July 20, 1944

NAT

Ernest Edward Perley

National Government

Mr. PERLEY:

Does the minister recall that at Round lake and at Crooked lake a dam was put in raising the level of the water between four and five feet? That resulted in the flooding of the flats on the Indian reserve and destroying their hay meadows. They used to get about 500 or 600 tons of hay off that land

just west of the lake, but for the last two or three years they have not been able to get any hay from that land, and that has been a terrible blow to the Indians. I have taken that matter up with the Minister of Mines and Resources, and I have had two delegations from the reserve wait on me within the last six months urging me to continue my representations to the minister that the water be lowered, say three feet, draining certain areas, so that the Indians could produce the quantity of hay which they produced previously. But the Minister of 'Mines and Resources would not give these representations any consideration at all. I have been over the location and know exactly the situation. Will the Minister of Agriculture take it into consideration? It would not affect the water in the Qu'Appelle river because, as the minister knows, that is a flat country, and1 the water level in the other lakes would not be affected either. There would be no less water going from the Qu'Appelle lakes into the river. I wish the minister would give this matter his earnest consideration. As I said before, I cannot get any consideration from the other department; and as the minister's department is building the dams and controlling the water, I bring it to his attention now.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

The Indian branch of the Department of Mines and Resources, of course, put in claims on account of that land, and we have paid them S3,330 in damages on account of these lands which were flooded by the putting in of the dam. I can understand that that does not get them the hay.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
NAT

Ernest Edward Perley

National Government

Mr. PERLEY:

They protested against that, as the settlement which the department offered to make them was permanent and for all time. They said that would not reimburse their loss for any more than one or two years. Certainly they will lose the hay for all time, so to speak, and that is one of the reasons they protest against having been forced to accept that settlement. I asked the Minister of Mines and Resources if his department would reconsider it. No, they said, that offer had been made and the Indians had to accept it. It was forced on them, and they accepted it under protest.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

What we actually do is buy the land. In all cases, whether it is individuals or the Department of Indian Affairs or any one else concerned, we set a price for the land and buy it; and of course the land is sometimes flooded and is under water for all time to come and no one can occupy it afterwards; it is occupied by a

Supply-Agriculture

lake. I am not just sure what the condition is at that point, whether the water is up over the land at all times.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
NAT
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

I presume we bought and paid for it, and it is now .part of the project.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
NAT

Ernest Edward Perley

National Government

Mr. PERLEY:

I may say that the water is over it now, and the raising of the dam has forced a good many of the campers to move their cottages back. It is a great injustice to them; it has given them no additional service nor has it made the resort any more convenient or pleasurable.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CCF

Percy Ellis Wright

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

Mr. WRIGHT:

Will the minister state how many municipalities have made applications to come under the P.F.R.A. which the government has been unable to accept, and what is the possibility of more of these municipalities being able to come under the scheme?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

The present position is that we have taken in certain river basins which I think everyone will agree are more or less in the drought area. This legislation is based first upon the fact that there is a drought area, and in defining it we have kept as close as possible to what is known as the old Palliser triangle. When we started out to operate under the act first we were not able to define exactly the boundaries of the old Palliser triangle, and we adopted the idea of confining it to river basins. What we have taken is the Assiniboine river basin, the Qu'Appelle river basin, the Souris, the Frenchman, the South Saskatchewan, and the North Saskatchewan until it comes to the point where it joins the South and becomes the Saskatchewan river. We have taken the height of land east and north of these and have made that the boundary as far as Saskatchewan and Manitoba are concerned. On the Alberta side we have followed down between the streams from Lloydminster toward Calgary where we touch the foothills, and then followed the foothills down to the United States boundary. That, roughly speaking, is the boundary line around the area. It starts just north of Winnipeg, comes up west of lake Manitoba, then follows into Saskatchewan, and around the height of land dividing the Assiniboine river from the Saskatchewan river basin including the Crooked, which is a branch of the Saskatchewan, and following the height of land through to a point where a line drawn north joins the Saskatchewan river. We have gone around the northern side of the municipal boundaries wherever we can, rather than taking the south side. Where the height of land runs through the municipality we have invariably

taken the northern boundary. At the point where directly south of the junction of the two Saskatchewan rivers it becomes to Saskatchewan river, the boundary runs up to the junction of those rivers and then on the north side follows the height of land between the North Saskatchewan and the Churchill or other rivers north of the North Saskatchewan. That brings us out at the boundary line of Alberta at about where the North Saskatchewan river crosses the boundary line from Alberta into Saskatchewan. Municipalities all along that boundary line have suggested that they would like to be in, but our difficulty in connection with that is that a matter of policy is involved. The bill says, and all the discussions in this house have been related to the fact that, there is a drought area in the Palliser triangle and that because we induced settlers to go into it we ought to do something to assist in rehabilitating them; and that is the reason the act has the name it has.

