March 10, 1930

UFA

Robert Gardiner

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. GARDINER:

He also stated that he was in favour of the construction of market roads more particularly for the benefit of the farmers than for the completion of this so-called trans-Canada highway. If the hon. member had only read the resolution he would have seen very clearly that it does not call for the expenditure of money for the purpose of building a trans-Canada highway. It is primarily for the purpose of assisting the provinces to build highways within their borders. They may be local highways, market roads or any other class of roads which the government, if they would make the grant, would determine was in the best interests of the country.

The discussion this afternoon has centred very largely on the question of a trans-Canada highway. When the Minister of the Interior (Mr. Stewart) spoke this afternoon, he intimated that with the exception of three or four hundred miles this road was practically completed. Let me call the attention of the house particularly to the situation in Alberta. If the Minister of the Interior imagines for a moment that we have from Medicine Hat to Calgary an all-weather highway which tourists can travel on at any season of the year except in the depth of winter, I am afraid he is forgetting the geography of that part of the country. That road is merely a dirt highway and when it is wet nobody can travel on it at all. So far as I am aware there is very little gravel road running east and west in any of the three western provinces. Probably there is a little west of Winnipeg, but on the remainder of the road, which might be called a trans-Canada highway, there is very little gravel. The hon. member who has just taken his seat objected to Ontario getting substantial grants of money for the purpose of building this trans-Canada highway in northern Ontario.

National Highways-Mr. Gardiner

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Robert McKenzie

Liberal

Mr. McKENZIE:

Then the hon. gentleman agrees that this does mean a trans-Canada highway?

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
UFA

Robert Gardiner

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. GARDINER:

Certainly not; I am

merely replying to what has been said. As I was saying, my hon. friend stated that he would be more favourable to a grant of money for building roads within the various provinces. We have in Alberta a situation that is different probably from that in any other province. We have had more vacant land there in recent years, and we have had settlers going in back from the railway, not twenty miles, but sometimes two or three hundred miles-. The Minister of the Interior will remember that the Alberta government, when he was a member of it, had to provide for colonization roads. They had also to provide railways, on which the province lost large sums of money, primarily because'the federal government did not restrict settlement on the lands it then held. Under these circumstances I maintain that something is coming to the province of Alberta at least, for the building of highways to permit the people now on the land to have some means of transportation for their products. I feel, therefore, that this resolution merits sympathetic consideration.

A good deal has been said this afternoon with regard to taking care of the funds of the Dominion government, and in some measure I agree with what has been said. It has been objected that if you make these grants from time to time, the taxes will be much higher. I would point out, however, that whenever this government thought it expedient to provide money for any purpose whatsoever, they could always find the money. Take, for instance, the Maritime Freight Rates Act. There was an illustration of the government making, practically for political purposes or on grounds of political expediency, certain grants of money to the tune of paying twenty per cent of the freight rates within the maritime area. I am not now criticizing that legislation, but last year the expenditure on that account cost the country $5,500,000, and that act is going to continue to cost the country large sums of money as long as it remains in force. It is futile, therefore, for members on the treasury benches to complain that the government is hard up for money and that money cannot be granted for the purpose set forth in this resolution.

I come to the question of subsidies. It has been intimated from the treasury benches that the proper way to deal with this matter is to give subsidies to the provinces. I agree that that is the proper way, and if the government would only rearrange the subsidies so that the 2419-29

provincial government would have a little more money with which to build roads, that might fill the bill; but in the absence of any such action on the part of the government it is only natural that we should bring this resolution before the house. The government did not have any difficulty in providing over

81,400,000 as a special subsidy for the maritime provinces. I was in agreement with that when it passed, and I am still, but when that special subsidy was granted to the maritimes it was clearly understood that the whole question of subsidies would be considered at a federal-provincial conference with a view to increasing the subsidies to all the provinces. This has mot been done. It is necessary for us to refer to these other measures of assistance in order that we may secure for the western provinces sufficient funds to assist us in building our roads.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
CON

Robert Knowlton Smith

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. R. K. SMITH (Cumberland):

I shall not detain the house very long. The hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Cantley), earlier in the evening gave some figures with respect to the mileage of road in the province of Nova Scotia under the jurisdiction of the highways department. I wish to give figures showing the cost of maintenance and construction of the roads in the province of Nova Scotia in the years shortly after confederation, and compare them with what it cost the province of Nova Scotia last year for maintenance fixed charges and capital expenditure on the provincial highways.

