March 20, 1950

PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Green:

If you will not be too strict about my time, sir, I shall be glad to answer the question.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Alan Carl Stewart

Liberal

Mr. Stewart (Yorkton):

When the other pipe line bills were before the house in April of last year, did the hon. member insist upon the insertion of a restriction such as he advocates for this bill?

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Green:

If the hon. member will read the speech I made on the main pipe-line bill, I believe he will find I advocated that Canadians should be served first; that has been our stand throughout.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Alan Carl Stewart

Liberal

Mr. Stewart (Yorkton):

You never moved any amendment to the bill.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Green:

The charter bills are in the shape they are because that was the policy of the Minister of Trade and Commerce.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. Howe:

On a question of privilege, Mr. Speaker, my hon. friend has made a statement about me; so may I say that the Minister of Trade and Commerce had absolutely nothing to do with those charters. There was no reason why he should.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
CCF

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

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

Mr. Knowles:

You drafted the over-all bills.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Green:

They were at least approved by the cabinet. I may have named the wrong minister.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Clarence Decatur Howe (Minister of Trade and Commerce)

Liberal

Mr. Howe:

No; approved by the law clerk of the House of Commons.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Green:

The development of British Columbia has been a long, hard struggle, made possible largely by the determination, courage, and foresight of our pioneer parents. The people of that province have been in direct competition with our neighbours in Idaho, Washington, and Oregon. They have been at a disadvantage as compared with those good folk south of the line. For one

[Mr. Green.l

thing, there are far more people in those three states than there are in British Columbia. The producers in those three states have a larger home market. There is far more arable land there than there is in British Columbia, and the produce matures much earlier. If this company's plan is followed and natural gas, and then oil, go by the United States route, British Columbia will be further handicapped. She will be handicapped because Canadian resources are allowed to go to the United States first.

If this house grants the application for incorporation, it is in fact betraying the people of British Columbia. I am in deadly earnest when I say that. I am convinced it is in the best interests not only of British Columbia but of Canada that this bill should be defeated.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. George A. Drew (Leader of ihe Opposition):

Mr. Speaker-

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Edward Turney Applewhaite

Liberal

Mr. E. T. Applewhaite (Skeena):

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me-

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Elie Beauregard (Speaker of the Senate)

Liberal

Mr. Speaker:

The leader of the opposition.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

George Alexander Drew (Leader of the Official Opposition)

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Drew:

I have no desire to speak first, Mr. Speaker, if the hon. member for Skeena wishes to go ahead.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Edward Turney Applewhaite

Liberal

Mr. Applewhaite:

I thank the leader of the opposition for his courtesy, and I trust that nothing I have to say will make him regret his decision.

It seems to me that I have heard over and over again what amounts to the same speech in these debates; I have lost count of how many times or by how many hon. members the speech has been made. In fact I have the impression that I have heard what amounts to the same speech from the same hon. member on more than one occasion. These two bills have been before us now for nearly a month, and we had two somewhat similar bills before us for the most of last session. We have listened to a lot of words about them, but we have learned very little that is new. I think all hon. members will admit that these speeches have been more notable for their vague generalities and their hysterics than they have been for their facts or logical arguments.

There is evidence now that this hysterical, illogical and incorrect thinking is spreading beyond this chamber to other parts of the country. I refer particularly to parts of British Columbia. Whether that is being encouraged and fostered by the friends of those who already have a charter, I am unable to say. It has been said before, but I am going to repeat it, that this bill we are discussing does nothing except bring into being a legal entity, a corporation or company

which can be born in no other way. Those who object to the granting of the charter, that is, to the birth of this company, have only one real argument. It amounts to this: Do not bring this company into the world; it might not do what we think is right. It would be just as logical to pass a law against having children, because they might not be amenable to the line of reasoning of my hon. friend. That may sound absurd, but it is no more absurd than some of the speeches to which we have listened.