A recommendation was made by a committee of this house last year that the principle should be applied to all lands and all provinces right across the country. The conflict is as between those two principles. If we are going to continue to apply this act to the Palliser triangle or-what is known as the drought area, then of course the problem of water conservation outside of it is the responsibility of the provinces. We at one time under the Saskatchewan government had a well-digging policy; and we also built dams all over Saskatchewan before this policy came in at all. The same thing was done in Alberta and Manitoba. You can find dams all over the drought area which were built by provincial governments before this plan was adopted. You can find wells on road allowances which were dug by the old territorial government before there was a province and that are still operating, and other wells which were dug, within the first years after the provinces were formed, by the provincial governments. In other words, the responsibility for that kind of thing has always been assumed to be a provincial responsibility, and the only place we have departed from that in this house is in connection with what we call the Palliser triangle, the drought area, and we only took that on during the recent drought period, on the assumption that the federal government had induced people to go there, knowing that it was a dry area.

I as minister, and many others in this house, would be in favour of having a policy which extended right across the country, provided we could adopt it without getting into great difficulties with the provinces. But for the time being, with this act as it is, and with the

Supply-Agriculture

discussions which have taken place in this house in carrying out these projects, we think it is impossible for us to go outside the Palliser triangle or the lands which are as nearly as possible related to the Palliser triangle.

At one o'clock the committee took recess.

The committee resumed at three o'clock.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
NAT

John Ritchie MacNicol

National Government

Mr. MacNICOL:

When the committee rose I was on the point of asking the minister a question with reference to what the prairie farm rehabilitation board is planning for that area west of the northern portion of the south branch of the Saskatchewan river west from Saskatoon. Last summer I met some engineers in the west who told me that the prairie farm rehabilitation board-to my mind quite rightly; I wish to support their plans in a general way-were planning to build a dam across the south branch of the Saskatchewan river at some point near Saskatchewan Landing. There is a natural depression north from that point, as the minister knows, which would seem to have been put there by Providence for some purpose. The depression is about forty miles long. A dam at Saskatchewan Landing, or perhaps near there, between 130 and 150 feet high, if the base of the river is of such material that a dam could be built that high, would result in that depression some forty miles long filling up with water. I believe that the general level would reach about 1,930 feet above sea level. If that could be done, the engineers really have something worth while. They could then run a canal north from a lake at the end of the depression, the name of which has slipped my mind at the moment; I think it is White Bear lake. The water level of that White Bear extension of the natural coulee would rise to about 1,930 feet above sea level. That would be providential, in my judgment. They propose to run a canal from the end of White Bear lake north for a few miles and then divide it into two main branches, one running northwest in the general direction of Tramping lake for perhaps fifty miles or more. Tramping lake is nothing more than a coulee at the moment. There is water in it at times and it is dry at times. Fortunately the general topography of the ground lends itself to these plans. In other, -words it slopes, I am told, from the high point of 1,930 feet down towards Tramping lake. If those plans are carried out it would mean that the water would flow by gravity as far as the Tramping lake depression. It would assist all of that area around Rose-town and the communities north. If my

memory serves me rightly the other branch of the canal runs off to the right in the general direction of Saskatoon and north of the general direction of Saskatoon towards a place called Kinley. Another branch is planned to turn southeast in the direction of Luck lake, west of Riverhurst. Riverhurst is on the opposite side of the south Saskatchewan river.

As it was explained to me, there were three areas that could be served for irrigation purposes with water from a reservoir built behind a dam in the vicinity of Saskatchewan Landing. The west area would be something over 200,000 acres. That great extent of land could be irrigated. The land that could be irrigated west of Saskatoon would consist of over 600,000 acres. The southeast area down in the direction of but west of Riverhurst would be something less than 100,000 acres. From the information I gathered from the engineers I judged that there would be at least a total of a million acres of land there that could be irrigated if a dam were erected at or near Saskatchewan Landing.

