Mr. A. L. BEAUBIEN (Provencher):: Mr. Speaker, I wish to present the second and final report of the select committee on radio broadcasting. This report is unanimous, and copies are being printed in English and in French.
The select committee appointed on radio broadcasting to consider the annual report of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and to review the policies of the corporation with special reference to revenues, expenditures and development, begs leave to present the following as its second and final report:
Your committee held seven meetings and had as principal witnesses the chairman and vice chairman of the board of governors and the general manager. During seven sittings, an exhaustive examination was conducted. All information required by the committee to carry out its terms of reference was supplied, confidential information not susceptible of publication in the public interest being made available privately. The committee was impressed by the ability and frankness of the principal witnesses.
The bulk of the evidence concerned the program, technical and financial policies of the corporation. Your committee is of the opinion that these policies are well designed to carry out the purpose for which the corporation was created. Your committee is also of the opinion that the policies of the corporation are being executed in a businesslike fashion.
With respect to programs, the corporation's policy is to utilize Canadian talent in the development of Canadian, programs of distinction and quality, and to make available to Canadians the best programs from the United States, Great Britain and elsewhere. With the resources at its disposal, your committee believes, the corporation can give Canada satisfactory broadcasting service, while at the same time enabling Canada to create programs worthy of exchange.
With respect to the corporation's plan of national coverage, involving the ownership of high power stations and the extension of CBC coverage to reach all parts of Canada, your committee wishes to indicate its approval. It is considered that the development of this plan is of great importance in the national interest. Your committee is of the opinion that while private stations will continue to serve a useful local purpose, the corporation urgently requires its own comprehensive facilities for distribution. At the present time, large areas of Canada, particularly in the maritimes, the prairies and British Columbia, receive somewhat scant and spasmodic service of CBC programs.
Your committee is satisfied that the financial policies of the corporation are sound and that the administration is being conducted in a prudent and efficient manner.
Your committee considered carefully the present and future revenue requirements of
the corporation. It is of the opinion that present sources of revenue should be sufficient to maintain and develop the projected plan of national coverage.
With respect to revenue for capital purposes, your committee is of the opinion that consideration should be given to the provision by loan or grant, of sufficient capital funds to enable the corporation to complete its plan of national coverage at the earliest possible moment.
Your committee is of the opinion that the present scale of licence fees of $50, for privately owned broadcasting stations of hundred watts or under is adequate, but believes licence fees should be increased on higher powered stations servicing densely populated areas.
Your committee recommends that the incidence of the application of the licence fee be carefully reviewed by the Department of Transport in the light of this year's experience, with a view of effecting a reduction of the licence fees.
Your committee was impressed with the importance of the establishment, at an early date, of a high power short-wave broadcasting station. Such a station, your committee believes, would be a great utility in interpreting and advertising Canada abroad and in facilitating an exchange of programs between Canada and other broadcasting systems. Canada, your committee was informed, is the only major trading nation without such facilities. It is submitted this should be financed as a national project, operated and controlled by the corporation.
Your committee believes that the constitution of the corporation, ensuring a proper division between policy and management and a degree of flexibility and independence essential to the medium of broadcasting, together with ultimate parliamentary control, is well suited to the purpose for which it was created. Public service broadcasting in Canada must necessarily continue to be free from partisan control, and your committee is gratified to report that the activities of the CBC have been free from any nature of partisanship whatsoever. Your committee also wished to pay its tribute to the governors of the corporation for their vision, public spirit and efficient conduct of the trust imposed upon them by parliament.
In conclusion, your committee wishes to express its belief that the broadcasting Bystem emerging in Canada is, and can increasingly be, an important factor in creating a sense of national unity and approves the general policy of concentrating on a national system-of high power stations.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
Government of the Northwest Territories: general administration, operation, maintenance and improvement of services, including Wood Buffalo park, $245,320.
Mr. PELLETIER:: Would the minister explain the increase of $30,714.50 in this item?
Supply-Northwest Territories


Hon. T. A. CRERAR (Minister of Mines and Resources):: The increase is due in part to the restoration of the salary deduction that was in effect for several years prior to last year, and to the annual statutory salary increases. There is also an increased amount for supplies and materials. In previous years practically all the government drug supplies required in the Northwest Territories were provided through the Indian Affairs branch, but under a rearrangement the Northwest Territories vote is charged with the amount this year. There is also an increased expenditure for provisions for destitute people in the Northwest Territories. Hon. members are familiar with the fur cycles in the Northwest Territories; these cycles come and go, and last year and this the cycle has been at a very low point; consequently the revenue derived by individuals from trapping has been reduced and more cases have required assistance from the administration. These are the main increases. There is also a small increase for hospitalization and an increase to restore fire fighting and other equipment at Fort Smith and Wood Buffalo park. Fort Smith is the administrative headquarters of the Mackenzie district.


René-Antoine Pelletier: There has been a good deal of talk and speculation, mostly in the newspapers, concerning the desire of British Columbia to annex certain portions of northern territory. Would the minister be kind enough to make a statement concerning any negotiations which have been carried on up to the present time, and what the probable outcome will be?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No negotiations have taken place on the mdtter to which my hon. friend alludes. Any discussions with British Columbia regarding the Yukon, which I understand the hon. member includes in his question, were brought down in a return to the house several months ago.


Mr. CLARKE (Rosedale):: I see on page 112, itemized, a reduction in the number of head clerks from six to five at $3,000, $15,000; last year there were six, the amount being $16,500, a difference of $1,500. Will the minister kindly explain why the reduction is only $1,500? Were the six clerks in receipt of $3,000 each?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am advised the explanation is that there is one clerk less this year.


Harry Gladstone Clarke: Yes, I see that. It is shown in the estimates. But the difference is only $1,500.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am advised that the clerk who has retired was paid $1,500 retiring leave which was coming to him when he retired. That is the explanation of the difference.


Harry Gladstone Clarke: He had worked only part of the year?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes.


Mr. SPENCE:: Where is Wood Buffalo park located?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Wood Buffalo park is
located partly in northern Alberta and partly in the Northwest Territories on the west side of the Athabaska river. It is a very large park, set aside many years ago. I am advised that it comprises 17,300 square miles. It was set aside for the purpose of providing a sanctuary for the wood buffalo. In more recent years some buffalo from the prairies have been moved to that park. It is really a game sanctuary, located in the northern part of Alberta and, to the extent of roughly one-third, in the Northwest Territories.


René-Antoine Pelletier: I mentioned a moment ago the desire of British Columbia to acquire more northern territory. That brings to mind an agitation which has been going on in parts of northern Alberta and northern British Columbia to form a new province in certain areas of those two provinces and to include in that new province certain parts of the Northwest Territories. I understand that petitions have been forwarded to the government and resolutions have been passed by various boards of trade advocating such a project. Would the minister tell us how far negotiations have gone and exactly how much there is to this agitation to form a new province by taking parts of northern Alberta, northern British Columbia and a part of the Northwest Territories? Has the matter been brought to the attention of the government? What action has been taken or what consideration is the government giving to a scheme of that kind?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Some petitions may have
gone to the Prime Minister's office. I do not recall that any came to the Department of Mines and Resources. As my hon. friend is, of course, aware, governments receive petitions and resolutions on all sorts of questions. I am aware only through the press that there has been some discussion in part of Alberta emphasizing the importance and desirability of creating a new province in that part of Canada. I would doubt if the circumstances are such as to warrant the greatly increased expenditure which such an undertaking would involve. All I can say is that I am certain that no negotiations have taken

Supply-Northwest Territories
place, although I should think it possible that some petitions or resolutions may have found their way to the office of some department of government.


René-Antoine Pelletier: I quite agree with the minister. My opinion is that we have a sufficient number of governments in Canada at the present time without creating any more:	We have enough taxing bodies, without adding devices to increase taxation. I do admit, however, that eventually, when development has progressed, the time may come when such a new division of territory will be required in Canada for the purposes of administration. But what I wanted to know from the minister was if there were any official negotiations, and I understand there are none-simply resolutions passed by various organizations demanding consideration of this problem. I agree with the minister that perhaps it is a matter for future consideration, but that at the present time the country has not developed sufficiently to justify consideration of the formation of a new province in that part of Canada.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Of course no such step
could be taken without legislation passed by this parliament. Whenever the time comes, if it is ever considered, it will have to be approved by parliament.


René-Antoine Pelletier: To put the matter
simply, there has been no official communication to that effect?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No.


Mr. STIRLING:: Have the Eskimos begun yet to make use of the reindeer for food and clothing?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes. The reports that we get of the value of the reindeer quite support the view which was held when they were originally introduced to that part of the Northwest Territories. They are providing not only food but clothing. Consideration is being given to providing some of the more advanced Eskimos with a few head of reindeer with a view to domesticating the animals, as has happened in certain parts of Europe.


Grote Stirling: That was the idea originally, was it not?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not know that any concrete steps have yet been taken with regard to it. I understand that a small experiment is to be carried on in that direction this year. We are using the Eskimo wherever possible in herding the deer and looking after them, and in that way they are getting an acquaintanceship with them which, we hope, ultimately will
bring about a condition whereunder the Eskimos will have their own small herds and be dependent upon them. Not only can they get food and clothing by this means, but they probably can use them for transportation purposes, as they are used,-1 believe, in Lapland.


Grote Stirling: Are the reindeer being allowed to spread and breed and so populate the areas further north?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No, up to the present time they have all been kept in herd. That has to be done in order to protect them from the wolves, and to build up the herd.


Mr. PERLEY:: I wish to bring to the attention of the minister a request which I have had from the young men's section of the Saskatoon board of trade to convey to the government their desire to retain a certain wild life exhibit in Prince Albert national park. I can place the case before the minister best by reading a letter I have received from the young men's section of the Saskatoon board of trade. It is addressed to myself and is as follows:
This exhibit is of great educational value and has proven an outstanding attraction for tourists and visitors to the park. We understand that Mr. Lund has received offers for his exhibit from United States interests and we believe that if no action to retain it is taken by the dominion government, it will be lost to Canada.
We feel that the dominion government should consider, as part of their policy to build museums throughout Canada, the possibility of constructing a building at the Prince Albert national park. Arrangements could be made with Mr. Lund for his exhibit and for himself to act as curator.
If this suggestion is carried out, the exhibit could be moved for the winter months to some larger centre in Saskatchewan for the benefit of winter visitors.
We strongly protest the action taken in asking Mr. Lund to remove his exhibit from the park and would greatly appreciate any assistance you may be able to give to have this fine exhibit retained in Canada and in Saskatchewan.
Can the minister give us any information with regard to this matter? Would they consider retaining that exhibit? It seems to be of great value from the tourist point of view.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The information in the
letter read by my hon. friend is not quite correct. Mr. Lund was not asked to remove the exhibit from the park. There were some negotiations with him with regard to the amount of money he should receive. The park officials thought the consideration he was asking was rather large, and, of course, if they had been unable to get together the exhibit would have -been removed. But arrangements have been made with Mr. Lund
Supply-Northwest Territories

to leave the exhibit in the park on the same terms as last year. The matter will be before me probably to-morrow, I am advised by my officials, and the arrangement will be carried through on that basis. The exhibit will remain in the park on the same basis as last year. There was no request to Mr. Lund to remove it from the park. I wish to make that very clear. There was 'a difference as to the amount of consideration that Mr. Lund thought he was entitled to, but that has been smoothed out in the way I have indicated.


George Halsey Perley: My letter is dated May 3.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That probably explains it.


Mr. HAYHURST:: How many reindeer are in the Northwest Territories at the present time and what success has been achieved?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Will the hon. member be good enough to speak louder. There is a lot of talking going on.


The CHAIRMAN:: Order. I would request
that there be less talking among hon: members. It is difficult to hear those who are speaking.


William Hayhurst: I was asking whether the minister could tell us the number of reindeer in the Northwest Territories at the present time.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: A few months ago on the last report there were over 4,000. When they were brought into the region east of the Mackenzie delta there were 2,300 odd in the herd and that has increased now, according to the last report, to something over 4,000. The fawning season is on now.


Harry Gladstone Clarke: Will the' minister please give me a breakdown of hospitalization, professional and other special services, grants to schools, assistance to industrial homes, $54,810? What does "professional and other special services" mean? Would that be medical and dental services?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: These are the figures for Anglican missions: Hospitals, $13,245; day schools, $1,537-1 am giving only the dollars- residential schools, $9,137, a total of $23,919. For the Roman Catholic missions in the western Arctic: hospitals, $10,877; day schools, $1,750; residential schools, $10,360, or a totai of $22,987. There is just a little less than 81,000 difference in the amounts contributed under the various headings to the Church of England and the Roman Catholic missions.


René-Antoine Pelletier: There has been a great deal of development in the mining areas in the Northwest Territories in recent years,

and one of the great difficulties is the matter of hospitalization and medical assistance. I know that the government has been kind enough to give grants to various institutions that are carrying on that work; nevertheless the minister will undoubtedly agree with me that with the intensive development of the Northwest Territories additional hospitalization should be provided. Conditions in that part of Canada are not as elsewhere. The people are situated many hundreds of miles from any medical assistance whatever, and because of the value which northern mining has added to Canada's wealth I believe it is a matter which the department should seriously consider. Perhaps the minister would give an outline of present hospitalization plans which are fostered by the department in the Northwest Territories, at what places they are functioning, and the services they are rendering.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It is rather difficult to give any precise information at the moment. Mining development in the Northwest Territories is taking place of course, in the Great Bear Lake region where the Eldorado mines operate, and to the north of Great Slave lake in what is known as the Yellowknife country. The Eldorado mines have their own doctor at the mine and a small hospital with a few beds to look after those who may be suffering illness. That service, however, is confined almost entirely to their own employees. Outside that, the population in that particular area is small. When we come to the Slave lake country we find that development is only in its initial stages. The question is being studied by the officers and the council of the Northwest Territories administration, to make provision for what may be necessary in that regard. We aim to get the administration of these things on the most efficient basis possible. We are trying to plan a little ahead.


René-Antoine Pelletier: The policy of the
department in the past I believe has been to provide hospitalization for the Indians and the Eskimo in the northern part of the country by giving assistance to various missions. I commend the government for that. But I point out that times are changing, mining development is increasing, and now there are others in that country who perhaps have a claim on the department for additional assistance so far as hospitals and medical service are concerned. Some mining companies maintain their own doctors, who can render assistance in case of emergency; nevertheless in order to encourage development and take care of the people coming into the north country, including the increasing number

Supply-Northwest Territories
of prospectors who go in on their own, not for any company, facilities should be provided at certain points. I believe at present there is an opening for a doctor attached to the Northwest Territories administration. Does the department intend to fill that position? Instead of curtailing the services the department should realize the increasing needs and enlarge the services it has provided in the past.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: We do not ourselves operate hospitals in the Northwest Territories; they are built either by the Anglican or by the Roman Catholic missions. In some cases we give a grant to assist in construction. For Indian patients and indigents who receive treatment in the hospitals we pay a per diem charge to the hospital. It is probable that a doctor will be appointed to the Fort Norman district before very long; the matter is now under consideration.


Mr. HANSELL:: Does the construction and maintenance of highways in the national parks come under this item?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It comes under a later item.


George Halsey Perley: Who makes the appointments in the national parks? Are they generally made through the recommendation of private members?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Practically all the appointments on the clerical and engineering staffs and that sort of thing are under the civil service commission certification. The expenditures under special supplementary estimates, and prior to that under the Public Works Construction Act of the late government, were exempt from the civil service commission's jurisdiction. Then there is another class, the labourers in the parks, who are not under the civil service commission. I can assure my hon. friend that we endeavour always to get the most capable men we can.


George Halsey Perley: But who makes the appointments?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The appointments are made in the way they have been made for many years past. They are made by the superintendents and by the engineers.


Mr. BARBER:: Are they not made by the minister?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Sometimes on the approval of the minister, but I can assure my hon. friend that the practice in that respect is precisely what it was before.


George Halsey Perley: Does the recommendation of a private member go very far?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Sometimes it is considered.


George Halsey Perley: I think I have evidence that the private member's recommendation does not go very far. I have here a photograph of a letter signed by an hon. member of this house. It is dated April 8, 1937, addressed to Fred Duval, and reads as follows:
Dear Fred:
I have your letter of recent date re a position1 in the national park.
In reply, may I say that the only way you can get a position in the national park is to be recommended by the Prince Albert federal Liberal executive. I cannot see why anyone writes to any of the federal members of Saskatchewan about a position in Prince Albert national park when there has not been one position given in the park outside of the Prince Albert riding since it was started. Any person who tells you that anything else is different is just "passing the buck." That is all. Will you kindly go to the president of the federal Liberal executive of Prince Albert and take up the matter with him to see what can be done. That is the only way action can be got.


An hon. MEMBER:: Who signed that?


George Halsey Perley: It is signed " Cameron R. McIntosh."


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I have no doubt that my hon. friend will place that in his archives and look at it occasionally with some satisfaction. I know nothing of the letter; this is the first time I have heard of it. But I repeat what I said a moment ago, which is as patent to the hon. member as to many other hon. members of the house, that the appointments in Prince Albert park are made in precisely the same way as they were made during the regime of the late government. In fact I would say there has been a substantial improvement as to the methods.


James Houston Spence: More Liberal appointments now.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No, no. This question may have its lighter aspects, but probably no one knows better than the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley) the procedure which has usually obtained in these appointments. We do aim as far as possible to get those who are unemployed, and to the best of my knowledge there has not been discrimination in that respect.


George Halsey Perley: This letter just sets out the procedure in getting appointments. Possibly some Liberal members from Saskatchewan can say how they are making out when they make recommendations.


Mr. MacNEIL:: To what extent has it been possible under that method of making appointments to maintain the preference for ex-service men?

Supply-Northwest Territories


Thomas Alexander Crerar: As far as my knowledge goes that preference has been maintained.


Mr. STEWART:: The minister I am sure will forgive me if I again remind him of the importance of establishing a national park on the Thousand islands in the St. Lawrence river adjacent to the fine new international bridge that is being constructed there, and which will be opened in August. I cannot add much to what I have already said in that connection. The attraction in connection with the tourist traffic cannot be over-emphasized. A very large proportion of the population of the United States and Canada is situated within three hundred miles of this bridge, which will be about eight miles long from one bridgehead to the other. In that eight miles is of course included a considerable mileage of highway, there being five or six spans in the bridge. Representations have been made to the minister, I know, from different sources in this connection, and the one thing I do urge upon him is prompt action in connection with the securing of Hill island as part of this park. It has been recommended that a number of other islands be secured also.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Who owns that island?


