Mr. J. W. Murphy (Lambion West):

Mr. Speaker, may I associate myself with the previous speakers in this debate in complimenting the mover (Mrs. Shipley) and the seconder (Mr. Laflamme) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne.

First I should like to deal with a matter which primarily concerns my own riding: that is, the Polymer Corporation, a crown company, of which we in Sarnia are very proud-and I think this is the general opinion of people all across this country. I make this statement because of an article which appeared in a weekly publication published in Fort Erie some months ago. This dealt with the Polymer Corporation but unfortunately did not speak the true facts.

I make this statement also because while the Gordon economic royal commission was sitting in Toronto an hon. member of this house who formerly belonged to the socialist party took it upon himself to state in his presentation to the commission that the government should dispose of all crown companies, including the Polymer Corporation. It so happens that I represent the riding in

The Address-Mr. J. W. Murphy which Polymer is located and I am going to accept the responsibility of speaking as the member for that riding on behalf of the employees of this successful crown corporation. What I have to say will be confined to the Polymer Corporation and will not refer to any other crown corporation, especially the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.

Like most hon. members of this house, I assume on both sides, I believe in free enterprise. That may be a misnomer as things are today in Canada, but for what it is worth I believe in free enterprise. I believe also that private enterprise or free enterprise and public ownership can contribute jointly to our economic development. We have considerable evidence of that in our province of Ontario and I think some other provinces have shared a similar experience. It is possible that the hon. member for Moose Jaw-Lake Centre (Mr. Thatcher) in suggesting that the government dispose of this particular crown corporation had in mind the success or failure of crown corporations when they attempted to do business in Saskatchewan with such disastrous results.

The Polymer Corporation produces synthetic rubber. I want it understood distinctly that it is not in competition with any other industry in the Dominion of Canada. I have followed this corporation from its beginning. I recall quite well making several statements in this house concerning the responsibility of Polymer to the municipality in the way of paying taxes or making payments in lieu of taxes. I recall the arguments I made year after year but I regret to say that I did not receive any support from any quarter in this house.

The fact is that I met with a great deal of opposition from the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe), who contended right along that this and other crown corporations should not have to pay taxes or make payments in lieu of taxes because of the great contributions they made to the municipalities in which they were situated. Any industry makes' a contribution to the municipality in which it is located, but it also imposes upon the municipality the necessity of providing services. I argued year after year that Polymer should make its contribution.

When the city of Sarnia enlarged its boundaries in 1950 and took in the Polymer Corporation in that year this crown company paid the city $45,000 in lieu of taxes. I was disappointed in the smallness of the amount and said so on more than one occasion. I expressed the hope that the government or the Polymer officials would reopen

The Address-Mr. J. W. Murphy the matter and renegotiate with the city for a larger sum. Apparently the city made no effort to obtain a larger sum.

I am happy to be able to say today that in 1955 Polymer paid to the city of Sarnia in taxes a total of $282,739. The amount paid in the year previous was slightly smaller, and in the year previous to that it was slightly smaller again. I expect and I hope other hon. members will share my optimism that in the next ten years this crown corporation will in all probability pay to the city of Sarnia well over $3 million. That is not peanuts for any municipality. I am very happy, and I have said so on more than one occasion, that a formula was announced by the former minister of finance, the Hon. Mr. Abbott, in November 1949 which obligated crown companies in this country to assume municipal responsibilities.

Polymer is a very successful corporation which is operated pretty much the same as any private corporation in this country. It has exclusive agencies in 23 countries. There was a period in the history of this crown company when it was touch and go. It was organized and brought into being during the war to play its part in the war effort in providing rubber for vehicles used in fighting that war. We were not able to get natural rubber and this corporation was organized to produce synthetic rubber. It was faced since with the wide fluctuations which occurred in the price of natural rubber, the price going up as high as 46 cents a pound and dropping to less than half that amount. All during that period it was necessary for this company not only to supply the local markets but to increase its production in order to supply the export market at the lowest possible price. As I said a moment ago, they have exclusive agencies in 23 countries selling rubber to most of the free world.

I should like to place a few more statistics on the record because I feel sure hon. members will be interested in the operations of this crown company. Last year it paid $3 million in dividends to the federal treasury and made provision for depreciation in the amount of $5,350,000. Its net income was $4,924,000 out of a gross income of just about $54 million. I am happy to say that it is the largest employer of labour in Sarnia. Only a few weeks ago there were 2,453 people in the employ of the corporation and the payroll for 1954 amounted to $9,790,669.

It will be noticed from these figures that the employees of Polymer are not being paid

starvation wages. They are highly skilled technicians. Sarnia is the centre of a large chemical industry in which hundreds and hundreds of engineers are employed. The chemical industry demands that type of employee.

The plant and equipment cost some $72 million. The working capital at the year end was a little over $15 million. The corporation retired $4 million of 4 per cent serial debentures during 1954. The greater part of the capital expenditure during the year went towards increasing productive capacity. Looking at the statements in the past three or four years, I have marvelled that more money was not spent for capital improvement or capital replacement, because this particular company is producing practically twice as much as it was set up to do when it was originally constructed.

I am also happy to see that, since the beginning of the construction of the Polymer Corporation, well over $200 million has been spent for industrial expansion in the city of Sarnia and the area immediately surrounding it. That does not include the immense amounts that are going to be spent by the Ethyl Corporation, the Imperial Oil, Dow Chemical and other companies this year, which will probably run into another $50 million to $75 million. In addition to that, Polymer had an export figure of $37 million in 1954. As I have said in previous years, this particular company has given leadership to private industry in its program of research and development.

There is every evidence from the figures I have quoted that this is a sound industrial enterprise, and I see no reason why Canadian industry should provide a luscious melon to satisfy the hungry taste buds of foreign investment seekers. We have heard about foreign investments, even this morning and on previous occasions in this house during this particular session. We had an eminent resident of Ontario speaking in Boston some months ago and saying that a little over 30 per cent of the investment in Canadian industry was United States money. I understand that this was somewhat qualified a few weeks ago by a United States economist in New York, who produced figures of a breakdown showing that United States investment in Canadian industry was about 44 per cent. That was startling to me, and I am sure it will be to the house.

I am going to say that today's welfare and the future security of Polymer employees should not be determined by any politician,

regardless of what party he happens to belong to, and especially one who has only so recently associated himself with the principles of socialism. The employees of Polymer do not have an inferiority complex as to their capabilities of competing in the competitive world trade in synthetic rubber. I say here emphatically that Polymer must continue to have the right to live as a prosperous Canadian industry owned and controlled by Canadians.

Over the years there have been some attempted disagreements by one of the senior ministers of the crown with statements I have made in this house concerning Polymer. Some of these have been made, of course, in the heat of an election campaign and have less weight, but at all times I have been interested in the welfare of the Polymer employees and the success of that particular corporation. I say that now because I think it is only fair to the taxpayers of Canada and to the members of this house that crown corporations officials should appear before the proper House of Commons committee and give an accounting of their stewardship.