In 1867 the provincial highways cost the government of Nova Scotia $180,700; in 1870, $214,200; last year, the fiscal year 1929, $1,800,000 was expended for maintenance, $782,200 for fixed charges, and $1,124,200 by way of capital expenditure. In other words, in 1929 alone it cost the government of Nova Scotia $3,706,400 for its highways. That amount is almost one-half the total revenue of the province. I repeat, it takes almost one-half the total revenue of the province to keep pace with the times and keep the roads in proper condition to attract tourists and provide proper means of transportation for our own people. I think, therefore, that we can wholeheartedly support this resolution, which does not call for a transcontinental highway but merely for a five-year federal contribution to the different provinces to enable them to get their highway services up to a point where they will not be such a load on the provincial treasury as they are to-day.

Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister of Finance): The resolution under discussion has been so framed as to permit those who advocate three different kinds of highway pro-

450 COMMONS

National Highways-Mr. Dunning

posals to support it. We have heard very valuable contributions to the debate this afternoon from those who believe that the resolution would involve the construction of a national highway. We have heard from those who believe that it would involve the government making grants to the provinces to enable them to construct market roads. We have heard from those who believe that a national highway is now all but completed, and that this resolution simply involves the federal government giving assistance to close what have been described as the gaps, the only considerable gap named being, I believe, that in northern Ontario. I would point out, however, that if this policy were adopted, in all human probability this house would find itself in future years committed to a policy of a national highwa3r, and of a hard surfaced all-weather highway at that; and therefore in approaching the matter I think we should look at it from the point of view of what it will grow into rather than from the standpoint of the somewhat smaller expenditures contemplated by those who have spoken hitherto in this debate.

Reference has been made to members of the government "trotting out," as it was described, the "old British North America Act." I do not think, Mr. Speaker, we should speak disparagingly of that enactment. After all, it sets out first what are our constitutional responsibilities in this parliament, and, second, what are the constitutional responsibilities of the provincial legislatures. This resolution does not call upon us to discharge what is a federal constitutional responsibility. This parliament and previous parliaments have discharged continuously the constitutional responsibility of the Dominion in regard to transportation. With respect to water transportation, the Dominion to-day is carrying practically the whole of the load of providing such facilities; harbours, rivers, our great canal systems-all are wholly Dominion responsibilities. The Dominion is carrying its constitutional load with respect to railway transportation. In fact the Dominion is now discharging obligations annually which were originally assumed by the provinces with respect to railways. In many of the provinces, Mr. Speaker, the provincial governments assumed, for reasons which seemed good to themselves at the time, the responsibility of guaranteeing the bonds of railway companies provincially incorporated for the purpose of building railways wholly within the borders of the province. With the exception of two railways, one in British Columbia and the other in Ontario, the Dominion is to-day

discharging whatever responsibilities attach to these provincial guarantees, and they amount to a very considerable sum. I have not the figures under my hand, but I do not t.hin.lr that $100,000,000 in capital expenditure is stating too much in regard to the provincial transportation guarantees which to-day are being discharged by the federal authority instead of by the provincial governments which originally gave them. Then the Dominion is called upon to assume a responsibility to-day in connection with a new form of transportation-aerial transportation. Who will deny that the backbone of aerial transportation in Canada to-day is the air mail system which is being developed by the Dominion government? Through the contracts which are being let from time to time by the Postmaster General, regular air mail routes are established and are used by the general public of Canada for the carriage of passengers and freight. In that regard the provinces are assuming at the present time no financial responsibility.

That, then, is our constitutional responsibility, and we are discharging it. What we are asked,' as a Dominion parliament, by a resolution such as this is to do as a matter of grace what we are not constitutionally obligated to do-as a matter of grace to make grants to the provinces in order that they may be the better able to discharge their constitutional responsibilities. The framers of the British North America Act did not contemplate grants being made systematically as a matter of grace. I opposed the system of making grants as a matter of grace when I was a provincial minister, and I take the same attitude to-day. I take the attitude that the fields of taxation are delimited as between the federal and provincial authorities; their obligations are broadly delimited also, and if the provinces find themselves unable to exploit reasonably as they may their fields of taxation to carry out the constitutional obligations imposed upon them, then it is the business of the Dominion and of the provinces in conference assembled to consider whether or not the free subsidies now granted-as a matter of the constitution, not as a matter of grace-by this parliament to the provinces should be increased.