Hugh Alexander Stewart: It is used as farm land. There are no very valuable houses on it; the assessment is low; the valuation cannot be very high, but in the meantime interests may be created, purchases may take place that will make the acquisition of that land a more expensive matter than at the present time. If this property is to be preserved from commercialization for undesirable purposes, this very beautiful bit of scenery in the heart of the Thousand islands, it is absolutely necessary that some action be taken, and I suggest that the minister consider the matter.
I am aware that in the main the policy of the department is that the provinces acquire the land to be used for national parks, and turn it over to the dominion, but a return was brought down showing that in several cases land has been expropriated directly by the dominion government for park purposes. This return is sessional paper No. 242, brought down on April 25, 1938. The question was whether the dominion government has purchased or acquired by expropriation any lands for public park purposes since the year 1900; if so, what lands were purchased, where they were located and what price or compensation was paid for them in each case. That return covers nearly two pages and shows that in a number of cases the government has expropriated land, thus making an exception to the general rule that the land must be acquired by the provinces 
and turned over to the dominion. Land has been acquired in the Riding Mountain park for that purpose. In Georgian bay twenty-nine islands were purchased at a cost of $30,000. Then in the same area, I think, there was an exchange of land for other land. Land was purchased for the national historic park area at Louisburg in Nova Scotia at a cost of $23,250. At Banff national park lands were acquired in exchange; at Buffalo park and Elk island land was purchased costing $4,000. Then in British Columbia, in the Kootenay district, land was expropriated, and in the St. Lawrence area islands have been acquired from the Indian department. I understand, and in fact I know, that the policy of the government has been that islands in the St. Lawrence are preserved for park purposes, and inasmuch as Hill island was originally, as I recall it, the property of the dominion and was sold by the dominion, possibly being Indian land, I suggest that there is perhaps a little additional obligation on the dominion to contribute to the establishment of this park.
The minister has promised to go with one or two of his colleagues in the near future and look over the situation. I hope when he does so he will be favourably impressed, and in the meantime I urge that he consider the wisdom, almost the necessity, of issuing notice of expropriation in connection with this one island. There is not so much hurry about the others, not so much danger that they may be commercialized or that values will increase by any transfers that may be made in the meantime anticipating that ultimately the government will acquire the land for park purposes.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The point my hon. friend raises is rather interesting. Of course the practice has been that in connection with what are really national park areas the provincial governments supply the land that is to be converted into the national parks. So far as I am aware there have been no exceptions to that rule in the strict sense. My hon. friend has cited some instances from a report brought down in the house earlier this session. In western Canada, for instance, I know of several parks that are under the administration of the national parks branch which really were secured as wild animal sanctuaries. For example, when the small herd of buffalo were brought back to Canada from Montana in order to preserve that distinctly national animal in this country, an area was set aside at Wainwright; but that was wholly a dominion government undertaking. Strictly speaking Wainwright, and Elk island as well, are not national parks in the



193S

[Stage Direction]
Supply-Northwest Territories
real sense of the word; rather they are sanctuaries for the perpetuation and maintenance of certain types of animals which otherwise might become extinct. I have not the particulars of the other cases at the moment, but probably some equally good explanation would be available as to why the federal government spent money to acquire either new areas or additions to existing parks. Some of these matters really had to do with Indian lands. I think.
If the principle were adopted in this particular case-and I am not urging this at the moment as a reason for saying "no" to my hon. friend's request-the question would be raised at once in other parts of Canada. For instance, at the present moment New Brunswick is studying the question of recommending a suitable area in that province to the general parks administration. A few years ago Nova Scotia spent a very considerable sum of money in acquiring an area which could be turned over for development as a national park, and I think we have to adhere pretty strictly to that principle. Under that rule in practice, quite obviously if the area to which my hon. friend refers is desirable for national park purposes it should be secured by the government of Ontario.
As my hon. friend probably knows, we have a number of islands in the St. Lawrence river at the present time, a dozen or so, which constitute a national park, and I understand the request to be that Hill island be secured and added to those we already have. I propose along with one or two of my colleagues, if I can induce them to go with me, to visit that district just as soon as we can get a little relaxation from the strenuous work of the house. It is my intention personally to examine the problems the hon. member has raised.
Hugh Alexander Stewart: With further reference to the suggestion that the province should acquire land for this purpose, I wish to point out that a new highway is being constructed for a good many miles along the river front, leaving a narrow fringe of what is really park land between the highway and the river. I understand that the provincial government is going to acquire and set apart that fringe for just this very purpose, namely to prevent commercialization and the destruction of natural scenery. That would be the provincial contribution. Under these circumstances I believe I might very fairly urge that the dominion make a similar contribution.
The return to which I have referred reveals that fourteen islands in the St. Lawrence between Brockville and Kingston were acquired in 1904. There is an acreage shown 51952-1951
of 180-8, and an expropriation and purchase price of $9,150. I know these are the islands to which the minister refers as having been set apart for park purposes. Pavilions and small wharves have been established upon them; they are open and accessible to the public and are very much appreciated. A great number of people use them.
I find another item with respect to twenty-nine islands in Georgian bay, acquired in 1929. Those islands had an acreage of 2,959-47 and a purchase price of $30,205. I am not familiar with the Georgian bay islands, but I do know that the islands in the St. Lawrence are suitable only for park purposes. They are not game preserves, or anything of that kind, but are connected with the tourist business, a business which alf governments are seeking to promote and develop. The federal government has placed great emphasis upon the value of that business.	[DOT]
I am glad to learn the minister intends to make the trip in the near future, because I am sure nothing but a visit to the place will give him a proper conception of the situation. I trust when he does go and has an opportunity to review the whole situation he will be convinced that in the interests of the dominion, and following the precedent which has been set in other cases, there is justification for acquiring at least this one island. Representations have been made that many of the islands should be acquired, and that course is no doubt desirable; but for the present Hill island is the one which should be kept in mind. Steps should be taken to prevent an artificial increase in value between now and the time the government takes it over. I say that because I am sure some government will take it over.
While the general policy is that the province should provide park sites, this case is exceptional. We know that the St. Lawrence river is exceptional in that it is an international stream. The federal government has acquired islands in circumstances similar to these. I am informed the government of the United States is doing something along the same line-on the part of the highway which is in that country. Some of the islands desirable for the-same purpose are located in the United States.. I am assured that the proper authorities in that country are taking steps to establish these islands as national parks, and have indicated a willingness to cooperate with the dominion government in that connection.
I thank the minister for his promise to visit the area, and I am hopeful that when he does understand the whole situation he will -become convinced that while it may be
Supply-Northwest Territories

necessary to make an exception, action here similar to that taken in connection with other islands in the St. Lawrence and in Georgian bay would be justified.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I appreciate what the hon. member has said, and would add for the information of the committee that the islands to which he referred in the St. Lawrence river and in Georgian bay were held by the Indians, and in effect there were transfers from the Indians to a government department. They were not acquired from private interests, according to the advice I have received. I assure the hon. member I will give consideration to the representations he has made.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: My only reason for making the statement was that in the return I find the expression " expropriation and purchase the word " purchase " is used.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Of course a sum of money had to be paid to the Indians.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: Exactly, although I do mot know that that makes much difference.


Grote Stirling: The road at the east side of the Big Bend highway on the Columbia river was built by the dominion government because that road lay within the park. To what point is the public allowed to drive cars? Is the bridge erected at the north, where the Canoe river comes in?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes.


Grote Stirling: How far can the tourists drive north, across the river and then south?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I cannot give the precise distance.


Mr. STEVENS:: About ninety miles.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I should think a tourist might go ten or fifteen miles.


Henry Herbert Stevens: More than that.


Grote Stirling: From the north?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: From where the bridge
crosses the river at the extreme northern point. That is more or less a guess on my part. Part of the road which is under construction tourists are not encouraged to use. But I can assure the hon. member that from Donald to Canoe river the road is in first class condition. I have been over it myself. May I call the attention of the committee to the fact that we have before us the item respecting the administration of the Northwest Territories. There are several other items under which parks administration could be discussed.
(Mr. Stewart.]


William Hayhurst: Has the government
under consideration the addition of Cooking Lake forest reserve to the Elk Island national park?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I understand some discussion in that connection has taken place with the responsible minister in Alberta.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Eastern Arctic expedition, $27,000.
Mr. NEILL:: Perhaps the minister would
tell us what is to be done in the eastern Arctic?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: This item concerns chiefly the Royal Canadian Mounted Police posts maintained in the far north to exercise our sovereignty over the country. The Hudson's Bay Company take in supplies to the eastern Arctic every year, and we have an arrangement with them whereby the supplies to be sent in for the mounted police, for hospitals, for scientific expeditions and scientific purposes, are carried on the Hudson's Bay Company's boat. The arrangement is one that we consider quite satisfactory for the government. This item is practically all for that purpose.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Would the minister give
the assurance that there is no effective challenge of Canada's sovereignty over that vast northern area? I ask the question because we frequently see in periodicals of other countries reference to expeditions, the language of which would indicate that they consider that territory as open, not attached to any country, whereas my understanding is that Canada claims full sovereignty over the area lying in the Arctic north of Canada. It is a subject that I think should not be allowed to drift, and a frank declaration from the minister now would not be harmful. I have no desire to criticize or to press the matter further than to request a statement from the minister.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I know of no challenge
that has been made to Canada's occupancy or ownership of the whole area lying to the north. Certainly when any person from any other country desires to fly over that area or visit it, the permission of the Canadian government is first asked. The principles upon which sovereignty has been claimed over the area in the remote north which may not have been visited by man, say between the northern shores of Baffin Land and the pole, have been fairly clearly established in international usage, and under those principles, according to the advice that is given to me, Canada's position in regard to this

Supply-Yukon-Administration
area can, I think, be regarded as secure. Certainly at the present time no challenge has been made so far as I am aware to our right of occupancy and ownership of the area in question.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Is Wrangel island in Canadian territory?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No, Wrangel island is
Russian territory.


Henry Herbert Stevens: We have admitted that?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am advised that we never claimed it.


Mr. TAYLOR (Nanaimo):: Would the
minister state whether any new occupancy is being entered upon by the northwest mounted police?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There is a police post at Craig harbour on Ellesmere island; Bache peninsula port was the most northerly that has been established, although they have been further north than that, I am advised, and planted a flag or erected a mound or something of the kind on that territory. I think our possession of the territory is pretty clearly established. We have some mounted police there; my colleague the Minister of Justice tells me that they always carry out their duties very thoroughly and completely, and I have no doubt that our interests are fully protected.


James Samuel Taylor: The point is whether you consider the occupation complete enough to justify yourself in the minds of other governments.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I think the fact that they apply to us for permission to go into or fly over the territory is a recognition of our sovereignty. When the Russian flyers, for example, came over the North Pole and succeeded in getting as far as California, and another expedition that was lost last August, I think it was, wished to fly over that territory, they applied in both cases to the Canadian government for permission, which I would consider a more or less formal recognition of our rights in this region.
Mr. TAYLOlR (Nanaimo): Do our friends to the south also ask the same privilege?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Oh, yes.


Grote Stirling: Is there not international recognition of the fact that we have a sort of sovereignty over the triangle bounded by the Alaska-Yukon line, continued to the pole, and then to the west coast of Greenland? Is not that internationally accepted?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes. What is known as the sector principle, in the determination of these areas is now very generally recognized, and on the basis of that principle as well our sovereignty extends right to the pole within the limits of the sector. My own view is that our supremacy there is established to a point where it could not be successfully challenged by any other country. I do not know that I can add anything further.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Government of the Yukon territory: administration, $48,000.
Alan Webster Neill: Mr. Chairman, I do not want to embarrass the government or delay the estimates but I should like to seek information as to the method employed or that should be employed in connection with the proposed transfer of the Yukon to the British Columbia government. The correspondence was brought down in the house, and while I have not it before me at the moment my recollection is that it consisted of one or two quite casual letters between the premier of British Columbia and the minister, dealing with the matter very much along the line that might be followed by a man buying a city lot. One man asks the other how much he will pay for it, and the other man says that is not enough, then there were some negotiations, and finally they agreed to take over the Yukon, as I said, like a man buying a city lot. Is there no custom of law or comity of nations by which the people are consulted when their territory is handed over to another jurisdiction? I cannot find from my observation in British Columbia that the province wanted the Yukon, and there is considerable evidence that the Yukon does not want us. Are not the common people, who after all are the people concerned, to be consulted before anything like that goes through? What is the situation?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My hon. friend is aware that no transfer of the Yukon to British Columbia can take place without appropriate legislation by this parliament and appropriate legislation by the legislature of British Columbia. The matter is not terminated with the exchange of letters that was tabled in the house some time ago. As I recall now, and I think I am correct, the suggestion was made that the matter might rest until after the Rowell commission had reported. I do not recall whether it is in the correspondence or not. The premier of British Columbia has made the suggestion that British Columbia should be extended eastward to take in part of the present Mackenzie river basin. However, so

Supply-Yukon-Administration
far as the people being consulted is concerned, they would be consulted in the way that they are consulted in respect of any legislation passing through either this house or the legislature of British Columbia; that is, before the transfer could be effective, legislation would be required not only in the federal parliament but in the legislature of British Columbia.


Alan Webster Neill: There did not appear in the correspondence any evidence of consulting anybody. It cannot be sold off like a sack or a ton of coals. It was said, "For a fixed sum you can have the Yukon." There was no suggestion about any local jurisdiction in the Yukon, for instance. It seems as though two hon. members got together and the one sold the property and the other agreed to take it over for a lump sum.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I can assure my hon. friend that it was not so casual as that. The plain fact of the matter is, of course, that any arrangement which might be entered into between the federal government and the government of British Columbia could not be made effective until the appropriate legislation had been passed in both jurisdictions.


Alan Webster Neill: And would the Yukon council be consulted?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Not necessarily.


Alan Webster Neill: "Not necessarily"?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No.


Alan Webster Neill: Well then, where do the people's rights come in?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I beg the hon. member's pardon?


Alan Webster Neill: Where do the people's rights come in?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Well, that is a question. While my hon. friend says they might not be consulted-


Grote Stirling: The minister said that.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: -I say that any representations made by the Yukon council or any other interest in the Yukon would be given full consideration. But if the hon. member meant his question to imply that their consent was necessary, then I say it would not be required.


Alan Webster Neill: I hope we won't wake up some morning and find you have traded off British Columbia to the States without our knowing anything about it.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I can assure my hon. friend that should there be any project of that kind he will have plenty of notice so that there will be opportunity to raise a protest.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Now that the question has been raised regarding even any remote consideration of the taking over or absorption of the Yukon into the province of British Columbia, I certainly wish to register a very strong protest against the matter being advanced to any great extent without its being fully discussed in parliament-I mean, in advance of legislation. Because if the government of the dominion and the government of British Columbia come to a definite understanding and each one presents a bill before its legislature, obviously the government stands or falls by the passage of that bill.


Alan Webster Neill: Hear, hear.


Henry Herbert Stevens: The whole subject then becomes merely a question of the government securing the support of its partisans in the House of Commons, which is an entirely wrong basis upon which a matter of this kind should be considered or discussed. I am disturbed by the answers the minister has given about the paucity of discussion or consultation; therefore, I wish to say a few words on the subject at this time.
In the first place the administration of the Yukon over the years, and certainly for a great many years past, has been marked by a degree of efficiency and economy which is highly commendable. In a sense it is a small thing for the dominion, and the department might conclude that if they could shuffle it off upon some other authority they would be pleased to do it. But that is not the way in which the matter should be approached. The fact remains that there has been effective, sane and economic administration of Yukon affairs. While it is remote, it is a part of the country which has very considerable significance. In the past it has produced much wealth, and as the years go by and the movement is northward, as all who are acquainted with western and indeed general Canadian problems expect it to be, the Yukon will become more and more important. Its wealth possibilities are considerable, and not only in respect of minerals. The experiments which are being carried on by the United States, although in their initial stages they may not be wholly successful, indicate the existence of other possibilities.
The other side of the picture is this: British Columbia is an exceedingly large province, and that section of it, constituting at least half, which lies north of the Canadian National Railway is very sparsely developed. It is now entering upon an era of development, and so far as the province is concerned it has a vast territory of new country where it can expand its energies, and its surplus wealth'

Supply-Yukon-Administration
if it has any, and its powers of administration. In my opinion there are no sound economic reasons for the amalgamation at the present time of the Yukon and British Columbia. The other side, the human side of the story, ought to be considered. In the last forty years or more there has grown up in the Yukon a population which, although small in comparison to the rest of the country, has its rights, its peculiar sentiments and attachments, and certainly should not be disturbed unless it so wishes. The opportunity of handing over a comparatively small responsibility, administratively speaking, to the province should not be a determining factor. The determining factors should be economic advantage, whether economies can be made, and most important of all whether the people of the Yukon themselves desire it.
The Yukon is not a burden upon this country. The idea that it is has, in my belief, no foundation. It has produced a tremendous amount of wealth and will produce a great deal more. May I add that the officials, not only those who are carrying on at this time but those who for many years back have been attached, here in Ottawa, to the Yukon administration, and Yukon councils past and present, deserve a measure of commendation for their administrative work.
It would be most unfortunate and unfair if the question should be approached in the way indicated in the correspondence cited by the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill).


Mrs. BLACK:: I wish to thank the last speaker (Mr. Stevens) for his very kind words. Naturally this is a subject about which I feel very keenly, having resided in that territory for forty years this month. There has been, as the hon. member who last spoke pointed out, a mistaken idea that the Yukon has been a burden to this country. It is not so. I have seen year after year in the estimates certain parts of the expenses of British Columbia lumped in with the expenses of the Yukon-for instance, the telegraph line. The telegraph line in the Yukon begins midway between Atlin and White Horse, but we pay for the telegraph line in that vast hinterland of British Columbia. For the last forty years we in the Yukon have had almost no crime. People who come from the coast in British Columbia, reading their papers as they are published day after day, will see reports of horrible crimes committed by boys and girls ranging from twelve to twenty years. We have nothing of that sort in the Yukon. Our children are put to work. They have to work or they go hungry; that is all
there is to it. The boys and girls born in that country know that they have to work for their living, if they do nothing but shoot game in the winter for the family table. In that way they learn to be self-reliant. Those of us who are in the Yukon, if there were a thought of annexation with some province that carried itself, that was not head over heels in debt, might feel interested. But I should like to know what we have to gain when somebody comes and says, "We will take you over so that you can clear off part of our debt." You do not see that in ordinary business life and certainly we do not want it in the life of our great northern country.
We have no fault to find with government as it is carried on in the north. We have had no complaints since the early days when the Yukon was so far out of the world that people who went there thought that they could do almost anything. Government has been carried on decently and honestly and as economically as possible. In the early days we went in over the trail on foot. We climbed those mountains and came down the waters of the lakes and rivers and went down in small boats. We became self-reliant. We knew what it was to get along without many of the amenities of so-called civilized life, and our children who live there now, though they may have the benefit of electricity and running water, still know that they must carry on as their parents did if they wish to accomplish anything in life.
As I have said so many times before, if we are only let alone to work out our own salvation we shall be a credit to the government of Canada as we have been in the past. We shall take pride in our government, I do not care on which side it sits. We simply want to work out our own salvation with the very small amount of help that we have had for many years. Individually we may not care for those who are administering the territory at this time, or that time, or at some other time; but no matter what our personal feeling is I am free to stand here and say that as far as humanly possible the administration of the territory, whether under Liberal or under Conservative government, has been decent, fair, square and honest. All I ask of the government is that they allow it to remain so, and not to trade us to any province that is head over heels in debt.


Mr. GREEN:: What is the attitude of the dominion government, as the governmental body in charge of the Yukon, towards the proposal to build a highway from the state of Washington to Alaska?

Supply-Yukon-Administration


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not know that we have any particular views on that question. It is regarded as a British Columbia matter. I suppose if British Columbia can borrow money, and wants to build a highway through the province with the cash it gets, that is its affair, and I do not think the federal government would have any right to intervene.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Would not the federal government have a right to intervene if the money were supplied by and in agreement with a foreign country?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I did not refer to money being supplied by a foreign country. I presume that if British Columbia borrowed money in a foreign country in the ordinary way it would be their money to do with as they pleased.


Henry Herbert Stevens: It would not be in the ordinary way.


Howard Charles Green: What about the Yukon? The road would have to go through the Yukon, and so far as the Yukon is concerned that is of concern to the dominion government. What would be the attitude of the dominion government towards such a road being built through the Yukon?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: If the British Columbia government wished to build a road through a small part of the Yukon to reach its ultimate end, I do not think any question would be raised about that.


Howard Charles Green: Would the dominion government be willing to cooperate in the building of such a road through the Yukon?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That is a question of
government policy and I am sure my hon. friend does not expect me to reply to it.


Howard Charles Green: The minister said he would be willing to allow British Columbia to build the road.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I said that if British
Columbia went into the money market and borrowed money to build a road from the southern to the northern boundary of the province, that would be British Columbia's affair, not ours.


Howard Charles Green: Even if it were a military
road?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I cannot conceive why
British Columbia would be building a military road. They would be building what is termed the Alaska highway.


Howard Charles Green: Can the minister conceive
why the Americans would want to build a military highway?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That is another question
upon which I have no opinion to express. It is a question of public policy which is not germane to the discussion of the estimate before us.


Howard Charles Green: The sum and substance
of it is that so far as the Yukon's part in such a highway is concerned, the dominion knows nothing about the plan, has not had it under consideration, and has no ideas at all. Is that correct?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Speaking for myself, all
I know about the matter is what I have seen in the newspapers. I can assure my hon. friend that the federal government is not considering the expenditure involved in the building of a highway through British Columbia to the Yukon, or in the Yukon section of it, for that matter. If I were to hint at such a thing, even in the most remote manner, the Minister of Finance would demand my head on a charger at once; consequently I can assure the hon. gentleman that the government is not considering the possibility of embarking on that enterprise.