In view of the suggestions that have been made by responsible speakers and by this weekly magazine, and because, too, as I said a moment ago, crown companies should give an accounting to the members who represent certain areas in the Dominion of Canada, I am going to ask that the government permit officials of Polymer to be called before a proper parliamentary committee. I am sure they will report on the remarkable achievements of this industry, which contributed so much to our war effort and which in peacetime has continued to expand at no expense to the Canadian taxpayer. I feel that the officials of Polymer would be glad to come before the committee and proclaim to the members of that committee, to this house and to the people of Canada how successfully they have managed to operate this particular crown company.

The next subject with which I wish to deal probably concerns not many municipalities in Canada, but last year-either during discussion of the estimates or during revision of the bill-it was made known that municipalities having within their boundaries Indian reservations would be entitled to be compensated for services they had rendered to those particular reservations. I immediately contacted the city of Sarnia and learned to my dismay that they had not made any claim since the enlargement of their boundaries, when the Sarnia reservation came within the 67509-10

The Address-Mr. J. W. Murphy city limits. As I understand it, it is the law of our country that where a municipality gives services to an Indian reservation it can be compensated by the government for those services-through the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, I suppose, since it is under that particular minister's department. As I have said, this probably does not apply to many municipalities, but in our particular instance this Indian reservation of some 3,900 acres which is still left in the city is very valuable property. A few years ago they sold 100 acres-one of the largest sales-to the Dow Chemical Company for $2,000 per acre. I think that since then they have been asking considerably more. True, other crown-owned property in the city, right on the St. Lawrence seaway, has been sold for some $350 an acre, but that, of course, was sold to a defeated Liberal candidate, and I hope the time has passed when that sort of thing is done. It is not ethical, to begin with, and it is to be hoped it will not happen again. Not every industry can pay $2,000 or $3,000 per acre for industrial property, but it is unfortunate that we have let the time slide by when property could have been purchased by the government and resold to the city for industrial purposes at a price much less than today's asking price.

I have asked the clerk of the city of Sarnia to prepare a table which might be used as a guide to other members who have Indian reservations within their particular ridings. It shows how they make up the amounts they have spent and the figures of the amounts for which they should be reimbursed. I have figures here for the last five years indicating what the reimbursement would have been since the Indian reservation came within the city limits. The table is broken down into the following headings: General government, fire, police, street lighting, public works, sanitation, health, welfare, education, recreation and community services, debt, land purchase and miscellaneous. These figures might be valuable to other members whose communities are in the same predicament as Sarnia, and with your permission, Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the table be incorporated in Hansard.

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

Has the hon. member unanimous consent to place this table on Hansard?

Agreed.

Mr. Murphy (Lambton West):

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The table is as follows:

Mr. Deputy Speaker:

Has the hon. member unanimous consent to place his table on Hansard?

Agreed.

Mr. Murphy (Lambton West):

The table follows:

Catch of lake trout, pickerel and whitefish in pounds

in Huron county

Year Pickerel Whitefish Lake Trout1954 494 128,501 1953 7,445 61,126 1952 2,843 123,262 -1951 2,291 225,549 -1950 95 15,825 - '1949 614 21,916 106

Catch of lake trout, pickerel and whitefish in pounds in, Lambton county

Year Pickerel Whitefish Lake Trout1954 230,453 29,887 2021953 299,628 46,707 201952 215,064 88,696 1221951 251,371 80,621 961950 239,272 55,999 1021949 204,013 118,894 136

I shall close in just a moment or two, but I want to mention a letter I received this morning from Port Huron. This city is right across from Sarnia on the United States side. The fishermen there are also concerned about what is taking place and what is not taking place. No doubt some hon. members in this house will be surprised that these people in the United States do not operate hatcheries as we do in Ontario. We have always maintained that hatcheries were necessary to restock the lakes. Perhaps these people took it for granted that our stocking of the lakes would be sufficient for their welfare.

We have met with these people and the members of the legislature of Michigan. This morning I received information that they are introducing a bill, that is the state of Michigan, which will involve a cost to the taxpayers of some $500,000, that is $100,000 a year for a five-year program of research and restocking. I am happy to see that they realize their position. They are opening hatcheries, and I think that is something we must do. I feel that when the government and their advisers look at the information available on the lessening of the various catches, they too will find it necessary to take additional measures. I believe that these 50 streams I mentioned a minute ago are the places, and probably the only places, where these lamprey spawn, so we are justified in asking the government to provide sufficient money to put in these weirs. If it happens to be a hundred, we should still make the expenditure because we will not re-establish the industry until the lamprey is exterminated.

I do hope that some of the members of the committee will be allowed to see how this program is progressing. I hope the committee will be set up as early as possible in this particular session. I am going to make one suggestion in closing. I hope the federal government can make representations to the one department of the Ontario government which issues permits for these sand suckers to take out sand and gravel as they do where lake Huron joins the river St. Clair. Hundreds of thousands of tons are taken to Toronto, Hamilton or Cleveland. I would think that Hamilton and Toronto could find sand and gravel elsewhere. In any event the old fishermen tell me that the removal of that sand in such large quantities destroys the spawning beds of the fish within 20 to 25 miles of the spot where the sand is taken out.

We have protested this action in the past, and I am glad to say that I do not believe any licences were granted this year. But as part and parcel of the program to reestablish the fishing industry on the great

The Address-Mr. MacDougall lakes, representations ought to be made to definitely ensure no more sand or gravel is taken out of that particular area. I am quite prepared to take the word of the old fishermen, who have had 30 years' experience, that the removal of the sand destroys these spawning beds. I am hoping that this session this government will find sufficient money to eradicate the lamprey menace within three or four years and thereby re-establish the fishing industry on the great lakes, an industry which has made a great contribution to the economy of this country.

Mr. J. L. MacDougall (Vancouver-Burrard):

I have been afforded a great opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to speak in this debate. I am not going to do as other members have done and thank the mover (Mrs. Shipley) and seconder (Mr. Laflamme) of the address. I never have done so because I believe that when the leaders of the opposition parties have done that on behalf of their parties, that is sufficient. Certainly, I feel it is true to say that many of these expressions of thanks, particularly those coming from opposition groups, are not entirely truthful. The upshot of the whole thing is that it could well be eliminated once the members who lead the various groups in the house thank the mover and seconder of the address.