Why do I say that? Not only from the point of view of protecting the federal treasury, Mr. Speaker-that is not the allimportant thing-but as a matter of safeguarding the autonomy of the provinces themselves. I speak from experience as a provincial minister. Others in this house on both sides have had the experience of de-

National Highways-Mr. Dunning

bating this matter from the point of view of the provinces in the various legislatures. The Dominion comes along to a province and says: As a matter of grace we are prepared to vote to you a certain sum of money for a certain period of years, provided you do such and so. That is a distinct invitation to the province; indeed, it is often a monetary consideration to the province to embark upon a policy which otherwise the province might not consider itself able to undertake at the time. That was the case as a matter of fact with the province of Alberta at the time the Dominion Highways Act was first enacted. It did not feel itself in a position to take advantage of that legislation, it did not feel it could afford to raise the sum of money necessary to put up the sixty per cent of the total amount provided for by the act, and for a number of years not only that province, but other provinces did not find it possible to avail themselves of the act, and as a matter of fact its terms had to be extended from year to year over a period of yeans beyond the original term, in order that the .provinces might be able to take up the quota prescribed for them.

The same, Mr. Speaker, its true with respect to others of these grants which have been made as a matter of grace. I am of the opinion that if that principle were continued and expanded, as it could be from time to time, it would lead to a centralization of governmental and parliamentary authority which is distinctly not contemplated by our constitution. If there is need for further grants from this Dominion to the provinces, I submit, sir, there is a constitutional way to do it, and that way is by gathering the provinces together and subsequently this parliament deciding to suggest to the imperial parliament an amendment to the constitution -as has in fact been done on previous occasions-enlarging the amount paid by the Dominion to the provinces. And it must be remembered that the subsidies provided for in the British North America Act are free subsidies. This parliament imposes no conditions that any part of the moneys so granted shall be spent for highways, for technical education, or for this or that purpose; the subsidies paid leave the provinces entirely free to control their own policies in their own legislatures as contemplated by the constitution.

Now, with respect to the purely financial side of the matter, I have pointed out that the Dominion is at the present time discharging-and discharging I think, very fully -its financial obligations with regard to water 2419-291

transportation, air transportation and rail transportation. The provinces have had the opportunity, during recent years, of very much enlarging their revenues-revenues of a kind which are pecularily applicable to the objects sought by this resolution. I have reference to the tax on motor vehicles mentioned this afternoon by the member for Kindersley (Mr. Carmichael) and also the tax on gasoline, which has become so general during the past few years. My hon. friend from Kindersley quoted figures indicating the amounts of revenue the provinces receive from these two sources. I think he quoted for 1928 the immense total of $31,500,000, which he said was received by the provinces that year from the proceeds of taxation of automobiles and gasoline. Since that time, may I inform him, some of the provinces have increased their tax on gasoline and others of them which formerly did not impose the tax are now imposing it, and it is a constantly increasing source of revenue to them. Might I point out that $31,500,000 capitalized would provide for $600,000,000 of road construction so far as the capital expenditure on the initial construction is concerned. By that I do not mean that the provinces could, in the nature of things, as a result of 'their gasoline and motor taxes, build S600,000,000 worth of roads, because I know from experience that they require to provide for the maintenance of their existing roads. At any rate the present gasoline and motor taxes do provide a very substantial revenue to the provinces, and in every province you will hear it stated by the responsible ministers, and by the members of the legislatures, that it is a sound principle for those who use the roads to pay for them. It is upon that basis that the gasoline tax has been imposed, because the consumption of gasoline is, to some extent at any rate, an index of the extent to which the individual purchasing it uses the roads which are being maintained by the province at the expense of the province.

