§ 42 and 43. Mr. TAYLORasked the Minister of Labour (1) how many men who went to Canada this year under the special scheme for harvesters have now returned to Great Britain;
(2) how many men who went to Canada this year under the special scheme for harvesters and have now returned to Great Britain received the whole or part of their return passage money on loan from the railway or steamship companies or from Government funds; and whether he can state the total amount owing on this, account?
§ 44. Mr. RILEYasked the Minister of Labour the number of harvesters who went to Canada under the Government's harvesting scheme and who have now returned to this country, and the total cost to date of the scheme?
§ The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. Amery)I have been asked to answer these questions. The number of harvesters who went to Canada was 8,449, and the number who have returned is 6,876. Of those who have returned 4,577 received a loan of the whole or part of their return passage money. I cannot state the total sum owed by these men in respect of the loans or the total cost of the scheme up to the present date, as all the accounts have not been received from the shipping companies.
§ Mr. TAYLOROn whom will the loss fall if these loans are not repaid?
§ Mr. AMERYI imagine that it will fall on His Majesty's Government, but I trust that there will be substantial repayments.
§ Mr. T. SHAWAm I right in assuming that more than half of them borrowed money to come back?
§ Mr. TAYLOROn what information did the right hon. Gentleman base his statements to the House in July that all these men would have an opportunity of saving from £30 to £40 after paying expenses? What justification had he for that statement?
§ Mr. AMERYOn the information available, I believe I had justification for it, and I believe that a very substantial portion of the men did save.
§ Mr. TAYLORIs it not a fact that responsible authorities in Canada, namely, the representatives of the three provincial Governments of Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Alberta, together with the federal authorities, agreed that farmers should undertake no obligation with regard to the rate of wages to be paid?
§ Mr. AMERYIt was never suggested that there was any obligation on the part of the farmers or that a rate of wages should be guaranteed.