June 13, 1923

BIOLOGICAL BOARD ACT AMENDMENT


Hon. ERNEST LAPOINTE (Minister of Marine and Fisheries) moved for leave to introduce Bill No. 206, to amend the Biological Board Act. He said: The Biological board, as it consists to-day has two members appointed by the government, and one representative of each university that carries on biological researches. The purpose of this bill is to add three members, one representing the Department of Marine and Fisheries and two others representing the fisheries industries both in the East and in the West. Motion agreed to and bill read the first time.


QUESTIONS


(Questions answered orally are indicated by an asterisk.)


WHEAT SHIPMENTS FROM QUEBEC

CON

Sir HENRY DRAYTON:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. How many bushels of wheat were received in the

public elevator at Quebec and exported from that port in the years 1914-15-16-17-18-19-20-21-22?

2. How many bushels of other grains were received

in the public elevator at Quebec and exported from

that port in the same years?

Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE:

Wheat Wheat

1. Year received exported1914 .. .. .. 75,174 Nil1915 .. .. .. 2,519 Nil1916 .. .. .. 1,162,066 1,137,4611917 .. .. .. 9,764 Nil1918 .. .. .. 3,257,368 2,936,1041919 .. .. .. 3.943,393 3.606,5631920 .. .. .. 113,780 513,0281921 .. .. .. 1,265,967 1,243,2851922 .. .. .. 2,009,207 1,810,911Other grains Other grains2. Year received exported1914 .. .. .. 639,556 Nil1915 .. .. .. 264,739 Nil1916 .. .. .. 913,612 638,7421917 ... .. .. 941,277 Nil1918 .. .. .. 2,365,860 1,255,2601919 .. .. .. 249,430 69.3521920 .. .. .. 337,006 Nil1921 .. .. .. 4,345,277 2,838,8931922 .. .. .. 1,666,133 138,723

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   WHEAT SHIPMENTS FROM QUEBEC
Permalink

NAVAL BASE AT SINGAPORE

IND
LIB

William Lyon Mackenzie King (Prime Minister; President of the Privy Council; Secretary of State for External Affairs)

Liberal

Right Hon. W. L. MACKENZIE KING (Prime Minister):

The government has no

information with respect to the several questions asked.

WELLAND SHIP CANAL Mr. CHURCH:

1. What amount of money has been spent and what work completed to date on the new Welland Ship Canal?

2. What contracts are being undertaken this year?

3. How much of the total work yet remains to be finished?

4. Is the work being done by contract or day labour, and will the Government in future allow tenderers to use their own plant on contracts?

5. When is it c*xpected that the new Welland Ship Canal will be open for traffic, and will the work be expedited ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   NAVAL BASE AT SINGAPORE
Permalink
LIB
LIB

Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE: (Minister of Marine and Fisheries)

Liberal

1. Radio direction finding: Yes. Sound

ranging: Yes.

2. Radio direction finding: Yes. The Canadian government erected radio direction finding stations at Cape Race, Canso, and Che-bucto Head in 1918. They have been in constant operation 24 hours a day since they were opened. Cape Race is 21 miles from the reef on which the Marvale struck. Sound ranging: No.

3. Radio direction finding: Answered by No. 1 and No. 2. Sound ranging: No sound ranging stations of the type mentioned are in practical operation as an aid to navigation in any country of the world. The department is keeping in touch with the development of these systems and does not consider it would be justified in recommending any expenditure in this reference at the moment.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   NAVAL BASE AT SINGAPORE
Permalink

GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY-TIES

CON

Mr. HANSON:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Were tenders called in 1923 for a supply of ties to the Grand Trunk Railway, such ties being for use in or to come from the Matapedia Valley in the Province of Quebec?

2. If so, who were the tenderers, and at what rates?

3. Who obtained the contract and why?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY-TIES
Permalink
LIB

George Perry Graham (Minister of Railways and Canals)

Liberal

Hon. Mr. GRAHAM:

I think on reflection my hon. friend wall agree with me that the detailed information asked for in this question is such that it would not be in the interest of the Canadian National Railways that it should be made public. That is my answer.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GRAND TRUNK RAILWAY-TIES
Permalink

GREAT LAKES-DIVERSION OF WATERS

CON

Mr. CHURCH:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. Have any compla nts been received from the Donrnion Marine Association, or harbour commissions on the Great Lakes in reference to the illegal diversion of the waters of the Great Lakes through the Chicago drainage canal?