In all the addresses we have listened to on this subject, Mr. Speaker, no one has suggested where the money should come from; no one has suggested the imposition of taxation by the Dominion in order to provide for the expenditure contemplated by the scheme. That, I submit, is a reasonable thing to ask, having regard to the tremendous obligations under which this Dominion stands at the present time-its tremendous obligation with respect to the war, with respect to interest upon the national debt, with respect to pensions, and with respect to railways. We have

_ COMMONS

National Highways-Mr. Dunning

a tremendous responsibility with respect to railway obligations. None of the provinces of Canada will come forward this year and volunteer to pay a portion of the deficit upon the Canadian National railway system, in spite of the fact that a part of the deficit is chargeable to the guarantees which the provinces themselves created in the first place. So I say it would have been quite reasonable for hon. members to have suggested that the finance minister might raise the money necessary to carry out the terms of this resolution by imposing an excise tax on gasoline. It would, to say the least, be as wholly within the competence of the parliament of Canada to impose a tax on gasoline as it is to-day within the competence of provincial legislatures to do the same thing. But no one suggests where the money shall come from. All these resolutions presuppose a tremendous surplus in Dominion revenues available for making grants by grace to provincial authorities to enable them to do things which are properly their own constitutional function. It is true, Mr. Speaker, that we have been favoured-and I hope we shall continue to be favoured-by surpluses of revenue over expenditure so far as Dominion finances are concerned. But is it not important to the people of this country that the process of debt reduction should continue, and the process of tax reduction as well? Neither of these processes can continue if year by year we embark upon new responsibilities, particularly responsibilities of a character which we are not constitutionally obligated to perform.

I believe the people of this country do expect a continuance of debt reduction and a continuance of tax reduction, and in order to accomplish that I say we have a right, first, to take stock, to make sure first of all that we are discharging the obligations which are constitutionally ours, and, second, to take care that we can do that and still have a margin, and to take care that that margin is devoted towards reducing the public debt and the burden of Dominion taxation.

I cannot support the resolution. The speeches which have been made with regard to it give me no clear idea of what the supporters have in mind as an obligation to impose upon this Dominion by the terms of the resolution. Some of them desire just a little piece of road, only a few miles to close a gap. Others want a hard-surfaced national highway-a splendid thing, a very desirable thing; it is coming in Canada. Others want it to be wide enough to enable grants to be made to the provinces to build main market roads.

I think, Mr. Speaker, it is the obligation of hon. members of this house when they bring forward resolutions of this kind, imposing as they would, if implemented, a load upon the Dominion treasury, to tell the house the amount of financial obligation involved in carrying into effect the terms of the resolution proposed. Ontario is the province which has been referred to by a number of the speakers as having within its borders the gap which at present prevents continuous travel by road from eastern Canada to western Canada.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
CON

Robert James Manion

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. MANION:

And the province of Manitoba, partly.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

Yes, and a little in the province of Manitoba, which I understand is already arranged for by the province of Manitoba. However that may be, the province of Ontario is, without doubt, the wealthiest province in the Dominion. The surplus reported a few days ago by that province does not indicate that it is in any need of grants by grace from this parliament in order to enable it to discharge its constitutional obligations. I would also point out to my hon. friends from Nova Scotia and Alberta who spoke to this resolution that they did not discuss, or name in their resolution, the basis upon which division should be made of any moneys which might be voted, by grace, by this parliament. It will be remembered that in the former case the moneys were voted to be granted to the provinces on the basis of population. The province which had the most people, got the most money, and the province which got the most money has still the biggest gap in any national highway system. That is not a criticism of the province of Ontario. They used the money in those parts of the province where it was most needed and where their people were. That is a very natural thing. But I would like my hon. friends from the province of Alberta and the province of Nova Scotia to express some views as to the principle which should be followed in dividing such moneys among the provinces if they were granted. These questions I have endeavoured to raise are all questions-

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
UFA

Edward Joseph Garland

United Farmers of Alberta

Mr. GARLAND (Bow River):

Last year

members from Alberta, on this side of the house at least, made it quite clear in the debate that took place then that they considered the mileage basis to be the fairest way of distributing the amount of a grant.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

Well, Mr. Speaker, in

answer to that I can venture the assertion

National Highways-Mr. Adshead

that had it been based upon mileage in the resolution there would not be the apparently unanimous support for it which now obtains on the other side of the house-

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
CON

Alexander Duncan McRae

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. McRAE:

Speak for yourself.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

-any more than there would be unanimous support for a resolution which called merely for a national highway.

Hon. members, in addressing the house, have made it very clear as to what they desire. Some have asked for a national highway, others for grants to provinces to enable them to build main market roads. I suppose hon. members-

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
CON

James Arthurs

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARTHURS:

Is the hon. gentleman

cognizant- of the plans of the United States and how the money is divided there?

