March 18, 1941

LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

That is it.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Richard Burpee Hanson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

I had a letter this morning from a labour union in British Columbia in regard to that matter. I am sorry I haven't it here, I sent it to the hon. member for Vancouver South and he is gone to Toronto to-day. In it they questioned that statement. I express no opinion at all, I do not know; but I wish the minister would take steps to explore the position in British Columbia, because they rather contradict the allegation that all skilled labour there is fully employed.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Thomas Reid

Liberal

Mr. REID:

I think the letter to which

the hon. leader of the opposition refers relates to unskilled labour, because it was signed by the labourers' union.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

We have had our director of shipbuilding in British Columbia for the past week or ten days exploring every avenue for obtaining new production there. We have also had a report from the war-time requirements board; that board consulted experts in shipbuilding from all parts of Canada. It is the considered opinion of all the experts who have reported to me that it will be possible gradually to expand the existing yards in British Columbia, but all recommend against opening new yards there for the reason that there is not sufficient skilled labour available.

I wish hon. members to understand that our shipbuilding project has never been static, it has always been increasing. In every yard in Canada capable of building steel ships, each

week shows an increase in the number of men employed; that will continue, and it continues rather in geometrical progression, in that as each staff gets larger it is capable of training and absorbing men at a higher rate.

As I say, we have finished placing orders for the corvette programme, but it will be the end of this year before the last are delivered. Our mine-sweeper programme is still under way, and we have additional minesweeper orders to place. It is our intention to concentrate this work more or less in the great lakes, to the extent that we can do so and still maintain deliveries. Those that order mine-sweepers order them to be delivered as of a certain date, and it is necessary for us to maintain those dates.

The policy of the department will be to concentrate in great lakes shipyards boats that can be moved out through the Welland canal. As for the coast and St. Lawrence river yards, we have already placed all the cargo ships for which berths are readily available. Twenty ships of approximately 10,000 tons have been placed; steel is being assembled, and work is proceeding.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Richard Burpee Hanson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

That is

for the account of Great Britain?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

That is right; and we have

determined on additional capacity that can be developed. It must be developed in the way of new berths, and we have worked out what our experts advise us is the maximum programme that can be successfully carried out, covering 1941, 1942 and 1943. It shows a rapid progression in the number of boats that can be launched in each of those years, and at the present time we are proceeding to arrange for the construction of this additional boat capacity, which we will follow up with orders as we are able to place them.

In brief, that is the policy. As I stated in the house, as Canada is situated to-day we believe it is necessary, even though it is not economical, to undertake the building of destroyers. We believe that with the fleet of destroyers we have to-day it is necessaiy to develop destroyer building technique in this country, and to develop sources of supply in Canada for every piece of equipment that goes into a destroyer. That work is proceeding and will be carried along as rapidly as possible without interfering with the more urgent requirements of our programme.

Of course, as I have said in the house before, the most urgent requirement of all is to be able to give rapid service in overhaul and repairs to the boats that are coming to our shores. The greatest contribution we can make to the immediate situation is to give a quick turn around to these boats, and we

War Appropriation Bill

are doing everything we can to build up the repair facilities at Halifax, Saint John and other ports capable of doing this repair work. We are building a floating dry dock at Halifax which will greatly help out the docking situation there, in connection with the repair of ships. Construction of that dock is well under way and will be in operation this autumn. We have also greatly enlarged the machine shop facilities at Halifax. The shore shops have been enlarged and in addition we have installed a floating shop, which is a great help in the repair and overhaul of ships. That will be our first and most urgent effort, to enlarge as rapidly as possible the personnel and facilities for the repair and overhaul of ships. The situation will be eased greatly when the St. Lawrence river opens and some of that repair work can be diverted to St. Lawrence yards, but I can assure the committee that we intend to move heaven and earth to make sure that adequate overhaul facilities are available on the Atlantic coast before the St. Lawrence closes this year.

