April 27, 1949

?

Some hon. Members:

Yea.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

William Ross Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The Chairman:

Those opposed will say nay.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Nay.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

William Ross Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The Chairman:

In my opinion the nays have it.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
SC

Solon Earl Low

Social Credit

Mr. Low:

I should like to have a standing vote, Mr. Chairman.

Amendment negatived: Yeas, 52, nays, 53.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

William Ross Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The Chairman:

I declare the amendment

lost.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
SC

Solon Earl Low

Social Credit

Mr. Low:

Mr. Chairman, two members walked in on the other side while the vote was being taken.

Section 24 agreed to.

On section 30-Application of Railway Act.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
PC

Douglas King Hazen

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Hazen:

As we are making rapid progress, I should like to ask a question with respect to section 21 (1), with particular reference to the words, "lands vested in the crown." Does that refer to lands vested in the crown in the right of the dominion?

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. Chevrier:

No, in the right of the province.

Pipe Lines Act

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
PC

Douglas King Hazen

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Hazen:

Do we not usually refer to the lieutenant governor in council, when we speak of the province?

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. Chevrier:

I am informed it covers both.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
PC

Douglas King Hazen

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Hazen:

I do not think it is clear. There is no definition of the word "crown" in the interpretation section.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. Chevrier:

It follows rather closely the practice in the Railway Act.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

William Ross Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The Chairman:

Shall the section carry?

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Green:

No. I should like to ask-

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

William Ross Macdonald (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

The Chairman:

Order. May I point out that the section to which the hon. member for Saint John-Albert referred is already carried. We are now discussing section 30.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Green:

Has any consideration been given to the use of railway rights of way for any of these oil and natural gas pipe lines? For example, what about pipe lines running through the Rockies? I presume they would have to go through one of the passes used by the railways. It would seem to be an unnecessary expense to put through new rights of way. If the cost is higher than necessary the Canadian people are going to have to pay the difference. Have any steps been taken to investigate the feasibility of using railway rights of way? The railways have very efficient maintenance staffs, and surely there would be a great saving, particularly through the mountains, in using rights of way already there instead of having new ones for hundreds of miles.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink
LIB

Lionel Chevrier (Minister of Transport)

Liberal

Mr. Chevrier:

No investigation has been made of the problem. Furthermore, I am informed by the railways that they are not very anxious that their rights of way be used; and neither are the pipe line companies anxious to use those rights of way. I am further informed that it would be somewhat dangerous in most cases to transport oil along railway rights of way because of the fire likely to come from the locomotive, and a consequent danger of fire and explosion. However, if the matter is feasible it could be done by way of agreement.

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink

Section agreed to. Sections 31 to 38 inclusive agreed to. On section 39-Board may declare companies to be common carriers.


CCF

John Oliver Probe

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

Mr. Probe:

In this section as it now reads it is optional with the board to declare a pipe line company a common carrier. I have certain reservations with respect to pipe lines. I would certainly have preferred to see the development of pipe lines under some form of public ownership. But in view of the fact that the government accepts the responsibility

Pipe Lines Act

for granting these charters to private pipe lines for the carrying of oil and gas, it seems to me that we should at the same time make it mandatory rather than optional that where investments of this type are permitted, and where the work that it being done is of a public transportation variety, it should not be optional whether oil line companies carry the products of small or large producers, or the production of their own affiliated companies to the exclusion of others in proximity to the field, or to say whether or not the consumers can acquire the products subject to the wish of the carrier companies.

In my own city of Regina, which is affected by one of the proposed oil lines, we have two refineries, of which one is privately owned and the other a co-operative refinery. The pipe line we are likely to get will be owned by the private company. As the bill now stands, there is nothing mandatory on that company to cause it to carry the products of the other company from the field or from any other source from which it may purchase the products it wishes to refine.

I understand that certain technical objections were raised in the committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines to declaring the pipe lines to be common carriers. I listened carefully to the hon. member for Calgary West when about an hour ago he explained the procedure by which oil fractions of various types can be sent along one pipe line almost simultaneously. I have personal knowledge of the variety of oil products that were carried in the pipe line constructed by the military forces overseas to run from Cherbourg to Rouen. I am sure many hon. members are familiar with that pipe line. For the reasons I have just given, the objections put forward to a pipe line being considered a common carrier do not impress me. Therefore, I wish to move, seconded by the hon. member for Kindersley:

That section 39 be deleted and the following substituted therefor:

"39. A company to which this part applies is hereby declared to be a common carrier."

Topic:   PIPE LINES ACT
Subtopic:   CONTROL OF INTERPROVINCIAL AND INTERNATIONAL OIL OR GAS PIPE LINES
Permalink

April 27, 1949