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

Yes, I think I am fairly cognisant of their plan. Is my hon. friend advocating a United States system of dealing with this highway?

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
CON

James Arthurs

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. ARTHURS:

So far as federal grants are concerned, yes.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

Well, there is another

opinion slightly different from some that we have heard this afternoon.

I cannot vote for this resolution, first, because of what I have previously stated; second, because the movers of it and those speaking in support of it do not indicate what the financial load shall be upon the Dominion, nor do they indicate in the resolution any principle upon which division should be made between the provinces which are to be served by it; and, finally, because I believe this Dominion has at the present time, in connection with water transportation and air transportation, with its tremendous responsibility with respect to railway transportation, with the need that exists for progressively reducing her public debt and reducing taxation, plenty to take care of without going, by grace, into the field of provincial responsibility and handing out money to another authority for a purpose which is really their own.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LAB

Herbert Bealey Adshead

Labour

Mr. H. B. ADSHEAD (East Calgary):

I

had not intended to speak on this resolution, but the speeches of the hon. member for Pictou (Mr. Cantley) and the hon. the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) compel me to make a point or two with regard to the prairie provinces.

The hon. member for Pictou made special reference to the claims of the province of Nova Scotia. In that regard may I impress upon the Minister of Finance, whom I am sorry to see leaving the chamber, that the

prairie provinces occupy a position distinctly different from that occupied to-day by the provinces of eastern Canada. The eastern provinces always have had their own natural resources; Ontario has drawn great revenues from its timber limits, its mines and other natural resources, so Ontario has been better able to provide for those matters which are under the control of the provinces only. The minister said we were asking for an act of grace. As far as the province of Alberta is concerned we are not asking for anything as an act of grace; we are simply asking for an act of justice. The provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba have not had their natural resources; they have received no revenue from mines, timber limits, oil leases or licences, or other matters of that kind. The revenue from those sources has gone to the Dominion government, and the province of Alberta has been crippled because of that fact.

How long have the prairie provinces been waiting for those -resources;? We have been waiting since 1911, and probably longer than that. I heard Sir Robert Borden state in tiie city of Calgary that the Conservative government would not be in office twenty-four hours before the natural resources would be returned to Alberta. Eighteen years have passed, during which time all the revenues have been going to the federal treasury, and because of that loss of revenue we are compelled to ask the Dominion government to help us along these lines. Go back to 1911, when those natural resources were promised. Ever since that time they have been a political football, pushed from one party to the other for various reasons until this year, and as yet we have had no revenue from them; as yet nothing has come into the province of Alberta whereby she could fulfil her obligations with respect to roads and technical education. Take the amount paid the Dominion government for oil licences, mining licences, timber licences and so on from 1911 to the present time; hand that amount to the province of Alberta and we will not ask this government to perform an act of grace. All we are asking is an act of justice. So far as the prairie provinces are concerned, because we are not on the same footing as the rest of the provinces which have had their resources from which they have received great revenues, we ask as an act of justice that the prairie provinces should be granted the aid necessary to provide for the construction of roads and for technical education.

Mr. ,T. S. WOODSWORTH (Winnipeg North Centre): I should like to add a word of protest in regard to the attitude of the Minister

454 COMMONS

National Highways-Mr. Woodsworth

of Finance towards the British North America Act. He objected to it having been trotted out. I am sorry he is behind the curtains, but he can hear what I have to say. His speech was a splendid example of the way in which the British North America Act is being used almost daily in this house. He spoke of the constitutional responsibility of this government and went on to say that they were responsible for the air routes. I should like to ask the Minister of Finance to name the clause in the British North America Act which gives the Dominion parliament control over the air routes.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

If my hon. friend had listened to me he would have heard that we have a constitutional responsibility with respect to mail, and that air mail is the backbone of air transportation. That is the very phrase I used.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LAB

James Shaver Woodsworth

Labour

Mr. WOODSWORTH:

I heard that. We have a responsibility with regard to mails, but we have no responsibility at all with regard to air transportation. One of these days mail may be carried largely by truck, I suppose. The trucks will have to be run over highways, and when that is done, for the life of me I do not know how truck-carried mail is less a federal responsibility than air mail.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LIB

Charles Avery Dunning (Minister of Finance and Receiver General)

Liberal

Mr. DUNNING:

