December 1, 1952

LIB-PRO

William Gilbert Weir (Chief Government Whip; Whip of the Liberal Party)

Liberal Progressive

Mr. Weir:

Now we are going to get it.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. Hansell:

That is going to happen and they will emerge as one of the great parties in Canada. If my guess is right the Social Crediters will emerge as the private enterprise advocates in Canada who will put a little effectiveness and freedom into our democratic way of life. That is my guess. You can dispute it if you like.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
PC

Douglas Scott Harkness

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Harkness:

That is your hope.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

William Duncan McKay Wylie

Social Credit

Mr. Wylie:

You would not know any better anyway.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. Hansell:

I would say yes, it is our hope; but in saying it is our hope let me tell my hon. friend that I am not hoping it because I want to sit over on that side of the house or because I want my party to take the reins of government. I am not saying it with that hope. I am saying it with the hope that I may see Canada governed by a party that can govern according to private enterprise principles, keep the people free and at the same time give us an administration that will reflect the true physical facts of life and give the people of Canada the things they want. That is my hope, and I do not care who it is that puts it across.

I was talking about the difference between parties, not in their machinery but in their

concepts, and I come once again to the two main parties of this country. The Leader of the Opposition tried to tell the government where they had failed and what they should do with respect to cutting taxation and at the same time keeping up their expenditures. The Prime Minister replied and although he was not fiery and did not wake the dead at all he was logical in presenting the facts to the Leader of the Opposition and asking him, "If you want to cut taxation, where are you going to cut it? If you want to cut expenditures, where are you going to cut them?" He was perfectly right in asking those questions.

As far as I am concerned there is no difference fundamentally in the basic financial policies of the two parties, not a bit of difference. They argue about little things but do not come to grips with the vital errors inherent in the present financial policy of Canada. The old financial system is just like a man with one leg shorter than the other going around in a circle all the time. The Conservatives and the Liberals are arguing with one another about this short-legged chap going around in a circle. What are they arguing? The Liberals say, "Well, of course we know the reason he is going around in a circle is that one leg is shorter than the other." The Conservatives jump up and say, "No, that is not it. The reason he is going around in a circle is that one leg is longer than the other." So they argue that point without coming to grips with the real situation.

The fact of the matter is that there is something wrong with our present financial system. To journalists and others who like to try to say that we Social Crediters of Canada are nothing but Conservatives made over, let me say it is true that in the province of Alberta they have not been able to exercise the Social Credit financial technique. That is true. We admit it. We know it. But let it not be said that if Alberta had the constitutional right to change monetary technique it would not do so. In that respect I want to quote from the report of an interview that the Lethbridge Herald had with Premier Manning during the recent provincial election campaign. Mr. Manning was asked whether or not Social Crediters were satisfied that they could not put Social Credit monetary technique into effect in Alberta, and this is the way the reporter wrote up Mr. Manning's reply. I am reading from the edition of the Lethbridge Herald of the 19th of July. The article reads as follows:

He dismissed-

The "he" refers to Premier Manning.

-as an "unsound theory" the idea that the Social Credit party no longer held to its original principles

The Address-Mr. Hansell

and was concentrating instead on providing a conservative administration. "We are blocked (by federal laws) from instituting our monetary proposals, but that was only one field of Social Credit ideas" he continued. "We have kept the guiding principle that our policies should enhance the freedom and security of the individual." This had been partly accomplished through decentralization -leaving as much power as possible in the hands of local elected bodies. If, however, the constitution were changed to permit Social Credit to put its monetary theories into practise, "we would immediately implement them."

Those are the words of Premier Manning, and in that respect I want to say: Let nobody write or think that if Social Credit should take over the reins of government here they would only follow along the lines of good honest conservative government. If the Social Credit party took over the government of Canada let it be understood they would introduce Social Credit technique. There will not be any argument about that. If you want to go out on the election platform and fight on that ground that will be all right with us.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

That is different from good honest government.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

William Duncan McKay Wylie

Social Credit

Mr. Wylie:

It may come in time and it will worry you if it does.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. Hansell:

The fact of the matter is that there is no use dilly-dallying around the outside of the problem. We have to get right at the heart of things and come to grips with the real issues facing the country. The real issue in the country is not to adjust your taxation so as to move it from one class of people to another, or to cut this expenditure here or something else there. We have to recognize-and I must say I have a little sympathy with the present government- that they have pursued certain policies along certain lines which have involved certain expenditures. They will not listen to us on where to get the money, so they have to get it by taxation. If they are to keep up the vast expenditures that are necessary they must get the money from somewhere, and their policy is to get it from taxation. That is all there is to it as far as they are concerned.