Mr. FINN:: I was very much interested
in the remarks of the hon. member for the Yukon (Mrs. Black). When the matter was once up in the house before-it was in the house, not in committee-I expressed the hope that, the occasion being Mrs. Black's birthday, she would long live to represent the Yukon in this house, and I very much regret to hear that she has made up her mind that she will not sit for the Yukon after this parliamentary term. I hope that decision is not irrevocable.
The absorption of the Yukon territory by British Columbia is not a matter for British Columbia alone; it is a matter for all the provinces of Canada, and one that would have to be considered by the government of Canada in relation to all the provinces. When the two new provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were carved out, they were carved out of public domain that belonged to the whole of Canada, and the development from east to west has come up to expectations so far as the problem of transportation through the provinces to the coast is concerned. When the Yukon is tired of governing itself it should have something to say about the matter. I would add that when the people there are tired of self-government they should hand back that territory to be part of the public domain of Canada. We in the mari-times were not adjacent to any of this territory in the west, formerly part of the federal domain, out of which the great provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan were carved, or

Supply-Forest Services
the hinterland given to Ontario, or that strip of country extending up to Hudson bay given to Manitoba, or that country rich in timber and water powers, Ungava, given to the province of Quebec. We had to sit by and keep our hands in our pockets for fear that what little we had might be extracted at the same time. We do not desire a further condition of that kind to arise. We hope the hon. member for the Yukon will come back representing the Yukon. Let them hand the land back to Canada as part of the public domain, and then this parliament will decide what to do in the light of the respective interests of all the provinces.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Dominion forest service-general scientific, economic and administrative services, $131,660.
James Houston Spence: Why is there a large increase in this item?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Last year part of the expense under this vote was in special supple-mentaries; this year it is included in the main vote. The combined total last year was a little in excess of the amount in the main estimate which we are considering at the moment.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul's):: Has this forestry service any control over the forests of the provinces? For instance in connection with the importance of forests to the watersheds of the country, and the large depletion of pulp-wood in Ontario, is there any control over the cutting down of trees by the department, or over the export of raw pulpwood from Ontario?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The provinces control their resources and consequently control the timber. But there have been five areas set aside where forestry experimental work is carried on under this department. In addition certain national parks are of considerable area and contain substantial forests. However the forest resources of a commercial kind are in the main under the control of the provinces. I understand they are at liberty to permit the export of pulp made from the wood cut in these forests if they wish. As far as I am aware no restriction has been put upon them in that respect.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Can the minister tell the committee how long the pulpwood resources of Ontario will last at the present rate of depletion?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am sorry I cannot give that information.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The Canada Year Book says that the depletion of the forests
of Canada is about four billion cubic feet per annum. Has the minister any idea what the annual increase is? Is it true that we are cutting down in Canada about seventy years' growth for every year's growth that we replace?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not know how accurate that estimate of annual depletion is. The total depletion each year, including that cut and that destroyed by fire and insects, and particularly the annual increment, are very difficult to determine.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Is it not very important to Canada to know with fair accuracy what the depletion of our pulpwood is? We have mills dependent on the supply; we are at present exporting raw pulpwood to the United States to be manufactured into paper in competition with that produced in this country. Is there no way we can find that out?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The total annual depletion, caused by cutting, fire and insects, and timber past maturity and merchantable condition through age, has been estimated at about 3,800 million cubic feet. I do not see here any estimate as to the annual increment.


Mr. ROSS (St. Paul'6):: Closely connected with the depletion of our forests is the effect upon our watersheds and navigable waters. Has the government no control of the forests in that regard? What cooperation is there between the dominion and the provinces with respect to fire prevention activities and generally in connection with the depletion of our forests?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There is no division of responsibility between the provincial and federal governments either for protection from fire or for protection of watersheds. The timber resources are under the control of the various provinces. We could not go to the provinces of Quebec or British Columbia and say to them: You must administer your forests in such and such fashion. That is outside of our power. As far as fire prevention is concerned the federal government has for several years made a study of fire hazards and the conditions under which the fire hazard increases in our forests. It has been a scientific study, and very useful results have been obtained; so useful, in fact, that the data gathered in this way through our forest experimental work has been made available to provincial governments and also to private companies operating timber limits for the purpose of manufacturing lumber, pulp or the like. In many cases they have
Supply-Forest Services

made practical use, with very beneficial results, of the data that we were able to supply as a result of the experimental work done in this way.
The general question raised by my hon. friend is of quite considerable importance. Without doubt there is much destruction by fire each year, and through publicity work of one kind and another we have endeavoured to impress upon the Canadian people the importance of guarding against forest fires. I think I am correct in saying that eighty per cent of the fires that destroy our forests have their origin in the carelessness of some human being. The only way to overcome that, I suppose, or at any rate one way to help overcome it, is by impressing upon the people in every way possible the importance of exercising care if they are travelling through the woods; if they are camping, or if their activities are such that they may be the means of starting a fire in our forests. All that work we are endeavouring to do. We give a grant, as will be noted under a later item, for the purpose of spreading popular education through the Canadian Forestry Association. It is only a small amount, but that association derives some of its support from private sources. In all these ways our department is doing what it can not only to aid the industry but also to create that wider public opinion that will have its effect in lowering the percentage of fires that have their origin in carelessness.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Cooperation between the federal and provincial governments is most important. There should be strict cooperation among the provinces as well. A fire starting on the border of Ontario might well go into Quebec, so that the closest cooperation is necessary. If it is left a purely provincial matter as between Ontario and Quebec there is a possibility that it might not be taken as seriously by one province as by another; but I congratulate the minister on what has been done.
I should like to ask one more question, with respect to pulpwood. Is it within the competence of the dominion government to prohibit the export of raw pulpwood from Canada?


Mr. POWER:: An order in council was passed in 1924, I think, prohibiting the export of pulpwood from private lands; of course we cannot prohibit the export from provincial crown lands. I am not quite sure whether the order in council was ever proclaimed, but as far as I know certainly this house has full authority to prohibit the exportation of pulpwood or logs from private lands.


Mr. REID:: I think that information should be given more publicity, because in British Columbia there has been considerable agitation to stop the export of logs from that province; and in debating the question many people hold the belief that it is a matter for the dominion government. Our information this afternoon is that the province of Quebec has the power to prohibit the export of logs and pulpwood, and if that is so I see no reason why British Columbia should not have the same right.


Charles Gavan Power: Since 1906, there has been a prohibition of the exportation of pulpwood cut from crown lands in the province of Quebec, and that order in council is still in force and effect.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I should like to draw the attention of the government to the necessity of preserving the pulpwood limits of Canada for the benefit of Canadians. I do not think very much benefit accrues to the individual Canadian by the cutting down of a tree and the shipping of that tree to some other country. I should like the government to look into the question whether or not they have the right to prohibit the export of raw pulpwood from Canada.
I should like to ask another question while I am on my feet. Could the minister tell me the present status of the forest experiment stations, at Petawawa, Kananaskis, Duck Mountain, Valcartier, and the Acadian, the one at Fredericton.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not think I quite get the point of my hon. friend's question. Did he ask what is the status of each of these experimental stations?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Yes. As the minister knows, the dominion government owns certain lands on which experimentation had been carried on. Is that work being continued and, if so, to what extent, or has it been dropped?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The work is being carried on at each of these experimental stations. Naturally the conditions in Manitoba vary considerably from the conditions in Ontario. There are different types of trees and so on, and these stations were established originally with the idea of conducting a study that would not overlap as between stations but that would fit together to give a general picture of the value of our forest woods, the best methods of protection, the rapidity of growth under varying conditions, and like matters. That is the type of work that is being carried on at each of these forest experimental stations. The data is gathered

Supply-Forest Services
together and compared, and from it very useful conclusions can be drawn. I understand that in some cases these conclusions have had practical value and are being applied by the forest woods industry in its various branches in Canada. These stations vary in size, Petawawa I think being the largest. The one at Petawawa is roughly one hundred square miles; the one at Kananaskis in Alberta is sixty-seven square miles, and the Acadian station in New Brunswick is seventy square miles. The others are smaller.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The work being done in connection with these experiments is indeed excellent and I should not like to see any lessening of efforts in this direction. I trust the department will bend its efforts towards increasing the work, in view of the depletion of Canada's forests.


James Samuel Taylor: Reverting to the question of the export of logs from crown granted lands, I sincerely hope the government and the minister will pay earnest attention to this serious matter. In British Columbia the situation is urgent. The period of availability of logs and timber generally is not more than fifteen years. An extended availability does not exceed twenty-five years. In view of the fact that public opinion in British Columbia is being very strongly awakened, and the further fact that the federal government does have some responsibility and has acknowledged its power to prohibit the export of logs, it seems to me the matter should be taken in hand very early. I say that because one of the greatest areas in British Columbia, one no less than forty square miles in extent is being logged by Japanese loggers for Japanese owners, for purposes of export to Japan. Even from the standpoint of a consideration of the preservation of our own resources the matter merits the earnest consideration of the government.


Mr. DUNNING:: When the question was discussed a few moments ago it occurred to me that perhaps the discussion was a little in reverse. As to the federal powers in connection with controlling the export of any commodity in Canada, wherever or however produced, I suppose one might say that in this parliament there is no doubt we could make general laws covering the export of any commodity. I am not a constitutional lawyer, but I doubt whether any province could deal with the export of a commodity. But, owning the lands upon which the timber grows, the province sets the conditions of cutting, and of course in setting the conditions of cutting in its own judgment it can determine whether or
not the timber cut from lands owned by the crown in the right of the province shall be used for this or that purpose. That could be a condition precedent to any extension of the cutting right.
But when we come to privately owned lands -I believe it was these the Minister of Pensions and National Health had in mind-and whether under the circumstances the province could impose on those private lands cutting conditions which would have the same effect with respect to exportation as would conditions set by the province with respect to cutting on crown lands, I think we get into a rather involved constitutional question. The matter is of course one of some difficulty, but this parliament acting for the country generally has not yet, so far as I know placed an embargo on the export of any commercial commodity. There is the question whether any laws affecting the export of commodities could apply nationally with respect to a commodity which came from a particular place, as distinct from the same commodity which came from another place; because the dominion's power undoubtedly is exercisable with regard to the commodity as such. To identify a particular log as having originated in a particular place, or to attempt to apply to lumber which is exported from one part of Canada export regulations which would not apply equally to lumber exported from another part of Canada, or to go further and to consider applying export regulations with respect to commodities destined to a particular foreign country as distinct from export generally, are all very involved questions of constitutional and international law, and of trade generally.


James Samuel Taylor: I thank the Minister of Finance for his explanation. It was the observations of the Minister of Pensions and National Health which brought me to my feet. I quite agree with what the Minister of Finance has said: the question whether or not we have any power to place an embargo upon the export of privately owned material is an involved one. But the question arises: Are those materials more necessary for the people of Canada than for people outside Canada? It was a consideration of that question which prompted me to make my observations. I do not agree with the procedure of enforcing embargoes; I believe free manufacturers and free producers have a right to export, and in that I respect the statement of the minister.


Charles Gavan Power: At one time this parliament prohibited the export of liquor to the United States; at that time it was dealing with free manufacturers.
Supply-Forest Services


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Mr. Chairman, may I point out that the export of pulpwood and logs has an effect on the watersheds and navigable waters of the country. There is no doubt that if the forests become depleted the waters in the navigable streams under the control of the federal government will be lowered. We can see that happening in Canada at the present time. No doubt the export of forest products must in some degree lower the waters in the St. Lawrence waterway system from lake Superior to the ocean. It seems to me the federal government should take under advisement the question of the lowered water levels and the depletion of the forests.


Mr. McLEAN (Melfort):: It is not the export of pulpwood or logs but rather the cutting and removal of those logs from the land which affects the water or climatic conditions in an area. The export of the forest products to a profitable market does not injure the coverage of the soil to any greater degree than it would be injured if those forest products were sold less profitably at home. The greatest damage is done by fire, which destroys not only the useful pulpwood logs and timber suitable for lumber but also the weed growth and the less valuable trees. I suggest the export of logs and pulpwood need not be considered in connection with the preservation of watersheds.


Mr. PURDY:: I notice the present estimates call for an expenditure of $359,300 for forestry projects. While there is some increase over the amount voted last year, to my mind the sum is most inadequate, having regard not only to the direct value of the forest industry to the country but also to the indirect value for the conservation of water and wild life, the attraction of tourists, and the availability to our people of a free means of healthy recreation.


Frederick George Sanderson: Is the hon. member referring to item 140?


Gordon Timlin Purdy: Yes; I am speaking generally with respect to the items dealing with forest preservation. If you wish, Mr. Chairman, I shall proceed under the next item.


Frederick George Sanderson: The hon. member may continue.


Gordon Timlin Purdy: I have said that the forests provide a free means of healthy recreation.


James Houston Spence: Louder; we cannot hear a word.


Gordon Timlin Purdy: Listen, then.


James Houston Spence: We are trying to listen.

Mr. PURD\ : I think the direct value of the forests and forest industries of Canada are well summed up in the closing paragraphs of a book recently published by the Department of Mines and Resources, entitled, Economic Aspects of the Forests and Forest Industries of Canada. The summary is on page 53 and reads as follows:
The products of the forests and forest industries provided the largest favourable balance in external commodity trade during the period 1931-35, and stood second in this respect to agricultural and vegetable products in 1936.
The United States and the United Kingdom are Canada's best customers for forest products, and also supply the larger part of her import requirements.
Of the total volume of wood taken from the forests from 1931 to 1935, over 92 per cent was either consumed in Canada or subjected to further manufacturing processes before being exported.
I draw that to the attention of the hon. member for St. Paul's (Mr. Ross) who has spoken of wood products being exported in the raw state. I continue the quotation:
The estimated net average value of forest products consumed annually during the same period was 132 million dollars, which included imports valued at approximately 14 million dollars. The value of Canadian products consumed at home was, therefore, 118 million dollars, and the additions to the wealth of Canada, accruing from forests and forest industries, averaged 275 million dollars annually.
From the same publication I observe that 13-8 per cent of the total car loadings of Canada originate with this industry, and therefore it has a very important bearing on the income of our railroads. I would suggest to hon. members who have not already obtained a copy of this publication that they do so, because it is of exceptional interest.
There is another important fact brought out in this book which would seem to substantiate my claim for further consideration for the industry, and that is that approximately one-fifth of the value of the primary production of Canada originates in the forests. I suggest that that is a very modest estimate because I observe from the last issue of The National Revenue Review that of our total exports of Canadian produce in April 1938. amounting to $51,248,752, a total of $11,668,934 came from this industry.
I quite appreciate the fact that in most of the provinces a large percentage of the forest lands is still owned by the crown in the right of the provinces. But the situation in the province of Nova Scotia is entirely reversed, and 87-6 per cent is owned by private parties. It is with privately owned lands in Nova Scotia that I would like to deal for a few moments.

Supply-Forest Services
I would first like to point out that some 40,000 of our farms consist in part of cleared land and in part of wood lots, and I would throw out the suggestion to the government that in these wood lots, and in other wood lots privately owned, they have an opportunity of doing for Nova Scotia what they have done and are endeavouring to do for the west in the matter of agriculture. If the west is adapted to the growing of grain, then surely we in Nova Scotia can say with equal truth that our land is adapted to the growing of timber, and claim equal recognition and consideration on this ground. Nova Scotia spruce, pine, birch and maple are by-words in the markets of the British Isles and also of the United States, and if this government would take steps to maintain and increase the supply of these woods it would go a long way towards rehabilitating the rural sections of this province.
With no. portion of our province more than thirty miles from tidewater and none of our land inaccessible for operating purposes, it will easily be seen that having regard to the increasing demand for these products from abroad, the expenditure of moneys for the development of forests in the province of Nova Scotia would give a greater return than in any of the others. In addition I think it is recognized that on account of climatic conditions tree growth is more rapid there than in most other places in Canada.
For the year 1937 it is estimated that in addition to firewood the products of our forests and forest industries were in excess of the equivalent of 500,000,000 feet board measure. While accurate figures are not available it is conceded from all sides that this cut was greater than the natural increase and that if we were to continue at that rate for many years our forests would be depleted.
On the other side of the picture, however, we have between twelve and fifteen thousand square miles of timber land or land suitable for growing timber. Experience has shown that under natural conditions many lots which were cropped forty years ago or less have in the past few years produced a crop of from 4,000 to 5,000 board feet per acre, and in many cases far in excess of this.
It seems to me that with proper care and study we have sufficient land in the province to give us an annual cut in excess of the figure named above, and it is toward this end that I would urge on the government the necessity and advisability, as a first step of the establishment of an experimental forest station in this province. Or perhaps a series of demonstration stations would be more
suitable, so that the farmers of the various districts could be educated to look upon their wood lots as a portion of their farms the same as they do their cultivated lands, harvesting each year only the trees ready to be cut and improving the growth of the remainder by scientific methods.
Full utilization of the waste products of the industry now destroyed or left to decay could in my opinion, with some assistance, be made to give gainful employment to a large number of our present unemployed.
I shall not further take the time of the committee to enlarge on the subject or to point out the many advantages that would accrue if these schemes could be worked out. I sincerely trust, however, that the minister will give the matter his careful consideration, and I can assure him that he and his officers will receive full cooperation from the provincial department.
Another point I would like to stress in favour of growing timber instead of growing grain, is that if the demand is poor, cutting can be curtailed with benefits to the stands, whereas in agriculture this is not possible. Further, when the time comes for the selection of sites for these experimental stations and the minister sends his officials to Nova Scotia, I trust that they will not overlook the constituency of Colchester-Hants, which is the biggest lumber producing constituency in the province.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I will certainly give consideration to the representations my hon. friend has made. I might mention that Cape Breton Island park is now under development, covering an area of five hundred square miles, and we have under consideration making some study within the park area of the timber growth and other resources relating thereto.
Mr. PUiRDY: The minister's officials, when they visit Cape Breton national park, will find that the woods there are entirely different from the growth on the mainland, and that the land within the park is not very well suited to the production of useful timber.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am glad to have that suggestion from my hon. friend.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Forest experiment stations, $77,520.
James Houston Spence: I presume I am the only one who attempts to criticize increases in estimates. I should like a little information on the reason for this one. It seems to be the government's policy that all estimates shall be increased. Here we have increases in this department, following the many in-
Supply-Forest Services

creases that were made in the Department of Agriculture. Why almost $36,000 should be added to the expenditure on forest experiment stations I cannot understand. This is no time for increasing experiments. Money should not be spent to-day unless it will bring work and wages to the unemployed. But this is pure experimental work, and I suggest that the government do not waste $36,000 more on experiments of this kind.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I might make to the hon. member the same remark I made to the committee on an earlier vote. In last year's estimates, with which he makes a comparison, he is dealing only with the main estimates; and if we take the total spent last year in main and special supplementaries, and set that against the amount in this vote, this vote is actually less than it was a year ago.


James Houston Spence: Your, estimates do not show it this year.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I know, but if we take into account the special supplementaries voted last year-


James Houston Spence: Oh, well, I do not have them here.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I notice that the hon. member for Melfort is not in the house; but in answer to what he said, I should like to remark that the necessity of keeping our pulpwood and manufacturing paper in this country and not exporting it, is that we have in the pulp and paper industry an investment of some $175,728,000, and it is necessary to keep the supplies for those mills in Canada. We can manufacture it here just as well as they can in the United States, and with more benefit to Canadians.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Forest Products Laboratories, $148,500.
Mr. MacNICOL:: We should like to hear what the minister has to say about this; what are the laboratories doing? The minister is probably familiar with the laboratory at Madison, Wisconsin, where wonderful work along this line is being done. I should like to know what work is being done in Canada in this respect, and upon what all this money is being spent.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There are three of these laboratories. One in Vancouver, one in Ottawa, and one in Montreal.


John Ritchie MacNicol: What are they associated with?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The study of the utilization of forest products. For instance, studies are 
being conducted as to the strength of woods, how woods can be most economically used, for example, in various building materials. Then there is the study of the utilization of waste material from wood, such things as sawdust and bark and slabs, which a few years ago were considered as waste material altogether; also, the study of lumber seasoning ; how our forest products can be best manufactured to suit the markets to which they may be going. These matters are studied particularly at the Vancouver and Ottawa stations. The Montreal laboratory is devoted almost entirely to the pulp and paper business which forms such a large and important part of the industry in both Quebec and Ontario. Scientific experiments are carried on with a view to the improvement of the quality of the paper by treatment of pulp. All that sort of thing is carried on in Montreal, and the department has had a definite recognition from the pulp and paper industry of the value of the government's contribution to this laboratory. I might say, as was pointed out in discussions of similar estimates in previous years, that the Montreal laboratory was begun through the cooperation of McGill university, the pulp and paper industry, and the federal government. To the costs of operating this particular laboratory the pulp and paper association make a contribution, in addition to that which comes from the federal government.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Is there a revenue from it?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No. You do not derive much direct revenue from experimental stations.


John Ritchie MacNicol: This is not an experimental station. This is a laboratory.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Well, I mean from laboratories.


John Ritchie MacNicol: The United States government receives considerable revenue from a similar line of work at its great laboratory at Madison, Wisconsin. When that laboratory renders a service along the lines the minister has outlined, and along scores and hundreds of other lines, it makes a charge for it. All that the minister has said is very largely the sort of information which has been handed down from the research bureau here, so that if these experimental stations are doing the same work, that is, only a duplication of what is being done here, then what is the research bureau doing?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The research bureau is not doing research work in this particular field.