That, I think, is the building programme. It is intended to expand our shipyards as rapidly as possible. Since the beginning of the war, we have kept every yard well supplied with work. I do not think any yard can complain that it has not had at all times all the work it was capable of carrying out. I am sure if any yard had been capable of doing more work it would have delivered its boats faster than has been the case, though I must say that deliveries of boats have exceeded our expectations up to this time, and we believe the shipbuilders are doing everything possible to cooperate with the government in producing the maximum number of ships.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Richard Burpee Hanson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

Is any

extension contemplated at Saint John, and is anything contemplated at Sydney?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Munitions and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. HOWE:

We are studying the Sydney situation, and I believe something should be done there. The difficulty at Saint John is that we cannot get enough men to operate the present facilities. My hon. friend will understand that where we have existing facilities the first necessity is to get those facilities operating to full capacity before installing further facilities. For example, there is no purpose in extending a dock if the present dock is operating only fourteen hours a day. It is far better economy to get that dock operating twenty-four hours a day; in that way we will get quicker and better results. The same situation exists at the Saint John dry dock. If we can ever get that dock operating anything like twenty-four hours a day we will then go ahead with the additional facilities. I feel sure the time will come when these facilities will be expanded.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ralph Maybank

Liberal

Mr. MAYBANK:

Mr. Chairman, it is

always a difficult matter to change the subject, and I suppose very often it is not quite in accord with the desires of hon. members that the subject should be changed. At the same time the difficulty in which I find myself is that if I do not change the subject, no one else will. There are certain matters I wish to lay before the committee under this omnibus resolution; therefore at the risk of appearing to be abrupt and even brusque- which is far from my intention-I must take the responsibility myself of changing the subject.

On Tuesday and Wednesday of last week I was speaking in this house upon a subject which was then left unfinished, and I wish to resume that discussion. I was speaking about the cordite plant located at, or certainly very near, the city of Winnipeg, and the matter of the coal to be used in that plant. I should like to preface my remarks to-day by an expression of regret at the course which the debate took last Wednesday afternoon, and to say that in so far as I had any responsibility for the debate being less orderly than it might have been, I apologize. As a matter of fact, after thinking it over I believe I had a good deal of responsibility in that respect, and I the more readily express my regret. I have another reason for saying that. Candour, I think, would compel one to do it; but I have a further reason, which I communicated in writing to the minister immediately after I left the house last Wednesday. I should regret indeed to say or do anything which would hurt the minister's feelings. There is no person for whom I have a higher regard than the Minister of Munitions and Supply. No man, I believe, is doing greater work at the present time in this war effort than this same gentleman. That does not mean that everything will flow along smoothly. In fact, I think he would be disappointed if that were the case.

There is another reason for my speaking as I do this afternoon. The general feeling has apparently been that a sharp attack has been made upon the government by one of its followers. My attitude with reference to this problem should not be interpreted as an attack upon the government, except in an indirect way. My attack is made upon some of these persons who have been given a great deal of authority but who have practically no responsibility to the House of Commons or to parliament. My attack is upon certain agents of the government of Canada. My attack is upon the people who head the Allied War Supplies Corporation Limited; the chairman of the board of directors of that corporation is Hon. Mr. Dunning, the president is Mr. Harold

War Appropriation Bill

Crabtree. They and their engineers are the people against whom I would direct any shafts

than I may shoot.

But I must say even with respect to them and to persons like them that I would not want it thought that there is any general dissatisfaction on my part. I am not one of those who is ready to come out and attack all the so-called dollar-a-year men just because it seems to be the popular sport. I think many of these men, and the two I have mentioned specifically, are doing a great job. They have given their services and time. They have had long experience, a great business build-up, and they have much to offer to the country. In the main, they are giving it fully and freely. I do not want to be misunderstood as making a general attack upon the motives, upon the patriotism, upon the abilities or upon the qualities of these people. My attack is made only on this one specific point.

As will be clearly seen to-day, my complaint is that a decision was made without thought: that no thought was given to the particular point in dispute. After the decision was made, and after the persons who had made it had drawn to their attention the fact that a wrong decision was arrived at, they were not prepared to back up or admit a wrong. They undertook to justify that decision. Having commenced to justify it, they stuck to their attitude and have been doing so ever since. I propose to prove this largely out of the mouths of these people themselves.

So far as any general attack upon the government is concerned, I do not suppose any person believes more profoundly than I do that we have a government to-day which is doing its job better than any government that possibly could have been put into these seats. I do not want to get into any tangle with the members of the opposition on this matter by saying to them what could be said. I could be just as frank with them should I so decide. I am not currying favour with the government when I talk that way, and I am not currying favour with the opposition when I please them.