I am sorry the hon. member for Rosetown-Biggar is not in his seat because I should like to draw attention to some remarks he made on November 1 while speaking in the town of Terrace in my province. He made an accusation against the federal government, and if he had only broadened his target to include everyone in the House of Commons I would support his contention 100 per cent. But he narrowed it down to a condemnation of the government when he said that they lacked vision. I think that every member of every party in every corner in this house, to a greater or lesser degree, lacked the vision to realize what a great country we have from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Therefore, if he would only say that his own party as well as the Liberal party lacked vision I would be inclined to go along with him; but since he has narrowed his target to represent only the Liberal administration, unfortunately I will have to disagree with him.

I could buy about nine-tenths of what was said in the speech from the throne. I was rather amazed at my good friend, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr. Drew), the other day. When he was about to move his want of confidence motion he said there was nothing new in the speech from the throne. Well, I am quite sure that the Leader of the Opposition from his childhood to the present time has consistently read his Bible. I do not think

142 HOUSE OF

The Address-Mr. MacDougall that every time he reads it he expects to find something new in it. Possibly he will get a greater understanding of what is in the Bible, but not necessarily anything new, because the same words are in it now that were there at the time of King James.

I think that by and large, of the speeches of members of the opposition, the leader of the official opposition was not as dynamic as he generally has been on past occasions. I think the leader of the C.C.F. party (Mr. Coldwell) excelled himself as far as leaders of the opposition parties are concerned. I cannot forget my good friend, the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell), who really put on a good show the other night, but in the final analysis I do not think he said very much.

Mr. Lennard:

What about your own leader?

Mr. MacDougall:

The hon. member would not expect me to comment on that.

Mr. Diefenbaker:

You are more than discreet not to.

Mr. MacDougall:

The whole question comes down to the matter of what is generally agreed across the length and breadth of the country to be good economics in government administration.

I must confess that this morning I was very much impressed with my good friend, the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe). You know, I hate to disagree with the hon. member for Prince Albert (Mr. Diefenbaker), who has been a good friend of mine for many years; but I sometimes wonder whether there is a little difference between an honest to goodness real dirt sod buster and a city slicker. I remember that on April 22 last my good friend the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Mang)-and he is really an honest-to-goodness sod buster; he is not one of those city slickers who go out to the manor every week end; he is there all of the time-said that he wished the people in this house realized that the western farmer was not bankrupt.

I think back to the days when I was a sod buster-and that is quite a while ago. In those days I busted sod with a team of oxen. I think I have intimated in this house before that in the old days we used to have itinerant preachers in Saskatchewan. One of them became a driver of oxen and worked for a neighbour of ours. He gave up preaching. My father asked him why he gave it up and he said: "No man can continue to be a Christian if he drives oxen."

I had that experience, and I know there is a lot in it. Before the outbreak of the first world war I was very much inclined that

[Mr. MacDougall.)

way. Since I was the youngest of a family of ten, none of whom had taken the cloth, I was very much tempted to go in for the ministry, but in the meantime I had driven a team of four oxen and there it ended.

I should like to speak for a few minutes on the trans-Canada highway. I commend the minister-

Mr. Knowles:

Is that where you are going to drive your oxen?

Mr. MacDougall:

-for the interest he has taken in the trans-Canada highway. The policy that was announced by the federal government when the trans-Canada highway was first conceived was a fair policy at that time. In the time that has elapsed we have seen the program of trans-Canada construction falling far, far below expectations. It seems to me the government will be well advised to reconsider a revision of the program which the minister has now decided on. Before I continue with this subject, may I assert that regardless of what I may say I am still a 100 per cent Liberal, and do not let anyone think that I have any idea of joining any other party.

In British Columbia we have a terrifically high cost of road construction. It runs to something approximating $169,000 a mile in the mountainous area as compared with $60,000 odd in the prairie provinces. Therefore, there is a great difference between the amount that one province has to spend in comparison with another in order to fulfil the terms of the agreement originally made with the federal government in connection with the trans-Canada highway. As far as I am concerned there is no argument in connection with this statement. I do not think that any of us who are sincere in our belief will disagree that, so far as provincial administrations are concerned, roads through mining areas, or lateral roads within the confines of the individual provinces, are of prime importance. That is their chief concern. I don't know that I blame them for it. Now, with that great difference of cost in the construction of the province of Saskatchewan-I say that pretty well because of the prairie provinces as well and the province of British Columbia-that policy of a 50-50 deal is scarcely good enough. First of all we have in the trans-Canada highway one of the real Canadian projects, when it is completed. It is 100 per cent Canadian, because it will link the furthermost eastern portion of our realm to the furthermost western portion and consequently it is a 100 per cent Canadian undertaking. I sincerely suggest to the government and particularly to my good friend, the Minister of Public Works (Mr. Winters), that they revise the situation with

respect to the construction of the trans-Canada highway, and that, from this date hereon, the federal government will bear 100 per cent of the cost of the completion of the trans-Canada highway.

Now I hold in my hands, Mr. Speaker, Votes and Proceedings of January 12, and on page 18 is one resolution that I am afraid I cannot go along with:

That it is expedient to introduce a measure for the payment of carrying costs of temporary wheat reserves owned by the Canadian wheat board in respect of board stocks of wheat in excess of one hundred and seventy-eight million bushels at the commencement of a crop year, such payment to be made to the board by the Minister of Finance out of the consolidated revenue fund.

Now maybe you will say that I am old-fashioned. I probably am; but, you know, being old-fashioned has its virtues just the same as being modernistic has certain virtues. I can well remember my father, when he was a much younger man than I am today, telling me, not on one but on several occasions: My boy, I want to tell you this fact of life; that you will never cure the economic ills of any country by charity.

I think that axiom is just as true today as it was when he uttered those words. Now as I have already stated, I used to be a western farmer. Western farmers, in their thinking, do not change very much from one generation to another, and I am taking the word of a practical western farmer when I quoted earlier what the hon. member from Qu'Appelle said. Now in connection with this I congratulate the government on being sincere in their endeavour to help the economy of everyone in the Dominion of Canada. From that I do not think there is any argument, but in this instance I believe that it is not going to be even remedial. There is no need to tell you that in this broad domain of ours we have the Atlantic on the east and the Pacific on the west. We have another ocean to the north and we have on some portion of the southern part of our realm the great lakes. We are, therefore, by and large a marine country. I want to tell you, Mr. Speaker, that if this item goes through-now I cannot give you the exact figure, but I understand that it is to be in the neighbourhood of something like $30 million-that that is not going to satisfy the western farmer. I have a vivid recollection of what happened in the last parliament, when unfortunately, with my vote, I aided and abetted the giving of $65 million to the western farmers as the unexpired portion of moneys that could have been spent by the United Kingdom for the purchase of grain under the wheat agreements at that time. That $65 million did not cure anything. When we had voted that $65 million, I doubt

The Address-Mr. MacDougall very much if the ink was dry on the paper before my good friend from Assiniboia (Mr. Argue) was hollering for $365 million. Now you cannot very well appease that type of thinking. As I have said, we are, whether we recognize it or not, a marine country; and if we pass this resolution, certainly it is in condemnation of the government if they do not, because they have acted most magnanimously with all these things. You are going to find in the prairie provinces that you are going to have a new prairie song, particularly in Saskatchewan, applicable also in Manitoba and Alberta, and the song is going to be: Strike up the band, here come the sailors with cash in their hands just off the whaler, stand in a row, do not let them go, for Jack Canuck is a cinch and every inch a sailor. That is what those boys are going to think of the federal government with $30 million minimum handout in connection with the storage of grain. I was amazed when the Minister of Trade and Commerce (Mr. Howe) said that the storage charges were going to be as high as 15 and 16 cents a bushel or even go a little higher. That is quite a bit of folding money, no doubt about it; but do not forget, Mr. Speaker, despite storage charges, they have something to store. As the minister pointed out, those surpluses are not the great curse that some of our friends would like us to believe.