I may point out to my hon. friend that to-day mails do travel in that way, and they are subsidized by the Dominion because it is a Dominion rseponsibility.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
LAB

James Shaver Woodsworth

Labour

Mr. WOODSWORTH:

How can they travel unless there are roads upon which they may run? How can they operate in bad weather unless there are hard surfaced roads? The minister cannot avoid the question in that way. The fact is that there is no provision whatsoever in the British North America Act in regard to air communication; there is not one word that says the Dominion government is responsible for air communication. I think it natural that we should assume such to be the case, but it is not in the British North America Act. Further than that, the automobile had not been invented when the British North America Act was drawn up, and the ordinary means of rapid communication between provinces at that time was either by steamship or railway line. Naturally those methods of communication which were not merely local in character, but which connected province with province and had communication with other parts of the world, were to be under Dominion jurisdiction.

I think that is very clear, if you read the British North America Act itself. Take for 'W Woodsworth.]

example subsection 10 of clause 92, which defines the work of the provincial legislatures. The clause reads:

Local works and undertakings other than such as are of the following classes:

(a) Lines of steam or other ships, railways, canals, telegraphs, and other works and undertakings connecting the province with any other or others of the provinces, or extending beyond the limits of the province.

The very idea there was that if there were means of communication between the provinces or extending beyond the provinces to any other country, they should be under federal jurisdiction. It seems to me that Since we are now using automobiles, more or less, instead of and in competition with the railways, when automobile roads run between the provinces, or come up from the United States to carry tourist traffic, as we have been told to-day, essentially those roads are not local or provincial in character, but they affect the welfare of the whole Dominion. I do not think it is an extravagant proposal that the Dominion should make some provision for helping out the provinces in matters of this kind. However I am not speaking so much in support of the resolution itself as I am protesting against the use of the British North America Act which w'as made once more tonight, as it is being made every day, absolutely ignoring the circumstances under which the British North America Act was drafted and presuming that we to-day are not ourselves to adopt those measures which are so sorely needed to meet the needs of the present day.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink
CON

William Anderson Black

Conservative (1867-1942)

Hon. W. A. BLACK (Halifax):

In looking at this resolution I find that it is somewhat general, but following the discussion to-day it would seem that a very great deal of attention had been paid to a national highway across Canada. I think the discussion has centered largely upon that point. Probably the intention of the resolution was not so much that alone as that a grant should be given to each of the provinces. So far as a national highway is concerned, I am in favour of it; I feel that we in the east, and our friends in the west, should not be compelled to take off our hats to the officials of a foreign country in order that we may get from one side of our country to the other. The assistance which was given formerly to the provinces by this government, especially to the smaller provinces in the eastern part of our Dominion, was of great help to them. Those provinces have not the same resources and the same means of increasing revenue as have the central and larger provinces, and so far as Nova Scotia is concerned the burden placed upon

National Highways-Mr. Black (Halifax)

that province with its limited revenue is almost staggering. As the hon. member for Cumberland (Mr. Smith) has stated to-night, one-half of the revenue of that province is applied to roads. That is a very severe tax and one which curtails allotment and assistance to very important matters within the province. For instance, education, technical and otherwise; health; hospitals, general and special, all require assistance and it is not within the power of the provincial government to fulfil the needs of those various institutions. There are many other things which are in the public interest and which should be helped and supported, but there is not sufficient revenue with which to do it.

The Minister of Highways in Nova Scotia has stated that during the.next twenty years the expenditure in connection with the provincial highways would probably reach the huge sum of $90,000,000. That would mean about $4,500,000 annually for upkeep, an amount which I do not think the province of Nova Scotia can expend. Our trunk roads possibly may be maintained in the state of efficiency in which they now are, but no money will be available for the by-roads or secondary roads and no progress will be made in putting them in such shape as present day conditions warrant. I think it was the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) who complained that we have made no suggestions as to how this money should be divided and how it shall be expended, and so on; it is up to the government to present its proposal which in due and proper time can be fully discussed.

I will add only that I intend to support this resolution with the hope that a generous al- [DOT] lotment may be given to Nova Scotia and to the maritime provinces.

Topic:   UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR PAPERS
Subtopic:   TENDERS FOR SUPPLY OF COAL
Sub-subtopic:   REVISED EDITION- COMMONS
Permalink

March 10, 1930