I wish to assure the minister as one hon. member of this house that if such a proposal to irrigate a million acres were put forward I would support it to the best of my ability. It would mean the opening up of many thousands of new farms. It would mean the irrigating of that area by gravity without pumping, as I understand it. I hope I am right in that. It would supply water to an area that richly deserves it. I believe if such a programme were carried out it would result in the doubling of the population of Saskatoon in twenty-five years. Instead of being a city of forty to fifty thousand people it could have ambitions of reaching a hundred thousand.

Other proposals, as the minister knows, have been made for bringing water four hundred miles from the north Saskatchewan river for irrigation purposes. I am opposed to that. I am opposed to any diversion from the north Saskatchewan river, and would do my best to organize opposition to it. But the scheme I have outlined seems to me to be one that Providence has provided for.

I ask the minister if any plans have been prepared to take care of providing water from a dam anywhere in the vicinity of Saskatchewan Landing for the irrigating of the million acres of the low moisture land west of the general line of Saskatoon and north of the general line from Saskatchewan Landing. If there are, they would have my sincere support. If the proposal to build the dam at Saskatchewan Landing-

Supply-Agriculture

and the dam itself would be of such a height that I believe some 75,000 horse-power could be produced there-is proceeded with it will have my support. However, I wish to warn the minister in one particular. As I see it, the primary consideration is the building of the other dam I proposed somewhere near River-hurst to take care of that area in the general [DOT]direction of Regina. I am not going to go into that, other than to say this. The engineers in charge of both those proposals should see to it that the dam at Saskatchewan Landing should not be so constructed that it would interfere with the backwater from' a dam that could be built near Riverhurst. By river water it would not be more than a hundred miles from Riverhurst to Saskatchewan Landing. I believe that the river level at Riverhurst is about 1,700 feet above sea level. I believe the river level at Saskatchewan Landing is about 1,811 feet above sea level. Therefore if the dam is raised to 1,930 feet the engineers would have to be careful that anything they do at Saskatchewan Landing would not interfere in any way with what must be done at Riverhurst. The first thing to be done is to build a dam somewhere near Riverhurst.

I wish to compliment the department on the grand plans that the P.F.R.A. people have apparently examined into. I can see plainly that if these plans were carried out, as they should be, with the cost divided in proportion, it would be a great thing for the central province of Saskatchewan.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

The engineers of the P.F.R.A. branch are making surveys in the area just referred to by the hon. member for Davenport. The first investigations have to do with the possibility of building a dam somewhere near Saskatchewan Landing. Last year a certain amount of money was spent in [DOT]drilling test holes during the time the ice was on the river, in order to determine whether or not conditions were suitable for the construction of a dam. That is about as far as we have gone up to the present in the matter of investigations. There is no report from which I can quote as to what are the possibilities. The statement that has been made was a general statement of the situation as it now exists. This summer we hope to spend some money in making surveys from the air and further surveys on the ground in order to ascertain the possibilities of that plan, but at the moment I am not in a position to give any details of what will be accomplished by the plan or what are its possibilities for the future, because as yet we have not received a report from the engineers which would make such a statement possible. I

should add that the distance from the proposed site north of Moose Jaw to the site suggested here is something like sixty miles.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
NAT

John Ritchie MacNicol

National Government

Mr. MacNICOL:

Am I right in my understanding that the general topography of the land slants to the north?

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
?

Robert Gardiner

Mr. GARDIINER:

I would think so, though I have not an engineer's report upon which to base that statement. I believe water will have to be pumped in order to get it up to the point where it will flow.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
NAT
LIB

James Garfield Gardiner (Minister of Agriculture)

Liberal

Mr. GARDINER:

Yes, I would think so.

