Mr. Benidickson:

We have a new provision in this bill, something that has not been in the existing act, which permits the federal government to make a grant in respect of

federally owned buildings even though they are not on land owned by the crown.

Mr. Johnston (Bow River):

I would like to ask a further question of the parliamentary assistant with regard to the situation in Banff. He mentioned a moment ago that the federal government was paying so much to the school district for these 17 pupils. I would like to ask him how much the federal government pays.

Mr. Benidickson:

I am not familiar with the actual rate for each pupil, Mr. Chairman, because the money is under a vote of another department; it is in the vote provided for the parks branch of the Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources. However, I know it is the same rate the school district would charge any non-resident.

Mr. Johnston (Bow River):

It seems to me, Mr. Chairman, that where the government has property in a place such as Banff-and I mentioned two a moment ago, namely the administrative building and the post office- they should be treated about the same as any other occupants of that area. For instance, the Canadian Pacific Railway has a hotel there, namely the Banff Springs hotel. It is my understanding that they pay on an assessment basis. If an institution such as the C.P.R. is taxed on an assessment basis for school purposes and for these other services that are rendered there, surely the federal government should be assessed on the property they hold, such as the administration building and the property which is used for postal services.

I hope the parliamentary assistant will give some consideration to this question which I have raised, and that it will be possible for some scheme to be worked out whereby the federal government, under this new arrangement, will be obliged to increase its contributions toward the services they receive in the national parks, particularly in Banff. It would also apply to Jasper and to other areas situated in national parks which are in a similar position.

Mr. Hamilton (York West):

Mr. Chairman, I was not able to see the minutes of the committee meeting; we had them only in typewritten form. Was any reference made to the method of arriving at a valuation which was satisfactory not only to the municipalities but also to the department? Is there any connection with the advertisements we have seen asking for assessors? Has that any bearing on what the department plans to do in connection with fixing a satisfactory assessment for these buildings?

Mr. Benidickson:

Some 700 or 800 municipalities that do not now get grants will,

Municipal Grants Act

under the present bill, be entitled to grants in lieu of taxes. In the committee we had evidence from the officials who administer the act. In the course of it they said that 98 per cent or 99 per cent of the assessments that came in caused very little trouble and that, generally speaking, if they were satisfied that the federal properties were being valued on the same basis as that on which the municipality would assess any other taxpayer, they were not complaining. It was only where there might appear to be a lack of understanding of a certain type of building which probably only the federal government would own, or where there appeared to be some desire to be a little bit more onerous in assessing the federal government than in connection with any other taxpayer within that area, that there would be any trouble.

Mr. Hamilton (York West):

Is the department taking on additional assessors to assist in this work?

Mr. Benidickson:

This staff has been very small. As the number of municipalities with whom they have to deal is now being greatly enlarged, I have no doubt that some additional staff will have to be taken on.

Mr. Hamilton (York West):

Would it not be possible to employ competent valuators already in these areas to do this type of work for the department, keeping in mind that once the general job of dealing with all these buildings throughout the 800 additional municipalities is finished, at that time there might not be any need for increasing this staff? I think all of us are concerned about the fact that in connection with almost every bit of legislation that comes before us here, one of the first items that has to be taken care of is the additional number of persons to be employed by the department. If we keep this up there will be less money in actual fact for the municipalities.

Mr. Murphy (Lambton West):

I do not

intend to take much of the time of the committee. I think the parliamentary assistant to the minister is aware of what I intend to speak about. It is a situation which concerns my own riding, but the same conditions might exist-and I am sure they do-in many other ridings in Canada. I have reference to the services rendered by the municipality to an Indian reservation within the city of Sarnia.

Along with other property which was formerly in the township of Sarnia, we have taken in the Sarnia Indian reserve. I have made some representations in the past in the hope that the situation there could be remedied to the extent that for any services that are rendered by the city to the reserve, there would be a return to the city. The land

Municipal Grants Act

is not subject to taxation. I have previously urged that a reserve such as this should be subject to taxation, especially when it receives such services from the municipality.