Now there is another surplus that I want to mention and that is the question of butter. You know there has been a lot said about wheat and a lot said about butter, if you believe everything that my good friends from the opposition benches say about the government's policy in connection with wheat and butter. It is an amazing thing to me when in 1953 the government went to the country without promising a solitary single thing excepting good government. They promised nothing but a continuance of good government. My good friends in the official opposition were going to reduce expenditures by $500 million a year, year after year. Well you know, the people of Canada may be a bit naive on occasions but they are not crazy enough to swallow that line of malarkey. Promises are just promises regardless of who happens to make them, whether he sits on your extreme left with the socialist party or is part of the official opposition or of the government. I believe the people of Canada have come to the point where they believe that the future performance of the government can be judged by its past performance. The administration was returned in 1953 without having made one single, solitary promise to the electorate of Canada other than the continuance of good government.

The Address-Mr. MacDougall

Now a word about butter. I hope the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner) will agree when I say that presumably we have a small, not a great surplus of butter. I think that if we were able to sell three to four million pounds of butter over the sales for the present year we would wind up at the end of the calendar year with no surplus at all. But supposing we do have a surplus, then I would offer two suggestions to the administration.

Some years ago when Holland started the manufacture of margarine they found that they had quite a surplus of butter. In order to correct this situation they amended their margarine legislation to provide that in the future all margarine should contain a certain percentage of butter. As a result of that the butter surplus was eliminated. This would be all to the good as I have never been convinced even by the advertising that is put out that margarine is as good a food product as butter. If this surplus continues, why should we not do as Holland has done and insist that each pound of margarine contain a certain percentage of butter?

If we do not want to do that, and if we are still faced with a surplus of butter, then my second suggestion would be that that butter be sold to the taxpayers who have bought it at the same price as margarine is being sold. I will buy that one any day in the week. It seems to me that that is one of two logical ways to dispose of this surplus which a great many people, particularly opposition people, seem to regard as criminal. We should give thanks to the Almighty for having surpluses of this, that and the other thing rather than scarcities.

There are many other things I could deal with before the expiration of my time, but I am going to mention only one. I think hon. members by and large, regardless of their politics, had the hope when the civilian disability pension legislation was passed that it would be broad enough to cover a wife who was disabled, a husband who was disabled, or a son or daughter who was disabled.

I know of one tragic case in Vancouver where the husband cannot get a disability pension for his wife who is suffering from multiple sclerosis and who must be waited on and nursed practically around the clock because he is earning a certain amount of money, not too much but enough to just put him over the borderline. As a result the wife cannot obtain a civilian disability pension.

I know as far as I am concerned, and I think this would apply to many hon. members whether they sit in the opposition or on the government side, that that was not the

spirit in which I considered the civilian disability pension legislation. I should like very much to have the government take cognizance of this right now, not next year or the year after, and make the necessary rectification of the legislation.

The speech from the throne does not indicate this as being one of the pieces of legislation to be amended at this session, but I think this is something that would appeal to the heart and mind of every full-blooded Canadian from the Atlantic to the Pacific. It has happened quite often that after new legislation has been passed and in force for some time we fail to iron out the bugs that develop. You know perfectly well that when a new type of airplane is constructed quite often bugs may develop. The Comet II was an outstanding example. However, in that case the bugs were eliminated and today the Comet III is one of the world's greatest airplanes. The Comet II was grounded because of bugs in the construction.

I am sure I speak for all in the house when I say that none of us wants to see the civilian disability pension legislation grounded because of bugs. Let us start immediately to eliminate the bugs and thus fulfil the spirit rather than the letter of the act.

In conclusion I just want to say that despite all the haranguing about the situation in Canada being pretty bad, about the poor farmer being in such a terrible condition, about the fisherman being faced with such awful conditions, I think it can be said that while things are not as good as they ought to be, by and large the economy of this country -I do not think I am exaggerating-is buoyant and the future is bright.

I must congratulate the Minister of Finance (Mr. Harris) on the bold endeavour he made in his first budget. If he will stop talking to that Tory who is sitting with him he will hear what I am saying, but I am not going to repeat it. I congratulate him because I think he has done a very fine job. Further, I think it is fair to say that the time has come for us to do what is right and not what is expedient, that the time is ripe for us to act with courage and not temerity in all things respecting the government and welfare of this beloved nation of ours.

Mr. J. A. Smith (Battle River-Camrose):

Mr. Speaker, I wish to join the other members of this house in congratulating both the mover (Mrs. Shipley) and the seconder (Mr. Laflamme) of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I am particularly happy to do so on this occasion, as I have gathered that during the course of the present session we shall be asked to agree to a bill

granting women of the federal civil service equal status with men. This, in my opinion, is most certainly a move in the right direction.

In making my maiden speech in the Canadian House of Commons I feel very humble indeed. I am well aware of the honour which was given to me by the people of my riding.

I am equally aware of the responsibilities that I must now assume as a member of this house. I realize, Mr. Speaker, that in you and your office are centred many of the fine and valuable traditions that have been handed down to us through the centuries, and that from your dais stems the guidance which makes our democratic process function.

I shall readily admit that in the field of parliamentary procedure I am one of the infants of this house. However, I shall at all times attempt to give your high office the respect and attention to which it is entitled, and I wish to assure you that I shall more than gladly welcome any guidance and assistance you may see fit to give me personally from time to time. At this time I should like to thank you personally, and through you the members of your staff, for the many courtesies which were extended to me during my short stay here last July. I would also like to include in this respect the courteous consideration I received from the members of all parties, the members of the civil service and others. I was the only new member at that time, and I feel that everyone went out of their way to, shall I say, acclimatize me during my stay here.

The riding which I represent, Battle River-Camrose, came into being following the 1952 redistribution. My predecessor, Robert Fair, was the first member of this new riding. This territory has a population of approximately

58,000 people. The vast percentage of these people are either actively engaged in agriculture or are dependent upon agriculture for their livelihood. It is an area of many small communities, each of which is justly proud of itself.