Perhaps I might just restate the problem. In the cordite plant at Winnipeg, a $10,000,000 project, it is desired to bum a coal which will be the most economical. The Allied War Supplies Corporation Limited, a creature of this government, decided to use a coal which in my opinion is not the most economical. I am interested in saving as much as I can of the money of the citizens of this country.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

Richard Burpee Hanson (Leader of the Official Opposition)

National Government

Mr. HANSON (York-Sunbury):

It is British money.

[Mr. Maybank.)

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ralph Maybank

Liberal

Mr. MAYBANK:

I realize that it is British money, but that has nothing to do with it. I do not want to be thought impolite in making that quick retort. I thank the hon. gentleman for making the interjection, but I do not think it makes any difference whether the money to be saved is British or our own. If we owe a duty to our own citizens to save money, we owe a greater duty to the beleaguered people of Britain to save their money. We are trustees for them, and I think my hon. friend will agree with what I say. If I appear to be vehement in my reply, I do not intend to be impolite to him.

There is the problem. Aside from its being an economic problem, there are other factors which enter into it. There is the question of government policy generally. So that hon. members may be left in no doubt I say that the company headed by Messrs. Crabtree and Dunning has deliberately flouted government policy in respects other than economical. I think I shall be able to show this. Since I have correspondence I wish to place upon the table, it may be necessary for me to ask the indulgence of hon. members to be allowed to speak longer than forty minutes. I hope that indulgence will be granted.

Between last Wednesday and Saturday morning I spent a good deal of time interviewing people in Ottawa in order to get their opinions upon this subject. For example, I interviewed the fuel board, who are interested in the conservation of coal in this country, as well as various experts in combustion engineering, most of them government employees.

Just before presenting some of the facts I wish again to make reference to the possibility of this matter being referred to the committee which has been set up to examine expenditures. The most cursory examination of this suggestion should suffice to convince anyone that it would be a useless act on our part. The problem we have before us now is to stop some of the government appointees from flouting the government. The problem we have before us now is to stop some of these people from wasting the money of the British government which we hold in trust. The problem we have before us is to stop them now from pursuing a course w'hich will waste the coal and put our transportation system to an uneconomic use. The problem we have before us is to stop these appointees of the government now, and not leave the matter entirely in their hands to deal with just as they like, leaving it to us to inquire afterwards. Merely to refer the matter to the committee would be putting our seal of approval on what they have so far done, and then inquiring afterwards whether they were

War Appropriation Bill

right. In the meantime the money would be lost, the coal wasted, and the transportation system overloaded.

Allied War Supplies Corporation is determined to have its own way in this matter, regardless. I repeat, they are determined to have their own way. Let us get that point clear. They know where, they are going. I quite agree that when organizations of this kind are set up we must allow them a great deal of freedom, but we cannot, it seems to me, give them full freedom; for that would be simply to abdicate governmental functions. They have made a decision here, I submit, first of all, without thinking; and secondly and thirdly and fourthly and fifthly they endeavour to support it by a lot of spurious reasons and arguments. I think they have proved that point themselves.

I should like to read to the committee a copy of a letter which would seem at first glance to wipe out all the objections I am making and to set at rest or brush aside any criticisms. But a second consideration of the matter will create quite a different impression. I read from a copy of a letter which is a report to the Department of Munitions and Supply, dated January 13, and signed by W. H. Wharton, chief engineer of the Allied War Supplies Corporation. There is a reference to a file number at the top of the page, and then the report is entitled "Fuel for steam generation". It reads:

Further to our conversation of Saturday morning regarding fuel for the Winnipeg project.

This matter was given considerable thought during September when we then had before us a resume of coal costs and analyses, all from Canadian mines, and ranging from the low rank Saskatchewan lignite to the bituminous and semi-anthracite eoals of Alberta.

Saskatchewan lignite from Estevan was definitely the cheapest fuel, but other important considerations mentioned below mitigated against its use.

Lignite fines can be burned successfully on travelling grate stokers-

Lignite fines, I may say, are simply the very fine particles that you will find in any kind of coal. It is a good descriptive expression. The report goes on:

Lignite fines can be burned successfully on travelling grate stokers, but this equipment was ruled out because of high first cost and the fact that such a job is unsuitable for use with other coals. The lignite "sized" coal is best handled on the sprinkler type stoker, but this machine is more costly than single retort underfeeds and this latter machine will provide a better fuel burning range and will give higher efficiency with other western coals. The kicker stoker would give us a problem of ash discharge which we must guard against in this type of explosive plant and this consideration also ruled out the possibility of going to pulverized fuel firing. It will be realized that

this plant would consume in excess of 20 tons of lignite per hour for steam generation and since lignite cannot be stored on the site in quantity, I did not feel that we could depend on day by day deliveries from the lignite field, especially in view of labour troubles which have been in evidence in that section.

