§ Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKEasked the Under-Secretary for the Colonies whether he was aware that the recent amendment of the regulations governing the emigration of assisted persons to Canada, to which his attention was recently called by the hon. Member for Devonport, conflicted with and practically nullified, so far as Canada was concerned, 334 the emigration facilities specially provided by Parliament under the Poor Law, The Local Government Act, 1888, The Unemployed Workmen Act, 1905, and The Labour Exchanges Act, 1909; whether he could inform the House if the Government of the Dominion of Canada gave any notice to the Government intimating this sudden change in their immigration policy; and whether he could cite any precedent where a Colonial Government had agreed to regulations conflicting with Imperial legislation without previous correspondence with the Colonial Office?
§ Colonel SEELYThe immigration regulations of the Canadian Government are not in conflict with the Acts of the Imperial Parliament referred to. The new regulations do not prohibit assisted emigration from this country, but impose certain restrictions on such emigration. The new regulations were made known in this country, but not in sufficient time to enable the agencies concerned in all cases to adapt their arrangements to the new conditions. The matter has formed the subject of correspondence between the Secretary of State and the Dominion Government.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEMy question referred, not to the agencies, but to the amended regulations.
§ Colonel SEELYI think I have answered the question put to me. I have said that the regulations do not conflict with the Acts of the Imperial Parliament. They may be inconvenient, but they do not conflict.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEWould the hon. Gentleman kindly quote the sections of the different Acts?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member is asking too much.