The only city in my riding is the jubilee city of Camrose. Camrose is the youngest city in Canada, and as such celebrated its first birthday last September. It was my privilege to attend its first birthday dinner, and I was very pleased to notice that at this gathering the vast majority of the guests were men and women in civic positions in the city, the administrative staff of the city offices, the teachers, members of the department of public works and others. To me this was a fine gesture on the part of the mayor and members of his council, for far too often those people charged with the responsibility of carrying out established policies are overlooked in civic functions of this type.

The Address-Mr. J. A. Smith

Other large centres found in my riding are Lloydminster, a meridian town as it straddles the Alberta-Saskatchewan border; Vermilion, where one may find one of the large generating plants operated by Canadian Utilities; Viking, just north of which is the large natural gas field which for years was the major source of fuel for the city of Edmonton; Wainwright, which until recent years was noted for its large buffalo park, the area now being a part of the Wainwright military camp; Bashaw; Hardisty; Holden; Daysland; Killam; and others.

Most of the towns and villages within my riding have taken advantage of the Alberta government's self-liquidating revolving fund and secured money at a very low rate of interest to instal water, sewage and other community projects. By making this money thus available the Alberta government has given the people of the smaller communities of the province the same modern conveniences enjoyed by city dwellers. It was with a great deal of pleasure that I officially opened the waterworks project in the village of Kitscoty, where my family and myself had resided for many years.

The ethnic origin of the people of Battle River-Camrose is, to my mind, a true example of how peoples of many nationalities can become one under a democratic system such as ours. It is not hard to find people whose ancestors came to Canada from the British Isles, from the United States, from the Scandinavian peninsula, France, Germany, the Ukraine, Poland, Russia, Czechoslovakia, Italy, Belgium, Holland and other European countries, all living together within this riding; and they are not only proud that they are now Canadian but they are consistently and conscientiously working together to make this a happier and more prosperous nation. We are all Canadians; and, while many of us still cherish and like to practise some of the customs of our ancestors, we are prepared to admit that we have gained and are still gaining much from the cultures of other ethnic groups. The United States often maintains that it is the melting pot of national groups. I would not want it to think that it is the only nation entitled to claim this singular distinction.

During the latter part of 1955 we in Alberta celebrated the golden jubilee year of our province. On this eventful occasion we were very happy to have with us for a short time the Prime Minister of Canada. It was a thrilling sight to see him being driven up to our legislative buildings, accompanied by our Lieutenant Governor Bowlen, in the same landau which had been used by Sir Wilfrid Laurier 50 years previously. This was a sight

The Address-Mr. J. A. Smith that stirred the emotions of most of us. It reminded us that we Albertans are a part of a large and growing nation.

This was a gala event. However, to my mind the events which really struck at the heart of Alberta were the ones which were held in the smaller communities throughout the province where the local people, young and old, gathered together to do honour to their senior citizens. It was at gatherings such as these that we of the younger generation were given the opportunity of expressing our appreciation to the men and women who had come to our province over 50 years ago, stayed there and played their respective parts in the moulding of our communities and the province as a whole. I can well recall watching one little old lady going forward to accept a scroll which was given to her at that time, a scroll which she so richly deserved. These events definitely laid down a challenge to the younger people of these communities, a challenge to continue the growth of Alberta and make it a still better part of our great country.

I would not want any member of the house to feel that all is well in my riding, because that most certainly is not the case. We have many problems which are bothering us. As I have already stated, agriculture is our basic industry just as it is still the basic industry of the whole of Canada. We in Battle River-Camrose have thousands upon thousands of bushels of wheat which cannot be marketed. I most certainly subscribe, Mr. Speaker, to the sentiments expressed by the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell), the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) and other hon. members on this side of the house. They have already mentioned the need for immediate action to provide cash advances to the farmers of the west to alleviate the crisis now confronting them. I am certain that all members from the west are acutely aware of this crisis, and that each and every one of them will be striving to persuade the government that something effective must be done immediately to, first, relieve the situation as ' it now exists and, second, establish machinery which will not permit such a disaster to happen again.

Many meetings of the farmers in my riding have been held to discuss this serious problem, serious because it affects the whole economy of western Canada right now and will within the very near future have an adverse effect upon the economy of the whole of Canada. At the annual convention of the farmers' union of Alberta one could sense the uneasiness that existed in the minds of the delegates, and we must remember that the delegates were only reflecting the over-all

thoughts of the farmers and townspeople of their own areas. There is very little use trying to encourage our young people to remain upon the farms of the west as long as the present uncertainty in the industry remains. Our farmers are forced to face too many crises, too many risks of nature from the time they sow their grain until they have it harvested, to have to face the risk of not being able to market their products at the end of the season. I would again like to point out, just as it has been pointed out time and time again in this house, that the farmers of Canada fall far short of receiving their rightful share of the national income.

You may well ask what are the Social Credit proposals for remedying this serious situation. I wish now to quote from a statement released to the press by the Social Credit caucus in Alberta in early December. They had this to say:

The present federal policy with respect to loans on farm-stored grain Is entirely inadequate and the proposal to put the farmers further into debt at 5 per cent interest is unfair and unjust when all the circumstances are taken into consideration. Not many farmers will be able to qualify for the full amount of the loan. Even if more of them did, the amount would not be sufficient in many cases to take care of the debts incurred in putting in and taking off the crop.

We believe the federal government should make it possible for the Canadian wheat board to make cash advances to farmers against grain stored on the farm. The Canadian government should make an immediate start on provision of approved storage on the farms. One way of doing this would be to pay the farmer storage rates on the same basis as paid to elevators, if they build approved facilities.

It is obvious that the federal government does not have the answer to surplus production. We do not look upon surpluses as a calamity. It is only when we bungle the handling of them that they become such. If we provide proper storage, widely dispersed on the farms, and are prepared to use the national credit to finance the cash advances against the surpluses so stored, these surpluses can become a blessing to our country and the world in the years ahead.

As a long-range program towards a permanent solution to the problem of surplus grain production tire Canadian government should undertake a vigorous sales campaign to sell our surplus agricultural products to other nations requiring additional food supplies. To this end we should be prepared to enter into barter deals, credit dealp and to accept at least some currencies of the importing countries in exchange for our surplus grain.

Nor would I wish hon. members to feel that the marketing of grain is the only problem of concern among the farmers of the west. The hog raisers in my area are going out of business as rapidly as possible because the returns from this branch of agriculture are not sufficient to justify the cost of feed and the work which must go into raising a litter of pigs for market. The cattlemen are viewing with alarm the steady decline in prices being paid for their stock on the Winnipeg and

other markets of the west. This winter has all the appearance of being similar to the winter of 1919. Cattlemen were forced to start feeding their cattle early in November, and many of them are seriously concerned whether or not they have sufficient feed on hand to carry them through.