Ostensibly the opposition to this bill arises out of the route of the pipe line, the construction of which this bill envisages. Those who oppose the bill claim to do so because they say they fear, perhaps with some reason, that this company might not build from Alberta to the Pacific coast by a Canadian route. As a matter of fact the bill does not say the pipe line will go to the Pacific coast, so it might be questionable whether that subject is before us. The responsibility for the route of that pipe line is not the responsibility of this House of Commons, as the law says today.

The Pipe Lines Act, sections 11(a) and (b), says:

A company shall not, except as in this act otherwise provided, begin the construction of a section or part of a company pipe line, until,

(a) The board has by order granted the company leave to construct the line;

(b) The plan, profile and book of reference of the section or part of the proposed line have been approved by the board.

Section 12(1) reads as follows:

(1) Upon an application for an order granting leave to construct a line, the company shall file with the board a map showing the general location of the proposed line, the termini, and all cities, towns, villages, railways and navigable waters through, under or across which the line is to pass.

To protect provincial rights and interests, section 12(2) says:

(2) The company shall file a copy of the application and of the map with the attorney general of each province to which the application relates in whole or in part . . .

Section 12(3) reads as follows:

(3) Upon the application, the board shall have regard to all considerations that appear to it to be relevant and in particular to the objection of any party interested . . .

That is the law today, that the board of transport commissioners shall decide the question of a route. Is it a wise provision? The hon. member who preceded me evidently thought so. When he was speaking on the general bill on April 8, 1949, as recorded at page 2513 of Hansard he said:

The minister has already pointed out that the board of transport commissioners is to be made supreme in administering this act. That is a wise plan, because the board of transport commissioners

Alberta Natural Gas Company is a judicial body, and it is wiser to put them in control rather than have the control placed directly in the hands of a department of government. But the minister said nothing at all about the interest of the provinces in these pipe lines. I believe that the provinces of Canada, certainly the province of Alberta, are vitally interested in this legislation. I am afraid that the legislation will not work out as it is meant to unless there is the utmost co-operation with the provincial authorities.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB
LIB

Edward Turney Applewhaite

Liberal

Mr. Applewhaite:

The hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra (Mr. Green). In order to set hon. members worries straight as to the views of the province of Alberta, I should like again to place on the record a paragraph from the telegram from Premier K C. Manning, who, I assume, speaks for Alberta, in which he said:

The Alberta government is not opposed to the incorporation of the Alberta Natural Gas Company or any other bona fide company under provisions of Pipe Lines Act but on the contrary feels very strongly that no bona fide company should be refused incorporation in that refusal would deprive the province of its right to deal with any or all legitimate companies interested in exporting gas and would restrict such dealings to those particular companies favoured by parliament for incorporation.

Are the hon. gentlemen still in favour of co-operating with the provinces, particularly Alberta, or do they prefer to restrict such dealings to those particular companies favoured by parliament for incorporation? I return to the statement of the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra, at page 2513, where he is reported as having said:

I am going to suggest to the minister and to the house that when this bill receives second reading it be referred to a committee of the house. I presume the proper committee would be the standing committee on railways, canals and telegraph lines. I suggest that it be referred to that committee for consideration. The same course should be followed with the special acts which are to be brought in in respect of the different companies. If such procedure is followed the result will be that the members of the house, the press and the Canadian public generally will have an opportunity to study the terms of the bill, and we may find in the end that we have the very best kind of legislation that can be enacted.

I assume that the hon. gentlemen are still in favour of the very best kind of legislation that can be enacted. Again, as reported at page 2653, the hon. gentleman said:

When the bill was up for second reading it was suggested by members of the various opposition parties that not only this foundation bill but also the special acts should be referred to that committee, and I would ask that that be done.

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

Arthur Leroy Smith

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Smith (Calgary West):

Whom are you quoting?

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
LIB

Edward Turney Applewhaite

Liberal

Mr. Applewhaite:

I am quoting the hon. member for Vancouver-Quadra. The hon. member said a great many things on that occasion.

soo

Alberta Natural Gas Company

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink
PC

Edmund Davie Fulton

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Fulton:

Why do you not read the whole of the speech?

Topic:   PRIVATE BILLS
Subtopic:   ALBERTA NATURAL GAS COMPANY
Permalink

March 20, 1950