March 21, 1979

?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

Mr. Speaker, there is just one other subject I would like to talk about before concluding these remarks. I realize I have gone some distance now from the five-point energy platform of the Tory party. I am not very concerned that they will steal the rest of if from us. They are always looking for ideas from this side, but I do not see how they can make up their minds on pricing. I am not afraid they will steal our policy on that, because it would mean either hurting brother Lougheed or brother Davis, and that is not going to happen. They just will not stand up and be counted, and I can predict that with certainty.

On Petro-Canada, of course, they have so many positions, as we say. If they steal anything they will be stealing it from some of their members, again on other members' backs.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Oh, oh!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

On allocation, which this bill is dealing with directly and which goes not only to the roots of our energy policy but which has to do with the notion of the country as such, I want to say just a few words. We on this side of the House take the view that the constitution, quite correctly, put

management and ownership of resources in the hands of the provinces. It was not always thus, as we know.

[ Translation]

I said on other occasions that the constitution had undergone many changes in this respect, that the New Quebec area in particular, the whole northern part of Quebec starting from the La Grande River, if I remember right, was given to the province of Quebec by the federal government whose property it was until 1908 when Mr. Wilfrid Laurier, the then Liberal Prime Minister, had a resolution introduced in the House which was implemented in 1912, in effect doubling Quebec's territory, giving it all those resources until then part of Rupert's Land, in other words Canada.

The Government of Canada did the same thing for northern Ontario. It did the same thing for the province of Manitoba, which it created out of nothing with federal lands in 1870, as well as with Alberta and Saskatchewan which it created out of nothing with federal lands, Rupert's Land and the Northwest Territories in 1905. And even more, it gave them explicitly what they did not have until 1930, namely jurisdiction and ownership over natural resources. So we see a change in the constitutional history where the federal government not only delegates powers but hands over to the provinces considerable resources in the form of territories, minerals and resources of all kinds. It is a laudable change because it enabled the provinces to develop, to have real autonomy, to make them more concerned with the development of their territories, the orientation of their economy and so on. But I believe it is important at this stage in our history, Mr. Speaker, to remind Canadians in general, and perhaps certain provincial premiers in particular, that no province can have absolute ownership without sharing all its resources on its territory.

If the Government of Canada gave large pieces of its territories to Quebec, Ontario and the western provinces, it is because under the constitution it was keeping certain fiscal powers, certain powers with respect to trade and commerce, with respect to other emergencies as the one we are discussing today, certain transcendental powers so the federal government may, when the well-being of all Canadians is at stake, intervene to make sure all Canadians can benefit to some extent from those resources which in fact belong to everyone.

I know, Mr. Speaker, that the premiers and the opposition party in particular will not be fond of this theory. But I appeal to all Canadians, Quebeckers, Ontarians and Albertans. I ask them to think of what this country would become if one province could have not only absolute control but absolute ownership of its resources without any consideration for sharing, by way of taxes or otherwise, with the rest of the country. What would be the consequences, Mr. Speaker? What would happen if an individual born in the maritimes moved to Alberta? He would automatically become entitled to share in the Heritage Fund which is worth about $4 billion now, or the entire budget of Nova Scotia.

Energy Supplies

What happens to the individual who was born and raised in Alberta, who studied there, who worked there and who, all of a sudden, wants to leave Alberta to work, study, marry, find a job or pursue his career elsewhere? Is it not obvious that by doing so he loses all benefits issuing as birthrights as an Albertan? Is it not obvious that a province could become so rich that an increasing number of Canadians would migrate there to enjoy those benefits which would be denied them by a central government capable of redistributing these resources?

This kind of country would be inconceivable. It would not be possible. Immigration posts would have to be set up at the present time at the Alberta border because-

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

An hon. Member:

Ah!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

I am talking about the hypothesis where the federal government would not be able to share in the resources as it is doing now. I know that the hon. member in the back bench is so bloated with himself that he cannot understand.

I am sure that this is not the position of Albertans, even if one considers the negotiations that we have had with the Alberta government over the past several years. They have agreed in this instance. They have accepted prices which would be less than world prices because they see-not because we have legislation with a revolver clause in it-that it is best for Canada. I respect the premier of that province too much to think that he is only agreeing to lower than world prices because there is a revolver clause in the federal legislation. He is agreeing because he shares a view of Canada which we all have to have-that the resources of this country belong to the people of this country.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

The constitution says that the resources shall be managed by the province, that the ownership will reside in the province. But it also gives the federal government many rights on those resources, whether it be through taxation power, trade and commerce power, or peace, order and good government power. What I say, and what I said at the first ministers' conference on the constitution in February, is that we are prepared to discuss these powers to limit their exercise, but we will never give them up totally.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

If hon. members of this House followed those debates in February, they will know that the premiers of several provinces, supporting each other, were trying to put this government in a position where it would no longer have the power to redistribute wealth across the country except in cases of crisis and emergency or where the peace, order and good government legislation had to be applied in all its force. I have a quotation from one member of the opposite side who said in this debate: "Well, you could always use the War

4394

Energy Supplies

Measures Act". We do not want to be forced to use the War Measures Act to make sure that the resources of this country go to the benefit of the people of this country.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

I can understand the premiers trying to protect their jurisdiction as much as they can and trying to reduce federal jurisdiction in these matters in these debates, as we saw in February. They are elected and their job is, first and foremost, to stand for the people of their province. They are not elected to think of the over-all scheme of Canada. It is nice when they do, but they do not always do so in their hard bargaining. But we have to think of the good of all Canadians. We have to think of the common good-

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Oh, oh!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

I hear groans again from the Tory party. I can understand that because of what happened after the February conference. Their leader went to Alberta and when asked about the premier's constitutional stand on resources, he said something to the effect: "I stand with the premier, and the provinces must have the resources". They have the resources now. That is not what the premier was asking for. He was not asking for jurisdiction over resources because he has jurisdiction. He was trying to limit federal jurisdiction over trade and commerce and over other powers which permit us to make sure that those resources can be for the benefit of all Canadians. On that, Mr. Speaker, the Tory party and the Liberal party are different and we will remain different.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

I see that the Tory party, which condemned us for not having any policy, has finally come up with a policy themselves. It is a vague copy of ours, but they missed the most important point, to wit: that we are elected in this House to look after the common good of all Canadians, not that of only one or other of the provinces-

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
LIB

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (Prime Minister)

Liberal

Mr. Trudeau:

-whether they are led by Tory premiers, NDP premiers, Social Credit premiers or Liberal premiers. We will continue to do our job. We will continue to press forward with this legislation, which is our way of discharging our duty to all the people of Canada, so that they know that if any emergency arises or the common good is disrupted there will be a federal government empowered by this parliament to act for the protection of all Canadians.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
?

Some hon. Members:

Hear, hear!

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink
PC

Allan Frederick Lawrence

Progressive Conservative

Mr. Allan Lawrence (Northumberland-Durham):

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the fact that even though the Prime Minister (Mr. Trudeau) has had an hour to speak the way that he has, at least he has given me ten minutes before the House rises to attempt to rebut. Of course, now the Prime Minister is leaving the House.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT ORDERS
Subtopic:   ENERGY SUPPLIES EMERGENCY ACT, 1979 MEASURE TO CONSERVE STOCKS
Permalink

March 21, 1979