I think, too, that when we propose things here-this goes for any member, and certainly we Social Crediters have adhered to it in the past-we should be capable of showing how we would do it. I was noticing the order paper and although I am not permitted to discuss resolutions on the order paper, I see that the Ottawa Journal referred to the matter tonight. There are perhaps six and certainly four resolutions on the order paper which ask the government to spend more on social legislation. That is all very well. Of course we cannot put resolutions on the order 68108-16*

paper calling for an increase in expenditures, so the way to get around it is to word the thing in such a way that the request is not for an increase in expenditures but that the government give consideration to this or that, and that gets around the technical point. I often wonder what would happen if we revised our parliamentary rules and forms. What would happen if we made them to the effect that when a person puts such resolutions as that on the order paper he should also state where the government would get the money to do the thing proposed? I wonder what kind of resolutions we would get.

Well, we would get the same suggestions as the Liberals and Conservatives are compelled to give: "We will have to get it from the people; we will have to get it from taxation, or we will have to borrow". It is a nice thing to put these resolutions on the order paper but it is another thing to say how we are to accomplish the thing we are after.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

Come on, let's have it.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. Hansell:

If you have been here all these years and cannot understand it, well, why should I bother answering the small fry anyway? If we-and I am not talking about ourselves, but anyone-want to appeal to the people to solve this country's problems and make Canada one of the greatest nations on the earth, and it can be made that, then let us go to the people with our proposals as to how we are to do this thing. Right now I think I should read from an editorial on this same subject that appeared recently in the Western Producer. The editorial is entitled "Social Security" and I will not read it all but it starts off:

In some quarters there is growing complaint about the rising cost of welfare measures.

It goes on to comment on those costs and indicates that just so long as we remain within the confines of present financial policy, of course those measures have to be paid for and the money must come from somewhere. Then it says, and this is what I want to read:

Those whose aim it is to eliminate unnecessary want and poverty will have to raise their sights. They cannot attain their objective if they confine their efforts to redistributing by means of taxation the present national financial income. Taking from the rich to give to the poor will not do the job because under the most equitable system of redistribution there isn't enough money to do it.

That is the thing our friends do not recognize. The editorial continues:

But there is enough and to spare potentially, if not actually, of goods and services to satisfy every reasonable demand. What is needed is a change in our economic system which will encourage the maximum use of our material and human resources

236 HOUSE OF COMMONS

The Address-Mr. Dumas

to the point of optimum production and a reorganization of the method of distribution so that the resulting goods and services are made available to consumers. That implies a drastic revision of finance and banking.

Now, the sooner we recognize that the better it will be for this country. I am going to skip a bit for the sake of brevity; but the editorial refers to the welfare state and here, I think, is a gem:

As one high authority recently stated, "the welfare state as a permanent institution bears witness not to the success of government but to its failure" . . . The ultimate aim should be economic policies which will remove the shackles from production so that it can function to capacity thus providing plenty for all. In the transition period generous welfare measures should be provided to aid all those in need. But the need for welfare legislation is the mark of the age of scarcity and the object should be to move with all possible speed from the age of scarcity to the age of plenty.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
CCF

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

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

Mr. Knowles:

Would you do away with welfare legislation?

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

Hear, hear.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Louis-René Beaudoin (Deputy Speaker and Chair of Committees of the Whole of the House of Commons)

Liberal

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

May I take advantage of the pause to tell the hon. gentleman that his time has expired.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. Hansell:

I would like to answer the hon. gentleman's question if I may. It has always been found that you cannot readily retract or undo something the country has already done; but I would say that the greatest welfare that can come to the people is to leave with them their absolute freedom to act according to their own conscience and will, and see that their incomes are such that they can make available to themselves the highest standard of living the resources of the country can give without interfering with that freedom. That to me is the greatest possible welfare state.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Gladstone Mansfield Ferrie

Liberal

Mr. Ferrie:

May I ask the hon. gentleman a question?