I believe under the plan sufficient power will be developed from the dam itself to take care of the pumping, and the cost will not be prohibitive. I believe some pumping will have to be done, but I would not want to be too definite on that before we get the final report.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Frederick William Gershaw

Liberal

Mr. GERSHAW:

This vote is to support prairie farm rehabilitation, the need for which was recognized long years ago. Ten years ago the need became particularly acute, and this act was passed. That need is still great, particularly in the Palliser triangle, which so desperately requires something in the nature of a permanent policy. Year after year it has been demonstrated that there is not sufficient rainfall in that district to permit agriculture to be carried on, so that some permanent policy must be adopted in regard to irrigation. Streams flow eastward from the Rocky mountains and north from the Cypress hills. If the waters of these streams could be made use of it would be a great blessing to the people of this district. The works should be of a permanent nature, so that they may continue to be useful long after we are gone. I am sure the staff in the office at Regina have gathered a great deal of valuable information in connection with this area, and I want to make the plea to the minister that the engineers should concentrate on this primary objective until it is much closer to accomplishment than is the case at present. In addition, some of these works which are partly finished could be completed at very small cost, and I think that should be done just as soon as men and material are available. The longer they are left unfinished the greater will be the suffering. This is really one of our very urgent problems.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Jesse Pickard Tripp

Liberal

Mr. TRIPP:

First of all, Mr. Chairman, I should like to congratulate the minister and the department on what has been done under the P.F.RA. I know this measure was brought into operation by a previous administration, but it took the present minister to realize the

Supply-Agriculture

possibilities of this area. He knows the country; he recognizes the needs, and if you travel through that country you will realize that he and his department should be given great credit for the way these projects are being developed under this act.

This morning I was very glad to hear the minister place emphasis upon the small projects which are to be undertaken. It is all very well for some hon. members to get up in this committee and advocate the expenditure of considerable sums of money on large projects, but in my opinion what is needed more than anything else is the further development of the small dugout and the small dam both on the farm and on the stream in the southern part of Saskatchewan. These small projects, I believe, best serve the needs of the greatest number of people. As far as the expenditure of money is concerned it does not cost much to build one dugout, but collectively they are of great benefit to the farmers of that country. Many farmers who formerly had to draw water three or four miles have benefited from the construction of these small dugouts and dams.

I should like also to bring to the attention of the minister a project on the Souris river, with which I am sure he is well acquainted. This project has been surveyed and fully covered by his department, and I believe the commissioner at Regina is quite prepared to go ahead with it when the money is available. It will consist of the construction of two or three small dams, which will provide storage for considerable water over a matter of about forty miles of country. The valley of the Souris river is quite wide, and if the pumping method of irrigation were adopted a great many acres of land could be developed for the production of hay and even fruit. I was speaking to the commissioner with regard to this project, and he feels that fruit crops could be developed in that valley just as they are now being developed at the experimental farm at Morden.

I also want to commend the minister upon the work he has done in establishing community pastures in that area. These pastures have served a very useful purpose and are still doing so. Years ago, when the drought was upon us, we had community pastures where we could send our stock, where water was provided, and they filled a great need.

I hope the minister will give consideration to this project along the Souris river. If it is not possible to include it in this year's programme I hope he will be able to include it in the programme for next year.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
CCF

Joseph William Burton

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

Mr. BURTON:

As has been pointed out by other hon. members, the P.F.RA., as it is

commonly called in the west, was begun primarily as an experiment in the so-called drought area. I want to join other hon. members who have given credit for the work that has been done in this connection.

While some of us may from time to time have offered criticism, in the right places, we are also prepared to give credit where credit is due. I sincerely believe that this so-called experiment, in the drought area has proven successful and is beyond the experimental stage. While we were experimenting with that work, the idea was to be made effective in the smaller field. That was the original plan. I was pleased the other day to hear the minister explain how the Moose Jaw water project had been taken care of by a special vote earmarked for that purpose. 1 think that was handled in the proper way, and I suggest that similar work in the future be undertaken in the same fashion.

While I am prepared to admit that the preliminary work, and even the active administration work and the handling of the larger projects, in all probability can best be done under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, I do submit that the larger irrigation projects, those connected with the supplying of water to urban centres such as Moose Jaw and Regina, as has been advocated by the hon. member for Davenport, should be provided for by a special vote, and the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act should carry out the work. However, the experimental stage of this work, as I suggest, has passed. I believe we have now reached the time when there might be a renaming of the act, and also a rewriting of it so as to widen its scope. The renaming might easily be done by inserting in place of the word "prairie" the word "Canadian", so that we would have a Canadian farm rehabilitation act.