Supply-Forest Services
That is being done by the laboratory at Montreal. The same applies to the forest laboratories at Ottawa and Vancouver. That field is not being duplicated by the national research council.


John Ritchie MacNicol: Do they also inquire into the proper kind of wood or lumber to be used for shipping purposes, for crating and so forth, so as to advise manufacturers of the strength of certain kinds of wood for certain lines of shipments, whereby they are able to reduce the weight and thus reduce the freight charges?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Those matters are studied not only in the Ottawa station but in the Vancouver station as well. Studies are also made of the lasting qualities of various kinds of woods, and what treatments can be given them to increase their length of usefulness. All these matters, which are purely scientific, are under investigation at both Ottawa and Vancouver. As I stated a moment ago, the Montreal establishment confines its activities very largely to those problems which relate to the pulp and paper industry in Canada.


Harry James Barber: How much was expended last year on the Vancouver laboratory?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The vote this year is divided as follows:	To Vancouver, 834,572;
to Montreal, $38,829; and to Ottawa, $75,099.


Harry James Barber: The minister said that experiments were carried on in connection with waste material such as slabs, sawdust and so forth. What has been the result of those experiments? Is there any result from them so far?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I cannot say that so
ar there have been any practical results.


Harry James Barber: How long have they been
carrying on these experiments?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am informed that it
is only within the last year that work of this kind has been undertaken.


James Samuel Taylor: Are there any
field research units associated with these laboratories, outdoors?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The officers in these various laboratories go out and have contacts with the people who are actually in the industry. Jf that is what my hon. friend means, the answer is yes.


James Samuel Taylor: Not exactly.
What I am trying to discover is whether any of these departments are directing themselves to the comparative advantages of natural or ordered reafforestation.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That comes under the
various experimental stations. It is not related to the work under this particular vote.


James Samuel Taylor: Is anything being done in that direction?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes. A study is being
made at these various experimental stations. There is one in New Brunswick, one at Val-cartier, one at Petawawa, one in Manitoba and one in Alberta. Experimental work is carried on as to the rate of tree growth, the conditions under which growth is best promoted, the matter of fire hazard and how it can best be provided against, and so on. All these matters are under constant study at these experimental stations. For instance, plots will be thinned down to a certain number of trees per acre to ascertain the relative rate of growth as compared with a stand which is much thicker. In a general way the work carried on is directed as far as possible to wholly practical ends, and when the data is accumulated it is passed on to those engaged in the industry in various parts of Canada. As I said earlier, we have had from people engaged in various branches of the woods industry commendations regarding the practical value they have received from the work carried on at these stations.


Harry James Barber: Where is the laboratory
in British Columbia located?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: In the university grounds
in Vancouver.


William Hayhurst: What varieties of timber of economic value are found in Alberta, and for what purposes are they used?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: We have no laboratory in Alberta. Conditions in the three western provinces are fairly similar so far as the type of timber produced is concerned. There is. of course, an experimental station at Kanan-askis, but there is no laboratory.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to Canadian forestry association, $1,620.
Mr. BLACKMORE:: What are the objects of this organization, and what has it done?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It was initiated under prviate enterprise to bring home more clearly to the Canadian people the value of the forests and the need of fire protection; in short, to develop a sort of forest consciousness in the people. It has largely been supported by private effort, and grants have been given for a considerable number of years, not only as a recognition of the useful work that the association is doing but as a practical aid in carrying it on.
Supply-Ordnance Lands


John Horne Blackmore: Perhaps hon. members have not been sufficiently impressed with the serious depletion of the forests on the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains in Alberta, and the effect which this may have on the provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. We are going forward with a prairie farm rehabilitation scheme which, I am sure, will be extended as the years go by, the object being to bring under irrigation a large part of what is now semi-arid land. The water with which these projects will be carried on must come from the eastern slopes of the Rocky mountains. It happens that some of them are in my constituency and others in Macleod riding, and therefore I am familiar with them. There is grave danger of forest fires crossing the mountains and destroying these forests. Such a thing has happened many times. I am informed that there is scarcely sufficient forest supervision to ensure ability to stop a fire soon enough to prevent a disaster. I understand that it takes about one hundred years for a burned forest to be replenished. These facts are sufficiently serious to make us stop and think. It would be far wiser to spend some extra money in protecting the forests as they are now, and some money in encouraging reafforestation so as to preserve the water, before it is too late. The Saskatchewan river, the South Saskatchewan particularly, and other great rivers flowing down the eastern slopes depend largely upon forests for their water. There is a genuine problem there. At present the task of looking after these forests is in the hands of the province.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: They own and control them.


John Horne Blackmore: I realize they do. but in these times when the provinces are in such straitened circumstances financially it would seem the part of wisdom for the dominion to make sure that there shall be no lack of adequate forest supervision. I emphasize this because, if these forests are destroyed and that water supply is in considerable degree diminished, it will long be a matter for regret; for it will be a loss that we shall not be able to replace.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Land registry: Land registry, seed grain collections, administration of ordnance, admiralty and public lands, $64,000.
Grote Stirling: It seems a curious thing to mix up seed grain collections with administration of ordnance lands.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It arises from what is left of the land administration of the old Department of the Interior. This land registry has several activities. It is responsible for the

administration of federal lands reserved under the natural resources agreement; it has the handling of military reserves that may have been abandoned for that purpose, of the issue of letters patent for lands in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon, and the administration of ordnance and admiralty lands on the east and west coasts and also on the great lakes. There are still some remnants of those old lands. Generally speaking, it is an office of record for all the lands controlled by or under the federal administration. It is a sort of omnibus item carrying everything that could not be attached anywhere else.


Grote Stirling: From whom are the seed grain collections made?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: On advances made many years ago, some as far back as 1914, I think, in the prairie provinces. My officers tell me it goes back as far as 1876; I do not think there are many of those, but some old claims date back to 1914. They are endeavouring to collect these; in some instances compromises are reached on the amounts.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
To provide for expenses in connection with the determination of boundaries of ordnance and admiralty lands in the province of British Columbia, $3,000.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: This is an item which
has been in the estimates for a good many years. We have not been able to make much progress with the British Columbia government in getting the matter actively in hand to have the boundaries of some of these lands delimited, but we may be able to make some progress this year.


James Houston Spence: How many pieces are there in British Columbia?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: About fifty, I understand.


Grote Stirling: Why only in British
Columbia?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I understand this arises
out of some provision in the act transferring the Peace River block and the railway belt to British Columbia. Provision was made then for the settlement of these boundaries. I am told that in some instances Indian reserves are involved. The matter has been under discussion with the British Columbia government; but they and the department here have never been able to agree on it, although it has been under discussion for several years.


Alan Webster Neill: Can the minister hold out any hope that they will ever get the matter of the Indian reserves in British Columbia settled, concerning which there was an agree-

Supply-Labour
ment made, known, I think, as the McKenna agreement, which originated about 1918? I know a large, expensive delegation went about British Columbia and made arrangements to cut off land from some large reserves not needing it and add land to others; the province agreed to surrender those lands necessary to be surrendered by it, and the dominion agreed to reciprocate, but as far as I know the matter has never been settled. There seems to be an almost childish sort of dispute in connection with some of the terms. If the matter has been settled, I should be glad to know, and, if so, when the settlement was reached. The delay is holding up a lot of progress that might be made. Parts of these reserves could be sold to public advantage, but sale cannot be carried out because no one has a title; the dominion does not have it because the province will not sign, and the province is still retaining it under a sort of pledge to give it to the dominion.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The matter is now under negotiation with the British Columbia government. Various efforts have been made to settle it, but without avail. I personally discussed the matter with the premier of British Columbia on his recent visit to Ottawa, and urged that it should be settled.


Alan Webster Neill: What is the trouble?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It is hard for me to say. Apparently there is in British Columbia some official view held rather strongly on the question. But I believe there is no good reason why it should not be settled. The basis of settlement was agreed upon. I urged upon the premier of British Columbia that it should have the immediate and careful consideration of his government, and he assured me it would be taken in hand. I hope when we come to consideration of these estimates a year hence the committee can be given the information.


Charles Avery Dunning: I move that the committee rise and report progress, and ask leave to sit again this day, in order to permit of the tabling of the supplementary estimates, and also a statement of the Minister of Labour in connection therewith, the intention being to ask the Speaker to leave the chair immediately after the message of his excellency has been received, and to call an item in the Department of Labour.
Progress reported.



SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES, 1938-39

[Stage Direction]
A message from His Excellency the Governor General transmitting estimates for the 51952-196
financial year ending March 31, 1939, was presented by Hon. Charles A. Dunning (Minister of Finance), and read by Mr. Speaker to the house.
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister
of Finance) moved:
That the message of His Excellency, together with the supplementary estimates presented this day, be referred to the committee of supply, with the exception of items Nos. 633, 634 and 635, which I would ask the house to refer to the standing commitee on railways and shipping owned, operated and controlled by the government.
Grote Stirling: Would the minister kindly explain his reference just now to the fact that it was the desire of the government to call an item under the Department of Labour. Surely that is quite an unusual thing to do, with the supplementaries laid before the house now for the first time.


Charles Avery Dunning: I am sorry; I thought I had made that clear. It is the intention again to call committee of supply immediately; and when the chairman is in the chair we shall call an item in Labour merely for the purpose of enabling the Minister of Labour to make a brief explanatory statement with respect to the estimates now being tabled, but with no intention of going further than that in the discussion of the items. I am sorry I did not make that clear previously.


Grote Stirling: Labour has been called already?


Charles Avery Dunning: Yes.


[Stage Direction]
Motion agreed to.
[Stage Direction]
The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.

[Stage Direction]
International Labour Conference, $15,000.
Hon. NORMAN McL. ROGERS (Minister of Labour): Mr. Chairman, in view of the questions raised during the recent debate on unemployment, I believe it will meet the wishes of the committee if a brief statement is made at this time with respect to the supplementary estimates which have just been tabled.
In these estimates provision is made for work-creating projects amounting to a total expenditure of over $40,000,000. This is in addition to work-creating projects in the main estimates amounting to an almost equal sum. Apart from expenditures on public buildings in the various provinces and the normal outlay for the repair of wharves and breakwaters, the larger items in these estimates
[Stage Direction]
Supply-Labour
[Stage Direction]
carry out the policy of the government to stimulate basic industries and broaden the foundations of a long range program of conservation and development. An amount of $1,310,000 is set aside for improved road transportation into new mining areas, and there is a further supplementary vote for geological surveys, in addition to the $300,000 appearing in the main estimates. The total of proposed expenditures on highway improvements apart from mining roads is over $3,500,000. Of this total there is a new item of $1,000,000 to reduce the menace of level crossings as a supplement to the contribution of $500,000 to the grade crossing fund already made in the main estimates. Over $3,000,000 is assigned to trans-Canada and tourist highways and national parks. Another item in the group of expenditures designed to assist the tourist industry is the sum of $450,000 for the restoration and development of historic sites.
Over $7,000,000 is to be spent on special projects of harbour and river development, including a contribution of $300,000 to the Grand River conservation project in Ontario. There are substantial construction outlays for harbour improvements at Halifax, Saint John, Quebec, Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton and Vancouver.
The sum of $1,000,000 is also to be spent on canal improvements in addition to the expenditures appearing in the main estimates.
The sum of $650,000 is to be spent for the encouragement of the fishing industry.
The expansion of facilities for air transportation is given a prominent place in the development program. The sum of $800,000 is allocated for the construction and improvement of airports along the trans-Canada route and an additional $500,000 for assistance to municipal airports. This is in addition to the sum, in the main estimates, of $1,722,400 for the construction of airports, and $800,000 for assistance to municipal airports.
As announced in the speech from the throne the youth training plans are to be extended. The sum of $2,250,000 is included in the estimates for training projects for unemployed young people and older unemployed persons. A considerable portion of this amount will be used for forestry training and conservation.
To provide for rehabilitation and water storage in the prairie provinces under the Prairie Farm Rehabilitation Act the sum of $3,500,000 is included in the supplementary estimates. This amount will be expended largely in the drought areas of Saskatchewan and Alberta.

New expenditures are included for forest conservation and fur conservation.
It is also possible at this time to make a further announcement which, I believe, will be welcomed in the house and in the country. In accordance with the principles laid down in the recommendations of the national employment commission, legislation will be introduced at the present session to provide additional encouragement to low cost and low rental housing. Legislation will also be introduced to provide low interest loans to municipalities for self-liquidating projects. These important developments of the government's program are designed to give further stimulus to the construction industry and to provide additional employment through private and public enterprise in large centres of population and in localities which may not benefit directly from the construction of public buildings and other works projects.
Mr. WOODSWORTH:: May I ask the
minister one question? Until these projects get under way, has the government made any provision for the emergency situation that prevails in Vancouver, Calgary, Winnipeg, Windsor and, in fact, nearly all our larger centres, where there are large numbers, especially of single men, who are not to-day provided for?


Mr. ROGERS:: Although the supplementary estimates remain to be passed providing for grants in aid to the provinces, those provinces concerned have the assurance that when the grants in aid are passed they will be made retroactive to cover the months since the expiration of the last fiscal year. There has been a difficult situation in Vancouver during the past few weeks. As I have stated before in the house, the government of British Columbia has been dealing with the situation in consultation with the Department of Labour here, and of course I am aware of the measures that have been taken in that province to deal with the immediate situation. As far as the other cities mentioned by my hon. friend are concerned, I know of no emergency situation which is not being met in the ordinary way through the provision of direct relief or in such other ways as have been employed by the provincial governments for that purpose.


Mr. MacINNIS:: I wonder if the minister would go a little more fully into the Vancouver and British Columbia situation. I notice by this morning's newspapers that the minister of labour of British Columbia made the statement that 1,800 single men who came into the province at the end of last year were to be returned to the provinces

Supply-Labour
in which they may have domiciles, and that if they did not accept that offer they would receive no more relief. From the same press dispatches I understand that the western cities or other provinces to which they are to be returned are objecting to that being done. Are any steps being taken to ensure that if these men are compelled to leave British Columbia, they will be maintained in the other provinces to which they may be sent or to which they wish to go?


Norman McLeod Rogers: I should be inclined to answer that question in this way: The men to whom my hon. friend has referred received employment in forestry conservation camps during the winter months. The dominion government contributed to the maintenance of those camps, which were carried on cooperatively by the dominion and provincial governments. These men received wages at the prevailing rate of thirty cents an hour while they were in the camps, and a portion of their pay was deferred and made payable to them after they loft the camps, in the form of post office vouchers. Had these men who came from other provinces chosen to return to those provinces at the conclusion of the work in the forestry camps, no possible objection could have been taken by the authorities in the provinces from which they had come originally. That, as I understand it, is what is now proposed by the provincial government; that these men who came to these forestry camps from other provinces shall be granted transportation to their homes. I have the assurance that in determining the destinations of these men to whom transportation will be given every possible safeguard is taken to see that they are sent to their own homes, or, in other words, to the places from which they came to enter the forestry camps in British Columbia during the past winter. As a matter of fact, my information also states that of those who have applied for transportation almost all have indicated as their homes smaller centres of population in the prairie provinces. So that up to this time we have no indication that there is likely to be a large concentration in the cities of western Canada. The number mentioned by the hon. member is also, I believe, something in excess of the actual number who would qualify for transportation under the plan proposed by the minister of labour of British Columbia.


Angus MacInnis: No doubt the minister has seen the press dispatches and realizes I mentioned the number indicated in those dispatches.


Norman McLeod Rogers: Quite.


Howard Charles Green: Are those the steps to which the minister referred when he said the provincial government had taken steps to deal with the situation? I ask that because I have understood that there were several thousand men assembled in Vancouver and the shipping back of 1,800 or 1,900 of them still leaves a large number in that city who will have to be cared for by the citizens. For instance, last Saturday a tag day was held at which the sum of $4,000 or $5,000 was raised. To a certain extent by threatening the city permission was obtained to hold the tag day. Is it the intention to reopen the forestry camps until these works projects are started, or is the government taking any other steps in the interim to meet the situation.


Norman McLeod Rogers: The government of British Columbia in dealing with this situation at close range-not a new situation entirely, but something which has developed from time to time in recent years-has decided it will be possible to absorb in employment in the province those who were formerly in the forestry conservation camps and who were residents of British Columbia. As a matter of fact, the experience of last year suggests that this has been done. About 2,500 men who were in the forestry camps of British Columbia last winter did not return this winter. The clear inference is that they had either found employment elsewhere or returned to their homes in the prairie provinces. As I have said, the province of British Columbia is able to judge as to the best measures with which to deal with the existing situation. As I understand the situation, it is not the intention to open forestry camps.


Howard Charles Green: As the minister must know, there is far less employment in the woods of British Columbia this year than last; that will mean less opportunity to place these men.


Norman McLeod Rogers: I am not able to give a definite opinion on that point. I have understood that there was a certain slackening in the forest operations in certain parts of British Columbia, but within the last few days I have heard evidence to the contrary. At all events, the statement made by the minister in the British Columbia government suggests that in his belief it will be possible to find employment for those formerly in the camps and properly resident in the province.


Howard Charles Green: The minister is satisfied that the difficulty has been settled in the coast cities, then?
Private Bills

Mr. ROGERS r I am afraid I am never Satisfied that difficulties of this kind are Settled. To some extent they ar.. chronic, and inherent in the problem with which the country and government is dealing at the present time; but I believe I can say-and perhaps this is known to members of the house-that many of those young men were induced to remain in Vancouver. They are organized in the relief project workers union, and I believe the efforts of the leaders in that union were directed toward dissuading those young men from returning to their own homes when work in the forestry camps was ended.


Charles Avery Dunning: It is not the intention to press passage of the item at this time. After the hour for private bills has expired, it is the intention to proceed with the estimates of the Department of Fisheries.
Item stands.
At six o'clock the Speaker resumed the chair and the house took recess.
After Recess
The house resumed at eight o'clock.



PRIVATE BILLS


[Stage Direction]
Bill No. 113, for the relief of Mary Elizabeth Fletcher Meigs Ballantyne.-Mr. Em-merson.
Bill No. 114, for the relief of Ada Alice Burns.-Mr. Thompson.
Bill No. 115, for the relief of Marjoire Isabel Meldrum Andersen.-Mr. Emmerson.
Bill No. 116, for the relief of Alice Pearl Shaver Booth.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 117, for the relief of Mary Grace French Clarke.-Mr. Jacobs.
Bill No. 118, for the relief of John Gerard Ahem.-Mr. Hill.


[Stage Direction]
On the order:
Second reading of Bill No. 16, an act to amend the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement Act, 1934.-Mr. Douglas (Weyburn).
Mr. SPEAKER:: When this bill was last
called, it stood in the absence of the sponsor. That has happened twice.


Charles Avery Dunning: Mr. Speaker, the bill
amending the Farmers' Creditors Arrangement
[Mr. Green.)
Act has passed, and I think for that reason we might very well drop this order from the order paper.


James Shaver Woodsworth: That is quite right, Mr. Speaker.


Walter Edward Foster: Then there should be a
motion to discharge the order.


Charles Avery Dunning: I move, Mr Speaker,
that this order be discharged.
Motion agreed to and order discharged.