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Order.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Gladstone Mansfield Ferrie

Liberal

Mr. Ferrie:

In your statement you said you wanted free enterprise. Would you want to put all the grain in western Canada back on the grain exchange?

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
SC

Ernest George Hansell

Social Credit

Mr. Hansell:

I do not regard that as a very clever question. However, I will answer my hon. friend. When we talk of private enterprise we do not say: Now, we are going to scrap all such things as orderly marketing. We certainly would not do that. We believe in orderly marketing because we believe that in a complex world it is necessary. We do not believe that you have to cast away all regulation. We do not believe in substituting liberty for licence.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

Armand Dumas

Liberal

Mr. Armand Dumas (Villeneuve):

I wish to associate myself, Mr. Speaker, with those who have spoken before in conveying my congratulations to the mover (Mr. Deslieres)

and seconder (Mr. Schneider) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I wish to also convey my congratulations to the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. Sinclair) and the Associate Minister of National Defence (Mr. Campney). Both the hon. members have proven to be able parliamentary assistants, and I believe they will be active and capable ministers.

(Translation):

Mr. Speaker, with all my fellow Canadians from coast to coast, I rejoice at the elevation of His Excellency Archbishop Paul-Emile Leger to the rank of cardinal. The people of Villeneuve county are happy to pay tribute to him and to assure him of their filial devotion.

(Text):

My main purpose in rising this evening is to draw to the attention of this house some of the problems of my constituents. I do so because I sincerely believe that other constituencies in Canada are concerned with the same problems. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the speech from the throne, and desire particularly to refer briefly to one paragraph because I believe Canadians should be interested in it. The paragraph reads:

You will be invited to consider a measure to provide for federal co-operation with the provincial governments in the conservation of the water resources of Canada.

I am sure every right-thinking Canadian will welcome this legislation. I am hopeful also that each and every one of the provincial governments will take steps to provide the legislation, the administrative organization and the educational services necessary for the effective conservation of the water resources. In 1949, without a dissenting voice, the forestry act became law, thus opening the door to federal-provincial teamwork. I hope the same thing will happen in connection with this legislation.

The conservation of our natural resources is actually a problem of prime importance. The conservation of our forests, of our soil, of our water and the preservation of our wildlife are matters of grave concern to every Canadian. The conservation of water is of paramount importance, and it bears a close relationship to the conservation of our forests and our agricultural land. Floods and the shortage of water are too often considered by the public only from the standpoint of immediate inconvenience. Much more publicity will have to reach the public. Hard campaigning for conservation has been carried out by the Canadian Forestry Association and L'Association Forestiere Quebecoise. Both devoted the main part of their revenues to bringing home to the public, through their

magazines and other publications, the idea of conservation. For this reason they must command greater financial support from all governments, especially from the federal government.

At this point, 1 should like to congratulate the Minister of Resources and Development (Mr. Winters) for having provided larger grants to the Canadian Forestry Association during the last two years. I hope the minister will see his way clear to recommending to the government that a substantial amount be granted to L'Association Forestiere Que-becoise. It has been wisely stated that the wealth and health of this world lies in the top six inches of its surface. The conservation of these top six inches is a problem of paramount importance to every nation, in order that its people may be well nourished and survive. If we do everything we can towards the conservation of our forests, our soil and our water, it will be easy to preserve that top six inches for our own good and for the welfare of our children.

There is another paragraph, Mr. Speaker, in the speech from the throne which to my mind is of great importance to all Canadians. This paragraph reads:

To give effect to recommendations made by the standing committee on banking and commerce at the last session of parliament and to extend its scope your approval will be sought for an amendment to the National Housing Act.

I do not intend to elaborate on this subject, but I hope we will do everything we can to provide all Canadians with adequate housing. I wish to congratulate the government for what it has done in the past; the undertaking was far-reaching and the results have been substantial.