Incidentally, Mr. Chairman, I may say that this reserve is not like many others that we have in Canada. It is, I think, in the process of being sold. If the sale goes through it is going to involve in the neighbourhood of $9 million; which will be the largest real estate transaction Canada has ever had. I am sure many will agree with me when I say that when a reserve obtains all the services this one is given-it gets the same services as any other part of the city in connection with police protection, health services and everything else that goes to make up the cost of servicing a municipality-the municipality should be compensated.

I think the parliamentary assistant has in his office a resolution and a statement from the city of Sarnia to the effect that last year the services to that particular reserve were worth in the neighbourhood of $27,000. While these reserves have not been subject to taxation, I have always contended that they should be. If not, at least the municipality in which they are situated should be compensated for the expense it incurred.

There is an astounding factor about this particular situation. I had from the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration a return to a question asking what was paid to the city last year for services. In the return I think he mentioned the amount of $2,630.59, of which $375 was for fire halls.

Mr. Benidiclcson:

For what?

Mr. Murphy (Lambton West):

Fire halls. The day after I referred to this matter in the house last January I had from the city manager a telegram to the effect that $375 was the total amount paid by the government for services. There may be some confusion about what services are included. However, my contention is that Indian reservations should be included so they come within the purview of the act, to the extent that they too would be subject to taxation.

Naturally we would not expect the reserve to be assessed on the basis of the amount for which the property could be sold. Sections of this reserve have been sold in the past for $2,000 an acre, so it is not a poor reserve. In fact I would say it is the second wealthiest reserve in the Dominion of Canada. There are only about 80 families on the whole reserve. I hope before this a bill is finally passed consideration can be given to this particular set of circumstances, and we can at least see that the city is reimbursed for its outlay. That is my first objection. The second one is,

of course, that the property should be assessed the same as other property within the city limits.

The second item I wish to mention briefly is this. We have a crown company in Sarnia in the Polymer Corporation. Homes were built there and taxes were fixed at a nominal amount because the homes were occupied by crown employees. I would suggest that where a special assessment or a special tax was fixed on an annual basis over a term of years, that arrangement should be abrogated and the property assessed the same as other property. I hope the department will seriously consider this situation, as well as the situation with respect to the Indian reserve.

Mr. Patterson:

I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, I have not been in the house because I have been in attendance at the committee on marine and fisheries. I understand that the hon. member for New Westminster posed some questions, and I was wondering if they had been answered.

Mr. Benidickson:

No, but I was just about to do that. The hon. member for New Westminster asked about the eligibility of a communication station for a grant. I confessed my difficulty in the banking and commerce committee which has not been resolved. What was the type of unit he had in mind? I could think offhand that it could be a communication station at an airport. I could think it might be something that was part of the activities of the C.B.C. It could very well be something that belonged to the Department of Transport. Normally, anything in the nature of a technical engineering structure is not something that would be assessed, but if he could give me the details I could make inquiries and within a day or two let him know.

Mr. Hahn:

It is a telecommunications station, one erected for the purpose of carrying this new transmission line we have to Australia and New Zealand. I believe it comes under the Department of Transport.

Mr. Benidickson:

It may come under the Department of Transport, in which case I am sure the land it occupies would be eligible for assessment. On the other hand, it may be something that is operated by the overseas telecommunications corporation, which is a crown company, and at the present time that would involve negotiation between the corporation and the municipality.

The other question related to an experimental station, and I take it that was a reference to what is sometimes described also as an experimental farm. An experimental farm as such would qualify for assessment, with this exception; that if it involves as part

of its operation something that might be called a public park, as does the farm in Ottawa, that section of the farm that is a park would not be subject to assessment.

Mr. Patterson:

I wonder if the minister has a list of defence establishments that qualify under this legislation. I was thinking especially of the large camp in the municipality of Chilliwack, and the Abbotsford airport, which is an R.C.A.F. airport.

Mr. Benidickson:

I do not seem to have it at hand, but I do recall that during the hearings in committee a list was put on the Hansard record of the committee of the 14 or 18 large military establishments that would doubtless be considered as establishments such as described here in the bill, in clause 1, subsection 1 (c) 4.

Mr. Brooks:

I did not ask the parliamentary assistant regarding Gagetown, but I assumed there would be no doubt Gagetown would be one of those self-contained military establishments.

Mr. Gillis:

I would ask the parliamentary assistant if there would be any doubt about a radar station operated by national defence?