2. Is the Government aware that this diversion of the waters of the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico is having disastrous effects on the carrying capacity of ships and on the levels of the lower lakes and the St. Lawrence?

3. What does the government propose to do in the matter ?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GREAT LAKES-DIVERSION OF WATERS
Permalink
LIB

Hon. Mr. LAPOINTE: (Minister of Marine and Fisheries)

Liberal

1. Yes, but not recently.

2. The government believes that the diversion at Chicago has injuriously affected the navigable capacity of the connecting channels of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence river.

3. The matter is under consideration.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   GREAT LAKES-DIVERSION OF WATERS
Permalink

QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN

CON

Hon. Mr. STEVENS:

Conservative (1867-1942)

1. (a) How many public terminal elevators in Fort William and Port Arthur ha.ve private terminal elevators which are owned by the same company, or practically the same company, or whose shareholders and executives are interlocked and associated in both enterprises; and how many of these said elevators have facilities for direct connections for transferring grain from the private elevator to the public?

(b) Has any direct transferring between a public and private elevator ever been done, or reported to have been done?

(c) Is the practice being carried on at the present time?

(d) By whose authority was the transferring, if any. done?

(e) Does .the Canada Grain Act not state that a private and a public elevator shall have no physical connection?

2. Is all the grain at a terminal point, as provided by the Canada Grain Act, officially weighed in and out of all elevators?

3. Are all elevators at Fort William and Port Arthur weighed up annually as provided by the Canada Grain Act? If not, why not?

4. Does the Inspection Department inspect grain and issue certificates according to section 27 of the Grain Act?

5. (a) In the loading of grain on boats at waterfront elevators situated at Port Arthur and Fort William, what method of inspection is carried on by the Inspection Department?

(b) Are samples taken from the belt in the tunnels of the elevator, or are the samples taken from the running stream of grain when it is running into the boat, or is it taken both in the tunnel of the elevator and from the running stream?

(c) In the case of a difference between the sample taken at the tunnel and the one taken from the running stream into the boat, which sample is considered official?

6. (a) Does the Inspection Department determine the amount of excess moisture that is contained in tough, damp and wot grain, and place same on each certificate issued for off-grade grain?

(b) Does the terminal elevator take out the excess moisture above normal, when drying grain as per their tariff?

(c) Are moisture tests made before grain is dried in public terminal elevators to ascertain what shrinkage or loss will be charged the owner of the grain by the elevator performing the drying? If not, how is the shrinkage arrived at?

(d) Does the Inspection Department verify and see that terminal elevators take out all excess moisture over normal on gra n they are drying according to their tariff?

7. What authority does the Inspection Department demand of a terminal elevator as to ownership or authorized agency, before any parcel can be loaded out; and is inspection made accordingly to ensure that the quality of grain or grain by-products ordered out by the owner or authorized agent is up to that received by the elevator from the owner?

8. Does the Inspection Department issue and charge a fee for inspecting grain or grain by-products that do not represent the quality as ordered out by the owner or authorized agent?

9. If contract wheat contains one to two per cent of small and shrivelled wheat, does the Inspection

Naval Base at Singapore

Department make this car a "clean to clean," or do they put one or two per cent dockage, as the case may be, on this car?

10. What are the charges levied by the government for inspection and weighing grain in each consecutive year since 1912?

11. Is grain arriving at a public terminal elevator in the Western Inspection Division, carrying a grade certificate and binned under government supervision, as provided for by the Canada Grain Act, subject to another inspection charge on being loaded out? If so, why the duplicate inspection?

12. Are the weighing and inspection charges based on the actual cost of the service rendered, and how is this determined ?

13. Is the owner of grain, the grade of which is in dispute with the Inspection Department and placed for survey, entitled to a sealed portion of official sample the survey is determined on? If so, from whom does he obtain same?

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   QUESTION PASSED AS ORDER FOR RETURN
Sub-subtopic:   TERMINAL ELEVATORS AND THE GRAIN TRADE
Permalink

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF PAPERS CANADIAN MERCANTILE MARINE

June 13, 1923