May 17, 1948

LIB
PC

John Ritchie MacNicol

Progressive Conservative

Mr. MacNICOL:

I am very glad. That

shows how I keep in touch with these matters. I try to do so, but, as someone said earlier tonight, we are not always advised of these applications and do not know of them.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB

Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. CHEVRIER:

Five applications from the city of Toronto are before the board.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
PC

John Ritchie MacNicol

Progressive Conservative

Mr. MacNICOL:

Of course you could

not expect me to be other than in favour of the Dufferin street subway, because that is a main north to south artery in Davenport riding. I seldom mention anything about my riding because I am trying to help the w'hole of Canada, in the firm belief that the more I can do for all Canada outside Toronto, the more I am doing for Toronto. I realize that the city of Toronto depends upon the rest of Canada, that the prosperity of the rest of Canada means the prosperity of Toronto; and I have often said there is no better way I can help my riding or the city as a whole than by seeing the rest of Canada prosper and expand. In this case, however, the subway would be in Davenport riding. I do not believe I have asked in this house for a public works for my riding as long as I have been here; I can hardly get down to that kind of stuff only. However, I leave that thought with the .minister. I am glad to know the matter is under consideration, and I very much appreciate his kindness in telling me so.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB

Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. CHEVRIER:

Perhaps I should add also, as I told another hon. member this evening, that the board will be in Toronto to deal with these projects early next month.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:

For a change, Mr. Chairman, perhaps someone from this side of the house might be permitted to say a word. We wohld appreciate the privilege of showing, through you, that we do belong here, and that occasionally we take part in the debates. I am sorry the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre did not take up the matter I intend to deal with, since he has spoken on everything else in this house and, in his own estimation, is an authority on every matter. If he had brought this matter up it would have saved me the trouble.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
CCF

Stanley Howard Knowles (Whip of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation)

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

Mr. KNOWLES:

You did not ask me.

Supply-Transport

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:

The matter I have in mind definitely concerns my riding and, unlike the hon. member for Davenport, I have no hesitation in speaking about such matters.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:

I have occasionally mentioned the name here: Fraser Valley. I was elected here with or in spite of the assistance of the hon. member for Vancouver North, and I am going to speak on behalf of my riding and on a matter in which I am personally concerned.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB
LIB
?

An hon. MEMBER:

Whale oil.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:

I would not go so far as to say whale oil; there is only personal profit in that.

In my riding we have a branch of the Canadian Pacific railway running a distance of 10-1 miles from Mission to Huntingdon. I took up this matter with the minister on his estimates last year, and I am going to quote from a letter he wrote me following the discussion at that time. This branch of the railroad runs behind a dike protecting the land from floods on the Fraser river, which at the present time are rather serious; yet the Canadian Pacific has never paid five cents in diking tax for this protection. I am going to quote this letter, because it shows that the president of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company was either deliberately giving the minister false information, or that he was misinformed. I want to place this on record because I was not permitted to rise a few minutes ago, and as a result this debate will certainly not be finished by eleven o'clock. Under date of November 3, 1947, the minister wrote me as follows:

The Mission subdivision extends from the main line at Mission, B.C., southerly for a distance of 10-1 miles to Huntingdon. It was placed in operation in June, 1891, that is, prior to the construction of the Matsqui dyke. The company from time to time has been requested to contribute toward the cost of the Matsqui dyke, but has consistently refused on the ground that the dyke does not benefit the lands of the railway company. Under the drainage, dyking and development act of British Columbia provision is made for the exclusion from a dyking district of lands not benefited. In 1895 a court of revision, because the company's land did not benefit, exempted the company from assessments in connection with the dyke.

The only grade revision on the subdivision took place in 1912, when a long timber trestle

was replaced. As a result of the replacement, the track was lowered approximately five feet for a distance of approximately three thousand feet. This grade revision was in no way dependent upon or connected1 with any dyke or other protective facility.

I could go on reading from this letter, but I wish to point out to the minister that either the president of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company was misinforming the minister, or he was ill-advised. I walked that distance in gum boots through two feet of water in the flood, and watched a locomotive go through under that water. Perhaps the minister could tell me how the president of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company is any way affected by this protection.

Perhaps I might give some facts and figures in connection with this. Mind you, this is a railway with millions of dollars invested in it, and making millions of dollars too. It was the best of all the lines they had during the war- all the lines of the Canadian Pacific Railway Company. It has never paid five cents in protection.

Here are the actual figures, and I defy the minister-I must correct myself; I was going to say his friends-I defy the minister or those gentlemen of the Canadian Pacific who gave these either deliberately falsified or misdirected statements. Here are the levels of this branch of railway from Huntingdon to Mission. The dike was constructed, after the break-in in 1904 or near that date, to an elevation of 28-37. Here are the flood levels:

Flood

Levels

1894 26-37

1921 22-70

1936 22-61

1920 22-35

1903 22-30

I ask the committee to take note of these levels of the Canadian National Railways, top of rail. These are the railways we own, that the people of Canada own. And I draw attention to the point where they cross the Canadian Pacific railway. Mark you, this is the Canadian National Railways, with millions of dollars invested in it. And I alone have paid over $300 a year diking tax. The level at Gifford is 24-15; at pump No. 1, 22-9; at Diamond, where is crosses the Canadian Pacific, it is 24-57.

And I will just give the point where Cruick-shank pays $300 on his own farm at the township road, where it is 21-8, and the flood was at 22-35 in that area.

The minister has the courage to send a letter such as that from the Canadian Pacific to me, and then to tell me that we should have an increase in freight rates of 21 per cent.

Supply-Transport

because the Canadian Pacific treat all parts of Canada fairly, and because they assume their full obligations in all parts of Canada! The fact is that right today we are very much afraid, on account of the climatic conditions in the coast this year, that we may have another flood.

No government since I have been connected with politics, and long before, has had the courage to say to the Canadian Pacific where they should go and what they should do. May I say I am disappointed in the attitude the government has taken in this matter to date. I am sorry I have not all the information with me, showing what the board of transport commissioners have said. I would very much like to read it all. I know the minister does not know all this, because I know him very well and I do not think for one moment that he would permit the Canadian Pacific to dictate to this or any other government, as they are dictating at the present time.

I am sorry to take up further time, but-and it is all very well for some of my hon. friends to laugh; but this is a serious matter for the farmers in my district.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
CCF
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:

I know where the hon. member for Vancouver Bast would be in this, because his party feel as keenly about this as I do, so far as that particular area is concerned. I might even get a little support from the hon. member for Vancouver North if I talk long enough.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB
LIB

George Alexander Cruickshank

Liberal

Mr. CRUICKSHANK:

I seem to get a great deal of assistance when I make a speech around here. But those who cannot tell the story on behalf of their own districts envy one who can speak on behalf of his district.

Topic:   194S
Permalink
LIB
LIB

May 17, 1948