Many other measures will be brought before this house. When they come before us we shall consider them calmly, laying aside and sacrificing if necessary our own interests and ambitions to think only of the interests of Canada and Canadians. Hon. members are aware of the importance of Canadian mining. It is already a great industry, and the future is even more impressive. A new record of production will be attained this year, if not in value at least in volume. Canada occupies first place in world production of asbestos, nickel and platinum. Canada occupies second place in world production of aluminum, cadmium, gold and zinc. It is third in the production of silver, fourth in cobalt, copper

The Address-Mr. Dumas and lead. In 1951 the production of these minerals by our Canadian mines was as follows:

Mineral Production

Asbestos

967,000 tonsAluminum

445,000 tonsZinc

334,000 tonsCopper

270,000 tonsLead

153,000 tonsNickel

137,000 tonsCadmium

1,210,000 poundsCobalt

947,000 poundsSilver

24,200,000 ouncesGold

4,300,000 ouncesPlatinum

154,000 ounces

The iron ore production in Canada this year will reach 4-8 million tons and the day is not far off when it will be 25 million tons. The petroleum production of 1951 had a value of $121 million. In 1952 it will reach $149 million, an increase of $28 million. The total value of the mineral production of Canada for 1951 was $1,228 million. In 1939 it was only $475 million. These are extremely impressive figures. During the last 50 years Canada has produced mineral products worth more than $12 billion, and actual mining operations are adding more than $1 billion every year. Every new mine adds to the richness of Canada and of Canadians. The past was great but the future will be greater.

Is Canadian mining going to continue to forge ahead? Will the value of our mineral industry move upward to the $2 billion mark in the near future? In both cases I hope the answer is yes. However, this objective cannot be accomplished without careful planning. We shall need a large amount of risk capital. Our leading operators, our engineers and our miners have, in the past, shown that they were equal to the task. We shall need more of their kind. Our governments, federal and provincial, will have the responsibility of building more roads, more railroads and more airfields in order to facilitate transportation and give access to new mining camps. Over and above that, we shall need people who are imbued with the spirit of determination and perseverance, people who have the vocation of pioneers. We shall need people of the same calibre as those who in the past took up the challenge and met it successfully, thus rewarding Canada with tremendous advantages which are felt in every home in this country.

The Cambrian shield, this V-shaped area covering more than half of Canada, has not yet yielded its full measure of usefulness to Canada and to Canadians. This great storehouse retains untold treasures yet to be found. The success of the past is merely an indication of what may be found in the future.

The Address-Mr. Dumas

The mining industry means the steady creation of new wealth for the people of Canada. The earth's most essential minerals are of greatest importance to the entire civilized world. From Newfoundland to British Columbia the industry gives employment to more than 110,000 men. These men are the breadwinners of their families, and counting them with others who are supported directly by mining and who are living in Canadian mining communities, we have a population of over 500,000 people.

Mining communities may seem to bear little relation to the prosperity of eastern and western farmers, but let me say this, Mr. Speaker: 500,000 people represent a large number of mouths to feed and a large number of people to clothe and shelter. Statistics are available to prove that these mining centres buy more than $65 million worth of food each year from the Canadian farmers. What do the mining communities mean to the manufacturing and lumbering industries? The answer is this. Annually the mining communities are buying more than $150 million worth of clothing, shelter, furniture and other articles, and the same communities are buying each year more than $100 million worth of lumber, machinery, electrical equipment and other similar products.

Keeping in mind what I have just said, we will have a look at the gold mining industry and briefly analyse what it means to the economy of this country. Every day close to 50,000 tons of ore-bearing gold, silver and other minerals worth close to half a million dollars are passing through the 59 mills operated by the Canadian gold mines. Every working day close to 22,000 men, the breadwinners of a population of some 130,000 people, are employed in these mines.

There are 30 Canadian gold mining communities and they buy more than $12 million worth of food from Canadian farmers and more than $50 million worth of other services from the manufacturing and the lumbering industries. Each year the gold mines themselves are paying over $70 million in wages and more than $45 million in purchases of all kinds.

Surely an industry such as this must be considered to be of primary importance. I am sure hon. members will agree that an industry which has played so great a part in opening up northern Canada and in building up our national economy must be a matter of interest and concern to all Canadians. History may repeat itself and the gold mining industry may be called upon again-if not this time to save the country from bankruptcy, as it did before-at least to strengthen our national credit.