I do know that the price demanded for baled hay has risen by leaps and bounds during the last few weeks. What will likely happen if the winter continues to be severe is that many of the smaller ranchers will be forced to place their cattle upon the markets of the west. As it takes years to build up a foundation herd, I feel that this would be very serious to many of the smaller ranchers in my area. We can also appreciate the depressing effect that the dumping of a large number of cattle will have upon the open market.

Some question with respect to whether the so-called floor price on hogs is being maintained was raised in the house the other day. It is my opinion, Mr. Speaker, that not only should the floor price on hogs be strictly adhered to, but that there should also be established a floor on all agricultural products, including cattle and cereal grains.

It has already been pointed out that the crisis in western agriculture has been growing in the last few years. This unhappy situation has affected practically everyone living in my riding. When a farmer's income is cut off it affects the merchant, the machinery agent, the professional people; in fact, nearly every phase of our life is affected. It is my intention to deal at greater length with this problem at another time. We still have problems centring around the administration of the Prairie Farm Assistance Act, the Income Tax Act as it affects farmers, old age pensions, veterans allowances, the Meridian bridge just north of Lloydminster, and public buildings. Just in that connection, Mr. Speaker, I wish to compliment the government, and more particularly the Minister of Public Works, upon the fine federal building which is now being constructed in the city of Camrose. I trust that similar structures will soon be undertaken in other parts of my riding.

It is no secret throughout the dominion that oil has meant much to Alberta. In this connection I should like to point out that while Battle River-Camrose cannot claim the same distinction as such places as the Pembina field, Redwater, Leduc, Golden Spike and so forth, yet we have experienced a lot of activity along these lines. There is hardly a small community in my riding which has not seen a drilling crew come into it

The Address-Mr. Carrick seeking oil. Oil has been discovered from south of Camrose eastward toward the Lloydminster area.

We realize that nature has been good to us in this regard. The town of Lloydminster with the Husky and Excelsior refineries, the Sydney Roofing and other plants associated with the oil industry, are good examples of what oil has meant to our economy. I will listen with great interest, Mr. Speaker, to the debate on the proposed gas pipe line through northern Ontario. I only hope that the people of Canada will soon be able to enjoy the advantages of this type of fuel. The story about Alberta coal is not one of which anyone can be proud, however.

My predecessor, Robert Fair, was known throughout western Canada as one of the champions of western agriculture or perhaps I should say Canadian agriculture, because to him agriculture was a Canada-wide project. He was also known as a strong advocate for a fair deal to all veterans. He was a friend of the old age pensioner. In fact, in my mind Robert Fair left an enviable record behind him. He was a very close and dear friend of my wife and myself. I knew of his ambitions and his accomplishments. I am aware of the respect in which he was held, not only throughout his own constituency but amongst the members of all parties here and throughout Canada generally. I am fully conscious of the fact that I am following in the steps of a truly great statesman, and it is my intention to attempt at all times to maintain the standards set by Robert Fair. With God's help I shall attempt to do this.

Mr. Donald D. Carrick (Trinity):

I should like, Mr. Speaker, to congratulate the hon. member for Timiskaming (Mrs. Shipley) upon the excellence of her speech in moving the address in reply to the speech from the throne. We knew that she would acquit herself well, and of course she has done that. We know that the choice of the hon. member is a tribute to her personally, and an indication of the high esteem in which she is held by this government.

I should like also to congratulate the hon. member for Bellechasse (Mr. Laflamme) upon the excellence of his address. It augurs well for his future as a parliamentarian.

I am going to speak on that portion of the throne speech which deals with the subject of natural gas in Canada and the trans-Canada pipe line. The government proposes to recommend to parliament the creation of a crown corporation to construct the northern Ontario section of an all-Canadian pipe line, and to approve an agreement

The Address-Mr. Carrick relating thereto made between the government and Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited. The federal government deserves the commendation of the people of Canada for the part it has taken in the development of natural gas and in the plan to bring Alberta gas to the people of eastern Canada.

It may be helpful to an understanding of the problems if I were to outline the situation at the present time. In Alberta, there are large reserves of gas available for export eastward. According to a recent estimate the reserves amount to 16 trillion cubic feet, and development is currently proving up over one trillion cubic feet of new gas each year. Everyone in Alberta is anxious to see the gas put to use. The owners want to get the revenue from the sale of gas and avoid the wastage involved in burning at the well heads. The establishment of a gathering system in Alberta will require capital expenditures which will stimulate industrial activity in Alberta. The Alberta government is anxious to see the gas put to use because the royalties will produce millions of dollars in income for its treasury, and the disposal of the gas will be a stimulus to continued exploration and development of further gas and oil deposits. For these and many other reasons, everyone in Alberta is anxious that Alberta gas be sold.

It is equally desirable that natural gas be made available to the people of Ontario and Quebec. The premier of Quebec, Mr. Duplessis, has stated that he is interested in having western gas made available to consumers in Quebec. The premier of Ontario, Mr. Frost, had a study of the whole situation made for his benefit, and he is anxious to have Alberta gas made available to the consumers of Ontario at the earliest possible date. Ontario is engaged in exploiting to the full its resources for the production of electricity and it is forecast that without the aid of natural gas there will be an acute shortage of fuel in Ontario by 1970. Of the approximate

1,250,000 people who have come to Canada since 1945, about 500,000 have settled in Ontario, and it is considered that if the enormous rate of expansion is to continue it is necessary to have natural gas as a supplementary fuel. In short, the people of Ontario and eastern Canada want to be able to buy Alberta natural gas.

Hon. members will recall that for a time there was a discussion whether it would be desirable to ship Alberta gas into the United States in the west and import Texas gas into Ontario and Quebec in the east, and not build an all-Canadian pipe line. That question has been settled, and all parties in this house are

agreed that the construction of an all-Canadian pipe line is desirable to transport Alberta gas to eastern Canada.

The question has arisen whether the pipe line should be constructed under public or private ownership. This government decided that it would be preferable, if possible, to have the pipe line constructed by private enterprise.

Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited, a company incorporated by special act of this parliament, is grappling with the problem of construction of the pipe line from Princess, Alberta, to Montreal, Quebec. The present plan is to have the line run from Princess, Alberta, through Saskatchewan via Regina; through Manitoba via Winnipeg; through Ontario via Port Arthur and Fort William, Kapuskasing, North Bay to Toronto and from there to Montreal via Morrisburg. A lateral will be run from Winnipeg through Emerson to the Minneapolis market. Already there is an existing lateral from Toronto to Niagara Falls available to feed the market in the northwestern part of New York State. Branch lines will also be run from North Bay to Sudbury and from Morrisburg to Ottawa. The pipe line will be 34 inches in diameter from Princess to Winnipeg, 30 inches in diameter from Winnipeg to Toronto and 20 inches in diameter from Toronto to Montreal.