The schedule on the Winnipeg project definitely called for a part of this steam plant being in service July 1, 1941, and this fact weighed heavily in favour of duplication of equipment at Nobel, and de Salaberry, on which plants all engineering work had been completed, entailing design of power house, steam generating equipment, piping, bunker storage, etc., etc. We are still dealing with the mines in Alberta and have not, as yet, signed a contract for coal, but we will, in all probability, burn the better grades of bituminous coal, either from the Crowsnest pass or from the northern field.

The letter concludes:

I trust that the foregoing will cover the situation fully, and am

Allied War Supplies Corporation, W. H. Wharton,

Chief Engineer.

Before passing on to something else I should like to direct a little more careful scrutiny of that letter. In the first place, according to the chief engineer, Mr. Wharton, the matter was definitely closed in September, 1940. It is important to bear that date in mind because of what developed afterwards. The matter must have been closed on the date of this letter, January 13. This letter, dated January 13, says the matter had been closed in September. Well, even if it was not closed in September we can be pretty sure that it was closed in January, and it is important to bear this in mind in view of what happened afterwards. He says in the letter:

This matter was given considerable thought during September when we then had before us a resume of coal costs and analyses all from Canadian mines, and ranging from the low rank Saskatchewan lignite to the bituminous and semi-anthracite coals of Alberta.

I want to tell you what I know now, and that is that tenders were called for coal on September 30, and there were not many days left in September after the 30th. Tenders were called on September 30. In spite of that fact the letter states that they had before them these costs and analyses from Canadian mines "ranging from low rank Saskatchewan lignite," and so forth. When you read that sentence there is enough right there to start the flow of suspicion. Would you think that they had ordered the equipment for bituminous coal, equipment which they admit and state over and over again is not suitable for lignite coal, and then sent out the call for tenders? If so, it was just playing ducks and drakes with the trade, just asking them to submit informalb.54

War Appropriation Bill

tion when they knew full well they did not want any such information. They did not get their replies until October. Here again I want to point out that it was clear in their minds-pluperfectly clear-that Saskatchewan lignite coal was definitely the cheapest. After this letter there is no more argument about the economics of the question. They have to find some other objection to the use of lignite. The travelling grate costs more, and therefore it is ruled out. I have not any special complaint about that. It may be so, although all manner of other people are using it and are finding it worth while. A large number of commercial plants are using that particular equipment. But I am not concerned about that; that is not the only equipment they can use. Every other person that uses it-and most of the big plants do- say they have found out over a period of lime that the savings far outweigh the disadvantage of the higher first cost. A big sugar beet plant which has been erected in the city of Winnipeg burns while in operation more coal than this ten million dollar cordite plant will burn, and they have that kind of equipment. However, I am not insisting that any particular type should be installed; all I am emphasizing is that sound economic practice should be followed, that Allied War Corporation should keep in accord with the policies of this government generally, which in fact it is violating. I say they should follow this government instead of trying to lead it. We shall have no difficulty as soon as Messrs. Crabtree and Dunning assent to that simple proposition.

As a matter of fact, with the kind of equipment which I have just mentioned, the cost to that sugar plant of making steam is something like 28 cents per thousand pounds, whereas by any method in use with bituminous coal, the figure is nearer to 40 cents.

However, Mr. Wharton gives another reason in his letter. He says that the equipment which apparently he had then decided upon is useful for a larger range of coals. But he does not mean to include in that, it will be recalled from reading his letter, the lignite coal, because he has ruled lignite out. Well, what he is deciding to put in may be better in the sense that it will take in a wider range of the bituminous coals, but it is against the interests of the country to use anything but lignite coal. So that he does not need to set out to use something which is suitable for burning several different kinds of coal. We shall find out, as we found out in the last war, that Canada has no more coal than she needs, and that something akin to rationing will be necessary. As I understand

'Mr. Maybank.]

it, government policy already points in that direction.

Mr. Wharton declares against using the travelling grate equipment. He adds that there is another kind which is best suited for using sized lignite coal. This is coal of about half an inch to two inches. He talks about the additional cost of that kind of equipment. But he never made any inquiries as to its cost; there never was any tender called; he and they decided without thought that certain things would be done. That is all there was to it. No inquiries were made of other concerns with reference to the equipment which, he says, has a higher cost; that is, this so-called "kicker" system.