RAILWAY ACT AMENDMENT


[Stage Direction]
The house resumed from Friday, May 6, consideration of the motion of Mr. Reid for the second reading of Bill No. 18, to amend the Railway Act (rates on grain).
Hon. CHARLES A. DUNNING (Minister of Finance): Mr. Speaker, 1 believe the hi inis ter of Transport (Mr. Howe) was speaking at the expiry of the hour for public and private bills when this motion was last before the house. He is unable to be present to-night, and has requested me to say to the house on his behalf what he would have said had he been able to be here and conclude his remarks.
The Minister of Transport says that when he last discussed this bill he had arrived at the point of making some remarks on the major contention of the member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) to the effect that mill feeds should move from the mills to consumers in British Columbia at rates now applicable to feed grain. The minister had pointed out that the hon. member for New Westminster was in error in stating that such a movement now takes place on a domestic rate for milling grain, as in fact the movement is now carried out on the balance of the through rate from the point at which the grain itself originates, and this balance of the through rate is usually lower than the domestic grain rate, and often as low as or lower than the rate on feed grain.
The Minister of Transport has conferred with both railways on the matter of the contention of the hon. member for New Westminster and has pointed out to them that a grievance, although the railways claim it is not a very real one, is still a grievance and should be removed by every means consistent with maintaining a reasonable rate structure. The railways are disposed to accept the minister's view of the situation, and after giving the matter full consideration both railways have authorized the Minister of Transport to

Railway Act-Grain Rates
make the following statement, which in his opinion concedes the demand of the hon. member for New Westminster and those who support his view so far as rates on mill feeds are concerned. The following is the statement of the railways handed to the Minister of Transport:
The railways will make provision in their tariffs that on straight carload lots of feed forwarded from the milling point, the balance of the rate as applicable under the railway regular milling and transit arrangements will not be in excess of the feed grain rates from the milling point. The railways will also provide in their tariffs applicable on feed grains that the rates named therein will apply on straight carloads of mill feeds from specific points at which mills are located in Alberta and Saskatchewan to points in British Columbia. The above special rates will be withdrawn if it forces reductions generally on feeds between points in western Canada.
The Minister of Transport states that it is only fair to point out once again that the present rates on feed grain were agreed to by the railways with the understanding that they represented a compromise between the demands of the four western provinces and the then existing tariffs. It is the minister's understanding that this compromise was accepted by each of the four western provinces, and having accepted the compromise, the minister doubts the propriety of further demands within the previous settlement. It is now the opinion of the Minister of Transport that the fact that both railways are willing to introduce the new rate voluntarily should be accepted as an indication of the desire of the railways to meet the needs of the agricultural development of British Columbia, and the minister suggests to the hon. member for New Westminster that he should withdraw this bill with the understanding that the new tariffs on mill feeds will be published without delay.
The minister desires to point out to members of the house that the very low rates now applicable on natural products moving for export are made possible only by a reasonable balance between export traffic and the movement of more valuable commodities within Canada. Truck competition has made heavy inroads on that kind of traffic, while drought conditions have reduced the export volume of grain. These two situations combine to create Canada's railway problem. The railways have every desire to meet the needs of agriculture. Ton mile rates in Canada for the products of the farm are far lower than for parallel lines in the United States, and are in fact the lowest rates in the world. While moving traffic at these rates, we expect our railways to produce a balanced budget, and the Minister of Transport suggests that we should not ask the
impossible in further reduction of rates that are now well below the cost of the service given.
Western Canada has always been ably represented on the board of railway commissioners, and the minister believes that no one can claim that the railway board has not understood the needs of western Canada and given sympathetic consideration to those needs.
In conclusion, the Minister of Transport desires to state again that parliament has constituted the board of railway commissioners the final authority to adjudicate on railway rates, and he expresses the hope that in future members of the house will address matters of rate adjustment to the board of railway commissioners rather than to parliament itself.
That is the end of the statement, Mr. Speaker, which the Minister of Transport desired me to make on his behalf.
On my own behalf may I say that I have a vivid recollection, going back through the years, of the continuous struggle in connection with this matter of westbound rates on feed grains. In fact, my recollection goes back vividly to the original fights with respect to-the Crowsnest rates eastbound, of which it might be said that the bills introduced year after year by the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) have been a by-product. I think all of us would agree in principle that parliament, having delegated the responsibility for rate making to the board of railway commissioners, should not, unless under exceptional circumstances, constitute itself the judge as to what a given freight rate should be on any commodity between points in any part of Canada. I speak, of course, subject to the fact that certain statutory rates enacted by this parliament before the board was created: do exist and have been a ruling factor in relation to the commodities and the geographical' areas with which they deal, even though the board has since come into existence for the purpose of regulating rates generally in Canada. I hope that the hon. member for New" Westminster will regard the further concession which the railways have authorized the Minister of Transport to offer as sufficient warrant to justify him in withdrawing the measurer which is now before the house. By so doing, we shall avoid further parliamentary adjudication with respect to railway rate matters, which, as I have said, all of us regard as undesirable generally. .Of course parliament is the highest court in the land, and there is no means of preventing discussion of these matters in parliament, nor is there any desire on the part of anyone to prevent such discussion. Nevertheless, parliament having created a
Railway Act-Grain Rates
[Stage Direction]
body and clothed it with the necessary authority, it is desirable, generally speaking, that that body should be left as free as possible in order that it may exercise its jurisdiction equitably on behalf of the people of Canada whom it is appointed to serve.
Henry Herbert Stevens: The decision of the government, as indicated in the statement read by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) on behalf of the Minister of Transport (Mr. Howe), is an extraordinary one. I agree with the minister and have always held that the question of fixing rates ought to be left to the railway board. The first speech which I made in this house, in the autumn of 1911, was on that subject, when the late Mr. MacLean, from Toronto, introduced a resolution calling upon parliament to take some action with regard to fixing rates. I then took the ground I did because I had faith in the railway board as an institution. I believe that the board, on the whole, has been one of the fairest courts in the land. It is, of course, more a court of equity than a court of law. It has earned for itself a record of justice and fairness, and in the choice of its chairmen the country has been singularly fortunate. I appeared before it years ago, when the late Mr. Justice Mabee was the presiding official, and before him Mr. Justice Killam, as well as those who have followed. In all instances, I believe, the gentlemen who have been the chairmen of the board have been distinguished by their fairness and their sense of equity. Therefore I have never felt comfortable when these bills were brought before parliament. It is true that on certain rare occasions when freight rates have been discussed, I have taken a stand in the house in regard to them, but in my opinion it has been more or less unfortunate that they should have been introduced into this house.
Having said that, I confess to a considerable disturbance of mind in witnessing a government-to judge from the document which was read-actually having discussed the matter and brought pressure upon railways in order to overcome an inconvenient measure which was brought before the house by one of its supporters. I suppose we might liken the hon. member for New Westminster (Mr. Reid) to the importunate widow who by her persistent attempts at last won some attention.


Charles Avery Dunning: There was similar action on a former occasion in the same matter.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Oh, yes, there have been many agitations of this kind.


Charles Avery Dunning: No; similar action.


Henry Herbert Stevens: Well, there was action taken on one occasion, which I think in itself was a mistake, on the Crowsnest rate, which, according to law cited properly by the minister a few moments ago, in its statutory form covered certain territory in certain directions. Then that was applied on movements west.
I do not object to the effect of it, but I object to the form of it.
Here is another consideration. The hon. member upon one or two occasions has appealed to the governor general in council, as was his right. I believe it would have been far better for the governor general in council, in accordance with the law, to take some action on appeal from the board of railway commissioners, than to have the matter dragged into the house and made more or less a political football, because that is what it amounts to. It will be quoted in the country as evidence of what can be done in parliament by anyone who wishes to be persistent and, shall I say, sufficiently embarrassing to the government. In my opinion it is an unfortunate precedent that the government should have given way, although in the concluding remarks of the minister's statement he made a pious appeal to all hon. members that in future they would be good boys and not embarrass the government in this way any more, but leave the subject to the board of railway commissioners. That is the substance of the closing remarks of the appeal. It is not an elevating spectacle for parliament. Either this thing is right or it is wrong. The rates should have been granted before or, they should not be granted to-day; the rates should have been granted by the board of railway commissioners or, on appeal, action should have been taken by the governor general in council. I am not condemning the hon. member for his action, other than to say this, that I do not agree with this form of rate making. In his desire to gratify his ambitions he has a perfect right to embarrass the government he is supporting; but it is a poor line of business and an unfortunate precedent to establish in the house that if an hon. member can make himself enough of a nuisance to the government in some way or another, he will get his wishes and his demands gratified.


Charles Avery Dunning: When I spoke of this
not being the first time that similar action had been taken on this matter, what I had reference to was a previous occasion when a similar bill was before the house. The hon. member informs me that it was in 1933. On that occasion a compromise was reached between those sponsoring the bill and the repre-



193S

[Stage Direction]
Railway Act-Grain Rates
sentatives of the four western provinces who were interested. The decision of the railways on that occasion-a voluntary decision -was communicated to the house, as I am communicating this decision to-day. That was what I meant when I said that similar action had been taken previously.
Henry Herbert Stevens: I still submit that is not a sound practice.


Charles Avery Dunning: My hon. friend was a
member of the government that did it.


Henry Herbert Stevens: That is true enough,
but I do not think I took any part in that particular matter. It makes no difference, however; the two incidents do not make each other right. I have always held that it is better to leave matters to courts that are set up to deal with them than to bring them here. What I am deploring is not this particular incident but the fact that a concession should have been granted in this way. It should have been done by the governor general in council upon appeal from the board of railway commissioners. That is the proper way, and if the government had decided to follow that course it would have been better to invite the hon. member to reopen his appeal before the governor general in council and have action taken in that way.
It is not adding either to the dignity of, or to public confidence in, the board of railway commissioners. Here are two railways coming and saying, "We have been harassed about this matter, and now we shall give so much if you will withdraw the bill and not bother us about the rest." In the statement read a few minutes ago they intimate that the moment there is any agitation in the territory with respect to intervening points they will withdraw this concession. The whole thing is on the basis of logrolling, whereas it should be on the footing of the findings of a court of equity and should stand as a matter of justice. It should be a matter of justice, or it should not be done at all. Either the rates are justified or they are not, and the board should be behind them.
This board is at the present time in a state of transition. Under the transport act it is going to become the board of transport and to it are to be handed enlarged powers to administer not only the railways but waterborne traffic, air traffic and other matters. In other words, the powers and jurisdiction of the board are to be extended; but just at the time of transition we find the board, a court which as I say has earned for itself a right to the confidence of the country, being brushed aside and a set of rates fixed
by a log-rolling process. It is that feature of the matter to which I object. I suppose the hon. member who introduced the bill and who has been so assiduous in his advocacy of it in the house, where a good many of us feel it should not be, will receive some encomiums for having achieved a great victory. I do not believe, however, that victories of that kind should be achieved in this house at the expense of constitutional and proper methods and at the expense, further, of public confidence in our judiciary, because if you are going to do this sort of thing in this instance you might just as well do it in some other matter.
All the talk about this being the high court of parliament, this high-sounding phrase, makes me a little weary. If there is a body in this country less fitted to be a court, it is this house, and we might as well admit it.


Charles Avery Dunning: I said so.


Henry Herbert Stevens: What is the use of talking about this being the high court of parliament? This is not a judicial court. Unfortunately, even the proper and legitimate functions of parliament are not discharged in the best possible form because of the introduction of patronage which has grown up over the years. To call this a court similar to courts of justice, or to suggest that it could take the place of a court of justice or a court of equity is, of course, silly. It is not a court in that sense. Courts have been established and the confidence of the people has reposed in those courts. That confidence should not under any circumstances be disturbed. If there is one thing that we should be proud of in Canada, it is the respect which, down through' the decades, the people have had for the courts of the land, and unfortunately these are times when loosely expressed opinions have a tendency to disturb the confidence of the less informed people of the country in our courts. Those of us in whose hands rests the responsibility of leadership in. Canada should be extremely careful not to lend any colour to the disturbance of public confidence in the courts. I say this with particular emphasis with reference to the board of railway commissioners, which, as I said in the committee the other day and as I repeat here, is a bod}'' whose work I have followed with great care for many years and for whom I have nothing but praise. I deplore that this matter should have been dealt with in the way in which it has been to-night.


John Horne Blackmore: There is one matter-


Charles Avery Dunning: The hon. member has
already spoken.
Railway Act-Grain Rates


Walter Edward Foster: Has the hon. member
spoken? If so, he cannot speak again.


Thomas Reid: The hon. gentleman has spoken. I am not objecting to his speaking again, but I am watching the time because I should like to have this matter finished to-night. The hon. member spoke on a previous occasion, when he said he would support the bill.


John Horne Blackmore: Did I speak in support of it?


Thomas Reid: Yes; the hon. member said he would support it.


John Horne Blackmore: I lost track of it.


Mr. W. K. ESLING (Kootenay West):: Can the minister interpret in dollars and cents this compromise rate? That is to say, what is the saving from the mill in Alberta to the coast, and does this compromise also apply to intervening points? I understand that it does not. What about the numerous poultry farmers in the interior of British Columbia, and many cooperatives too, who would like to bring in cargo lots? I take it from what has been said that they do not participate in any of these benefits. Am I right?


Charles Avery Dunning: I have exercised my right to speak and am debarred, as the hon. member for Lethbridge is, except by unanimous consent.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Go on.


Walter Edward Foster: The minister may speak with the unanimous consent of the house.


Charles Avery Dunning: I am sorry I cannot go into details. As I indicated at the outset, I was placed in the rather embarrassing position of endeavouring to perform a service for the Minister of Transport, who desired to make the statement communicated to him by the railways. I cannot answer my hon. friend's question in dollars and cents. Perhaps if I read again slowly the statement of the railways' contention which is here categorically stated, it may answer at least part of what he desires to know. It says:
The railways will make provision in their tariffs that on straight carload lots of feed forwarded from the milling points, the balance of the rate as applicable under the railway regular milling and transit arrangements will not be in excess of the feed grain rates from the milling point. The railways will also provide in their tariffs applicable on feed grains that the rates named therein will apply on straight carloads of mill feeds from specific points at which mills are located in Alberta and Saskatchewan to points in British Columbia.


Grote Stirling: All points?


Charles Avery Dunning: I am reading what is here.
[Mr. Dunning. 1
The above special rates will be withdrawn if it forces reductions generally on feeds between points in western Canada.
I am sorry I cannot elucidate that any further; I have no more information about it than the statement contains.


Grote Stirling: There was a statement also that if this matter were raised again for intermediate points, the arrangement would not live. If we do not know what the destination point is, then we do not know what points are intermediate points.


Charles Avery Dunning: The statement is:
The above special rates will be withdrawn if it forces reductions generally.
I take that to mean, in case the rates here voluntarily put into force result in a ruling by the board of railway commissioners in future that because of their existence, rates between points on the prairies should be reduced to a similar level.


William Kemble Esling: Mr. Speaker-


Walter Edward Foster: I think the hon. member has spoken on this already. He can do so again only with the unanimous consent of the house.


William Kemble Esling: I did not get an answer.


Walter Edward Foster: I must remind hon. members that the house is not in committee.


John Horne Blackmore: I think there is no record of my having spoken before on it.


Thomas Reid: With all deference to the hon. member, I have just checked up and I find that page 2642 of Hansard shows that he spoke on it, and I was agreeably pleased to hear him say he was in support of this bill.


John Horne Blackmore: And I was.


Thomas Reid: The reason I was rising to object was-


Walter Edward Foster: Before the hon. member speaks, I call his attention to the fact that if he speaks now he closes the debate.


George Halsey Perley: The minister made in respect to the bill of the hon. member for New Westminster a statement which is not correct.


Walter Edward Foster: The hon. member is out of order. He has already spoken.


George Halsey Perley: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker, a statement was made a few minutes ago by the minister with respect to the voluntary arrangement brought into force between the provinces and the railway companies with respect to a rate in 1933. The impression was given-

Railway Act-Grain Rates


Charles Avery Dunning: Is this a point of order, Mr. Speaker?


Walter Edward Foster: No; it is not.


George Halsey Perley: The statement is not true ; it is not a fact, and I think I am within my rights when I make that plain.


Charles Avery Dunning: That is not a point of order.


George Halsey Perley: I think a statement that is not correct should not be allowed to pass.


Malcolm McLean: What is the statement?


George Halsey Perley: The statement that in connection with the bill of the hon. member for New Westminster in 1933 the then Minister of Railways advised the board of railway commissioners to bring into force a voluntary agreement between the provinces and the railways with respect to a reduction of rates.


Charles Avery Dunning: No, no.


George Halsey Perley: I have here Hansard of 1933-


Walter Edward Foster: The hon. member is out of order.


Charles Avery Dunning: May I say, on the point of order, that I did not intend to refer to any particular hon. member, I referred to a similar happening. That is what I meant to convey, and I think I did.


George Halsey Perley: The hon. member for New Westminster suggested that it was on his bill.


Thomas Reid: Mr. Speaker-


Walter Edward Foster: If the hon. member speaks now he closes the debate.


Thomas Reid: The reason I rose to object when the hon. member for Lethbridge (Mr. Blackmore) began to speak was that I was watching the clock, and it is not the first time we have been accused in the public press of talking out our own bills. I want it distinctly understood that I have no intention of talking out my own bill on this occasion. I thank the hon. member for Lethbridge for his remarks when he last spoke that he was in favour of this bill. But I was surprised at the interjection of the hon. member for Qu'Appelle (Mr. Perley) that he was not aware that he spoke on this bill a few weeks ago, when the fact is that on that occasion he practically ridiculed the bill. The speech of the hon. member appears on page 2640 of Hansard.


George Halsey Perley: I knew quite well I had spoken. I wanted to correct a misstatement.


Thomas Reid: I am going to correct the hon. member on a few things before I conclude my remarks. He is one who needs correcting.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Thomas Reid: Just listen to what I have to say, and if hon. members do not agree with me I shall withdraw anything they do not like. Before dealing with the proposition put before the house by the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) on -behalf of the Minister of Railways (Mr. Howe), let me deal briefly with the history of my efforts in this matter, and with statements made, particularly by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle. When he spoke on the bill a short time ago he made two definite statements. On page 2642 of Hansard he is reported as saying, in reference to myself:
I understand that during the campaign of 1935 he assured the electors in the province of British Columbia that if there were a change of government and his party came into power there would be no difficulty in having the government accept his bill or bring in a similar measure.
The hon. member had better look it up, because he is still doubtful whether he spoke.


George Halsey Perley: I am not in doubt whether I spoke.


Thomas Reid: That statement which I have read I unequivocally deny. The one promise I gave to the electprs since I entered public life was one of service to the people. And I do not think any hon. member will challenge my statement that I have endeavoured to carry out that promise faithfully. Let us proceed. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle also said, as reported on the same page:
In conclusion I wish to say that I am heartily in accord with the hon. member's bill.
I was glad to hear that. To continue, he stated:
I regret that he did not see fit to support me when I was introducing resolutions providing for practically the same thing as his bill.
In the light of that statement I can well understand his rising to-night and denying that he had spoken already.
Here is the brief but correct history. In 1932 the hon. member for Qu'Appelle moved a motion, and the then Minister of Railways objected to it and practically tore it to shreds. His resolution read:
That in the opinion of this house the domestic freight rate on grain and grain products moving from any point in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia to a point in any of the said provinces, or from one point to another point in any one of said provinces, be substantially reduced.
Railway Act-Grain Rates

Referring to page 863 of Hansard of 1932, hon. members will find that the member for New Westminster spoke, and my first remark was that I was pleased to support that resolution. Yet the other day the hon. member for Qu'Appelle said I never supported it. But where was he when the bill came in? He was absent when the vote took place. That resolution of his was talked out and the question not put.


George Halsey Perley: Was the hon. member ever absent when a vote was taken?


Thomas Reid: You just take it. You started this and you will now get the truth. Carrying on the history to 1933, we find it is still very interesting. That year he altered the resolution which he introduced, and instead of saying "be substantially reduced" he put it that it be 50 per cent of the differential then existing between domestic and export rates. Well, there was a statement by the then Minister of Railways, Mr. Manion, and the debate was adjourned by two hon. members; at least two rose to move the adjournment. That year a freight rate bill was again introduced by myself, and both the hon. member for Qu'Appelle and the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Barber) voted against it.
Just to clear up a little matter that, I think, should be cleared up, in regard to what results were obtained in 1933, I do not think it is entirely fair to give the credit to the Minister of Railways of that day, Mr. Manion, for what took place. The hon. member for Kootenay East (Mr. Stevens) put the situation well when he said this bill embarrasses a government. The bill I introduced in 1933 certainly embarrassed the Conservative government, and I do not think I am revealing secrets that should not now be told when I tell the house that if there is any credit to be given it should go to the right hon. leader of the opposition (Mr. Bennett), because he told me personally that if Mr. Beatty would not agree to do something in the way of reducing the freight rates on grain he would do it himself; and at that time he instructed the then Minister of Railways to take up the matter with the railway companies and see what could be done. And let me tell the house that if Mr. Manion had been fighting valiantly on behalf of the people of Canada and particularly of the prairie provinces and British Columbia in the matter of reducing freight rates, I think at that time we might have had mill feeds included as well; but when the railway companies proposed the reduction only in feed grains, he accepted the offer right away, without further protest.


George Halsey Perley: Would the hon. member permit a question?


Thomas Reid: If it is short.


George Halsey Perley: Does the hon. member not think, if the bill introduced this year had been in the same terms as the bill introduced in 1933, it would have embarrassed the present government as well?


