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

LIB

Andrew Wesley Stuart

Liberal

Mr. A. W. Stuart (Charlotte):

My opening remarks, Mr. Speaker, will be congratulations to the mover and the seconder of the address in reply to the speech from the throne. I wish to compliment them sincerely. I think their contribution was worth while and was well delivered.
After having listened to the remarks by the member from Newfoundland I think that the house will have, when I have finished, a good idea that the members from the maritimes are much dissatisfied and in many cases are much of the same mind.
The particular part of the speech from the throne in which I was interested was a section which dealt with trade relations between the various countries of the world who were willing to trade with us. That is one of the most important things we have to deal with in the maritimes. We are in a different position from that of many parts of Canada, since we are practically wholly dependent on the United States for our markets. For that reason the closer relationship there is between the United States and Canada and the better trade agreements that can be arranged between the two countries the more beneficial it will be to our part of the country.
On many occasions in the house we hear discussions on unfavourable trade balances. As a rule when that condition does prevail every effort is made to rectify it. But I often

The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart wonder whether we give sufficient consideration to the unfavourable trade balances as between the provinces of the dominion. That is the great problem that faces the maritime provinces. At this point I might say that we have found it much easier to break into the markets of the United States than into the markets of central Canada. We have always been able to deal with the United States; we have always been able to get along with them even though the things that we produce are also produced in the United States. They have always been very considerate of us and we consider them our friends.
During the war we were told that it would be necessary to centralize industries in this part of Canada, and that after the war it was hoped that the centralization of industry would be discontinued, and that we in our section of the country might expect a better break than we had received in wartime. Many of the war plants in Ontario and Quebec, to the construction of which we paid our proportionate share, were practically given to industries in the two central provinces immediately after the war. I have seen them in Hamilton and in other parts of central Canada. We paid our proportionate part to build these very fine structures. After the war, instead of the maritime provinces receiving what they considered belonged to them, these properties were practically given away to create new industries and to induce other industries to come to the two central provinces. It was the same old story that we have had since confederation, centralization of industry.
There is a point that I wish to make, which I feel will be discussed openly some time in the near future, and which is of great interest down in my section of Canada. During my five years in Ottawa I have heard hon. members from Ontario and Quebec, who I believe were sincere, say that they would like to have an opportunity to assist the people in less fortunate provinces. We believe that today they have that opportunity. It is only a few years ago that an hon. member from Ontario visited the maritime provinces. He was the former member for Davenport, Mr. John R. MacNicol, a most distinguished Canadian. Speaking in Saint John city on that occasion he had this to say, according to the Saint John Telegraph-Journal:
It is an outrage against the maritime provinces that the (Chignecto) canal was not built fifty or seventy-five years ago. I say further that the buildi-ing of that canal would revolutionize the whole economy of the three maritime provinces.
He went on to make further flattering statements about the maritime provinces. I believe he was sincere in every way.

In the province of Quebec and in Labrador we have enormous quantities of iron ore, which has been discovered within the last few years. Iron ore cannot be manufactured without coal, and so far as I know there is no coal in Ontario or Quebec. Therefore it would be necessary to ship this iron ore to central Canada, and then use United States dollars to import United States coal if this industry is to be centralized where most other industries are. That idea has already been strongly suggested by many papers in Ontario, and by many people. At this point I should like to quote a short statement from Maclean's, which is a national magazine, read all over Canada. It was written by "the man with a notebook." It is dated February 15, 1949, and reads as follows:
If the seaway does go through, Ottawa of course will stand up and cheer.
He is referring to the deepening of the St. Lawrence waterway in order to provide means of bringing Labrador ore into central Canada. I fail to understand why we from the maritime provinces who sit in the House of Commons should stand up and cheer over the announcement that the St. Lawrence waterway was being deepened. In other words, the people in the central provinces expect the maritime provinces to make their proportionate contribution toward the deepening of the St. Lawrence waterway in order that the ore that should be manufactured in the mari-times may be taken to central Canada to be manufactured so that they may enjoy the benefits. To me that is merely a selfish statement. It goes on to say:
High tolls on Labrador ore would divert it from the great lakes area to the Atlantic seaboard.
I realize that in the eyes of a person living in central Canada that would be a terrible calamity; but in the eyes of the people living in the maritime provinces that would be the logical thing to do, and the economical thing as well. It would be the logical and economical thing to manufacture Labrador ore where there is coal. I am certain to hear arguments propounded in the house sometime in the near future as to why this ore should be manufactured in central Canada. I realize that we are going to be asked to stand up and support it. That ore could be taken a much shorter distance to where we already have coal, and we already have a problem in connection with our coal industry. Markets cannot be found for maritime coal. We are told that it cannot compete even as far west as Montreal. If the hon. members from central Canada are sincere this is their opportunity to assist the maritime provinces. Here is the opportunity from an economical standpoint, and from the standpoint of the saving of

The Address-Mr. A. W. Stuart United States dollars, to make every effort bers in the House of Commons from the to manufacture this ore in the maritime maritime provinces will stand on his feet provinces. and fight against it.
When the Chignecto canal is built-and I hope it will be-much of this ore may be manufactured on the Atlantic coast of the United States. I have no doubt that some people would not like to see that happen, but I would love to see these people get Canadian ore. They have supplied us with ore for many years. They have supplied us with many commodities that we were not able to produce in this country. I would never take the selfish attitude that it should be kept at home. If we have a surplus we should not hesitate to sell it to our neighbours to the south who have always given us most generous consideration.
I should like to read another article at this time from the Northern Miner, of recent issue. This is along the same lines and, speaking about Labrador ore, states:
With the domestic iron production on the march to an annual outpouring that could conceivably reach 20,000,000 tons, Canadians can see the basis for tremendous industrial expansion for the nation. This is a mighty giant that has been unleashed by the proving up of hundreds of millions of tons of reserves.
It is not likely to stop with the mere digging up of the ore and loading it on a train or boat. The resulting annual influx of United States dollars from these simple operations-$100 million or more is quite possible-is nothing to be sneezed at but Canadians with courage and imagination will expect the iron ore revelations to mean much more than that.
They can see huge growth for the Canadian steel industry, not ignoring the sixty per cent expansion that has taken place in the last half dozen years and the works currently in progress. Their ideas go far beyond. They see present steel plants much, much bigger and1 new steel centres established-at the head of the lakes, for instance.
Every mention made of manufacturing Labrador ore contains reference to the head of the lakes. I have yet to hear or read anything from Ontario or Quebec which would suggest that this ore should be manufactured in the maritime provinces. Perhaps I am repeating myself, but before leaving this subject let me say that we feel we have in our argument a logical approach; we feel we have coal for which markets cannot be found. We feel we have the personnel, some of whom are unemployed. We feel that from an economic standpoint there can be no argument in favour of any other part of Canada. I do hope that when any mention is made of the deepening of the St. Lawrence waterways so as to take this iron ore to central Canada, each and every one of the mem-

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