In spite, however, of his objection to the higher cost he does not go so far as to say in this case that the higher first cost of that kicker equipment would offset the savings from the lignite coal. On the contrary, the lignite is good, and he knows it, and every person knows it; it is still by far the cheapest coal for Canada, and, having regard to that, it is thoroughly efficient coal for Canada.

The description of this kind of machinery which has been given to me-and I have also seen it-is substantially this. What he calls the "kicker" system is simply a system of stoking which carries the coal in and lays it on top of the fire, whereas the kind of equipment in use with bituminous coal has already been referred to as an underfeed; it pushes the coal up from the bottom. I mention that because these terms may be used from time to time. What more than one engineer has remarked to me about the kicker equipment, which lays the coal on top of the fire, is that it is simply hand-firing, except that it is done mechanically; this is rather a contradiction in terms, but it is the way they put it; and most people would think that so long as you pile enough coal on, you can get enough steam, although you cannot do as well in some cases as in others.

I have discovered a further point. When he speaks about the unsuitability of that equipment for certain other coals, it is to be noted that this equipment which ought to be put into the cordite plant is the standard United States government equipment from coast to coast, and consequently it must be in use in the United States for all kinds of coal. In seven years in the area from Swift Current to Kenora there has not been installed a single new underfeed plant; we are left to this day and this date with Crabtree and Dunning, with a creature of this government under their leadership, or rather under their compulsion, trying to turn back the clock.

War Appropriation Bill

Not all these other people can be wrong, you know. Do you suppose that every industrialist in western Canada would be fool enough deliberately to place his industrial plant in jeopardy? It just does not make sense, Mr. Chairman. I do not mind a man on the outside making-to a certain extent- fools of the members of this parliament, but these gentlemen are going a step too far. Do you suppose that every combustion engineer out there is always and completely wrong, and that only the combustion engineers whom these gentlemen have in their employ are always right? As I have said, one of them, not the Mr. Wharton whose name I have mentioned, but Mr. Abbott, comes straight from the company which makes the equipment that is to be put into the plant. I do not suggest that this man is financially interested, but I say that after long experience with that company he is almost certain to be prejudiced in favour of the organization for which he worked so long, and which doubtless he served so well.

I might interject this. Whenever any possibility of personal interest or personal bias or prejudice, because of long association with an industrial concern or for any other reason, enters into a picture, then it is the part of wisdom to examine most carefully any decision that is being made; and it would be wisdom on the part of a man in such a position to lean backwards against the making of a decision in favour of his own company.

It was remarked in the letter I read to you that the writer did not feel safe in relying on day to day deliveries. Well, all kinds of others use a great deal of coal. They are relying on day to day deliveries. Nobody has been let down yet. There is coal of all kinds there. It is very close to Winnipeg. They are all getting it. The Canadian Pacific Railway at its Weston shops is burning 15,000 tons. The Canadian National Railways at one of its shops is burning 30,000 tons, and the Canadian National Railways in another shop is burning

30,000 tons.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CCF

Alexander Malcolm Nicholson

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. NICHOLSON:

Per annum?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ralph Maybank

Liberal

Mr. MAYBANK:

Per annum. I might

tell you, by the way. that the Canadian National Railways found out-and it is simple enough for us to find out from them-that when they installed the equipment for lignite they saved $40,000 in one shop. The Swift Canadian company, another big plant, is using 12.000 tons. The Manitoba Sugar company, which I have already mentioned, is using 20.000 tons. There are all kinds of small ones. The university of Manitoba is using 8.000 tons, and' all our hospitals in the city of Winnipeg are using it, one using 5,000

tons. The Selkirk mental hospital, just outside Winnipeg, is using 10,000 tons, and another large place in Brandon is the same. They are all the same. All you have to do is to take the list of industrial concerns in the area I am talking about and it will be practically a list of those that burn lignite with this equipment, with this exception. The only ones you have to cross off the list are those with old equipment, who could not change; but apart from that, the list of industrial places burning coal and the list of places burning lignite with the proper equipment that we have been talking about here to-day are coterminous. No one says they are fools except the engineers of allied war supplies.

