Friday, March 1, 1968

do something about it. We get promises but we do not get any action in this mat- ter. Maybe those people should be moved out to some other locality where it will be easier to supervise their housing but if they want to stay where they are I don’t think the Department should use that as an excuse for not doing anything. While commenting on that, I might as well deal with the Department of Welfare. I am sorry that the Minister is not in his seat. I think there are certain changes that have occurred in the Dept. of Welfare with respect to allowances that are perhaps not altogether to the good. I do not think it is a good thing to do away with dis— abled pensions and old age assistance, mother's allowances as such, and to put all these, lump them all together, under this general Welfare Assistance Act because I think many people should have individual consideration according to their disability or situation in a special category. They’re all put under this general Welfare As- sistance Act which is the same thing as the old Social Assistance Act which I don’t think was ever a very good act. I don’t think people were ever very equitably treated under that old act, and they’re all going to be treated the same now under this new act. The Minister says that he’s going to have more money, that he’s going to be able to do more for these people but I don’t think he is doing more. I think he’s doing less on the average for them all. Well now, I asked for the figures. I’ll wait ’til I get the figures. I won’t insist on that statement but I know that there are people that told me that they’re only geting ten or fifteen dollars a month. This is certainly entirely inadequate. A person who said he was disabled and had come under this General Welfare Assistance Act and was only getting ten or fifteen dollars a month. Now we must certainly not consider this a matter of relief. We have the promise of the government that the need will be supplied and I don’t think it is being supplied in many cases, that this is the basis on which it operates, that a person will get what they need. Now, I know families where there are five or six children, they’re not getting mother’s allowances, there’s no bread winner and they’re certainly not getting a sufficient amount to maintain a decent standard of living.

Hon. George J. Ferguson: Have they made application? L. George Dewar: Oh, yes, repeated applications. Hon. George J. Ferguson: They must be getting money from another source.

L. George Dewar: Well, no other source except Family Allowance. That’s the only other source.

Hon. Robert Campbell: They must be getting a full Mothers’ Allowance if they had no bread winner.

L. George Dewar: Oh, but they’re not. They’re not qualified. In the first place there’s no such thing as Mothers’ Allowance now and they don’t qualify for Mothers’ Allowance.

Hon. Robert Campbell: They should apply for Canada Assistance.

L. George Dewar: They did apply and they’re getting an allowance from Canada Assistance but they’ve . . . .

Hon. Robert Campbell: Well, they can always have their case reviewed.

L. George Dewar: Yes, well, we’ll certainly ask them to have it reviewed. 1 will admit that it has been a tough case. I’ve been working on it for years. I’ve been trying to get it adequately looked after and there has been some improve- ment in it over the years and we’ll hope there will be continued improvement but I’m going to look into it further and see if something else can’t be done.

Unknown Voice: You said everything was worse.

L. George Dewar: Well, I was speaking on the average. I was speaking on the average. There are individual cases probably that have benefited from this program. The Dept. of Welfare is handling the, perhaps I’ll call it “Minicare”, program in this Province. The “Minicare” program was initiated and which I see the Government believes is a good thing now and they’re going to continue it and

—103—