It is estimated that the cost of constructing the pipe line from Alberta to Quebec will be about $375,000,000. Of this amount about $118,000,000 will be involved in construction of the pipe line from the western boundary of Ontario to Kapuskasing. In endeavouring to arrange its financing the company found that it could not at this time, by its own efforts alone, finance the construction of the whole project.

The possibility of Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited doing its own financing was investigated for the Ontario government by Mr. J. G. Glassco of Clarkson, Gordon and Company in Toronto. In a report dated November 18, 1955, he says the figures show that without government assistance in any form the project would suffer losses for two or three years and would earn only small profits for several years thereafter. Apart from unsatisfactory initial earning power, the uncertainties of market development in areas new to natural gas and the possibility of heavy construction and operating costs in the rugged terrain of northern Ontario constitute additional difficulties in financing the project by conventional methods. He concluded that the company would not likely be able to attract enough support from private capital to finance the whole pipe line.

The Address-Mr. Carrick

The governments of Canada and Ontario, which are both interested in seeing the pipe line completed at the very earliest possible date, have agreed, subject to approval of the appropriate legislative bodies, to construct the pipe line from the western border of Ontario to Kapuskasing at an estimated cost of $118,000,000. Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited will construct the rest of the pipe line, that is from Princess, Alberta to the western border of Ontario and from Kapuskasing to Montreal at an estimated cost of $257,000,000.

It was recognized that even with temporary government assistance it was not possible, on the basis of the present markets in eastern Canada, to construct and operate the pipe line on an economic basis. Arrangements were therefore made by Trans-Canada to sell to Tennessee Gas Transmission Company at Emerson, Manitoba for the Minneapolis and mid-west market 200 million cubic feet of gas daily for a period of 25 years. Arrangements were also made to sell the same company 100 million cubic feet of gas daily for a period of 25 years for export via Niagara Falls into northwestern New York state only if gas surplus to Canadian needs is available. It is expected that the revenues derived from these two sales with an expanding market in eastern Canada will enable the project to be operated on an economic basis.

The import now taking place of Texas natural gas by Consumers Gas Company from Buffalo in New York state to Toronto for consumption in the market in the Toronto area is an integral part of the plan of building up markets in Ontario. The gas is being brought into Toronto under an arrangement by which it can be discontinued when Alberta gas is available to satisfy the requirements of the Toronto market. The pipe line can at that time be used with a reverse flow to carry Alberta gas to northern New York state.

It is also an integral part of the plan of building up the markets in Ontario for Tennessee Gas Transmission Company to export from the United States into Ontario 90 million cubic feet daily of Texas gas until Alberta gas is available to replace it. This Texas gas will service the communities east of Toronto along the north shore of the St. Lawrence as far as Montreal.

It will be realized that the export of gas to the Minneapolis market and to northwestern New York state and the export of gas from the United States into Ontario by Tennessee Gas Transmission Company are an integral part of the financing of Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited. This export of gas cannot take place without the prior sanction of the federal power commission in the United States. Applications are

now pending before the commission for such approval. Tennessee Gas Transmission Company is endeavouring to obtain it before April 30, 1956, the date on which Trans-Canada expects to be able to demonstrate to the government of Canada that its financing has been arranged.

This government proposes to carry out the construction of the pipe line from the western border of Ontario to Kapuskasing through the medium of a crown corporation which is to be created. The government has entered into an agreement with Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited to construct the pipe line and lease it to that company for a period of 25 years. The government of Ontario has agreed to pay up to one-third, but not to exceed $35,000,000, of the estimated $118,000,000 cost. That is a very brief factual statement of the situation existing at the present time.

Some criticism has been directed at the federal government for entering into this agreement with Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited. It might be profitable for us to look at this criticism for a moment in the light of the circumstances which existed when the agreement was made on November 21, 1955. It was in May, 1954, that Trans-Canada obtained permission from the Alberta petroleum and gas conservation board to export gas eastward. Since that time it has been engaged in arranging for the purchase of gas for a period of -25 years from its owners in Alberta. It has also been engaged in arranging for the sales I have already mentioned in the United States, and in procuring markets in Ontario and Quebec. The arrangements for purchases and sales had to be completed before the company could arrange to raise money to finance the construction of the pipe line to eastern Canada. The company finally came to the point where it was clear that it was not able, without some temporary assistance from the federal government, to finance the construction of the pipe line to eastern Canada.

The choice facing the federal government was a difficult one. Its paramount interest was to see the pipe line constructed so that Alberta gas could be brought to eastern Canada at the very earliest possible date. I have already outlined why it was in the interests of both Alberta and eastern Canada for this to take place. Trans-Canada had been interested in the project since 1949 and had spent in excess of $13,000,000 working on the project and exploring the possibility of constructing and financing the all-Canadian pipe line. The company had already contracted to purchase at an estimated cost of $30,000,000 the pipe necessary to lay the line from Princess. Alberta to Winnipeg, Manitoba. It was

150 HOUSE OF COMMONS

The Address-Mr. Carrick

a reasonable expectation that if the federal government gave some temporary assistance to the company, the pipe line could be completed and Alberta gas would be flowing into eastern Canada by 1958. If the federal government refused to give the company any temporary assistance, the possibility of Trans-Canada financing the pipe line was at an end.

What was the alternative to rendering temporary assistance to the company? Since Alberta needed to sell its gas and eastern Canada needed the gas for its fuel requirements, it was clear that the pipe line had to be built. If it could not be built by Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited it would have to be built under public ownership. Assuming an arrangement could be made among the federal government and the governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, it was a reasonable expectation that it would take considerable time to complete the negotiations for such an agreement and that the line would not be completed until at least 1960.

The federal government was faced with the fundamental question whether this is the kind of economic activity in which it and the provincial governments should participate. In view of what has happened in the recent federal-provincial conferences, it could be under no illusions about the difficulty of reaching an agreement with the provinces. There was the very distinct possibility that no agreement could ever be reached by the five provinces concerned and the federal government on the construction of the pipe line. Taking all these factors into consideration, it was a reasonable conclusion for the federal government to reach that the better alternative was to render temporary assistance to Trans-Canada Pipe Lines to enable it to construct the pipe line.

Criticism has been expressed in some quarters to the federal government rendering any assistance at all to Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited. It is argued that if the pipe line is to be constructed by private enterprise, then private enterprise should be prepared to do it without any assistance from the government. I see no justification for this argument. There might be some justification for it if Trans-Canada were at liberty to construct the pipe line upon any route it desired. It could lay its pipe line along an economic route which would pay its own way, and no help would be required from the government.

