I have listened with a good deal of interest to what the Minister of Agriculture said in regard to the innocent character of this Bill as it now stands, and his explanation of the letter of the hon. Chairman of the Conservation Commission. I do not read this Bill as of the innocent character that the Minister of Agriculture does, and I think he must give more consideration to it before he comes to that
conclusion. As I understand the letter, Mr. Sifton, the Chairman of the Conservation Commission, wanted the Bill to be limited to transmission, and I do not understand the minister to say that Mr. Sifton has seen the Bill in its amended form. If it be intended that this Bill is to accomplish nothing but transmission, that is not its effect even as amended. By clause 6 the company may purchase or lease electric power, and acquire such lands, easements and privileges as are necessary for the purpose of it3 undertakings. Now, it must be admitted that the Act of 1901, incorporating the St. Lawrence Power Company, though it may be a different Act, gives that company the right to sell those powers, and that Act contains no clause such as we insert in railway charters, preventing any amalgamation with any other company except with the approval of the Governor in Council or the Railway Commission. So that the two companies, being under the one control, could be so manipulated as to give them the joint power of generating and transmitting electricity. Clause (6) provides that the company may:-
(a) construct, maintain , operate, use and manage conduits, tunnels, transmission lines, structures, buildings, machinery, plant, appliances, instruments and devices, and erect and maintain poles and towers, and lay and maintain pipes, cables, wires or other conductors and connect them with similar lines in other provinces and with similar lines in the United States for the purpose of importation only.
It does not say for transmission only, and I cannot presume that would be the result