We have lignite coal close to Winnipeg, about 290 miles away. It comes into Winnipeg by both railways, and there is a twenty-four hour service. Every person gets all the coal he wants of this kind. There are no difficulties. On the other hand, the coal which these people propose to use comes from a place about 890 miles away, and there is only one railway bringing it in. They cannot get it from the northern part of Alberta but only through the Crowsnest pass, a trip of about 890 miles. Any kind of tie-up on the railway is much more serious for that kind of delivery than in the case of the short haul of lignite.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
CCF

Alexander Malcolm Nicholson

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. NICHOLSON:

Which railway?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ralph Maybank

Liberal

Mr. MAYBANK:

The Crowsnest is Canadian Pacific.

Now, someone might wonder about the possibilities of supply-whether or not they have all the coal in the ground, whether or not they are working at it. I have heard that raised. This man talks about the dependability of supply. I talked with Abbott, the engineer whom I have mentioned, and he spoke of dependability of supply. That was the final and only thing he had to talk about. He said that was the only thing that worried him. Well, I have a memorandum I made after inquiring into the facts-and there is no doubt about it that the facts are correctly stated.

Who are there out there who can deliver one hundred tons a day? There is one company which for a long time has been delivering

1.000 to 1,200 tons a day, and it has not let anyone down. There is a larger company which has been delivering for a long time from

3.000 to 4,000 tons a day. Numerous small mines are producing 100 tons a day or more. Most of the mines are not working to capacity. Most of them can be stepped up almost double without any difficulty at all; that is to say, they can spring right into double to-day's pro-

War Appropriation Bill

duction almost overnight. So that there is no problem of any kind involved from the standpoint of dependability of supply.

But for a really egregious statement indicating ignorance, I commend you to the last sentence of this gentleman's letter where he talks about labour troubles. There have been no labour troubles there. That is the answer. That is the fact. In 1932 in the Estevan field there was trouble. The only bit of trouble in the Estevan field in regard to labour from that time to this was a dispute between two trade unions as to which one of them should be recognized. They eventually got that settled. It was not under the present Minister of Labour; it was under Norman Rogers. I remember discussing the question with him at that time. They got that worked out. I do not know which one turned out to be the one recognized, but what does that matter? I do know that there was never any dispute about wages and working conditions.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
NAT

John Ritchie MacNicol

National Government

Mr. MacNICOL:

No dispute between the company and the men?

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Ralph Maybank

Liberal

Mr. MAYBANK:

Nothing of that sort.

The man who talks about labour trouble in this field does not know what he is talking about. There is no coal field in Canada as free from labour troubles as this. As soon as that particular union war was over the union that won signed its agreement of wages and working conditions, which had always been ready for them. Not only that, but they got a model agreement whereby all changes that come about in conditions from forces over which they have no control-cost of living and so forth-will be immediately incorporated as changes in the agreement. You have the best labour situation out there of any coal mine in Canada. When an engineer says he cannot rely on his supply because of labour troubles, and is going somewhere else on that account, he is not getting out of the frying pan into the fire; he is getting out of the refrigerator into the fire.

One day in that little community of Estevan -and that is the centre spot of this business- they decided to raise money for an ambulance. They required S2,500. In twenty-four hours the fund was SI,000 oversubscribed by the workmen in and about that field. The Red Cross and all other similar drives were quickly over the top. What do hon. members suppose would be the results in Toronto in one of these subscription drives that newspapers, such as the Telegram, put on, if there were a similar response? Instead of getting half a million, in the same ratio they would be picking up two or three millions at a time.

My reason for mentioning this is not sentimental, but simply to drive home the

thought that you cannot get that kind of patriotic response in a community which is brooding over some real or fancied labour wrong. It is only people who are enjoying a reasonable approach to contentment from whom action of that kind can be expected. And when you have such a reaction to the various movements you can be reasonably sure that there is no serious labour trouble or threat of labour trouble in the neighbourhood.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Alphonse Fournier

Liberal

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Fournier, Hull):

I must remind the hon. member that he has spoken for forty minutes.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
?

Some hon. MEMBERS:

Go on.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink
LIB

Alphonse Fournier

Liberal

The ACTING CHAIRMAN (Mr. Fournier, Hull):

With the unanimous consent of the committee.

Topic:   WAR APPROPRIATION BILL
Subtopic:   PROVISION FOR GRANTING TO HIS MAJESTY AID FOR NATIONAL DEFENCE AND SECURITY
Permalink

March 18, 1941