Having gone through the experimental stage in the west, we now have the advantage of knowing what can be done. The time has-arrived when we should take in all the farming areas in Canada. We might have three separate zones, one for the maritimes, one for central Canada, and one for the western provinces, all working under an administrative head. The other evening the hon. member for Cumberland suggested that there should be a reclaiming of the marsh lands in the maritime provinces. That work could' be taken care of, as well as other necessary work. I had hoped when coming to Ottawa that during the course of the session I would have time to get around to other parts of so-called eastern Canada so as to familiarize myself with the conditions in this section of

Supply-Agriculture

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Charles Albert Henderson

Liberal

Mr. HENDERSON:

I should like to add a word to what has been said in connection with the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. There are seven community pastures in the constituency of Kindersley, which I have the honour to represent. Those pastures aggregate 174,680 acres of submarginal land which has been reclaimed. Nearly all the pastures have been operating for three or four years, and the greater portion of them have been regrassed with tame grasses of various kinds, chiefly crested wheat grass. Those pastures are supporting and feeding over 3,000 head of cattle and 2,000 horses. There are two more pastures ready for construction when we can get the men to build them. Those pastures are rendering service not only locally to Kindersley constituency, but to the whole of Canada.

With the advantage of registered Shorthorn and Hereford sires in developing those strains of cattle on the pastures, buyers from eastern Canada are in a position to select from one to three or four cars of feeder steers in the fall if they care to come to that community. They can go into these pastures and soon get plenty of splendid cattle. In truth those cattle are fairly well ready for the market when they come off the pastures in the fall. There are some feeders who would consider them pretty well warmed up, and in condition that the old country pepole like. The way the present minister has extended this work under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act, in connection with pastures, is most commendable.

I have one further word in connection with water. I support what the hon. member for Davenport has said. We have cooperated on this subject before. I believe I have spoken with respect to it on two other occasions in this chamber. The hon. member was on sound

ground in practically everything he said in connection with irrigation along the south Saskatchewan river. I did not agree with him, though, in what he said with respect to the area north to Tramping lake. There is a height of land there which would eliminate it from the area. Most of the country to which the hon. member referred could be covered, more particularly that portion near Saskatoon via Eagle creek. It could be taken care of from there. But Tramping lake would have to be filled from the north, either from the North Saskatchewan river or the Red Deer river. It has been suggested we should not take anything from the North Saskatchewan river. It could be secured from the Red Deer and other sources in the west, utilizing Sullivan lake and Tramping lake to take care of the surplus of water now running away. .

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink
LIB

Donald Alexander McNiven

Liberal

Mr. McNIVEN:

From the remarks made in connection with the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act it would appear that there is unanimity with regard to the merits of the act and its administration by the present minister. With that view everyone in western Canada would agree. Scattered throughout western Canada there are about 19.000 individual dugouts, watering dams and small irrigation projects which have proven a veritable boon to western Canada. It was a real tribute to the minister to hear the hon. member for Humboldt suggest this afternoon that the name of the act should be changed to the Canadian farm rehabilitation act and be administered for the whole of Canada in the same way as it has been administered for western Canada. I am in accord with that suggestion. The matter was considered last year by the reconstruction committee, and in an interim report to the house it was recommended that the provisions of the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act be extended to other parts of Canada so that districts which might be afflicted would be able to receive the benefits of this legislation.

I concur in the plans that are being developed for the irrigation of certain parts of western Canada. In this connection I would commend the efforts and vision of the director, Mr. Spence. In giving evidence before the reconstruction committee he formulated plans for an irrigation project which would provide water for very extensive areas and assure abundant crops. _

These amounts are contained in a general vote, but, as has been mentioned by the minister, special votes have been provided for water conservation. This was the case in connection with Saskatoon and later for Moose Jaw and more recently for the town of Hum-

Supply-Agriculture

boldt. In this connection the department has undertaken a search for water to supply this town. I commend the minister for this undertaking. Having recently spent three weeks in Humboldt I know something about the quality of the water there. I think I can say there is not a town in western Canada in greater need of a supply of consumable water.