The gold mining industry is going through a difficult period because the official price set for the precious metal is much too low. Were it not for the Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act few gold mines would still be operating. This legislation really rescued the declining industry. Many producers owe their continued operation to this assistance. The gold mining communities have also greatly benefited by it. The facts show that the legislation enacted by the government has done a real job. Proposed amendments to the act were outlined in a statement made last week by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Abbott) and they will surely be of great help in assisting the industry to survive.

In this respect, I should like to quote an article which appeared under the title "Help For Gold Mines" in the Ottawa Journal of November 26, 1952:

More aid for marginal gold mines, beginning with 1953, should be welcomed by more than gold miners and owners of gold shares. Gold mining is one of the important industries of this country, supporting many communities, providing work and wages for scores of thousands, providing a profitable market for many allied industries, and undoubtedly a major factor in taking care of our international balances.

During recent years gold mining has suffered grievously through the fact that while operators of the mines have had to meet soaring costs in wages and other needs the world price of gold has remained at a fixed official level.

The help now provided by the government may not meet this situation entirely (the formula of assistance is so complicated a layman cannot understand it) but it is bound to make some difference, and in some instances, the Journal is informed by mining men, may make a substantial difference.

The only question that may be fairly asked is: In the light of knowledge by everybody that gold mining has been in jeopardy these past three years, why was this aid not given before?

While the article is good, I think the last paragraph is superfluous. The Emergency Gold Mining Assistance Act was instituted at the beginning of 1948. It has been amended and extended, and has been profitable to the great majority of gold mines.

Many other newspapers had articles commenting favourably upon the proposed amendments to the assistance act. I should like to quote from a letter I received yesterday. It is dated November 28, 1952, addressed to myself, and states:

Our association wishes to go on record as commending heartily the recent amendment to the gold mines assistance act, under which additional costaid has been provided for the hard-pressed gold producers of the country.

Yours very truly,

Prospectors & Developers Association V. R. MacMillan President.

I have received many similar letters from people closely connected with the industry. They are all thankful for what is being done by the government to provide additional assistance to the gold mines.

Altogether there is ample evidence that this government is doing much to help the industry. The welfare of the gold mining communities has always been regarded by the government as of very great importance. For this I wish to express my thanks. The fact that the government has definitely stated that increased assistance will be provided is encouraging to the industry and to the residents of the gold mining communities. We are all very thankful.

No government would have made this effort and gone to this expense unless it was firmly convinced that the price of gold was much too low, and unless it had in mind that the situation was indeed a temporary one, that it should be corrected or that it would in time correct itself.

We must not forget this. We are sellers of gold, so we can hardly dictate the price to the buyers. We are not the largest producers, and for this reason we can only more or less influence the market. And, last but not least, the production and sale of gold is very important to our economy. I firmly believe that better days are not too far ahead for the gold mining industry. The future of gold is much better than some of us are inclined to think. I saw in this morning's press that Canada intends to support South Africa's request for a higher price for gold. I congratulate the Canadian government on this logical attitude, and for two reasons. The first is that this is the best way I know of to help the sterling bloc to get back on its feet. The second reason is that it will also be of great assistance to our people generally, and to the gold mines in particular.

There are two ways of helping the other commonwealth countries. The first is to give or lend them billions of dollars which either we will have lost or they will have to repay. The second is to do something that will be beneficial to all of us. In supporting South Africa we will be choosing the second method, which will be the most beneficial to all of us. I believe the choice is obvious.

When the price of gold is where it should be, the industry will take its rightful place in our economy. Instead of being a burden to the taxpayers of this country it will, as it did in the past, contribute generously to the welfare of Canada and its people. For the benefit of those who are afraid that the government is not doing the right thing, or that it is doing too much for the gold mines,

The Address-Mr. Fulford I should like to quote a short article from the Rouyn-Noranda Press of November 20, 1952. It states:

In terms of Canada's total budget gold assistance payments are not large. They are not large when compared to the sums paid out to carry other key industries, notably wheat growing, through bad times. They are not large when set against the revenues the federal government derives in corporation and personal income taxes from the industry and those who work in it.

