August 8, 1904

LIB
CON
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. EMMEBSON.

To advance the interest of the road.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Samuel Barker

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BARKER.

But why ? Is there any particular reason why, for instance, this grant should be made, as under subsection (a), for a road of three miles in length only ? It may be, as I said, simply a grant for a siding to a mill.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Samuel Barker

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BARKER.

There must be some reason for making the change, and perhaps the minister will tell us what it is.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

There seems to be something very peculiar about this subsidy. This is a road of only three miles long ; when we granted the subsidy before, it was for a line of considerable length. I fail to see for what good purpose the government can give aid to such a line as this. Surely it cannot be for any great commercial purpose. It cannot be for the purpose of opening up the country. It is more likely to my mind to be for the purpose of aiding some private individuals. It bears very much that construction upon the face of it. A line three miles long into a new country would seem to be of no value whatever as a colonization road, and it is only for five purpose of colonization that we on this side of the House, at any rate, consent at all to granting these subsidies. Now it is due to the committee that some better ex-

planation be given before this item is allowed to pass. We ought to know who is going to benefit by it. Certainly the general public is not going to benefit; a road three miles long into a new country is not going to be of material benefit to the country at large, it is not going to operate as a colonization road ; and it is going to benefit some private individual let the minister say who it is, and let us judge whether the enterprise to be benefited by this subsidy is of sufficient importance to warrant the government taking public money to promote private interests.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON.

I do not know that there is any private individual who is going to be benefited, it is for the benefit of the whole country. The road will be 100 miles long, and will open up woodlands of nearly 10,000,000 acres, which are at present inaccessible. These portions which are to be built now are merely stepping stones, and will form part of a road which will be eventually 100 miles long. So far as I know, there is no mine owner or mill owner who is to be benefited, only the general public.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON.

The same number.

' The line is intended to be 100 miles long, but there are only 21 miles subsidized.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

Now we are subsidizing 3 miles, 6 miles and 12 miles. Is this one of the roads to which the Ontario government has loaned money for the benefit of the Soo industry ?

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB
CON

Samuel Barker

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BARKER.

Does the hon. gentleman mean that the sections of the line mentioned here are precisely the same line as originally subsidized ?

Mi-. EMMERSON. No, there is some change in the wording.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Samuel Barker

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. BARKER.

I think the hon. gentleman ought to have told us that. He said he was making no change. The people are [DOT]entitled to know whether he is granting money to new lines.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

Henry Robert Emmerson (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Mr. EMMERSON.

I think I stated that. It is the same lines, but with variations as to the wording.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON
LIB
CON

David Henderson

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. HENDERSON.

I understand that three sections of a road are being subsidized. I would like to know if these three sections form one continuous line, are connected with each other, or are they separate portions of a railway, or are they simply branches off what is intended to be a

main line. I think we ought to know whether any good purpose is to be served by the payment of this money I confess it seems to be surrounded with a good deal of secrecy. To my mind, if they are separate sections, they will answer a very small purpose indeed. If they are to constitute a continuous line of 21 miles, then some justification might be given. So far as I am concerned, I am very much opposed to this system of subsidizing railways, unless for colonization purposes into a new country.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
CON

Thomas Simpson Sproule

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. SPROULE.

There is this difference. This item reads :

For that portion of its line of railway from Bruce Mines Junction southerly.

Topic:   RAILWAY SUBSIDIES.
Permalink
LIB

August 8, 1904