This is not the situation. It is the federal government, supported by all parties in this house, that is requiring Trans-Canada Pipe Lines Limited to lay its pipe to eastern Canada over a stretch of territory in Ontario

which is devoid of substantial customers. Since the federal government is requiring this action in the national interest, should it not assist in offsetting any economic disadvantage to the project required by the national interest?

There is nothing unique or unusual in the federal government assisting private enterprise in a project that is in the national interest. Federal government assistance to private enterprise in constructing a railroad to unite Canada was a cornerstone in the policy of Sir John A. Macdonald. It may well be that the construction of a trans-Canada pipe line in our day will rank in importance with the construction of a railroad in the generation of Sir John A. Macdonald.

Some criticism has been directed at the federal government on the ground that it assumes all the risk of the construction of the uneconomic part of the project and gets none of the profits. This is not an accurate statement of the agreement or summary of the situation. The agreement provides that the federal government through the crown corporation will construct the portion of the pipe line between the Manitoba-Ontario boundary and Kapuskasing, a distance of 675 miles, as an integrated part of the all-Canadian line. Upon completion of construction the crown corporation will lease this northern Ontario section to the pipe-line company for a maximum period of 25 years.

Trans-Canada undertakes to purchase the section as soon as the finances can be arranged. It is given an option to purchase for the 25-year period of the lease, and the terms of the purchase provide a strong incentive to exercise the option at an early date.

The provisions dealing with what the federal government is to receive are somewhat complicated. Rental payments are to be made monthly and annually. If the option to purchase is not exercised, the federal government will receive by way of rental payments a profit over and above expenses, interest costs and amortization in the event that gas demand increases as expected.

If the option to purchase is exercised the least the federal government will receive will be its full investment plus interest thereon at 3J per cent per annum. Depending on the time the option is exercised the purchase price may be higher.

In view of the fact that Trans-Canada must show the federal government that the project has been financed before the federal government spends one cent on the construction of the northern Ontario section, the risk to the government is minimal. The federal government will get its money out of the project

with interest, and it is doubtful if this is the kind of undertaking in which the government should make any further profit.

There has been some criticism in the newspapers of the project on the ground that Trans-Canada in its contract with Tennessee Gas Transmission Company has sacrificed Canadian consumers to the interest of the Tennessee company.

The charge is that Trans-Canada had a contract with Northern Natural Gas Company to sell that company gas for distribution in the Minneapolis and midwest market, and that Trans-Canada cancelled that contract and made a less favourable one with the Tennessee company. It is charged that as a result of the Tennessee company paying a lower price for gas than the Northern Natural Gas Company had agreed to pay, the Canadian consumers will have to make up the difference and pay a higher price for gas. All of this came about, it is charged, because the Tennessee company had a financial interest in Trans-Canada which it improperly used to procure a contract favourable to itself at the expense of the Canadian consumers. It is also alleged that the Tennessee company used its influence to obtain a contract for the purchase of gas from Trans-Canada for sale through Niagara Falls, Ontario, to the markets of New York state at a price which is too low, with the result that the price to Canadian consumers will be too high.

These charges puzzled me, because the directors of Trans-Canada did not seem to me to be the type of men who would sacrifice the interests of the Canadian consumers. Of the 15 directors of Trans-Canada 11 are Canadians, so that Canadians control the board. Hon. members will recognize the names of many of the Canadian directors as men who are highly esteemed in the Canadian business community. They are the president, Mr. N. E. Tanner, a former minister of mines and minerals in the Alberta government; H. R. Milner of Edmonton; A. Deane Nesbitt of Montreal; J. K. McCausland of Toronto; Jules R. Timmins of Montreal; Hon. Edouard Asselin of Montreal; J. R. Tolmie of Ottawa; E. W. Bickle of Toronto; Hon. G. Peter Campbell of Toronto; G. P. Osier of Winnipeg and M. A. MacPherson of Regina.

I made inquiries about the facts from persons associated with the project and am advised that these charges are based upon a complete misunderstanding of the facts and are not true.

I have mentioned the charge that the Tennessee company improperly used its financial interest in Trans-Canada to procure contracts detrimental to the interests of Canadian

The Address-Mr. Carrick consumers. I am told that at the time Trans-Canada made the contract with the Tennessee company, the Tennessee company had no financial interest whatsoever in Trans-Canada nor at that time had there been any discussion of the Tennessee company acquiring any interest. The contract with the Tennessee company was made on the 11th day of August, 1955. The Tennessee company did not begin negotiations to acquire any financial interest in Trans-Canada until the latter part of October, 1955, and the contract defining its interest was dated 1st November, 1955. Moreover, there was no relation between the contract of the 11th August, 1955 and the interest of the Tennessee company in Trans-Canada. The desire of the Tennessee company to acquire a financial interest in Trans-Canada arose in connection with a liability it assumed of $30,000,000 to enable Trans-Canada to obtain pipe for use in construction in 1956. Obviously since the Tennessee company had no financial interest in Trans-Canada at the time the contract was made, the charge that it used its interest improperly is without any foundation.

I am also told that everything considered, the contract with the Tennessee company is more favourable to Trans-Canada than the contract with Northern Natural Gas Company. Northern Natural Gas had agreed to purchase 100 million cubic feet daily of natural gas for sale in the Minneapolis market the first year, building up to 200 million cubic feet daily the third year with an option on an additional 100 million cubic feet daily beginning the fourth year. The Tennessee company agreed to purchase double that amount, namely 200 million cubic feet in the first year, with an option on an additional 200 million cubic feet. A prominent market consultant retained by Trans-Canada advised in effect that considering the volume and load factor the price to be received by Trans-Canada from the Tennessee company compared favourably with the price Trans-Canada was to receive from Northern Natural Gas Company. t

There is another consideration that is important. The only gas Northern Natural Gas Company could purchase was for use in the Minneapolis market. But the Tennessee company contracted to purchase, if Alberta gas were available surplus to Canadian needs, 100 million cubic feet daily for sale in the markets of northwestern New York state. This additional volume of sales has an important bearing on the volume of gas to be shipped to eastern Canada, and consequently will ultimately have a beneficial effect on the eastern Canadian consumer in the rate he will pay for gas.

Point of Order

Mr. Knowles:

Might I rise on a point of order? I wonder if Your Honour will consider a comment on the application, now that we have new rules in the house, of citation 293(o) of Beauchesne's second edition; also citation 314. Citation 293(o) prohibits a member from reading from a previously prepared speech. This rule has been sanctioned by usage both in England and Canada. Citation 314 reads:

It is a rule in both houses of parliament that a member must address the house orally, and not read from a written, previously prepared speech, for the reason that "if the practice of reading speeches should prevail, members might read speeches that were written by other people, and the time of the house be taken up in considering the arguments of persons who were not deserving of their attention."

I hope the hon. member for Trinity will not take it personally that I raise this point of order in the midst of his speech. I think this is the first instance of the reading of a speech this session. Perhaps we might have a ruling.