I will ask those who are worried over this question to think twice before objecting to this increased assistance to an industry which needs it so badly. I will repeat what I said at the outset: Let us consider this question calmly, laying aside and, if necessary, sacrificing our personal interests and ambitions, to think only of the betterment of the nation as a whole, which demands everywhere and always that citizens shall be happy and contented with their lot.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink
LIB

George Taylor Fulford

Liberal

Mr. G. T. Fulford (Leeds):

Mr. Speaker, in rising to take part in this debate on the speech from the throne one usually performs the perfunctory duty of complimenting the mover and seconder of the address in response to the speech from the throne. In this instance it is no perfunctory duty; it is a genuine pleasure. I can say without hesitation that in my view the hon. member for Brome-Missisquoi (Mr. Deslieres) as mover and the hon. member for Waterloo North (Mr. Schneider) as seconder made the best speeches I have heard on any parallel occasion during the years I have sat in the House of Commons. Certainly their speeches have put to shame many of the more futile efforts of those of us who have sat in the chamber a much longer time.

It was most gratifying to hear in the speech from the throne mention of the findings of the international joint commission in relation to the St. Lawrence seaway.

Recently I had the privilege of addressing a group of citizens of Canton, New York, in a large auditorium which had recently been opened at St. Lawrence university. I tried to deal with this matter from a different angle than is generally used. I did a little research, particularly on the subject of navigational facilities between the great lakes and the sea. I had said that all my life I had heard this referred to as the St. Lawrence deep waterway, and latterly as the St. Lawrence seaway and power development. I found that I spoke better than I knew because the first committee to advance the project was founded in 1902, and that happens to be the very year I was born.

As one delves into the history of the navigational facilities connecting the lakes and the ocean he will be interested to note that

The Address-Mr. Fulford from the beginning Canada has taken the initiative. The first connecting link was around the Lachine rapids and was constructed by the Capuchin Fathers in 1700. Naturally it was only a narrow ditch capable of carrying canoes loaded with furs. Then in 1797 the Northwest Fur Company, a private company, constructed a canal connecting lake Superior with lake Huron. This canal served a most useful purpose for fifteen years, but was completely destroyed by the United States army in the war of 1812.

I shall not bore the house with all the details of this history but shall try to say enough to demonstrate how proud we Canadians ought to be of the work we have undertaken. In the 1820's a private company began and completed a canal connecting lake Erie with lake Ontario. That was no small feat in those days when it is considered that the height of Niagara falls and the drop of the Niagara river had to be taken into account when the canal and locks were built. Later on this canal was taken over by the government of Upper Canada. Previous to that the government of Lower Canada had circumvented the stretch of river between Beau-harnois and lake St. Francis. Strangely enough the canal of that day followed closely what is now the Beauharnois canal.

It was not until many years later that the present Soulanges canal, which is used at present for navigational purposes, was built. Then in the 1840's the government of Upper Canada started and completed in stages the Cornwall canal and the Williamsburg canal. Those were finally completed in 1848 and permitted small draught vessels to ply between the upper great lakes and the St. Lawrence river below Montreal.

With the completion of the great Welland canal ships with a draught of 27 feet could be accommodated and the "only real bottleneck that exists today is the area from just above Cornwall, Ontario, down to the foot of the Lachine canal. There would be no restrictions upon Canada building a deep waterway in its entirety, as this section would be entirely within Canadian territory.

The section about which we would have to negotiate with the United States begins just above Cornwall and continues to a point just above Cardinal. This is the international section which will have to be developed jointly. Canada can go ahead with the navigational section and the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) has said that Canada courageously will go ahead. But we must have the co-operation of the United States in order to develop power.

We all know that the Canadian power will be developed by the Hydro Electric Power

Commission of Ontario. The international joint commission has given the green light to go ahead, but the matter is still being held up because of uncertainty in the United States as to which authority in the state of New York will be given the right to develop power, whether a federal power authority or a New York state power authority.

