May 29, 1930 (16th Parliament, 4th Session)

CON

Thomas Langton Church

Conservative (1867-1942)

Mr. T. L. CHURCH (Toronto Northwest):

Is the government going to follow this same practice with regard to the rest of Canada, especially the building of bridges in the province of Ontario? This resolution is outside the powers of this parliament because this is not an international bridge, nor an interprovincial bridge, nor does it affect navigation. Those are the only three grounds upon which this parliament can vote money for bridges. This is a purely municipal undertaking or a bridge between municipalities all in the same prov-nces-Lachine and Caughnawaga. The city of Toronto has had a contract with this government for seventeen years since 1913 for the building of a bridge across to the island at Toronto, and the government have backed out of the agreement although this order in council is enforceable in the exchequer court. There should be equality of treatment for all the provinces, and if the government is going to do this for the province of Quebec it should do the same thing for the province of Ontario, the maritime provinces and every other province. The British North America Act, as a matter of fact, does not allow aid to be granted for bridges that are purely municipal undertakings.

Topic:   QUESTIONS
Subtopic:   PROPOSED CAUGHNAWAGA BRIDGE
Full View