Mention has been made on more than one occasion of the projects to provide Moose Jaw and Regina with permanent water supplies. It is part of the plan that this water should come from the Saskatchewan river and be piped to these areas. This plan is not new; it was first broached in 1913 when a vote of the burgesses of Moose Jaw, Regina, Weybura and some of the intervening areas, together with the inhabitants of the rural areas concerned, was taken. The proposal was that the city should pay a certain portion of the cost, the provincial government a proportion, while the lands bordering upon the project and which would be benefited therefrom would be taxed. The project was defeated, and until recently there has been little done or said with respect thereto. *

I would point out that the minister has partly developed this plan by means of an open ditch and pumping station at Riverhurst in order to make available a supply of water for Moose Jaw. Moose Jaw has an acute water situation, and those of us who live in Regina are in sympathy with the situation in which that city finds itself. We are heartily in accord with any plan that may be formulated for the correction of that situation. When the plan was first broached some three or four years ago our citizen body was glad to lend its support to carrying it out.

Regina is not in exactly the same position. Regina is peculiarly situated in a saucer, and it obtains its water supply from a series of artesian wells. These were first drilled some forty years ago and at the present time there are forty-two wells in operation. Water has never been rationed in Regina and there has never been any shortage for domestic purposes. We have an abundance of water to satisfy any reasonable demands of industrial life. The water consumption in Regina for the first six months of this year was 869,000,000 gallons, an average of slightly under 5,000,000 per day or 80 gallons per person. These figures indicate that there is immediately available a supply of water for all reasonable purposes. Within the last few weeks another well has been brought into production with a flow of 1,000,000 gallons per day, and two other wells are being drilled at the present time. Water is found at a depth of from 150 to 180 feet. In addition

to the forty-two wells I have mentioned, certain industries, including two breweries, have artesian wells on their own properties. The General Motors plant have an artesian well, the two packing plants have wells, as has Imperial Oil. It will be apparent that there is available an immediate supply of water.

I want at this juncture to pay a tribute to the hon. member for Davenport for his continued interest in western Canada and in the development of water and irrigation projects in particular. He has had a continued interest in the cities of Regina and Moose Jaw. On several occasions the hon. member has said that he is a retired eastern manufacturer, but unlike other eastern manufacturers the hon. gentleman spends much of his time and considerable of his money in visiting western Canada to ascertain for himself the problems facing that part of the country. I want also to commend him for his industry in eastern Canada. On numerous occasions when addressing eastern audiences the hon. member has emphasized the necessity of the development of western Canada to ensure a prosperous east.

The other evening the hon. member stated that having been engaged in the manufacture of radiators, if he were to establish a plant in Regina the first thing he would ask for would be the water supply. With an inadequate water supply he would be deterred from starting his plant there. I know the extent to which the words of the hon. gentleman are weighed and considered by those in eastern Canada and I hope therefore that eastern manufacturers will not consider that Regina is a continuing victim of the drought and that a shortage of water is a reasonable excuse for their refusal to establish manufacturing plants there.

I should have stated earlier that the city engineers informed me that there had been no appreciable diminution in the supply of water, nor had the water level dropped in the artesian wells in the drought years between 1930-39. I have before me a telegram from the mayor of Regina in which, after expressing his thanks and appreciation to the hon, member for Davenport, and commending the Moose Jaw water project as a post-war undertaking, he says:

Mr. Farrell, waterworks superintendent, quite interested. States present supply adequate with no suggestion of failure but ultimately water from Riverhurst logical.

My view that eastern manufacturers, in addition to the hon. member for Davenport, have some such thought in their minds is confirmed by certain statements made by the hon. member for Danforth, who, before the reconstruc-

Supply-Agriculture

tion committee, said that 'western Canada could not expect industrial development until the water situation in western Canada had been corrected. I am very much afraid that our eastern industrialists are looking for an excuse to keep out of western Canada, rather than to go in there and develop a market. I am constrained to that viewpoint because at the city of Calgary, for example, they have the Bow River and an unlimited supply of excellent water. The same is true of the city of Edmonton, on the north Saskatchewan. The same is true of Battleford in the province of Saskatchewan, where they have the Battle and North Saskatchewan rivers. It is equally true of the city of Saskatoon, where the river flows right through the middle of the city. It is equally true of the city of Prince Albert, where the North Saskatchewan flows right through the city.

Topic:   DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Permalink

July 20, 1944