committee thereon, Mr. Bradette in the chair. Section 1 agreed to. On section 2-Power to issue securities for capital expenditures.


NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

I recall that in the railway committee it was stated that some twelve or thirteen million dollars was set aside for deferred maintenance, an item which would not be allowed to any private company but which was set up by the Canadian National because it made no difference to their statement, inasmuch as they were not subject to taxation. What would become of that money, and why would it not be available to the company to finance these capital expenditures, instead of asking the government for authority to issue $6,000,000 odd in securities?

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Subtopic:   PROVISION TO MEET CERTAIN EXPENDITURES AND GUARANTEE OF SECURITIES AND INDEBTEDNESS
Permalink
LIB

James Lorimer Ilsley (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. ILSLEY:

The deferred maintenance reserve is for deferred maintenance rather

than for capital additions and betterments. I may add that the $17,000,000 is available from reserves for depreciation and debt discount amortization, but nothing is taken from the deferred maintenance reserve, because the purpose of this expenditure is not maintenance.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Subtopic:   PROVISION TO MEET CERTAIN EXPENDITURES AND GUARANTEE OF SECURITIES AND INDEBTEDNESS
Permalink
NAT

Harry Rutherford Jackman

National Government

Mr. JACKMAN:

I appreciate that the purpose is capital, but inasmuch as the railway company must lean on the government for all of its capital expenditures, nevertheless there is this amount for deferred maintenance which is an extraordinary amount and one not allowed to private companies. I am suggesting that unless it is absolutely necessary for its working capital account-and I do not think that it is because it has ample working capital-it is hard to understand why this money is being made available to the railway company for its capital expenditure instead of borrowing more through the government authorization.

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Subtopic:   PROVISION TO MEET CERTAIN EXPENDITURES AND GUARANTEE OF SECURITIES AND INDEBTEDNESS
Permalink
LIB

Joseph-Arthur Bradette (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The CHAIRMAN:

Shall the section carry?

Topic:   CANADIAN NATIONAL RAILWAYS
Subtopic:   PROVISION TO MEET CERTAIN EXPENDITURES AND GUARANTEE OF SECURITIES AND INDEBTEDNESS
Permalink

July 17, 1943