In the report of the international joint commission reference was made to the Gut dam; I trust you will not call me to order when I say "Gut dam". The Gut dam was built by Canada at a point between Prescott and Cardinal in order to divert water flowing between two islands to the head of the Cardinal canal and thus eliminate certain dangerously swift currents, and at the same time create a somewhat safer channel. I understand that engineers have estimated that this dam makes as much as eight inches difference in the water level of the upper reaches of the St. Lawrence river, with a somewhat lesser effect in lake Ontario. Not being an engineer I cannot give an expert opinion, but I venture to say that it does not make half an inch difference. I base that statement upon evidence I heard last summer at a hearing of the international joint commission at Ogdensburg, New York. At that time the treasurer of the Ogdensburg Trust Company stated that he owned land on the United States side both below and above the dam and he found that the height of water on both sides of the dam was exactly the same. In other words the water below the dam on the United States side was as high as the water above the dam. We who live in that part of the country know that on the United States side the dam is not visible. The shore line simply seems to be a continuation of the New York state side of the river. To me that evidence showed conclusively that the Gut dam made no difference. However, the international joint commission recommended that Canada should destroy this dam and work is now in progress to carry out that recommendation.

With Canada showing its good faith, I think it is only reasonable to ask our friends to the south to give proof of their good neighbour policy toward us by not holding up any longer than is necessary the action that will determine which body will be given the authority to proceed with the development of the power, whether it be the federal power authority or the New York state power authority. I am sure that every one of us in this house was most alarmed when we read last week in the press of Canada that the whole project may be held up eighteen months or more while Washington decides which authority will be granted the right to develop the power. Surely it is not asking

too much of our great neighbours to the south to ask them to co-operate with us as we have co-operated with them by carrying out the order of the international joint commission.

I should like to suggest that along the connecting waters of the St. Lawrence seaway project certain of the larger ports be designated as harbours under the Canada Shipping Act. I make this suggestion so that these harbours will have the necessary authority to regulate the course and speed of vessels plying up and down the narrow channels. Naturally I have special reference to my own town of Brockville. Recently large ships, both domestic and foreign, have been increasing their speed and the wash from these ships is constituting a menace not only to small craft owners who leave their craft in their boathouses but also and particularly to people who are out on the water in small craft such as rowboats, boats with outboard motors or even canoes. Sometimes in recent years we have seen waves come in that would almost make one think they were rollers coming off a vast ocean.

It has been stated that some years ago when the port of Albany, New York, was opened as the head of the seaway from New York city up the Hudson river one of the large steamship lines proceeded to send an ocean vessel up to Albany. That was well before the war, and that particular line is still settling lawsuits for the damage that was done to small craft, docks, boathouses and other buildings along the Hudson river. Certainly we do not want to see that happen when the St. Lawrence seaway is built. A certain amount of damage is being caused now, and I think it could be avoided if the necessary authority were given to the ports along the various streams connecting the great lakes and along the St. Lawrence connecting lake Ontario with the ocean.

The Address-Mr. Fulford

I also should like-and I have mentioned this in the house before-to call to the attention of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Chevrier) the advisability of establishing a weather station somewhere along the upper reaches of the St. Lawrence river. At present the weather prophesying facilities in this district are unreliable. We do not have much fog in the Thousand Islands region but when we do they are bad fogs. Eventually a weather station will have to be set up somewhere between Cornwall and Kingston, and I should like to recommend that it be established as soon as possible. It must be done when navigation facilities for larger vessels are completed, and if it were done now it would be an invaluable aid to farmers in prophesying how severe a frost will be.

We are told to look at the Ottawa valley weather reports, that they will tell us what we can expect. That is not so, and I will give the house a concrete example. Last night, according to the official bulletins in the elevators in the parliament buildings, the temperature in Ottawa reached a minimum of 4 degrees above zero which would be more than enough to create a navigational hazard on the St. Lawrence. I understand that the lowest temperature reached in Brockville was 14 and that the lowest in Montreal was 13, which is not enough to cause a navigational hazard. Therefore in spite of the fact that Ottawa is so near the St. Lawrence valley the fact remains that we are in a different weather belt, and I believe our request for a weather station should be given consideration with the least possible delay.

On motion of Mr. Fulford the debate was adjourned.

Topic:   SPEECH FROM THE THRONE
Subtopic:   CONTINUATION OF DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY
Permalink

December 1, 1952