Thomas Reid: I think I can deal with that later on. I am dealing at the moment with the history of the matter, and I am dealing with the record of the hon. member, which takes some dealing with, especially when he rises in his place in the house and makes the accusation that I did not support his resolution. That is untrue, and the hon. member knows it. If he does not, I will send him the Hansards.
In 1934 the freight rates bill was again introduced. At that time an amendment was moved by the hon. member for Fraser Valley (Mr. Barber) that the subject matter of the bill be referred to the board of railway commissioners. On that occasion several hon. members took the stand that this was not the place to debate freight rates; that the railway commission was the place for that, and so an amendment was moved. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle and the hon. member for Fraser Valley both voted for the amendment, which was carried by 78 to 44, thus killing my bill. The division, however, came on a ruling of the Chair, not on the bill itself; the resolution was agreed to on division. That year the hon. member for Qu'Appelle did not speak in support of the bill or in support of lower freight rates.
The amendment introduced by the hon. member for Fraser Valley was that the matter be referred to the board of railway commissioners. That resolution, so amended, was agreed to on division; but, Mr. Speaker, it never was referred to the board of railway commissioners by the Conservative government. In 1935 my bill was again introduced. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle did not speak on it, and again he was not in the house when the vote was taken. That year, however, the hon. member for Fraser Valley voted for the bill, though previously he had voted against the same bill. I do not suppose the impending election of that year had any bearing on the fact that he voted for the bill at that time.


Harry James Barber: This is for consumption
in your own riding, I suppose.


Thomas Reid: I will take you one at a time. It is just about time somebody got after you two members, because you have been making statements in this house-


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


Thomas Reid: I am sorry they cannot stand it very well, but now the truth is coming home. To proceed further, in 1936 there was a resolution introduced by the hon. member for Qu'Appelle, and for the third time there was a change. His resolution read:
That, in the opinion of this house, the domestic freight rate on grain and grain products moving from any point in the provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia to a point in any of the said provinces, or from any point to another point in any of the said provinces, be adjusted or reduced to at least not more than three cents per hundred pounds over the existing export rates.
Three times he introduced that resolution, and each time it was different. Evidently he really did not know what he wanted in the matter of a reduction in freight rates, as is evidenced by the changes in the resolution.


George Halsey Perley: Will the hon. member tell us just what happened to that resolution?


Thomas Reid: You sit down. I haven't time.


George Halsey Perley: Just tell us what happened to that resolution.


Thomas Reid: Yes, I will tell you; I am going to.


George Halsey Perley: It was ruled out of order. Mr. REID: I am going to tell the exact truth. I am not like you; I will keep to the record of Hansard.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Order.


George Halsey Perley: I appeal to the Chair; I think the hon. member should withdraw that remark.


Walter Edward Foster: What is the point of order?


George Halsey Perley: The point of order is that the hon. member should withdraw the statement that I was not telling the truth.


Walter Edward Foster: I do not think the hon. member meant that.


Thomas Reid: I mean that when the hon. member spoke the other evening and said I did not support his resolution, he did not keep to the record. That is as far as 1 can go, according to the rules.
Let us proceed. The motion was ruled out of order on division; objection was taken under the rules of the house because it was similar to the freight rates bill. The hon. member for Qu'Appelle was asked by the hon. member for Winnipeg North Centre (Mr. Woodsworth) which had been on the order paper first, the bill or the resolution. It is true that the resolution was sent in some time
. 1938	3103
Railway Act-Grain Rates
before the house met; but my bill was placed here immediately after the previous session and could not be placed on the order paper until after the house met, so the hon. member could say that his resolution was first on the order paper. Under the rules a resolution can be printed the first day, while a bill cannot. The speakers on that occasion were myself, the hon. member for Outremont (Mr. Yien), the hon. member for Comox-Albemi (Mr. Neill), the Minister of Transport, the hon. member for Fraser Valley and the hon. member for Souris (Mr. McDonald). At that time the hon. member for Qu'Appelle was silent, but I notice that though, by the amendment moved by the hon. member for Fraser Valley in 1934, I had been advised to go to the board of railway commissioners, the hon. gentleman keeps chiding me because I took that advice and went to the board. However, that is just the way they act; I have more important things, however, than that to say, and I see the time is going by.
Reference has been made to appeals to the board of railway commissioners. I have brought this matter into the house because we find it useless to go to the board of railway commissioners and ask for a reduction in freight rates on grains to the province of British Columbia. It is interesting to note that a change is now taking place, and if the transport bill passes the board of railway commissioners will become the new transport board. When the railway commission was appointed it was set up to protect the public of this country; the new bill, however, in my opinion is going to protect the railway companies, which is an entirely different matter. What chance of success shall we the public have if we go to the new transport board for a reduction of freight rates, when their duty is to protect the railway companies instead of the public? So I have no apology to make for bringing this matter up in this house.
In 1925 the house dealt with this very question but omitted to put in a clause which would have given British Columbia the same equal treatment that the other provinces have enjoyed for many long years. This has placed on the people of British Columbia a greater load than is borne by the people of most of the other provinces. Even in our flour requirements we pay $450,000 a year more than is paid by the other provinces. The estimated population of British Columbia is 700,000 or more. The estimated amount of wheat required for each individual is five bushels. That means 160,000 tons, and with a differential of $4.30 in favour of the domestic rate it means $450,000 more for flour requirements alone.
Railway Act-Grain Rates

I have not time to go into all the matters 1 should like to deal with, because I do not want to be accused again of talking out my own bill. The railways require traffic these days, and I know of no better way to get it than by encouraging the movement of grain to British Columbia so that the poultry-men and dairymen of that province may produce more eggs, poultry, butter and cream. We have lost a great market in the old country; we are sending only one-half of one per cent of their total requirements in eggs. The British market takes 240,000,000 dozen eggs a year, but last year Canada only supplied approximately one and a half million dozen. In 1928 the railways received $298,000 in freight on eggs alone leaving the province of British Columbia for other markets, whereas last year they received only a total of some $7,000. In 1927 the number of laying poultry in British Columbia amounted to 2,750,205, whereas in 1936 the number had dropped to less than 1,500,000. In 1927 we produced 27,500,000 dozen eggs, whereas in 1936, the latest year for which I have the figures, the number had dropped to 15,800,000 dozen.
I should like to mention one point here. Perhaps this -may be not pertinent to the discussion on my bill, but I believe it should be brought to the attention of the house. British Columbia is bringing in this year, and brought in last year, many bushels of wheat. They brought it from Yakimo, a distance of 634 miles, to Cloverdale, near my own home town, at the rate of 34 cents per 100 pounds. That comprised No. 2 and No. 3 grades of wheat. And, note that it was brought in from across the line. We might also commence to grow in the province of British Columbia, and particularly in the Fraser valley, hard wheat. In my own constituency we have the world's champion grower of hard wheat who won the Chicago world's championship last year. The gentleman's name is Mr. W. G. Gibson, and I have a sample of his wheat in my hand. It is called Reward, and those who have sampled or looked at it, including the Minister of Agriculture (Mr. Gardiner), believe it is harder than the wheat grown on the prairies. Bear in mind that this wheat was grown at sea level, right at the coast, and that-is something unprecedented in wheat production. I think it is only right and fair that some honourable recognition be given to the man who produced this fine quality of hard wheat, Mr. Gibson of Ladner.
Mr. Speaker, my time is passing, and I should like to conclude what I have to say.


George Halsey Perley: You had better hurry;
you have only a short time to withdraw.
[Mr. Reid.)


Thomas Reid: Yes; you are now at your
usual interjecting. No matter what claims have been made by Conservative members in connection with the rates given on feed grain by the railways in 1933, I maintain that the bill introduced by myself had considerable effect on what was done in that year. My bill had to be voted on, whereas the resolution of the hon. member for Qu'Appelle was disposed of by being adjourned or talked out, and was therefore not so embarrassing to the government.


George Halsey Perley: It got results, though.


Thomas Reid: It was a concession to my
bill, and has saved the people of British Columbia a considerable sum of money. Mill feeds might also have been included in the same manner, had the then Minister of Railways demanded that they be put in the agreement. The proposal to include now mill feeds and carry them at the same freight rate as feed grain, while it is not as much as the people of British Columbia would like to obtain, still it is a considerable concession, and I believe it would be much better to accept what has been offered than to refuse the bill altogether. As mill feed constitutes fifty per cent of the feed requirements of the poultrymen and dairymen of British Columbia, the proposal will mean an annual saving of approximately $100,000. I am disposed tonight to accept that proposal. It will also mean a saving of around $5,000 annually to the members of Fraser Valley Surrey Farmers' Cooperative Association. It will certainly mean a considerable saving to the 600 members of that association.
It has been a long battle to obtain what has been accomplished, but I believe the fight has been a worth while effort on behalf of the people of the province. I wish to say tonight that in agreeing to withdraw the bill I am not agreeing to discontinue the fight.
I am willing to accept half a loaf, so to speak, in the belief that it is better than no bread. The saving of $100,000 annually is certainly, I must say, a worth while concession in the meantime. But even that is not what the people of British Columbia want.
Had I had time I should have liked to go into the loss to the railways. It has been pointed out that the freight rates in the United States are higher than those in Canada. I should like time to meet that argument, because I dispute the statement to that effect made by the Minister of Transport. May I give one instance of what is taking place right now, to show where we are losing a great deal of trade because of high rates in

Supply-Lands, Parks and Forests
Canada. I have before me an invoice of a piano shipped from Toronto to Vancouver. That piano weighing 550 pounds was sent at the regular freight rates, and the freight bill amounted to $33. The same company brought a grand piano from the same point, namely Toronto, shipped it by way of Chicago and Seattle, then completed the shipment by reshipping by regular freight rates to Vancouver. The grand piano weighed 700 pounds, or 150 pounds more than the other, but it was carried the whole distance at a cost of $19, as against $33 over the Canadian route.
I have in mind another case which will perhaps be known to the hon. member for Fraser Valley. The greatest rose grower in British Columbia, Mr. H. M. Eddie, possibly the greatest in Canada, who lives in the constituency the hon. member represents, wanted to ship rose bushes from that point to eastern Canada, and particularly to Toronto. He was quoted a rate of $3.58 per 100 pounds by the Canadian railways, and the United States railways quoted a rate of $1.58 for the same distance. The United States railway landed them in Toronto at that rate and in about the same time. I mention these facts to show that it is about time we reconstructed the rate structure, and had something more in keeping with the times.
I am sorry I have not more time to develop further arguments, because I had much more to say, but I realize it is almost nine o'clock and I am afraid that again I might be accused of talking out my bill.


Walter Edward Foster: Is it the pleasure of the house that the hon. member have leave to withdraw his bill?


Mr. SENN:: No.


Some hon. MEMBERS:: Carried.


Walter Edward Foster: The bill will be withdrawn.


Charles Avery Dunning: Discharged.
Bill withdrawn.

The house in committee of supply, Mr. Sanderson in the chair.



DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND RESOURCES

[Stage Direction]
Lands, parks and forests branch-To provide for expenses in connection with the determination of boundaries of ordnance and admiralty lands in the province of British Columbia, $3,000.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: Mr. Chairman, we were
considering this item when my progress in connection with the estimates was interrupted. I had given an explanation of the item.


Grote Stirling: I think I was asking the minister with regard to the location of these lands, and he had said that the delineation of boundaries was an old matter. I wonder where the difficulty lies in connection with boundary delineation? There must be some plans. Is there difficulty in connection with actually laying them out on the ground?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am informed that the procedure involves a search of old records and old titles that are in the records office of the legislature of British Columbia. Altogether there are now fifty parcels; originally there were 170 parcels.


Mark Cecil Senn: In British Columbia?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: In British Columbia
altogether, and there are about fifty of them left. We hope to make some progress with the matter this year; in fact, we had hoped to make some progress last year and did not, and consequently we have this item in the estimates again this year to cover the expenses deemed necessary in clearing the matter up. I hope I may be able to report to the house next year, if I am still responsible for this department, that the matter has been disposed of.


Mark Cecil Senn: The statement just made by the minister brings up a question about which I had a word or two to say last year. The minister has told us that originally there were over a hundred parcels in British Columbia, and that now there are approximately only fifty. Evidently some of them have been disposed of in the meantime. I know that in Ontario applications have been made from time to time to the department for the purchase of some of these ordnance lands which lie along the shores of the great lakes, and the minister was quite firm at that time that there was no chance and no inclination on the part of the government to dispose of any of these lands. In Ontario there have been disputes over the boundary lines because these lines lie adjacent to farmers' property. Whether these ordnance lands have been encroached upon or whether the boundaries have never been clearly established I cannot say, but I would ask the minister why, if ordnance lands have been disposed of in British Columbia, it is impossible for applications for ordnance lands in Ontario to be granted at any time.

Supply-Lands, Parks and Forests


Thomas Alexander Crerar: These were disposed of in British Columbia years ago. I am not at the moment familiar with any difficulty in Ontario.


Mark Cecil Senn: I do not know that at the moment there is any difficulty over boundary lines.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My information is that there is not; but these cases in British Columbia are still outstanding, and we think their land department has been rather dilatory in doing its part. Perhaps this may be regarded as unfair criticism. I do not so intend it. As I have said before, I discussed this matter with the premier of British Columbia when he was here recently, and we hope to make some progress this year.


Grote Stirling: Does the minister expect eventually to dispose of these lands, or is this merely for the delineation of the boundaries?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: This is to get the boundaries determined and the titles cleared up. After that, the question of what might be done with these lands will be considered. There will also be the question, I am advised, of their need or suitability for defence purposes. But the problem at the moment is to get the boundaries and the titles cleared up.


Grote Stirling: Is some of it city property?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am advised that none of these lands is in that category now. There were some in the past but the province disposed of them, but the titles to these parcels have yet to be fully cleared up. Quite frankly, I think it is a matter that should have been settled years ago.


Mark Cecil Senn: My reason for speaking on this item, Mr. Chairman, is that along the north shore of lake Erie and lake Ontario, but lake Erie particularly, there is a number of summer cottages strung all the way along the lake shore, and in many places there is ordnance property which would make an excellent site for a summer cottage, but the department in the last few years has consistently refused to make any arrangements for the sale or transfer of these properties. My idea was that in case of war or these properties being needed by the government for some purpose, they could be expropriated if necessary, but in the meantime they are lying idle and are overgrown with weeds which are more or less a menace to the neighbourhood. It would be much better if the department would take into consideration

the disposal of such of these properties as are not necessary for ordnance or defence purposes.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I shall be veiy glad to take the suggestion of my hon. friend into consideration. At the moment there are no questions at issue so far as I know.


Mark Cecil Senn: I have had applications, not this last year, but within the last two or three or four years, from people who were anxious to purchase and were unable to do so.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: We are not selling ordnance lands, and that has been the policy not only of this government but, I think, of preceding governments; but I am advised that a lease may be granted on these lands, and I suppose that applications for the lease of some particular piece of property for the erection of a cottage or for some other purpose would be considered. My hon. friend says he made reference to the question last year, but this is really the first I have heard of it. There is in regard to these ordnance lands in Ontario no difficulty such as I mentioned in connection with the lands in British Columbia.


Mark Cecil Senn: My only reason for mentioning the matter was that the minister had said that there had been over one hundred parcels of these ordnance lands in British Columbia, and now there were only fifty. I supposed some had been disposed of, and I wondered why one province was being treated differently from another.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: There has been no change in the situation in British Columbia for many years. These lands originated, I dare say, even before the provincial government was formed, away back in the time of Governor Douglas in British Columbia. The matter has dragged along and really should be cleared up. I do not know that I can add anything further.


William Kemble Esling: Would the minister tell u? if the title to the foreshore of navigable rivers is vested in the federal government or in the province, and is there any difference between such lands in front of municipalities and those in front of unorganized territory? To be more explicit, take the Columbia river, which is a navigable stream. In which government is the title to these foreshores vested?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That lies wholly, I think, with the province of British Columbia. The Columbia river flows through that province; they own the land on either side of the river and, I think, the foreshore rights as well.

Supply-National Parks
Frankly, I am not familiar with the legal position of the matter. But my information now is, and certainly my impression is, that in the case cited by the hon. member the foreshore rights would lie with the province of British Columbia.


Alan Webster Neill: Does the riparian owner not own out to the middle of the stream or creek or river?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes; I should think probably he would. I do not know whether that answers the point raised by my hon. friend. If a riparian owner has bought a river lot in British Columbia, I suppose under provincial law that would carry certain rights out to the middle of the stream, but the authority to dispose of that lies, and has lain in the past, with the province.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
National parks bureau-National parks and historic sites services, $1,383,500.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: This is a general item dealing with the administration of all the national parks in Canada. There are now altogether about twenty of these national parks established, embracing an area of roughly
12,500	square miles. The purpose of this vote is to pay for the administration costs of the parks, and improvements within the parks such as maintenance of roads and, in some instances, the construction of new roads. The increase as indicated in the estimates arises in the same way as one or two other increases I referred to earlier on other items: that is, we have included in the estimates this year for national parks considerable sums which heretofore were either in special supplemen-taries or, under the late administration, under the Public Works Construction Act. After we combine all the figures there is an actual decrease in the vote as compared with a year ago. That, of course, does not include the supplementary estimates which were tabled this afternoon.


Mark Cecil Senn: Would the minister give us the number of historic sites? He mentioned the number of parks. I imagine that will include the historic sites as well.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I find in the report of the lands, parks and forests branch for the year ended March 31, 1937, that at the close of the fiscal year 1936-37 a total of 239 sites of national importance in Canada had been acquired by the department. Of this number 235 have been marked by the erection of suitable memorials on the recommendation of the historic sites and monuments board of Canada.


Mark Cecil Senn: Is that pamphlet available for anyone who desires it?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Oh, yes. It is an annual report of the lands, parks and forests branch. It is incorporated in the report of the Department of Mines and Resources. There is a great deal of useful information in that report.


Angus MacInnis: When can the minister give any information about the Garibaldi park area near the city of Vancouver, British Columbia? I understand that area was offered to the federal government for a national park some seven or eight years ago. Has it been accepted as a national park area?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No. Garibaldi park is, I understand, a provincial park under the control of the provincial government. Suggestions have been made that it might be taken over by the federal government and incorporated in the national parks of Canada. It is an interesting suggestion, and some day, probably, it will be acted upon. But, after all, in the development of national parks we have to cut our coat according to the measure of our cloth. The decision was reached a few years ago to establish a national park in Nova Scotia, and development in that park is taking place now. Prior to that, parks were established in Manitoba, and in Saskatchewan north of Prince Albert, within the last ten years. The development of national parks is progressive. Obviously, as I stated a moment ago, we must have regard to the amount of money we have available to spend for this purpose. I should say that some time in the future-I am not going to predict when- the Garibaldi park proposition might be considered. I know the view is held, particularly in Vancouver, that Garibaldi park would be a desirable acquisition for the national parks system of the dominion. But according to our information quite a considerable amount of money would be needed to make any appreciable development in the park, principally in the way of constructing roads to it, as well as carrying on other necessary developments. At the moment we are not in a position to undertake that development.


Angus MacInnis: I quite understand that the government could not take over and develop all the land which might be available for national parks in the dominion, and that development must necessarily be fairly slow, but I believe there are, in connection with this area, circumstances that the government should take into consideration in the very near future. The late Doctor Tolmie, when he was premier of British Columbia,
Supply-National Parks

definitely offered the area to the federal government to be developed as a national park. It is one of extremely fine scenic beauty, and it is only about fifty miles from Vancouver. As a tourist attraction so close to the largest city in British Columbia, I do not suppose there is anything else to equal it. I hope the minister's department will give consideration to it, as there is a strong desiie in British Columbia, and particularly, as the minister himself said, in Vancouver, to have this area opened up as a park.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: We shall be glad indeed to give consideration to the suggestion of my hon. friend. I might point out to the committee, though, that there are already four national parks in British Columbia: Kootenay park, the Yoho, Glacier, and the park at Revelstoke. These embrace altogether an area of about 1,700 square miles. And we have requests for the establishment of national parks in provinces in which there are not any. The hon. member for Leeds (Mr. Stewart) was urging this afternoon consideration of the establishment of a national park in the area along the St. Lawrence river below Kingston. Well, Ontario has a few, small national parks. There is a small park at Point Pelee, which is the most southerly point in Canada on lake Erie, and there are the islands in Georgian bay which belonged originally to the Indians and were secured from them many years ago for national park purposes, and the islands in the St. Lawrence river. Quebec has not yet a national park, although the Quebec government has broached the question of establishing one. New Brunswick has not yet a park, although the matter of selecting a site is under consideration. When there are four national parks already established in British Columbia and none in some of the other provinces, my hon. friend will appreciate some of the difficulties that we would face if we attempted to ignore New Brunswick, for instance, or Quebec, and proceeded to establish a fifth park in British Columbia. I know that he will appreciate the problem which would face the administration in that respect and I hope he will sympathize with me.


