The fact remains that we all know in this house that the government of Saskatchewan has complete control over property and civil rights within the boundaries of that province. They have the right to take over the bus lines, but they have not either the courage or the vision, or they have too much sense to go in there and take over the oil industry. So today when the hon. member for Vancouver Centre-and mark you, it is not a Saskatchewan member but the hon. member for Vancouver Centre-says that these pipe lines should be socialized, or that the oil industry should be socialized, we in this house know that statement for what it is -just a cheap political gesture.
I rise on a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker. The hon. member for Vancouver North (Mr. Sinclair) has misquoted me, but I am sure it is an unintentional error. To the best of my knowledge, I at no time advocated that the oil industry should be socialized. I advocated the nationalization of the oil pipe lines.
On a question of privilege, the hon. member for Vancouver Centre has said that I suggested that he believed in the socialization of the oil industry. Might I ask him this: Do you not believe in the socialization of the oil industry in Canada?
I think that this is no time, Mr. Speaker, to be indulging in a lot of foolish politics. The welfare of a great many people is at stake in some of these bills that are before us. In order not to unduly delay the passage of some of these bills, or all of them for that matter, I intend to be brief; and I shall reserve until some later time my reply to the appeal of the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Young). We certainly shall be happy to go into economics just as deeply as the hon. member would care to go, and we shall see how much he knows at that time.
The bill that is now called for second reading is the first of a series of bills called pipe lines bills, all providing for the organization of companies whose main purpose would be to export oil or gas from the province of Alberta. I understand that there is some opposition to one of the pipe lines bills which is more particularly a gas pipe line bill, and not an oil pipe line bill at all. I understand that an attempt is to be made to talk it out, so my remarks will take just about two minutes.
On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, a reflection is being cast by the hon. member for Peace River on myself and all the members of this group. We have made it known to them that with respect to at least one of these bills we will require the ordinary rules of this house to be observed. That is all we have indicated to them. We have no intention of talking any one of these bills out.
On the same question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, may I say that I intend to talk on this bill as a British Columbia member, and I do not intend that my remarks shall be described by the hon. member for Peace River as talking out the bill.
I will let hon. members put their own interpretation on that. If I am wrong, I am glad to withdraw what I said.
We are facing a rather strange situation- I am speaking now for the people of Alberta -in this whole matter of the pipe lines bills. In the first place, we are told by the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) and by the Prime Minister (Mr. St. Laurent) that the government of Alberta has the constitutional right to deal with her resources as she sees fit. But at the same time Alberta is refused legislation to eliminate any doubt there may be as to her legal rights to deal as she sees fit with her resources. That is the position which parliament has taken thus far. After having taken that position parliament, in dealing with these bills, if it intends to pass any of them at all, is going to tell Alberta in effect: "Yes, you have control over your resources but we, the dominion parliament, are going to tell you how you may be allowed to export your resources. We have not sufficient confidence in your judgment to make the decision." In the light of that situation I want to make our position absolutely clear. As long as Alberta has authority to control her resources, and if that be true, then we have no objection to any one of these private bills. They should all be passed. If they are passed it will enable both the Alberta government and the board of transport commissioners to consider every application for a licence and to deal with that application on its own merits. That would be ample protection to the people of this country. Just before I close, may I say that the government
should direct their law officers to undertake an immediate and searching study into our position, and into this whole question, with a view to providing at the next session of parliament an amendment to the legislation which has gone through in the major bill, which will affirm the undoubted right of the provinces to control effectively their conservation program without interference from any source.
afraid that I have not previously given any explanation of this bill. I thought that that was unnecessary because, in the debate on the over-all pipe line bill, it was abundantly clear that this bill was of paramount importance to the people of this country. Every hon. member realizes that as the first stage of their development the sponsors of this bill intend to construct a pipe line from Edmonton to Regina. I feel that every hon. member believes that this is an important national development which deserves the favourable consideration of the house.
At this late stage of the session and of this parliament I do not intend to indulge in any repartee with the hon. member for Vancouver Centre (Mr. Young) as to the relative merits of private enterprise and public ownership. I am sure that most hon. members realize that this bill will have a good effect upon the Dominion of Canada, and I hope that at this late hour we may get ahead with it without any further delay.
member from Alberta I should like to appeal to all hon. members to co-operate in putting through bills dealing with oil lines in particular which are absolutely essential to the development of our industry in Alberta.