March 6, 1950 (21st Parliament, 2nd Session)

LIB

Emmett Andrew McCusker

Liberal

Mr. McCusker:

I shall take the hon. member aside and explain it to him later. I have not the time to do so now because I have other things to say. There are a few other matters to which I should like to refer, now that I am on my feet. One of these is the Hudson bay route, a road which has been too long
The Address-Mr. McCusker neglected and to which I suggest attention must be paid. However, I understand another hon. member will refer to this matter in greater detail at a later date.
We have in Saskatchewan an office in connection with the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act. In that office we find a group who are doing good work for the rehabilitation of farmers in the western part of the province, and especially in the area of Gull lake, and Maple Creek which is represented by the hon. member who the other day made what I thought was a jocular remark with respect to dividing the province. He may feel it is necessary to do that to get rid of the government we now have in Saskatchewan. That is not my view however, because I think they are on the way out now-just waiting for the next election.
Let me tell the house why I believe they are on the way out. About 1941 or 1942 the Imperial Oil Company came to Saskatchewan and initiated a program of exploration and drilling for oil. It was their opinion that the main pool of oil lies under Saskatchewan. With that in mind they brought in drilling and seismographic crews. Then the C.C.F. government took office and passed confiscatory legislation, with the result that the crews left the province and went to Alberta, where they felt they would receive a fair deal. Those crews which were driven from Saskatchewan to Alberta were responsible for the discoveries of the Leduc and Redwater fields, and other discoveries in the area.
The good fortune Alberta is enjoying today might have been ours, had we had more experienced people in charge of our government.

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