Mr. McGEER:: I suppose the reason why
the department cannot assume responsibility for developing Garibaldi as a national park is not merely the fact that there are already some other parks in British' Columbia, but that the limit of the financial resources allowed by the government to the department has been reached. May I take this opportunity to direct the attention of the department to two matters. In the first place, I would point out that the parks in

the Rocky mountain and Selkirk mountain areas were never developed as British Columbia parks. They grew out of a great conception that Sir William Van Home had that those parks would be a real asset to the Canadian Pacific railway, and then the idea was copied into Jasper park, not as a. British Columbia park but as a park that would be a real acquisition in the development of traffic for the railways. The fact is that there are no national parks in British Columbia in the sense that national parks are established in other places.
With regard to the question of finance, it seems more than strange that, when we realize that through national parks can be sold to the greatest advantage Canada's chief export asset, namely her tourist trade attractions, some recognition of the tourist trade of Canada is not given in appropriating moneys for the development of further tourist trade attractions. The figures indicate that out of a total revenue of some $300,000,000 from tourist trade there is an actual profit to the dominion of somewhere between $160,000,000 and $180,000,000. I venture to say that this favourable balance, which is so essential to a nation carrying so heavy a load of foreign debt, would not exist at all if it were not for the park facilities and the natural attractions that Canada enjoys at the present time.
There can be no good reason why a nation that enjoys a revenue of $300,000,000 a year from the tourist trade cannot appropriate to the development of national parks and of highways leading to them, the funds that are necessary to make them as attractive as possible. As a matter of fact, the policy which is being pursued here is one that is probably costing the dominion anywhere from $200,000,000 to $500,000,000 a year, because it is a policy which persistently refuses to recognize the fact that Canadian credit can be properly and safely invested in the development of those Canadian assets which will increase foreign revenue and develop revenues from abroad. I happen to be interested in Garibaldi park because it affects, by reason of its lack of development, the economic life of the city of Vancouver and of a substantial portion of British Columbia. Today, for want of the kind of attraction that Garibaldi would offer, thousands upon thousands of Canadians from Vancouver and British Columbia generally are now going across the boundary line and finding that entertainment both in summer and in winter in the great parks of Mount Baker and Mount Rainier in Washington. That drift southward will show, I think, that British Columbia of all the provinces of Canada has an adverse

Supply-National Parks
balance of tourist trade. I am confident that, if Garibaldi park were opened and developed as it could be, instead of Canadians going south by thousands they would find better entertainment in that park than they can get elsewhere, and because of that thousands upon thousands of United States citizens would come north where we to-day are going south.
There is another reason why Garibaldi should be developed. The government, quite wisely I think, has recognized the fact that to serve the 130,000,000 people in the south who own and operate some 28,000,000 automobiles, it is good business for the administration to cooperate in building highways through gateway points into various sections of the dominion. If we could get a highway connection from the boundary line at Blaine, through Vancouver, across the First Narrows bridge now being built by private capital, and up Howe sound to Garibaldi park, recognizing that as the first link in the Alaska highway from the southern boundary line, we could show the government a possible revenue in tolls if it were necessary, and certainly in the way of tourists from the south, which would make it a good, sound, self-liquidating investment and turn an adverse balance of trade into a favourable one. I should like the minister to take up the question with his colleagues, and particularly the Minister of Finance, and ascertain why it is that this nation of ours, richer in proportion to its population than any other nation in the world, cannot find the means to develop those attractions which are essential to the advancement of our international trade. Why is it that nations like Germany and Italy can find money without limit to finance an aggressive program of armament, while we Canadians cannot find a few million dollars for the development of our national parks and roads? There is no good reason why any Canadian should look either to the soviets or to Germany or Italy for lessons in finance. Let us forget the dictatorships and ascertain from our own Department of Finance why it is that Great Britain, hopelessly bankrupt in 1931, to-day can stand forth and meet the threats of almost the whole world ranged against her and finance a great program of social reconstruction, of rehousing, of national defence, carrying her obligations clear out to the enormous Singapore base in the far east. If the 45,000,000 English people can do what they are doing, why have we to stand shivering in impotence, unable to develop assets like Garibaldi park in British Columbia, which are just as necessary in the interests of Canada and of every province from ocean to ocean?
The time may soon come when we in Canada must look at what is going on elsewhere in the world, and particularly in Great Britain, Australia and New Zealand. Our Canadian people are not going to remain satisfied with answers such as we have had to-night. With our government in possession of all this wealth, boasting of a favourable trade balance of hundreds of millions of dollars, of a favourable balance from tourist trade last year of $160,000,000 odd, and more this year, I am satisfied that our Canadian people will not accept as reasonable the statement that we have not the money to put our unemployed men, who are ready and anxious lor employment, to work in developing the kind of thing that experience and records of performance prove will pay and pay well. We have no reason to be afraid of the future, unless those in the seats of government have lost confidence in the possibility of future development of this nation's wealth. If the government lose faith in the nation, it is impossible to expect others to have confidence.
But I do congratulate the Department of Mines and Resources upon the splendid work it has been doing and the splendid results it has achieved. I venture to say that, of all the things accomplished, the opening up of roads and trails and the development of highways from the international boundary to our national parks has given the best kind of employment and been probably the best practical service, not only in eliminating immediate unemployment but in removing unemployment as a continuing evil, of any step this government has taken. My hope i3 that, in view of the splendid results which have been achieved, those of us who have faith in the great program the minister is carrying out will rally to his support and do all we can to guide the Department of Finance out of that swamp of financial ignorance in which it seems to be lost.


Ernest George Hansell: How much of the roads in the Banff national park and the Waterton lakes national park is hard surfaced?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: So far we have no hardsurfaced roads within these park boundaries.


Ernest George Hansell: I would not criticize the type of roads that are in the two parks I have mentioned. I have been over nearly every road in the Banff national park except the one now being constructed up to Jasper-


Gerald Grattan McGeer: Do not miss that; that is the best.


Ernest George Hansell: I hope it will be. The roads are in good condition; but there are, and will be every year, spots in them that

Supply-National Parks

need considerable repair, because notwithstanding the fact that the roads are graveled and well scraped and oiled, they do deteriorate. There was a time when tourists and citizens going into those parks used to talk about the terrible roads until one got to the gates of the parks, and then one could depend upon the roads being good. But now the picture has to some extent changed. As far as the Alberta side of those two parks is concerned

and some credit is coming to this government for the assistance they have given-the road from Calgary into the Banff park is now hard surfaced and is a splendid road. When you come to the gate of the park the road is fair to good, but not hard surfaced. If you are going into the Waterton lakes park from the east or northeast, the road is now hard surfaced from Macleod into Pincher Creek; from Pincher Creek on the road is fair but not hard surfaced.
Following the remarks of the last speaker concerning the tourist trade, I suggest to the minister that I believe no better circle tour could be found, from the many points of view I have in mind, than the one from Calgary through to Banff and down the Windermere highway, and return by way of Macleod and Lethbridge. You can take a number of side roads if you wish; but the route I have in mind is through to Cranbrook, east through the Crowsnest pass, visiting the Waterton lakes national park, then up to Macleod or through by Cardston and Lethbridge and back to Calgary. I believe that is one of the most wonderful tours in Canada, from the standpoint both of scenic beauty and of what one might learn of the wealth and industry in different parts of this territory. From Calgary west through the Cochrane district there is a most wonderful ranching country, with eighty or ninety miles of good, hard-surfaced road. We know what is at Banff; that has been well advertised, and I shall have something to say in that connection later on. The road through the Banff national park and down the Windermere highway certainly is beautiful, and I want to compliment the minister upon the continual improvements that are being made in various projects within the park. Then, coming through the Crowsnest pass, we get a glimpse of the coal mining industry of Alberta. It is in the mountains, but tourists are interested in other things than scenery. If you go through to Pincher Creek, down to Waterton Park and back again either by way of Macleod or through Cardston and Raymond, you go through a magnificent stretch of farming country. I would even 
go so far as to mention that it has been said that the Mormon temple at Cardston is one of the unique buildings in the British Empire. Certainly it is a point of interest. Then there is the Raymond sugar factory, which is another point of interest, as well as all those irrigation projects in and around that district. If one wanted to take a little side trip from Lethbridge into the Taber district he would see a canning factory, and it is no little two by four factory. They can put out vast quantities of fruit and vegetables from that place. If you go north towards Calgary again, whether you take the route by way of Macleod or by way of Lethbridge, you will go through one of the greatest wheat growing areas you could find anywhere. It has been said that in the Champion-Vulcan district, and to the north, as much wheat can be produced from a given area as can be produced anywhere in the world. Of course, in the last few years we have experienced a good deal of drought there, but in good years, Mr. Chairman, we can certainly grow wheat. In Vulcan, which is a small village, there are nine large elevators. In Nanton, which is about the same size, I think there are about nine elevators also. I should not forget to mention that before entering Calgary you can go through the famous Turner valley oil fields. That is a sight to behold, a sight that any tourist coming to Canada will love to see. This is a circle tour within which you find all these points of interest.
I should like to say another word in this connection. I have not received a copy of the supplementary estimates, but I notice the Evening Citizen mentions that in them $40,000,000 is provided for public works. Perhaps we can discuss that at another time; but I would say to the minister, and to the Minister of Labour, that there could be no more profitable project undertaken in Canada than to see that the highways in that circle tour are hard surfaced. I realize that this is partly a provincial responsibility; but if the sum of $40,000,000 is to spent on public works in an attempt to put the unemployed to work, I believe the government would be well advised to spend some of the money right there. They would get it back in a few years, through the tourist trade that would come to this country.
I should also like to compliment the minister upon that project in the Banff national park known as the "Cascade of Time." I fancy that project comes under this department rather than under the town of Banff. Of course, at the present time it is not much more than a beautiful garden; but a good deal

Supply-National Parks
of work is being done on it from year to year, and certainly it is becoming a real beauty spot.
Before resuming my seat, I should like to ask the minister if he is able to give the committee any information as to whether or not some of the money that is to be spent for public works-I am talking now of the $40,000,000-will be spent on the roads I have mentioned. Would the minister care to make a pronouncement on that point? I know it is pretty early to say very much about it.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No; at the moment I am not in a position to make any definite statement in that regard; but doubtless my hon. friend will get the information in good time, when the supplementary estimates are under consideration. This year we are planning to do some hard surfacing in Banff, and also to carry on with the work that has been in progress for a few years now, designed to create a hard-surfaced highway from Kings-gate north to Cranbrook and into the park system at Radium Hot Springs, then out to Calgary, over the road my hon. friend has mentioned; from Calgary south to Waterton lakes and on to the Glacier national park in the United States. We are making progress with that. I quite realize the importance of the point raised by my hon. friend as to the value of hard-surfaced roads for tourist traffic; I think there is an increasing realization of the importance of such roads. I have no doubt we shall progress steadily and, I hope, fairly rapidly, in the future in the creation of these roads.


William Hayhurst: What has been said to-night rather reminds me of what was said yesterday: Each man for his own part of the country. It would seem that the members from the maritimes have not yet spoken on this subject, and I know they are anxious to do so. We have heard members from central Canada, from the prairies and some from British Columbia. As hon. members know, the greatest and most beautiful road in the world is now under construction, namely the road from Jasper to Banff, following the Columbia glacier. It presents the most magnificent scenery, so far as mountains are concerned, and would connect with the road system to which the hon. member for Macleod (Mr. Hansell) has referred. It also connects with the Jasper highway which goes directly to Edmonton.
Yesterday we heard a great deal of talk regarding the amount of money used for advertising in the United States and Great Britain to bring people to Canada to see the beauties of this country. From letters I have received from both the old country and the United 51952-1971
States, I am certain a large number of people are waiting the completion of this road which would go from Jasper to Lake Louise, following the ice-fields. I would ask the minister when he thinks the road would be completed, because I believe the work done on that road would prove most profitable in the near future through the number of people it would bring to that part of the country. Not only would it carry tourists, but it would also accommodate geologists and scientists. I know that at one time while I was in the mountains a thousand students came from the various universities of the United States to study geology, the ice age and so on. The road runs right along the great glaciers and, as I have said, it presents the most magnificent scenery in the great Rocky mountains system. I speak from knowledge, because I believe I have travelled from Utah north, through most of the mountains in the great Rocky mountains chain, and also along the coast range. If the minister could have the work completed quickly, it would prove most beneficial to that part of the country. Probably he is in a position to give the committee some information with respect to the road from Jasper, following the Columbia glacier to Lake Louise.


John Horne Blackmore: Hon. members in this section of the house do not wish to monopolize the attention of the committee, but I must remind hon. members that Alberta has a tremendous number of scenic beauties. We must not allow anybody to forget that, not because we wish to boast about it but because those beauties are a great national asset. I believe there are more parks in Alberta than in any other province. We are strategically located, particularly because we are near the Yellowstone national park. People come from all parts of the world to visit the Yellowstone park, from which with modern automobiles it is not a difficult or forbiddingly long trip to Glacier park. If there were a hard-surfaced road from the border towns of Coutts and Carway into Lethbridge and Cardston, it would invite many tourists who are now turned back as soon as they look across the Canadian border and see roads which yield dust. So important is this matter that I am taking it. upon myself to burden the committee a bit to-night by adding a third voice from Alberta urging that something be done soon. A good many people-and I do not include members of the house-do not realize that the tourist trade affects our trade balance.


Charles Avery Dunning: No, not our trade balance; it affects our balance of payments. That is a different matter.
Supply-National Parks


John Horne Blackmore: Yes; but there is an international balance between nations which is affected seriously.


Charles Avery Dunning: Of payments.


John Horne Blackmore: Which is our chief anxiety.


Charles Avery Dunning: One of them.


John Horne Blackmore: In the last analysis
it is the balance of payments which bothers us, and here is an excellent opportunity of overcoming what might become an adverse situation for Canada. Inasmuch as in this very year there are grave indications that we may have very trying times economically before we come together again, it might be worth while to readjust our plans to some extent this year so as to permit of the finishing of these roads from Coutts and Camay. It is not very far from Coutts to Lethbridge or from Camay to Cardston, and it would not be difficult to hard-surface the Kennedy creek cut-off road, which is another scenic attraction. I believe no expenditure in Canada would bring greater returns, unless it would be that particular portion mentioned by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. McGeer), a portion with which I must admit I am not familiar.
I wish to add my voice to those which have been lifted in commendation of the efforts of the minister. So far as I have been able to find out, I believe, considering the money he has had at his disposal, he has administered his department very well. Nevertheless, I feel we will strengthen his hand with his fellow colleagues if we state that he needs even more money for the development of these roads and the encouragement of the tourist industry in Canada.


Charles Avery Dunning: I wish to say just a
few words which may be as much out of order as the remarks which cause me to make them. I gather that in the previous discussion the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard indicated that many desirable things could be done if it were not for-and I am not sure that this is the exact language-an inadequate Minister of Finance, and that he and other hon. members in the house would undertake to help the Minister of Mines and Resources in bringing about a reformation in that regard. In that connection I merely desire to point out that reformation is a very easy matter, if the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard is speaking for any substantial number of members on the government side of the house, or, in fact, for any substantial number of members in 
the house. We still have responsible government in this country. The financial affairs of the country must be conducted in accordance with the principles of responsible government.
I do not believe that in those remarks the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard spoke for any considerable number of members supporting the government. Further, I do not believe that he spoke for the people of Canada. It will be very easy, Mr. Chairman, to discover either of those things. The hon. member has an opportunity of demonstrating the extent of the support which he could get for getting rid of the present Minister of Finance and the present financial methods of the country, and I hope he will attempt it, because then we shall have the house clearly on record as to whether the somewhat vague proposals of so-called financial reform, which I personally regard as financial reaction and not financial reform, should be applied in the proper constitutional manner by the government of Canada.
So far as I am concerned, I do not count. At this time I have a responsibility. It is not a responsibility which any man would seek in these times. It is a responsibility which I feel very keenly because of the debt I conceive I owe to Canada. In discharging it, I discharge it according to my conscientious belief as to what is best for Canada. But it is the function of this house to decide what is best for Canada; it is not my function or that of the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard. This house having decided what is best by way of financial policy, then the man who occupies the position which I occupy should be in accord with that policy. I am in accord, naturally, with the policy at present being followed.


Mr. LANDERYOU:: Not in Alberta.


Charles Avery Dunning: In the Dominion of
Canada. Most certainly I am not in accord with the policy being followed in Alberta. But I am not responsible to the people of Alberta, as a province. I am responsible to them merely through their representatives in this house, in the same manner as I am responsible to the people of Canada through all the other representatives in the house. If at any time, which I would sincerely regret in what I believe to be the best interests of Canada, my hon. friends opposite who now occupy a few seats in the far comer should occupy the majority of seats in this house, they would expect to have a man sitting here who would carry into effect the policies in which the majority of that house believed. I am sure they would. I sincerely believe

Supply-National Parks
that I am putting into effect, and the government on my advice is following in matters of finance, a policy which is in accord with the wishes of the majority of members supporting the government in this house, and, indeed, far more than that. But I rose simply to say that there is an easy way to demonstrate whether or not that is the case.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: In my few remarks this evening I regret very much that I have precipitated what appears to be a crisis in the government.


Charles Avery Dunning: No crisis in the government.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: I would never have thought that Garibaldi park would have figured so prominently in the politics of the dominion as that. I do want to take this opportunity of complimenting and congratulating the Minister of Finance (Mr. Dunning) upon the courageous and magnificent way in which he defends his conception of what his responsibilities are to this house, to his government, and to the people of the Dominion of Canada. But may I offer the suggestion, Mr. Chairman, that upon this question of public finance there may be good reasons why men even on the same side of politics may differ in the interpretation of the policy upon which this government was elected. It seems to me that I remember standing before my own electors, speaking throughout the province of British Columbia, and declaring that we were going to establish a reformed monetary system under which we were going to issue currency and credit through a national bank in terms of public need.


Charles Avery Dunning: Which we are doing.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: And in terms of the social, economic and domestic needs of this nation.


Mr. JOHNSTON (Bow River):: Ninety
per cent of the Liberals thought that.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: I want to say to my friends on the other side that I never knew of any suggestion on our part that we were only going to give national credit away for nothing.


Frederick George Sanderson: Order. Will the hon. gentleman take his seat for a moment? I think this discussion is entirely out of order. It is quite true that the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard did bring in the monetary question. The Minister of Finance was not in his seat, and later he made a short reply, but this is not the time for this discussion. We are on the item, national parks bureau- national parks and historic sites services.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: And the financing of them, as I understand, Mr. Chairman.


Frederick George Sanderson: No. Order, please. I would ask all the members of the committee to confine their remarks to the item under discussion.


Mr. ISNOR:: Mr. Chairman-


Gerald Grattan McGeer: Wait a minute, please. I am not put out of the house just because I am out of order. Now that the Minister of Finance is in his place, may I offer to him for his consideration that if we could get the means of incorporating Garibaldi park within the administrative authority of the national Department of Mines and Resources, and if the same good policy of parks development and highway development to the parks were undertaken, it might prove a source of revenue that would more than justify the expenditure.


Charles Avery Dunning: That is not what I was commenting on at all. I take no exception to that.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: If we had this done, possibly we would find a source from which the revenues of the Department of Finance could be greatly enhanced.


Charles Avery Dunning: Certainly.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: I am satisfied that if the Minister of Finance were convinced of that, he would not hesitate to make the investment, because I think everyone will agree that even in national finance an investment that returns revenues, particularly when it is an investment that eliminates unemployment, and particularly also when it establishes a national asset of enduring value, is within the limits of the soundest and most orthodox finance. If I have any complaint to offer against the department, it is that they have not been awake to the opportunities of improving the revenues of the dominion, and I believe that Garibaldi park stands out as only one example of many that may be found in every province. May I say further to the Minister of Finance that such a program of development will meet with the unanimous approval of the whole people of the Dominion of Canada.


Charles Avery Dunning: You take in a lot of territory there.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: I think what I have suggested is so sound that everybody would approve it. But when I rose to speak, I really did not have in mind the precipitation of any discussion on the administration of
Supply-National Parks

the Department of Finance per se, and may I apologize to the minister for having carelessly let go one or two shots that probably should have been reserved for the budget debate.


Charles Avery Dunning: Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, you will allow me to accept the apology, and to say that I had no reference whatever to Garibaldi park or any other park but was referring simply to the suggestion made by my hon. friend that "we will make this antiquated Department of Finance" do something or another, and I was merely pointing out to the committee that there is a simple way for a majority of the members on this side of the house to determine the financial policy of the country. I was explaining how my hon. friend could obtain his wish. He will forgive me if I say he was taking in rather too much territory when he said: "we" will. "He" would, I have no doubt, but I doubt very much if he could associate with himself a sufficient number of members who think as he does to bring about the change which he indicated he so heartily desired.


Gerald Grattan McGeer: Oh, do not take it too seriously.


John Charles Landeryou: I am not going to refer to the promises of the Liberal party before the election or get into a discussion of finance. I was interested in the observation of the minister that this year he expected to complete the road from Banff to Calgary, from Calgary to Waterton, and to connect up with the Glacier national park in the United States. Am I right?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My hon. friend is not quite right. I referred to the hard-surfaced road, all within Canadian territory, which was being constructed north of Kingsgate, and which, when completed, would lead into the parks sj'stem at Radium, out again to Calgary and on to Waterton lakes, then on to Glacier national park in the United States. That road will cover about six hundred miles, and I hope the program of work of hard-surfacing will be completed in a year.


John Charles Landeryou: Then I am right in
saying that as far as the expenditures this year are concerned, no money will be spent in connecting these parks with the boundary to the south; that is, outside the parks themselves?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No; I did not say that.
Part of the work will be carried on this year. It was carried on last year and the year before. We hope to finish it next year.


John Charles Landeryou: I notice in the supple-mentaries that there is considerable money 
to be spent. That road to which the minister is referring is mostly in British Columbia. I am talking about roads in Alberta connecting the boundary line with the parks. Will there be any work done on those highways?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That work was carried on
last year and the year previous under an arrangement with the Alberta government; that is the hard-surfacing from Calgary south to Waterton Park, and I expect that it will be continued this year. The national parks have the responsibility of doing the work from Waterton lakes to the international boundary, and we hope to get a start made on that this year.


Mr. BROOKS:: It has been interesting to
listen to the remarks with reference to national parks in different parts of Canada and to hear the extravagant language used in describing each particular section-"most beautiful," "most magnificent," "most grand," an so on. But I wish to say, in the words of the poet Guest, that "you ain't been nowhere, you ain't seen nothin'," until you come down and see some of the beauties of the province of New Brunswick.


Charles Avery Dunning: And then go on to the Island.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: A very good idea. Unfortunately, they are doing that now.


An hon. MEMBER:: For a rest.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: The minister has told us
that the proposed park in New Brunswick has been under consideration for some time. This, unfortunately, is very true; it has been "under consideration" now for at least three years, and it does not seem to be any nearer development now than it was three years ago. I am not blaming the federal minister for the situation, but I do blame those in authority in New Brunswick. I believe the interests of that province are being sacrificed by the provincial government, through the sectional jealousies and whims of various members of that government. When I make that statement I feel that, in the light of what has been happening for the past three years, I am doing no injustice to anyone.
The hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard pointed out-a fact we all know-the great benefits which are being derived in Canada from our tourist trade. I believe he said that $300,000,000 is the revenue we receive from this source, and that possibly S180,000,-000 of that was net revenue to the people of the dominion. I want to point out to the committee that we in New Brunswick are not receiving a dollar of that revenue as

Supply-National Parks
far as parks is concerned. The importance of national parks cannot be overemphasized. There is at least one park in each province with the exception of New Brunswick and Quebec. I believe the minister earlier in the evening said there are twenty national parks in Canada, with an extent of some 12,500 square miles. A number of sites have been under consideration in New Brunswick. I do not think it should have been so difficult as it has been to decide upon one of those sites. When the matter of a national park for New Brunswick was considered, the neighbouring provinces of Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island were also considering national parks. Both of them have already established their parks, and development is well under way. I understand that Nova Scotia has one of the finest sites in Canada.
But I want to point out this: We have heard much about the construction of roads to give access to national parks. We in New Brunswick have been spending in the last few years millions of dollars in hard-surfacing roads, and at the present time we are doing it simply in order to send tourists to the national parks in Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. The situation is very unfair, and I hope that the minister, if he has any influence with the authorities in New Brunswick, will exert it and see that the in-justie which is being done to our province is remedied as soon as possible.	[DOT]
The importance of this matter in connection with the relief problem was emphasized this afternoon by the Minister of Labour when he stated, if I understood him correctly, that $3,000,000 would be expended on relief projects throughout Canada with relation to national parks. We in New Brunswick have not had direct relief in the last two years, though I venture to say that there has been as much destitution and as much need for relief in that province as in any other province of the dominion. It is a crying shame that the labouring men in New Brunswick are not in a position to-day to take advantage of some of this money which is being expended in different sections of Canada in developing parks. What is the situation at the present time with reference to the development of a national park in New Brunswick.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The problem in New
Brunswick is one of some difficulty. I understand the delay is due to the fact that, whatever site is selected, a considerable amount of private property will have to be re-possessed. My hon. friend is aware that the requirement is that the provincial government shall supply the area for development and convey the title
to that area to the federal government, whereupon the federal government will undertake the work of development.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Pardon me; is that not true of every national park which is established in Canada?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Quite.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is the situation in New Brunswick any different from that in any other province?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: If my hon. friend will allow me to continue for a moment, that was true- taking it as an illustration-in the Cape Breton island park in Nova Scotia, but in New Brunswick the matter of securing an area involves., as I understand it, re-possession by the government, through purchase or expropriation or whatever means they may take, of the private property at present within the area of the park which might be selected. As I understand it, that applies to any one of the areas which may be chosen. I appreciate the difficulties of the provincial government in that respect, because I understand the government of New Brunswick is a prudent government that does not wish unnecessarily to spend the taxpayers' money, and perhaps the worst criticism that might be directed against it is that it is proceeding with too much caution. However, I have no doubt that if that or any other criticism can be leveled against it for being rather dilatory in the matter, my hon. friend will take good care that the facts are presented to the people of New Brunswick as he has presented them here to-night, which of course is his privilege.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: It is not facts of that kind the people of New Brunswick want. It is a park they want.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I quite understand that. After all, it is a matter of the province getting the area, and that is their business. I do not wish to criticize them, and certainly I have no wish to instruct them as to how they should proceed. What they should do is their business, not the business of the parks administration.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is there anything further that the federal department needs to do?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: How many sites were inspected in New Brunswick, and what was the order in which they were selected by the federal department?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My recollection is that
four or five were examined, but at the moment
Supply-National Parks

I cannot recall the order of priority in which they were placed. My recollection is that that information was given in the discussion of the estimates a year ago.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: No doubt the minister has the record there, and perhaps he will give it.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am sorry I have not that information here; but when the supplementary estimates are up, there will be an opportunity again, to raise the question and I shall then have the information for the hon. member.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: There was a vote of $25,000, I believe, either last year or the year before. How much of that has been expended, if any?
Mr. 'CRERAR: The vote was $25,000. It was put in for preliminary surveys that would be necessary before the active work of development would be undertaken. A similar vote is in the supplementary estimates for this year. It appeared in the special supplementary estimates a year ago. Once the area is selected, an accurate survey and an examination of the physical characteristics may be made, so that development can proceed in the best way in order to give the maximum result for the money expended. The amount in the supplementary estimates will cover the initial work in that respect, and that is the manner in which we have proceeded in all these matters. Once the initial survey is made and the data correlated, the parks officials are in a .position to recommend the type of development that should take place in order to get the maximum effect from the expenditure of the money.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: I understand that the money provided in the supplementary estimates will be spent on an initial survey in New Brunswick. Is that correct?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: We have included in our supplementary estimates the sum of $25,000. If the provincial government is in a position to turn over the area to us, then the money is available, once we know where we shall work, to make the initial surveys and to do the work I have mentioned.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Is it necessary for the provincial government to pass an act in the local legislature?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I understand that they have passed an act which will enable them to take appropriate action.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: 
Thomas Alexander Crerar: The hon. member may not be aware that the supplementary estimates were tabled this afternoon.


Gordon Benjamin Isnor: I said the special supplemen-taries.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not think there will be any further supplementaries, but he will observe that there is in the supplementary estimates an item for historic sites and monuments. I think I can say that when it comes to the allocation of that vote, the citadel at Halifax will not be overlooked.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: What is the amount of money to be expended on each of the three national parks in Ontario?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Does the hon. member mean out of this vote?


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Yes.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: On Point Pelee park in lake Erie, $22,200; on the St. Lawrence islands, $3,500, and on the Georgian bay islands $4,000,


Douglas Gooderham Ross: The Thirty Thousand islands district in Georgian bay is a very fine tourist centre, but those who live on those islands have much trouble in getting there on account of the difficulty of the channel. Tourists come there in great numbers from the United States as well as from Ontario, travelling by the boat from Midland. The difficulty is much greater at night. Would
it be possible to have the channel through those islands between Midland and Parry Sound, and up by Pointe au Baril, better buoyed? And if the channel were better lighted at night, many more people would be attracted to the islands.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The Department of Mines and Resources has nothing to do with the marking and lighting of channels. However, I shall be glad to bring my hon. friend's remarks to the attention of the Minister of Transport, whose department has charge of that work.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I thank the minister for that assurance. I understand that one of the buoys marking the channel to Penetang harbour was taken away last year. I do not think it would cost very much to place more of those light buoys in that channel.


James Samuel Taylor: Are any negotiations being conducted with the province of British Columbia about a national park on Vancouver island? There is no need for me to descant on the glories of that place, after every other part of Canada has had its day. But some attention should be paid to the question of a national park on Vancouver island, especially now that we have learned that there are no national parks in British Columbia; that they are merely railway parks.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I do not agree with the view of the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard (Mr. McGeer) in that connection. It may be that in the remote past, in the genesis of these parks in British Columbia, there was something to support the view he expressed, but I can assure the committee that now, at any rate, they are national parks. We realize they are when we have to devote money every year to their maintenance and administration. They are not in any sense railway parks.
As far as a park on Vancouver island is concerned, I think the hon. member for Comox-Alberni (Mr. Neill) a year or two ago advanced the claims of Vancouver island for recognition in that regard. Nothing further has been done. Of course the island itself is one vast park, and I do not know that an expenditure of federal money could very greatly improve its well known attractions.


Howard Charles Green: Has work been commenced yet this spring on the gap in the Big Bend highway?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No. The vote for that work is in the supplementary estimates which were laid before the house this afternoon. I
Supply-National Parks

expect the work will start very shortly. The plans for it are complete, but we like to proceed in a manner that will not excite criticism on the part of our hon. friends opposite for proceeding in a non-orthodox fashion, and so we did not start this work until we had at any rate the estimates before the house. If my hon. friend feels like giving me an assurance that he would not criticize me for starting the work before the estimates were passed, we might consider getting it under way next week.


Howard Charles Green: If I may interrupt, let me say that I would never criticize this government for moving too fast in anything.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My hon. friend, I am afraid, has not as much imagination as I thought.


Howard Charles Green: One would need a lot of imagination to see any fast action in this matter.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: If my hon. friend will
survey the record of the past two years of this department, I do not think he can seriously level that criticism against it. However, speaking more seriously, we do hope to get the work there started very shortly.


Howard Charles Green: I was in Revelstoke during the Easter recess, and people there told me that conditions were such that the work could be started, but nothing had been done, and apparently it takes some time to get the work camps established. Is it the intention of the government to complete the gap this year? I believe there are only about thirty-three miles to finish.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am afraid it cannot be
completed this year. There is a good deal of very heavy construction, and it is through difficult country, as my hon. friend knows. If you have to push your work and machines and equipment very far in advance of the road as completed, it adds greatly to the expense. We shall not be able to complete it this year, but certainly it is the intention to have it completed next year. I am a little disappointed that we have not made more rapid progress; but last September I went right to the end of that road, where they were pulling out stumps, cutting down great, heavy trees and clearing rock cuts from Revelstoke north. I saw for myself the extremely difficult nature of the country through which they are building, and taking all the facts into consideration I think the progress with that road has been very good.


Howard Charles Green: I realize that is an extremely difficult piece of construction, but I would suggest that the minister give serious con-
sideration to finishing the gap this year. I am quite sure that once the gap is completed, a great deal of the difficulty mentioned by the hon. member for Vancouver-Burrard will be done away with, because then the people of the coast, not only from British Columbia but also from the Pacific states, will be able to drive up to the national parks. Then we shall realize that the parks in the Rockies are really British Columbia parks.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Well, I should like very
much to see that completed this year, but I would not be quite frank with my hon. friend if I gave him any impression that this would be the case. Quite frankly, I do not think it can be, but as I said a moment ago I certainly hope it will be completed next year.


William Hayhurst: How is the work progressing on the road between Banff and Jasper national parks, and when will it be completed.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Precisely the same conditions are met with there that we find on the so-called Big Bend road; that is, the Jasper-Banff road has been built from both ends. Work has proceeded from the Jasper end and from the Banff end ever since the road was started, and there is still a considerable gap remaining; I believe some thirty miles remain to be completed. That, also, is very heavy construction. I may tell my hon. friend that I was also over both ends of that road last September. I like to get out and see the work that is going on and the nature of the difficulties that have to be overcome. The remaining portion of that road is very heavy construction, a great deal of it being rock work and the clearing of timber. In that class of construction, unless you are prepared to throw money around rather freely, it is not possible to make rapid progress, but I think I can say to the committee that, it is the intention to have that road also completed next year.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: May I ask what
the amount of $22,200 for Pelee island is expended for, and also the $4,000 for the Georgian bay islands and the $3,500 for the St. Lawrence islands?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: It is for general administrative work. The administrative costs in the islands, both in the St. Lawrence and in Georgian bay, are not very heavy, and consequently the vote is small. At Point Pelee, as my hon. friend is probably aware, there is heavy tourist traffic during the summer months, and the cost of administrative work is heavier. The amount is divided thus:

Supply-National Parks
Management and clerical work, $8,900; public services, $11,200; and those comprise water, roads and bridges, health, sanitation, camp grounds, gateways and information bureaux. The other items are: Stores and equipment, $2,000, and a small item for garage and repair shop, warehouses, stores and mechanical equipment. This amount has been increased in the supplementary estimates which were tabled this afternoon.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Is this expenditure on the Thirty Thousand islands of Georgian bay in connection with game wardens or something like that?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I can give my hon. friend the particulars:	Administration, $3,190; office
expense, $400; garages and repair shops, $200; warehouses and stores, $210.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: I should like to say a further word in regard to the Georgian bay lights. Very often in that country one cannot get down in the daytime, but the wind goes down at night and you can get through. I think lives would be saved if there were lights so that people could travel at night rather than during the daytime. I want again to urge the importance of better lighting for the channel through the Thirty Thousand islands and also around by Point au Baril.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I shall see that my hon. friend's suggestion is placed before the Department of Transport, which has to do with these matters.


Grote Stirling: I should like to ask one more question about the Big Bend road. Is British Columbia contributing any portion of the cost on the west side?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No.


Grote Stirling: It is entirely borne by the dominion government?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That expense is borne by the federal government.


Grote Stirling: That agreement fell
through?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: My recollection is that the arrangement was made by the late government to build the west leg. The original arrangement was made when my right hon. leader was Prime Minister previously, to build the east leg, and the provincial government is bearing no part of the cost of construction. Under the agreement, when the road is constructed it will be taken over by the provincial government, and of course thereafter the cost of maintenance will be their responsibility.


Grote Stirling: From the edge of the park?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No; from Golden to
Revelstoke.


Grote Stirling: Through the national park?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: No; we did not undertake the obligation to build the portion of the road from the west gate of the park to Golden. The original arrangement covered from Donald to the crossing of the Canoe river. Later, that was extended to cover the portion between Golden and Donald. Then, during the administration of the present right hon. leader of the opposition the arrangement with British Columbia was extended to cover the portion of the road from the crossing at Canoe river down to Revelstoke, and the expense of that construction is being wholly borne by the federal government.


Mr. POTTIER:: Since some of the discussion on this item has developed in connection with points of interest having particular reference to historical spots, I want to bring to the attention of the minister a place in western Nova Scotia where it is claimed the first white man landed in North America. There are records in the old country describing the voyage and the shore where the landing was made, and that description exactly fits this location in western Nova Scotia. We also have a runic stone, where they are supposed to have landed, bearing an inscription which they marked at the time. According to the records, that landing is presumed to have been in the year 1006, the first landing of the Norsemen in North America, actually the first white men to come here from Europe. I have no doubt that the development of a place of that kind would prove a spot of historical interest, and would help develop the tourist trade.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Administration of Migratory Birds Convention Act, $51,000.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: This item has to do with the administration of the migratory birds convention between Canada and the United States. In the present year there is a slight increase in the vote. I assume at least part of that is due to the restoration of the salary cuts and to the ordinary statutory increases in salaries. I believe there was the appointment of one additional stenographer. That is an expense which under the Migratory Birds Convention Act we are obligated to carry out.
Supply-Migratory Birds


Howard Charles Green: I have no fault to find with the vote, but the report has got about in British Columbia that there is a chance of the administration of this act being turned over to the provinces. I have a protest from an angling and game association in Vancouver against the administration being turned over to the provinces. I hope there is no question of that being done.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The hon. member's remarks are the first I have heard to that effect. I can assure him there is no intention of doing anything of the kind. As a matter of fact, 1 do not think we could turn over to a province the administration of an international obligation with the United States.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: It has been called to my attention that last year two or three hunters got into trouble through lack of knowledge of the law. We realize, of course, that is no excuse. The laws with respect to duck shooting were published by the province of Ontario. There are also certain variations or extensions in the law which are made under the Migratory Birds Convention Act. I understand the regulations are posted up by the federal government, but it is very difficult for a hunter to look on the telegraph posts to find out what those regulations may be. Could some arrangement not be made between the provincial and federal governments for the combining of the provincial and federal laws?
I should also like to learn how the enforcement of the act is carried out. Do the provinces do it; is it a combination between the provinces and the dominion, or is it done by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: In most provinces the regulations agreed upon by the federal and provincial authorities are enforced by the province. There are certain cases where enforcement is carried out by the mounted police. We aim to get cooperation with the provinces, and have been very successful in that regard. The regulations framed from year to year govern particularly the hunting of wild fowl. We have not run into any difficulty in connection with the administration of the act. I think almost everyone from one end of Canada to the other is seized with the importance of preserving the migratory birds. I might point out further that opinion in the United States has crystallized into a more strict enforcement of regulations than obtained several years ago. I believe they are now doing their full share.


Douglas Gooderham Ross: Is there any danger from the shooting of ducks and other types

of game which takes place in James bay? In the minds of some people there seems to be a certain amount of apprehension with respect to the preservation of ducks and other types of wild fowl. They feel that the hunting in the feeding grounds in James bay will have a serious effect on the wild fowl population.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: That matter has been discussed with the Ontario authorities; but, for the greater part, I believe the migratory birds go farther north for nesting and rearing their young. I am informed that the James bay situation, to which the hon. member has just referred, is being discussed between the Ontario government and the federal department.


Alfred Johnson Brooks: Were any new bird sanctuaries established during the past year?


Thomas Alexander Crerar: I am advised there were a few established, but I cannot give the hon. member exact information in that regard. I should be glad to supply it when the supple-mentaries are under consideration. If the hon. member will raise the question at that time, I shall be pleased to answer it.


Harry James Barber: I believe that during the last few years there has been some conflict in connection with the game regulations in British Columbia. I have received representations similar to those indicated by the hon. member for Vancouver South, and I endorse the statement that the administration of the act should be carried on by the federal government. I should like to know what the conflict was; I know there was some conflict in connection with the game regulations.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: The only question of conflict which arose was that some of the hunters in British Columbia were not quite satisfied with the periods of open and closed seasons which were established. It is only very rarely that all of the regulations in any province are accepted without at least some criticism. I must add, however, that the general good sense of the public supports the regulations as they are framed from year to year.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Grant to John Thomas (Jack) Miner, $4,000.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: This is the usual grant.


Hugh Alexander Stewart: I suppose there will be supplementary estimates under which we shall be able to discuss almost anything pertaining to the department.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes.

Questions


Hugh Alexander Stewart: If not, I would ask the minister to leave an item open so that there may be general discussion.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Practically all of these
items will reappear in the supplementary estimates for additional votes. I would be very glad to accede to the suggestion of the hon. member, and I would do so particularly because I know of the interest of the right hon. the leader of the opposition in the Banff national park and in western parks generally.


Charles Avery Dunning: There will be plenty of opportunity.


Thomas Alexander Crerar: Yes, there will be plenty of opportunity, under the supplementary estimates, to discuss these matters.


[Stage Direction]
Item agreed to.
Thomas Alexander Crerar: Mr. Chairman, I wish to express my appreciation to the committee for the assistance they have given in getting these votes through.
Progress reported.


[Stage Direction]
At eleven o'clock the house adjourned, without question put, pursuant to standing order.
Monday, May 23, 1938